Autopsy Round 9, 2021: Hawks get bounced

[The hands of stone]

We sure are, but to me at least its not unexpected

The last 20 games is a pretty good indicator .....yesterday was the cream on the cake.
I expected bottom 4 , but we are currently the worst side in the comp .

 

[Mercy Seat]

I hate that I am saying this. But it's better for Clarko and the club he moves on. It needs to be as dignified an exit as possible and we should all remember him for what he delivered us. But he is the problem right now imo.

We need seperation from the decisions he has made and as a club aknowledge it was a total cluster fu**, one after another, since 2016 that has led to where we are today. I'm not sure he can easily pivot, as that will require him to accept his fault in all of this. Which would be a really tough thing for him to do.

The place needs a fresh start. You can only live off the past for so long. Since 2016 we have made list management decisions that you shouldn't survive from.

Had we landed a few free agents and Rioli not retired and had we had better luck with some long term injuries, we might be calling the list management genius. We had rotten luck with this period but it was all done with eyes open and the full support of the club.

On paper, it would have been negligent not to have taken the shot that we did. I don’t think we can turn around now and pin it all on Clarko, particularly when we’ve already moved on the list manager from that period.

Clarko has enough credits to turn this ship around if he wants the opportunity.

Nonetheless I think he’ll finish up at the end of the year on his own accord...

 

[Slow Love]

Ugly reading. Carlton had similar issues but still look way more promising than we do

 

[Mercy Seat]

Ugly reading. Carlton had similar issues but still look way more promising than we do

Grim

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

Ugly reading. Carlton had similar issues but still look way more promising than we do

This is a trend in a lot of games this year though.

We are just elite at letting other teams walk back to back goals in.

 

[Sicily]

One thing we need to do at the draft (in addition to looking for elite talent across the ground) is draft some potential leaders. I don't see a future Hodge, Lewis, Mitchell, Roughead in terms of leadership among the current crop other than JOM. We are bereft of leadership. No one stands up when things are going against us on field.

Give Will Day a year or two - has definite fkre in the belly

 

[Judd2Sewell]

Better coaches than Clarko? Really? 4 premierships not good enough for you?

Our list profile is different right now and guess who taught Hardwick, Simpson, Beverage, Ratten, Fagan, Cameron, not to mention Uze and several other assistants.

Dont see any disciples of Horse being any good (Dew especially) or any emerging coaches from Dimma.

Clarko coaches the entire club and is in another stratosphere compared to others. We are lucky to have him. Our young talent will come through. We aren’t far away. I have full faith in Clarko!


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

This idea that Clarko is infallible and still the best coach because of what he was able to achieve circa 6 years ago has virtually no bearing on what is happening right now.

All of the legendary great coaches reached a point in their career when they became out of touch. It's inevitable.

Otherwise Matthews, Malthouse, Parkin, Sheedy, etc would all still be coaching.

 

[Mercy Seat]

This idea that Clarko is infallible and still the best coach because of what he was able to achieve circa 6 years ago has virtually no bearing on what is happening right now.

All of the legendary great coaches reached a point in their career when they became out of touch. It's inevitable.

Otherwise Matthews, Malthouse, Parkin, Sheedy, etc would all still be coaching.

That’s fair, but the game all went past those guys. Maybe I’ve still got rose coloured on, but this guy still appears to be one of the most educated and curious football brain in the game. He still demonstrates an understanding of the game better than most and continues to do things outside the box, paying from his own wallet for his constant re educate and that of his assistants. He’s also still relatively quite young (10+ years to those guys).

If he took over a half decent list, I’d back him in to find success, whereas I wouldn’t say that about those other guys you mentioned.

 

[hk89]

I'm not sure why it's hard to understand, or why you're making such hard work of a simple point. I'm saying that the personnel when we bottomed out in 2004 was superior to what we currently have.

Yes, and I'm not sure why you're struggling with my point, which is that I think you are wrong. The 2004 list had two or three elite young players, some decent older players, some of which we traded out, a few above average players like Bateman, and a bunch of average to below average players , half of whom didn't survive 4 years to play in the 2008 GF. That team also suffered these kind of losing margins that year:
81
48
56
86
74
66
65
52
80
44
65

I accept that Hodge and Mitchell ended up being better than anyone we currently have on the list is right now, and may well have become better than anyone we have on the list will ever be. That wasn't the situation in 2004 though, and in any case, that doesn't make up for the fact that they were part of a below average team that suffered far worse losses than the team we have right now. That 2004 team actually DESERVED consecutive priority picks. This one does not. Keep in mind we are talking about a team that was about to gain the following players in the next 5 years:
- Franklin
- Roughy
- Lewis
- Birchall
- Rioli
- Burgoyne
- Gibson
- Breust
- Guerra

now THAT is a list of players stacked full of talent. We got them partly because we were a complete shit show in 2004 (and 2005). To say the 2004
team was full of unearthed talent seems wrong to me, and IMO falls into the trap of overrating players simply because they were lucky enough to play in a flag winning side. Osborne, Ladson , Brown and Campbell were nowhere near elite, and I'd struggle to rate any of those 4 higher than a B+, and that would probably be being generous for some of them.

I don't think the AFL were wrong in giving us back-to-back priority picks. At the time we needed it, the list was horrible, and we needed help in fixing it. It is my opinion that it was more horrible than what we have now, and the actual results back that up. I understand that is not your point view, and you're welcome to your opinion.

If we added equivalent quality to the current list that we added to the 2004 list over the 5 years that followed, we'd have a very very good side on our hands. The challenge for the club is IMO trying to somehow match what we did from the 2004 draft onwards, both on draft day and at the trade table. The quality of our current list compared to the 2004 list before that year's draft is IMO not our biggest challenge. How well we do on draft day, trade day, and whether we have the balls to make the decisions that will get us the number of picks we need will dictate the success of the rebuild a lot more than any gap in talent between the 2004 (pre-draft) and 2021 lists, which I believe is arguably a non-factor, and actually favours the 2021 list. This is not a double-priority pick list.

 

[Pessimistic]

This idea that Clarko is infallible and still the best coach because of what he was able to achieve circa 6 years ago has virtually no bearing on what is happening right now.

All of the legendary great coaches reached a point in their career when they became out of touch. It's inevitable.

Otherwise Matthews, Malthouse, Parkin, Sheedy, etc would all still be coaching.

‘sheedy the only one club coach but 85-93 and 93 to 2000 is 7/8 years between flags as a measure
Matthews 91-2001 10 years Malthouse 94-2010 16 years Parkin 82-95 13 years?

 

[Dragz]

I'll throw in something that looked extremely poo from the ground. A minute or two to go in the match, Hardwick with the kickout and zero people upfield gut running to give him an option, so he attempted the barrels up the middle.
Most of the day in fact, there was a complete lack of gut-running to give options. Or if there was and it was shut down, it was hang about in the same area rather than run some other way to open space.

 

[hk89]

The main problem I have with the doomsayers who are fully fixated on the general shitness of the list, is why they are not asking questions about why we actually look like we can play a good brand of footy for about a quarter each week. Very few games have we looked like complete rubbish for 4 quarters, although we've probably had a couple of those games too. The rather large gap between when we look to be playing with confidence and when we are playing at our worst makes me wonder how much we are looking at a work in progress that can't hold to team instructions for 4 quarters (or even 2 quarters). I'm not saying we are an unpolished gem that just needs some work - there are some obvious and fairly large list gaps - but the unevenness of our level during games leaves some hope that even with the list issues, if we could execute more confidently and consistently , we'd be at least a bit more fun to watch.

 

[hk89]

Ugly reading. Carlton had similar issues but still look way more promising than we do

I actually think that's one of the more optimistic data points. We've lost a lot of games off the back of relatively short mental lapses. Several of those flurry of conceded goals ended up being the difference between a win and loss. Perhaps they were inevitable, and we just don't have the cattle to keep up the defensive pressure long enough to avoid those short and sharp scoring bursts from the opposition. I'd rather our losses come down to 10-15 minutes of deplorable drop-offs, than playing entire games like that and getting done regularly by 10 goals+ (which is what was happening with alarming regularity back in 2004).

 

[H00t]

Apart from the loss I’m a bit concerned because of some comments here after the Moore goal. I appreciate the inside info especially from those that get to training.

I’m concerned about our coaches plans if we are trying to play a run and gun handball game.

It would make sense why we haven’t been able to get it going despite trying for years. It’s the worst game plan for this list. We are slow apart from Impey, CJ and Frost. We can’t play such a way. Our woeful handballing skills and ball handling also don’t help.

A precision kicking game style would work better. And we wouldn’t be able to pull that off either. It would only work against a team slower than us. Which is no team currently.

 

[killerspud]

Ugly reading. Carlton had similar issues but still look way more promising than we do

yeah but we have 4 flags including a threepeat whereas they have squat to show for ALL those number 1 draft picks

 

[Lickmesocks]

Agree with this, plus we're kicking it to turnover merchants in Phillips and Frost... Hartley had a couple of shockers today and I dare say will be dropped.

On SM-G965F using BigFooty.com mobile app

I watch the opposition closely and they leave Frosty free and dare us to give him the ball. Other sides started doing this to Chip Frawley towards the end as well.

If you think I am making this up watch the game closer.

 

[Slow Love]

Yes, and I'm not sure why you're struggling with my point, which is that I think you are wrong. The 2004 list had two or three elite young players, some decent older players, some of which we traded out, a few above average players like Bateman, and a bunch of average to below average players , half of whom didn't survive 4 years to play in the 2008 GF. That team also suffered these kind of losing margins that year:
81
48
56
86
74
66
65
52
80
44
65

I accept that Hodge and Mitchell ended up being better than anyone we currently have on the list is right now, and may well have become better than anyone we have on the list will ever be. That wasn't the situation in 2004 though, and in any case, that doesn't make up for the fact that they were part of a below average team that suffered far worse losses than the team we have right now. That 2004 team actually DESERVED consecutive priority picks. This one does not. Keep in mind we are talking about a team that was about to gain the following players in the next 5 years:
- Franklin
- Roughy
- Lewis
- Birchall
- Rioli
- Burgoyne
- Gibson
- Breust
- Guerra

now THAT is a list of players stacked full of talent. We got them partly because we were a complete sh*t show in 2004 (and 2005). To say the 2004
team was full of unearthed talent seems wrong to me, and IMO falls into the trap of overrating players simply because they were lucky enough to play in a flag winning side. Osborne, Ladson , Brown and Campbell were nowhere near elite, and I'd struggle to rate any of those 4 higher than a B+, and that would probably be being generous for some of them.

I don't think the AFL were wrong in giving us back-to-back priority picks. At the time we needed it, the list was horrible, and we needed help in fixing it. It is my opinion that it was more horrible than what we have now, and the actual results back that up. I understand that is not your point view, and you're welcome to your opinion.

If we added equivalent quality to the current list that we added to the 2004 list over the 5 years that followed, we'd have a very very good side on our hands. The challenge for the club is IMO trying to somehow match what we did from the 2004 draft onwards, both on draft day and at the trade table. The quality of our current list compared to the 2004 list before that year's draft is IMO not our biggest challenge. How well we do on draft day, trade day, and whether we have the balls to make the decisions that will get us the number of picks we need will dictate the success of the rebuild a lot more than any gap in talent between the 2004 (pre-draft) and 2021 lists, which I believe is arguably a non-factor, and actually favours the 2021 list. This is not a double-priority pick list.

I won't insult your intelligence as you've clearly been watching the game at least as long as I have.

That list again though:

Peter Everitt
Nick Holland
Jonathan Hay
Rayden Tallis
Mark Williams
Sam Mitchell
Shane Crawford
Chance Bateman
Joel Smith
Nathan Lonie
Luke Hodge
Rick Ladson (raking kick inside 50!)
Ben Dixon
Richie Vandenberg (led when no-one else was ready)
Nathan Thompson (so promising but cut down by depression)
Trent Croad
John Barker
Brad Sewell
Mark Graham
Angelo Lekkas
and Michael Osbourne, James Morrissey's natural heir

So much more talent compared to what we have now. Do you disagree?

 

[Crankyhawk]

No drama, I genuinely am curious what people think...
I don't claim to have any answers.
But I find it interesting that the view of some is lose every game and we will be right in no time at all (personally do not agree)
Or, recruit 1 or 2 Free Agents add in 1 or 2 top 5 draft picks and we are done... (again do not agree myself).

People seem to think that a year or two of top draft picks will fix everything. I do not agree, GCS and Carlton are good examples.
The team that has dished up what we have seen this year will essentially be unchanged next year and quite a bit the year after.
We can only really change 4 to 6 players per year (players that can cut it).

And any recovery over 4 or 5 years has to factor in that our "A" graders now will no longer be "A" grade, so they too will need replacing.

Of course you do not need 22 "A" graders.
6 to 8 is probably enough, then you need the rest of the squad to bat deeper than the opposition. (I should mention that I really rate Day, so thats one in my book...)

So, do people really think two years is enough to achieve that?

Oh and PLEASE will some one let me in on the joke??
I cannot post Ninth..... mond (all one word)
It turns into the AFL equivalent of Voldemort !!

Try Tenthmond

Hah it works!

 

[Lickmesocks]

I won't insult your intelligence as you've clearly been watching the game at least as long as I have.

That list again though:

Peter Everitt
Nick Holland
Jonathan Hay
Rayden Tallis
Mark Williams
Sam Mitchell
Shane Crawford
Chance Bateman
Joel Smith
Nathan Lonie
Luke Hodge
Rick Ladson (raking kick inside 50!)
Ben Dixon
Richie Vandenberg (led when no-one else was ready)
Nathan Thompson (so promising but cut down by depression)
Trent Croad
John Barker
Brad Sewell
Mark Graham
Angelo Lekkas
and Michael Osbourne, James Morrissey's natural heir

So much talent compared to what we have now. Do you disagree?

Listen to Hodge and Crawford and they both recognise Vandenburg as a leader.

He drove elite training standards and flew the flag on game day even when we were getting flogged. He would bust his gut with hard running and lay huge tackles!!!!

Who is our Vandenburg now? Who is going to stand up and say.....I will lead for the next 2-3 years with my fitness, game preparation, never give up attitude until it is driven into every single player and set us up for the future.

 

[Slow Love]

Listen to Hodge and Crawford and they both recognise Vandenburg as a leader.

He drove elite training standards and flew the flag on game day even when we were getting flogged. He would bust his gut with hard running and lay huge tackles!!!!

Who is our Vandenburg now? Who is going to stand up and say.....I will lead for the next 2-3 years with my fitness, game preparation, never give up attitude until it is driven into every single player and set us up for the future.

I couldn't agree more. He also stood up whenever we were challenged physically. I've no idea who fulfills this role now

 

[Pessimistic]

The vibe ACTUALLY in 2004-05 was not quite how we see it now. Remember the call that Sam Mitchell’s game saving tackle saved clarkos career? That was 2010

Did this moment save Alastair Clarkson's coaching career?

Imagine if this didn't happen...🤔

www.zerohanger.com

Hawks fly, Tigers flounder

THE popular perception is that Terry Wallace had his choice of either the Richmond or Hawthorn job at the end of the 2004 season and elected to go with the Tigers, Garry Lyon writes.

www.perthnow.com.au

I still think this list goes deeper, even than 2008, even if the top end may not be there

 

[Dipper]

It was odd , used to see some similar stuff trotted out in 2005.
Even with that and pretty much not locking down at any stoppage in the middle or around the ground , playing slow when behind etc ...

Our personal should still have beaten them , we essentially made it a who wants it more game and floundered .
That was the most galling part of it.

It was talent/will v talent/will after 1/4 time we were smashed .....by the 18th side who were severely undermanned

It was like we quit on our stool, shaking our heads saying no más.

On moto g(7) using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[The hands of stone]

Listen to Hodge and Crawford and they both recognise Vandenburg as a leader.

He drove elite training standards and flew the flag on game day even when we were getting flogged. He would bust his gut with hard running and lay huge tackles!!!!

Who is our Vandenburg now? Who is going to stand up and say.....I will lead for the next 2-3 years with my fitness, game preparation, never give up attitude until it is driven into every single player and set us up for the future.

He was huge on game day setting the younger players up .
You would see him directing Buddy and Rough on where to be even when to led.

He would be the one making sure our mids were set up , even our defenders.

We were damn lucky to have him at the time, very underated .

 

[kawker]

I watch the opposition closely and they leave Frosty free and dare us to give him the ball. Other sides started doing this to Chip Frawley towards the end as well.

If you think I am making this up watch the game closer.

confirmation bias...

 

[hk89]

I won't insult your intelligence as you've clearly been watching the game at least as long as I have.

So much more talent compared to what we have now. Do you disagree?

Once you've eliminated those we traded out for picks (in some cases quite fortunately because they were not that good or were mentally spent), or were too old to make it to the next flag, yes I disagree with you. The players on that list that managed to play in the 2008 GF are what we were dealing with as the base for the next flag and that was:

Mitchell
Hodge
Williams
Crawford
Bateman
Croad
Sewell
Ladson
Osbourne
Brown (who you left off your list for some reason?)
Campbell (who you also seem to have left out).



Based on what they were producing at that point (and I don't see any fairer point of comparison, because players on our current list like Day, Jiath etc obviously have scope for improvement just like several on that list improved, Sewell only played his first game that year, Hodge and Mitchell a year away from starting to really kick in as top level talents) I like our current list of "might make it to GF day in 4 years" players better:
O'Meara
Mitchell
Wingard
Sicily
Day
Impey
Hardwick
Jiath
Scrimshaw
Worpel

With 1 more to make up the 11 players in the 2004 11 from the likes of:
DGB
Kosi
Lewis
Downie
Brockman
Reeves

In fact if you include players that will be the same age or younger than Crawford was on GF day in 2008, and assume a 4 year window, then you could feasibly add:
Breust
Gunston
(I doubt it though, Crawford was elite on the preparation front which allowed him to go that long, and Gunston is showing some signs of wear and tear already, although that might be unkind given that he could easily overcome his current back niggles and play several more productive years).

IMO our 2021 had more talent depth compared to the 2004 players that made it until 2008 had. It doesn't have the two standouts of Hodge and Mitchell (and arguably Williams), but I'd argue that list of 2021 players is actually better right now than the 11 2004 players were IN 2004. On top of that we still have scope for improvement from Jiath, Day, Scrimshaw Worpel, Kosi, Lewis, Reeves etc, just as the 2004 list had scope for improvement.

So if your contention was that 2004 was a better base to build on than the 2021 side, then yes I disagree. The soul destroying losses and two priority picks that 2004/2005 side managed also backs me up - unless we go on a big slide into massive losing margins during the rest of the year, which could still happen. I also suspect that right now our backline and forward lines are both being made to look worse than they are due to a massively underperforming midfield group. I believe you think the 2004 core was better because you remember how they played together as a group in 2008 once we added 4 years of development and these handy players around them:
- Franklin
- Roughy
- Lewis
- Birchall
- Rioli
- Guerra

You add 4 years development to Jiath, Day, Scrimshaw, Worpel, DGB, Kosi, Lewis, Reeves and put some more quality players around them that we recruit in the next few drafts (and/or trade periods) and then picture how you'd view the 2021 bunch. It is hard to picture the 2004 mob as they were in 2004 after you saw them play together in a flag in 2008, with a lot more talent around them than they had in 2004.