Review The most idiotic media call about Hawthorns rebuild

[KermitJagger]

King said we had all facets of our game going well but the area we led the competition in statistically was clearance work.

The measure for the conversation was did we have the game to win a preliminary final. Gerard thinks we do, King thinks we have improved heaps but we aren’t there yet.

I don’t see much to complain about in this clip. It’s all good isn’t it?

I have a problem with it, because it's King's classic "find a conclusion based on one stat and then try to fit everything to it". Sure we've been good at clearance work and we're scoring well from that source, but across this purple patch in terms of differential we're top 3 in scores from all sources - Kick In, Stoppage and Turnover. In an absolute sense we're top 3 for scores from Kick In as well as stoppages.

Also the fact that he's saying "Well they're good at getting the ball forward and then making sure it doesn't go back the other way, but that's it" - what is that supposed to mean? We're good at the two most important elements in winning a game of footy? He keeps saying that we haven't seen other parts but he hasn't given 1 metric we should be improving on, not a one. It's just fluff.

Maybe it's a bit much but I expect people paid for their opinions to be more informed.

 

[grumbleguts]

King ..... wasn't he the "expert" who tipped Sydney to win the 2014 GF by 10 goals or more?

He tipped swans by 36, when they showed the graphic it had King: Swans by 63. He saw it and said "that'll do"

 

[Buttonsticher]

IMO the most informative, insightful and intelligent football pundits are The Front Bar. I enjoy Wheatleys show on SEN (Podcast only-no ads). AFL 360 should piss Robbo off and put Sellors in.

 

[Yardie]

I thought my wife was joking when she said she'd leave me if I didn't stop singing "I'm a Believer." Then I saw her face...

I know people make great contributions to the forum in their insights on all things related football.

But I'm really here for this pure gold content. So good.

 

[grumbleguts]

king's comment a couple of weeks ago where he said "I see Hawthorn as an 8 to 10 win side."

Maybe, but then stop and think who we are playing. Coming up immediately were Richmond and West Coast. There's your 8 you muppet. We finish with Richmond and North. So that's it? Did you even look at the rest of the draw?

 

[play2win]

King’s views largely reflect the bets he has placed

Purple the deadshite kept on harping on about how we should be stripped of draft picks over the racism saga, even after the Afl had clearly responded that this wouldn’t happen. We should all chip in for a drink card for him at eldorado choice of pub.

 

[Stranglers]

King said we had all facets of our game going well but the area we led the competition in statistically was clearance work.

The measure for the conversation was did we have the game to win a preliminary final. Gerard thinks we do, King thinks we have improved heaps but we aren’t there yet.

I don’t see much to complain about in this clip. It’s all good isn’t it?

I agree, I thought it was reasonably measured. All he said was we aren't leading the competition in every aspect YET. Then said he still expects plenty of growth to come. Pretty fair assessment I'd say.

 

[kazzooka]

For me it's from most to least idiodic.

1. Montagna - 10 year rebuild? just so stupid. most teams move from rebuilding to competing for finals, to flag contenders, to decline to rebuilding in 8. I'd say in the last 10 years onld Gold Coast, North and Essendon haven't been flag contenders. And all have certainly been in finals contention and out of "rebuild"

2. Barrett - I understand what he's trying to say in that Hawthorn did not make list decisions to be most competive in 2023 they made decisions to improve. We could have had a better 2023 if we kept those players and traded in others etc.. but then would decline in 2024/25 and be stuck no where. EVERY club does these decisions. We took the shortest path to a Flag not the shortest path to getting out of the bottom 4.

3. King - What Sam and the club did took serious balls to get rid of/lose to retirement a 3 time premiership mid, ruckman/captain, a brownlow medalist and highly touted recruit with multiple top 3 bnf results. And back in a midfield consisting of a young back flanker, a struggling irishman, a mid season draft pick with less than 40 games, a struggling late pick inside mid who can't stay in the side with poor kicking and the CEOs son. Sam said it best at Peter Crimmons medal " I knew something you didn't know" he knew Day and Nash could be quality mids, he knew Newcombe was really special and could handle the extra attention of Mitchell not being there.

4. This was under clarkson and many of his critisisms were valid. Clarkson became too attached to players especailly the commitment he made to the recruits who came for success and the 3rd wave failed basically on the back of a few dud pickups, a broken leg and cyril retirement. But Clarkson couldn't admit that the list build failed.

 

[cryptor]

King said we had all facets of our game going well but the area we led the competition in statistically was clearance work.

The measure for the conversation was did we have the game to win a preliminary final. Gerard thinks we do, King thinks we have improved heaps but we aren’t there yet.

I don’t see much to complain about in this clip. It’s all good isn’t it?

His analysis is very shallow and I suspect he's using full season stats to form his opinions. Which isn't idiotic, but there's a stark difference between how we played and who was available in the first half dozen or so games and the games since the win over the Bulldogs in round 8.

We lead or are in the top few teams for a large variety of stats (averages and differentials) when looking at that most recent stretch of games. It’s very relevant context that he seems to just be ignoring.

But even then he says we lead a key part of the game and are good at everything else with scope to get even better. Which is nice, but you’d think if he doesn’t believe in or rate our current form that he’d be able to clearly articulate where our weaknesses are.

Instead he just offers some weak justification that our strong forward half defensive pressure is covering up for our backline (provides zero evidence of that) and suggests the best teams will be able to score against that even though the numbers suggest we’re one of the hardest teams transition against and we are the leaders from scoring from defensive half over the last half dozen or so rounds.

As someone else mentioned. It’s like he’s picked his conclusion and then tried to justify it. It’s lazy but not idiotic as he could still be proven right in time by factors that have nothing to do with talent or system.

 

[KermitJagger]

His analysis is very shallow and I suspect he's using full season stats to form his opinions. Which isn't idiotic, but there's a stark difference between how we played and who was available in the first half dozen or so games and the games since the win over the Bulldogs in round 8.

We lead or are in the top few teams for a large variety of stats (averages and differentials) when looking at that most recent stretch of games. It’s very relevant context that he seems to just be ignoring.

But even then he says we lead a key part of the game and are good at everything else with scope to get even better. Which is nice, but you’d think if he doesn’t believe in or rate our current form that he’d be able to clearly articulate where our weaknesses are.

Instead he just offers some weak justification that our strong forward half defensive pressure is covering up for our backline (provides zero evidence of that) and suggests the best teams will be able to score against that even though the numbers suggest we’re one of the hardest teams transition against and we are the leaders from scoring from defensive half over the last half dozen or so rounds.

As someone else mentioned. It’s like he’s picked his conclusion and then tried to justify it. It’s lazy but not idiotic as he could still be proven right in time by factors that have nothing to do with talent or system.

The part where he tries to justify what we're not doing at an elite level is so frustrating to listen to because he can't even articulate it properly. I was waiting for him to say something about how we're opened up too easily on rebound, or how we're poor defensively 1:1 when the ball gets down there, or that we're not built to defend against taller forwards and are struggling with high ball or whatever else. None of those things are true but I was hoping he'd at least give me something to look into.

 

[Ned Ryerson]

Thread needs this to be added to the poll option:

Every AFL club’s 2022 draft haul assessed — and how their new recruits will fit in

Draft’s ‘big winner’ revealed; duo’s gamble could backfire: Every AFL team graded

www.foxsports.com.au

Ben Waterworth - the D+ of footy journalists.

 

[kazzooka]

Might have to move Kingy up to second spot in my rankings…



Apparently all we’ve got is our clearance game. And our defensive profile is just on the back of winning the contest and locking the ball in the forward half.

I don’t know… some people, maybe even most people would just call that being good at football. But Kingy sees right through that form line.

Sydney's only real way of winning is scoring more than the opposition. Not sure that's gonna hold up as a tactic long term and Freo proved it on the weekend. If you don't let them score more than you they are really beatable. Other clubs will learn from that game and I'd be surprised if during the run home and in finals if all clubs aren't trying to replicate that and score more than them.

 

[MasterSamurai]

Montagna is a . 10 year rebuilds is actually an ok " going rate" at shit truck clubs like saints so for Muppets like him, 10 years, is just around the corner.

 

[cryptor]

Sydney's only real way of winning is scoring more than the opposition. Not sure that's gonna hold up as a tactic long term and Freo proved it on the weekend. If you don't let them score more than you they are really beatable. Other clubs will learn from that game and I'd be surprised if during the run home and in finals if all clubs aren't trying to replicate that and score more than them.

It has been the prevailing tactic throughout the history of the game so I can understand why they'd stick with it and other teams would continue to replicate it. I struggle to think of the last time a team scored more than their opposition and weren't able to translate that into a W. There's probably a good reason why coaches strive to implement that.

 

[Faraway Hawk]

Barrett for me should be held accountable for the rubbish he kept writing and saying as the chief AFL Journo. There's accountability for every job so then why isn't this guy being questioned? The very least he can do is come out like Caro and say he was wrong with his call of tanking. The club was crystal clear on why we let go of Tom and Jaeger and we have seen the results. The irony of Barrett doubling down of his tanking call is I am dead set sure we wouldn't have won as many games last year or this year with Tom and Jaeger still in the middle.

Barrett, I know you are reading this...show some dignity and admit you got it wrong.

 

[MasterSamurai]

And although I don't mind King's analysis most times, I'm lost as to what he's on about Hawthorn. We're a very young team coming from zip and five with a young coach , NO ONE in their right mind expected us to push for finals let alone a premiership. I don't get his jib on this one.

 

[Slainte]

It's because of his Saints background.

Montagna has a lot of inside knowledge on the art of the slow rebuild. St Kilda started rebuilding in 2012 after getting very close to saluting in 2010. Twelve years later, it looks like they are still at it - and it could easily be another twelve years. You don't want to rush these things.

 

[CD Xbow]

I thought my wife was joking when she said she'd leave me if I didn't stop singing "I'm a Believer." Then I saw her face...

She would have taken the last train to Clarkesville then.

 

[Paul Kersey]

King ..... wasn't he the "expert" who tipped Sydney to win the 2014 GF by 10 goals or more?

Yep. Remember he wrote some article about ‘how are Hawthorn going to stop the Swans forward line?’ thinking wtf when you consider Hawthorn’s forward line for the 2014 GF. Also can’t remember if it’s him or that arse hat Gerard Healy who never tipped us in a grand final. Actually wouldn’t shock me if Healy never tipped us in a final at all.

 

[jenniferHAWKinS]

Why worry what any of them say?

Because it is frustrating. They are supposed to be impartial and judge football teams on a week to week to basis. Not be stuck on previous misjudgements or biases and worst still, not have the balls to admit when they were wrong! I just want these guys to admit that our youth is far more talented than they 1st thought.

 

[CD Xbow]

Most footy pundits are morons. There's a huge amount of groupthink as well because it's all basically mates looking after each other. It's why anyone who goes against the grain makes them nervous - that and the fact it's a huge boys club.

I will give Kane a pass as he's shown his views can evolve over time but people like Barratt are the equivalent of Andrew Bolt. Rely on us reacting to their stupid calls to make a name for themselves.

Good analogy between Bolt and Barret - both are clickbait morons. I did hear a joke the other day.
Q. What's the difference between Andrew Bolt and Damien Barret

Spoiler: Answer

A. Bolt knows a lot more about footy.

 

[Faraway Hawk]

https://www.afl.com.au/news/1163064/barrett-time-for-tough-calls-at-tigers-starting-with-dusty

So here's Barett calling for Tigers to "tank". Ship off Dusty, Lynch and wait for it...even Rioii!

 

[MasterSamurai]

Barrett = Muppet

 

[happy_hawks]

Great thread. Barrett by a mile. At least King and Montanga try to back up opinions with evidence and analysis, may not agree with it, but better than the vitriolic opinions of Barrett.

Cornes I respect as one of the few independent thinkers in the AFL media. Darcy's lame attempt to take down Cornes earlier this year pretty sums up the AFL boys club media landscape.

Darcy:

“You (Cornes) are a 300 game player and you have a special place in the footy community, as you should have for your deeds on the football field, and I feel like the footy community is a golden ticket of people that generally have each other’s back. But you take a position that is almost unique where you have been probably more mean spirited and nasty to people than anyone in the history of our industry."

Cornes has the audacity to forgo the "golden ticket" and instead calls it how he sees it. Good on him, wish there were more independent voices that valued integrity and honesty over "having each other’s backs".

Heaven forbid someone question Luke occupying a media role, while sitting on the Bulldogs board and commentating his son playing, conflicted much?

 

[HairyO]

Its Purple. Its always Purple.