It was looking that way, General, but he was surplus to requirements. He wasn't going to get a run in our midfield. And heck, we got picks 39,46 and 70 for him and McGlynn With those, we picked up Grimley(39), Stratton!!!(46) and Suckling(70). While we may have only really seen Stratton pay off (and pay off he has), I have no doubt it will be a win-win for both clubs when we see Grimley develop over the next few years, and Suckling could well pay off this year - both played in the NAB matches, and Suckling looked really good, while Grimley is clearly a future prospect. Stratton filled a key deficiency, and seems to have bulked up considerably over the preseason and may just end up playing FB for us. While Kennedy and McGlynn were flourishing at the Swans, they were playing in positions in which we had no room for, so don't be too disappointed by that. The trade will work out just nicely I think, for both teams.
I think thats a good summation of the situation Spud. Sometimes players just do not fit at a particular club whether by team structure, personality clash or failure to gel with the club culture. Better for all concerned to move on and find better options. However, I understand GenHodge frustrations.
In hind sight, we probably have room for McGlynn in our forward line with the departures of Hooper and Peterson, but that was 12months after the trade so not entirely relevant. And meh, we played him as a tagger, full credit to Roos for re-inventing him as a small forward. The emotional attachment with Joshs' surname aside, I don't see where he would fit into the hawks side. I don't mind the Swannies, they're pretty hard to dislike. Roos was a great coach, the only gripe I have with them is with their ground - the SCG being about as large as a biggest loser finale winner. Edit: Yeah, agreed FSB
I see your point Spud. Very happy with Stratton. One day I expect him to knock out Chuck Norris. Just would like to have kept Kennedy and traded McGlynn for that Pick 46 (Stratton).
<blockquote>Quote from Nick on February 22, 2011, 22:07 <blockquote>Quote from Ruddy on February 22, 2011, 19:09 @Jason I agree Boyd killed it in the NAB cup, yet he scored poorly. Obviously it's just the NAB cup game, but that is my biggest worry with him, even when he has great games, he may not score that well.</blockquote> Ruddy I'm a little confused you think he scored poorly. I'm assuming we are going by DT scores as SC are too inflated, and his adjusted total was 95? Or are you going by SC scores?</blockquote> No, i'm going by SC scores. Obviously they aren't the best representation, because of the NAB cup format, but DT scores are probably just as bad. At least with SC scores, we see he got a lot of the ball, but because of his below par efficiency, his handball to kick ratio, and his lack of long kicks, his scoring was below what others got for that number of disposals.
<blockquote>Quote from GeneralHodge on February 22, 2011, 22:49 I can't believe Hawthorn let him go for nothing. It hurts.</blockquote> As others said they were surplus. Also, they said they wanted to leave, we couldn't do anything. Given our midfield is way better than our defence, i'd take Stratton over either of them.
Kennedy could be ripe for a first mid-level upgrade in the mids after his bye. If his tank as improved again like reported. I see his role interchangeable with Goodes, but I do like his tackling stats... On Boyd earlier it is his kicking that creates good SC scores as his Kick to Handball ratio is great. First round NAB games scores in SC or DT should be taken with 'a grain of salt'. Currently I have Hodge, Watson and Juddy Mid Prems. Has come at the expense of Fwd Prems going the lower end of prems there. Opting for the GNR mid strategy with the usual suspects. I think I need a Chess Grand Master or CIA stategist to work out what to do with R6 bye conundrum. What I want and what I can get just doesn't add up. Especially when the next best guys are all R4 bye guys..
@dabombers Interesting going wit that combination of three. Watson and Judd will probably need a trade each for SC finals, while there are question marks over Hodge, especially since, if Hawthorn want to make top four, he can't be the standout this year, with the likes of Mitchell, Sewell, Burgoyne etc., hopefully bridging the gap a bit.
Just a quick one.... Boyd or Bartel??? Both Premiums, but will Bartel hit Elite with no GAJ around?? Thoughts?
Everything else aside, I prefer Bartel, Martyg. But if you're shooting for overall, you might find Boyd slots into the team better as a result of bye placement.
Thanks Spud, I have had him for the past 3 seasons and he never lets me down... Not too worried about the tonsils, he should be good for round 1. With Swan, Montagna, Judd (SC), Beams (DT) don't really have any issues with byes...
<blockquote>Quote from yumcha on February 24, 2011, 11:24 Is Hodge a definite in your teams? He was until all this achilles injury talk lately. </blockquote> I was never even considering Hodge this year. If Hawthorn expect to make top 4, then the likes of Burgoyne, Mitchell, Sewell etc. will have to pull their weight a little more, as well as the smaller named guys. If that happens, then Hodge will be relied upon less, which will probably result in less SC points for him.
Ruddy, there's no reason why Hodge's points have to go down for the other players to go up. look at St.kilda, 5 premiums with 1 elite and two who avg around 115ppg. the main problem I have with your argument is, i've heard people say the same thing, and then almost in the next breath, argue that Ablett's output will go down because he won't have the same support he had at Geelong. The arguments are contradictory. maybe with better support in the middle, Hodgey steps up to elite this year. he's certainly good enough, and in the right age bracket.
Hodge might be someone I bring in as another prem midfielder, but I won't start with him simply because of the issues with round 6. I feel I already have enough points missing from that round as it is and simply can't afford to have to cover yet another player. I reckon there's every chance he can finish in the top 6 midfielders if he can stay fit.
@Bonesy Given Hawthorn's midfield, Hodge was getting the physical support he needed, but he wasn't getting enough support in the way of hitting targets, and getting the team going. Ablett is in a completely different predicament. They players at GC are mighty talented, but they are unlikely to be able to give Ablett the support in the way of shepherds, tackles, etc. that he was receiving at Geelong with the hard bodied midfield. Hodge will likely find it harder to get 30 disposals in a game, simply because the number of others who are getting high possessions. Ablett will probably still be able to average 30+, but he will be under more pressure when he disposes of it, and may see a rise in turnovers, or has nobody to link up with and handball to. Just for the record, Hawks have 4 players who averaged 100+ last year (including Bruce) and Mitchell on 99, Rioli on 95, and Sewell on 93. I would expect Franklin, Hodge, Rioli, Burgoyne, Sewell and Mitchell to all average 100+ this year (Bruce depends on his role). The three that didn't last year, all had injury interrupted seasons, and Mitchell was basically averaging that, even after breaking his hand etc. When you add the expected increase in scoring from the likes of Gibson, Roughead, and even guys like Guerra, who didn't have great seasons last year, it is hard to see Hodge averaging 115 again this year. 100+ definitely, and even 110+ is probable, but i don't think he will go top 6 in the midfield.