Have we gone with too many small guys?

[Bluthy]

Gresham 177cm
Lonie 174cm
Sinclair 180cm
Curren 178cm
Minchington 179cm

Watching Lonie stand side by side his opponents in the praccy game really drove home what he is up against in terms of his size - he looked like a kid against men. Would we really want to go into a Grand Final with three very small players in Gresham, Lonie and Sinclair? Small players have a tendency to go missing in the huge crush and contested footy of finals. To have 3 of them - particularly as at least one would be rotating through the midfield at any one time, which is a brutal battleground in finals - is a big investment in smalls.

Were we wise to use our first rounder for another tiny player in Gresham? The average height of AFL footy players just keeps going up. Cripps is now close to 195 cm apparently - bigger than Paddy. Was the thinking "Oh his size is fine in junior footy - he's getting plenty of it including contested ball so no problems". But then you go into AFL and everyone is much bigger. You look 5 years down the track when we are in our first grand final - by then perhaps 177 will be considered absolutely tiny and you would have to be freakishly Ablett like good to justify your place at that size.

Was it poor risk management to get yet another small guy with our first rounder when we had done well with 2 small guys working their way into our top 22 already with bargain picks? Obviously you can point at Mitchell - but there are exceptions to all rules and who knows how even he would go in 5 years time when the average size is even bigger. And there is no guarantee that Gresham will get close to Mitchell abilities.

[BringBackMadDog]

Hawthorn had Dureya (179cm), Hill (181cm), Puopolo (173cm), Mitchell (179cm) and Rioli (177cm) all in their last premiership team so I don't think height is the issue, its whether our smaller guys can develop into B grade or above players, plus I don't think that we will ever have anymore than 3 of those players named in our side on any given day. The rest of our midfield/utility players are 183 or above with the exception of Joey.

[ripplug66]

Gresham 177cm
Lonie 174cm
Sinclair 180cm
Curren 178cm
Minchington 179cm

Watching Lonie stand side by side his opponents in the praccy game really drove home what he is up against in terms of his size - he looked like a kid against men. Would we really want to go into a Grand Final with three very small players in Gresham, Lonie and Sinclair? Small players have a tendency to go missing in the huge crush and contested footy of finals. To have 3 of them - particularly as at least one would be rotating through the midfield at any one time, which is a brutal battleground in finals - is a big investment in smalls.

Were we wise to use our first rounder for another tiny player in Gresham? The average height of AFL footy players just keeps going up. Cripps is now close to 195 cm apparently - bigger than Paddy. Was the thinking "Oh his size is fine in junior footy - he's getting plenty of it including contested ball so no problems". But then you go into AFL and everyone is much bigger. You look 5 years down the track when we are in our first grand final - by then perhaps 177 will be considered absolutely tiny and you would have to be freakishly Ablett like good to justify your place at that size.

Was it poor risk management to get yet another small guy with our first rounder when we had done well with 2 small guys working their way into our top 22 already with bargain picks? Obviously you can point at Mitchell - but there are exceptions to all rules and who knows how even he would go in 5 years time when the average size is even bigger. And there is no guarantee that Gresham will get close to Mitchell abilities.

It isn't small players that go missing in finals, its small forwards. A small mid can be excellent in finals. Harvey and Mitchell do pretty well without thinking of others. Another thing is they wont all make it anyway. Minchington and Curren are on their last chance. And I think maybe we have a look at Gresham before we even slightly suggest it could be poor risk management. We also have Acres on the way up and he is a tall mid. A couple more wouldn't hurt but there is plenty of time.

[Bluthy]

Hawthorn had Dureya (179cm), Hill (181cm), Puopolo (173cm), Mitchell (179cm) and Rioli (177cm) all in their last premiership team so I don't think height is the issue, its whether our smaller guys can develop into B grade or above players, plus I don't think that we will ever have anymore than 3 of those players named in our side on any given day. The rest of our midfield/utility players are 183 or above with the exception of Joey.

Good reply. I didn't realise Puppolo was 173 - he's pretty stocky. Mitchell and Rioli are freaks in their own way. Lonie could be a freak - he has some real x-factor. As Clarkson obviously likes, little guys can give you plenty of run-down factor and fwd pressure as Lonie and Sinclair have both shown. Hawthorn have the best system I think any VFL/AFL team has ever had so it's hard to compare what they do .

When these small Hawks were drafted 179cm probably would have been considered pretty average for a non-tall footy player and with their experience and fitness they can over-come any size deficiency presently. What concerns me is 5 years down the track if these guys at below 179cm are just going to be completely out of their weight division. You've got to draft looking 5 years ahead and try to predict the trends.

[spert]

What's the difference between a 171cm player and a 200cm player kicking a goal? We need to improve speed around the packs and though the middle, and a bunch of gangly gorillas won't give us that.

[LTN16]

Size doesn't matter.. It's how you use it

[ripplug66]

Size doesn't matter.. It's how you use it

Totally agree. The better you use it the more pleasure you give someone.

[Sainternist]

Size doesn't matter.. It's how you use it

Totally agree. The better you use it the more pleasure you give someone.

Yes, just so long as they bulk out. There's a bit of a myth about height bringing upon success, when in actuality it's all about having the right girth.

[Dr Spaceman]

Size doesn't matter.. It's how you use it

Totally agree. The better you use it the more pleasure you give someone.

Yes, just so long as they bulk out. There's a bit of a myth about height bringing upon success, when in actuality it's all about having the right girth.

Agree.

And if you have both size and girth, well, that's just the cream on top.

[ripplug66]

Size doesn't matter.. It's how you use it

Totally agree. The better you use it the more pleasure you give someone.

Yes, just so long as they bulk out. There's a bit of a myth about height bringing upon success, when in actuality it's all about having the right girth.

Agree.

And if you have both size and girth, well, that's just the cream on top.

Size and girth may matter but if you cant touch the ball then no one gets pleasure.

[Bluthy]

What's the difference between a 171cm player and a 200cm player kicking a goal? We need to improve speed around the packs and though the middle, and a bunch of gangly gorillas won't give us that.

Yes we need different sized players but I'm wondering if there is a size that becomes an issue in terms of effectiveness in the future especially in finals. If Mitchell is 177 and lets say the average height of an AFL player is currently 185 - so Mitchell is giving away 8 cm in height. That's not a huge barrier. When Gresham is at his peak in 7 years time, lets say the average height is now 190 - so Gresham is now giving away 13 cm. That could be a huge issue in terms of being able to hold your own in packs, blocking, getting pushed off the ball easily, marking (especially important when considering wanting to keep possession of the footy) and spoiling. Should we be drafting a 177cm player now knowing that in 5 years time when we want them to come into their peak, that will be considered not just small, but tiny?

[ripplug66]

What's the difference between a 171cm player and a 200cm player kicking a goal? We need to improve speed around the packs and though the middle, and a bunch of gangly gorillas won't give us that.

Yes we need different sized players but I'm wondering if there is a size that becomes an issue in terms of effectiveness in the future especially in finals. If Mitchell is 177 and lets say the average height of an AFL player is currently 185 - so Mitchell is giving away 8 cm in height. That's not a huge barrier. When Gresham is at his peak in 7 years time, lets say the average height is now 190 - so Gresham is now giving away 13 cm. That could be a huge issue in terms of being able to hold your own in packs, blocking, getting pushed off the ball easily, marking (especially important when considering wanting to keep possession of the footy) and spoiling. Should we be drafting a 177cm player now knowing that in 5 years time when we want them to come into their peak, that will be considered not just small, but tiny?

The average isn't going to increase 5 cm in that short of a period. That could take 30 years.

[dragit]

It's not the size that matters but what you do with it that counts.

[To the top]

I think there are a couple of the 5 named who will have to lift a level, so would not expect all of those named to be in the same side.

Lonie, on his first year signs, would be the only "lock" - and we are yet to see Gresham.

Then again opportunity can produce.

Puopolo was a mature aged recruit from Norwood, where he was initially struggling to hold a spot as a forward pocket - then Bassett shifted him to a back pocket, told him a few home truths and the rest is history including being Drafted by Hawthorn.

Hawthorn initially played him in defense, but have now shifted him forward - where he started out at Norwood, including from their Junior ranks, with limited success.

[desertsaint]

It's not the size that matters but what you do with it that counts.

Ah, but just how much you have to do, depends on it's size!

[borderbarry]

I noticed that Bluthy missed Joey and Jack out of his list.

[mr six o'clock]

Five is enough to do the Oomph a loompah dance !

[Bluthy]

I noticed that Bluthy missed Joey and Jack out of his list.

Joey should retire this season or the next, but definitely Steven at 180cm. You can throw in rookie Nick O'Kearney at 180 as well. I don't know how we compare to other lists but we seem to have a lot of short-arses. They are obviously conscious of this as they've spoken about wanting taller mids. So it was an interesting decision to go with a 177 mid with our first rounder. But I guess they considered Gresham too good to pass up - lets hope he can deliver.

We do have some guys who should play through the midfield a bit that have some height - Ross 187, Acres 190, Murdoch 188, White 188, maybe even Roberton at 194 as a defensive midfielder. If we get desperate then we throw Pierce in there to freak out the oppo mids.

Interesting article on height in AFL http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/s ... 6650225771

They found those shorter than 180cm could just about forget trying for a place in the elite league - unless they happened to be an indigenous or Pacific Islander player, who thrive on leg speed and lightning reflexes. But just 88 (16.4 per cent) of the 535 non-indigenous/islander recruits over the seven years stood less than 183cm (6ft).

[saintact7]

If just one of them achieves even close to what Milney did we are on a winner. Just hope the ball bounces right for them when it counts!

[samuraisaint]

Hawthorn had Dureya (179cm), Hill (181cm), Puopolo (173cm), Mitchell (179cm) and Rioli (177cm) all in their last premiership team so I don't think height is the issue, its whether our smaller guys can develop into B grade or above players, plus I don't think that we will ever have anymore than 3 of those players named in our side on any given day. The rest of our midfield/utility players are 183 or above with the exception of Joey.

Mitchell is more like 175cms and Crawford was only 173!

[Freebird]

[dragit]

Size doesn't matter.. It's how you use it

I totally missed this post, sorry for repeating you!

[Zed]

Footy is more and more about keeping possession. If they can get their hands on the ball enough and have excellent disposal there will always be a spot available.

[BringBackMadDog]

Hawthorn had Dureya (179cm), Hill (181cm), Puopolo (173cm), Mitchell (179cm) and Rioli (177cm) all in their last premiership team so I don't think height is the issue, its whether our smaller guys can develop into B grade or above players, plus I don't think that we will ever have anymore than 3 of those players named in our side on any given day. The rest of our midfield/utility players are 183 or above with the exception of Joey.

Mitchell is more like 175cms and Crawford was only 173!

Not according to the hawthorn official website, it lists Mitchell at 179, I haven't personally measured him so I can't confirm

[Sainternist]

Size doesn't matter.. It's how you use it

Totally agree. The better you use it the more pleasure you give someone.

Yes, just so long as they bulk out. There's a bit of a myth about height bringing upon success, when in actuality it's all about having the right girth.

Agree.

And if you have both size and girth, well, that's just the cream on top.

Size and girth may matter but if you cant touch the ball then no one gets pleasure.

Right. In that case, the only way the team could take pleasure would be by using their imagination of getting possession and kicking goals.