Rule 529: Review at the bye round.
A not so quick check-in, looking at the now and the future
Subscribe to Hawks Insiders for the most in-depth and wide ranging Hawthorn cover there is. From exclusive interviews, analysis, match recaps, and podcasts, the Insiders have you covered.
When putting some initial thought to the bye week review of Rule 529, we were 0-5, so it looked to be one with a focus on how the second half of the season could be used to set up the team for 2025 rather than focusing on the competitive position for the remainder of 2024.
How quickly the outlook for 2024 has changed since that time, with the team on a 6-1 run, so has this assessment of Rule 529 for the balance of this season.
However, I will make some observations about the implications for 2025 along the way. For those who may not have seen the pre-season assessment of Rule 529 , you can find it here:
The underlying principles of Rule 529 were as follows:
23 games for the season with 23 players to be selected gave us 529 as the key number for the season as Rob McCartney stated in his pre-season chat. This meant for the first half of the season, it equated to 322 games (14 rounds) and for the second half of the season left 207 games (9 rounds) to be allocated.
To allocate the games within the team structure, the following “rule” was applied: 7 defenders; 8 midfielders; 7 forwards and 1 ruck man. (Note: I have made some comments on how this has played out over the season to date.)
The other factor that does come into play with the bye review is the contract status of the playing list, particularly for those who are currently not contracted beyond the end of 2024 as follows (in number order): Morrison (F/A), Frost, Jiath, Nash (F/A), Meek, Gunston (F/A), Wingard (F/A), Stephens (F/A), Breust (F/A), Grainger-Barras, Phillips, Bennetts, O’Sullivan and Tucker.
(It will be interesting to see if any of the players in this group will be “gifted” games as Jack Saunders was a couple of years ago. I think given where the team is now, this may be less likely, which may be unfortunate for a couple of them.)
As we have all seen, the injury wand for hasn’t been as favourable to us this year as it was last year.
Rucks (14 games/9 games)
(^ Out of contract at the end of 2024.)
Meek has taken over the role of the number one ruck option, and has shown his capacity to provide a contest on the ground as much as in ruck contests, being a key contributor to the midfield’s impact on the turnaround through the season.
His ankle injury in Round 12, which provided Reeves with the opportunity to show his learnings over the season, Meek may be managed at times later in the year. It was noted that he had work done on his ankle at ¾ time in the Tigers game and ankles can be troublesome for ruck men. It could also become a strategic decision for the coaching panel that would be an interesting watch for the later part of the year.
2025 projection
Meek has certainly earned himself a contract extension and I think that Tucker would also be given another rookie contract, as he looks to be improving his physical capacity as his body matures.
Backs (98/63)
Note:
Whist the backs were allocated 98 games for the first 14 games, they ended up taking 103 games over this period of the season.
Also, having classified Hardwick as a forward after the pre-season, he played more as a defender than a forward for this part of the season and would’ve skewed the allocation further.
Tall backs
At the beginning of the year, it was known that Blanck was going to miss the year and it was not clear as to when Grainger-Barass would be back on the ground, so the way Frost has performed as the genuine key tall defender has been outstanding. I think he may not only have earned himself another contract, but also a game off on the run home which would allow some others, primarily DGB, to be given some game time with a decision to be made on a contract offer for 2025.
Small backs
The work of this group has been consistent throughout the first half of the year. It is noted that Mitchell, who was under an injury issue in the pre-season, had become a regular in the team when he has been fit. However, looking at the Tiger’s game, it appears that he may be a “victim” of the Hardwick experiment and the development of the options in the forward half, which means Hardwick playing back forces him out. Impey’s leadership has been a slow burn and was finally recognised over the Indigenous rounds. Amon’s delivery by foot has been a feature of the improved ball movement from the back half which can be an issue for Mitchell at times.
Hybrid backs
Our unsung heroes to the general football world, who have assisted in overcoming the deficiencies of our tall stocks, are Weddle and Scrimshaw playing to their maximum height. The interesting one for the remainder of the year will be the role played by Maginness as it appears that Sam may have moved away from tagging players with a more proactive approach to the game plan as well as the improved availability within the midfield group. As part of his development, I’d hope to see Serong play some more games on the run home rather than say Maginness.
2025 projection
Looking at contract issues for the talls, and as stated, Frost has certainly earned himself another one. McCabe is set to feature more in 2025, along with Blanck returning, this means I think that it will be a contest between DGB and Phillips as the other tall defender option. I’m more in the DGB camp given his flexibility as a back and a forward, however with the drafting of Scaife, this aspect has become less of an advantage.
If Frost had gone down earlier, or if Scrimshaw hadn’t been as effective as a tall, it would’ve given Phillips more opportunity. I don’t see the game plan needing three tall lock down defenders which means this third tall option will be plying their trade at Box Hill in a game style that doesn’t necessarily work at that level. The factor in Phillip’s favour is that he would be on a rookie contract,
If we had been solely looking at 2025 for the remainder of this year, I’d look to give some game to B. Macdonald, whose disposal by foot needs to develop, and possibly Ryan, in the latter part of this year.
Midfield (112/72)
Note:
Whilst the mids were allocated 112 games, they have only taken up 110 games.
Again, the game allocation is “inflated” by C. Macdonald who has pushed up from the forward 50 as an extra mid rather than starting as a pure mid.
Inside Midfielders
The overall work of the inside mids has benefited from the return of Day to the side. Worpel led the mids in the early rounds and it was almost a one-man band for this period. Whilst classed as an inside mid, Mackenzie has been able to combine both an outside and an inside role. Obviously, the one player to have been forced out so far is Ward who has effectively traded places with Mackenzie from 2023.
It is hard to see the allocation of games for the remainder of the season not being allocated to Newcombe, Worpel and Mackenzie. The issue will be finding a way to give Ward some opportunities as the season progresses, hence a managed rest for Mackenzie. For reasons of both opportunity and fitness, it is unlikely that Stephens will be seen at AFL level this year.
Outside Midfielders
The astute recruitment of D’Ambrosio and the return from injury of Jiath has seen the work of the outside mids as a significant contribution to the form of the team in winning weeks. Whilst C. Macdonald is often listed as a forward, his role has been that of a high half forward becoming the additional midfielder (shared with Moore & Ginnivan at times); it is his work as a connector from the defensive to offensive 50 has also been a key part of the game plan. As to the remainder of the year, Jiath may need some managed game time, given his injury history, and a similar management plan may be applied to D'Ambrosio. This would allow Ward a couple more games in the run home.
Tall Midfielders
As well noted, the return of Day has had a key impact on the midfield combination. The role of Nash as the “chop out” around the ground ruck assists with the overall team structure as it has allowed Chol to remain as a forward target, particularly with Lewis not getting on the ground, which has been a significant factor in our scoring capacity. From the pre-season, there was some belief that Hustwaite may have a break-out year, and whilst his opportunities have been limited, his progression hasn’t been as linear as some may have expected. His opportunities in the coming weeks may be more dependent on injury rather than form.
2025 projection
It is hard to see Stephens (F/A) being offered another contract, mainly due to his body not being able to give him a clear run at it. As to Morrison and Nash, both being unrestricted free agents, Morrison may be an unlucky victim of list management numbers (see below) whilst the recent news has Nash back next year. Jiath is also off contract, and it may be his fitness for the rest of the year that will be the key determinant as to the length of the contract he will be offered rather than his form.
(Note: For those supporters who still grieve the Anderson & Allan F/S “misses”, Morrison is on 95 games.)
Forwards (98/63)
Note:
The forwards were allocated 98 games but took 95 of them.
I’ve maintained Hardwick as a forward option from the pre-season planning which also inflates the games played.
For the small forwards, on pure numbers, this is the largest sub-group within the playing list.
Scaife nominated for the MSD on an 18-month contract.
Small forwards
As noted earlier, the hard work and football intellect of Ginnivan and Moore has been an important contributor to the work of the forward half and the success in recent weeks. This also meant that the loss of Breust to his injury and limited game time hasn’t been as significant as it may have been last year. Similarly, the energy of Watson has been a feature of his early contributions compared to his goal kicking. Having the lengthy injury break, it will be interesting to see if he needs some time management in the run home.
Because of his recent albeit minor injury, the opportunities for Wingard may be limited in the run home. At one stage, I thought he and Breust may share games through this period, however with the return of Lewis, it may become a strategic decision.
Tall forwards
As indicated by our MSD pick, this is an area of the list where we were thin and the injury to Lewis has certainly brought this to the fore. It may have been a slow burn initially, the recruitment of Chol has proven to be a very profitable pick considering Lewis’s absence as well as his capacity to be a more than handy support in the ruck. Gunston’s on-field contribution has been another gain this year and his off-field work has assisted Dear who has made the most of his “crisis creating opportunity” chance. There is no doubt Dear is still raw and for the benefit of the list development, it would be opportune for Lewis to be able to play games in the run home after the bye which would allow Dear to work on some aspects of his game at VFL level. It may even mean that Gunston plays with him at Box Hill as an on-field coaching role as well as managing his own workload – see hybrid forward below. Effectively, with Chol a lock, then it would be a choice of two from Lewis, Gunston and Dear as the three tall forward set-up.
The advantage of Lewis would be that Chol could be able to play as the 2nd ruck around the ground rather than relying on Nash (or Weddle) to fill this role. This was shown up in the Tiger’s game where Nankervis was able to sneak forward and take a mark I50. It would also allow the midfield to maintain its structure.
Some supporters have suggested that Scaife should get a game at some stage, and this is a genuine unknown as Sam said they have no physical assessment of him or any insight into his overall fitness, so it may not be one to be rushed. His start at Box Hill has been more than promising, so it may be good to see him at AFL should finals not be attainable.
This does create some issues for Ramsden who may now become a ruck/forward option rather than the reverse.
Hybrid forwards
Whilst not having played forward as often as the pre-season had indicated, when Hardwick played forward, he has shown that he knows how to have an impact. If he plays his hybrid role in the later part of the season with Lewis being available, it will allow Dear and Gunston to be managed as stated earlier. Similarly, it otherwise makes it very difficult for Seamus Mitchell.
2025 projection
From a list management perspective, the small forwards are going to be the key group to focus on. If this season had continued as the first five games had gone, I’d have liked to see O’Sullivan get some chances this year, although his body lets him down regularly – this recalls the early years of Duryea and Breust. He has shown some glimpses in his VFL games this year but has strong competition for opportunities. Bennetts is in the same boat, with his VFL form strengthening in recent weeks where he has moved up the wing at times. Being a Cat. B, he does have an advantage for a list spot next year.
Similarly, what will happen to the “old blokes” in the forward half – Wingard, Breust and Gunston – with the underlying factors being: just how much experience will the playing list need next year; and how “happy” will they be to play more games at VFL than at AFL level? For example , I’m not sure that Breust, as a sub, will be a beneficial strategy next season, however Wingard provide this option when needed.
List management overview
A quick look at the current list which sits as follows considering the long-term injuries to Blanck and Butler that allows the list to exceed the numbers required for the start of the season.
This means that we are currently two players over the total maximum list and clearly one over for rookies. For the National Draft, a team must make three selections for the primary list (which I think can include any rookie upgrades to the primary list). Leaving aside any trades, this means that the current total list would have to be trimmed by at least 4 spots – three from the primary list taking it to 34 and 1 rookie.
Note:
Stephens, Phillips and Tucker are the rookies without a contract for 2025.
Bennetts is the Cat. B rookie in his 2nd year and whilst I’m not 100% on Cat. B’s, I think it is his last year on that list (although he may be upgraded to the Cat. A rookie list for a year)
Don’t forget to listen in as the HI team goes live on Wednesday nights on X (Twitter). Follow us on social media through the links below:
 | A guest post by
|
Thanks Mick, that's a gem. Unless we fall away quite significantly in the back half of the season, I suspect that we'll generally adopt a 'best 22' approach to selection, subject to younger players such as Watson, Dear and Mackenzie perhaps being rested / managed.
You've noted that there will need to be a number of list changes at season's end. Acknowledging that there's still a lot of season 2024 to play out and views on players will be in part shaped by what happens in the remainder of this season, what do you think we'll see in the way of retirements, delistings, free agents moving to other clubs and players traded to other clubs?
Do you have a view on whether Josh Battle as a free agent is worth pursuing and do you think we should be looking at players such as Bailey Smith and LDU, who are not free agents?
Love the perspective you bring Mick. It is a very insightful way to analyse the list.
For me Wingard, Stephens and Morrison should be the 3 to go. Might get some currency for Morrison. I’d also trade Maginness if it brought us something ( maybe a tough call but his decision making and disposal at AFL level are poor). Also one of Bennett or O’Sullivan may be dispensable?
DGB and Phillips are interesting ones. I’d like to see them both retained. DGB has had a tough season but liked him the last few weeks at Box Hill and I thought Phillips first and only game was very impressive. As much as I applaud Frost for his season to date I think we need to think beyond him for 2025.