Bulldogs sniffing around ex-Lion Rhan Hooper

[Sedat]

Bulldogs sniffing around ex-Lion Rhan Hooper
By Scott Gullan

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/bulldogs-sniffing-around-ex-lion-rhan-hooper/story-e6frf9jf-1225800721502

Quite an interesting development. Whilst on paper Hooper represents a low-cost opportunity to fill a glaring area of weakness for us, alarm bells are ringing loud and clear. On top of the numerous indiscretions during his time in Brisbane, to have missed a training session this current pre-season with Richmond, for a bloke on the bones of his arse AFL career wise, is a cardinal sin in my books.

He also gets precious little of the football when he isn't on song (which is almost every 2nd week). His 2 finals this season were appalling efforts from your small forward, with Brisbane virtually playing a man short as a result. We also have the likes of Stack coming through and ready to start impacting at senior level in a similar role. On the positive side, Hooper does have undeniable talent and is young enough to still make an impact at this level if he commits himself 100% to the cause. I'm personally quite skeptical about Hooper but it would be good to hear everybody else's thoughts.

[Happy Days]

No.

No no, no no no no, no no, no no, no.

He is not good enough to justify selecting him and the off-field issues he brings with him. As simple as that.

[Rocco Jones]

We have played Dale Morris on Rhan Hooper in the past, so I am not surprised to hear Eade is interested in him.

I am actually up for it because of the small price and glad to hear we are at least talking to him. We would be giving up the last spot spot on our list in a weak draft and can offer him a one-year minimum wage deal. The talent pool is going to be reduced by 6-7% twice over the next 2 years as well. I really rate his talent highly and see his inability do anything other than the flashy stuff really tied into his poor attitude. Of course his attitude is a risk but that's why he comes so dirt cheap.

[GVGjr]

If this is to be believed, we really have extended our search range this pre-season and players with troubled pasts have been in the mix more than any other season that I can remember. Being linked to Hall, Thorp (even after a DH rating) and now Hooper is certainly a change from seasons gone by.

At the same time we said goodbye to a couple of guys with apparent questionable work ethic and commitment.

Hooper has talent but as Sedat pointed out, consistency isn't a strong point so based on that I'd prefer not to have him at the club.

[AndrewP6]

Being linked to Hall, Thorp (even after a DH rating) and now Hooper is certainly a change from seasons gone by.

At the same time we said goodbye to a couple of guys with apparent questionable work ethic and commitment.


Good point, we got rid of two for those reasons, we don't need to bring in someone with the same issues.

[Wing_Nut]

Worth the risk in my opinion. Upside to him is pretty large, whilst the negatives would be what? Sure he has an attitude problem but I don't think that have a significant impact on other players. And as stated the draft this year is weak. Get him on board!

[Dry Rot]

If the Hawks and Tigers and interested, what pick would we use?

[AndrewP6]

whilst the negatives would be what? Sure he has an attitude problem but I don't think that have a significant impact on other players. And as stated the draft this year is weak. Get him on board!

He got sick of working hard a year after debuting, fines and suspensions from the Lions for his unprofessional approach (60 day suspension and a $40,000 fine says it was serious), missed a training session w/Richmond AFTER Brisvegas gave him the arse... isn't that enough negatives?

We're nudging the salary cap as it is, I wouldn't use any remaining coin on a guy who may or may not actually come to training. And I'm not certain the kids in the side need ANOTHER slack arse to carry... Minimum wage or not, it's not worth it, IMO.

[Pedro Sanchez]

Nice profile pic Wing Nut... and i think you speak wise words ont he Hooper front too!

[mighty_west]

He apparently missed a training session with Richmond i think it was yesterday, listening to KB's show, why he missed it?, cos he forgot!

Let's think about it for a sec, trying to impress a team to get another shot at it, and he forgets to rock up to training.................

Says it all really, pass.

[The Coon Dog]

Hawks could swoop and draft disgruntled Hooper

Jake Niall | November 19, 2009

HAWTHORN is considering taking the punt on former Brisbane Lion Rhan Hooper, with the 2008 premier contemplating selecting him in next week's national draft.


Article in full... (http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/rfnews/hawks-could-take-hooper/2009/11/18/1258219881694.html)

[The Bulldogs Bite]

Already voiced my opinion of Hooper in previous threads, but in reality he's only holding back Stack. I'd much rather put our faith in a guy we've been developing who has just as much talent and without the attitude problems. Next year is a big year for Stacky - I hope he's given some sort of chance.

[Wing_Nut]

He got sick of working hard a year after debuting, fines and suspensions from the Lions for his unprofessional approach (60 day suspension and a $40,000 fine says it was serious), missed a training session w/Richmond AFTER Brisvegas gave him the arse... isn't that enough negatives?

We're nudging the salary cap as it is, I wouldn't use any remaining coin on a guy who may or may not actually come to training. And I'm not certain the kids in the side need ANOTHER slack arse to carry... Minimum wage or not, it's not worth it, IMO.

Yeah but in the end if he doesn't perform or he plays up he's only taking the spot of, what would hopefully be, a later round draft pick. And since there's risk in drafting a kid in a weak draft, I'd go for Hooper. He's got some runs on the board at least and he is a talent.

My point was moreso that he wouldn't affect the rest of the group if he does play up. As I said, with his potential upside I think he's worth the risk.

[chef]

We have played Dale Morris on Rhan Hooper in the past, so I am not surprised to hear Eade is interested in him.

I am actually up for it because of the small price and glad to hear we are at least talking to him. We would be giving up the last spot spot on our list in a weak draft and can offer him a one-year minimum wage deal. The talent pool is going to be reduced by 6-7% twice over the next 2 years as well. I really rate his talent highly and see his inability do anything other than the flashy stuff really tied into his poor attitude. Of course his attitude is a risk but that's why he comes so dirt cheap.

^^^^What Rocco said.

He also has good defensive pressure when he doesn't have the ball. I wouldn't be disappointed if he joins our club.

[Hotdog60]

Wouldn't touch him if he was free, he lacks commitment and if he keeps with his current attitude which young kid is he going to drag with him. Yes he's got talent and maybe half his problem is that he knows it, I say if the Hawks want him let them have him.

[Rocco Jones]

Just a question that's not just relevant to Rhan Hooper.

Do we rate our club culture high enough to believe we can turn around a young player who has talent but a poor attitude or do we believe we are so vulnerable that a player with a poor attitude can really hurt us?

Truly meant to be question rather than a statement.

I am definitely against the notion of simply dismissing anyone with a history of displaying poor attitude. It's all about risk vs reward for me.

[OLD SCRAGGer]

On Rhan Hooper - Smarter people than any of us know more about what's happening at our club. While I was one who thought "GOD NO - DON'T GO AFTER HOOPER" I'll put my faith in Rocket's knowledge and IF anyone can turn Hoopers mind around it's Rocket. So if he thinks he's worth a punt and we can get him cheaply, I say GO for it:)

[GVGjr]

Just a question that's not just relevant to Rhan Hooper.

Do we rate our club culture high enough to believe we can turn around a young player who has talent but a poor attitude or do we believe we are so vulnerable that a player with a poor attitude can really hurt us?

Truly meant to be question rather than a statement.

I am definitely against the notion of simply dismissing anyone with a history of displaying poor attitude. It's all about risk vs reward for me.

To be brutally honest I think our strong club culture has slipped over the last two seasons. It could just be the sign of the times but we seem to have more than our share of Brad Murphy types than I can ever recall. I don't mind a bit of strut and confidence in young players but in my opinion we already have enough peacocks and Bogans without needing to add more high maintenance types.

We seem to be backing our ability to turn players with a checkered past from other clubs around but at the same time I'm not sure that our own house is in order.
It's probably more about my intolerance to players that don't seem to want to measure up to their ability or grasp this golden opportunity so few are privileged to experience but having a team with potentially more distractions isn't something that I would regard as a good thing.

Hooper doesn't have a noted work ethic so I'm not sure how he convinces the list managers that he has changed for the better.

[azabob]

To be brutally honest I think our strong club culture has slipped over the last two seasons. It could just be the sign of the times but we seem to have more than our share of Brad Murphy types than I can ever recall. I don't mind a bit of strut and confidence in young players but in my opinion we already have enough peacocks and Bogans without needing to add more high maintenance types.



Interesting observation overall.

I think it does have something to do with the younger generation and the generational change that we are seeing in society as a whole.

[Bulldog Revolution]

Hooper is an elite talent, but it would be a wild gamble

As GVG has pointed out we already have a few high maintenance youngsters, and I'd prefer to see us draft a few more of the Cross, Morris, Boyd ilk.

[anfo27]

Say it ain't so Rocket.

I would rather use our last pick on Majak Daw than Rhan Hooper. All his problems aside the kid just isn't that good of a player. He may be quick & kick the odd goal or two but so what. If the tigers are interested in him that says enough to me, anything they are interested in everyone else should stay well away.

[anfo27]

To be brutally honest I think our strong club culture has slipped over the last two seasons. It could just be the sign of the times but we seem to have more than our share of Brad Murphy types than I can ever recall. I don't mind a bit of strut and confidence in young players but in my opinion we already have enough peacocks and Bogans without needing to add more high maintenance types.

We seem to be backing our ability to turn players with a checkered past from other clubs around but at the same time I'm not sure that our own house is in order.
It's probably more about my intolerance to players that don't seem to want to measure up to their ability or grasp this golden opportunity so few are privileged to experience but having a team with potentially more distractions isn't something that I would regard as a good thing.

Hooper doesn't have a noted work ethic so I'm not sure how he convinces the list managers that he has changed for the better.

What was the story with this kid?

I saw him once at the Anglers on a Saturday night having a few. What really disturbed me was he was wearing a HEADBAND, that was enough for me to delist him. I'm not paying my membership so the club can pay some flog who wears a headband to a night club.

[Yankee Hotel Foxtrot]

I would rather us re-draft Lynch than take a risk on Hooper. At least Lynch is a known quantity to us.
The fact that despite Hoopers career as an AFL player hanging by a thread he still chose to not turn up to a training session with the Tigers speaks volumes for his state of mind.
I would've thought that given his precarious position Hooper would've been busting a gut to show prospective clubs ahead of the draft that the penny had dropped and would've been training the house down.

[GVGjr]

What was the story with this kid?

I saw him once at the Anglers on a Saturday night having a few. What really disturbed me was he was wearing a HEADBAND, that was enough for me to delist him. I'm not paying my membership so the club can pay some flog who wears a headband to a night club.

Whilst he had the talent he wasn't anywhere near as good as he thought he was. Overly confident and had little respect for his senior team mates.
He also wouldn't pass the ball to team mates clearly in the open if the goals were in sight.

[anfo27]

Whilst he had the talent he wasn't anywhere near as good as he thought he was. Overly confident and had little respect for his senior team mates.
He also wouldn't pass the ball to team mates clearly in the open if the goals were in sight.

When i saw him at the Anglers my first thought was ' he's a FIGJAM'

[mighty_west]

Hooper is an elite talent, but it would be a wild gamble

As GVG has pointed out we already have a few high maintenance youngsters, and I'd prefer to see us draft a few more of the Cross, Morris, Boyd ilk.

You can add Harbrow to that list, the kid has a super attitude.

Patrick Rose may very well be the next in line to add to that group, while i have my doubts whether he can step up to that next level, Picken certaintly has, and i always thought Rose was the more talented out of the 2.

[Sedat]

He also has good defensive pressure when he doesn't have the ball. I wouldn't be disappointed if he joins our club.
Like the rest of his game, his defensive pressure wildly fluctuates between very good and non-existent. He displayed absolutely no defensive pressure and did not even try to work hard enough to get into the game in his last two matches for Brisbane. Putting aside his chequered past, the area I have a major concern with Hooper is his wild inconsistency on the park - you simply cannot afford to carry non-contributors when the intensity ramps up in September.

On a side note, I cannot believe Hooper was paid more in 2009 than Brian Lake was.

[bulldogsman]

To be brutally honest I think our strong club culture has slipped over the last two seasons. It could just be the sign of the times but we seem to have more than our share of Brad Murphy types than I can ever recall. I don't mind a bit of strut and confidence in young players but in my opinion we already have enough peacocks and Bogans without needing to add more high maintenance types.

Brisbane seems much worse and yet we seem to be looking at their players all the time.

[AndrewP6]

Yeah but in the end if he doesn't perform or he plays up he's only taking the spot of, what would hopefully be, a later round draft pick. And since there's risk in drafting a kid in a weak draft, I'd go for Hooper. He's got some runs on the board at least and he is a talent.

My point was moreso that he wouldn't affect the rest of the group if he does play up. As I said, with his potential upside I think he's worth the risk.

I think he could well affect the kids...and not in a good way - no for mine.

[Swoop]

You can add Harbrow to that list, the kid has a super attitude.

Patrick Rose may very well be the next in line to add to that group, while i have my doubts whether he can step up to that next level, Picken certaintly has, and i always thought Rose was the more talented out of the 2.
I guess the qualities that Picken brought to us weren't based around his skills rather his attitude, hard work, determination, toughness & ability to play a specific role for us. If Rose was to be picked he would be relying on his skills and ability which I still have doubts as to whether he can make the jump to AFL.

[Mofra]

To be brutally honest I think our strong club culture has slipped over the last two seasons. It could just be the sign of the times but we seem to have more than our share of Brad Murphy types than I can ever recall. I don't mind a bit of strut and confidence in young players but in my opinion we already have enough peacocks and Bogans without needing to add more high maintenance types.
I'm actually kind of happy with this.

Everytime we've had a list of nice guys we've been fairly uncompetitive. Every Premiership team of the last decade has had a dickhead component to it, and to count out a guy who has obvious talent, and fills an obvious list need, would be folly without at least talking to him. Rocket would be derelict in his duties as a coach if he didn't even sound the guy out.

[Nuggety Back Pocket]

Already voiced my opinion of Hooper in previous threads, but in reality he's only holding back Stack. I'd much rather put our faith in a guy we've been developing who has just as much talent and without the attitude problems. Next year is a big year for Stacky - I hope he's given some sort of chance.

Hooper has shown enough to suggest he is more advanced than Stack at this stage. With time running out for Johnson, Akermanis and Eagleton beyond 2010 and an injury riddled Robert Murphy we are going to need to find more goalkickers.The draft advantages given to the new Gold Coast team next year will result in a skinny draft for teams like the Bulldogs. Iwould think that our list management people would have taken these factors into account before deciding Rian Hooper was worth the risk.

[The Bulldogs Bite]

Hooper has shown enough to suggest he is more advanced than Stack at this stage. With time running out for Johnson, Akermanis and Eagleton beyond 2010 and an injury riddled Robert Murphy we are going to need to find more goalkickers.The draft advantages given to the new Gold Coast team next year will result in a skinny draft for teams like the Bulldogs. Iwould think that our list management people would have taken these factors into account before deciding Rian Hooper was worth the risk.

I agree - but why apply that to a very ordinary footballer?

Hooper doesn't have enormous talent like so many here believe. His skills are poor and he simply can't find the footy. Every player has a couple of games per year they stand out. It doesn't make them quality. There's a reason he only played 6 or 7 games this season. He's not good enough - that's without taking into account his attitude problems and inconsistency.

I'm amazed that anyone can be sucked in by his annual 1-2 games a year.

The draft restrictions etc. shouldn't really play too much of a factor. At the end of the day, I want quality footballers on the list with a work ethic. Hooper has neither. He's quick - that's it.

[anfo27]

I agree - but why apply that to a very ordinary footballer?

Hooper doesn't have enormous talent like so many here believe. His skills are poor and he simply can't find the footy. Every player has a couple of games per year they stand out. It doesn't make them quality. There's a reason he only played 6 or 7 games this season. He's not good enough - that's without taking into account his attitude problems and inconsistency.

I'm amazed that anyone can be sucked in by his annual 1-2 games a year.

The draft restrictions etc. shouldn't really play too much of a factor. At the end of the day, I want quality footballers on the list with a work ethic. Hooper has neither. He's quick - that's it.

Right on the money there.

[alwaysadog]

I'm an absolute sceptic about the sincerity of this move; but having been wrong before I'll believe it when I see it... but what I can't see Rocket on his bike to Rhan's place when he forgets to turn up for a game. If Guy O'K went predominantly for attitude reasons this appears inconsistent with that decision.

I remain committed to giving kids with a problem or two a few chances, but there's nothing to show that he is improving. It doesn't make him a bad person, just puts a huge question mark about his reliability. and there's a point at which that becomes a critical factor in our quest for a flag.

Methinks somebody is using the media very well. Two candidates come to mind. I'm not sure if this is being used by Rhan's managers to keep his name in the public eye; we're the second club in a couple of days, or if it's being used by the club to keep a continuing media profile.

[alwaysadog]

On another point, how many last positions on the list can a club have?

I was taught a very simple Maths at school there was only one last place, but I now wonder if some posters on this sight haven't created a new mathematics. Their argument to each and every potentially problematic recruitment is to go for the last posi on the list justification.

Just so as I know for future reference, does the last place for such cases ever fill or can there be a multitude of last places on the list?

[macca]

If Rose was to be picked he would be relying on his skills and ability which I still have doubts as to whether he can make the jump to AFL.

Will Rose offer more than Hooper?

[GVGjr]

There is a comment on the Age today that hoses down our interest in Hooper a bit.

The Bulldogs reportedly have some interest in Hooper but that is understood to be tepid at best.

[LostDoggy]

Already voiced my opinion of Hooper in previous threads, but in reality he's only holding back Stack. I'd much rather put our faith in a guy we've been developing who has just as much talent and without the attitude problems. Next year is a big year for Stacky - I hope he's given some sort of chance.

Well said.

[Mofra]

Will Rose offer more than Hooper?
I haven't seen as many games as the other guys, but he seems more of a leading mid-sized forward than a crumber.
A pure crumber is something we don't really have on our list, unless Rocket thinks Stack could become one and Stack starts improving his consistency / has a massive pre-season.

[The Scray]

Why are the dogs having a punt on another small forward? Most people are right there is Hill & Stack plus others who will be there for a while Murphy, Guido, Hahn etc. plus midfielders going forward ie. Higgins & Coons. What about a punt on a young Key Forward. If Jake Edwards is training at the club give him a go i say! Hall will only be there for 2 years...

[Rocco Jones]

Why are the dogs having a punt on another small forward? Most people are right there is Hill & Stack plus others who will be there for a while Murphy, Guido, Hahn etc. plus midfielders going forward ie. Higgins & Coons. What about a punt on a young Key Forward. If Jake Edwards is training at the club give him a go i say! Hall will only be there for 2 years...

Whether you agree with going for Rhan Hooper or not, I think there is definitely room for a small forward to be bough into the club. Stack, Hill, Hahn and Murphy are different types of medium forwards. Guido is a HF who is a link between the midfield and effectively disposing the ball forward. Higgins is more of a HF than typical small forward like Hooper. Cooney is only a part time forward.

If we don't get Hooper or Lynch, there is definitely a spot to recruit a small forward.

[LostDoggy]

I'd prefer we concentrate on our indigenous boys we already have on the forward line in Hill and Stack. Teach them to apply defensive pressure. We know Hill has lacked that in the past, but his attitude in general can't be questioned. Stacky has the body now to have a similar physique to Hooper in a couple of seasons.

Hooper is trouble, he's shown that in the past with his noted indiscretions. We've delisted O'Keefe who lacked discipline, and now they're (reportedly) looking at Hooper, who's missed a training session with Richmond during the "test the waters" period. Got to be joking.

[mighty_west]

PHEW!

He's the Hawks problem now.

[LostDoggy]

PHEW!

He's the Hawks problem now.

With their already contemptible culture down there (Hodge and Sewell notwithstanding), a lazy lairy 'show-up-when-I-feel-like-it' type is a gleeful addition to their attempt at continual deterioration into anonymous mediocrity.

Unsociable football? More like egomaniacal faux-socialite pill-popping attention-quaffing ill-disciplined underachievers. I know many are tipping them to get back into the top 4 next season but I just can't see it -- the 'Buddy' factor is already receding with clubs developing precisely the type of backline/backmen to negate it (much like Kouta's massive influence over a year and a half dissipated after every other team developed tall mobile midfielders, and Franklin himself isn't exactly Mr.Consistency -- rumour is that he showed up to pre-season training in less-than-ideal shape), they are unable to develop a meaningful squad into the future with no one willing to trade equitably with them due to their dickheadedness, and any advantage they got from their 'zone' has equalised, being no longer innovative nor competition leading.

7th - 8th at best.

[ledge]

I tend to agree Lantern, the team had a bolter year but have come down to their real standard.

[Sedat]

PHEW!

He's the Hawks problem now.
Perhaps the Dogs were never interested in Hooper but threw it out there in the hope of muddying the waters a little. Hawthorn were always the keenest on Hooper (especially when Richmond dropped out of the race) but perhaps the Dogs 'interest' in him forced the Hawks to use pick 58 to snare Hooper instead of pick 69 or 70, knowing the Dogs had pick 63 in play. And perhaps the Dogs did this to ensure that Markovic was not going to be selected by Hawthorn at pick 58, leaving him available for us at pick 63. I love a good conspiracy theory :)

[alwaysadog]

I think the draft is still an arena for lots of attempts at mind games and many still try to get one up on the opposition. They then entertain coterie groups and the like for decades afterwards with stories about how clever they were.

To my thinking it's a fruitless exercise, but boys will be boys even when their hair is receding.

That said I think we lost any chance of others thinking they know what we are likely to do and hence of taking our predicted intentions into account when we called out our first pick this year.

[boydogs]

Perhaps the Dogs were never interested in Hooper but threw it out there in the hope of muddying the waters a little. Hawthorn were always the keenest on Hooper (especially when Richmond dropped out of the race) but perhaps the Dogs 'interest' in him forced the Hawks to use pick 58 to snare Hooper instead of pick 69 or 70, knowing the Dogs had pick 63 in play. And perhaps the Dogs did this to ensure that Markovic was not going to be selected by Hawthorn at pick 58, leaving him available for us at pick 63. I love a good conspiracy theory :)

I like it :D

[alwaysadog]

I like it :D

It's a touch convoluted but it makes more sense than just about everything thing else in the draft.
Perhaps I should revise that, does anything make sense in a draft which has such a low success rate?