Analysis 2019 List, Game Plan and Best 22?

[caesar88]

Can the season start already, this board has lost it's marbles with each other !!!!

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Can the season start already, this board has lost it's marbles with each other !!!!

The off season has been a nice change

 

[Kirkswan]

On Christmas day it will be 88 days to go...

Coincidentally, on Christmas Day it will be 88 days since I've had a cigarette!

What's that got to do with 2019 List, Game Plan and Best 22? Absolutely nothing, but I just can't resist skiting!

 

[LukeParkerno1]

On Christmas day it will be 88 days to go...

Coincidentally, on Christmas Day it will be 88 days since I've had a cigarette!

What's that got to do with 2019 List, Game Plan and Best 22? Absolutely nothing, but I just can't resist skiting!

Congratulations for the 88 days well done

 

[The Gong]

Alright. Everyone go watch some cricket, have a swim and we'll pick this up again in late Feb.

 

[RUNVS]

On Christmas day it will be 88 days to go...

Coincidentally, on Christmas Day it will be 88 days since I've had a cigarette!

What's that got to do with 2019 List, Game Plan and Best 22? Absolutely nothing, but I just can't resist skiting!

Did the Swans gameplan stress you out so much you had to have a cigarette?

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

On Christmas day it will be 88 days to go...

Coincidentally, on Christmas Day it will be 88 days since I've had a cigarette!

What's that got to do with 2019 List, Game Plan and Best 22? Absolutely nothing, but I just can't resist skiting!

You should be safe to have a social one now then.......

 

[SwansProudly]

On Christmas day it will be 88 days to go...

Coincidentally, on Christmas Day it will be 88 days since I've had a cigarette!

What's that got to do with 2019 List, Game Plan and Best 22? Absolutely nothing, but I just can't resist skiting!

Bravo on the 88 days. Skite away

 

[sthmelb_dimmies]

Mofra's bottom 50 has only highlighted two Swans so far. Both of which we've offloaded. Savvy trading.

 

[Kirkswan]

You should be safe to have a social one now then.......

Not going to happen... when I've quit for as long as I've smoked (about 40 years!) then I'll think I'm safe (I'll most probably be dead!)

 

[Kirkswan]

Did the Swans gameplan stress you out so much you had to have a cigarette?

No, I was smoking long before there was a Swans team... I keep telling you all I'm an old duck!

 

[connolly]

On Christmas day it will be 88 days to go...

Coincidentally, on Christmas Day it will be 88 days since I've had a cigarette!

What's that got to do with 2019 List, Game Plan and Best 22? Absolutely nothing, but I just can't resist skiting!

That's an outstanding pre-season. You have been not smoking the house down

 

[Kirkswan]

That's an outstanding pre-season. You have been not smoking the house down

Cheers mate, pretty proud of myself to tell the truth...

 

[caesar88]

http://www.sydneyswans.com.au/news/2018-12-23/kirk-rapt-with-evolution-of-midfield

Still not sold on the necessity for guys like Hayward and Papley to run through the midfield. I just don't get it. Hayward is a marking target with great goal sense, Paps is the perfect small forward crumbing type. I get the idea of trying to increase the rotation from say 6-8 mids to about 10-12, that's how GWS and Bulldogs repeatedly got the better of us in 2016 with their massive midfield spreads. But throwing two youngsters who won't make much of an impact on the ball in there just doesn't achieve that IMO. As the article states we've also got Dawson, Clarke, Mills, Florent, Jones, Hewett and Heeney to add to JPK and Parker. We also drafted two guys who I think could help in the midfield next year in Blakey (seemed to thrive in the mids and may not be ready to be permanent forward anyway), and Rowbottom (second in clearances in his draft year behind Bailey Smith.)

I see Papley and Hayward as both having the potential to have 40-goal seasons. Let's remember Paps kicked 30 in his debut year, and Hayward has already had two seasons of 20+ goals. But they won't be getting close to 40 goal seasons unless they're full time forward 50 players IMO

 

[RUNVS]

Here is an article about the midfield from Brett Kirk

http://www.sydneyswans.com.au/news/2018-12-23/kirk-rapt-with-evolution-of-midfield

though I must admit this bit annoyed me

“We’ve got some really strong experience in Parker and Kennedy, who’ve been around for a long time. But we also want to keep giving opportunities to some other players so we’re able to bat through to 10-12 players that can roll through there on game day. That might be a mixture of half-forwards, wingers, midfielders, half-backs and so on.

“Players need to be flexible these days because you don’t just start in the one spot and stay there. Quite a few of the younger players are able to shift through a number of positions, like Oliver Florent, Callum Mills, Zak Jones, Tom Papley and Will Hayward. They’re all guys who are trying to hone their experience over the pre-season.

“The aim every season is certainly to be really strong and contested on the inside of the contest and balance that with speed on the outside – and it’s the outside run that we’ve been really working hard on. Clarke will add something to the outside run and a few of the names I’ve just mentioned will be looking to as well – Papley, Jones, Mills and the like.”

I am rather sick of our coaching staff trying to make players "versatile" by playing them in positions they are clearly not suited to. Is it too much to ask, or too simplistic to suggest that we should have players playing in the midfield who are actually midfielders, and not small to medium forwards (like Papley and Hayward) who Longmire has just decided to play in the midfield rather than playing them to their strengths?

 

[caesar88]

Here is an article about the midfield from Brett Kirk

http://www.sydneyswans.com.au/news/2018-12-23/kirk-rapt-with-evolution-of-midfield

though I must admit this bit annoyed me



I am rather sick of our coaching staff trying to make players "versatile" by playing them in positions they are clearly not suited to. Is it too much to ask, or too simplistic to suggest that we should have players playing in the midfield who are actually midfielders, and not small to medium forwards (like Papley and Hayward) who Longmire has just decided to play in the midfield rather than playing them to their strengths?

What do they say about great minds again?

 

[RUNVS]

http://www.sydneyswans.com.au/news/2018-12-23/kirk-rapt-with-evolution-of-midfield

Still not sold on the necessity for guys like Hayward and Papley to run through the midfield. I just don't get it. Hayward is a marking target with great goal sense, Paps is the perfect small forward crumbing type. I get the idea of trying to increase the rotation from say 6-8 mids to about 10-12, that's how GWS and Bulldogs repeatedly got the better of us in 2016 with their massive midfield spreads. But throwing two youngsters who won't make much of an impact on the ball in there just doesn't achieve that IMO. As the article states we've also got Dawson, Clarke, Mills, Florent, Jones, Hewett and Heeney to add to JPK and Parker. We also drafted two guys who I think could help in the midfield next year in Blakey (seemed to thrive in the mids and may not be ready to be permanent forward anyway), and Rowbottom (second in clearances in his draft year behind Bailey Smith.)

I see Papley and Hayward as both having the potential to have 40-goal seasons. Let's remember Paps kicked 30 in his debut year, and Hayward has already had two seasons of 20+ goals. But they won't be getting close to 40 goal seasons unless they're full time forward 50 players IMO

We had almost the exact same thought at the exact same moment. We both seemed to take very similar things from that article. Papley and Hayward are not midfielders, why are we trying to limit them by playing them as midfielders. We don't try and make Buddy more versatile by playing him as a small defender, or try and make Sinclair more versatile by playing him as a tagger.

 

[caesar88]

We had almost the exact same thought at the exact same moment. We both seemed to take very similar things from that article. Papley and Hayward are not midfielders, why are we trying to limit them by playing them as midfielders. We don't try and make Buddy more versatile by playing him as a small defender, or try and make Sinclair more versatile by playing him as a tagger.

Agreed. It's baffling. There's only two theories I have for why they could want this.

1. They want to increase the midfield rotation. As I said, that's a valid priority, but two medium forwards won't actually help that. In fact it may even hinder us because we'd have two youngsters on the ball that may just not belong there, instead of youngsters who have proven themselves capable of playing on the ball.

2. They want to add dimensions to Hayward and Papley's games. I hope this isn't the case because to me, neither of them need to add dimensions to their games. They just need to get better for longer, which is expected given their age. But they've both had nearly 30-goal seasons within their first few years at the top level. One is only 20, the other 21. They have both performed well above expectations so far and could become stars if they could focus on just honing their forward crafts and turning those 30-goal seasons into 40+ goal seasons.

But it doesn't surprise me at all. Horse has a history of over-complicating players' roles.

 

[RUNVS]

Agreed. It's baffling. There's only two theories I have for why they could want this.

1. They want to increase the midfield rotation. As I said, that's a valid priority, but two medium forwards won't actually help that. In fact it may even hinder us because we'd have two youngsters on the ball that may just not belong there, instead of youngsters who have proven themselves capable of playing on the ball.

2. They want to add dimensions to Hayward and Papley's games. I hope this isn't the case because to me, neither of them need to add dimensions to their games. They just need to get better for longer, which is expected given their age. But they've both had nearly 30-goal seasons within their first few years at the top level. One is only 20, the other 21. They have both performed well above expectations so far and could become stars if they could focus on just honing their forward crafts and turning those 30-goal seasons into 40+ goal seasons.

But it doesn't surprise me at all. Horse has a history of over-complicating players' roles.

It not only stunts Papley's and Hayward's growth as forwards but it also means that it is again down to Buddy to kick all our goals since he is the only player that is regularly in the forward line. Buddy would also perform better if he had some support in the forward line too.

 

[caesar88]

It not only stunts Papley's and Hayward's growth as forwards but it also means that it is again down to Buddy to kick all our goals since he is the only player that is regularly in the forward line. Buddy would also perform better if he had some support in the forward line too.

Yes! Add that to the list of reasons why this should not happen. Just so frustrating, we have all these players that could be weapons, yet Horse doesn't seem to know what to do with them. We could have Buddy, Menzel, Hayward, Papley and Ronke all potentially kicking over 30 goals next year (not including Reid who will probably get shampoo in his eyes and then miss the year), but I'm taking bets now on how many of them will actually do it. Wouldn't surprise me if it was only Buddy.

The article above makes note of how the focus is on winning contested footy, yep very important, but no mention of how two goalkickers spending less time up forward to achieve that will effect our already-struggling forward line. We have enough midfielders to improve our contested game without compromising the forward dynamics.

 

[TheMase]

Small medium forwards spending some time through the midfield is hardly revolutionary stuff. It has been pretty standard since I have been involved in footy...

We are talking spending some minor minutes in the midfield.

Papley has spent some minutes in the midfield over the last couple of years and even Hayward last year sometimes ran in off defensive 50 pushing forward as an outside receiver.

The article talks about the importance of the inside brigade but that they are working hard on the outside game. These guys would come in from time to time to change the mix mostly on the outside.

I don’t really get the issue.

 

[caesar88]

Small medium forwards spending some time through the midfield is hardly revolutionary stuff. It has been pretty standard since I have been involved in footy...

We are talking spending some minor minutes in the midfield.

Papley has spent some minutes in the midfield over the last couple of years and even Hayward last year sometimes ran in off defensive 50 pushing forward as an outside receiver.

The article talks about the importance of the inside brigade but that they are working hard on the outside game. These guys would come in from time to time to change the mix mostly on the outside.

I don’t really get the issue.

Because Papley and Hayward are goal-kickers first and foremost. Our forward line was diabolical at times this year. We seemed incapable of scoring quickly and heavily. To do that you need a) a strong midfield that can win contested footy and win the team possession of the ball, and b) a forward line with multiple and varying options. Point A won't be achieved by having two medium forwards in the mix, and that is the area we struggled with most, not the outside as much (who woulda thought!). Point B also won't be achieved if your best crumber and one of your best marking targets isn't always around.

Then there's also the development side of it. I don't see the point in a small forward and a marking forward needing to learn the midfield craft, especially when they are both still inexperienced and still with some ways to go before they master their actual roles as forwards. To me it just over-complicates their development with not much reward for it.

 

[TheMase]

Because Papley and Hayward are goal-kickers first and foremost. Our forward line was diabolical at times this year. We seemed incapable of scoring quickly and heavily. To do that you need a) a strong midfield that can win contested footy and win the team possession of the ball, and b) a forward line with multiple and varying options. Point A won't be achieved by having two medium forwards in the mix, and that is the area we struggled with most, not the outside as much (who woulda thought!). Point B also won't be achieved if your best crumber and one of your best marking targets isn't always around.

Then there's also the development side of it. I don't see the point in a small forward and a marking forward needing to learn the midfield craft, especially when they are both still inexperienced and still with some ways to go before they master their actual roles as forwards. To me it just over-complicates their development with not much reward for it.

We will agree to disagree. Won’t hurt their development at all. Not complex. Won’t hurt our forward line if rotated through appropriately, especially now potentially with Menzal there (and the return of Reid).

FWIW 1st March 2018:
https://www.sbs.com.au/news/swan-papley-adds-afl-value-in-two-areas

He's (Papley) one of a number of players the Swans will look to rotate through midfield to assist their established on-ball champions, Josh Kennedy and Luke Parker.

"There will be different times where we might have a Dean Towers or a Will Hayward, someone from a forward perspective, come through and spend a bit of time there," Swans assistant coach Brett Kirk said.


The article is just fluff.

 

[RUNVS]

"There will be different times where we might have a Dean Towers or a Will Hayward, someone from a forward perspective, come through and spend a bit of time there," Swans assistant coach Brett Kirk said.

Yeah, and how well did that strategy go in 2018?

 

[TheMase]

Yeah, and how well did that strategy go in 2018?

Giving a 19 year old some midfield minutes? I am not sure I’d be reviewing it negatively from that perspective...

As for Papley I have liked his cameos at times, an area he will continue to get better at if it is persisted with.

So I don’t find issue with persisting with it.