Preview Finally - Sydney v Essendon (79 day wait is over)

[caesar88]

He was. It's not really disputable. You could say Kennedy and maybe Betts and Gray were ahead of him along with Buddy, but I know who I'm taking if I'm trying to build a GF winning side.

So? Conversation came up and I responded to it. We won't have teams for 6 days. There's not much else to talk about, and a bloke with a famous Essendon name wanting to come to us is inevitably going to be a key talking point.

The wow was sarcastic. Not because I was disputing that he was the second best forward, but because it just doesn't mean much to me, because

A) I'm not as pumped up about having a dominant forward as I am about having a functioning forward group. (See: Ben Brown @ Norf) I firmly believe the two don't go hand-in-hand, but realise I'm in the minority there so will cop that.

B) It was three years ago, with very little footy since. Strong likelihood the Daniher that could play next year will be a very different Daniher to the one you rate so highly.

I also wasn't knocking the discussion, simply that there's a Daniher thread where you, I, and others have shown a willingness to bang on about it for pages. No point dragging down the preview thread with it. Apologies if it seemed dismissive.

 

[SSwans2011]

B) It was three years ago, with very little footy since. Strong likelihood the Daniher that could play next year will be a very different Daniher to the one you rate so highly.

If Essendon kicked one more goal he'd have won an Anzac Medal in one of his only games in a few years, playing for a team he seems to have very little passion for anymore. IF we think we can get him fit, he's one of the best forwards in the comp.

And given his size and agility, he would give us plenty of freedom. Good luck to teams trying to find match-ups for Heeney and Daniher. Could easily be the most destructive forward duo in the comp, and * I would love to watch them in the same forward line.

 

[caesar88]

If Essendon kicked one more goal he'd have won an Anzac Medal in one of his only games in a few years, playing for a team he seems to have very little passion for anymore. IF we think we can get him fit, he's one of the best forwards in the comp.

And given his size and agility, he would give us plenty of freedom. Good luck to teams trying to find match-ups for Heeney and Daniher. Could easily be the most destructive forward duo in the comp, and fu** I would love to watch them in the same forward line.

We will have to agree to disagree methinks. Interesting though how isolated games and seasons are often disputed as evidence to defend a Swans player on here, but are then used on the contrary to make the case for a non-Swans player. Not accusing you of doing this but it happens.

In any case, you say IF the club thinks Daniher can be fit and is worth the risk - but what if we don't? What if we decide that after careful consideration of all the evidence, that he's just not worth it? Will you accept that or will you join the "another poor trade period by the Swans" bandwagon?

 

[SSwans2011]

We will have to agree to disagree methinks. Interesting though how isolated games and seasons are often disputed as evidence to defend a Swans player on here, but are then used on the contrary to make the case for a non-Swans player. Not accusing you of doing this but it happens.

If you're not saying I do it, I'm not sure of its relevance to the argument. I like to think I tend to defend our players. For years I've been one of the biggest defenders of players like Towers, Cunningham, and Sinclair that routinely get shat on on this board. If you need any evidence, just find any match thread where they had a good game and read me carrying on about it.

In any case, you say IF the club thinks Daniher can be fit and is worth the risk - but what if we don't? What if we decide that after careful consideration of all the evidence, that he's just not worth it? Will you accept that or will you join the "another poor trade period by the Swans" bandwagon?

Not sure what point you're trying to make here. Of course I wouldn't begrudge the club if they came out and said they don't think the risk is worth it anymore. I'd accept it, and suspect that if I was criticising the club for another poor trade period, it'd probably be because, excluding the draft (which is unpredictable at the best of times let alone this year), we'd lost more quality than we'd gained. It's ironic that you're asking me if I'd back the club in when you seem to be the one refusing to do so.

 

[caesar88]

If you're not saying I do it, I'm not sure of its relevance to the argument. I like to think I tend to defend our players. For years I've been one of the biggest defenders of players like Towers, Cunningham, and Sinclair that routinely get shat on on this board. If you need any evidence, just find any match thread where they had a good game and read me carrying on about it.

Not sure what point you're trying to make here. Of course I wouldn't begrudge the club if they came out and said they don't think the risk is worth it anymore. I'd accept it, and suspect that if I was criticising the club for another poor trade period, it'd probably be because, excluding the draft (which is unpredictable at the best of times let alone this year), we'd lost more quality than we'd gained. It's ironic that you're asking me if I'd back the club in when you seem to be the one refusing to do so.

I bring those points up because I am confused. Why is it being discussed eight months after the club first came to the conclusion he wasn't worth as much as people on here, like yourself, think he is? We offered the hypothetical pick 9 and 25 for Daniher, but from how you and others describe him, he's worth three first rounders. The club clearly didn't value him as such, so his value from a Swans perspective now has been well and truly established. It makes painting him as the next Buddy Franklin seem somewhat pointless.

 

[BloodySwan]

Are the quarters reduced or benches extended for this match? Or is everything business as usual?

 

[SSwans2011]

I bring those points up because I am confused. Why is it being discussed eight months after the club first came to the conclusion he wasn't worth as much as people on here, like yourself, think he is? We offered the hypothetical pick 9 and 25 for Daniher, but from how you and others describe him, he's worth three first rounders. The club clearly didn't value him as such, so his value from a Swans perspective now has been well and truly established. It makes painting him as the next Buddy Franklin seem somewhat pointless.

Wow, way to put words in my mouth. I've regularly mocked Essendon for not taking what we offered, and I'd be pissed if we offered more than we did last year. Nothing about 3 first rounders. You're the one that was pissed off that the club offered that in the first place. You're the one that's not backing the club in.

 

[RUNVS]

Are the quarters reduced or benches extended for this match? Or is everything business as usual?

Given that other sporting codes have shown that coming back like this does increase injuries I am hopeful the AFL will allow a 6 man bench.

 

[SeanM]

I think 4 on the bench and same length quarters as round one.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Daniher is the kind of player that can almost single-handedly win you a flag if he finds form at the right time.

That is a lot of “if’s and maybes” with a broken down bloke who hasn’t played in 3 years

 

[RUNVS]

I think 4 on the bench and same length quarters as round one.

Difference is in round 1 they had a 4 month preseason they had just completed, not to mention two preseason games. Now going into round 2 they have a 3 week preseason and no preseason games.

 

[SSwans2011]

That is a lot of “if’s and maybes” with a broken down bloke who hasn’t played in 3 years

There's a lot of ifs and maybes to every draftee too. Particularly this year. Only difference is we have seen Daniher's ability at AFL level.

 

[caesar88]

Wow, way to put words in my mouth. I've regularly mocked Essendon for not taking what we offered, and I'd be pissed if we offered more than we did last year. Nothing about 3 first rounders. You're the one that was pissed off that the club offered that in the first place. You're the one that's not backing the club in.

You said Daniher could "nearly single-handedly win you a flag", "could win a Norm Smith", "was the second-best forward in the competition" and also made a Buddy comparison. All of that would suggest a player worth 3 first rounders to me. That guy sounds like a once-in-a-generation player who you simply could not turn away.

So again I go back to my confusion. You say you were happy with our offer last year. I'll take your word for it. Why then are you so convinced he's this marvellous player who by your descriptions sounds so much better than that offer we put on the table? I'm not trying to have a go, just genuinely not understanding the logic. Might be on me and if so I'll cop to it.

 

[BloodySwan]

Given that other sporting codes have shown that coming back like this does increase injuries I am hopeful the AFL will allow a 6 man bench.

Injuries already seem to be higher due to how the break was handled. The club has said if we had been allowed to monitor Buddy his injury probably would have been as severe.

The Bundesliga said they saw a injury rate spike 3 times since coming back from the break! No doubt we place greater physical strain on our players here. Really hoping for a 6 side bench

 

[RUNVS]

Injuries already seem to be higher due to how the break was handled. The club has said if we had been allowed to monitor Buddy his injury probably would have been as severe.

The Bundesliga said they saw a injury rate spike 3 times since coming back from the break! No doubt we place greater physical strain on our players here. Really hoping for a 6 side bench

Exactly. It is a sensible idea, so of course the conservative AFL won't go for it. Every club will have an injury list a mile long by round 6.

 

[SSwans2011]

You said Daniher could "nearly single-handedly win you a flag", "could win a Norm Smith", "was the second-best forward in the competition" and also made a Buddy comparison. All of that would suggest a player worth 3 first rounders to me. That guy sounds like a once-in-a-generation player who you simply could not turn away.

He would be worth that without his injuries. Just because he's struggled with injury doesn't mean he still have all of that going for him, but it does decrease his value.

So again I go back to my confusion. You say you were happy with our offer last year. I'll take your word for it. Why then are you so convinced he's this marvellous player who by your descriptions sounds so much better than that offer we put on the table? I'm not trying to have a go, just genuinely not understanding the logic. Might be on me and if so I'll cop to it.

Because he is a marvelous player, but he also has injury issues... I think the risk is worth the reward.

Your points here are bizarre Caesar. His quality has nothing to do with his value being slightly diminished, injuries do, and that has always been the case.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

There's a lot of ifs and maybes to every draftee too. Particularly this year. Only difference is we have seen Daniher's ability at AFL level.

Have we? Do you know what he’s going to be after 3 years out with OP that still hasn’t been fixed...

Rather take my chances at the draft

 

[caesar88]

He would be worth that without his injuries. Just because he's struggled with injury doesn't mean he still have all of that going for him, but it does decrease his value.

Because he is a marvelous player, but he also has injury issues... I think the risk is worth the reward.

Your points here are bizarre Caesar. His quality has nothing to do with his value being slightly diminished, injuries do, and that has always been the case.

Yeah we might just have to agree to disagree here. His quality and the injuries go hand-in-hand, so I don't see what the point in focusing on just what an amazing player he supposedly is when he may not be that player anymore.

 

[RUNVS]

We have a Danniher thread. I would much rather be discussing the actual game against Essendon here. I don't care that much about what happens with Danniher.

 

[SSwans2011]

Have we? Do you know what he’s going to be after 3 years out with OP that still hasn’t been fixed...

Rather take my chances at the draft

Yeah we might just have to agree to disagree here. His quality and the injuries go hand-in-hand, so I don't see what the point in focusing on just what an amazing player he supposedly is when he may not be that player anymore.

Yeah, his injuries have really turned him to s**t. That's why he was so awful in the Anzac Day game last year, taking speccies and booting goals from outside 50.

 

[caesar88]

Back on topic...

On the training video posted on FB of the boys first hit-out at the SCG, the squad seemed to be divided into two groups, with basically all of the 22 wearing red, and the rest in yellow bibs. FWIW, Sinclair was wearing red with the 22, while Hewett, Stephens and Gould were in yellow. No sign of Naismith, though that may have to do with a recent family situation, so doesn't necessarily mean Sinclair's automatically in.

Could possibly be no changes to the rd 1 side at this stage.

 

[caesar88]

Yeah, his injuries have really turned him to s**t. That's why he was so awful in the Anzac Day game last year, taking speccies and booting goals from outside 50.

My point is that we don't know what Daniher will be like next year or beyond. You cannot deny the impact that missing so much footy over a three year span could have on an athlete. There are lot of possibilities and each is as likely as the next. There's a lot of praise being heaped on him without acknowledging the very real possibility that he could end up a bust.

 

[SSwans2011]

My point is that we don't know what Daniher will be like next year or beyond. You cannot deny the impact that missing so much footy over a three year span could have on an athlete. There are lot of possibilities and each is as likely as the next. There's a lot of praise being heaped on him without acknowledging the very real possibility that he could end up a bust.

He could. So could Stephens. So could Gould. *, Blakey could cop an injury (hope I'm not jinxing myself here) and be a bust. There are no knowns in football. Daniher has shown he can be one of the very best in the comp, and therefore I want him in my side.

 

[The King!]

Bring on the actual game

 

[SSwans2011]

Bring on the actual game

Bring on trade period