List Mgmt. 2020 Draft and Trade Hypotheticals

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
I agree. I'm also not as confident as others that we will be able to attract top-end talent at the trade table in the future without over-paying. If we don't fix our midfield, we don't rise up the ladder, and if we don't rise up the ladder, we can forget being a destination club for trade targets.

Western Bulldogs the last few years are proof that you can be bang average down back and up forward, but if you have a quality midfield you can be competitive, contend in finals, and sell your future to trade targets.

Just don't see that happening with our midfield stocks atm. Love Rowbottom, the rest all have question marks over them IMO.
McInerney is worth some love too.
 
The list of head-scratching decisions are growing, no doubt. But I think using Harley-Gardiner-Longmire as a negative connotation is a bit unfair.

Doing an imperfect job of navigating a difficult phase with our list doesn't quite warrant it IMO. If we become a rabble then fair enough they should cop it.


We'll revisit it in 10 months.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

fair enough.. my point was that it seems the goal for our current list strategy is to keep this young list together.
eg.. We gave Amartey another year, not because he fills a need for 2021, but because he could potentially fill a need 2-3-4 years from now.. theres a few others in that boat too. Not saying they'll all make it, but the Swans will be hoping they do, or at least give them the chance
And a young list costs less dollars. It's also a consequence of investing in the talent we want to keep as marquee players.
 
Why NOT to draft ‘em, Swans board style:

Thiltthorpe: the spectre of 2m Peter, inbetweener & could lose years to OP.

Hollands: dodgy knees, half forward who doesn’t fill a need.

DGB: skinny & key defenders aren’t worthy of pick 3.

Phillips: will just go home to Vic after a few years anyway, not tall or fast enough.

Clearly, none of them are any good.

The only solution is evidently to reach for a speedy half-back flanker.
 
Why NOT to draft ‘em, Swans board style:

Thiltthorpe: the spectre of 2m Peter, inbetweener & could lose years to OP.

Hollands: dodgy knees, half forward who doesn’t fill a need.

DGB: skinny & key defenders aren’t worthy of pick 3.

Phillips: will just go home to Vic after a few years anyway, not tall or fast enough.

Clearly, none of them are any good.

The only solution is evidently to reach for a speedy half-back flanker.

You leave out my number 1 wish!
 
Swans have parted ways with Elijah
“It is obviously a sensitive situation and a legal process is still to play out, but in working with Elijah and his management, our collective view was that the right call for both Elijah and the club is to part ways. We have also consulted with the AFLPA and appreciate the support James Gallagher and his team has provided during the process.

“This has been an incredibly difficult situation for Elijah, his family, and those involved. We are keen to see Elijah receive ongoing education and support in the hope that he can mature and learn from this experience, make better decisions in the future, and take steps towards rebuilding his career.”
 
Is our midfield really that bad?

Parker Rowbottom
Stephens Campbell
Hickey Blakey
Clarke Florent
Hewett Naismith
Warner

I think we will go for McDonald if he slides and then DGB is next in line.
Yeah I still remain unconvinced.

Parker - will he still be around by the time we hope to start competing? Answer is probably but he has a lot of milage in his legs, I suspect in 3 years time he'll mostly be a forward by that point
Rowbottom - a star, but one swallow does not make a summer
Stephens - will he actually play on the ball? Still skinny and has mostly been a specialist winger at all levels, so it's hard to see him playing in the centre square long-term.
Campbell - yet to play, his skillset isn't really that of an inside mid either (excellent skills but not a great accumulator). Again like Stephens I don't think he's gonna be an onballer.
Hickey - not young, mostly been a B-grader throughout his career. Has to be upgraded if we're to go places.
Blakey - little exposure on the ball, IMO his best position is as a utility
Clarke - improving but if he's in our first choice onball combination we have problems. Still only feels like a depth player.
Florent - coming off an ordinary year, still quite a few significant weaknesses. Has to improve if he's going to be in our starting onball combination
Hewett - good defensive player, probably doesn't have enough attacking class to be a top-tier onballer though.
Naismith - can't stay fit. Decent when he's there but I think he's done.
Warner - decent hype and looks OK on the trading paddock but still a long way off it and I'm not sold he makes it.

So we've got 1 star onballer, an aging star onballer, a number of excellent utilities/outside types and the rest are B-grade types. It's clearly at least a midfielder short IMO.
 
Swans have parted ways with Elijah
“It is obviously a sensitive situation and a legal process is still to play out, but in working with Elijah and his management, our collective view was that the right call for both Elijah and the club is to part ways. We have also consulted with the AFLPA and appreciate the support James Gallagher and his team has provided during the process.

“This has been an incredibly difficult situation for Elijah, his family, and those involved. We are keen to see Elijah receive ongoing education and support in the hope that he can mature and learn from this experience, make better decisions in the future, and take steps towards rebuilding his career.”

They make it sound like it was a mutual decision to part ways, and Taylor wanted it just as much as the Swans. In reality we wanted him gone and basically fired him. Not that I am not pleased we fired him, but the business talk about collective view and the business talk associated with that is weird.
 

If I'm being honest looking ahead 4-5 years, I don't think any bar one will be full-time mids. They all have a few strings to their bow that will see them be played in other roles as well as on the ball.

And unlike some, I am not a fan of the idea of a rotating bevy of hybrid mids at our centre bounces.
 
Let’s not forget 15 months ago the general consensus was that Gulden looked likely to be a first-rounder and Campbell might also get drafted.
Since then they both struggle for opportunity as underagers at the nationals, Campbell stars in a futures game and Gulden wins his B&F against the men in the Sydney comp.
Braeden may well be deserving of his rise in the rankings but i don’t get how Errol has slid so far when a lot of the kids have done diddly squat for 12 months.

Because Gulden has the attributes that can be found at any stage of the draft - ticker, hardness, accumulation, endurance, pressure, work rate.

Campbell has the much rarer attributes that are generally only found in the very early stage of the draft - elite foot skills, line-breaking pace, poise and composure.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Because Gulden has the attributes that can be found at any stage of the draft - ticker, hardness, accumulation, endurance, pressure, work rate.

Campbell has the much rarer attributes that are generally only found in the very early stage of the draft - elite foot skills, line-breaking pace, poise and composure.

Gulden also has something that of recent times is something most of our draftees haven't had, and that is a natural instinct to find the ball. You can have all the talent in the world but if you are only getting 10 disposals a match you aren't going to be of much use as a midfielder.

Guys like Rohan, Stoddart and Ling are perfect examples. Very talented players who all don't or didn't get disposal numbers they probably should.
 
1. Doubt Crows will bid on JUH to tell their eventual pick he wasn't first choice. More likely straight bid on local boy Thilthorpe.
2. North most likely to take McDonald after the departure of Brown.
3. Swans bid on JUH. Dogs match.
4. Swans take DGB.
5. Hawks take Hollands.
6. Suns take Phillips to join up with Rowell et al.
7. Bombers bid on Campbell. Swans match.
8 & 9 Bombers WGAAF.
So we agree on everything except Pick 1. One uncertainty for mine is if the Hawks take Phillips who apparently wants to be in Vic. Not sure that Suns will take Hollands. Possibly Bruhn.
Another is that North bid for JUH, then take McDonald, but why bother.
I don't get this thinking, this then must apply to every bid that gets matched not just number 1. Are the draftees so insecure they cannot handle not being the first choice of a club...the whole draft is filled with players who are not the clubs first choice so why is it an issue at the first pick. If the 10k is a reason, then you are picking a player who is not so confident in their own ability to generate plenty more than that in years to come. Make no mistake, between themselves the boys know who the number 1 pick is.

This comes up so often it is simply ridiculous to have as a reason Adelaide would not pick JUH. They should definitely pick him as you never know, there just might be a reason the Dogs cant match the bid, very unlikely of course, however, they will be derelict in their duty to the footy club if they do not select the clear number 1 pick first. Put it on the Dogs to match, then go for Tilthorpe or McDonald or whoever....
 
Gulden also has something that of recent times is something most of our draftees haven't had, and that is a natural instinct to find the ball. You can have all the talent in the world but if you are only getting 10 disposals a match you aren't going to be of much use as a midfielder.

Guys like Rohan, Stoddart and Ling are perfect examples. Very talented players who all don't or didn't get disposal numbers they probably should.

Yes. But the flip side of course is you get mids who have no trouble getting 30 possessions, but a fair portion of them don't achieve much with those possessions. I don't think that will be the case with Gulden, but you never know, and it's why I think Campbell has the greater upside. It will depend on how he is developed and played.

But I think they will both be 50/50 in terms of inside mid and other positions (small forward for Gulden, wing/flank for Campbell), so neither have to be prolific.
 
Mmm that’ll bring the list back to 33 again, so up to 5 senior list spots available and 1 rookie... I think.

I can’t see how we will only take 3 now. I think we will trade back into this draft in some capacity whether it be top 10 or to grab someone like Neale (ruck) in the second-third round.

McCartin you’d think is fairly likely too.
 
They make it sound like it was a mutual decision to part ways, and Taylor wanted it just as much as the Swans. In reality we wanted him gone and basically fired him. Not that I am not pleased we fired him, but the business talk about collective view and the business talk associated with that is weird.

Not at all weird. Pretty normal for a professional organisation like the Swans.
 
Swans have parted ways with Elijah
“It is obviously a sensitive situation and a legal process is still to play out, but in working with Elijah and his management, our collective view was that the right call for both Elijah and the club is to part ways. We have also consulted with the AFLPA and appreciate the support James Gallagher and his team has provided during the process.

“This has been an incredibly difficult situation for Elijah, his family, and those involved. We are keen to see Elijah receive ongoing education and support in the hope that he can mature and learn from this experience, make better decisions in the future, and take steps towards rebuilding his career.”

Thank goodness that has been laid to rest.
 
Yes. But the flip side of course is you get mids who have no trouble getting 30 possessions, but a fair portion of them don't achieve much with those possessions. I don't think that will be the case with Gulden, but you never know, and it's why I think Campbell has the greater upside. It will depend on how he is developed and played.

But I think they will both be 50/50 in terms of inside mid and other positions (small forward for Gulden, wing/flank for Campbell), so neither have to be prolific.

I wonder if Gulden will follow similar lines to a guy you actually compared him to recently, Dayne Zorko. Hadn't thought of that comparison but I think it might be on the money. Has the knack to play as a forward and good goal sense but in the end he's too valuable as a midfielder to go forward for much of his career. I don't think I'd write Gulden off from being a permanent midfielder.
 
They make it sound like it was a mutual decision to part ways, and Taylor wanted it just as much as the Swans. In reality we wanted him gone and basically fired him. Not that I am not pleased we fired him, but the business talk about collective view and the business talk associated with that is weird.
Collective view is code for we have this statement from our legal eagles to avoid any unfair dismissal claims issues going forward. Swans wanted him gone and liaised with the other parties to make it happen. Simple as that. Its how you need to work to remove even the most obvious of cases for dismissal these days.
 
Mmm that’ll bring the list back to 33 again, so up to 5 senior list spots available and 1 rookie... I think.

I can’t see how we will only take 3 now. I think we will trade back into this draft in some capacity whether it be top 10 or to grab someone like Neale (ruck) in the second-third round.

McCartin you’d think is fairly likely too.

Can you not mention the possibility of us ending up with Neale please?

I talk s**t a lot so I'm allowed to, but things you talk about often come to fruition, so now you're just getting my hopes up!
 
Mmm that’ll bring the list back to 33 again, so up to 5 senior list spots available and 1 rookie... I think.

I can’t see how we will only take 3 now. I think we will trade back into this draft in some capacity whether it be top 10 or to grab someone like Neale (ruck) in the second-third round.

McCartin you’d think is fairly likely too.

For what was considered the most compromised draft in history, COVID has actually balanced the draft a bit imo. The late picks in this draft are going to be very interesting, I am sure clubs have smokies tucked away this year and there will be many surprises at the back end of this draft and commentary on the night around what can you tell us about him?? with quizzical looks on faces....

Even my smokie Flynn Maguire might be a show..!!
 
McCartin you’d think is fairly likely too.
Judging by the statements the only way it doesn't happen is if we draft McDonald and/or he suffers a concussion within the next week.
 
I wonder if Gulden will follow similar lines to a guy you actually compared him to recently, Dayne Zorko. Hadn't thought of that comparison but I think it might be on the money. Has the knack to play as a forward and good goal sense but in the end he's too valuable as a midfielder to go forward for much of his career. I don't think I'd write Gulden off from being a permanent midfielder.

Fair call. I think it will be a reverse, in that he will prove far too valuable inside 50 to spend large chunks in the midfield. His goal sense, and most importantly his ability to set up and create scoring opportunities around goal is elite, and under-appreciated on this board. However if I think that about his forward craft, and you think that about his midfield craft, it's likely Horse will have the exact same conundrum. That's why I think he (and Campbell) will follow the Heeney, Dawson, Blakey route of being capable in too many roles and shifted around a lot.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top