Player Watch #9 Will Hayward

[Kennedy Parker]

Will Hayward
Spritely Sydney Swans forward Will Hayward

9

Will Hayward

Age

25

Ht

186cm

Wt

83kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

10.6

3star

K

6.6

3star

HB

4.0

3star

M

3.4

3star

T

2.8

4star

G

1.1

4star

D

9.0

2star

K

4.3

2star

HB

4.7

3star

M

2.7

3star

T

2.7

4star

G

0.7

4star

D

9.4

3star

K

6.2

3star

HB

3.2

3star

M

2.6

3star

T

3.4

5star

G

1.4

5star

enjoyed a rocketing start to his career as he became the 11th-youngest player in the AFL era to reach 50 career goals in 2018. The 2016 draftee’s nippy pace and cunning goal awareness have made him a dangerous option in coach John Longmire’s forward line. A broken jaw and a persistent hip injury limited Hayward to just 12 goals in 13 senior games in 2019, but the South Australian is attacking the 2020 campaign on the back of his first full pre-season. Don’t be surprised if the exciting Swan finds himself on a wing this year.

Will Hayward

9

Will Hayward

Age

25

Ht

186cm

Wt

83kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

10.6

3star

K

6.6

3star

HB

4.0

3star

M

3.4

3star

T

2.8

4star

G

1.1

4star

D

9.0

2star

K

4.3

2star

HB

4.7

3star

M

2.7

3star

T

2.7

4star

G

0.7

4star

D

9.4

3star

K

6.2

3star

HB

3.2

3star

M

2.6

3star

T

3.4

5star

G

1.4

5star

DOB: 26 October 1998
DEBUT: 2017
DRAFT: #21, 2016 National Draft
RECRUITED FROM: Walkerville (SA)/North Adelaide (SANFL)

Will Hayward | AFL

Follow Will Hayward's progress through AFL

www.sydneyswans.com.au

 

[Jimbo OZ]

This board seems too willing to let players go that are best 22. Not many other teams in the “premiership window” are prepared to let 25yr old talents go especially when there are almost zero other players in the VFL ready to replace them.

 

[Ticky009]

This board seems too willing to let players go that are best 22. Not many other teams in the “premiership window” are prepared to let 25yr old talents go especially when there are almost zero other players in the VFL ready to replace them.

Yes. Let them go and then moan about it for the next decade.

 

[Kirkswan]

I can't speak for others, and I won't go into the reasons I'm not that keen on him in the side, lest it turn into another Hayward pile-on, but I think as for the reasons to trade him, I think our hands may be tied somewhat.

Judging by his RFA status, Hayward is in our top 25% of earners, but he's not in our top 25% of players (This is not a criticism - I don't think even his staunchest advocates could claim that he is one of or even close to being in our best 11 players.)

We've re-signed better and more important players recently, and will need to re-sign better and more important players in the immediate future, so the club has to think about where - or who - they're gonna put their money towards.

It's very likely we won't be able to offer him what he was previously on. So to stay with us he'd have to take a substantial pay cut. That already works against us. Then when you consider the seemingly desperate SA clubs lurking, it's not hard to imagine a reality where they ARE willing to offer him what he was previously on, possibly more.

It wouldn't be fair to expect Hayward to settle for less if he doesn't have to, and it wouldn't be fair to expect the Swans to offer more if they don't want to. Could just be two parties at odds with each other's priorities.

We've lost better players for less in the past.

If he chooses to go that's one thing, and it will be a loss imo... my gripe is with the people wanting to drop him, trade him and get him out at all cost.

You say he is not in our best 11, but it seems to me no-one on here has any clear idea of what his role is, and/or how perfectly and/or consistently he plays it. It's seems to me that this board bases their top players on disposals, meters gained and/or goals and all else is pretty much forgotten. But having some who plays their given role week in and week out, is a highly sought after commodity... Just ask the clubs currently vying for his favours!

 

[caesar88]

If he chooses to go that's one thing, and it will be a loss imo... my gripe is with the people wanting to drop him, trade him and get him out at all cost.

You say he is not in our best 11, but it seems to me no-one on here has any clear idea of what his role is, and/or how perfectly and/or consistently he plays it. It's seems to me that this board bases their top players on disposals, meters gained and/or goals and all else is pretty much forgotten. But having some who plays their given role week in and week out, is a highly sought after commodity... Just ask the clubs currently vying for his favours!

That's fair enough KS.

I really don't want to get into Hayward as a player. I understand his role and I think many others seem to acknowledge the role he has and the value he has as a unique player in that role, even if we all differ on his effectiveness of it.

But he's not the first player to have value to the side. We lost players like Mitchell, Aliir, Hewett & Dawson, all of whom are better players than Hayward, and at points in time when our list wasn't as stacked as it currently is. It's probably a great thing that someone like Hayward isn't in our top half a dozen players, whereas for a team like Adelaide or Port, maybe he would be.

So I think it's just a realistic acceptance that we can't keep everyone. It's just not possible in today's industry.

So if someone is squeezed out that isn't Hayward, then who? What would the alternatives be? Would people have preferred we made re-signing Hayward a priority over Gulden & Rowbottom? Would people have preferred us not lock away Blakey & Heeney for life last year? Would people have preferred us throw the kitchen sink at Hayward to keep him rather than keep some away for McDonald & Warner in the future? Would people have preferred us lose a key defender we've been crying out for in Melican, in order to keep Hayward?

Once you start getting into players like potentially losing a Fox or a Cunningham, or a Reid or Rampe retires, then you're getting into players whose contracts have barely any relevance to the salary cap anyway.

 

[tombomb]

A bad scenario would be Hayward going to Adelaide as they could again leverage the preseason draft to f us over and force us to accept a crappy compo pick.

Whereas if he chose almost any other team, we could leverage a good deal.

 

[The King!]

Is there a land developer that can give his partner a house and land package

 

[Callipygian]

A bad scenario would be Hayward going to Adelaide as they could again leverage the preseason draft to f us over and force us to accept a crappy compo pick.

Whereas if he chose almost any other team, we could leverage a good deal.

I don't think we have much leverage because the scenario where Hayward leaves is because we aren't prepared to offer him as much as other clubs. Where we get our leverage is from multiple clubs competing for his signature. That drives up his price and his price will determine the compo pick we get. He's not leaving by trade, I just don't see a scenario where that happens.

 

[tombomb]

I don't think we have much leverage because the scenario where Hayward leaves is because we aren't prepared to offer him as much as other clubs. Where we get our leverage is from multiple clubs competing for his signature. That drives up his price and his price will determine the compo pick we get. He's not leaving by trade, I just don't see a scenario where that happens.

I don't think it is that far fetched that he gets offered around 800k and we match the offer and force a trade.

If we match an offer, that doesn't mean he will be coming back to play for us and we have to honour the contract.

 

[JackHiscoxWasFast]

Is there a land developer that can give his partner a house and land package

Yeah I know a guy in Adelaide.

 

[Heeney2Franklin]

I don't think it is that far fetched that he gets offered around 800k and we match the offer and force a trade.

If we match an offer, that doesn't mean he will be coming back to play for us and we have to honour the contract.

If it is Adelaide we will make it as difficult as possible we will 100% match.

If he nominates Port i suspect Beatson wont be such a campaigner about it.

 

[Jimbo OZ]

So I think it's just a realistic acceptance that we can't keep everyone. It's just not possible in today's industry.

How do we go from a position where we have enough salary cap room to offer players like Naughton huge money one year to squeezing out Hayward the next?

How many other teams squeeze out 25 years olds who have played 144 games? It is not reality. Dawson wasn't squeezed out due to money. Hewett was squeezed out but it was due to position availability not money.

I get that everyone has a price but I feel if Hayward goes it will be because he wants to go for reasons he knows and not because the club is being squeezed.

 

[Crust]

If he chooses to go that's one thing, and it will be a loss imo... my gripe is with the people wanting to drop him, trade him and get him out at all cost.

You say he is not in our best 11, but it seems to me no-one on here has any clear idea of what his role is, and/or how perfectly and/or consistently he plays it. It's seems to me that this board bases their top players on disposals, meters gained and/or goals and all else is pretty much forgotten. But having some who plays their given role week in and week out, is a highly sought after commodity... Just ask the clubs currently vying for his favours!

I agree.
It is more than metres gained and disposals. Last two games he got free kicks (which led to goals) from tackles.
In 7 games he's kicked 11.4 which is equal to 36 goals for the year (23 games).
As a half forward Heeney has averaged 29 goals. I did not count 2015 (14 games) 2020(7 games) or this year. Heeney's best years are 2021 (36 goals) 2022 (49 goals) and 2023 (30 goals). Of course, Hayward has not been that prolific in the past but his previous best was 34 in 2022. So Hayward is on track for his best year ever. Why do we want to get rid of him now?
He still shits me to tears when he misses from directly in front but thankfully not so much this year.
Ultimately, who will kick his 36 goals?

 

[tombomb]

If it is Adelaide we will make it as difficult as possible we will 100% match.

If he nominates Port i suspect Beatson wont be such a campaigner about it.

If he selected Adelaide, they could do the exact same thing they did with Dawson.

 

[caesar88]

How do we go from a position where we have enough salary cap room to offer players like Naughton huge money one year to squeezing out Hayward the next?

How many other teams squeeze out 25 years olds who have played 144 games? It is not reality. Dawson wasn't squeezed out due to money. Hewett was squeezed out but it was due to position availability not money.

I get that everyone has a price but I feel if Hayward goes it will be because he wants to for reasons he nows and not because the club is being squeezed.

Well a key forward (or defender) is different to a medium forward isn't it?

So the club can want to save a significant portion of the salary cap for a particular player that may command it and also believe that Hayward as a medium forward isn't worth commanding it. The two aren't mutually-exclusive.

 

[Heeney2Franklin]

If he selected Adelaide, they could do the exact same thing they did with Dawson.

Wait so if we force a trade they can still use the PSD?

 

[tombomb]

Wait so if we force a trade they can still use the PSD?

As I understand it, I asked this on the main draft board today, if a restricted offer is matched and a trade can't be agreed on then the player would go into the draft.

What is unclear is whether that is the main draft or the preseason draft, however I think he would just be like any uncontracted player and would go to the preseason draft.

So it would essentially be the same scenario as Dawson, yet we have the option of not matching and just taking the compo pick. Which if it was today, would be at best pick 18.

 

[Jimbo OZ]

Well a key forward (or defender) is different to a medium forward isn't it?

So the club can want to save a significant portion of the salary cap for a particular player that may command it and also believe that Hayward as a medium forward isn't worth commanding it. The two aren't mutually-exclusive.

True. Key forward is different. Just like midfielders are different and backs are different. There are differences everywhere. Differences when using Hewett, Dawson, Mitchell, and Aliir as evidence too.

Fact is, based on the Naughton report, we don't have a salary cap squeeze. We also don't have a ready replacement waiting in the wings to take Hayward's role. Someone mentioned 31 year old Robbie Fox earlier. That says a lot about our medium forward stocks.

I just don't buy that it is reality that we can't keep everyone of our 21-26 year old players. We can. Other teams do.

 

[caesar88]

True. Key forward is different. Just like midfielders are different and backs are different. There are differences everywhere. Differences when using Hewett, Dawson, Mitchell, and Aliir as evidence too.

Fact is, based on the Naughton report, we don't have a salary cap squeeze. We also don't have a ready replacement waiting in the wings to take Hayward's role. Someone mentioned 31 year old Robbie Fox earlier. That says a lot about our medium forward stocks.

I just don't buy that it is reality that we can't keep everyone of our 21-26 year old players. We can. Other teams do.

Who? Geelong? Collingwood? We're not really in the same boat as those clubs...

There's also different ways a player can be "squeezed out." Hewett was squeezed out of the midfield which effected how much it was going to cost to keep him. Carlton were prepared to offer $450k. Could we have used that money to keep Hewett? Probably. Would we have wanted to use that money to keep a then-solid role player? Evidently not.

So "squeezed out" doesn't always mean the salary cap is bursting and someone's gotta make way. It's relative to positions and roles.

Hayward may do his role perfectly but at the end of the day he's a solid player in a team stacked with gun players and a rumoured trade interest in more gun players for either end of the ground. So the money is probably there, but doesn't mean we'd want to use it on him.

 

[bedford]

Only if we let Logan roam further a field, something I'd love to see

Logan does roam

 

[rustycrate]

Logan does roam

Logan's run.

 

[bedford]

I agree.
It is more than metres gained and disposals. Last two games he got free kicks (which led to goals) from tackles.
In 7 games he's kicked 11.4 which is equal to 36 goals for the year (23 games).
As a half forward Heeney has averaged 29 goals. I did not count 2015 (14 games) 2020(7 games) or this year. Heeney's best years are 2021 (36 goals) 2022 (49 goals) and 2023 (30 goals). Of course, Hayward has not been that prolific in the past but his previous best was 34 in 2022. So Hayward is on track for his best year ever. Why do we want to get rid of him now?
He still shits me to tears when he misses from directly in front but thankfully not so much this year.
Ultimately, who will kick his 36 goals?

Teams change every year

 

[bedford]

Logan's run.

He's not a stay at home forward , but he's got a great footy brain , run Logan run

 

[Jimbo OZ]

Who? Geelong? Collingwood? We're not really in the same boat as those clubs...

There's also different ways a player can be "squeezed out." Hewett was squeezed out of the midfield which effected how much it was going to cost to keep him. Carlton were prepared to offer $450k. Could we have used that money to keep Hewett? Probably. Would we have wanted to use that money to keep a then-solid role player? Evidently not.

So "squeezed out" doesn't always mean the salary cap is bursting and someone's gotta make way. It's relative to positions and roles.

Hayward may do his role perfectly but at the end of the day he's a solid player in a team stacked with gun players and a rumoured trade interest in more gun players for either end of the ground. So the money is probably there, but doesn't mean we'd want to use it on him.

So if Hayward is not being squeezed out due to salary cap and not being squeezed out because we have excess players fulfilling his role, how again will he be squeezed out? It honestly just sounds like you don't rate him or his role and so would spend his money elsewhere. If that's the case, there is no squeezing - just releasing.

 

[Kirkswan]

Logan's run.

Showing your age there Rusty!

 

[bedford]

So if Hayward is not being squeezed out due to salary cap and not being squeezed out because we have excess players fulfilling his role, how again will he be squeezed out? It honestly just sounds like you don't rate him or his role and so would spend his money elsewhere. If that's the case, there is no squeezing - just releasing.

No money , bstter players to pay