Swans cut 3

[Swans_01]

Bradshaw cannot go on the veterans list because it is based on the number of years a player has been at the club they are listed. From memory Bolton and Goodes qualified last year but if they are put onto the veterans list we still need to spend about 92 percent of the cap forcing us to spend more on the players we have or throw money at others. By keeping them off this list it gives us more flexability to offer our developing players more as they improve.

yeah mate if you read my suggestion, i said we could throw some money at pearce or someone similar to join us. a quick, skilful midfielder.

btw if we only offered that player a three year contract or so i dont think it would make much difference to the tpp in the whole scheme of things as jack and grundy and hanners have just signed new deals and the likes of jetta and rohan etc wouldnt be on big contracts next contract either.

 

[mark121]

fair enough i just meant we would be forced to do it even if the players we want arnt available

 

[its game on]

All four teams in 2010 grand finals, two of them won, what did Ormond do this year??

Very disappointed that Gilchrist hasn't been given another go.

Seen a lot of Taylor at CGS and thought he'd kick on at the Swans. I really rate their young player developement, so I guess he was just not up to scratch. I'm tipping he'll head to the Bullants in the VFL.

 

[Dangas]

haha orreal, currie stays, he will make his debut next year

 

[Dangas]

Moore = trade bait
O'Dwyer = trade bait
Barlow = trade bait

 

[SM]

We still need to make one more delisting from the Senior List I believe - minimum of three changes to make way for draftees.

Suspect O'Dwyer's place on the EMG list for the game against Carlton was to up his trade value, and I do suspect we could get something half-decent for him as he did show a bit in his games in 09. Barlow however I suspect will be the one delisted.

 

[Sanecow]

I don't think being listed as an emergency does squat for trade value. It does a bit to let a player know that they are close to a game though.

 

[grimlock]

O'Dwyer was making up the numbers, there wasn't much in the cupboard at that stage I'm afraid.

 

[GotTheGoodes]

Yep, sad to say it but Barlow as trade bait would probably be a good option at this stage... Moore & O'Dwyer as well. I like all 3 but at some stage their cost outweighs their benefit and at the moment we're running at about breakeven imo... Agreeing with Grimlock I'd have to say O'Dwyer was just making up numbers and Moore just doesn't seem to have the right attributes to fit into the team atm imo. The only one I've been up in the air about is Barlow but after some umming & ahhing I'd have to say at this stage of his career he could be useful in securing us some good options come trade time.

 

[SOPH_CROSS]

Now that ive had time to think about it im bummed that Jake didnt make it the back injury really threw him out i hope he tires for the gc

 

[legend166]

Does anyone know the last ruckman we developed from draft to being a regular in our best 22?

Pyke is a special case, so he doesn't count.

Would it have been Stafford?

 

[liz]

i believe we can also put two players on the veterans list. say goodes and rok who are probably the two highest paid players at the club. would free up positions on the senior list as well as salary cap room and would allow us to offer big dollars to a decent player, say like a pearce or someone.

Bradshaw cannot go on the veterans list because it is based on the number of years a player has been at the club they are listed. From memory Bolton and Goodes qualified last year but if they are put onto the veterans list we still need to spend about 92 percent of the cap forcing us to spend more on the players we have or throw money at others. By keeping them off this list it gives us more flexability to offer our developing players more as they improve.

Goodes and Kirk were on the veterans' list last year, but as "inside' rather than "outside". That means the club got salary cap relief for them, but chose not to also get list relief (ie an extra two senior listed players).

Bolton was eligible last year too so obviously could be elevated this season. ROK has served enough years at the club but would need to turn 30 at some point during the next season to qualify - I am not sure whether he is there yet or not.

 

[mark121]

Does anyone know the last ruckman we developed from draft to being a regular in our best 22?

Pyke is a special case, so he doesn't count.

Would it have been Stafford?

Goodes or he was for about 2 seasons he even won a brownlow in the ruck but before him i have no idea. Maybe Doyle played a few seasons but injury held him back

 

[BarneyBent]

Does anyone know the last ruckman we developed from draft to being a regular in our best 22?

Pyke is a special case, so he doesn't count.

Would it have been Stafford?

Goodes.

 

[basashi]

It is particularly disappointing with Thornton. He was at the Swans for 5 full seasons and even though it only yielded a handful of senior games, they kept persevering with him for good reason. It truly is a case of talent versus injury.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Sorry for intruding but is Orreal any decent player? He is the sort of player I'd like my club to rookie list.

 

[Swans120]

Wait for the regular 2's watchers to come on, but he has been injured pretty much all year and from what I've heard has never really been close to senior selection. Has been a development player for the last few years and has shown some improvement but not enough to play seniors, going on what I've read and heard.

 

[SOPH_CROSS]

Jake had surgery on his back an it hampered his development this really would have been a make or break year for him i also had all the faith he'd get there he had the right stuff just to many guys before him but i pretty sure his looking into the gc now he wrote me a really sweet message and im gonna miss beanie

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Jake had surgery on his back an it hampered his development this really would have been a make or break year for him i also had all the faith he'd get there he had the right stuff just to many guys before him but i pretty sure his looking into the gc now he wrote me a really sweet message and im gonna miss beanie

If Skipper can get picked up Orreal surely would get another shot. What sort of ruckman is he? We need some backup as Laycock well he is finished and I have doubts on Bellchambers long-term. We could do worse than putting Orreal on the rookie list and see what happens.

 

[Dangas]

difference is though, skipper had already played afl games

 

[Lakey91]

Barlow to go (either through a trade or delisted). Great athlete, but a pathetic footballer. He is an off/pre season specialist - tuns like a machine and wins time trial after time trial, but then when he actually gets on the field, he just looks lost, lazy and dissinterested.

Can O'Dwyer be rookie listed under that "mature age" rookie rule like playfair was?

 

[SkankDanker]

Barlow to go (either through a trade or delisted). Great athlete, but a pathetic footballer. He is an off/pre season specialist - tuns like a machine and wins time trial after time trial, but then when he actually gets on the field, he just looks lost, lazy and dissinterested.

Can O'Dwyer be rookie listed under that "mature age" rookie rule like playfair was?

Hey Lakey.

What is that rule?

 

[Rhino5]

Yep, sad to say it but Barlow as trade bait would probably be a good option at this stage... Moore & O'Dwyer as well. I like all 3 but at some stage their cost outweighs their benefit and at the moment we're running at about breakeven imo... Agreeing with Grimlock I'd have to say O'Dwyer was just making up numbers and Moore just doesn't seem to have the right attributes to fit into the team atm imo. The only one I've been up in the air about is Barlow but after some umming & ahhing I'd have to say at this stage of his career he could be useful in securing us some good options come trade time.

As much as many of us would like to see Moore used as trade bait, it just isn't going to happen. He will be here next year and likely in the best 22 as well.

I think it's a pity about O'Dwyer - I reckon he showed a fair bit in the limited opportunities he had. At the end of the day though, there are too many guys ahead of him in that position.

 

[RTTF]

Can O'Dwyer be rookie listed under that "mature age" rookie rule like playfair was?

That classification was axed in August. For now, there are no max age restrictions on Rookies.

I think it's a pity about O'Dwyer - I reckon he showed a fair bit in the limited opportunities he had. At the end of the day though, there are too many guys ahead of him in that position.

+1 but note he hasn't been formally delisted yet, he may get a reprieve...v.doubtful, but we'll see what happens....

 

[BarneyBent]

If O'Dwyer stays on the list, it's probably a sign that Longmire rates him higher than Roos did. If that's the case, we may see him get many more opportunities next year.