Analysis Tom Mitchell

[Millky95]

We got a pack of chips for Membrey? Who ate them?

They were delicious

 

[swansfan51]

12 was quoted above by a Tiger fan. I would be ecstatic with that for a slow NEAFL playing mid with no other strings to his bow than an awful kick and dubious delivery. Poor bugger will hard pressed to get to the stoppages on time let alone extract it.

12....grab it and run.

I think you missed the point of my post. Kennedy was in a very similar position and had extremely low trade value. I expect Tom would be similar

 

[The King!]

I heard the same thing about McClean...I heard the same thing about a few others. Clubs will take a known commodity over a top 10 pick that could be the next Kane Lucas dud.

Brock mclean? That was a while ago

Mitchell has sat on our list not being picked, i think there is a real suspicion around why and his value has dropped

 

[LukeParkerno1]

They were delicious

Thanks for sharing!

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Brock mclean? That was a while ago

Mitchell has sat on our list not being picked, i think there is a real suspicion around why and his value has dropped

Brock couldn't make the starting side for Melbourne.....and still didn't lose trade....

 

[robbieando]

Brock couldn't make the starting side for Melbourne.....and still didn't lose trade....

He was injured during his final year at the Demon, huge difference.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

He was injured during his final year at the Demon, huge difference.

Not for the whole year he wasn't. He isn't the only one that fetched a first rounder anyway

 

[robbieando]

As a Swan I would want at least a top 5 pick for him. We allegedly knocked back Carltons pick 4 last year so the coaches must have faith in his ability.

Carlton had Pick 7. They weren't interested in trading for Mitchell unless it was for their 2nd Round Pick, as they had a deal lined up with GWS which went ahead involving that pick. Mitchell however was never interested in being traded anywhere so it was a non-starter regardless.

 

[robbieando]

Not for the whole year he wasn't. He isn't the only one that fetched a first rounder anyway

Sorry I was wrong the year McLean was traded he played 19 senior games for the Demons, missing 3 weeks with a knee injury. It was 2008 where he missed the last 8 games of the season with an ankle injury. Played every other game in the seniors though.

So you want to correct yourself, he was playing far more regular football than Mitchell ever has?

 

[The King!]

I would say mclean was a much more proven commodity

The comparison to JPK is more apt in my view


However round 1 is early to talk trading, he should just be playing

 

[bungee]

As an opposition supporter I just simply cannot believe that there is a player of that quality sitting outside your 22. He got cut down by injury and then the swans have just never given him another chance. That last round game vs us last year he was absolutely sensational and BOG by a mile. I know you need team balance ect but you can never have too many quality mids.

I would love for Richmond to go hard for him at the end of the year he is an absolute jet. Think his price tag would still be quite high trade wise. Longmire just must not rate him. Drafted him second round in my league last year...was a very long and frustrating year especially the week he got 56 touches in the 2's and didn't get picked. However he seemed to keep getting a niggle at the wrong time.

What can I say. We have depth in that part of the ground. Of course Horse rates him but we can't play a team of mids.

 

[bungee]

Did the reserves play last week??????????, I know NEAFL doesnt start till this week.

Mitchell was named as an emergency but due to wet weather surprised he wasnt picked.

I cant see him getting picked this week with benny and jarrard back, whens the last time the swans made 3 changes in a week...but i still think he is in best 22.

ALso WTF is going on with Jones???? I hoped that he could success Shaw, but he hasn;t been seen!!!!

Your ?????? and !!!!!!! keys are sticking.

 

[Lakeside Swan]

What can I say. We have depth in that part of the ground. Of course Horse rates him but we can't play a team of mids.

If that is the case and he isn't good enough to kick anyone out of the team, why didn't we trade him last year for pick 4? I get the feeling that the coaches see him as part of the team in the long term. But, I can't explain why they don't see him as part of the current team. What is going to change? His main competitors, Bird, Kennedy and Hannas are all young and are going to be around for several more years.

 

[The King!]

If he cannot pass bird who is now 26 and the player he will be then mitchell is not worth much on the trade table

 

[GotTheGoodes]

I respect McGlynn, but half the reason our midfield got smashed in the GF is we didn't have enough genuine ball winners. McGlynn is a terrior but he isn't a ball winner. He can be good a small defensive forward though.

I disagree. A well laid tackle or pressure turns the ball over as much as getting first hands to it. These acts alone win the ball alot of the time. The 1%ers and pressure he displays wins the ball.

MgGlynn was a forward before a midfielder. He isn't a great midfielder, he attacks the ball, he tackles, but he doesn't win the ball. You need ball winners with good skills. It is why I have been campaigning for 12 months....we need dual sided midfielders that can kick!

I disagree again. He is a great midfielder because he attacks the ball, tackles and does those things that lift the team. The tough nut is invaluable to a side because of this aggressive persistence and determination. Never say die. Stand up for your mates. Go in f**kin hard. That's what we needed more of in the GF and what we need more of in general IMO.

The words that spring to mind when I think about what Benny brings to the table week in week out are things like Dedication. Determination. Persistence. Courage. Selflessness. Aggressiveness.

These things are as much who you are as what you do and are things I'd rate over "good skills" every time. Kelly, Kirky, Bolton... These guys all had similar attributes even without a huge amount of "ability" or "skill". They used these features of their personality to get more out of themselves and those around them most of the time. It's something Benny Mac has and something that's hard to replace.

 

[Tedeski]

I can't help but think that the ban on trading has had just as much of an impact on who we wanted to trade out as to who we wanted to trade in.
With Mills & Dunkley on the horizon, it wouldn't have surprised me to see Tommy &/or Reid come back to a Melbourne club/s in order for us to gain Ryder &/or Frawley &/or Patfull to fill our obvious deficiencies & in order to enable us to keep players such as Hanners & Parker by giving them a decent pay rise when contract talks next come up.

Tommy to Melbourne with Roos as his coach was the one that would have made plenty of sense in order for us to somehow gain Frawley, with Ryder coming to us as well for our first or second round pick.

The only thing that would have made the AFL angry enough with us to ban us from trading would have been if we traded in both Frawley & Ryder after playing off in the GF.
I have no doubt that the main reason Goodesy has continued playing is because we cleared up some cap space for such recruiting only to now have to spend it, hence Goodesy & perhaps Shaw playing on.

Never mind me! This has just been my theory all along.

 

[The King!]

Mcglynn played midfield last year and was not far off all australian talk before getting injured

 

[The King!]

I can't help but think that the ban on trading has had just as much of an impact on who we wanted to trade out as to who we wanted to trade in.
With Mills & Dunkley on the horizon, it wouldn't have surprised me to see Tommy &/or Reid come back to a Melbourne club/s in order for us to gain Ryder &/or Frawley &/or Patfull to fill our obvious deficiencies & in order to enable us to keep players such as Hanners & Parker by giving them a decent pay rise when contract talks next come up.

Tommy to Melbourne with Roos as his coach was the one that would have made plenty of sense in order for us to somehow gain Frawley, with Ryder coming to us as well for our first or second round pick.

The only thing that would have made the AFL angry enough with us to ban us from trading would have been if we traded in both Frawley & Ryder.
I have no doubt that the main reason Goodesy has continued playing is because we cleared up some cap space for such recruiting only to now have to spend it, hence Goodesy & perhaps Shaw playing on.

Never my me! This has just been my theory all along.

I was wondering earlier if Goodes either played on motivated to right the wrongs of last year i.e the loss, or did the club after the stupid ban ask him to stay ditto shaw, because we were a bit stuffed list management wise

 

[TigerTime88]

Seems fair value to me too mate. Cheers buddy.

It would be in Richmonds best interests to bring in a guy who is 22 at the start of next season, proven ball winner and imo genuine A grade potential. At worst he will be a very good player.

Add him to Deledio (29 next season), Riewoldt (27), Rance (25), Cotchin (25), Edwards (27), Griffiths (23), Martin (23) and so on an so forth and he fits right in. Getting another kid won't work for us as we need to bring in guys ready to step up. Sydney get a low pick for a draft pick who can develop until your windows closes and then he will be ready to step up.

 

[Tedeski]

I was wondering earlier if Goodes either played on motivated to right the wrongs of last year i.e the loss, or did the club after the stupid ban ask him to stay ditto shaw, because we were a bit stuffed list management wise

Add to that the loss of Malceski which would have saved us more cap money.

We were in Micky Mouse shape to lure both Ryder & Frawley to strengthen our weaknesses in the ruck & down back & we would have perhaps been prepared to part with the supposedly highly paid Tommy & Reid.
The retirement of ROK & perhaps Shaw would have cleared up enough cap space.
The whole situation really stinks when are unable to trade out a player & even bring one in for less.

 

[Millky95]

Add to that the loss of Malceski which would have saved us more cap money.

We were in Micky Mouse shape to lure both Ryder & Frawley to strengthen our weaknesses in the ruck & down back & we would have perhaps been prepared to part with the supposedly highly paid Tommy & Reid.
The retirement of ROK & perhaps Shaw would have cleared up enough cap space.
The whole situation really stinks when are unable to trade out a player & even bring one in for less.

Can't have those gosh darn Sydney folk stealing another flag

 

[Tedeski]

Can't have those gosh darn Sydney folk stealing another flag

Yeah!
Why don't we just go & f.. k ORRRFF & stop being the best list managers in the comp.

 

[Jack2Jack]

Mitchell doesn't need to replace Bird, Hannebery, Parker or any of those guys. The side needs another contested ball winner, who's not nearly as slow as he's being made out to be..and yes he can actually hit the scoreboard... 13 goals (and 19 behinds) in 20 games isn't a terrible return for a guy who's primary role is as an inside mid (turn that into 19.13 and it looks very good actually)...and he can actually play half forward as well..go watch some 2013 replays when he played there and where he was also the king of score involvements. Kicking skills can improve but he has 10 times the football smarts of a few others who seemingly get an umlimited amount of chances, he's had 100 tackles in his 20 games as well..not bad for someone who apparently can't apply defensive pressure.

From the side chosen on the weekend we were probably one 'tall' type too many. Goodes, Reid, Laidler (more a 3rd tall I know) only 2 of those guys should be in the side or we also probably had one too many 'quick' low possession winning outside players, Rohan, Jetta, Cunningham, Towers...all these guys depend on others feeding them the ball, can't carry all those guys in the one ide (unless one can start regularly getting 20 odd touches a game) in addition to one tall too many.
Mitchell should be in as another ball winner, obviously McVeigh and McGlynn will come back to but there will be acouple of injuries along the way. Get these 3 players back in at the expense of a couple of the names above and we have the right balance imo.

There's should spot for him and he should be playing..or at least get an opportunity to show his stuff...given how poor our depth is it will come sooner rather than later due to injuries. Hopefully this time when he performs he won't get dropped for half-injured players or perennial underperformers again.

 

[mtooler]

"Goodes, Reid, Laidler (more a 3rd tall I know) only 2 of those guys should be in the side or we also probably had one too many 'quick' low possession winning outside players, Rohan, Jetta, Cunningham, Towers"
Id keep 1 tall from that list and scarily it is Laidler. Id keep Rohan and Jetta. Id bring in McGlynn, Mcveigh and Mitchell.

 

[The King!]

"Goodes, Reid, Laidler (more a 3rd tall I know) only 2 of those guys should be in the side or we also probably had one too many 'quick' low possession winning outside players, Rohan, Jetta, Cunningham, Towers"
Id keep 1 tall from that list and scarily it is Laidler. Id keep Rohan and Jetta. Id bring in McGlynn, Mcveigh and Mitchell.

Yup people go on about swingman reid

But who is he going to play on in defence this week, or what role will he play forward

Too many games now doing nothing