Analysis Tom Mitchell

[Millky95]

Thing about Tom leaving, he should've left last year. He stayed. Shows a lot about his character.

 

[robbieando]

Thing about Tom leaving, he should've left last year. He stayed. Shows a lot about his character.

there is that, plus the fact he is contracted to the club until the end of the 2016 season. So its not as if he can just up and leave on a whim.

 

[db swannie]

there is that, plus the fact he is contracted to the club until the end of the 2016 season. So its not as if he can just up and leave on a whim.

Phew, at least if he wants out at the end of this year we hold some cards.

 

[Millky95]

there is that, plus the fact he is contracted to the club until the end of the 2016 season. So its not as if he can just up and leave on a whim.

GWS dislike this

Boyd likes this

 

[swansfan51]

He lost a lot of form last year and had to battle back. I don't think there's anything personal in Tom playing in the ressies. I imagine Horse takes a very keen interest in where Mitchell is at. Maybe someone else would feel frustrated in his position but I think he's got more character than that. He strikes me as someone who understands deferred gratification.

Can you provide any evidence to back up your opinions? He was one of our best against Richmond and was promptly dropped. He was best on ground in the reserves Grand Final, having been best or 2nd best on ground for the previous 3 games as well.

He had only 1 senior game under 17 disposals - it was sub affected. He then got sent to the reserves and immediately pumped out 2 BOG performances in 3 weeks. Where did he lose form?

Which other smalls/midfielders had to deliver that level of reserves performance to get or regain a senior spot?

 

[GotTheGoodes]

Which other smalls/midfielders had to deliver that level of reserves performance to get or regain a senior spot?

Which other smalls/midfielders were essentially playing for the same spot JPK & Parker currently possess?

The fact is it has zero to do with his stats or how dominant he was again being that clearance machine... It is a structural decision by the coaches. JPK is that man and Parker backs him up. Horse can't fit another in there or we simply become too predictable IMO.

Saying all this, I reckon he's a freakin gun & want them to find a way to fit him in the side. Last thing I want is to lose that kind of talent without giving him a real crack.

 

[The King!]

So was Tom picked this week?

 

[bungee]

Can you provide any evidence to back up your opinions? He was one of our best against Richmond and was promptly dropped. He was best on ground in the reserves Grand Final, having been best or 2nd best on ground for the previous 3 games as well.

He had only 1 senior game under 17 disposals - it was sub affected. He then got sent to the reserves and immediately pumped out 2 BOG performances in 3 weeks. Where did he lose form?

Which other smalls/midfielders had to deliver that level of reserves performance to get or regain a senior spot?

I wrote "He lost a lot of form last year and had to battle back"

That's not my opinion, it's a fact. In Tom's own words....

Sunday, 23 November 2014
Tom Mitchell says dealing with injuries in 2014 was a frustrating experience.
"I suppose the main factor [the Swans coaches] wanted me to work on was my fitness, but it was kind of hard to work on since I had injuries. I couldn't run at times and couldn't really do training, and it's hard to get fit obviously when you can't train," he said.

"So that was very frustrating and added to the frustration of the whole year."

 

[bungee]

Tom will be fine. I have no doubt he knows exactly what he needs to do. He could have taken the easy road and taken an offer last season, but he obviously wants to force his way into the team and I have little doubt he will achieve it.

He will light up he reserves and force his way in. He is not slow (but not fast) but he is an elite inside player (*to be)both as a tackler and getting clean hands on the ball and distributing outside.

I personally think that Kennedy, Parker and Mitchell are all very different inside players that complement each other. I would have two in the centre square at any one time and one up forward. Parker and Mitchell in particular would provide good forward pressure whilst Kennedy and Parker are exceptional overhead.

I think when Goodes moves on, Rohan moves to his role with Parker/Mitchell/Kennedy/KJack/Mcglynn/Heeney/Cunningham etc providing forward pressure (as well as rotating through the midfield and should prove to be a dynamic forward line with Tippett and Franklin.

Agree. The thing is, to keep our premiership window open we need top notch players to be knocking on the door. We need the depth and we need the pressure on spots. Some of Hawthorn's players could also look for opportunities elsewhere and be welcomed but most players would rather risk throwing their hat in with a potential GF team than be a star in a bottom dweller. It's different for, say, a Malceski, who has a premiership gong, an All-Australian and now just needs to top up the bank balance as much as possible in his twilight years. Even if a team like the Hawks approached Mitchell he'd still be facing the reality that he'd not be an automatic inclusion, as good as he is.

 

[mtooler]

He should be in the team, end of debate. If winning clearances becomes too predictable for some, he can rest in the half forward line so we can lose the majority while hes resting.

 

[bungee]

He should be in the team, end of debate. If winning clearances becomes too predictable for some, he can rest in the half forward line so we can lose the majority while hes resting.

It's entirely up to him. He'll have been set goals and, no matter how high they are, he'll be expected to meet them.

 

[Superstar swan]

What annoys me the most is that there is guys like reid, cunningham and towers have beem gifted alot of games and yet 64 touches in the twos isnt good enough to get mitchell picked

 

[swansfan51]

I wrote "He lost a lot of form last year and had to battle back"

That's not my opinion, it's a fact. In Tom's own words....

Sunday, 23 November 2014
Tom Mitchell says dealing with injuries in 2014 was a frustrating experience.
"I suppose the main factor [the Swans coaches] wanted me to work on was my fitness, but it was kind of hard to work on since I had injuries. I couldn't run at times and couldn't really do training, and it's hard to get fit obviously when you can't train," he said.

"So that was very frustrating and added to the frustration of the whole year."

I read his own words, it says absolutely nothing about form. What you're now saying is that, despite a lack of fitness, he was repeatedly and consistently best on ground in the reserves plus performed well in all but 1 senior game (which was sub affected), and that this evidence somehow supports him not being in form?

Unfit and still better than everyone in the Reserves, and many of the seniors when picked? Sounds like great form to me.

 

[GotTheGoodes]

Why would the coaches not do what they thought was the best thing for the club? Why would they leave this amazing talent, the equivilent of Jetta/Reid & Cunningham combined out of the side? The reasoning is pretty simple... They are doing what they feel is best for the club & our success.

No coach wants to lose (well, unless you're coaching for picks of course). They have left Tom out for a reason & while we supporters can be dissapointed & have our ideas about it ultimately we don't know the clubs reasoning behind it.

Shit, Tom could have proclaimed his love for Carlton & called Skilton & Kelly flogs for all we know! As such, I trust the coaches to always put the club & our success first. Have faith this is the best for the club & thus best for us as supporters guys & girls. You'll enjoy the year a far greater amount not thinking Horse is incompetent or somehow out to hurt/impede our success or that of individual players.

 

[swansfan51]

Why would the coaches not do what they thought was the best thing for the club? Why would they leave this amazing talent, the equivilent of Jetta/Reid & Cunningham combined out of the side? The reasoning is pretty simple... They are doing what they feel is best for the club & our success.

No coach wants to lose (well, unless you're coaching for picks of course). They have left Tom out for a reason & while we supporters can be dissapointed & have our ideas about it ultimately we don't know the clubs reasoning behind it.

Shit, Tom could have proclaimed his love for Carlton & called Skilton & Kelly flogs for all we know! As such, I trust the coaches to always put the club & our success first. Have faith this is the best for the club & thus best for us as supporters guys & girls. You'll enjoy the year a far greater amount not thinking Horse is incompetent or somehow out to hurt/impede our success or thst of individual players.

The coaches are not right all the time, neither is anyone else. Drafting Patrick Veszpremi and Josh Willoughby was not "the best thing for the club", it was an error. We're welcome to discuss when we think incorrect decisions have been made, because they will be made at times.

 

[GotTheGoodes]

The coaches are not right all the time, neither is anyone else. Drafting Patrick Veszpremi and Josh Willoughby was not "the best thing for the club", it was an error. We're welcome to discuss when we think incorrect decisions have been made, because they will be made at times.

Yes in hindsight mate but at the time the coaches are just doing what they thimk is the best for the club. Anyone can look back & say it was right/wrong but ultimately they make a call based on the best imterests of the club. I agree that you can disagree with a decision but I believe the coaches are trying to make the best call for the club none-the-less. I get the impression a lot of sentiment around Mitchell has a level of "I can't believe this!!" to it & just wanted to point out that I'm sure there's some reasoning behind it we're most likely unaware of.

 

[swansfan51]

Yes in hindsight mate but at the time the coaches are just doing what they thimk is the best for the club. Anyone can look back & say it was right/wrong but ultimately they make a call based on the best imterests of the club. I agree that you can disagree with a decision but I believe the coaches are trying to make the best call for the club none-the-less. I get the impression a lot of sentiment around Mitchell has a level of "I can't believe this!!" to it & just wanted to point out that I'm sure there's some reasoning behind it we're most likely unaware of.

I agree, and I'd love to see Longmire address the topic, but unfortunately the general communication with members on many topics is a bit lacking IMO.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

I agree, and I'd love to see Longmire address the topic, but unfortunately the general communication with members on many topics is a bit lacking IMO.

Don't agree that selections should be discussed openly. Sometimes there are a million reasons as to why people are not selected. You will get 100 lots of throw away lines 'we need player X to work on things, he is still in the mix". What does that tell you exactly? Would rather just keep it as it is, private within the club.

 

[grimlock]

Coaches aren't responsible for the draft. Veszpremi was clearly a Maxfield love story.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Coaches aren't responsible for the draft. Veszpremi was clearly a Maxfield love story.

Lets be honest every side has made a blunder or two....Richmond (the Tambling disaster), Essendon (Keplar Bradley), Hawthorn (Dowler and Thorp..). Drafting isn't an exact science. You can be the world's greatest junior and an absolute disaster at AFL level.

 

[J_Moore]

I understand that Mitchell might be competing for a limited few spots based on the gameplan Longmire has. But I kind of think you should build your gameplan around the quality of players you have at the time. It's all very well and good to build a gameplan around outside run, but if a few of our running players leave a bit to be desired, and we've got an exceptional clearance player sitting in the reserves, maybe the gameplan should change to reflect that.

Gameplan.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

I understand that Mitchell might be competing for a limited few spots based on the gameplan Longmire has. But I kind of think you should build your gameplan around the quality of players you have at the time. It's all very well and good to build a gameplan around outside run, but if a few of our running players leave a bit to be desired, and we've got an exceptional clearance player sitting in the reserves, maybe the gameplan should change to reflect that.

Gameplan.

The gameplay did get us to the final though last year, and save from a performance that would have almost beaten Essendon in 2000 or Brisbane in that 3 peat era, it would have worked. I get what you are saying though.

 

[The King!]

If every topic comes down to club knows best we may as well not discuss anything much

 

[melbournehammer]

I understand that Mitchell might be competing for a limited few spots based on the gameplan Longmire has. But I kind of think you should build your gameplan around the quality of players you have at the time. It's all very well and good to build a gameplan around outside run, but if a few of our running players leave a bit to be desired, and we've got an exceptional clearance player sitting in the reserves, maybe the gameplan should change to reflect that.

Gameplan.

But I don't think it is based on outside run at all. It is based on the inside and midfielders pushing back to prevent scores from the other team and then kicking the ball to the wing to force stoppages.

This is why I can't understand why he isn't in the 22.

But its easy saying he should be in - its much harder saying who for. I'm not convinced about Mitchell's kicking and never have been. But he does win the ball and does have good hands inside and I think the Pyke to JPK model of simple ruckwork and big strong midfielder has run its course.

So who does he come in for ? Its not enough to simply say he should be in - you have to tip someone out. i don't think he is a small defender so not shaw or rampe. he's obviously not a tall. as a hff he just seems too slow to me - bird is slow enough. but maybe he could come in for towers. In reality though I think towers is in for mcglynn. He is not as hard as mcglynn, but i think he might have better hands and mitchell's may be better again. So maybe towers.

I can't see him replacing rohan - who can play forward and back and wing.

Reid is a disappointment. But to my mind he still remains the only viable option of going back in the event that one of ted or reg got injured in a game. so I keep reid.

As a midfielder he has to tip out one of jack, parker, jpk, mcveigh, bird etc. he is not a wingman and even though jetta is not bedford's cup of tea - jetta is simply too different a player.

So out of the midfield group I don't know who Mitchell is obviously better than ( and I mean stand obviously better than).

I keep coming back to the same point. Goodes is playing 3rd tall but doesn't provide the defensive pressure of a small. He is supposed to get the third best defender but he never really cuts any of them up. Having watched him for a long time goodes has never been a great forward. his best play has always been when he could run at the goals and every club targets him as someone to run off during games.

Its either Goodes or mitchell for me. And while I agree with the majority that 1. goodes could come good and 2. he deserves a few more games to demonstrate it, I think for the good of the club beyond season 2015, and for the boy as well we should be looking at mitchell coming into the midfield mix for goodes.

 

[MickyG]

But I don't think it is based on outside run at all. It is based on the inside and midfielders pushing back to prevent scores from the other team and then kicking the ball to the wing to force stoppages.

This is why I can't understand why he isn't in the 22.

But its easy saying he should be in - its much harder saying who for. I'm not convinced about Mitchell's kicking and never have been. But he does win the ball and does have good hands inside and I think the Pyke to JPK model of simple ruckwork and big strong midfielder has run its course.

So who does he come in for ? Its not enough to simply say he should be in - you have to tip someone out. i don't think he is a small defender so not shaw or rampe. he's obviously not a tall. as a hff he just seems too slow to me - bird is slow enough. but maybe he could come in for towers. In reality though I think towers is in for mcglynn. He is not as hard as mcglynn, but i think he might have better hands and mitchell's may be better again. So maybe towers.

I can't see him replacing rohan - who can play forward and back and wing.

Reid is a disappointment. But to my mind he still remains the only viable option of going back in the event that one of ted or reg got injured in a game. so I keep reid.

As a midfielder he has to tip out one of jack, parker, jpk, mcveigh, bird etc. he is not a wingman and even though jetta is not bedford's cup of tea - jetta is simply too different a player.

So out of the midfield group I don't know who Mitchell is obviously better than ( and I mean stand obviously better than).

I keep coming back to the same point. Goodes is playing 3rd tall but doesn't provide the defensive pressure of a small. He is supposed to get the third best defender but he never really cuts any of them up. Having watched him for a long time goodes has never been a great forward. his best play has always been when he could run at the goals and every club targets him as someone to run off during games.

Its either Goodes or mitchell for me. And while I agree with the majority that 1. goodes could come good and 2. he deserves a few more games to demonstrate it, I think for the good of the club beyond season 2015, and for the boy as well we should be looking at mitchell coming into the midfield mix for goodes.

Very good summary of the situation.