Who do you want to take at pick 3?

Who do you realistically want the Swans to draft with pick 3?


  • Total voters
    95
Status
Not open for further replies.

Thewlis Dish

Cancelled
10k Posts
Sep 9, 2003
27,578
28,761
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
FGR
It would have to mean that we rated Campbell more highly than our pick three. If we didn't rate him we would not match and use our pick three for a player we rated more highly. Dangerous game for Norf to play if Campbell was not their legitimate choice at pick two.

I think supporters care more about bidding and making other clubs "earn it" more than recruiters do, who are far more concerned with getting the best draft return for their own club. We will only bid on Campbell if we rate him as the best or second best player in the draft, it would be madness to do otherwise with such a high pick.

Plus no way you'll burn pick 3 on him. You'd either decline to match, or you'd have a trade agreed with someone else to swap 3 for later picks/points and a 2021 first.
 
It is a bit strange we have not put much effort into Phillips and Hollands. I would be happy to take either of them with pick 3.

The club literally came out and said that our off-season priorities were rucks and key forward. Given we didn't really achieve much in that department during the trade period (other than basically a 30 year old stopgap ruck), fairly obvious we'd then make it a priority with the draft.

If that is the case then I think the club is so far off course on this decision that it's not even infuriating, it's just... baffling.
 

Kapers

Norm Smith Medallist
Sep 25, 2019
5,055
11,566
AFL Club
Sydney
The club literally came out and said that our off-season priorities were rucks and key forward. Given we didn't really achieve much in that department during the trade period (other than basically a 30 year old stopgap ruck), fairly obvious we'd then make it a priority with the draft.

If that is the case then I think the club is so far off course on this decision that it's not even infuriating, it's just... baffling.
You don't draft for a need.

Ever.

If you are you've already lost.

Everything I've heard of Dalrymple is that he picks best available, yes Beatson has last say, but he is also big on 'know your role' within the club. Dalrymple's role is to take the best player.

Also, I think your downplaying DGB a lot. Key defenders usually come into the system very well. Or intercepting marker if your intent on labelling him that.

But defenders are already used to being accountable and being part of a cohesive unit more than other players. This is based of recent defenders picked high in the draft rather than any empirical evidence.

You're the one who talks about us getting Rowbottom, which was a Dalrymple pick most likely, and yet your doubting that the club won't follow the first rule of drafting a player.

If we do take Riley, which I doubt, it'll be because he was the best available in the swans eyes, not because he fills a need.
 

Bear31

Club Legend
Feb 15, 2020
1,145
1,751
AFL Club
Sydney
The club literally came out and said that our off-season priorities were rucks and key forward. Given we didn't really achieve much in that department during the trade period (other than basically a 30 year old stopgap ruck), fairly obvious we'd then make it a priority with the draft.

If that is the case then I think the club is so far off course on this decision that it's not even infuriating, it's just... baffling.
We traded in a ruck. We could still rookie another ruck and Paddy McCartin. That leaves our options open at 3.
 
You don't draft for a need.

Ever.

If you are you've already lost.

Everything I've heard of Dalrymple is that he picks best available, yes Beatson has last say, but he is also big on 'know your role' within the club. Dalrymple's role is to take the best player.

Also, I think your downplaying DGB a lot. Key defenders usually come into the system very well. Or intercepting marker if your intent on labelling him that.

But defenders are already used to being accountable and being part of a cohesive unit more than other players. This is based of recent defenders picked high in the draft rather than any empirical evidence.

You're the one who talks about us getting Rowbottom, which was a Dalrymple pick most likely, and yet your doubting that the club won't follow the first rule of drafting a player.

If we do take Riley, which I doubt, it'll be because he was the best available in the swans eyes, not because he fills a need.

If we don't pick Phillips or Hollands then we're not picking the best available and are diverting from that rule you speak of.

In fairness, I think the chasm between those two and the rest is much, much greater than the majority seem to believe. They are on another level entirely in my view.

The Rowbottom selection was also different as he was one of a few who I was hoping we'd pick, at a point in the draft when there were so many options. Our pick 3 is much more black and white. It's very possible the two clear best prospects (in my eyes) will be there at our pick, and if we don't go for one of them, then you betcha I will doubt Dalrymple's decision as I think it would just be a very obviously-wrong choice.

Btw though this won't effect how I perceive whoever we do take. I think it's unfair when folks have a clear bias against certain players just because they weren't the ones they wanted. You can be frustrated over someone we didn't pick, while still celebrating whoever we did pick if they've earned it. I would've liked to have seen more of this from some with Stephens this year, who I loved watching develop and was happy we got him even though there were about four others I wanted a lot more.
 
Last edited:
Feb 28, 2007
51,375
66,872
Sydney
AFL Club
Sydney
If we don't pick Phillips or Hollands then we're not picking the best available and are diverting from that rule you speak of.

In fairness, I think the chasm between those two and the rest is much, much greater than the majority seem to believe. They are on another level entirely.

Injury needs to be taken into account and previous injuries pushes Hollands down a bit.
 

RobbieK

Cancelled
Aug 20, 2009
5,731
10,803
AFL Club
Sydney
The club literally came out and said that our off-season priorities were rucks and key forward. Given we didn't really achieve much in that department during the trade period (other than basically a 30 year old stopgap ruck), fairly obvious we'd then make it a priority with the draft.

If that is the case then I think the club is so far off course on this decision that it's not even infuriating, it's just... baffling.
I don't think it is fairly obvious that if you wanted a mature aged key forward but were unable to bring one in that you would then necessarily draft a key forward even if they weren't the best available player at our pick. I think that is a big assumption on your part.
 
I don't think it is fairly obvious that if you wanted a mature aged key forward but were unable to bring one in that you would then necessarily draft a key forward even if they weren't the best available player at our pick. I think that is a big assumption on your part.

I was trying to offer an explanation to SeanM's post that didn't involve me having to again mention that I've heard on good authority that Phillips and Hollands - the only two mids in our range - aren't high priorities for us. Because you're all within your rights to call BS on that claim.
 

RobbieK

Cancelled
Aug 20, 2009
5,731
10,803
AFL Club
Sydney
I was trying to offer an explanation to SeanM's post that didn't involve me having to again mention that I've heard on good authority that Phillips and Hollands - the only two mids in our range - aren't high priorities for us. Because you're all within your rights to call BS on that claim.
What's your "good authority"?

I think the club's statements and actions around drafting in the last few years should make it clear to all that we keep our cards close to our chest don't make all of our plans public or explicit. Any public statements that are made prior to the draft should be taken with a grain of salt.

Which is as it should be.
 

Kapers

Norm Smith Medallist
Sep 25, 2019
5,055
11,566
AFL Club
Sydney
If we don't pick Phillips or Hollands then we're not picking the best available and are diverting from that rule you speak of.

In fairness, I think the chasm between those two and the rest is much, much greater than the majority seem to believe. They are on another level entirely in my view.

The Rowbottom selection was also different as he was one of a few who I was hoping we'd pick, at a point in the draft when there were so many options. Our pick 3 is much more black and white. It's very possible the two clear best prospects (in my eyes) will be there at our pick, and if we don't go for one of them, then you betcha I will doubt Dalrymple's decision as I think it would just be a very obviously-wrong choice.

Btw though this won't effect how I perceive whoever we do take. I think it's unfair when folks have a clear bias against certain players just because they weren't the ones they wanted. You can be frustrated over someone we didn't pick, while still celebrating whoever we did pick if they've earned it. I would've liked to have seen more of this from some with Stephens this year, who I loved watching develop and was happy we got him even though there were about four others I wanted a lot more.
Look, I'm on your side, but in the end I don't quite rate myself above Dalrymple.

I don't quite understand why it's so obvious to you that Phillips and Hollands are so much better than everyone else, yet it seems that no one really shares the same opinion.

And once again, it's fine to believe that they are best by a margin, but to say the Swan's aren't choosing best available becuase their best doesn't agree with your best? That doesn't line up imo.

On that note, I DO want Phillips, but I also rate DGB way higher than you. Can't think of the last key defender taken in the first round that has been a bust. (obviously someone will pull out a key defender that's been a bust now)
 

Kapers

Norm Smith Medallist
Sep 25, 2019
5,055
11,566
AFL Club
Sydney
I was trying to offer an explanation to SeanM's post that didn't involve me having to again mention that I've heard on good authority that Phillips and Hollands - the only two mids in our range - aren't high priorities for us. Because you're all within your rights to call BS on that claim.
I actually wouldn't mind how you know this as well. Did similar info come out last year?
 

RobbieK

Cancelled
Aug 20, 2009
5,731
10,803
AFL Club
Sydney
If we don't pick Phillips or Hollands then we're not picking the best available and are diverting from that rule you speak of.

In fairness, I think the chasm between those two and the rest is much, much greater than the majority seem to believe. They are on another level entirely in my view.
How many times did you see Phillips or Hollands play this year?
 
What's your "good authority"?

I think the club's statements and actions around drafting in the last few years should make it clear to all that we keep our cards close to our chest don't make all of our plans public or explicit. Any public statements that are made prior to the draft should be taken with a grain of salt.

Which is as it should be.

There are club statements and then there are club actions. The club can control who it does or doesn't associate themselves with publicly. But the club had no control over Hollands revealing in an interview that the Swans were one of the clubs who didn't have a second interview with him, a pretty telling piece of evidence. The club had no control over the Phillips family telling people they knew that they didn't expect their son to be moving interstate.

So yes we're a tight-run ship, but we're also not without leaks. It's impossible for that to be the case when there are so many moving parts and people involved in the weeks-long process leading up to the draft.

Twomey knew we were into Stephens last year an hour before the draft. How, when we are the club that keeps our cards so close to our chest that they can never be known to the public?
 

RobbieK

Cancelled
Aug 20, 2009
5,731
10,803
AFL Club
Sydney
There are club statements and then there are club actions. The club can control who it does or doesn't associate themselves with publicly. But the club had no control over Hollands revealing in an interview that the Swans were one of the clubs who didn't have a second interview with him, a pretty telling piece of evidence. The club had no control over the Phillips family telling people they knew that they didn't expect their son to be moving interstate.

So yes we're a tight-run ship, but we're also not without leaks. It's impossible for that to be the case when there are so many moving parts and people involved in the weeks-long process leading up to the draft.

Twomey knew we were into Stephens last year an hour before the draft. How, when we are the club that keeps our cards so close to our chest that they can never be known to the public?
Am I to understand from this response that your "good authority" is these reported comments from Hollands and Phillips' family?
 
Look, I'm on your side, but in the end I don't quite rate myself above Dalrymple.

I don't quite understand why it's so obvious to you that Phillips and Hollands are so much better than everyone else, yet it seems that no one really shares the same opinion.

And once again, it's fine to believe that they are best by a margin, but to say the Swan's aren't choosing best available becuase their best doesn't agree with your best? That doesn't line up imo.

On that note, I DO want Phillips, but I also rate DGB way higher than you. Can't think of the last key defender taken in the first round that has been a bust. (obviously someone will pull out a key defender that's been a bust now)

If Dalrymple believes DGB or Thilthorpe or whoever to be the best available over Phillips or Hollands, then he's within his rights to do that. And I am within my rights to very much doubt that decision and think he was dead wrong. These guys might be getting paid big money and have more information than we do, but at the end of the day they are human beings going with their own opinions, and whether it's a more-informed opinion than ours, it's still just an opinion based on who they think is the right pick. Doesn't make them disaster recruiters when they get one wrong, but it also doesn't make them all-mighty, infallible Gods either.
 

elastic

Cometh the moment
Jul 24, 2012
1,102
2,354
Melbourne
AFL Club
Sydney
There are club statements and then there are club actions. The club can control who it does or doesn't associate themselves with publicly. But the club had no control over Hollands revealing in an interview that the Swans were one of the clubs who didn't have a second interview with him, a pretty telling piece of evidence. The club had no control over the Phillips family telling people they knew that they didn't expect their son to be moving interstate.

So yes we're a tight-run ship, but we're also not without leaks. It's impossible for that to be the case when there are so many moving parts and people involved in the weeks-long process leading up to the draft.

Twomey knew we were into Stephens last year an hour before the draft. How, when we are the club that keeps our cards so close to our chest that they can never be known to the public?
I think the players themselves let out some information regarding the clubs that are most interested. Not sure if the clubs themselves tell them to keep their interest on the lowdown but it does seem to happen.
 

Kapers

Norm Smith Medallist
Sep 25, 2019
5,055
11,566
AFL Club
Sydney
If Dalrymple believes DGB or Thilthorpe or whoever to be the best available over Phillips or Hollands, then he's within his rights to do that. And I am within my rights to very much doubt that decision and think he was dead wrong. These guys might be getting paid big money and have more information than we do, but at the end of the day they are human beings going with their own opinions, and whether it's a more-informed opinion than ours, it's still just an opinion based on who they think is the right pick. Doesn't make them disaster recruiters when they get one wrong, but it also doesn't make them all-mighty, infallible Gods either.
See, this I mostly agree with. What I was calling out was you saying that we were 100% going to draft for a need, rather than take the best.

Having a different opinion is also fine, I wanted, and still want Serong. But I'm willing to fold and see how it plays out.

All I was annoyed about was you saying that we're going to draft for a need, as if we won't rate the player we take. I truely believe we're going to take who we believe to be best.







Also, totally willing to see how this plays out, I think DGB is going to be top 3 of the draft in 10 years.
 
Am I to understand from this response that your "good authority" is these reported comments from Hollands and Phillips' family?

Yes. But it is hearsay until proven otherwise, and you can choose to believe it or not. I have been honest in the past that the connections I have where the draft is concerned don't have a perfectly reliable track record in feeding me intel, and this is what happens when people play one giant game of telephone. However they are connected, and do hear things, and so I try to deliver them on here accordingly.

I like to think it contributes to the conversation and I only share it as I consider everyone on here - including you even though you can be a pedantic prick with me at times - to be part of the Swans family. But if it is counter-productive and only makes the waters even more murky then that is fair enough, and it's duly noted.
 

RobbieK

Cancelled
Aug 20, 2009
5,731
10,803
AFL Club
Sydney
Yes. But it is hearsay until proven otherwise, and you can choose to believe it or not. I have been honest in the past that the connections I have where the draft is concerned don't have a perfectly reliable track record in feeding me intel, and this is what happens when people play one giant game of telephone. However they are connected, and do hear things, and so I try to deliver them on here accordingly.

I like to think it contributes to the conversation and I only share it as I consider everyone on here - including you even though you can be a pedantic prick with me at times - to be part of the Swans family. But if it is counter-productive and only makes the waters even more murky then that is fair enough, and it's duly noted.
I'm not saying you can't say what you have heard. I just think if you don't give any context for who you have heard it from or how you have heard it from it is pretty impossible for anyone to know how much, if any, weight to place upon it.

I'm interested in your answer to the other question too. You say there is a chasm between Hollands and Phillips and the alternatives that we could select. Not that they are just a little better, but conclusively and clearly better. How many times have you seen those two play this year to make that judgement?

Sure, this is me being pedantic... but if you are going to come out with these big calls, expressing certainty about things that as far as I can tell no one can be certain of, I will question it and feel justified in doing it.
 

elastic

Cometh the moment
Jul 24, 2012
1,102
2,354
Melbourne
AFL Club
Sydney
Personally would like to go with DGB or Hollands ahead of Thilthorpe or Philips. I think Mcdonald will be gone already. Obviously Philips looks to be a solid inside mid and moves well but I think his disposal has an element of sloppiness about it. He is also very well developed already and I think clubs are looking for guys who will develop that physicality later and have more upside. Swans have gone for guys like Stephens, Florent and Stoddart in the past who are stick thin and have some development in them.
Alternatively someone like Parker who drifted in the draft was already well developed but the scouts seem to be looking for the Nat Fyfe types who have alot of upside with their physical development. Not sure what Dalrymple thinks but I trust his judgement over mine. Hollands is much classier than Philips but given Campbell has similar attributes they may be looking for some variety.
I also think that the Swans have put the cue in the rack for the next two seasons til Bud is gone so they may be prepared to invest in someone like Thilthorpe who will take some time to develop. Regardless I'm confident Dalrymple will make the right decision. We are fortunate that we've had that Vic scout there because this draft will ikely produce some surprises due to Covid. The late bloomers will be harder to spot.
 
I'm not saying you can't say what you have heard. I just think if you don't give any context for who you have heard it from or how you have heard it from it is pretty impossible for anyone to know how much, if any, weight to place upon it.

I'm interested in your answer to the other question too. You say there is a chasm between Hollands and Phillips and the alternatives that we could select. Not that they are just a little better, but conclusively and clearly better. How many times have you seen those two play this year to make that judgement?

Sure, this is me being pedantic... but if you are going to come out with these big calls, expressing certainty about things that as far as I can tell no one can be certain of, I will question it and feel justified in doing it.

A few different sources. One is involved in the APS competition in a management role so has frequent interactions with students and their families, within and away from football. And a few who are involved in the Oakleigh Chargers and Sandringham Dragons. So I'm relatively in the loop with APS games and NAB League games (though I feel like enough people don't realise there are full NAB League matches on Youtube.) I gather a handful of prospects I like from an U16s level, track them through the following years, and then try to find out what I can about them as the draft approaches, and report on here accordingly. This is why I do not have any, or even pretend to have any intel, on those I don't rate. And also why I have zilch in terms of kids from other states.

Ironically enough though I am in WA, I am more in the loop on the Vic kids than I am on our very own. (Shannon Neale is the one exception, and that is only through coincidence.)

As for Hollands and Phillips, I haven't seen them play any footy this year. I have seen McDonald, DGB and Thilthorpe play this year, and mount their cases for selection with their U18s campaigns, and on all three fronts I was underwhelmed. Don't get me wrong, I think they are all good, particularly Thilthorpe who I've been consistent in rating the whole time, but I just don't see anything remarkable about them that warrants using a pick 3 on them. Meanwhile, some of the footy that Hollands and Phillips played last year as bottom-agers was, and I don't say this lightly, stunning. Both have no discernible flaws in their game, and I take that to be a very important factor when looking at juniors because any weakness one has could be exposed at the highest level. In McDonald, DGB and Thilthorpe, I see quite a few.

Their U18s form, with a whole extra season to prepare and show what they can do < Hollands and Phillips' U17s form, when they still theoretically had another level to go to. In my opinion, they have a far better body of work behind them, even without the footy this year, and also a far greater upside ahead of them.

But... to each their own.
 

RobbieK

Cancelled
Aug 20, 2009
5,731
10,803
AFL Club
Sydney
... I have zilch in terms of kids from other states....

... As for Hollands and Phillips, I haven't seen them play any footy this year...
And yet you express such extreme certainty about how much better they are relative to others possible selections...

It just doesn't add up.
 

Kiama Chris

Norm Smith Medallist
May 10, 2016
7,502
16,906
Kiama
AFL Club
Sydney
If we don't pick Phillips or Hollands then we're not picking the best available and are diverting from that rule you speak of.

In fairness, I think the chasm between those two and the rest is much, much greater than the majority seem to believe. They are on another level entirely in my view.

The Rowbottom selection was also different as he was one of a few who I was hoping we'd pick, at a point in the draft when there were so many options. Our pick 3 is much more black and white. It's very possible the two clear best prospects (in my eyes) will be there at our pick, and if we don't go for one of them, then you betcha I will doubt Dalrymple's decision as I think it would just be a very obviously-wrong choice.

Btw though this won't effect how I perceive whoever we do take. I think it's unfair when folks have a clear bias against certain players just because they weren't the ones they wanted. You can be frustrated over someone we didn't pick, while still celebrating whoever we did pick if they've earned it. I would've liked to have seen more of this from some with Stephens this year, who I loved watching develop and was happy we got him even though there were about four others I wanted a lot more.
I might be unusual because I don't have a clear preference, except JUH who we certainly won't get, even if we call him.
Any of the remaining 5 "top picks" can do a fine job for the club with talent and good attitude. WE CAN'T LOSE.
We will for sure find a way to get Campbell and Gulden. Terrific young men and talented footballers. WE CAN'T LOSE.
If the team finds a way to swing another pick I'm sure he will be a good'un.
If not, we'll head to the rookie draft and hopefully obtain a past #1 draft pick who wants to come here and play with the Swans. With any luck at all we'll get a young ruck to be developed by one of the best rucks ever and a decent offside, while working with team-first people like Cal Sinclair. WE CAN'T LOSE.
I'm beyond excited watching this draft period unfold. Even if long term someone doesn't work out (Stoddart, Foot, Rowles, Knoll) they will have been worth a shot.
I can see the 2024/5 premiers evolving.
WE WON'T LOSE!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back