Why Havent We Won A Flag Since 1933?

[SWANSBEST]

Quote from Go Swannies

"We do need some young key recruits and I'll be interested to see what we find. "



I said similiar after the win against the Saints and a few people took me to task. I watch most of the Reserves games and it has been obvious that our back up talent is very light on . I realise that the youngsters need time to develop but IMO we are lacking any real quality in our back up players.

[NMWBloods]

Originally posted by Ruckman
Sure B1 isn't a combination of Bob Skilton and Paul Kelly
but
On the other hand he isn't Scott Watters or Adrian Battiston either.

What's good about J Bolton is that he makes a very handy no 2 or even no 3 midfielder. However, he's not your prime midfielder, who is very damaging, which we so desperately need.

[Barry Schneider]

Just to be controversial do any Sydney residing Swans fans who didn't barrack for South Melbourne think we have won a premiership?

[liz]

Originally posted by SWANSBEST
Quote from Go Swannies

"We do need some young key recruits and I'll be interested to see what we find. "



I said similiar after the win against the Saints and a few people took me to task. I watch most of the Reserves games and it has been obvious that our back up talent is very light on . I realise that the youngsters need time to develop but IMO we are lacking any real quality in our back up players.

But surely we need to be patient. Quality sometimes takes quite a while to emerge and can come from unexpected places.

The majority of players running around in the reserves at the moment are first or second year players. There is a smattering of players in their third year but most of them are taller players who, in general, will take longer. And it doesn't help at the moment that there are only about 10 of them playing who train together. The rest are very young kids gathered from around the state, most younger than the real Swans "youngsters".

McVeigh aside, most of our current developing players have been taken with lower picks. We don't have the McLeans, Cooneys, Rays of this world. That is even more reason why they will take time.

Some examples:

Brett Kirk was sent back to Albury after his initial try out. At a relatively mature age (21 or 22) he was given a second chance as a rookie. He was promoted that year and played some decent senior footy but then faded to the fringes of the team. Two short years ago his career was almost over. Now he is one of the most respected defensive AFL players in the comp and is still developing an important offensive side to his game. By all reports he wasn't far off AA selection last year and got to play in the actual IR game. He came second in the B&F for the club that finished 3rd in the competition, ahead of the likes of Barry Hall and Paul Williams.

Paul Bevan started to get some attention at the end of last year for the consistency of his efforts for the reserves. The club has commented that this consistency saved him from getting the chop after just one year (as the majority of rookies do - see Crawford, Piltz etc). But, watching him last year, would anyone have picked the ease with which he has slotted into senior football this year, the rate at which his skills are improving from week to week, the composure he shows on the last line of defence? I doubt it.

Four or five years ago the Swans used a fourth round pick on a solidly built and aggressive young midfielder that many draft pundits had a question mark over. He did make his senior debut in his first year on the list, mostly on the back of a fairly well developed physique. He showed only glimpses of being an AFL-likely player. Watching him play reserves footy that year and the next, he seemed to think of himself as an "enforcer" and was a bit of a hothead I remember seeing him give away a 100m penalty in one game for the Redbacks up at NSO and, I think, another 50m penalty in the same game. His career was then up and down, interrupted by injuries, a suspension (for a reckless spoil in a reserves game, IIRC) and a personal tragedy. Every time he looked like he was getting it together, something else appeared to thwart him.

Fast forward a few years and we now have a definite best-22 player even with a fully available squad, who has morphed himself into a classy HFF-come-decoy CHF (with a nod to Dermott on that description), with a lethal left foot, excellent endurance to make up for a slight lack of leg speed, a very solid mark for his height, and someone who is almost certainly in the top half dozen in the club B&F to this stage of the season. If anyone doesn't know who I'm talking about, they don't follow the Swans.

My point? No-one would have picked what these players have become from watching them at the very early stages of their careers. Past history suggests that around half the reserves level players probably won't make it to even 20 AFL games. Some will never even debut. But it is far far too early to say that a Schmidt, Willoughby, Erikson or Meiklejohn won't become a seriously good AFL player with any degree of uncertainty. Indeed, when I saw Erikson play down in Canberra a month or two ago (first time I'd seen him) I mentally wrote him off. All his disposals - and there weren't many - went straight to the opposition, he looked terrified of any physical contact and hadn't a clue where to run. Yet his improvement even over the past few weeks has been palpable and he still has another two or three years before the club realistically expects him to be ready to produce at AFL level.

So be patient. Not every quality AFL player has to be a Chris Judd or Nick Riewoldt.

[liz]

Re: Re: Why Havent We Won A Flag Since 1933?

Originally posted by Ruckman


In 1996 we made the GF and lost, and then entered another period of bandaid recruiting, selling off young talents and draft choices in order to purchase some good but aging players and a few outright hacks.
Cowardly vacilation!

Agree with all of your post, Ruckman, apart from one small part about selling off young talents post 1996. Those "young talents" that we lost were Grant, Heuskes, Rocca, O'Farrell, Kinnear, Cook and Licuria. The first four definitely wanted out and I'm pretty sure Licuria was keen to move back to Melbourne as well. I'm not sure about Cook. Kinnear just walked out on the club, and as it turned out, it was good riddance. So losing these players wasn't the club's choice.

The point about trading the draft picks is valid, though with hindsight it is hard to imagine not having had the pleasure of Williams, Hall, Schauble and probably Ball.

Hawkins and Green we could have done without, though.

[Ruck'n'Roll]

Re: Re: Re: Why Havent We Won A Flag Since 1933?

Originally posted by lizz
Grant, Rocca, definitely wanted out

While there was probably no way to keep them,

The trades we did were so bad (Grant plus a draft pick for Schwass ~ Orchard etc for Rocca)

Either we were just glad to be rid of them
or
we underestimated their worth
or
we panicked that we'd get nothing.

Just a thought

[Bart]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Why Havent We Won A Flag Since 1933?

Originally posted by Ruckman
While there was probably no way to keep them,

The trades we did were so bad (Grant plus a draft pick for Schwass ~ Orchard etc for Rocca)

Either we were just glad to be rid of them
or
we underestimated their worth
or
we panicked that we'd get nothing.

Just a thought

This may be so, but if a player definitely wants out, then its better to get somethimg for him. We picked up David fairly cheaply, and the Pies at least got a second round pick, whereas Port played brinkmanship with Stevens and got nothing when they

Read this extraordinary interview with Mark Williams during trade period when they were demanding TWO first round draft picks

http://carltonfc.com.au/default.asp?pg=players&spg=playerprofiledisplay&articleid=123924

[liz]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Why Havent We Won A Flag Since 1933?

Originally posted by Ruckman
The trades we did were so bad (Grant plus a draft pick for Schwass ~ Orchard etc for Rocca)

Don't agree with that. As Bart says, when a player wants out, the bargaining strength is often against you.

With hindsight, given that he has become a pretty good player, the Rocca deal may seem poor. But at the time he was merely a talented but unfit sook who had delivered nothing.

As for the Grant-Schwass deal, it is usually cited as one of the best examples of a win-win deal ever done. Sure, age was against the Swans in the deal. And unlike Rocca, there was little doubt that Grant was going to become a very good player. But Schwass was a very very good footballer at the time. His addition alongside Kelly and Cressa brought the first-string Swans midfield right up there with the very best in 1998 and 1999. In 1998 he might have helped deliver the ultimate prize had another couple of things (on the injury front) gone our way.

[hammo]

Originally posted by Go Swannies


Keeping the team towards the front of the middle of the pack while rebuilding is about the best we can expect. It's a lot better than the Saints did during their rebuilding.

Ironically that may count against us in the short to mid-term. By finishing last with priority picks the Saints have been able to top up their list by drafting elite players like Reiwoldt. No matter how aggresively we trade unless we finish in the bottom two we will never be able to draft those guaranteed champions as clubs simply aren't prepared to trade those picks.
There is no doubt this year will be the most crucial trading period for the Swans in many years. With one of the youngest lists in the AFL the club has indicated it is ready to go after some experienced key position players. By suggesting this Roos must be satisfied with what young talent is already on the playing list.

[Bart]

Originally posted by hammo
Ironically that may count against us in the short to mid-term. By finishing last with priority picks the Saints have been able to top up their list by drafting elite players like Reiwoldt. No matter how aggresively we trade unless we finish in the bottom two we will never be able to draft those guaranteed champions as clubs simply aren't prepared to trade those picks.

Well we managed to trade magnificantly (without going into who we actually picked - done to death) in 98 for high picks despite finishing up the ladder

Pick 3 (traded by Collingwood for Mark Orchard, Paul Licuria) Nic Fosdike
Pick 4 (Draft choice 4 traded by Hawthorn for Brett O'Farrell) Ryan Fitzgerald
Pick 8 (Draft choice 8 traded by Geelong for Jason Mooney) Jude Bolton
Pick 28 Heath James (father-son and rated first round)

On the other hand this was the same draft we picked up O'Connor and Bomford.

[sharpie]

Originally posted by Bart
Well we managed to trade magnificantly (without going into who we actually picked - done to death) in 98 for high picks despite finishing up the ladder

Pick 3 (traded by Collingwood for Mark Orchard, Paul Licuria) Nic Fosdike
Pick 4 (Draft choice 4 traded by Hawthorn for Brett O'Farrell) Ryan Fitzgerald
Pick 8 (Draft choice 8 traded by Geelong for Jason Mooney) Jude Bolton
Pick 28 Heath James (father-son and rated first round)

On the other hand this was the same draft we picked up O'Connor and Bomford.

Geez we sucked Hawthorn and Geelong right in with those trades. That was brilliant.

[Sanecow]

From where I sit, O'Connor was a much more useful player than Fitzgerald?!?

[sharpie]

Originally posted by Sanecow
From where I sit, O'Connor was a much more useful player than Fitzgerald?!?

Obviously O'Connor WAS, but no one expected Fitzy to be so injury-prone. Fitzy WOULD have been much more useful had his body stood up to the rigours of AFL better.

[Bart]

Originally posted by sharpie
Geez we sucked Hawthorn and Geelong right in with those trades. That was brilliant.

Although I was unhappy with the BOF trade at the time, he turned into another Mott