You asked for it!

[robbieando]

Originally posted by liz
I don't think it's true to say he has no real trade value. I read that his mooted trade to the Crows was hampered by the size of his contract. If he were out of contract, wanted to continue playing AFL and the Swans were keen to trade him, he would probably accept a lower contract if that is what was needed.

I would think if this was the case a situation akin to what happened to Spriggs would be the likely outcome. Really what could we really expect in return in a trade??? Not much I would think

[Charlie]

Originally posted by liz
You want a disagreement?

OK, I disagree quite strongly with your comments on Mathews, though not your catergorisation.

I think he is probably the most under rated player on the Swans list, particularly by many Swans fans. I agree that he's a fairly "vanilla" player, and the role he plays could be filled by many other on the list. But I haven't seen evidence - yet - that any could perform that role as well as he does. Bevan and Ablett may get there, but they were some way behind last season.

I agree his skills are "medium", but his reading of the play and his concentration are huge assets.

For me, he was probably the stand-out midfielder of the first third of last year, certainly ahead of Bolton, Williams, Maxfield and Kirk in what he delivered, and a little way ahead of Crouch. The rest caught up with him and, mostly, overtook him as the season went on but he was still a very solid contributor all year.

I know many on here will disagree with my views on Mathews. But he's just racked up his third (or maybe even fourth) successive top 10 finish in the B&F and that is no mean feat for one of the more workmanlike players in the team.

Hmm... I get the feeling you're more disagreeing with the tone than the content - which I agree ended up more negative than was intended. He's a 'good ordinary player', nothing more, nothing less. His asset, as you pointed out, is finding the ball. His weakness is using it.

Do you disagree that he doesn't get enough hard won possessions? When I try to picture Mathews getting the ball in my mind, I see him on his own in the middle of the ground, gathering up the loose ball and then quickly kicking it to another loose player, who may or may not be in a better position than Mathews.

Are you disagreeing that he doesn't kick enough goals? I'm aware his role doesn't specifically call for him to be a goalkicker, but a goalkicking midfield is important, and if Mathews is to be a full-time midfielder, he needs to contribute to that.

Do you disagree that Bevan and Crouch will keep him out of the back pocket?

[liz]

You're right that it was more tone than content that I disagree with, though overall you paint a picture of far less worth than I think he brings to the team.

I disagree with your comment on hard won ball. He's certainly no Simon Black when it comes to feeding the ball out from a pack constructively, but sadly he has many R&W mates in this specific aspect. However, I have never seen him shirk a contest, he tackles well and he can play a run-with role effectively when asked to.

The role he is often asked to play is as a loose player, operating at the back of the midfield - as a "midfield sweeper", if that term makes any sense. He's good at it because he reads the play so well and knows how to position himself. However, that does mean he is often is space and thus it may appear he doesn't win as much hard ball as some others.

As a midfield run-with player I'd probably rank him ahead of Crouch, though Crouch is superb on smaller forward pocket types (plus Aker, wherever he plays ) and Crouch has a much sharper burst of speed. Both lack penetration with their kicking and can be wasteful at times. But last season Williams, Bolton and Maxfield all copped their share of criticism at times for poor use of the ball, and even Kirk is not the best kick in the game.

I do agree that he doesn't kick as many goals as we might like, but again, that is a criticism that can be levelled at all our top flight midfielders. Williams wasn't as prolific in 2004 as in prior years, and we missed Cressa's love for a goal. Bolton, Kirk, Crouch, Fosdike, Maxfield - none of them kick as many goals as they should, IMHO. Far too much is left to Baz and co.

As for playing in the back pocket, I'd rather see him in a more midfield role. As a defender he's better on midsized players because he doesn't have the pace of Crouch or Bevan (or Fixter, for that matter) and thus is not equipped to play on a Davey, Milne, Matera type. But he's probably ideally suited to the likes of Cupido, Haynes, Chick, Ladhams - or even Ryan O'Keefe!!

[NMWBloods]

I still reckon Mathews could be a good centreman, in the traditional style.

[liz]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
I still reckon Mathews could be a good centreman, in the traditional style.

Yep, though his ability to play highly accountable football will not necessarily be used to its best advantage in that role.

I know he didn't play for us for very long, but Dyson was great in that role. He knew how to use his body mass to hold his ground and make space, and was a pretty good distributor of the ball.

One thing Dyson had going for him in that role - something that Mathews lacks - is a booming, penetrating kick. For that reason, I suspect it is a position that Ablett has the raw tools to excel at.

[NMWBloods]

Yep - Mathews disposal and ability to lock down players does make him as a centreman less likely.

Ablett may one day turn into that player, but not sure if he has the football smarts of Dyson, which would be surprising considering Ablett's pedigree.

[liz]

Originally posted by NMWBloods


Ablett may one day turn into that player, but not sure if he has the football smarts of Dyson, which would be surprising considering Ablett's pedigree.

Bear in mind that you are comparing a 21-22yo Ablett with a 30yo Dyson. It's not really fair to contrast their "footy smarts" at such different stages of their careers.

I suspect that great vision is the most important part of "footy smarts" for the centreman role. Ablett has shown glimpses of being able to spot a target and pinpoint a pass but, like everything else in his game thus far, he doesn't yet do it consistently enough.

[penga]

Originally posted by liz
But he's probably ideally suited to the likes of Cupido, Haynes, Chick, Ladhams - or even Ryan O'Keefe!!

FWIW, if mathews were to play on o'keefe, o'keefe would move directly to the goal square and quickly kick 3 goals

i do agree, however, i would like to see mathews to take on kennelly's role defensively by taking the least dangerous mid-sized forward and move kennelly to the wing. essentially moving mathews to the HBF. mathews wouldnt provide the same run that kennelly generates, however.

[liz]

Originally posted by penga
FWIW, if mathews were to play on o'keefe, o'keefe would move directly to the goal square and quickly kick 3 goals

i do agree, however, i would like to see mathews to take on kennelly's role defensively by taking the least dangerous mid-sized forward and move kennelly to the wing. essentially moving mathews to the HBF. mathews wouldnt provide the same run that kennelly generates, however.

You're probably right on O'Keefe - he is versatile enough, and a strong enough mark - to do that.

I don't see the point of playing Mathews on a player who is seen to be a relatively low threat if we agree that he wouldn't provide the same run from HB that Kennelly does. We would not be making best use of Mathews' defensive skills, he would probably be largely dragged out of the play, without the speed to run off his man to provide rebound, and in the process we would lose Mathews as a "play-through" man on the defensive end of the midfield. Seems like a lose-lose-lose situation for the Swans.

Opposition coaches tried this tactic on Barry in 2004, sometimes with good effect. It became less of an issue once Barry starting playing roles on key forwards because he was no longer being relied upon to provide the rebound. But earlier in the season, while James was being tried on a key forward, it was noticeable that Barry's influence was being successfully curtailed while minding a "lesser forward".

[NMWBloods]

Originally posted by liz
Bear in mind that you are comparing a 21-22yo Ablett with a 30yo Dyson. It's not really fair to contrast their "footy smarts" at such different stages of their careers.

I suspect that great vision is the most important part of "footy smarts" for the centreman role. Ablett has shown glimpses of being able to spot a target and pinpoint a pass but, like everything else in his game thus far, he doesn't yet do it consistently enough.

Yes, you are correct that a straight comparison like that is unfair, but I am more thinking about just him compared to other young footballers. Still, I hope he is a 'late bloomer' and comes on with a rush in the next year or two.

[chammond]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
Yes, you are correct that a straight comparison like that is unfair, but I am more thinking about just him compared to other young footballers. Still, I hope he is a 'late bloomer' and comes on with a rush in the next year or two.

I think the thing with Ablett is that he keeps improving, but it's slow and steady. We've got used to players taking giant steps like Bevan, Schneider, Kennelly and Kirk, but I think we'll need to be a lot more patient with Ablett.

And going back to Mathews' kicking ability, I remember him kicking a goal from the centre square in his first or second game. He has got it in him, but I think he lacks confidence in his kicking, particularly from a set shot.

[Dpw]

Originally posted by chammond
I think the thing with Ablett is that he keeps improving, but it's slow and steady. We've got used to players taking giant steps like Bevan, Schneider, Kennelly and Kirk, but I think we'll need to be a lot more patient with Ablett.

And going back to Mathews' kicking ability, I remember him kicking a goal from the centre square in his first or second game. He has got it in him, but I think he lacks confidence in his kicking, particularly from a set shot.

I disagree on Ablett I think he has been given far to much time to prove himself and has showen little in return. hes just one of those players who plays reasonable when the team plays well, he only played one good half of footy in a game we lost the rest of his better games where in games we where winning.

on Mathews he has improved to a point that he is an asset to the team and less famous for the clangers he makes, rather the good football he plays

[liz]

Originally posted by Dpw
I disagree on Ablett I think he has been given far to much time to prove himself and has showen little in return. hes just one of those players who plays reasonable when the team plays well, he only played one good half of footy in a game we lost the rest of his better games where in games we where winning.

I can't make head or tails of your second sentence. But Ablett played a handful of pretty good halves of games last year. He hasn't yet done it for a whole game, granted, but his best football has, at least sometimes, been played when the heat is very much on. Consistency over a game should come with better endurance, as he physically matures.

Most players don't play anything like their best football until they are 23+. The Judds and Riewoldts of this world are the exception. Few emulate them.

How long would you have given Brett Kirk? Or Leo Barry?

Ablett may or may not become a good AFL player but, given that he has shown steady improvement, I don't think he has been given undue opportunities thus far.

Pressure for a spot in the midfield will hopefully increase this year, with the recruitment of Spriggs, hoped-for improvement of McVeigh, with Willoughby and Moore maybe pressing for places, and possibly Monty, Schneider and Bevan looking for opportunities in the middle. Unless we are ridden with midfield injuries, Ablett will certainly not get any "free" games. I think we'll find out if he has what it takes.

[NMWBloods]

Originally posted by liz
I can't make head or tails of your second sentence.

Translation - he only plays well in games we are winning - the exception was one game we lost where he played a good half.

Which one was that?

But Ablett played a handful of pretty good halves of games last year. He hasn't yet done it for a whole game, granted, but his best football has, at least sometimes, been played when the heat is very much on. Consistency over a game should come with better endurance, as he physically matures.

I think DPW's point is that usually he only plays well when the rest of the team is. ie: maybe a 'downhill skiier'.


I've been a bit disappointed with his efforts, but if he continues to improve next year by a reasonable amount then you'd persist with him. Obviously this year is very important in his progress.

[liz]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
Translation - he only plays well in games we are winning - the exception was one game we lost where he played a good half.

Which one was that?

Even if that is the case - I'm neither agreeing nor disagreeing off the top of my head - which direction is the causality?!!