A Theory on delistings?

[TheMase]

I have a theory. I apologise if this is mentioned on the other thread because I have not read it all.

Just a thought that perhaps Roos is looking ahead. Sees that Hall, O'Loughlin, Barry etc are in probably the last 3-5 years of their careers.

And since we are at the top of our game, and young guys are struggling to get into the team, they will draft a lot of youth and get rid of what they consider the dead wood.

That way the new players that come on will be ready to replace those players.

Why not do this whilst you are at the top of your game, rather than after all those players are gone.
Why not do it in what many consider a 'super draft'?

This is in an attempt to stop us from sliding down the latter. Rather than rebuild whilst you are down. Rebuild whilst you are up

Thoughts?

[ROK Lobster]

Makes as much sense as any. I think that they arre simply making room to see what falls their way. Hopefully they find some talent in the super draft that will become the core of a very good side in 3-4 years time.

[goswannie14]

I think you are probably fairly accurate. I also think that a couple of these guys may be redrafted, depending on what is available when we take our later picks.

[Jeffers1984]

That's a good enough theory. We all know we're gonna face some problems after our core are gone so i reckon having this many picks in what is considered a super draft is a solid gamble. However i'm still concerned that we don't have a back up back up ruckman if Doyle or Spida get injured. That's why i'm still bewildered by the dumping of Shaw.

[Bas]

Sydney can't afford to rebuild when it's down unlike Melbourne teams.

I thought Sydney handled the mass retirements in recent years quite well. Sydney will always need a key position forward like Plugger or Barry to build a team around. IMO it's what excites the Sydney crowd. Sure everyone admired Kelly but they really came to see Plugger kick the big goals.

At the moment, perhaps Grundy is being groomed for this role. He has showed glimpses of it.

The Swans recruiting team has worked very hard at getting it right and for evry Chambers, they have unearthed the likes of O'Keefe, Schneider and Bucky in ordinary drafts.

With 5 picks, I have to agree with ROK on one of the very few occasions. If the Swans don't pick up a 4th or 5th player in the draft, they will re-draft one or two of our junior talls.

[nomae]

if we want youth, why get rid of willioughby?

[TheMase]

Originally posted by nomae
if we want youth, why get rid of willioughby?

Getting rid of what they consider dead wood. Players that are not going to make it.

No point having a player on the list that the coaching staff believe is not good enough, just for the sake of having them there.

[Bloody Hell]

I think it's been stated elsewhere the Swans have a habit of delisting and redrafting...motivating players.

Kirk, Buchanan, James....

[Chow-Chicker]

The theory is practical if unconventional but questionably possible. Resisting the temptation to maintain as much of the list as possible is equally as difficult to trying to evaluate who should be de-listed in an attempt to maintaining success. Potentially, the club can fall dramatically if too many changes are made, however, proportionately, the club could also stabilise and benefit from such a manoeuvre.

[SimonH]

Doesn't make any difference. Those whose delistings are 'an issue' were all 21 yoa at the oldest. (We can leave aside retirees and Spriggs, who was always a certainty to go on the 'mid-career and no regular spot in the firsts: see ya later' policy.) The average AFL career is 5 years or so. You'd always rather pick up a Luke Vogels at 22 yoa who is going to be able to make your league side, than an 18 year old who won't.

So, it all boils down to the same question: were Ericksen, M Davis, Shaw and little Willo going to make it at AFL level? The club's given its answer; fans can form their own view.

In terms of maintaining a good list balance, all you can do is minimise your risk by trying to ensure that there's a good spread of ages across the squad. Which we had anyway; if anything, adding 6 18 year olds (if that's what the club does) would slightly increase our risk of list age imbalance in the longer term. Likely to be a moot point, though, 'cos even if we did draft 6 18 year olds, the chances are that 3 of them won't be here in 3 years' time. To be replaced by 3 more youngsters. And so the world spins.

[swans song]

Earl Shaw will get re-drafted. We still have plenty of talent in our younger brigade but unless injuries happen I don't think they are going to get much of a chance. In my opinion the drafting of Everitt, the Swans are hell bent on getting victories whilst they can and when the present squad falls away through retirement or injuries only then we will see the younger,(ones left) given a chance. They must give some a taste in 2007. It's not every season that only 28 players are used.

[Bloody Hell]

Originally posted by swans song
Earl Shaw will get re-drafted. We still have plenty of talent in our younger brigade but unless injuries happen I don't think they are going to get much of a chance. In my opinion the drafting of Everitt, the Swans are hell bent on getting victories whilst they can and when the present squad falls away through retirement or injuries only then we will see the younger,(ones left) given a chance. They must give some a taste in 2007. It's not every season that only 28 players are used.

This may be odd...but for the Swans individuals don't matter. For them I think it's how a player fits into the team context. This doesn't mean that great or even good (Ben Matthews) are the right selection for the team result. How many swans are in the top 50 of AFL players...for a team that has played 2 consecutive GF. Compare them to the Lions of recent times or the HAWKS of the 80's.

(I'm not sure this makes sense as I've had a few beers, (public holiday tomorrow) but I've written it so I'm going to post it.)

[caj23]

Top 50?

Definites: Goodes, Hall
Probables: O'Keefe, C Bolton, Kenelley, Kirk (sp?)
Possibles: Barry Everitt

If the probables were in then that's > 10% of the top 50, which is pretty good representation for a 16 team comp.

Plus Goodes and Hall are both definite top 10 players

(thanks Justice, forgot our gun recruit as well)

[Justice]

Originally posted by Will Sangster
Top 50?

Definites: Goodes, Hall
Probables: O'Keefe, C Bolton, Kenelley (sp?)
Possibles: Barry

Think you missed one:

Probables: Kirk....

And therefore the % in top 50 is even higher.

Cheers

Justice

[Bloody Hell]

Originally posted by Will Sangster

If the probables were in then that's > 10% of the top 50, which is pretty good representation for a 16 team comp.

As a percentage of the comp it is...but we have had one of the more dominate teams of the past few years.

Look at the Lions.

Lynch, Brown, Leppitsh, Michael, Johnston, Voss, Lappin, Black, Ackermanis, Power...Superstars. (At the time of their dominace).

The point that I'm making is the personality of the player is more important than the skills they possess (BM - Mr Reliable)...as long as they fit into the swans ethos.