Who will want out at season end?

[giant]

I don't agree entirely with the comment earlier in the thread (Giant?) that other clubs won't be looking at our kids and won't rate them because none was particularly highly rated as a junior. Every club is on the look-out for youngish players who are more ready to play than 18yo draftees. The obvious place to look for quality is on the lists of well-performing clubs or those that have had very low injury lists. The combination of the two would have to put Sydney's list right at the top to have a squizz at. And every other club would be aware that our youngsters are unbeaten for two and a half years and have an average winning margin of over 100 points. Add to that Sydney's reputation for playing a very team orientated game and drilling its players very well.

I'd be amazed if there aren't clubs who regularly send scouts to watch our reserves play in the hope of finding someone yearning for more opportunities. It is much lower risk for them than picking an 18yo from the dregs of the draft.

Not I, but I did say in another thread that every year someone on here screams "OMG,we're gonna lose the next Judd if we delist Fixter/Willoughby/Garubba." In reality, we'd need to go back to Troy Cook to think of a player we've let go that's made an impact at another club (OK, Scotty Stevens does all rite at the Crows but I"m not even convinced he's in their best 22).

It would be nice to find the right mix of keeping a winning team on the park and blooding newbies (the Pies seem to have done a great job of it this year but will it cost them in August/September?), but it's a bit like taking shots at the Aust cricket selectors - they can just shrug their shoulders & point at the scoreboard. There may be pain to face in the future but I'll take the prsent day pleasure for now.

[hammo]

Not I, but I did say in another thread that every year someone on here screams "OMG,we're gonna lose the next Judd if we delist Fixter/Willoughby/Garubba." In reality, we'd need to go back to Troy Cook to think of a player we've let go that's made an impact at another club (OK, Scotty Stevens does all rite at the Crows but I"m not even convinced he's in their best 22).

I said it.

What I actually said was that none of our draftees forged such a reputation as a junior that other clubs (e.g the WA ones with Thornton, Brabazon etc) would seek to trade for them. I know they were good junior footballers but given the paucity of trades completed these days, or opportunities given to recycled players, you'd have to say they will either make it or Sydney or not at all.

[Industrial Fan]

His wife is handy though.

Apparently Fev got her for a second round pick.

[graemed]

Like many others I have opinions about some of our current playing crop and have a habit of focussing on their weaknesses rather than their strengths. The fact remains that at season's end 4 players from the current list have to be delisted.

Here are my 4 with the arguments

Ted Richards - Pros: courageous beyond fault, strong contested mark, played well in 2006 GF, may have trade prestige after GF performance, reads game well.
Cons: poor decision making skills, weak kick for goal, poor disposal skills under pressure.

Nick Malceski Pros: reads play well, excellent kick to position, provides run out of defence, excellent trade bait.
Cons: weak under pressure, gives ball up too easy, does not do 1%ers well, poor overhead, loose marking.

Matt Davis - Pros: size and marking skills, improving player, free from injury.
Cons: Lacks pace, has not shown sufficient improvement to justify his continued placement on senior list.

Stephen Doyle - Pros: Genuine tall with finals experience, strong o'head, postions well in attack, good converter, got a bit of mongrel.
Cons: Injury prone, lack of consistent playing time cannot see him as a short term player with potential or a long term project.

Others come to mind but like many I can forgive much about Jude because of his comittment and his attitude, would have to be critical of Fossie on two counts (lack of 1%, especially shepherding and poor marking o'head) but his ball-getting ability and general football brain are important to the team.

[Plugger46]

Malceski

Don't be so ridiculous. He's far too valuable.

[ScottH]

Of the last 2, well I haven't seen Davis at all, so I can't comment. Doyle , maybe.

Ted I doubt will be delisted.

But I can't believe you would even consider -

Nick Malceski Pros: reads play well, excellent kick to position, provides run out of defence, excellent trade bait.
Cons: weak under pressure, gives ball up too easy, does not do 1%ers well, poor overhead, loose marking.

A 39 game player, after a knee reco, who has improved dramatically in the last 12 months. There is no way he would be delisted. He is already showing he is one of our most important cogs in the back line.

[ugg]

Cons: gives ball up too easy

You would have to delist 70% of the team under this criteria.

[connolly]

[QUOTE=graemed;323662]
Nick Malceski Pros: reads play well, excellent kick to position, provides run out of defence, excellent trade bait.
Cons: weak under pressure, gives ball up too easy, does not do 1%ers well, poor overhead, loose marking.

QUOTE]

Nick Malcevski. As Sir Humphrey would say - "A courageous decision Minister"

[bigswan]

Smokey can't be used to delist because he is on the rookie list. Malceske is going to finish in the top 10 B and F so forget about him.

[NMWBloods]

Nick Malceski Pros: reads play well, excellent kick to position, provides run out of defence, excellent trade bait.
Cons: weak under pressure, gives ball up too easy, does not do 1%ers well, poor overhead, loose marking.

Others come to mind but like many I can forgive much about Jude because of his comittment and his attitude.

It's not that I disagree with the general theme of the cons, but to then compare unfavourably against Bolton is bizarre.

FWIW - Malceski's cons will reduce over time with experience. Bolton's won't.

[DST]

You can forget about Laidlaw wanting to go, I have it on good authority that he wants to extend his contract so it will come down to whether they want to trade him which is very unlikely.

DST

[connolly]

It's not that I disagree with the general theme of the cons, but to then compare unfavourably against Bolton is bizarre.

FWIW - Malceski's cons will reduce over time with experience. Bolton's won't.

One other thing about Jude. The umps just love him. Maybe its a blond thing. He has the fourth highest number of frees for in the comp. Averages about two a match. We need him to balance Big Bustling who has about the highest against and Goodesy(?)

[hammo]

He has the fourth highest number of frees for in the comp. Averages about two a match.

They would be valuable free kicks if he could convert.

He got 2 in five minutes in the first quarter of the 06 GF and fluffed both kicks. You could argue they were very costly misses.

[ernie koala]

You can forget about Laidlaw wanting to go, I have it on good authority that he wants to extend his contract so it will come down to whether they want to trade him which is very unlikely.

DST

Hope your right, he looks a real prospect. I'd love to see him in this week. But alas, 'buckleys and none' seems more realistic, given the swans selection history He should do more odd jobs for the leadership group.

[#73]

Malceski's going nowhere. Thats our next captain you're talking about.