2008 Draft discussion

[SimonH]

I also think the club reckons it has a solid group pushing for their chance to shine next year, their chance to do a Jack or Bird and convince the club that they have a long term future. For many of those players, next year really is it (though some might be saved the chop if they don't quite perform if we have the maximum number of anticipated retirements - ie O'Loughlin, Barry, Hall, Kennelly, Crouch are all possibilities to be playing their last season).

The real 'problem' if you can call it one is the wildly over-large collection of young mids at varying stages between 'almost an automatic selection' and undebuted: in random order Bird, Moore, Jack, Vespa, Schmidt, MOD, Smith, Laidlaw, Brabazon, Meredith and now Hannebery.

It seems inconceivable that we could carry all of the above list into our 2010 season; and yet the real prospect that we'll lose 5 senior players at the end of '09, will give us little motivation to do a substantial chop of 'em.

If Hannebery had not nominated and was expected to be top 10 next year, there is a fair chance he would have ended up at the Gold Coast.

Nope. GC do not participate in the 2009 draft. Their only involvement is to be able to offer direct contracts to 12 kids born in the 1 January-30 April 1992 age range, who due to the minimum age increase commencing 2009, will not be eligible to nominate for the 2009 draft. Hannebery would be a year too old to qualify.

So it's actually technically wrong to call the 2009 draft 'compromised'. It's a perfectly ordinary draft according to the usual rules, with only 16 teams participating. It's just that the pool of new players coming through will be one-third down (8 months' worth of new players compared with the usual 12 months). The impact on the top 20 will be fairly limited, but in later rounds, clubs will look more closely at 'over-agers' who missed out this year (or some earlier year). Which is no bad thing for anyone.

[liz]

The real 'problem' if you can call it one is the wildly over-large collection of young mids at varying stages between 'almost an automatic selection' and undebuted: in random order Bird, Moore, Jack, Vespa, Schmidt, MOD, Smith, Laidlaw, Brabazon, Meredith and now Hannebery.

It seems inconceivable that we could carry all of the above list into our 2010 season; and yet the real prospect that we'll lose 5 senior players at the end of '09, will give us little motivation to do a substantial chop of 'em.

Not sure it is that inconceivable on a purely needs basis. With Kirk and Bolton nearing the ends of their careers too, we really only have McVeigh, Buchanan and Ablett as established mid-career aged on-ballers. And Ablett can't afford another season like last year's or he may not make it much beyond "mid-career". So with Bird, Moore and Jack already taking up three spots in the 2008 midfield, and Vez/Laidlaw capable of contributing as medium sized forwards if they can't break into the midfield (and no-one else really competing for those spots ATM), there is room for many of that group, including some as depth.

More relevantly, two or three or the above are unlikely to get much of a look-in next season unless we have injury carnage in the midfield. Many will be safe, regardless, due to the upcoming retirements, but time must be running out for Laidlaw, Schmidt and Brabazon in particular.

[SimonH]

Not sure it is that inconceivable on a purely needs basis. ...
More relevantly, two or three or the above are unlikely to get much of a look-in next season unless we have injury carnage in the midfield. Many will be safe, regardless, due to the upcoming retirements, but time must be running out for Laidlaw, Schmidt and Brabazon in particular.

These sort of things (culling mids who won't quite make it) can quite rationally be run on a 'first in, first out' basis.

From 2003: if Schmidt doesn't play at least 50% of his matches in firsts (and isn't fit for at least 50% of the season) in 2009, if retained after that he'd potentially be dragging on into his 7th year without ever holding down a solid spot in the side. Borderin' on absurd.

From 2004, Moore must surely be safe barring something v weird happening. In fact, along with Bird, Vespa and Jack, 2009 should be the year that Moore is one of those names everyone just unselfconsciously writes down automatically when selecting our best 22.

From 2005, surely Laidlaw and Braba would have to be expected to play at least half a dozen games or so in 2009. To go into your fifth year at a club, where you've earned a grand total of one or two games of firsts across the whole time, would just be embarrassing. You can basically include Thornton in that list because he'll be with us in 2009, but unless something good happens he might not be in 2010 (albeit he's not occupying a senior spot).

From 2006: DOK has 2009 to prove that he's not going to be a 'what might have been but for injury' hopeless case. Doesn't need to play firsts, just needs to consistently get on the park and in the best players for the twos. Very hard to know where the bar is for MOD and Smith as they seem to be virtually depth players at this stage of their careers.

The problem is that, bar apocalyptic injuries, many of the players in the above list will only get limited opportunity to play firsts in 2009. A few of them are surely going to have to go out crying.

[hammo]

LOL. No. I was referring to the Paul variety.

I thought so!

[johnno]

Can anyone out there tell me whether Lewis Johnston will actually play any senior games next season(2009), or will he only play in the reserves and then we will see him in action in season 2010?

[goswannie14]

Can anyone out there tell me whether Lewis Johnston will actually play any senior games next season(2009), or will he only play in the reserves and then we will see him in action in season 2010?

Paul Roos can.

[ScottH]

Paul Roos can.

Good answer, but I bet he doesn't even know.

Not too many 1st year players have debuted in next year, recently.
Bird and Vespa excepted.

[liz]

Bird was more than a year older than Johnston when he arrived at the club. Vez was around 6 months older. Both have pretty solid builds too.

Johnston is not only still very young, he's pretty slim still too. And he plays in a position where traditionally it takes a bit of time to be physically ready to play senior footy.

He might get a game or two but wouldn't count on it.

[Legs Akimbo]

Bird was more than a year older than Johnston when he arrived at the club. Vez was around 6 months older. Both have pretty solid builds too.

Johnston is not only still very young, he's pretty slim still too. And he plays in a position where traditionally it takes a bit of time to be physically ready to play senior footy.

He might get a game or two but wouldn't count on it.

I think the fact that Roos commented that he can play on the wing is probably indicative that will get a few games, but probably not in the forward line, certainly not as a key forward.

[liz]

I think the fact that Roos commented that he can play on the wing is probably indicative that will get a few games, but probably not in the forward line, certainly not as a key forward.

We ought to be hoping he doesn't in the sense that if the Swans have a good, competitive season next year, there ought to be others on the list more capable of having an impact playing on the wing than an 18 yo Johnston. A 22 year old Barlow, for instance.

And I don't think that whether Johnston gets a few games next year on the wing will have much - if any - impact on the time it takes him to be ready to assume a KPF role. Which is what he's been recruited for.

[Legs Akimbo]

We ought to be hoping he doesn't in the sense that if the Swans have a good, competitive season next year, there ought to be others on the list more capable of having an impact playing on the wing than an 18 yo Johnston. A 22 year old Barlow, for instance.

And I don't think that whether Johnston gets a few games next year on the wing will have much - if any - impact on the time it takes him to be ready to assume a KPF role. Which is what he's been recruited for.

Fair enough....just commenting that Roos said he could play on a wing, which to me seems a left field comment, and seems to imply something.

[SimonH]

I would vastly prefer to see Johnston not play in 2009; unless he pushes for selection with something like 6 weeks in a row of physically dominating grown-up opponents in Canberra. Which isn't likely.

Nowhere near physically ready for AFL, and the risk for the club in playing him before he's physically ready is huge.

[Matt79]

I would vastly prefer to see Johnston not play in 2009; unless he pushes for selection with something like 6 weeks in a row of physically dominating grown-up opponents in Canberra. Which isn't likely.

Nowhere near physically ready for AFL, and the risk for the club in playing him before he's physically ready is huge.

One thing the Swans could hardly be critisized for in the past is playing youngsters too early and putting them at risk!!

[johnno]

One thing the Swans could hardly be critisized for in the past is playing youngsters too early and putting them at risk!!

That is so true.

[giant]

One thing the Swans could hardly be critisized for in the past is playing youngsters too early and putting them at risk!!

And when you see the state of the Balls, Del Santos etc of this world, amen to that.