Tweet
I want to keep ROK, but I'd entertain the idea of a straight swap for Gibbs.
-
He reminds him of the guys, close-set, slow, and never rattled, who were play-makers on the team. (John Updike, seeing Josh Kennedy in a crystal ball) -
*sigh* Just as the Swans are destined to be associated with any out-of-contract player, it seems that it's become O'Keefe's lot to be the subject of trade rumours with the Victorian clubs whenever he's out of contract. I'd be very surprised (not to mention disappointed!) if he goes because he's now one of our most experienced players, even if we are a fair way off a premiership, to give him up now would be crazy!
On the other hand, I could envisage a scenario in which we traded Hall for adequate compensation, of course he would leave a hole but given that we did better than expected without him this year I think we could just about cobble together a reasonable forward line around MO'L, Playfair, Goodes, Davis if he stays (?) for a season or two until a new long-term prospect emerges. O'Keefe is another one along with Goodes who could certainly play out his career up forward.
Both trades are extremely unlikely though!Comment
-
Ok... So not even consider a PROVEN performer and game breaker at the peak of his powers and instead roll the dice on some could be's???FFS, if you get an early 1st round pick why would you trade it away for a gimp like Kerr? Take a @@@@ing look at the talent in this year's draft and see if you would honestly trade it away.....
Naitanui
Rich
Watts
Ziebell
Hurley
are going to be absolute guns for the next decade.
Think boys, THIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIINK!
Umm..... How do I say this....
Think man, THIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIINK!Comment
-
It would seem to be a pointless move trading ROK for a deal with Kerr....
For mine, Swans have two options.
We either bet the farm and tarde away everything we have in order to have one more realistic tilt at the falg whilst we still have the likes of MOL, Kirk, BBBH, Leaping and any one of the other 27+ players we have. Or, alternatively, we trade the likes of ROK and anyone pluss 24/25 and recruit like nothing else to wind up for another crack in about 2012.Comment
-
We have a third option. Keep our better players, let the older ones retire steadily and graciously over the next 2-3 years (by which time more will be at retirement age), continue to recruit younger players into the club, develop them (and the ones who exist) in an environment that values being as competitive as possible, gradually expose those younger players into senior football to play alongside a core of experienced and competitive players, and wait and see what happens.
There is no evidence that approach B has much chance of success. The Hawks are the closest yet to succeeding with that approach (but have achieved less so far than the Swans of 2005-6) but they supplemented their trading of good players with being completely and utterly crap for 3 years and accumulating low draft picks that way.
Also, despite the focus on the likes of Buddy and Roughhead, their current success also relies heavily on the input from Mitchell (late 2nd round pick), Bateman (3rd round + draft pick), and Osbourne, Sewell and Campbell (all ex-rookies). Good players have always been found and developed from all ranges of the draft and I believe that will continue to be the case.
Sure, read the profiles of the top 30 or so likely draftees this year and salivate on how they all read like potential Brownlow medallists, multiple AAs and club B&F winners, but bear in mind that amongst them will be future Fitzgeralds, Walshes and Doyles (whose bodies won't stand up to the rigours of AFL football), Johnstones and Headlands (highly skilled players who don't have the work ethic to ever turn that promise into more than sporadically excellent performances), Reillys, Fosdikes, Harrises (the list is endless - players who are GOPs are nothing more), or Morrisons, Willoughbys, Stevens, Rances, Sampis, Egans, Coles (this list is also endless - players who were just plain flops for whatever reason).Comment
-
Hawthorn looked at their list and decided it did not contain the material required for a tilt at the flag. Clarkson drew a line through the guys he thought were clogging their list and cleaned them out, realising that the consquence would be a trip to the foot of the ladder. This, as much as the high draft picks, was the recipe for current success. The point you make about the various low round pick-up just emphasises it. It is not about bottoming out and tanking, but the velocity of list turn-over.
I think Hawthorn have already done enough to show the formula can work. I emphasise, the formula is not about draft picks but list management.
To win a flag you have to form a playing group,with stability and talent. So by definition, clubs must vacillate between periods of high list turnover and low turnover to foster stability. History shows that stable teams win flags. The draft is an aside (albeit an important one), which can accelerate formation of a stable list, at a price.
Each player on the list needs to be judged according to his place in the next flag. This may include being a 'bridge' to avoid decimation of the club culture and education of the younger cohort. This is the mistake Carlton made - not retaining guys who were the heart and soul of the club in their relentless quest for youth. I am sure that is why Clarkson retained Vandeburg and then appointed him as Captain. Smart guy Addis.
IMHO, we were remiss in not accelerating the list turnover in 2007 and may well make the same mistake this year. Consequently, 2010 is still a potential disaster year for us.
Sheedy made a similar mistake at Essendon by retaining a host of favoured fringe players, top-up drafting (remember his reputation for turning @@@@ into shinola?) and playing an outdated style of footy. Sounds familiar?
I hope I am wrong, given the Gold Coasters situation.He had observed that people who did lie were, on the whole, more resourceful and ambitious and successful than people who did not lie.Comment
-
One of the most sensible posts I've seen in a while, and a very persuasive argument. We have had the benefit of stability for a while now, but we are IMO on the cusp of the cull. If not this year (and there are reasons to persist with e.g. Leo, MOL, Kirk) then probably next year must see it happen.He reminds him of the guys, close-set, slow, and never rattled, who were play-makers on the team. (John Updike, seeing Josh Kennedy in a crystal ball)Comment
-
Whilst I shouldn't credit this question with a response, I AM in a generous mood, so I will:
O'Keefe.
You know, loyalty is a diminishing quality in football. I'd rather hang onto O' Keefe for another 4 years than sell out to a demented douche-bag like Kerr.
It really worries me that so many 'supporters' are quick to off-load our premiership boys. Especially when some of them are playing the best footy of their careers. It's bad enough we lost Schneids and Demps. There's no way I'd want to see one of the hardest working players in the comp go too.Damn that Sorcerer! Twenty gold pieces and I'm wankered on rohypnol!Comment
-
I agree with the sentiment, but unfortunately football has lost a lot of loyalty.
I'd like to think that players are desperate to stay at the team they love, but in the end it's their job.
I don't mind losing players who aren't performing.
Even premiership players.
ROK is performing.
So is Hall.
To me over half of the team should not even be considered for a trade.
And they won't.
The couching staff know who they will be keeping and who they think might go.The difference between insanity and genius is measured only in success.Comment
-
So if Hawthorn do win the flag you will deem 10 years of constant failure (ok then 4 years under the clarkson regime but the "rebuilding pahse" at the hawks started around the Judge years) and hanging around the bottom 4 for draft picks to be the correct model for list management?
I think its an indication of all things wrong if the hawks do win a flag and it has come during a long rebuiling phase.Comment
-
From purely a value for money perspective, now is the time to trade him. His value is at an all time high and would be highly doubtful that we could get more for him in the future.Comment
-
ROK to NMFC
Would love to have O'Keefe at North.... Admittedly he struggled a little this year, but still a great contested mark and seems to play 'tall'. True matchwinner on his day.
Not sure who you would want from our list for him though...
Comment
-
Good Point.
Not sure if there is anyone at North that we would want. Don't know your list that well, but I'm confident in stating that your on ballers are similar to ours when it comes to speed.Comment
Comment