Henry Playfair - the forgotten man

[SwansFan1972]

So you think Playfair was a good pick up? And the Cats can't win the flag this year?....

Look, he showed a bit when he was on the park for us, then injury intervened. At the time, how many other talls were on offer via trade? If it makes you feel better, he probably will get cut at the end of the year. Dance on his grave all you like if it floats your boat. All I'm saying is that given the turn over likely to happen this year, there could still be a place for him. In a more settled season with fewer likely retirements, keeping a spot for him would be harder based on game time and his history, but in a clean out scenario, I think he deserves another crack.

As for the cats, you infer "can't" - I never said it. Of course they can - I just think they won't. Subtle but important difference between those two words.

Should I expect to see six of these on your next post?!?!

[i'm-uninformed2]

This is where our list management at the end of the year gets interesting. Already we have four gone - Leo Barry, MickyO, Fosdike and Keneally (yes, they still count).

The other two oldies with question marks are Crouch and Bazza, for different reasons. My hunch is Crouch will go with a quiet push but they may yet keep Bazza for structural reasons.

That opens up five spots so far. Allow then for Pyke, and maybe one other rookie based on past form, to come in. Back to three slots being free.

Now, given what Roos has said recently and what we need with the cycle of our list and polluted drafts ahead, we are going to want more picks than three.

Delisting Playfair, Ablett or other surplus junk merely gives us more picks at the bottom end of a draft. Not really what we need.

More likely is a couple of trades that yield us some extra picks in the 20-30 range - a Malceski/Bucky double act for example might leverage something akin to the Schneider/Dempster offering - and we will have to work hard for those. But this is what suits us more.

(If they can get something great for Hall, fine, but I cant see anyone giving us anything inside the top 20).

But with the combination of natural retirements, and trades we need to regenerate the lift - a couple of people might stay on beyond convention. I like Schmidt and Laidlaw but they would naturally get the punt after so little for so long on the list. They may now hang on.

Equally, someone like Henry may hang on simply because others did/had to go first and if Baz goes, he may be a default option now and then next year if he gets his body right. This - even though I rate him below useless.

Anyway, I don't think the usual rules will apply this offseason.

[The Big Cat]

If all the exits suggested by this forum come to fruition we'll be struggling to put a team on the park!

Those suggested as gone, being traded or being cut on RWO:

Hall
DOK
Malceski
Barlow
Fosdike
Kennelly
MOL
Noggy
Leo
Laidlaw
Henry
Crouch
LRT
Bucky
Bulldog
Reg
Smith
MOD
Bevan
Brabazon

In reality we need to make room for Murphy and perhaps Orreal. Pyke and Gilchrist can stay as Rookies. Plus we need to make room for at least four draft picks.

At this stage only Leo, MOL and Fossie are sure exits. I have a sneaking suspicion that Kennelly will be back. Forget trades, as no club will want to trade with GC17 and WS18 (?) buggering future drafts trade. Hall won't be a trade as he will be out of contract and he'll be lucky if more that one club will want him anyway in preference to a draft pick. IF he goes it will be via the PSD. I suspect he'll stay.

So accommodate 2 rookies and four draft picks they need at least 6 exits. 3 are known already.

[ernie koala]

Look, he showed a bit when he was on the park for us, then injury intervened. At the time, how many other talls were on offer via trade? If it makes you feel better, he probably will get cut at the end of the year. Dance on his grave all you like if it floats your boat. All I'm saying is that given the turn over likely to happen this year, there could still be a place for him. In a more settled season with fewer likely retirements, keeping a spot for him would be harder based on game time and his history, but in a clean out scenario, I think he deserves another crack.

As for the cats, you infer "can't" - I never said it. Of course they can - I just think they won't. Subtle but important difference between those two words.

Should I expect to see six of these on your next post?!?!

Let's put aside the fact I think he's an ordinary player at best. Obviously Geelong didn't think he was any good, or that his hamstrings wouldn't hold up, otherwise they wouldn't of traded him. Given he was on their list for 4-5 years, they should know. So the Swans wasted a spot on the list for an ordinary player with injury problems...that's a dud trade. As for dancing on his grave, that's crap..But if it floates your boat to ridiculously attack my motives because you don't agree with my criticism of him as a footballer...that's your issue.
You think the cats are chokers and won't win the flag, because they played badly in last years GF...I think your completely wrong, time will tell...So I assume you thought the same of the Swans after they played badly and lost the 06 GF? I think 'eeks' are appropriate this time.

[BSA5]

In reality we need to make room for Murphy and perhaps Orreal. Pyke and Gilchrist can stay as Rookies. Plus we need to make room for at least four draft picks.

At this stage only Leo, MOL and Fossie are sure exits. I have a sneaking suspicion that Kennelly will be back. Forget trades, as no club will want to trade with GC17 and WS18 (?) buggering future drafts trade. Hall won't be a trade as he will be out of contract and he'll be lucky if more that one club will want him anyway in preference to a draft pick. IF he goes it will be via the PSD. I suspect he'll stay.

So accommodate 2 rookies and four draft picks they need at least 6 exits. 3 are known already.

Trades for picks will be difficult, but not impossible. I could picture Collingwood, Bulldogs, Adelaide, Brisbane and maybe Carlton and Essendon being interested in ready-made players over draft picks, as these teams, with a Premiership window open or opening, will be looking to consolidation and challenging in September, rather than rebuilding, but aren't quite there yet. As such, the short-term draft concessions to GC and WS will have minimal effect on these teams. These will be the teams to focus on.

I can see us trying to upgrade a few picks. Perhaps something like Ablett and a 4th rounder to Collingwood for a 2nd rounder. The Pies lack a decent tagger. With the emergence of Jack and return to the side and to form (when not playing injured) of Crouch, Ablett has been forced to play as an extractor for the Swans, and this is not his strength, hence him dropping out of the side. Roos' new youth policy has not helped his cause. If used as a tagger at Collingwood, where rebuilding is not a priority and there are very few genuine taggers, he'd be a decent pickup, and worth a second round pick in a shallow draft.

Anyway, I digress. Of the guaranteed leavers, there is Fosdike, Leo and O'Loughlin. I think it's highly unlikely Kennelly will come back if he doesn't win the All Ireland title, and that's apparently looking extremely unlikely itself. So I feel safe adding Kennelly to that list.

DOK has shown some fine form in the ressies by all reports, after finally being able to string some games together. I would be surprised if he was cut, especially given the free ride Brabazon has had (which may yet prove to be beneficial). Laidlaw is in the same boat. MOD may be in trouble, but given some of his attributes (namely, SPEED), we may give him another year to work on his ball use. Crouch may retire, but it depends on his body. I personally don't think he'll be pushed.

I would say that we'll look very hard at putting our two eligible scholarship boys, Gordon and Bottin-Noonan (actually I think May is also technically eligible as a bottom-ager, but I read somewhere that the Swans, if everything goes right, will look at drafting him next year), straight onto the senior list. Gordon definitely. If we can do a couple of trades like the one I suggested above, upgrading a middle-tier pick for a higher one and getting rid of a lower one (thereby effectively downgrading it to the next one down), we'll have a few pretty high picks and a few pretty low picks. If the low picks are used on players that are preselected anyway (i.e. Scholarship players), then it doesn't matter where they are.

Where does Playfair fit into all of this? Well, basically, the poor depth of the draft, plus the fact that draft quality tends to flatten out after the second round or so, means I think we'll try to make use of rookie list on top of a few high choices. So I can see us cleaning out the senior list, upgrading a number of rookies (probably Murphy and Orreal, but Pyke and Gilchrist are both chances as well), and filling up the rookie list.

Say, through trading, we manage to pick up 3 picks in the first two rounds. Nothing too aggressive, as aggressive trading for picks will be near impossible, but just a bit of consolidation. No third rounder, maybe no fourth either, but 5th and so on. If the above strategies are taken to the extreme (I'm not saying they should, this is just to give context), we would keep the 3 top picks active, dedicate two of the bottom ones to Gordon and Bottin-Noonan, scrap the others and promote 4 rookies. That's a total of 9 list changes. I mentioned above four definite leavers in Fossie, Kennelly, O'Loughlin and Leo. That leaves 5 players that may or may not leave depending on how forcefully Roos adopts the strategies above (if at all). So, despite a number of retirements, GC and WS, and the shallow draft, there is still potential for quite a bit of delistment pressure. In my opinion, if Hall stays, Playfair is a definite out. Guys like Schmidt, DOK and Laidlaw would be ahead of him in the injured players category. The only way I can see him staying is if Roos takes a conservative approach to the draft, and Hall retires (leaving us a big man short). I don't think this would be the way to go.

If I was Roos and co, I would go try to upgrade our third rounder to a second rounder, dedicate one late pick to Gordon, put Bottin-Noonan on the rookie list, and elevate Murphy, Pyke and Orreal (if he's deemed up to it) or Gilchrist. That's a slightly more conservative 7 senior list changes, but it still leaves 3 changes on top of the definite leavers. If Hall was to go, that's 2 delistments. If the trade I mentioned at the start of this post (or something with a similar structure) happened, that's another senior player out, leaving one final delistment. For me, it has to be Crouch or Playfair, and I think Crouch has shown enough this year to be given another one, should he want it. We don't have any young back pockets developing, but we've got a few talls in Johnston, White, Murphy and Gilchrist, with Currie, Pyke and Orreal as ruckmen. The other factor to consider is the veterans list. Leo and Magic are both on the veterans list, and as such don't count on the senior list. Kirk can replace them there, so one of the losses is still counted in terms of room on the senior list, but the other one is iffy. If the Boltons, O'Keefe, Goodes, etc, can be added (you have to be 30, but it doesn't state whether that's 30 at the time of list lodgement, or turning 30 in the year applicable), then it's not an issue, but if they can't, Crouch is the only one who can (this is assuming Hall goes, remember). So delisting him/him retiring makes absolutely no difference to room on the list. All it does is give us an extra rookie (and given that we did not use our full quota last year, it seems unlikely this would make any difference anyway). Playfair's departure, on the other hand, would make room for an extra young player to make his way onto the senior list, whether that be by rookie elevation or drafting.

So basically, by my reckoning, I reckon the smart way to go would be to cut Henry adrift. He'll never be a power player, there are huge question marks over his ability to get on the park, and the other young guys on the fringes have a heap more potential. Best to cut our losses, which is a pity, because he was rather handy when fit, and if we were heading for a premiership in the near future he would have been a decent depth player.

[SwansFan1972]

You think the cats are chokers and won't win the flag, because they played badly in last years GF...I think your [sic] completely wrong, time will tell...So I assume you thought the same of the Swans after they played badly and lost the 06 GF? I think 'eeks' are appropriate this time.

Agree to disagree about cats - time will always tell. As for comparing what I think of them now to the Swans team of 2006 - what twaddle. You would be far out alone on a limb if you think a 1 point loss is a choke, but I'd never be so impolite to assume that is what you mean.

I'm happy to sit on the opposite side of the fence to you where the cats are concerned. You and their 07 premiership on one side, me and their 08 RUP on the other, with the ghosts of 97, 95, 92 and 89 floating around. One of us will have company come September 2009!

On Henry, I think there might still be a place for him and some goods to deliver. I may well be wrong. Time will tell ....

[SwansFan1972]

Trades for picks will be difficult, but not impossible. ...... decent depth player.

Phew! Hey, Eddie - we've been aced in the analysis department! Very detailed and interesting post - i'm not so confident about a spot for Henry after reading it!

Suffice to say, very interesting trade period coming up. And if any of us knew how to eliminate uncertainty in recruitment, we'd be making squillions somewhere recruiting super stars, rather than posting here!

BSA5 excepted - does the club use you in any capacity??!?!

[BSA5]

Phew! Hey, Eddie - we've been aced in the analysis department! Very detailed and interesting post - i'm not so confident about a spot for Henry after reading it!

Suffice to say, very interesting trade period coming up. And if any of us knew how to eliminate uncertainty in recruitment, we'd be making squillions somewhere recruiting super stars, rather than posting here!

BSA5 excepted - does the club use you in any capacity??!?!

I wish! I'm a uni student that still has assignments due, despite it being holidays (glandular fever is a bitch). Procrastination is a powerful, powerful thing.

[The Big Cat]

Bomber Thompson has stated that had he known Nathan Ablett was pulling the pin he would have kept Playfair (or Charlie Gardiner)

[Plugger46]

Bomber Thompson has stated that had he known Nathan Ablett was pulling the pin he would have kept Playfair (or Charlie Gardiner)

So? Not every player on their list is a gun. He kept Tenace too.

[ernie koala]

Bomber Thompson has stated that had he known Nathan Ablett was pulling the pin he would have kept Playfair (or Charlie Gardiner)

And that says it all, he had Gardiner and Playfair on par, and he would keep only one of them.