Rookies

[Matt80]

Surely football clearly shows that you shouldn't trade solely on the basis of 'potential' and 'opportunity.' Tom Mitchell is far from disproven at the top level. His numbers so far are what you'd expect from a young midfielder - a bit up and down, but very promising (much like Parker was in his 1st season). If he was a hack and not up to it, I'd be all for trading for him.

But, and I think its a matter of when not if, Mitchell begins to consistently reproduce his junior/reserves form in the top league, then he is going to be an elite midfielder. We would be absolutely crazy to trade him, just on the basis that we think heeney has lots of potential, and that we need to give opportunities to other youngsters.

Its hard to win premierships without depth, and without significant competition for places. I always think, in the end, the cream will rise to the top. If Heeney is as good as everyone thinks, and for instance Zak Jones is so good, then they will work hard and get themselves to a position where they are clearly a member of the Best 22 at the club, and hence get a game in the Seniors. I don't think list management should be played upon 'hypotheticals' - that is a very risky game indeed.

. IMO, if you are going to trade players, it should only ever be absolute hacks, players that want to leave, or big names if you are offered ridiculous currency for them (no one is every irreplacable). You shouldn't trade players, especially ones of the potential quality of Tom mitchell, just for the sake of providing 'opportunities' for others. You trade players for that reason if they are 'list cloggers', and I'm happy to conclude that a player that got 64 touches in a game (NEAFL I know, but still!) is not in that category.

Some great points MCS. I will put this argument to you. Josh Kennedy is now being spoken off as the Greatest Ever Swans Midfielder. Five years ago at the Hawks he was not able to raise to the top. He played under 10 games and could not find away to get regular games. He needed senior game time to be great and he found that with us.

Mitchell needs senior game time to become great. I hope he can get back in. Craig Bird or Jake Lloyd are playing well and should not be made to make way for him.

One thing is for certain, I don't think the Swans can hang on to great talent to fill the reserves side. Some of the players need senior opportunity and sooner or later we need to get higher in the draft.

[mcs]

Some great points MCS. I will put this argument to you. Josh Kennedy is now being spoken off as the Greatest Ever Swans Midfielder. Five years ago at the Hawks he was not able to raise to the top. He played under 10 games and could not find away to get regular games. He needed senior game time to be great and he found that with us.

Mitchell needs senior game time to become great. I hope he can get back in. Craig Bird or Jake Lloyd are playing well and should not be made to make way for him.

One thing is for certain, I don't think the Swans can hang on to great talent to fill the reserves side. Some of the players need senior opportunity and sooner or later we need to get higher in the draft.

I don't know enough about the Kennedy situation, btu I think he would come under, from hawthorn's point of view, being a player they would have loved to keep, but left because he was offered a better opportunity elsewhere, and clearly more $$$. If such a situation happened with a player like Mitchell, Lloyd whoever, and they wanted to take it, then I don't really see a problem. I guess the difference is what is the prerogative - is it the player taking a better offer from elsewhere, or is it the club actively looking to get rid of. I don't think Kennedy was being actively shopped around by the Hawks!

If we can keep a deep list with lots of talent in the reserve side, then surely if the talent is good enough, it'll find its way to the top and into the first 22. Geelong is a great example of this - but to create opportunity the Cats are not one for dumping young talen to make way for more young talent. they do it by making the hard calls on older players, even earlier than other clubs would (i.e. chapman). Thus allowing their list to consistently regenerate without hitting a 'wall' when a bunch of old players go. That is where our strategy should also lie, not looking to dink around trading young players with plenty of talent, but making sure, that if the hard calls have to be made in regards to older players (as it seems to have been done with ROK), then they are made.

[magic.merkin]

Kennedy was offered another 1 year deal at Hawthorn, but Clarko didn't discourage him to take our offer as he said he would still be a backup at Hawthorn and they couldn't match the deal.

better info:

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/thirdgeneration-hawk-flies-high-up-north-20110915-1kbxg.html

[Auntie.Gerald]

with the reduction in interchange bit by bit the for the oncoming season maybe an extra midfielder will be on the paddock compared to talls anyway ?

[rojo]

McVeigh, Jack, Kennedy, Hanners, Parker, McGlynn, Bird, Jets, Mitchell, Cunningham, Lloyd - are our current best 22 mids/small forwards and will be for the next three years at least. One of these is going to have to miss out each week this year if there are no injuries and it looks like it will have to be Lloyd if Mitchell is back to his best. This is the on-going dilemma we now have. We had to let go of Lamb last year. More tough decisions coming up!

I recently heard Guy McKenna speaking about having to cut back the Suns list each year and how difficult it was to know which good young players to keep and which to trade on. Mitchell, Lloyd, Cunningham, and throw BJ in there too, each have different skill sets. Is it a case of which have the skill sets our team needs, or does Mitchell's quality track record override even if we have enough inside mids already?






l

[Matt80]

[QUOTE=rojo;641370]McVeigh, Jack, Kennedy, Hanners, Parker, McGlynn, Bird, Jets, Mitchell, Cunningham, Lloyd - are our current best 22 mids/small forwards and will be for the next three years at least. One of these is going to have to miss out each week this year if there are no injuries and it looks like it will have to be Lloyd if Mitchell is back to his best. This is the on-going dilemma we now have. We had to let go of Lamb last year. More tough decisions coming up!

I recently heard Guy McKenna speaking about having to cut back the Suns list each year and how difficult it was to know which good young players to keep and which to trade on. Mitchell, Lloyd, Cunningham, and throw BJ in there too, each have different skill sets. Is it a case of which have the skill sets our team needs, or does Mitchell's quality track record override even if we have enough inside mids already?

I think the Swans need to also look at the monetary situation of players. Rookies who can come in and do a job like Lloyd are always going to cost less than a Mitchell. Rookies come off a lower pay base with the primary aim of getting on the senior list. They are therefore likely to accept a low base contract offer to join the senior list. It will take them a couple of years of good senior football to work up their monetary levels off this low base.

Someone like Mitchell who is a 1st round draft pick, a highly rated junior and with some good senior games in 2013 where he was nominated for the NAB rising star would demand a much bigger contract than a newly upgraded rookie.

Lloyd's output and improvement at senior level is very encouraging and he is not costing the Swans big money.

These are considerations that need to be taken into account.

[DK_]

with the reduction in interchange bit by bit the for the oncoming season maybe an extra midfielder will be on the paddock compared to talls anyway ?

Or mids just outside the best 22 may get rotated through more to keep everyone fit and fresh.