List changes and trade bait

[Reggi]

If our football department trade Mitchell will be our dumbest idea since trading Carey and Longmire.

[Melbournehammer]

The trade deal is not completely correct. Melbourne didn't trade pick 2 to GWS for Tyson. Melbourne traded pick 2, 20 and 72 for Tyson, 9 and 53. If we did a similar deal, it might involve melbourne's pick 2 and 2nd round (say 22) for mitchell and our 1st round (say 20). In which case we would miss out on Heeney.

Melbourne are after 2 for one deals - not a one for one deal. they want to get two top ten players for the one draft pick.

we are not in that market.

iirc roos was willing to offer the tigers picks 6 and 14 for 3 to get dustin martin. I still reckon that is madness from the clubs position with the two picks. two top 15 picks get you some top end talent - in our case rohan and jetta.

for us it is only a question of how many clubs might be willing to bid to make trades worthwhile. My concern remains if one club taps mitchell up our negotiations will resemble those where adelaide was negotiating with us re tippett and re hawthorn re gunston - ie negotiating from a position of horrible weakness

[liz]

My concern remains if one club taps mitchell up our negotiations will resemble those where adelaide was negotiating with us re tippett and re hawthorn re gunston - ie negotiating from a position of horrible weakness

Except that Tippett and Gunston were uncontracted and could leave under their own steam. Mitchell is not and can't.

The Swans are only going to trade Mitchell if they receive a very good offer AND Mitchell has indicated he has a strong desire to leave.

[Reggi]

Ibhave heard his dad say twice in recent weeks he is very happy in Sydney

[Ludwig]

My view, and Horses' from what he has said only a month or so ago, is that a fit Mitchell is definitely in our best 22.

His first ten odd games last year were fantastic...In his first game alone, he had something like 10 score involvements.

I think a few of you on here are forgetting just how good he was last year.

Lloyd has been really good in his first dozen odd games, but he's had nowhere near the impact Mitchell had last year.

So for mine the only question over Mitchell is injuries...

If our medicos and conditioning staff think his body's going to be fine in the long run, then I would hope, and expect, that we will keep him long term.

Mitchell had a big impact in his first several games, but gradually faded as the season went on. He was also fairly inaccurate in his goal kicking. No denying that Mitchell, when fit, has put in some eye-catching performances, but he may not be in our best 22 atm. Mitchell being a strong contested ball winner will rack up more possessions than Lloyd does, but Lloyd has put together a season where he has gradually improved as the season progressed. When Lloyd plays on-ball, which he rarely does in the seniors, he gets plenty of the footy; in the NEAFL he read the play very well at stoppages and was our midfield general. Anyway, it really isn't about comparing Mitchell and Lloyd.

Next year, and certainly by 2016, we will have 3 additional gun midfielders, perhaps all equal to or better than Mitchell, vying for full time spots, namely Jones, Hewett and Heeney. And they all can play on the inside. We are heading for a situation where the second best midfield in the AFL will be playing in the NEAFL; and this is where the problem lies.

Auntie Gerald has posted a list of midfielders with projections for incoming players, and I think this is the way to look at our situation concerning player movements. Take the list and try to decide who plays seniors, who plays reserves and who should be traded.

[Flying South]

I'm going to throw something out there that maybe a little controversial. If we have a glut of quality midfielder's why do we need to trade in Heeney? It seems that people want to get rid of Mitchell because if Heeney and Mills come in he will become surplus. Seems to me if we bring in Heeney, then he becomes surplus. Do we really know he will be better than what we have got?

Not sure if we can do this, but we declare we are going to use our 1st round pick 20 for Heeney. Most experts say he is a top 5 pick. Can we then actually trade Heeney to a another club like Melbourne for their pick 2?

As I said controversial because "Everyone Loves Heeney". Just throwing it out there for debate.

[Matt80]

Ibhave heard his dad say twice in recent weeks he is very happy in Sydney

That is true Reggi, but every political leader before they have seized the party?s leadership has said they are happy in their current position.

Barry Mitchell is not going to start a media storm by revealing Tom's true feelings. Tom may be happy in Sydney or he may not be happy in Sydney. Whatever Tom's feelings, Barry will feed the company line.

[Matt80]

I'm going to throw something out there that maybe a little controversial. If we have a glut of quality midfielder's why do we need to trade in Heeney? It seems that people want to get rid of Mitchell because if Heeney and Mills come in he will become surplus. Seems to me if we bring in Heeney, then he becomes surplus. Do we really know he will be better than what we have got?

Not sure if we can do this, but we declare we are going to use our 1st round pick 20 for Heeney. Most experts say he is a top 5 pick. Can we then actually trade Heeney to a another club like Melbourne for their pick 2?

As I said controversial because "Everyone Loves Heeney". Just throwing it out there for debate.

I asked this exact same question on another forum and Ugg gave me the answer that it can?t be done.

We bid for Heeney before the NAB draft, but he is not ratified as a Swans player until his name is called out in the draft.

[Melbournehammer]

Except that Tippett and Gunston were uncontracted and could leave under their own steam. Mitchell is not and can't.

The Swans are only going to trade Mitchell if they receive a very good offer AND Mitchell has indicated he has a strong desire to leave.

I agree with your point Liz, except 1. it can be problematic to hold players to contracts when they dont want to be held to them and 2. the pre-season draft is supposed to be a risk for players to enter hence reducing a player's freedom of contract until they reach free agency. In reality though players seem to be able to get to whatever club they want through the pre-season draft.

In any case you have to show (and to be fair horse has done this) that the player is a required player not just a player playing in the reserves because we hold the contractual rights. I have no reason to believe horse isnt doing the right thing here. This all comes back to the eternal list management question - is Tom rated highly enough by the swans coaching staff that he will push his way into the starting 22 with a few games and assuming only 1-2 midfield injuries and does tom want to stay in teh absence of an alternative offer.

Personally I think the jury is still out on 1 (and I may be in the minority here because there are a lot of swans fans who rate him very very highly) and i sincerely hope 2 is true.

[Reggi]

That is true Reggi, but every political leader before they have seized the party?s leadership has said they are happy in their current position.

Barry Mitchell is not going to start a media storm by revealing Tom's true feelings. Tom may be happy in Sydney or he may not be happy in Sydney. Whatever Tom's feelings, Barry will feed the company line.

I will be very direct. You speak utter @@@@

[Melbournehammer]

Mitchell had a big impact in his first several games, but gradually faded as the season went on. He was also fairly inaccurate in his goal kicking. No denying that Mitchell, when fit, has put in some eye-catching performances, but he may not be in our best 22 atm. Mitchell being a strong contested ball winner will rack up more possessions than Lloyd does, but Lloyd has put together a season where he has gradually improved as the season progressed. When Lloyd plays on-ball, which he rarely does in the seniors, he gets plenty of the footy; in the NEAFL he read the play very well at stoppages and was our midfield general. Anyway, it really isn't about comparing Mitchell and Lloyd.

Next year, and certainly by 2016, we will have 3 additional gun midfielders, perhaps all equal to or better than Mitchell, vying for full time spots, namely Jones, Hewett and Heeney. And they all can play on the inside. We are heading for a situation where the second best midfield in the AFL will be playing in the NEAFL; and this is where the problem lies.

Auntie Gerald has posted a list of midfielders with projections for incoming players, and I think this is the way to look at our situation concerning player movements. Take the list and try to decide who plays seniors, who plays reserves and who should be traded.

I thought this could be said with his kicking generally. his hands are good but his kicking is just OK for a midfielder.

but it is early days for a player like him.

[Swansongster]

I'm going to throw something out there that maybe a little controversial. If we have a glut of quality midfielder's why do we need to trade in Heeney? It seems that people want to get rid of Mitchell because if Heeney and Mills come in he will become surplus. Seems to me if we bring in Heeney, then he becomes surplus. Do we really know he will be better than what we have got?

Not sure if we can do this, but we declare we are going to use our 1st round pick 20 for Heeney. Most experts say he is a top 5 pick. Can we then actually trade Heeney to a another club like Melbourne for their pick 2?

As I said controversial because "Everyone Loves Heeney". Just throwing it out there for debate.

Pretty sure Roos said he wants an established/proven player (or two) for pick 2.

Meanwhile, Heeney has to come to the Swans for mine. It would be a manifestation of all the good reasons why the academy should exist. Local boy given all the required mentoring and coaching opportunities to play the big stage for his home team in a developing market for AFL.

I think there should be more tribalism in AFL. Indeed, I believe all clubs should have the opportunity to grow and harvest their own whether they be Father/Sons, local juniors or even just passionate supporters. I don't have the answers to what framework needs to be constructed around the management of such a system for fairness to all, I just think tribes should have some opportunity to stick together.

[Melbournehammer]

I will be very direct. You speak utter @@@@

matt cops an unfair level of criticism here, and i happen to agree with him. You should neither accept or reject what players say about their club and coaches. They say what is necessary to say in public. and that goes for their families too.

it might be true that he is incredibly happy at sydney. In 2012 i remember watching gary rohan sprint past me in the clubs gear to be one of the first onto the ground when they won the flag. I assumed he was incredibly happy. But I also saw trent dennis lane do the same thing and he was traded a few weeks later.

you will never really know what is going on behind the scenes unless you have really good access. But I once dealt with a player in a different code who was told he would never play firsts again after publicly criticising his coach. it just doesnt happen if you are wise.

[Flying South]

I will be very direct. You speak utter @@@@

I thought matt made a reasonable point.

[Swansongster]

I thought matt made a reasonable point.

Me too. However, Matt, I would request that you stop referring to the National draft by its AFL-commercialised nomenclature. I hate that.

I am looking forward to going to Docklands on Sunday and getting to Homebush (or The Olympic Stadium) for a prelim final.

Just sayin'.