2017 trading, drafting, list management

[707]

The post above says Murray, not Fisher.

Sorry, late at night and the bottle of Shiraz appears to be empty, hmm! Anyway, chasing rookies is interesting.

So summary of the first day is that we have a lot of deals not happening because no one wants to do fair trades. Dogs want a top 10 pick for Stringer but will accept Dons pick 11 but as usual Dons want something extra. GWS want a first rounder for Devon Smith but Dons only want to give a second rounder about 30. Hawks say they've got Impey but Port say more work to do. That's what happens when you burn two years of draft picks in one trading period.

However the positive news is SOS is weaving his magic and seems to be getting Kennedy for a 2019 second rounder?

Swans look to be bystanders, of players on offer, do any one of them look to be a must have for us? Still think we'll do something with picks to grease the rails elsewhere and strengthen our 2019 position.

[ugg]

@DanielCherny

Collingwood interest in Sydney rookie Sam Murray. Been offered a 3rd yr rookie deal by Swans, if no primary list offer he can walk to Pies.

Will be hard for Murray to turn that down you would think.

[Scottee]

The post above says Murray, not Fisher.

Godda keep both Sams.

Sam M has had lots of development invested in him already. Large mid, booming kick, fastest runner in the ressies.Should break through in 2018.

Sam F a real gut runner and ball magnet and very young. Plenty of improvement to come.

Sent from my SM-T805Y using Tapatalk

[liz]

With senior list spots pretty tight, I can see why the Swans would prefer to keep him on the rookie list, though with changes to the playing rules for rookies next year the distinction is getting very blurry.

I'm not yet sure whether he looks like a senior AFL player in the making but

a) he has the attributes to fill a role in the senior team that we don't really have at the moment - aggressive, quick, hard running HBF
b) his rate of improvement since he joined the club has been impressive, and he probably improved over the course of 2017 more than any other rookie player on our list, though his form was interrupted by a late season injury and he didn't really get back to the same level when he returned.

We lost a similar player in Biggs a few seasons ago, and he's gone on to produce some reasonable footy for the Bulldogs. Murray is a bit quicker and I think his kicking is better. He's also deceptively tall and his defensive work has been quite good this year. With Laidler's retirement opening up another senior list spot and no apparent trade-in targets, I think he's worth upgrading if that's what it takes to keep him.

[RogueSwan]

...
a) he has the attributes to fill a role in the senior team that we don't really have at the moment - aggressive, quick, hard running HBF
...

Newman? Maybe not as quick?

[liz]

Newman? Maybe not as quick?

I don't think Newman is particularly quick. He certainly doesn't take the game on with his running in the same way as Murray (and didn't at NEAFL level either, just to compare apples with apples). Jones does, but I think Jones is of more value in the midfield than as a permanent half-back-flanker.

[707]

We have four+ vacancies on the senior list and only the one obvious upgrade in Melican. Our third pick will drift out to the early 50s by the time FA compo picks are pushed into the order below us.

So the decision for the club is whether Murray with two years of Swans development is a better bet than an 18yo with pick 51/52 in the draft. I know which way I'd lean.

[Ludwig]

I agree with Liz' evaluation of Murray. I think we should try to keep him if we can, but he's no certainty to make it at AFL level. Also, Newman's pace is okay, but he's no line breaker. Murray is a line breaker at NEAFL level, but I'm not sure how he would go at AFL level.

I thought we had enough senior space to elevate either Murray or COR, but think COR would be the better choice. I doubt if that decision has been made and we don't know what O'Riordan would be thinking if he has to spend another year on the rookie list. With a the LTIL being reduced to 6 weeks, there will be more playing opportunities available for Cat B rookies. There's nothing preventing us from paying rookies above the AFL base, if that's the difference in keeping Murray at the Swans.

If we want to keep Murray with a senior contract there are several options open. We can delist Johnson and redraft him as a rookie. We can also delist Rose, McVeigh or Tippett. I don't think anyone would take them in the ND, then we can redraft them as rookies to fulfill their contracts. And if anyone takes them, it's no big loss. In fact, I don't see why we don't try to rookie Tippett so that we can exclude half his salary from the TPP, unless that only works for kid rookies.

The way the Pies have been going they're probably offering Murray a 4 year $2 million contract. I think he has more to offer than Chris Mayne.


PS: And 707: Put the bottle down. We're still only in 2017 and you're taking about trading 2019 draft picks. I've heard of people losing a day, but a whole year. Now that's a Class A bender.

[CureTheSane]

I saw somewhere that Rampe was our fastest during game time.
This surprised me.

[longmile]

I saw somewhere that Rampe was our fastest during game time.
This surprised me.

You mean he was registered as hitting the fastest speed during a game? He's always been known for his elite closing speed as a defender but this is suprising. He strikes me as one of those players with quick acceleration but over 100-200m wouldn't be as fast as other players

[waswan]

I saw somewhere that Rampe was our fastest during game time.
This surprised me.

If only we had others to play key defence we could use his run off the hbf

[CureTheSane]

You mean he was registered as hitting the fastest speed during a game? He's always been known for his elite closing speed as a defender but this is suprising. He strikes me as one of those players with quick acceleration but over 100-200m wouldn't be as fast as other players

Yeah I think it was that.
Was afl.com who rated the fastest at each club

[707]

We don't need to pull any other strings moving people to rookie lists, already have four vacancies plus two we choose not to fill for cap reasons.

38 minus BJ, Leonardis, Talia, Laidler = 34 = Melican = 35. Can have up to 40 on the senior list. I reiterate that our third pick at 51/52 is highly speculative.

You can't delist contracted players like Rose, Tippett etc without them agreeing and I can't see that happening. We have enough vacant positions.

[S.S. Bleeder]

Hmmm. Tippett to GWS if we pay a large amount of his salary? They need someone to step into the breach after Mummy's retirement.

[Ludwig]

I don't think delisting contracted players is expressly prohibited in the CBA, but perhaps it's part of a standard player contract or even some specific contracts. I know contracted players have to be paid out their contracts if they are delisted. There was the Joel Patful delisting and redrafting as a rookie which was connected to contractual considerations.

I agree with 707 that pick 51 is not of much value and can be used for a player upgrade if needed.

Thinking about our current list, I would place Murray in the bottom 3 players, along with Ronke and Pink. It's going to be hard to keep these kind of players if another club is willing to give them immediate senior playing opportunities and a better contract.

Murray sounds like a good fit for Gold Coast, considering that they are losing a similar player in Adam Saad. If Stewie Dew rates him, GC would be in the drivers seat if they want him. Murray can turn down our contract, delist himself and go into the PSD where GC have a pick before Collingwood.