2018 trading, drafting and list management: players and personnel

[Ludwig]

The talk in the media has been about how the Swans are forever this slow contested ball team that never changes and has fallen behind quicker teams like Richmond. This is simply incorrect.

The Swans have been transitioning to a side that tries to move the ball quicker and we showed our intent to do this for quite a few years. Sometimes things don't work out the way you want. To site one example,Longmire and us supporters were very hopeful that Brandon Jack would make the grade. He was quick, but just not a good enough footballer. Same can be said for Hiscox. If only Rohan could be more productive and Towers use his speed to greater advantage.

Draft years 2014 and 2015 offered up 2 great academy kids who are well on their way to being elite players, but neither has line breaking pace. We might have used those draft years to target some quicker players, but I doubt they would be in the class of Mills and Heeney. Luckily we did manage to draft the speedy Papley in 2015.

In 2016 we made a bold move that looks to be paying off. We traded an elite inside midfielder in Tom Mitchell to put us in a position to draft 2 quick and talented players in Florent and Hayward. We also did some fine recruiting in taking Ronke in the rookie draft. It's not often that a team recruits 3 talented players with great pace in one year, but we did it.

We followed up the next year by drafting Ling and Stoddart, both very fast players.

In a couple of years we will be one of the quickest teams in the AFL, with speed on every line. The midfield will be well served with plenty of the usual types of contested ball winners in Kennedy, Parker, Hannebery, Hewett, Heeney, Mills, Jones and Dawson. That's a lot of ball winning talent.

We've been rebuilding on the run. We've been struck down with so many injuries to key players this year. Not only to established players like Reid and Hannebery, but also to Dawson, Melican, Ling, Johnson and Foote (who started the year looking quite an improved player). Despite this injury blight, we still find ourselves in 4th place. We probably are not good enough to win a premiership this year, but we've made a good run so far, all things considered.

When I look at our list I see a lot of talent spread across all lines. I may not agree with every decision made by the football department, but I think they've done a fantastic job during the Longmire period. We're still challenging for the cup. We haven't missed finals. And I think we still have a couple of years to go before seeing the best of our young and talented list. I'm not at all worried about the post-Buddy period. We've got that covered already.

It's important to look at the big picture and see how things are evolving. It's unrealistic to think we should be premiers every year. A lot has to go right to win even once. Geelong and Hawthorn, the other 2 clubs that have had done exceptionally well during the past dozen years, have given up a lot of draft picks just to try to stay in touch with the 8. I like our chances more than theirs going forward.

[The Big Cat]

I said it then and I'll say it again. That was the biggest trade mistake we've made in decades. We would have been better fitting him in best we can and trading Hanners or Parker at the time or the following season. We also should have had the vision to plan for his contract in the years prior.

Hold on! Isn't everybody hinting that the last thing we need is another slow inside mid?

[Flying South]

Not sure if this is doable. But I think we should try to target Fremantles pick 6. Their only other pick is 78. So they will be looking to get into the draft a lot more. In a deep draft, maybe we could bundle up some picks to entice them. I'm thinking
1. Try for GCS pick 17. Maybe Lloyd could get that trade done. Dreaming???
2. Trade pick our 15 and the Collingwood 2nd rounder (33ish) to Freo for pick 6. Dreaming again? What could get it done?

Use pick 6 to trade in the best inside bull in this draft Jackson Hately. Played 7 or 8 games for Central Districts and averaging over 20 possessions. Not bad for a 17yo kid. I really like the SANFL kids that are playing senior footy. They're tough. Has an afl ready body 190 and 80kg. Jackson could come straight into our team next year. With Kennedy, Dawson and Hately that gives us a big inside midfield trio. Hannebery, Parker and Hewett can provide support via rotations. Enabling Heeney, Mills and Florent to provide the outside polish.

I doubt anyone would bid on Blakey before pick 6, so our remaining pick 17 should be enough to get the job done.

Maybe I'm dreaming, but anyone have any other ideas to get us another high 1st round pick?

[Faunac8]

I haven’t seen this posted anywhere else on the site but apologies if I am doubling up. AA resigning for three more years continues some great work by the club in locking away some youth for the future . Great news that sadly probably doesn’t bode well for Reg in 2019
Aliir Aliir signs on - sydneyswans.com.au

[Auntie.Gerald]

I don’t quite agree Ludwig

When playing AFL you always match up individually and you are aware immediately whether u feel you can push ahead of your player more then they can seperate from you

I played wing till 18yrs then Forward pocket thereafter and it was something that I was aware of in a nano second - the speed or lack of speed of your direct opponent

One of the greatest strengths of a team is if indv players can push ahead of their opposition player and create spare men in attack with minimal risk

Nothing kills game plan more then extra players getting ahead of the ball and they manage to lose their opponent plus keep possession

I know it sounds basic but it is imprinted on u as an AFL player that in attack create seperation and an extra player in attack and in defence do not lose your man

The teams that have the speed and cardio to do this week in week out win if they kick straight.

The last 3 years “when it has counted” this has been executed against us and we have fallen

2016 Bulldogs did it to us via their HBFs and midfield

Last year initially and at the end of the season in the finals , teams took the risk of flooding forward against ahead of the contest breaking hard and we couldn’t go with them because we didn’t have the speed to anticipate this

I still feel that most teams know that if they can win the contest they can break faster then us

We have a lot of players that are warriors but not fast


Kennedy
Parker
Hewett
Hannes
Jack
Smith
Newman
Grundy
Etc

Our recruitment has been one way last couple years to add speed and it’s chabging but I don’t feel fast enough yet with experience

[S.S. Bleeder]

Hold on! Isn't everybody hinting that the last thing we need is another slow inside mid?

Yes, but my point was that we should have given up Hanners or Parker in the process. Mitchell is better than both of them and could have replaced Kennedy when he retires.

[liz]

Yes, but my point was that we should have given up Hanners or Parker in the process. Mitchell is better than both of them and could have replaced Kennedy when he retires.

He wasn't better than both of them in 2016. They were both All Australians that year. For Hannebery it was his third AA guernsey, something Mitchell hasn't yet achieved.

Hannebery has clearly been affected by injury for the past two seasons, something that couldn't have been anticipated when Mitchell was traded (and he'd made up his mind to leave long before Wood clattered into Hannebery's knee in the 2016 GF). Parker was also significantly affected by a knee issue (or lack of pre-season arising from a knee injury) in 2017 yet still finished the season strongly enough to win a B&F in a team that finished higher on the ladder than Mitchell's team.

And while Mitchell is a good player who has won heaps of the ball for his team over the past two seasons (though not as many games for them), I don't think his package of attributes is more attractive than that offered by Parker or Hannebery. Parker's marking and forward line prowess, for example, gives him a dimension Mitchell doesn't have. And in the final quarter of last week's game he showed he can generate clearances that actually get the ball moving forward just as well as Mitchell. He just doesn't spend as long doing it as Mitchell does in his team. I agree 2018 hasn't been one of Parker's most consistent seasons but he's still been a pretty good player.

And then there's the fact that both Hannebery and Parker were contracted. Mitchell wasn't. Mitchell exercised his option to leave. The Swans maybe didn't try overly hard to keep him but nor did they push him out.


Mitchell would be a poor replacement for Kennedy. He gets a lot of the ball but I've never seen him completely dominate portions of games in the way Kennedy can. Of course, if he were still on our list when Kennedy retires, he'd take over more of the centre bounce work, and he'd win clearances in his own way. But he wouldn't be a "replacement" as such.

[Markwebbos]

Not sure this is entirely the right thread for this, but Derm has criticised Horses defensive game plan.

Category: | Herald Sun

John Longmire needs to change his ways or risk another season coming up short in finals, writes Dermott Brereton.

THERE is much to admire about Sydney. There has been for a long time.

The Swans have compiled an excellent list and their coaching staff, led by an A-Grade football citizen, is very solid, but last Saturday raised questions that have been ignored for some time.

Everyone within a club is beholden to do the right thing by the club. So if I was a Swans’ board member I would ask the director sitting next to me: “Is this really the way we want to play?”

...

It is as if Sydney coach John Longmire is so set in his ways, the ways of his predecessor Paul Roos, that he refuses to change his team’s style even as that team evolves.

What is bewildering is why the Swans would pay a king’s ransom to get a freakish forward — Buddy — and still play a style that produces 12 goals on a good day.

Especially when whichever way you want to slice and dice it, since Franklin landed at the Swans their salary cap has not allowed them to retain Shane Mumford, Lewis Jetta, Toby Nankervis and Tom Mitchell.

The Swans won a premiership and then added Franklin. So why the insistence on playing dour, defend-at-all-costs football in their back half?

Buddy has been brilliant, but how much more brilliant might he have been if the Longmire-led Swans played a brand that complemented him? What if they placed more emphasis on keeping the ball in attack, rather than protecting the backline at all costs?

[Blue Sun]

Not sure this is entirely the right thread for this, but Derm has criticised Horses defensive game plan.

Category: | Herald Sun

John Longmire needs to change his ways or risk another season coming up short in finals, writes Dermott Brereton.

THERE is much to admire about Sydney. There has been for a long time.

The Swans have compiled an excellent list and their coaching staff, led by an A-Grade football citizen, is very solid, but last Saturday raised questions that have been ignored for some time.

Everyone within a club is beholden to do the right thing by the club. So if I was a Swans’ board member I would ask the director sitting next to me: “Is this really the way we want to play?”

...

It is as if Sydney coach John Longmire is so set in his ways, the ways of his predecessor Paul Roos, that he refuses to change his team’s style even as that team evolves.

What is bewildering is why the Swans would pay a king’s ransom to get a freakish forward — Buddy — and still play a style that produces 12 goals on a good day.

Especially when whichever way you want to slice and dice it, since Franklin landed at the Swans their salary cap has not allowed them to retain Shane Mumford, Lewis Jetta, Toby Nankervis and Tom Mitchell.

The Swans won a premiership and then added Franklin. So why the insistence on playing dour, defend-at-all-costs football in their back half?

Buddy has been brilliant, but how much more brilliant might he have been if the Longmire-led Swans played a brand that complemented him? What if they placed more emphasis on keeping the ball in attack, rather than protecting the backline at all costs?

Gee whiz, not too far off the mark from Derm, though I do feel the Swan's lack the pace to play 'all guns blazing' type attacking football, so we instead play more defensively. Perhaps the game plan will become more attacking once the likes of Heeney, Mills, Florent, Hayward and co. become more experienced and confident in their ability to break the lines and hit-up targets.

[stevoswan]

Not sure this is entirely the right thread for this, but Derm has criticised Horses defensive game plan.

Category: | Herald Sun

John Longmire needs to change his ways or risk another season coming up short in finals, writes Dermott Brereton.

THERE is much to admire about Sydney. There has been for a long time.

The Swans have compiled an excellent list and their coaching staff, led by an A-Grade football citizen, is very solid, but last Saturday raised questions that have been ignored for some time.

Everyone within a club is beholden to do the right thing by the club. So if I was a Swans’ board member I would ask the director sitting next to me: “Is this really the way we want to play?”

...

It is as if Sydney coach John Longmire is so set in his ways, the ways of his predecessor Paul Roos, that he refuses to change his team’s style even as that team evolves.

What is bewildering is why the Swans would pay a king’s ransom to get a freakish forward — Buddy — and still play a style that produces 12 goals on a good day.

Especially when whichever way you want to slice and dice it, since Franklin landed at the Swans their salary cap has not allowed them to retain Shane Mumford, Lewis Jetta, Toby Nankervis and Tom Mitchell.

The Swans won a premiership and then added Franklin. So why the insistence on playing dour, defend-at-all-costs football in their back half?

Buddy has been brilliant, but how much more brilliant might he have been if the Longmire-led Swans played a brand that complemented him? What if they placed more emphasis on keeping the ball in attack, rather than protecting the backline at all costs?

I read that article at work today and I think it is one of the best articles Derm has written......I agree with virtually all of it.

Barrett (who is a tool) somewhat agrees....."If there's one thing we're not going to let go ...

then it is this: until Buddy is allowed to be the player this club recruited, and not just one member of a 22-man outfit, the Swans are going nowhere."

I don't totally agree with that assumption but somethings do need to change.....

[Blood Fever]

Not sure this is entirely the right thread for this, but Derm has criticised Horses defensive game plan.

Category: | Herald Sun

John Longmire needs to change his ways or risk another season coming up short in finals, writes Dermott Brereton.

THERE is much to admire about Sydney. There has been for a long time.

The Swans have compiled an excellent list and their coaching staff, led by an A-Grade football citizen, is very solid, but last Saturday raised questions that have been ignored for some time.

Everyone within a club is beholden to do the right thing by the club. So if I was a Swans’ board member I would ask the director sitting next to me: “Is this really the way we want to play?”

...

It is as if Sydney coach John Longmire is so set in his ways, the ways of his predecessor Paul Roos, that he refuses to change his team’s style even as that team evolves.

What is bewildering is why the Swans would pay a king’s ransom to get a freakish forward — Buddy — and still play a style that produces 12 goals on a good day.

Especially when whichever way you want to slice and dice it, since Franklin landed at the Swans their salary cap has not allowed them to retain Shane Mumford, Lewis Jetta, Toby Nankervis and Tom Mitchell.

The Swans won a premiership and then added Franklin. So why the insistence on playing dour, defend-at-all-costs football in their back half?

Buddy has been brilliant, but how much more brilliant might he have been if the Longmire-led Swans played a brand that complemented him? What if they placed more emphasis on keeping the ball in attack, rather than protecting the backline at all costs?

Shallow analysis. We have been trying to change our style to a degree. Brereton's article makes out it is easy to score by playing through Buddy as if defensive structures haven't changed since his playing days. As if we want the opposition to have more I50s than us. The best teams have a good defence as well as the ability to score. Game is won and lost in midfield and with Jack and Hanneberry out as well as young players, we are less consistent. No mention of this from Dermott, just simplistic stuff.

[stevoswan]

Shallow analysis. We have been trying to change our style to a degree. Brereton's article makes out it is easy to score by playing through Buddy as if defensive structures haven't changed since his playing days. As if we want the opposition to have more I50s than us. The best teams have a good defence as well as the ability to score. Game is won and lost in midfield and with Jack and Hanneberry out as well as young players, we are less consistent. No mention of this from Dermott, just simplistic stuff.

....but I do agree with him that our game plan is too defensive.

[Blood Fever]

....but I do agree with him that our game plan is too defensive.

Like two weeks ago v North in what media described in one of the matches of the year? That is how we want to play - defensively sound with the ability to move the ball quickly to score. That is what happened 2 weeks ago and that is what we want to achieve. Some games it doesn't work because of other team's pressure and effort etc.

[AB Swannie]

Like two weeks ago v North in what media described in one of the matches of the year? That is how we want to play - defensively sound with the ability to move the ball quickly to score. That is what happened 2 weeks ago and that is what we want to achieve. Some games it doesn't work because of other team's pressure and effort etc.

I also think we tried to play like that last week. We were very open and speedy in the first quarter and tried to keep going that way but were just completely awful with our disposal. I think someone quoted that we had a disposal efficiency of 40%. Nothing to do with game style, selections, or plan B - just horrible football.

[Blood Fever]

I also think we tried to play like that last week. We were very open and speedy in the first quarter and tried to keep going that way but were just completely awful with our disposal. I think someone quoted that we had a disposal efficiency of 40%. Nothing to do with game style, selections, or plan B - just horrible football.

+1