2018 trading, drafting and list management: players and personnel

[Ludwig]

Yep - we are stuffed if we have any reasonable number of injuries, and it could get ugly if there are a lot of injuries and our biggest names are among them. But with a decent run and more development from the younger players, it can be OK.

I don't think our depth is all that big a problem. I tried to come up with the best team without either the 4 2019 out of contract over 30s, Macca, Reg, Smith and Jack, or the draftees from 2017 and 2018, McCartin, Ling, Stoddart and Blakey. So can we field a good team missing 8 decent players from both ends of the age demographic? Here it is:


FB: Thurlow, Melican, Aliir
HB: O'Riordan, Rampe, Lloyd
C: Mills, Kennedy, Jones
R: Cameron, Parker, Heeney
HF: Hayward, Reid, Dawson
FF: Ronke, Franklin, Papley
INT: Florent, Cunningham, Clarke, Hewett

There's also Naismith and Sinclair not included. So if a club can go into the season with 32 players probably good enough to play AFL football, then it must have some decent depth. It doesn't mean that the club is necessarily even good enought to make the eight, but it does mean that we should be able to select a competitve side if they go out and play solid, hard and spirited footy.

[liz]

A lot can happen with open slather on trading picks, but if things stand as it is now, and Blakey goes at pick 7 or later, then our 3 late picks will actually drop to at least 39-40-41, because Quaynor and Thomas will get matched by Collingwood and North, respectively, with picks after our pick 40, so everyone will drop down 2 slots. But we could move back up to our starting postion if Rhylee West goes to the Buildogs at higher than pick 18, which will be a close one.

I've seen one phantom draft that had our picks 38-40 landing up past the 50 mark due to the number of FS and academy players taken beforehand. Blakey and Thomas have had most of the attention but there are quite a lot of potential priority access players available to clubs this year. I suspect not as many will be bid upon in the first 40 or so picks as this phantom drafter assumed, but as well as the two mentioned, plus West and Quaynor, there are players like Cameron, Scott, Brownless, Kelly, McFayden, Briggs, Khamis. Predictions of where most of these players will be bid upon seem to vary wildly.

[Ludwig]

I've seen one phantom draft that had our picks 38-40 landing up past the 50 mark due to the number of FS and academy players taken beforehand. Blakey and Thomas have had most of the attention but there are quite a lot of potential priority access players available to clubs this year. I suspect not as many will be bid upon in the first 40 or so picks as this phantom drafter assumed, but as well as the two mentioned, plus West and Quaynor, there are players like Cameron, Scott, Brownless, Kelly, McFayden, Briggs, Khamis. Predictions of where most of these players will be bid upon seem to vary wildly.

I tried to consider those players most likely to get bids before pick 38. Quaynor and Thomas has to drop back everyone after their matched bids because the first selection either Collingwood or North has is pick 41, so there's no extra caluculating to do, as far as our picks are concerned. Rhylee West is the one that could affect us because he's in the range where the Bulldogs might have to use 2 of their 2nd round picks to match the bid. I didn't consider Khamis, but he is also likely to get a bid before the Bulldogs second 2nd round pick, and if that happens, then it's wash, with the Bulldogs using both second round picks for their 2 priority selection players.

It doesn't really matter if we drop back a slot or 2 if it arises due to a matched bid in the 1st 2 rounds for players that shouldn't get drafted before the 3rd round. Who cares if say Collingwood uses picks in the 50s to match a bid on Kelly at pick 35, and we drop back a slot as a result. It has no effective impact as it's really a 3rd round quality player getting picked early using 3rd round picks. Another wash.

I have no idea how much pick trading will eventuate. If there is a lot, it could have an impact. It will interesting to see the first go around this year.

[sharp9]

Indeed, our recent history suggests it's not a great route for us.


I hope that is still true of the Swans, it certainly was in the past) - but I think we can only assume/hope it still applies today (actual evidence will only emerge with the passage of time).


A good positive piece, although the publication date makes it look a little post-facto.



On a less sombre note, regarding the midfield, I sometimes think there's a self fulfilling meme that anyone good should end up in the midfield. There's been lots of talk about freeing up Jones and Mills for the midfield.

I love the way Jones plays the wing, and hope he is released from the backline permanently. He reminds me so much of Stewie Maxfield. The both play/ed with such fury and vigour, even the same excessive-enthusiasm-induced-clangers. If only he wasn't bald, tattooed and lacking an exaggerated ball drop . . . it'd be uncanny.

On the other hand, from his very first season, I have always thought Mills bore an remarkable resemblance to Johnny Rantall in the way he plays, do any other old timers see it?
If the midfield thing doesn't work out, perhaps the coaches should consider him as backline general/quarterback and think of moving Lloyed upfield.

In our case, though, the problem is our midfield. We got destroyed all year in the inside 50 count. If we win that stat we win the game (well about 90%) of the time. So that's what we need to fix (primarily) and that's why we need maximum talent in the midfield. Hopefully all those coaches are as aware of this as I am

[barry]

After Blakey, picks 37,38 and 40 are not really worth much. If you get one 100 gamer out of that lot, you're doing well.
I hope we upgrade those to a 20's pick

[Markwebbos]

After Blakey, picks 37,38 and 40 are not really worth much. If you get one 100 gamer out of that lot, you're doing well.
I hope we upgrade those to a 20's pick

That’s a pretty bold statement Bazza. Got any evidence to back it up?

- - - Updated - - -

I’m thinking of players in this years team taken around that mark or as rookies.

[0918330512]

That’s a pretty bold statement Bazza. Got any evidence to back it up?

- - - Updated - - -

I’m thinking of players in this years team taken around that mark or as rookies.

Our record with pick 40+ is pretty good I think it’s our 1st & 2nd rounders that struggle a bit more I’d suggest

[liz]

After Blakey, picks 37,38 and 40 are not really worth much. If you get one 100 gamer out of that lot, you're doing well.
I hope we upgrade those to a 20's pick

There's a few things wrong with that observation / suggestion.

If picks 38-40 (as we currently hold) "are not really worth much", why would any other club trade a pick in the 20s in exchange?

If picks in that range "are really not worth much", why do clubs continue to draft players with picks at that range, and much later in the draft (including into the rookie draft)? Clubs would have very short lists if they never drafted players beyond pick 35 or so (or wherever the cut-off for them to be valuable is deemed to be).

If picks in that range really weren't worth much, there are an awful lot of players who've carved out good careers for the Swans (and other teams) who shouldn't even have been drafted. From our current list (just looking at those who've played a more than a handful of senior games) that includes Luke Parker, Heath Grundy, Kieren Jack, Nick Smith, Jake Lloyd, Tom Papley, Ben Ronke, Lewis Melican, Dane Rampe, Aliir Aliir, Callum Sinclair (via West Coast), and Sam Naismith.

And notable recent past players who would never have got their chance include Micky O'Loughlin, Adam Goodes, Ryan O'Keefe, Nick Malceski, Brett Kirk, Marty Mattner (via Adelaide), Adam Schneider, Amon Buchanan etc etc

[waswan]

Still waiting for a few words about Ling, the club speaks more about Stoddard.
I know one played and one didnt but one is also a pick in the 50s which is typically not spoken about with regard to seniors

If he is a flop at 14 gonna be hard to convince me what KB can do with picks in the 40s

[KSAS]

Still waiting for a few words about Ling, the club speaks more about Stoddard.
I know one played and one didnt but one is also a pick in the 50s which is typically not spoken about with regard to seniors

If he is a flop at 14 gonna be hard to convince me what KB can do with picks in the 40s

Even though we've heard very little of Ling, the club has expressed confidence with him as I do recall he signed a year extension? I remember last year post draft KB saying how impressed he was with Ling. KB gave impression they were hoping to pick him up with their 2nd round pick, but after Ling put on some break out late season performances was worried he'd be gone by then. KB was impressed with Ling's outside run & team oriented 2nd/3rd efforts.

[Ludwig]

After Blakey, picks 37,38 and 40 are not really worth much. If you get one 100 gamer out of that lot, you're doing well.
I hope we upgrade those to a 20's pick

Yet you're bagging Tom Harley for not being able to recruit a #65 pick (Langdon) and a rookie pick (VDB). Why would you criticize someone for failing to acquire a player that's not really worth much?

[AnnieH]

Heard a rumour that Shane Mumford is sniffing around for a comeback.

(BWA HA HA HA HA HA HA. I love it when I make myself laugh.)

[barry]

There's a few things wrong with that observation / suggestion.

If picks 38-40 (as we currently hold) "are not really worth much", why would any other club trade a pick in the 20s in exchange?

If picks in that range really weren't worth much, there are an awful lot of players who've carved out good careers for the Swans (and other teams)

Teams that would want them are ones who need the points for a father son or academy pickup.

If you take out the trades, rookies, father-son, academy, zone or any other draft concession types, you'll find slim picking in the late 30's and above.

[Go Swannies]

My issue is that the other teams competing for the 8 have improved vs our list significantly ie north, bombers, hawks etc

We were well off the pace of Richmond

GWS are in my opinion about to peak with such amazing talent at the right age. Their injury toll all season was worse then ours. We looked like a reserve grade team in the finals vs gws. We were completely dismantled

The pies depth and talent looks like it will be hitting its straps come 2019.......very very exciting list of players and had massive injury toll all season

So yes I will support our team all the way but I can’t see through rose coloured glasses. Our recruitment strategy concerns me a lot. Our outside run vs gws looked absolutely terrible in the finals. So does our backline outside run come down to Stoddart and or Ling ?

We know we need Jones in the midfield

We have fallen behind in my opinion and it could be a very very tough season

I can’t see our plan B for 2019

It'd be great to have the excitement of a big trade to talk about throughout summer. But, other than a key forward to team with Buddy, I'm not convinced we need it. Through injury we saw a lot of young talent step up in 2018.

I know the run to finals - and the final - were disappointing but was anyone surprised? We've always been told that the kids run out of puff at the end of the season and ours certainly did. Hopefully, they will all have matured by 2019 and we'll see them step up further - and for longer in 2019.

Even a year ago I don't know if I would have been just as excited to see Mills back as Smooch. McCartin showed great signs of potential this year and next year he'll have the trainer wheels off. Ronke burst onto the scene and faded out as the year progressed.

i'm a bit sad to see Towers leave but he was such a confidence player and we always had to carry him for a few weeks till he rose to the level where he was definitely in our Top 22. Who would have thought a finger in the eye would end an AFL career?

Historically, I'm sad to see Dan and Gary go and wish them well. But it certainly puts paid to the oft-run line that some players get game time they don't deserve. They fell off the pace - or never consistently delivered on potential - and they've gone. That's harsh. AJ is a tragedy and our ultimate response showed that AFL, even the Swans, is a business.

Finally, I don't think Horse is stupid. I think he devises a game plan to suit our players' strength. In many ways we have quite a new-look team and I expect a 2019 game plan to match. But I confidently expect the AFL media to say (into the indefinite future) that the Swans are slow and too defensive, just as they have been since 2003.

Roll on 2019.

[barry]

Yet you're bagging Tom Harley for not being able to recruit a #65 pick (Langdon) and a rookie pick (VDB). Why would you criticize someone for failing to acquire a player that's not really worth much?

Ludders, imagine you are in a game show, and there are three doors with only a prize behind one of them. You pick. 1 in 3 chance right.? Correct. Now, host eddie mcguire unveils one of the doors which he knows doesnt have a prize, then offers you the chance to switch doors (the other one that is left). Do you ? On the above comment, I assume you wouldnt.

But you should, because Eddie has offered to drop your odds from 1 in 3 to 1 in 2. Take it man!

The moral of the story is that Langdon was probably a 1 in 20 chance of being a decent player when picked at #65, but has shown enough now to be a pick 26 or there abouts. Eddie has shown you the other door!