2019 trading, drafting and list management: players and personnel

[gazza]

we now have 7 off the list, only 1 on. did we promote any rookies? lots of space for high draft recruits. I am happy they way draft worked out.

[gazza]

we now have 7 off the list, only 1 on. did we promote any rookies? lots of space for high draft recruits. I am happy they way draft worked out.

[Ludwig]

Good word-smithing there 707 .
Thank goodness it didn’t come to pass.
Big tick to trading nous Swans.

+1. Sums it up well.

It will be interesting to see how things go down for Daniher. I can only imagine that it will be worse if he stays uncontracted and become a FA. He's going to be hounded all year long about who he loves, and issues of loyalty. If we make an offer next year, would Essendon really match it and force Joe into the PSD or ND? Would they destroy the football life of someone from such an exalted Essendon family?

Watch this space.


I count that we have 42 players now including O'Connor, which leaves a max of 5 list spaces to fill. I guess we will take 4 picks to the draft, but it is possible that our pick 44 could be traded into next year. Bennell could fill the final spot. We could go with a list size of 46. Hirst might be jeopardy with the addition of Taylor. I would like to Wicks another year; I think he's done well. Cutting him would only open a Cat B spot, probably for Sam Thorne.

Not getting Daniher likely means that Menzel stay another year. If he can get a full preseason, he could challenge for a spot in the forward line.

[barry]

You guys a very generous.

I give this a "D" mark.

We lost Cameron, and Jones.
We gained Ryan and a late 2nd round pick.

That alone is a C-. Cameron and Ryan even each other out. Jones for a pick seems a bit low.

Then, we have a player who requested to leave, still on the list.
And we have a player who wanted to join us, not here.

Now I know that is more the fault of the dodo than us, but still its not an ideal situation, and will consume our trade period next year.
Knocking us down to a D.

Cant see us improving much as any organic improvement will need to cover the loss of Jones.

[707]

Barry, we also got a pick upgrade for 2020 in the Jones trade, valuable points when we have academy players to pay for.

For those that want a laugh, head over to the BF boards for Carlton and Essendon, some classic melts on view :-)

[Jeynez]

Amen to that. The amount of attention given to people who were either clearly ignorant or utterly cavalier with the facts (e.g. Montagna, Wallace, Barrett) or had an obvious agenda to bolster the position of their team (Lloyd, Watson) was beyond ridiculous. The footy media was never exactly a paragon of journalistic excellence, but it has become little short of a circus.

Yep, agreed. If these journos & ex-players had any bloody clue how to manage a playing list, they would actually be managing or coaching at a club.

[Beerman]

I read a good article on the Daniher situation last night, forget where (could it have been the Hun?!). It said said "Swans simply didn't want Daniher as much as Essendon". Author's argument was that we didn't ask for Daniher to come to us, but we were happy for him to name us as his preferred destination and work to see if we could make a trade. But Essendon really wanted to keep him, and we weren't desperate to get him and so a trade was always going to be pretty likely.

I think that's a good summary, and reflects something that was implied by the AFL's "winners and losers" article last night, which is that the only party that really wanted the Daniher trade to happen, was Daniher himself. (Excluding media bozos of course).

It makes me wonder if we really will go that hard at Joe next year. It might be another situation where we make a pretty reasonable offer, and Essendon match it. I can't see us being desperate for him then, either. Of course, next year is a whole new ball game as we'll all have another year to work out whether Daniher's body can recover, and if enough of our youngsters come good we might be starting to think about saving our pennies to re-sign them to inevitably larger contracts.

[rb4x]

we now have 7 off the list, only 1 on. did we promote any rookies? lots of space for high draft recruits. I am happy they way draft worked out.

I make it nine off the list and either one or three or four on depending on how you count it.

We have lost
Tippett
Grundy
McVeigh
Smith
Jack
Rose
Tucker
Jones
Cameron

Gained
Taylor

McLeam
Knoll

Hirst but he is still in limbo

Maibaum
Menzel
Pink
Wicks
Hirst

are all I believe still uncontracted

Does anyone know which of the rookie re-signings got upgraded from the rookie list to the senior list as rookie restrictions etc. will determine the shape of who we draft.

Amartey
Bell
McLean
Knoll

[Ludwig]

You guys a very generous.

I give this a "D" mark.

We lost Cameron, and Jones.
We gained Ryan and a late 2nd round pick.

That alone is a C-. Cameron and Ryan even each other out. Jones for a pick seems a bit low.

Then, we have a player who requested to leave, still on the list.
And we have a player who wanted to join us, not here.

Now I know that is more the fault of the dodo than us, but still its not an ideal situation, and will consume our trade period next year.
Knocking us down to a D.

Cant see us improving much as any organic improvement will need to cover the loss of Jones.

Ryan who?

Cameron was lost by lack of opportunity. We can blame Longmire for that, not the list management team.

Deals involve both parties to come to the table with a fair offer. Dodoro wanted way too much for Daniher, and in my opinion, and the opinion of others on here, the timing on this trade was poor, and next year is a much better outcome.

Papley is a strange one, because of the conflicting stories about how badly he wants to leave the Swans. The word from the trade room was that Carlton wanted Papley + pick 25 for Papley, which is equivalent to Papley going for a pick 27. I don't think we could accept this. I look forward to an accurate account of the Papley situation as the evidence defies some of tales.

What do you think should have gone down and how could it have gotten done?

[KTigers]

Beerman makes a good point. Some of our younger guys are going to turn into seriously good players within a couple years, and
then suddenly the North Melbourne's of the world are going to be offering them long contracts at two or three times PA what they
are getting now, and the club will need to be in the ballpark money-wise to keep them.

[barry]

Ryan who?

Cameron was lost by lack of opportunity. We can blame Longmire for that, not the list management team.

Deals involve both parties to come to the table with a fair offer. Dodoro wanted way too much for Daniher, and in my opinion, and the opinion of others on here, the timing on this trade was poor, and next year is a much better outcome.

Papley is a strange one, because of the conflicting stories about how badly he wants to leave the Swans. The word from the trade room was that Carlton wanted Papley + pick 25 for Papley, which is equivalent to Papley going for a pick 27. I don't think we could accept this. I look forward to an accurate account of the Papley situation as the evidence defies some of tales.

What do you think should have gone down and how could it have gotten done?

Ryan = Lewis Taylor. For some reason I thought his name was Lewis Ryan. Senility setting in.

We are a results driven competition, and the results show we were a minor player in the trading period, despite a number of opportunities.

Dealing with dodo is hard. But he wanted a player. Could it have not been Papley, or Jones, or a 3 way trade with another team (eg Jono Patton). Did we leave no stone un-turned to get a fair deal ?

[Aprilbr]

Not surprisingly the AFL website categorised us as a big draft loser because we could not get the Daniher deal done. They also classed Essendon as a big winner because their tough negotiating stance paid off and they did not lose Daniher. The reality is that nobody will really know who won or lost for at least 12 months.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

[i'm-uninformed2]

Have we found Paps a new bird yet?

[Mr Magoo]

Looking generally at the trade period, I dont think we missed on anyone we needed.

Cameron leaving is one I would like to know a little bit more about. He couldnt get a game in a year we were crying out for ruckman and I just cant see that its just a bias from Longmire. Something has to have happened behind the scenes, either in his attitude or approach.

The melbourne media hype on Daniher was ludicrous. The suggestion of giving up any of Heeney, Mills, Florent or Parker (as I saw ) is just plain crazy and Daniher, while a great player to get is not make or break for our chances next year and still has a question mark over his ability to recover from his current problems. The suggestion that he is worth two first round draft picks is so out of balance with the patton trade for essentially nothing.

Zac Jones leaving is just further evidence that the Swans still need assistance to keep players or to allow them to retain academy players. Papley same (if he had gone). That of course is never considered in the constant speculation around the academies.

[Jeynez]

Ryan = Lewis Taylor. For some reason I thought his name was Lewis Ryan. Senility setting in.

We are a results driven competition, and the results show we were a minor player in the trading period, despite a number of opportunities.

Dealing with dodo is hard. But he wanted a player. Could it have not been Papley, or Jones, or a 3 way trade with another team (eg Jono Patton). Did we leave no stone un-turned to get a fair deal ?

Harley confirmed that Papley and Jones were brought up as potential players, but Essendon didn't want either.