2020 trading, drafting and list management: players and personnel

[Auntie.Gerald]

Tom Mitchell
Tom Scully
Jaeger O’Meara
Jon Patton
ORourke
Sam Frost
Impey
Wingard
Scrimshaw
Henderson

Out of interest which one of these trades Hawthorn made would NOT be in our 22 right now ?

[Mr Magoo]

Tom Mitchell
Tom Scully
Jaeger O’Meara
Jon Patton
ORourke
Sam Frost
Impey
Wingard
Scrimshaw
Henderson

Out of interest which one of these trades Hawthorn made would NOT be in our 22 right now ?

If we traded like Hawthorne we would probably face trade sanctions and question marks over our salary cap

[bloodspirit]

Tom Mitchell
Tom Scully
Jaeger O’Meara
Jon Patton
ORourke
Sam Frost
Impey
Wingard
Scrimshaw
Henderson

Out of interest which one of these trades Hawthorn made would NOT be in our 22 right now ?

I note that you don't say best 22.

If you're talking about our best 22 I'm not sure that Patton, O'Rourke, or Scrimshaw would be in our best 22. This is partly because our needs were different to the Hawks e.g we have Buddy, Reid, McCartin and Blakey so had less need for a player like Patton than the Hawks.

Anyway, I'm feeling my disgruntlement about our trading strategy the past couple of trade periods at the moment. I, like most of us, hoped that we would have done more to strengthen our midfield than we did (or even apparently attempted). In this most recent trade period I suggested that we might do well to pursue Hugh Greenwood so it's irksome to see him doing well at the Suns. The previous season we had a go at vandenBerg but we didn't get him. As it turns out he's been mostly injured since but that kind of a contested ball winner to help Joey and Parks and Hewett out in the middle is something we're missing, more so since losing Jones.

[neilfws]

Interesting read by Jake Niall today. Almost deserves its own thread but I'll put it here.

Sydney on the brink of recession: the hard road for the Swans

Says Swans are now "a net exporter of mature talent", hard to argue with that really.

To a degree, club insiders concur with much of the diagnosis of Roos (which developed in a conversation with this journalist), although there was an understandable reluctance to make it sound as though they were complaining about the tougher road ahead.

[707]

Interesting read by Jake Niall today. Almost deserves its own thread but I'll put it here.

Sydney on the brink of recession: the hard road for the Swans

Says Swans are now "a net exporter of mature talent", hard to argue with that really.

Very good article, Niall is in the top echelon of AFL observers. Hard to disagree with anything written there.

[dimelb]

Very good article, Niall is in the top echelon of AFL observers. Hard to disagree with anything written there.

I took particular notice of this statement by a (very good) Victorian reporter:

... the Swans have long argued that COLA was really a leveller rather than an advantage; the AFL, clearly, thought otherwise and finally acceded to the demands of the Victorian lobby, headed by Collingwood and Hawthorn.

[liz]

I took particular notice of this statement by a (very good) Victorian reporter:

... the Swans have long argued that COLA was really a leveller rather than an advantage; the AFL, clearly, thought otherwise and finally acceded to the demands of the Victorian lobby, headed by Collingwood and Hawthorn.

I tried to find an article from 2009 in which Eddie was strongly supportive of a cost of living allowance in Sydney. That opinion was published at the time he was living in Sydney. I couldn't find it, but found this that directly refers to the 2009 article (and hence proves it isn't a figment of my imagination).

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/mcguire-an-amnesiac-on-cap-fight-20130324-2go25.html

As for the rest of the article:-

- the idea that recruiting players from other clubs is something that the Swans have lost a monopoly over is daft. We never had a monopoly.

- the Swans' recruitment from other clubs has been varied over the last 25 years - from the underappreciated at their club (like Shaw, Kennedy and Richards, the last of which we still paid a first round draft pick for) to higher profile, established players like Lockett, Williams, Roos and Franklin, taking in those in between like Maxfield, Hall, Mattner.

- that the club seems currently to be a "net exporter of talent" is, at least in part, a reflection on better recruiting over the last decade compared to the previous decade. No-one wanted our discards or second grade players then because they weren't much good. More recently teams have seen value in the likes of Nankervis and Newman and Cameron - they were all fringe players for us, at best.

- we're not the only club with a player on a salary at Franklin's level so it can't be the only thing handicapping us in terms of retaining those we want to retain or attracting other talent

- judging a club as in recession based on missing the finals for a single year (or even two years, if the footy world has already made up their minds we won't make finals this year) is a bit dumb in a competition where at least half (more than half for most of the last decade) fail to make the finals every year

- Franklin is injured at the moment, and was injured for around half of last year. Before then, his ability to get on the paddock was pretty good, even if sometimes it was while carrying injuries. Many players from all clubs get injured, including some highly paid ones. (See Daniher at Essendon.) It happens. It's not Buddy's fault, it's not the club's fault. When he has been able to play, few would question that he's made the team more competitive. He's won us a few games we would probably otherwise have lost. We spent most of last year losing without him by fairly modest margins. We lost last week - without him - by a very small margin. Richmond were awful yesterday without their million dollar player. It happens. Teams generally play less well when their best players are missing. If we were regularly losing with him on the paddock I think it would be far more concerning that losing (modestly) without him. That suggests we're not completely reliant on him, albeit he makes us better. For me, that vindicates that the decision to recruit him was reasonable, remains reasonable, and doesn't indicate anything much different with our club's list and cap management to other clubs. (And that's ignoring the entertainment, membership, media-inches and possibly sponsorship benefits he's delivered.)

[MattW]

Typical of Niall: lots of conventional wisdom, little original insight.

[707]

Typical of Niall: lots of conventional wisdom, little original insight.

Can't agree, I thought Niall summed up where we've got to.

We were leaders in finding gems amongst others clubs dross but we are no longer. This is, as Niall points out, due to a number of factors, not just one, and I think he's laid out those factors fairly clearly.


We were a nett importer of talent for many years, we are now a nett exporter, that's fact. Things may change, may not. Ladder position or potential ladder position assists in attracting talent as noted by where Free Agents choose to go. It may be cyclic but geography, expansion clubs and the Vic centricity of the AFL organisation does favour certain clubs.

Best that you nail your draft picks to lessen the need for attracting mature talent and keep winning games, starting today eh?

[MattW]

Can't agree, I thought Niall summed up where we've got to.

We were leaders in finding gems amongst others clubs dross but we are no longer. This is, as Niall points out, due to a number of factors, not just one, and I think he's laid out those factors fairly clearly.


We were a nett importer of talent for many years, we are now a nett exporter, that's fact. Things may change, may not. Ladder position or potential ladder position assists in attracting talent as noted by where Free Agents choose to go. It may be cyclic but geography, expansion clubs and the Vic centricity of the AFL organisation does favour certain clubs.

Best that you nail your draft picks to lessen the need for attracting mature talent and keep winning games, starting today eh?

Ok, some explanation:
- The net exporter of talent point is not new. It's plain. But it's his central point and he spends a lot of time on it.
- He mentions COLA and the debate about whether its removal was justified, again a common point, without digging into the practical effect of taking it away. The reader is left to guess whether taking COLA away had an effect and the case for it coming back.
- He then quotes Roos and relies on his diagnosis throughout the rest of the piece. The Roos interview is a good get, but his quotes aren't Jake's own insight.
- But I guess my main gripe is that most of the analysis is of external events. As usual, there is no indication he is across the drafting strategy, coaching, player performance. I listen to The Age podcast quite a bit and the light touch analysis of the Swans play (as opposed to their experience of events as a club) is a bummer, and is in my view reflected in this piece.

Further, despite the 'net exporting' we had a pretty decent recent record until last year and one can wonder how much more competitive we'd have been last year and this with Buddy. I guess the response to that is that is the risk you take when you rely on a star for performance. But that's a risk that other successful clubs have taken - Richmond for example, had success on the back of a small group of stars staying fit.

[Ludwig]

A club has to go about its list management within the context of its situation. Just because one system worked in the past doesn't make it the right strategy for all time.

During the period in question we were limited in our recruiting by the loss of COLA, the TPP burden of Franklin and Tippett, as well as the need to lock in a number of sought after young players on our list. That left the draft and 2nd tier players as the only realistic way to rebuild the team.

Under the circumstances, I think we've built one of the best young lists in the AFL, but the fruits of this strategy won't be realised for several years unless we can get key senior players like Franklin, Reid and Naismith on the park to smooth over the current transition period. And of course, good prospects don't necessarily turn into top tier players.

It doesn't pay to import elite mature players when they are just going to take a spot we need to use developing one of those promising draftees. It's actually detrimental to the overall development of the team. Once the team starts to seriously compete for a premiership, then it makes sense to try to land a top mature player to fill a weak spot on the list. I can't see this happening until the 9 year Franklin contract expires.

[Ruck'n'Roll]

During the period in question we were limited in our recruiting by the loss of COLA, the TPP burden of Franklin and Tippett, as well as the need to lock in a number of sought after young players on our list. That left the draft and 2nd tier players as the only realistic way to rebuild the team.

"During the period in question"
Sounds like your talking history Ludwig. Do you think the Swans recruiting is no longer impeded by the TPP burden?

Tier 2 or Tier 3
Agreed the Swans have a history or acquiring and developing 2nd tier players from other clubs, and doing successfully. But since Buddy, most of the acquisitions we've made from other clubs should be flattered to be described as tier 2.
The quality of these recruits from other clubs is (in general) more closely remiscent of the players picked up immediately after the Edelston era.
Should we expect any more from Thurlow (to pick a name at random) than was delivered by Andrew Bomford?

[Markwebbos]

Why did Jake Niall completely overlook the vindictive trading ban

[MattW]

Why did Jake Niall completely overlook the vindictive trading ban

Didn't come to mind, I'd expect. But yes, the piece would have been much more interesting if it involved a deep dive into the effect of that and the removal of COLA.

[barry]

Change of subject, but we should be targetting crows players looking for a change. Maybe a year too late, but that club is in turmoil.