2020 trading, drafting and list management: players and personnel

[Ludwig]

A few comments on previous posts:

Parker is only 28 yo and will be only 32 for the entire 2025 season. That's the same age as Pendlebury, who just had a great season at 32. There is some kind of meme going around with footy journos that Parker is near retirement and no one seems to challenge this. Why can Pendlebury play at a very high level at age 32, but not Parker? Why shouldn't Parker be part of our next premiership side? I think we should be challenging within the next 5 years.

We should take note that Parker is the next midfielder in line for retirement after JPK. In my midfield analysis omitting JPK, all those other names should be with the Swans for the next 5 years at least, unless they are traded, delisted or forced out by injury. So that midfield I refer to is the base. We will have 5 more drafts to add midfielders to that group without anyone necessarily needing to go out.

We can pick out a few players and challenge whether they can make it or not:

• Warner is just starting out.
• Ling hasn't had a go yet because of injury. Maybe he's not really a first round pick kind of player.
• Bell hasn't shown enough to convince.
• Clarke isn't skillful enough. (Just a note on Clarke, who has changed my opinion of him during the year. His kicking is much improved. It lacks power, but the distance and accuracy is a lot better than it was last year. He is also one of the elite aerobic runners in the game. With reduced interchanges, his value will increase. Not best 22, but the kind of depth that's nice to have).

But we have at least 5 drafts to replace any of the weak links in the group. There will always be players on the list who have yet to prove their worth. And if they fail to prove their worth, they are likely to be replaced, through the draft, by other players who have yet to prove their worth. It's just a normal part of the list demographic. The alternative option is to go the full-Geelong, just get a lot of old but proven performers and keep replacing the dead ones with more of the same.

Defence: It's more than just the high number of players with the defensive group, but the quality of the group. Gould has yet to play a game and Ling is more likely to play midfield, given how well Cunningham and Fox played this year. COR is a quality player who should be in the side, except for the competition for spots being so high. Most of the players in the group have yet to play 50 games, so we should expect a lot of improvement to come.

These comments about DGB are from Peter Sumich: AFL draft 2020: Fremantle draft picks, Denver Grainger-Barras, Peter Sumich urges Dockers live trade | Fox Sports

Sumich added that Grainger-Barras could also thrive outside of the defensive 50, claiming he could be just as damaging as a tall forward.
“I don’t think the side who picks him up will pigeonhole him just for the backline. I think he can play both ends,” he said.
“He’s just very agile. Great reader of the game and a great mark.”

So maybe KB has a similar view to Sumich and sees DGB as a tall utility, who can play either end of the ground. Then it would make more sense having him square in the picture with our first pick.

2 of McDonald, Tintorp, Hollands and DGB will be available at our 1st pick. I think we will get a very high quality player, whoever it turns out to be.

[707]

Wonder not, in KB we trust! I'm comfortable with whoever we take.

That late season win by the Hawks to push them behind us has proved invaluable.

[Auntie.Gerald]

AB i think the only mistaken belief is trying to be ahead of where the coach wants a player to play

Tom mccartin
Blakey
Heeney
Mills
AA
Etc
Have all had to adapt to roles not predicted by many in the year they were drafted

Happy to see the olds threads showing a belief that Mills and Heeney would end up either end of the ground rather than in the middle ?

[Captain]

I was impressed by Tom Mc playing back but I still think his greatest worth to us is to continue his development as a tall forward. This is especially so if we don't draft McDonald or Thilthorpe.

With this in mind, I'm warming to drafting DGB and form permitting, getting games into Gould. I share Ludwig's concerns about being too heavy in midfielders. If we were going to get Phillips or Hollands (on top of Gulden and Campbell), then we should've moved on a few of our existing midfielders. Bell and Clarke are 2 that spring to mind.

A backline from Rampe, Gould, DGB, Lloyd, Cunningham, Mills, Dawson, Melican, Brand, Ling and Fox will still be handy. In particular, if Gould, Ling and DGB are best 22 by the end of 2021, we will be one step closer to our next tilt at the flag.

I agree with you on moving McCartin back forward if we draft DGB. Without that, we have zero key forwards coming through and Reid/Buddy almost finished.

I'm excited to see Gould but given we have seen nothing yet, it's way too early to tell whether he is going to be an asset.

[Markwebbos]

A few comments on previous posts:

Parker is only 28 yo and will be only 32 for the entire 2025 season. That's the same age as Pendlebury, who just had a great season at 32. There is some kind of meme going around with footy journos that Parker is near retirement and no one seems to challenge this. Why can Pendlebury play at a very high level at age 32, but not Parker? Why shouldn't Parker be part of our next premiership side? I think we should be challenging within the next 5 years.

We should take note that Parker is the next midfielder in line for retirement after JPK. In my midfield analysis omitting JPK, all those other names should be with the Swans for the next 5 years at least, unless they are traded, delisted or forced out by injury. So that midfield I refer to is the base. We will have 5 more drafts to add midfielders to that group without anyone necessarily needing to go out.

We can pick out a few players and challenge whether they can make it or not:

• Warner is just starting out.
• Ling hasn't had a go yet because of injury. Maybe he's not really a first round pick kind of player.
• Bell hasn't shown enough to convince.
• Clarke isn't skillful enough. (Just a note on Clarke, who has changed my opinion of him during the year. His kicking is much improved. It lacks power, but the distance and accuracy is a lot better than it was last year. He is also one of the elite aerobic runners in the game. With reduced interchanges, his value will increase. Not best 22, but the kind of depth that's nice to have).

But we have at least 5 drafts to replace any of the weak links in the group. There will always be players on the list who have yet to prove their worth. And if they fail to prove their worth, they are likely to be replaced, through the draft, by other players who have yet to prove their worth. It's just a normal part of the list demographic. The alternative option is to go the full-Geelong, just get a lot of old but proven performers and keep replacing the dead ones with more of the same.

Defence: It's more than just the high number of players with the defensive group, but the quality of the group. Gould has yet to play a game and Ling is more likely to play midfield, given how well Cunningham and Fox played this year. COR is a quality player who should be in the side, except for the competition for spots being so high. Most of the players in the group have yet to play 50 games, so we should expect a lot of improvement to come.

These comments about DGB are from Peter Sumich: AFL draft 2020: Fremantle draft picks, Denver Grainger-Barras, Peter Sumich urges Dockers live trade | Fox Sports



So maybe KB has a similar view to Sumich and sees DGB as a tall utility, who can play either end of the ground. Then it would make more sense having him square in the picture with our first pick.

2 of McDonald, Tintorp, Hollands and DGB will be available at our 1st pick. I think we will get a very high quality player, whoever it turns out to be.

Given how KB often misdirects prior to the draft I’m not sure we are into DGB. But if he has the ability to make it as a KPF that would make our interest more understandable.

[Ralph Dawg]

A few comments on previous posts:

Parker is only 28 yo and will be only 32 for the entire 2025 season. That's the same age as Pendlebury, who just had a great season at 32. There is some kind of meme going around with footy journos that Parker is near retirement and no one seems to challenge this. Why can Pendlebury play at a very high level at age 32, but not Parker? Why shouldn't Parker be part of our next premiership side? I think we should be challenging within the next 5 years.

We should take note that Parker is the next midfielder in line for retirement after JPK. In my midfield analysis omitting JPK, all those other names should be with the Swans for the next 5 years at least, unless they are traded, delisted or forced out by injury. So that midfield I refer to is the base. We will have 5 more drafts to add midfielders to that group without anyone necessarily needing to go out.

We can pick out a few players and challenge whether they can make it or not:

• Warner is just starting out.
• Ling hasn't had a go yet because of injury. Maybe he's not really a first round pick kind of player.
• Bell hasn't shown enough to convince.
• Clarke isn't skillful enough. (Just a note on Clarke, who has changed my opinion of him during the year. His kicking is much improved. It lacks power, but the distance and accuracy is a lot better than it was last year. He is also one of the elite aerobic runners in the game. With reduced interchanges, his value will increase. Not best 22, but the kind of depth that's nice to have).

But we have at least 5 drafts to replace any of the weak links in the group. There will always be players on the list who have yet to prove their worth. And if they fail to prove their worth, they are likely to be replaced, through the draft, by other players who have yet to prove their worth. It's just a normal part of the list demographic. The alternative option is to go the full-Geelong, just get a lot of old but proven performers and keep replacing the dead ones with more of the same.

Defence: It's more than just the high number of players with the defensive group, but the quality of the group. Gould has yet to play a game and Ling is more likely to play midfield, given how well Cunningham and Fox played this year. COR is a quality player who should be in the side, except for the competition for spots being so high. Most of the players in the group have yet to play 50 games, so we should expect a lot of improvement to come.

These comments about DGB are from Peter Sumich: AFL draft 2020: Fremantle draft picks, Denver Grainger-Barras, Peter Sumich urges Dockers live trade | Fox Sports



So maybe KB has a similar view to Sumich and sees DGB as a tall utility, who can play either end of the ground. Then it would make more sense having him square in the picture with our first pick.

2 of McDonald, Tintorp, Hollands and DGB will be available at our 1st pick. I think we will get a very high quality player, whoever it turns out to be.

So Sumich reckons Freo should trade up for DGB?
Only way they can guarantee to get him is if they get our pick 3.
Would we consider it for their first pick (12) and next year's first rounder?
I wouldn't!

[Ludwig]

So Sumich reckons Freo should trade up for DGB?
Only way they can guarantee to get him is if they get our pick 3.
Would we consider it for their first pick (12) and next year's first rounder?
I wouldn't!

I wouldn't either. We would have to trade out pick 12 anyway, probably for Collingwood's 2021 1st rounder, which would give us 3 for next year, else it would just be wasted on Campbell. Then we would have a bunch of late picks after our next pick or picks are used on Gulden. It messes up our entire draft.

[Auntie.Gerald]

too much risk i suspect if Campbell was the Hawks first pick or even Essendons first pick

[wolftone57]

A few comments on previous posts:

Parker is only 28 yo and will be only 32 for the entire 2025 season. That's the same age as Pendlebury, who just had a great season at 32. There is some kind of meme going around with footy journos that Parker is near retirement and no one seems to challenge this. Why can Pendlebury play at a very high level at age 32, but not Parker? Why shouldn't Parker be part of our next premiership side? I think we should be challenging within the next 5 years.

We should take note that Parker is the next midfielder in line for retirement after JPK. In my midfield analysis omitting JPK, all those other names should be with the Swans for the next 5 years at least, unless they are traded, delisted or forced out by injury. So that midfield I refer to is the base. We will have 5 more drafts to add midfielders to that group without anyone necessarily needing to go out.

We can pick out a few players and challenge whether they can make it or not:

• Warner is just starting out.
• Ling hasn't had a go yet because of injury. Maybe he's not really a first round pick kind of player.
• Bell hasn't shown enough to convince.
• Clarke isn't skillful enough. (Just a note on Clarke, who has changed my opinion of him during the year. His kicking is much improved. It lacks power, but the distance and accuracy is a lot better than it was last year. He is also one of the elite aerobic runners in the game. With reduced interchanges, his value will increase. Not best 22, but the kind of depth that's nice to have).

But we have at least 5 drafts to replace any of the weak links in the group. There will always be players on the list who have yet to prove their worth. And if they fail to prove their worth, they are likely to be replaced, through the draft, by other players who have yet to prove their worth. It's just a normal part of the list demographic. The alternative option is to go the full-Geelong, just get a lot of old but proven performers and keep replacing the dead ones with more of the same.

Defence: It's more than just the high number of players with the defensive group, but the quality of the group. Gould has yet to play a game and Ling is more likely to play midfield, given how well Cunningham and Fox played this year. COR is a quality player who should be in the side, except for the competition for spots being so high. Most of the players in the group have yet to play 50 games, so we should expect a lot of improvement to come.

These comments about DGB are from Peter Sumich: AFL draft 2020: Fremantle draft picks, Denver Grainger-Barras, Peter Sumich urges Dockers live trade | Fox Sports



So maybe KB has a similar view to Sumich and sees DGB as a tall utility, who can play either end of the ground. Then it would make more sense having him square in the picture with our first pick.

2 of McDonald, Tintorp, Hollands and DGB will be available at our 1st pick. I think we will get a very high quality player, whoever it turns out to be.

I think we will take DGB as well. It looks like Adelaide are going cold on Tilthorpe and are looking more to McDonald. Maybe it is the groin injury even though it is not supposed to be a huge problem. Norf look like taking Phillips according to the latest gossip, it is just gossip of course. We have been pretty keen on DGB all along and have a really good history with WA & SA players, not so much with Vic players early in the draft Rocca, Grant etc. Yes Mitchell did leave but he is a Victorian even though he played in WA where his father was coaching.

All the talk is that we will take DGB, then the two academy players. End of draft and enter the Rookie draft. Two spots are already filled by Fox & Gray. We will rookie at least one more Academy player I think and any one player we think worthwhile who gets overlooked in the Draft. So two, maybe three if we have the space. I think we could Rookie a ruck and a tall forward. Barling from the Academy is a good enough prospect. Even though JPK gets plenty of ball the doubt is on how effective he is at translating possessions into positive forward entries. The reason for this is simple. When JPK is in the mids we become predictable. Although not many mids can stop him getting the ball what they can do is gang up on him and stop him being effective. If he is the central player in the mids, the extractor, then all the opposition mids automatically move in his direction. What happened when he was injured is that the Swans had to reorganise our midfield around Rowbottom, Florent and Parker. this actually worked very well in the end because we were no longer predictable. I think if we add Dawson, Mills, Warner, Ronke (who came to us as a mid), Ling and occasionally Rampe to the mix, as we have Taylor and Clarke, we will have a very strong contingent of mids.

This could happen due to us drafting DGB. We would have DGB, Brand, Gould, O'Connor, McCartin and Melican as KB and Fox, Lloyd, Ling, Rampe, Gould, O'Riordan, Cunningham, McInnerney (can play both wing and HB), Dawson and Bell who can play virtually anywhere and has proved to be a very good back flanker at NEAFL level. I think we are very well covered.

[i'm-uninformed2]

So re DGB.

I do get where Liz is coming from but ...

One: with a pick as high as pick 3 you simply take the best available, secure the elite talent and then work things from there. If our team believe it’s DGB, so be it.

Two: I don’t think we have quality in defence, bar Rampe and Mills. (I view Lloyd as something other than a pure defender.)

Three: the way the game is played now you need elite marking talents in defence. Richmond has had Rance, Vlaustin, Grimes and Astbury as great intercept players. Brisbane has Harris. Geelong has had Taylor etc. WCE has Hurn and McGovern. I could argue nothing hurt Collingwood more than the loss of Howe this year.

So I get our list still has holes to plug, and deep strong midfields are essential to success. We also clearly have an emerging gap up forward so if they are still there I’d gladly have McDonald or Thilthorpe.

But at where we are and where the game is going, I’ve got no gripe with DGB either.

[dimelb]

I'm posing this question under the category of personnel. How is our doctor situation? Does anyone know whether we keeping whoever we have?

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/perfect-storm-set-to-result-in-afl-medical-exodus-at-clubs-20201205-p56kux.html

[MattW]

So re DGB.

I do get where Liz is coming from but ...

One: with a pick as high as pick 3 you simply take the best available, secure the elite talent and then work things from there. If our team believe it’s DGB, so be it.

Two: I don’t think we have quality in defence, bar Rampe and Mills. (I view Lloyd as something other than a pure defender.)

Three: the way the game is played now you need elite marking talents in defence. Richmond has had Rance, Vlaustin, Grimes and Astbury as great intercept players. Brisbane has Harris. Geelong has had Taylor etc. WCE has Hurn and McGovern. I could argue nothing hurt Collingwood more than the loss of Howe this year.

So I get our list still has holes to plug, and deep strong midfields are essential to success. We also clearly have an emerging gap up forward so if they are still there I’d gladly have McDonald or Thilthorpe.

But at where we are and where the game is going, I’ve got no gripe with DGB either.

Good post.

[i'm-uninformed2]

Oh, and one other thing.

Barely anyone had us taking Stephens last year, pulling the swiftie to get Rowbottom the year before or Ling in 2017.

So, because our club doesn’t talk, the media supposing we are after DGB is just that - a guess.

[Thunder Shaker]

So Sumich reckons Freo should trade up for DGB?
Only way they can guarantee to get him is if they get our pick 3.
Would we consider it for their first pick (12) and next year's first rounder?
I wouldn't!

I wouldn't either. We would have to trade out pick 12 anyway, probably for Collingwood's 2021 1st rounder, which would give us 3 for next year, else it would just be wasted on Campbell. Then we would have a bunch of late picks after our next pick or picks are used on Gulden. It messes up our entire draft.

I concur with these sentiments: we would essentially be trading out of a high pick in this year's draft for no gain. Even if we end up with three first-round picks next year, we would have none this year. In this year's draft, we would essentially be swapping pick 3 for a pick in the 50s.

If there's any live pick trading happening, the only club with a top-5 pick that may be interested is North - and they've already rejected better offers than what Freo can offer.

So this is nothing but speculation on Sumich's part. More likely, Freo will be happy with their mid-range first round pick and choose a good player with that pick.

[Markwebbos]

Oh, and one other thing.

Barely anyone had us taking Stephens last year, pulling the swiftie to get Rowbottom the year before or Ling in 2017.

So, because our club doesn’t talk, the media supposing we are after DGB is just that - a guess.

I completely agree with your point I-U2. I can't see how anyone outside the inner sanctum at the Swans would have a clue what our intentions are. If KB tells the Tombstone we are into DGB, based on previous form, that probably means the complete opposite. The only possible way to validate interest I can think of is if a player has been told something by the club (e.g. we'll take you at pick 3 if XYZ happens), but I cannot see us doing that. And I think in the past we've re-interviewed unwanted players close to the draft as a diversionary tactic. I don't think frequency of contact necessarily indicates level of interest.