2021 trading, drafting and list management: players and personnel

[Maltopia]

I think we went better than most of us expected, and if we don't finish 6th or better next year, that would be disappointing after what we accomplished, but not a total let down.

My concern is how we will do post Buddy. Logan is still very young, lightly built (in comparison) and doesn't have the tank yet, and I think unlikely to be a 40+ goal full forward in 2022 or 2023. He is not a man mountain like a Dixon or a Hawkins, and is shorter than Buddy/Danniher/Kings.

Josh Kennedy is slightly shorter than Logan, but he has had the big framed Jack Darling to pair up with for years and years.

Once Buddy goes (and Reid will be gone by then too) we won't have a genuine second tall forward above 190 cm to pair up with Logan. Sure McClean is 199cm, but not a first 22, neither is Almarty.

People keep calling for Heeney to do more midfield, but if you take out his marking ability from the forward area, you are left with Hayward, Papley, Wicks/Bell, Gulden/Parker, and a developing McLean/Almarty as the forward line with Logan.

So I think we need a second tall forward to help Logan, as much as we need a second tall back to help McCartin once Rampe retires!

[MattW]

I think we went better than most of us expected, and if we don't finish 6th or better next year, that would be disappointing after what we accomplished, but not a total let down.

My concern is how we will do post Buddy. Logan is still very young, lightly built (in comparison) and doesn't have the tank yet, and I think unlikely to be a 40+ goal full forward in 2022 or 2023. He is not a man mountain like a Dixon or a Hawkins, and is shorter than Buddy/Danniher/Kings.

Josh Kennedy is slightly shorter than Logan, but he has had the big framed Jack Darling to pair up with for years and years.

Once Buddy goes (and Reid will be gone by then too) we won't have a genuine second tall forward above 190 cm to pair up with Logan. Sure McClean is 199cm, but not a first 22, neither is Almarty.

People keep calling for Heeney to do more midfield, but if you take out his marking ability from the forward area, you are left with Hayward, Papley, Wicks/Bell, Gulden/Parker, and a developing McLean/Almarty as the forward line with Logan.

So I think we need a second tall forward to help Logan, as much as we need a second tall back to help McCartin once Rampe retires!

Interesting post.

I think Amartey has potential to be best 22 or at least a decent stop gap in the second ruck role. Looks like Buddy may have two years left. Agree a second spearhead needed by 2024, but with a decent preseason, Logan could be available for a push next year.

- - - Updated - - -

I'll certainly start feeling better if we sign Paddy McCartin.

[Markwebbos]

I think we went better than most of us expected, and if we don't finish 6th or better next year, that would be disappointing after what we accomplished, but not a total let down.

My concern is how we will do post Buddy. Logan is still very young, lightly built (in comparison) and doesn't have the tank yet, and I think unlikely to be a 40+ goal full forward in 2022 or 2023. He is not a man mountain like a Dixon or a Hawkins, and is shorter than Buddy/Danniher/Kings.

Josh Kennedy is slightly shorter than Logan, but he has had the big framed Jack Darling to pair up with for years and years.

Once Buddy goes (and Reid will be gone by then too) we won't have a genuine second tall forward above 190 cm to pair up with Logan. Sure McClean is 199cm, but not a first 22, neither is Almarty.

People keep calling for Heeney to do more midfield, but if you take out his marking ability from the forward area, you are left with Hayward, Papley, Wicks/Bell, Gulden/Parker, and a developing McLean/Almarty as the forward line with Logan.

So I think we need a second tall forward to help Logan, as much as we need a second tall back to help McCartin once Rampe retires!

I agree that the successor to Buddy is our #1 challenge.

Not sure Logan will be up to leading our forward line in 2023.

It’s unlikely we can draft our way out of it. You’d hope the club is working overtime on this.

[AB Swannie]

From memory, we normally wait until after the Bob Skilton Medal to make announcements regarding delistings. Is my memory correct?

[bloodspirit]

Are we still "top 6"? This will impact our draw next year. The groupings of 6 probably influence our rise this year, and will probably impact on our ability to achieve as high a place on the ladder next year.

No. We have finished 7th and will get draft picks and a draw accordingly. Might help us a little bit next year.

I agree we need KPPs not just KPDs. I agree that McDonald will need support in 2023 and beyond. But I don't agree that he doesn't have the tank - he has a very good tank. Quite possibly the equal of Buddy and Reid already.

I do think that the club will be thinking about who we can bring in and add to the team, not just about retaining talent. I expect us to bring in someone at least as significant as Hickey in the trade period (that is, as significant as Hickey appeared at the time we did the trade - not based on how fantastically Hickey performed and exceeded expectations) and more than like when we brought in Thurlow, Clarke, Taylor, Gray. I also wouldn't be surprised if we brought in more than one player. I think the club will be focused on improving our list via trade. Even though we may lose some players, we will be calculating who we can afford to lose and then bringing in what we need i.e. you have to give something to get something - a bit like Aliir for Hickey last year.

[mcs]

No. We have finished 7th and will get draft picks and a draw accordingly. Might help us a little bit next year.

I agree we need KPPs not just KPDs. I agree that McDonald will need support in 2023 and beyond. But I don't agree that he doesn't have the tank - he has a very good tank. Quite possibly the equal of Buddy and Reid already.

I do think that the club will be thinking about who we can bring in and add to the team, not just about retaining talent. I expect us to bring in someone at least as significant as Hickey in the trade period (that is, as significant as Hickey appeared at the time we did the trade - not based on how fantastically Hickey performed and exceeded expectations) and more than like when we brought in Thurlow, Clarke, Taylor, Gray. I also wouldn't be surprised if we brought in more than one player. I think the club will be focused on improving our list via trade. Even though we may lose some players, we will be calculating who we can afford to lose and then bringing in what we need i.e. you have to give something to get something - a bit like Aliir for Hickey last year.

It will be very interesting to see what our strategy is bloodspirit.

While the scenario you outline would not surprise me at all, equally I would not be surprised if our strategy amounted to nothing more then 'minimising the losses', a little bit of pick manoeuvring to strengthen our draft hand (either for this year or next year), and leaving it until 2022 before we go seeking out more experienced players to 'plug the gaps' and 'top up the list' as such.

It really comes down to that question of whether the club thinks we are close enough to challenging for a flag that we just need to 'fill the gaps', or whether they want to stick towards the more original aims, which surely had ~2023 onwards as the focus point for list development and flag contention.

Even if the club opts for something in line with what I say above, it would not surprise me if there is a bit of fringe horse trading, where we get rid of some fringe first teamers/depth (players like Clarke/Gray etc) and try to find one good experienced player that would be a genuine first 22 player (I read somewhere this week someone mention Josh Caddy - not saying he is the player, but someone of that sort of profile - experienced, unlikely to cost a whole lot in trade value, reasonable salary, but likely to be first 22).

It will be very interesting to see what our strategy in trade/draft time ends up being.

[Markwebbos]

From memory, we normally wait until after the Bob Skilton Medal to make announcements regarding delistings. Is my memory correct?

I think that would make sense

[bloodspirit]

The Hun is apparently reporting that the Suns may be interested in Parker. Makes a lot of sense - he would be ideal for them and there's the connection with Stewie Dew. They should go all out to get him if they think they're in with a sniff in my opinion. I hope we don't lose him. He's currently our most important player, with Mills and then Heeney close behind.

[barry]

The Hun is apparently reporting that the Suns may be interested in Parker. Makes a lot of sense - he would be ideal for them and there's the connection with Stewie Dew. They should go all out to get him if they think they're in with a sniff in my opinion. I hope we don't lose him. He's currently our most important player, with Mills and then Heeney close behind.

He'd be a perfect addition to them. But if the foot was on the other boot, he'd be a perfect addition to us too.

Considering the difficulty of getting players to transfer interstate to Sydney from other clubs, and the premium we have to pay to do so, I dont think we should be letting anyone go who is in the top 20 on the list.

[AB Swannie]

I agree that Parker would be awesome for the Suns. However, they have enough salary cap problems themselves trying to retain King, Lukoscius, Rankine, Anderson, Rowell amongst many others over the next few years.

[Markwebbos]

The Swans (to my knowledge) have never plundered any other NSW or QLD club). Not sure the Suns can complain about being raided if this is true.

[Markwebbos]

I can’t find anything on the Hun. I can find a speculative article where pundits say he’d be a great target for the Suns.

[Markwebbos]

Sam Edmund on SEN today

Sam Edmund’s trade update on Parker, Hewett, Narkle and more

“The player wants to stay, and the club wants to keep the player…He is at the centre of a contract stand-off with the Swans, at the moment people tell you that the Swans just can’t move, and Parker’s camp have been frustrated by the inability to get something done at this point.

On George he says he’s almost certain to leave because Swans aren’t talking about a new contract.

Makes me think Parker’s (and other) deals may actually be contingent on Hewett finding a new home. He’s the first domino as it were.

Which would also explain the radio silence.

[longmile]

Sam Edmund on SEN today

Sam Edmund’s trade update on Parker, Hewett, Narkle and more

“The player wants to stay, and the club wants to keep the player.” but

“He is at the centre of a contract stand-off with the Swans, at the moment people tell you that the Swans just can’t move, and Parker’s camp have been frustrated by the inability to get something done at this point.

On George he says:

“He’s the one that’s almost certain to leave, we say that because the Swans have showed no inclination to start talks on a new contract with him.”

Makes me think Parker’s (and other) deals may actually be contingent on Hewett finding a new home. He’s the first domino as it were.

Yep AFL.com is also reporting Parker and Dawson likely to stay but Hewett and Stephens likely to go.

No word on Reid or McLean.

Think Hewett is criminally underrated. If he goes plays for Carlton as discussed, get ready to hear about how much of a superstar he is and why would Sydney let him go.

[mcs]

Sam Edmund on SEN today

Sam Edmund’s trade update on Parker, Hewett, Narkle and more

“The player wants to stay, and the club wants to keep the player…He is at the centre of a contract stand-off with the Swans, at the moment people tell you that the Swans just can’t move, and Parker’s camp have been frustrated by the inability to get something done at this point.

On George he says he’s almost certain to leave because Swans aren’t talking about a new contract.

Makes me think Parker’s (and other) deals may actually be contingent on Hewett finding a new home. He’s the first domino as it were.

Which would also explain the radio silence.

I find it hard to believe from the article on Fox that we are only offering Parker 2 years at 500K. 2 years perhaps, but only 500K??? Surely that would be a significant pay cut compared to what he would be on now.