2021 trading, drafting and list management: players and personnel

[troyjones2525]

Really want Ladhams now and it will turn out an OK trade period for us. Would love it to be for pick 39 but if it has to be 31 then so be it I guess. Definitely don't want to have to pay a higher price than that though!

Sent from my SM-G998B using Tapatalk

[MattW]

Aliir was in contract and in our best 22 when we traded him last year. For pick 39 (? or thereabouts).

I don't agree we have near zero ruck depth. Sinclair, while not great, will always give a wholesome effort if called upon. Amartey hasn't done more than relief ruck so far, but he might be capable of more if needed. We could also give Reid another year.

The reality is that if we are going to contend next year, we need Hickey to play the majority of games. But we do have enough in reserve to pick the odd game here and there to give him a rest.

Thanks for the post. Two points in response:

- We lost that Aliir trade - we should have gained a better pick. However, I think we were willing to let him go, in circumstances where we needed ruckman in and Port were offering him a better contract than our extension offer - those facts exposed us to losing the trade. (As an aside, although we lost the trade, it was defensible given Hickey's performance. I doubt we finish as high as sixth if we keep Aliir and don't sign Hickey!)

- I disagree with the apparent value you've with assessed to Sinclair, Amartey and Reid. Sinclair gives effort yes, but he has not been a winning player for a year or two. Joel is promising but still very raw, with two career games with greater than ten hitouts. If we re-sign Sam, it's hard, given his injury record, to bank on him playing any games as a lead ruck. Ladhams gives the assurance required for a premiership contender (our season is dead if Hickey suffers a 6-8 week injury and we're relying in the three you mention). But, he'll be best 22 anyway. Three of the four preliminary finalists this year played with two specialist rucks in their final game of the year - including the premier with the best ruckman of the lot.

[MattW]

Its an interesting debate as to whether we would have been better off to have accepted Adelaide's early offer of this year's 17 pick or what we ended up with - a most likely low first round pick for next season. Normally, one would say this year's pick is better for the reasons outlined by Ludwig a while back (one year's extra contribution by the selected player) but the uncertainty of the form of players due to Covid interruptions makes it a less clear cut comparison this time. Also, we weren't to know then that Adelaide would subsequently make that huge offer for the No 1 pick that included all of their first rounders.

I prefer Melbourne's first next year to the Bulldogs' pick 17 this year. In part because it could end up being a better pick, but also I don't think we're much interested in high draft picks this year but have the opportunity to wield two firsts next year.

- - - Updated - - -

That’s disappointing about JD, but clearly we had no other card to play. I’ll be interested to see what else we get up to.

I really hope we don’t overpay for Ladhams.

Still wouldn’t mind us having a crack at Sicily.

Yes, it's interesting that we reached the agreement tonight, freeing us up to attend to something else tomorrow. Agree that we might look for a key defender, and I'd be happy with Sicily.

[707]

We took unders but our hands were tied.

The debate really is whether taking 17 early, that's assuming the Cows had an agreement to get it from the Dogs, would have been better than getting Dees 2022 first very late in the trade period as we may have been able to get involved in other pick shenanigans.

The secondary debate is the two picks are going to be similar numbers in their drafts but will next year be a better draft just because of more exposed form. And that is only a debate if we don't trade it to Port in the Ladhams trade.

I won't be happy if the final wash up is simply Dawson out for Ladhams in

[Bangalore Swans]

Its an interesting debate as to whether we would have been better off to have accepted Adelaide's early offer of this year's 17 pick or what we ended up with - a most likely low first round pick for next season. Normally, one would say this year's pick is better for the reasons outlined by Ludwig a while back (one year's extra contribution by the selected player) but the uncertainty of the form of players due to Covid interruptions makes it a less clear cut comparison this time. Also, we weren't to know then that Adelaide would subsequently make that huge offer for the No 1 pick that included all of their first rounders.

MCS has a view that the Swans desire future picks over 2021 picks. They know what’s coming in their Academy. The Swans may like having two 1st rounds picks in 2022.

Demons can be up and down year to year. They may have a bad year in 2022 and the Dawson pick comes in at value.

I heard a rumour that the Robe council is going to be renaming a water way near Robe. The waterway will be renamed “Dawson’s Creek” in acknowledgment of their returning hero.

[Meg]

I heard a rumour that the Robe council is going to be renaming a water way near Robe. The waterway will be renamed “Dawson’s Creek” in acknowledgment of their returning hero.

There is already a town not far from Robe named in honour of his partner ... Dawson doesn’t need any more accolades.

[WomblingFree]

MCS has a view that the Swans desire future picks over 2021 picks. They know what’s coming in their Academy. The Swans may like having two 1st rounds picks in 2022.

Demons can be up and down year to year. They may have a bad year in 2022 and the Dawson pick comes in at value.

I heard a rumour that the Robe council is going to be renaming a water way near Robe. The waterway will be renamed “Dawson’s Creek” in acknowledgment of their returning hero.

I would have thought we’d be aware of any academy guns for 2022 draft by now.

I could see two reasonable reasons to trade out to 2022

(1) ambivalence about this years draft - a lot of analysts are finding it hard to pick between 10-40. Next year may provide more certainty for a late first round pick

(2) that with cap space largely cleared we are planning on being very active next year with a second first rounder being very handy.

[barry]

Dee's first rounder is going to be somewhere between pick 12 and 18.
It suits us better to be future because we will be in the post buddy salary cap era.

We worked out his value was pick 10, so not quite fair value, but good enough. Hope the demons get big heads and tank.

[dejavoodoo44]

Aliir was in contract and in our best 22 when we traded him last year. For pick 39 (? or thereabouts).

I don't agree we have near zero ruck depth. Sinclair, while not great, will always give a wholesome effort if called upon. Amartey hasn't done more than relief ruck so far, but he might be capable of more if needed. We could also give Reid another year.

The reality is that if we are going to contend next year, we need Hickey to play the majority of games. But we do have enough in reserve to pick the odd game here and there to give him a rest.

Yes, I was quite impressed by Amartey in the ruck last season, and I'm also quite bullish about McAndrew: although that's from a limited sample size. But from what I saw, apart from his obvious height, McAndrew had pace, tackling ability and was just starting to improve his contested marking and his positional sense.

Which makes me a bit ambivalent about Ladhams. On the one hand, I think that our future ruck needs could be covered by Amartey, McAndrew and by using a second round pick drafting a project ruckman. On the other hand, maybe management are thinking that we're currently in the premiership window, and therefore, if Hickey went down with injury, then Ladhams would be a better bet to fill that possibly urgent gap.

[dejavoodoo44]

Dee's first rounder is going to be somewhere between pick 12 and 18.
It suits us better to be future because we will be in the post buddy salary cap era.

We worked out his value was pick 10, so not quite fair value, but good enough. Hope the demons get big heads and tank.

I hope the Demons are still celebrating.

[tlock]

Ok I’ll be the one to bite. Who the hell is Hodor?

In the Bitcoin community they use a term called HODL - hold on for dear life, a position where you hold onto your bitcoin and never sell. I think they named it after Hodor in Game of Thrones.

Anyway what I meant was the Swans should hold onto our positions in the trade and not budge.

[bloodspirit]

Well, we were left with little choice and read the writing on the wall. The Crows screwed us because they could.

Do we regret not taking pick 17? I'm glad we put up a fight even though ultimately it's just symbolic.

One advantage of having an extra first next year is that's when we also clear the Buddy salary out of our cap and might go hard at prising a young star out of another team. I've got my eyes on Lukosius.

[Ludwig]

My understanding is that the offer of pick 17 from this year required us to give back a pick. I don't know what that pick was, maybe 39, but it wasn't an offer of a clean swap of pick 17 for Dawson. In that case, next year's pick is an improvement, but still way unders.

[The Runner]

I really hope we use that pick to get another in this years draft or for a ready made player

[ugg]

I really hope we use that pick to get another in this years draft or for a ready made player

I suspect it’ll be used in the Ladhams trade, otherwise I don’t understand why we accepted it now.