2021 trading, drafting and list management: players and personnel

[Ruck'n'Roll]

Why do you think a team with an aging midfield would get rid of a big young inside midfielder like Charlie Constable? Stephen Wells is a very clever list manager.
Even when Josh Kennedy goes, we are not going to look for a like for like replacement. We don't want a like for like replacement, as good as JPK has been. We have evolved into a different team requiring different kinds of players.
The Swans want midfielders who are quick and can move the ball out of the congestion and get it forward before the opposition get a chance to set their defence. Those are the type of midfielders we will be looking for in the draft or recruiting from other clubs.

I was one of them Ludwig. I even suggested the other Pies big inside midfielder Rupert Wills. My thinking at the time was one of them could be the next JPK. What last season showed was a big body is one thing but the ability to break away from the contest is more crucial. The day of the monster in the middle is over.

I think there's still room for someone in the middle with brute strength. In an ideal world you'd have people with the strength and power to break away - the Dangerfields, Petraccas, Martins of this world - but they are hard to find. Even though he's nearing his footballing end, there were still some wonderful plays last season from Kennedy, whereby he was able to hold his ground with a couple of opponents hanging off him, and find a team mate in a great spot, or running past.
So there is a role for them, but they have to be very good.
And while JPK doesn't have explosive pace - or any pace by AFL standards - he's still fit and runs hard. So he's not limited to winning the ball in close. He can also work to find space and act as a receiver.

The other consideration is the cyclic nature of AFL. Who knows how long big midfielders will go out of vogue for? The demise of the ruckman has been predicted so often, yet they seem back in favour again.
FWIW I think as long as they have sufficient pace to avoid being a liability, there'll be places in squads for all sorts of midfielders including those whose primary attribute is brute strength.

[Ruck'n'Roll]

With the PSD, it's gotten to the point where I've heard a couple of media commentators suggest clubs should be ruthless exploiting the PSD in getting uncontracted players like Dawson for nothing. No trade negotiating, just get player to walk straight through to them with his club receiving nothing.

This should be a worry to the AFL that this sort of thinking is spruiking in the media. The fix is simple as mentioned above by MCS & others.

I think the PSD was designed to help boost the playing stocks of cellar dwellers with A graders that wanted out of their present club.
We certainly made use of it in the 90's. Not just with Paul Roos and Demolished Dermie either.
The Swans picked up Richard Osborne in the PSD, then traded him when the very next year to the Dogs at a profit. Such an approach may be worth considering for a bottom of the table club.

[Auntie.Gerald]

I personally would lean towards Constable at 192cm and a lean build more a backline player similar to Mills role prior to 2021 and what Dawson played when down back ie a intercepting attacking defender

I don't think Charlie would make our midfield rotation as yet but might over time

[Roadrunner]

I personally would lean towards Constable at 192cm and a lean build more a backline player similar to Mills role prior to 2021 and what Dawson played when down back ie a intercepting attacking defender

I don't think Charlie would make our midfield rotation as yet but might over time

Is it a case like JPK where he hasn’t had the opportunity to break into the side, or he simply hasn’t got it? If it’s the former, maybe worth a punt but KB and team would have a pretty fair idea. Interesting to see how we will use our latter picks.

[Bangalore Swans]

I think the PSD was designed to help boost the playing stocks of cellar dwellers with A graders that wanted out of their present club.
We certainly made use of it in the 90's. Not just with Paul Roos and Demolished Dermie either.
The Swans picked up Richard Osborne in the PSD, then traded him when the very next year to the Dogs at a profit. Such an approach may be worth considering for a bottom of the table club.

What a post. The PSD changed our club for the better. Paul Roos was a brilliant player then a brilliant coach.

Think about how Fitzroy felt about Roos, their favourite son, leaving in the PSD?

We can’t now complain about JD and the threat of the PSD. We are a strong successful club. We should cop it sweet.

[Roadrunner]

COB gets it and I stand alongside COB in supporting COB’s opinion. COB’s post is very fair and rational.

Bangalore and COB- we’ve said it a million times before: clubs do what is in their best interest and loyalty is a two way thing. The issue with Jordan is the WAY he went about it- firstly being dishonest with the fans with a false reassurance, then not telling the club of his intentions until the last moment, and finally by nominating a club thus considerably weakening the potential return and bargaining power for our club. Of course he is entitled to go home after 6 years if he is out of contract. But a player who was just average ( but talented) for all but the last year and a bit and now commands well above average coin, can be expected to repay the club without disadvantaging himself. The Crows were always going to get him over Port, but he could have forced the fruit tingles to pay us a bit more had he allowed Port to be in the game.

It’s done now and we move on. But please don’t defend him- he doesn’t deserve it!

[mcs]

What a post. The PSD changed our club for the better. Paul Roos was a brilliant player then a brilliant coach.

Think about how Fitzroy felt about Roos, their favourite son, leaving in the PSD?

We can’t now complain about JD and the threat of the PSD. We are a strong successful club. We should cop it sweet.

The PSD in the early 1990s was a very different beast to what it is now - there used to be something like 50 odd players taken each year in it. Now it is lucky to reach double figures. The advent of Free Agency should have seen the PSD reformed, but the AFL didn't move on it - that was truly a 'break point' that means comparing what happens now to what happened prior is pointless. And that's before the fact timings around trading and drafts used to be very different as well.

If I remember rightly, a key reason out of contract players that didn't secure a trade originally ended up in the PSD was that standard player contracts used to run to later in the year than they do now (30 November maybe - if someone can remember the detail better than me please correct!) and trade week was directly before the national draft. Which meant an OOC player that didn't get a move during trade week had zero ability to nominate for the main draft anyway, as it was too late, and so PSD was the only option.

But with free agency and the rejigged contract timeframes alongside a lot more seperation between trade week and the national draft, there is zero reason why uncontracted players could not as a next step be required to enter the draft proper.

[dejavoodoo44]

The PSD in the early 1990s was a very different beast to what it is now - there used to be something like 50 odd players taken each year in it. Now it is lucky to reach double figures. The advent of Free Agency should have seen the PSD reformed, but the AFL didn't move on it - that was truly a 'break point' that means comparing what happens now to what happened prior is pointless. And that's before the fact timings around trading and drafts used to be very different as well.

If I remember rightly, a key reason out of contract players that didn't secure a trade originally ended up in the PSD was that standard player contracts used to run to later in the year than they do now (30 November maybe - if someone can remember the detail better than me please correct!) and trade week was directly before the national draft. Which meant an OOC player that didn't get a move during trade week had zero ability to nominate for the main draft anyway, as it was too late, and so PSD was the only option.

But with free agency and the rejigged contract timeframes alongside a lot more seperation between trade week and the national draft, there is zero reason why uncontracted players could not as a next step be required to enter the draft proper.

Yes, I was just going to post much the same thing, about the fallacy of pretending that nothing has changed over the last 25 years or so, and then doubling down on that silliness, by using that fallacy to claim that the system in its present form can't be criticised.

I won't repeat your arguments, but I'll just add a few stats. Since us taking Roosy in 1995 was mentioned, I looked up how many players were taken in the PSD, at around that time. In the five drafts from 1993 to 97, the number was 216. In the last five drafts, there's been four. And two of those, Martin and Hately, were holdouts.

[liz]

In the last five drafts, there's been four. And two of those, Martin and Hately, were holdouts.

To save me the bother of looking it up, who were the other two?

The comparison with the Roos situation is daft. He was a veteran of the competition who would have qualified for free agency many times over.

[dejavoodoo44]

To save me the bother of looking it up, who were the other two?

The comparison with the Roos situation is daft. He was a veteran of the competition who would have qualified for free agency many times over.

Cameron O'Shea in 2018 and Michael Hartley in 2020. Can't really recall who O'Shea is, but it appears that he just went from the Carlton feeder club, Northern Blues, to Carlton.

[Bangalore Swans]

Bangalore and COB- we’ve said it a million times before: clubs do what is in their best interest and loyalty is a two way thing. The issue with Jordan is the WAY he went about it- firstly being dishonest with the fans with a false reassurance, then not telling the club of his intentions until the last moment, and finally by nominating a club thus considerably weakening the potential return and bargaining power for our club. Of course he is entitled to go home after 6 years if he is out of contract. But a player who was just average ( but talented) for all but the last year and a bit and now commands well above average coin, can be expected to repay the club without disadvantaging himself. The Crows were always going to get him over Port, but he could have forced the fruit tingles to pay us a bit more had he allowed Port to be in the game.

It’s done now and we move on. But please don’t defend him- he doesn’t deserve it!

Why does Jordan owe the club something because he is now above average and had a good year?

If we apply your logic to this scenario then the club owes Matt Ling another contract because he worked hard and was unlucky with injuries and was below average.

Maybe Sam Reid is owed something by the club for his hard fought decade?

Jordan owes Sydney nothing and Sydney owe Sam Reid nothing. This is business and both sides play the game.

[bloodspirit]

Is it a case like JPK where he hasn’t had the opportunity to break into the side, or he simply hasn’t got it? If it’s the former, maybe worth a punt but KB and team would have a pretty fair idea. Interesting to see how we will use our latter picks.

It's clearly a different situation to JPK. While both players may have been held out of the first team by the strength of the incumbents, JPK was nowhere close to being delisted. The Hawks wanted him but just couldn't offer him the opportunity he needed. Whereas the Cats have just delisted Constable to facilitate his move to another club for free: Mitch Cleary on Twitter: "Geelong has agreed to delist Charlie Constable to make him available to other clubs as a Delisted Free Agent. Should he not receive any interest elsewhere, there remains a possibility he will be re-rookied by the Cats @7NewsMelbourne @7AFL" / Twitter.

[RogueSwan]

Boring bagging Dawson at every opportunity. Get over it and move on. ... Can't have it both ways. ...
Cheer Cheer ...

+1

[Ludwig]

Bangalore and COB- we’ve said it a million times before: clubs do what is in their best interest and loyalty is a two way thing. The issue with Jordan is the WAY he went about it- firstly being dishonest with the fans with a false reassurance, then not telling the club of his intentions until the last moment, and finally by nominating a club thus considerably weakening the potential return and bargaining power for our club. Of course he is entitled to go home after 6 years if he is out of contract. But a player who was just average ( but talented) for all but the last year and a bit and now commands well above average coin, can be expected to repay the club without disadvantaging himself. The Crows were always going to get him over Port, but he could have forced the fruit tingles to pay us a bit more had he allowed Port to be in the game.

It’s done now and we move on. But please don’t defend him- he doesn’t deserve it!

It's the way Dawson went about it that irks me and a lot of others.

This post sums it up well, except that I don't think players should have the right to go home, or use it as an excuse. The PSD should be ended and if an OOC player can't come to terms with their current club, they can nominate for the draft and go to the club that selects them. When they become free agents, then they can sign with whomever they want.

The go home excuse is a big disadvantage to the northern clubs, especially GC and GWS. A person who doesn't like to travel shouldn't apply for a job as a traveling salesman. Don't be a surgeon if you faint at the sight of blood. The same should apply to AFL players. If you want to stay near mummy, don't get a job that might take you away from home for 8 years.

[Smith]

That is a very narrow view of the world. I tend to believe Jordan was sincere when he communicated fans had nothing to worry about, but things change.

I sit here in Sydney today having spent the past 3 years abroad. At Xmas relocation was not on the agenda yet by March we were back home. Change of jobs, schools, selling cars etc is not something you take lightly. It was not my intent to return, and my preference was to remain, however wife and family considerations came into play due to COVID. What has happened over the past 2 years have impacted a lot of people and the desire to be nearer family can be genuine. Until you are away from family with no ability to return should there be sickness or death, it is hard to know how you would react. Yes it looks to be resolving but there is no certainty. A new variant could come, borders could be shut again, who knows.

I agree the mechanism of the PSD is wrong, but I don’t begrudge him for making that decision. I also agree he should have been able to nominate SA only. Hopefully changes are made.

For all we know the contract offer from Sydney increased over time, if they had of put our best foot forward earlier in the year he could have remained.

Such is life. Disappointed, but wish him well.