2022 List management, trading, drafting

[stevoswan]

Great, thoughtful post. Thanks deja.

I'm more with NeonBible and Auntie Gerald than stevo in relation to Dawson. I don't think he lacked passion for the Swans, he's just a laconic kind of guy from the country. And these days footy is enough of an industry that he is entitled to look after himself. I think of him regretfully but wish him well - the Crows, not so much.

Which he did....at our expense. We as Swans fans owe him nothing and that includes wishing him the best in football IMO. As I said ages ago, as long as he is happy in his big house and near family, that's as far as my sentiments go. As for footy success......nah.

[Aprilbr]

No love for Dawson from me. Mislead us (Club and supporters) about re-signing and then insisted on going to a Club that was in the position to screw us over which they happily proceeded to do. I hope we smash him (within the rules of course) and the Crows this season.

[bloodspirit]

To be clear, I wish him well in a kind of bland, general way the same I would do most people - not particularly on the footy field. I am more heartfelt in my well wishing for Hewett, Luke Parks, Nic Newman, Aliir and even Gary Rohan. But somehow I still have more goodwill for Dawso than for Mitchell - and I don't think he exactly betrayed us either.

[i'm-uninformed2]

The ability to see and process options is an interesting topic and one that gives me a bit more appreciation of the task faced by the recruiting staff. In that, they're skills that are probably hard to pick up by testing and data, but are more likely to be noticed through plenty of observation.

On observation: seeing which players have a higher level of mental processing ability, is probably easiest when they're compared to players that have less than average ability to see the game. For instance, there wouldn't be that much difference in the fitness level, athletic prowess and attitude of Gulden, Franklin and Papley, compared to the group of Clarke, Bell and Ronke. But time and time again, the first three would have successfully completed an onfield task, in the time that the other group were still assessing what the task was. So, it's fairly easy to conclude, that there's a difference in processing ability between group A and group B. However, assessing the difference between very good mental processors and elite processors, would be more difficult. And for recruiting staff observing juniors, that could involve going to an awful lot of games and watching even more footage.

And I'm not sure how footy IQ could be tested at draft camp, in a similar way that athletic ability is tested through beep tests, time trials, etc. Maybe you could test reaction time, but that tends to just measure speed of response to a stimulus, rather than a talent for assessing a range of stimuli. Possibly more useful would be something like distracting a participant in the foreground, then quizzing them on what they observed in the background? Although, a confound there, is that might be more of a test of memory rather than observation? That is, on a football field, someone might see a range of options and pick the right option, without actually committing any of those options to memory.

And there'd be problems with data as well. Disposal efficiency stats could be helpful, but they're likely to be affected by a range of influences: how well team mates run into space; how much shepherding they do to protect the ball carrier; how often a player gets possession in heavy traffic, etc. So stats may not be that much use for assessing footy IQ?

One thing that may be handy is networking? That is, since recruiters have limits on how many games they can get to, they do have networks of contacts, who report back to them on likely prospects. And I suspect that a few of those reports, will involve something like, "I don't really know what it is about this kid, but he seems to use the ball really well, so I think you should come down and have a look at him".

So, the recruiter would then come down, to process just how well the prospect processes the game.

Great post.

I think one of the challenges for recruiters the past two years is how to assess footy IQ, when because of COVID, there was a lot of junior footy cancelled. I got the feeling from an interview KB did before the draft this year that he regarded it as a bit of a crap shoot accordingly.

It's one of the benefits the Swans had with, say, Gulden. We'd have watched a lot of his footy up close and knew he had a lot of attributes, but probably had a special appreciation for his elite footy IQ. Other clubs will have watched him, but not as much, and probably focused on his size, rather than his brain (there's a joke in there somewhere), and let him slide to pick 32.

[O'Reilly Boy]

There's quite a nice spine of ex-Swans out there:

B: Aliir, Newman

Mids: Nankervis, Mitchell, Jones, Hannebery, Hewitt, Dawson

F: Rohan Darcy Membrey


Have I missed anyone?

[liz]

Great post.

I think one of the challenges for recruiters the past two years is how to assess footy IQ, when because of COVID, there was a lot of junior footy cancelled. I got the feeling from an interview KB did before the draft this year that he regarded it as a bit of a crap shoot accordingly.

It's one of the benefits the Swans had with, say, Gulden. We'd have watched a lot of his footy up close and knew he had a lot of attributes, but probably had a special appreciation for his elite footy IQ. Other clubs will have watched him, but not as much, and probably focused on his size, rather than his brain (there's a joke in there somewhere), and let him slide to pick 32.

Not just his footy IQ but his exquisite kicking skills too. I reckon I'd see him play maybe 10 games or so at underage level (including a couple at NEAFL level) but hadn't seen evidence of footskills that good. But at underage level, where he was the team's best player (or amongst them) and thus expected to rack up loads of possessions and get to contest after contest, and where he couldn't rely on team mates to run to the right places to take best advantage of his kicking skills, I don't think they came to the fore.

The club, on the other hand, would have had a much better idea of what he was capable of.

I'd love to know at what pick the Swans would have matched a bid. He was talked about, pre-draft, as likely to go in the early 20s. I wonder if Beatson and Dalrymple were already sniggering at the idea they might get him for that price, well before he lasted another ten or so picks.

[Ludwig]

I'd love to know at what pick the Swans would have matched a bid. He was talked about, pre-draft, as likely to go in the early 20s. I wonder if Beatson and Dalrymple were already sniggering at the idea they might get him for that price, well before he lasted another ten or so picks.

I think we would have matched any bid, even if it came in the top 10 and we had to go into deficit. As you said yourself, we knew the kind of player we were getting with Gulden, and he would be too good to let go.

I was hoping he would last until the 2nd round. IIRC, I think we had the points covered once we hit the early 20s. A lot of academy players slide beyond fair value once they get out of the top 10. I think a lot of clubs just can't be bothered bidding on players that they don't follow because they know they're going to another club anyway.

[dejavoodoo44]

I think we would have matched any bid, even if it came in the top 10 and we had to go into deficit. As you said yourself, we knew the kind of player we were getting with Gulden, and he would be too good to let go.

I was hoping he would last until the 2nd round. IIRC, I think we had the points covered once we hit the early 20s. A lot of academy players slide beyond fair value once they get out of the top 10. I think a lot of clubs just can't be bothered bidding on players that they don't follow because they know they're going to another club anyway.

Before round one last year, I certainly remember telling a few non-Swans friends of mine, that while I thought Campbell was worth pick 5, Gulden was the real gun, and pick 32 was a real steal. I'm sure other Swans felt the same way.

[Auntie.Gerald]

agree x 3 Liz

also i do remember it was yourself as one of the early reporters re Wicks and his northern beaches strut and tenacity

i am absolutely amazed where we are in 2021/22 vs 2020 where i honestly thought we had missed the boat to bring in a little more talent via trades to compliment the legacy years talent we had in Bud, Kennedy, Rampes etc

2022i am so pumped for

The changes in in recruitment, coaches, game style and players merging jumping miles ahead has been over whelming pleasing !

[graemed]

The ability to see and process options is an interesting topic and one that gives me a bit more appreciation of the task faced by the recruiting staff. In that, they're skills that are probably hard to pick up by testing and data, but are more likely to be noticed through plenty of observation.

On observation: seeing which players have a higher level of mental processing ability, is probably easiest when they're compared to players that have less than average ability to see the game. For instance, there wouldn't be that much difference in the fitness level, athletic prowess and attitude of Gulden, Franklin and Papley, compared to the group of Clarke, Bell and Ronke. But time and time again, the first three would have successfully completed an onfield task, in the time that the other group were still assessing what the task was. So, it's fairly easy to conclude, that there's a difference in processing ability between group A and group B. However, assessing the difference between very good mental processors and elite processors, would be more difficult. And for recruiting staff observing juniors, that could involve going to an awful lot of games and watching even more footage.

And I'm not sure how footy IQ could be tested at draft camp, in a similar way that athletic ability is tested through beep tests, time trials, etc. Maybe you could test reaction time, but that tends to just measure speed of response to a stimulus, rather than a talent for assessing a range of stimuli. Possibly more useful would be something like distracting a participant in the foreground, then quizzing them on what they observed in the background? Although, a confound there, is that might be more of a test of memory rather than observation? That is, on a football field, someone might see a range of options and pick the right option, without actually committing any of those options to memory.

And there'd be problems with data as well. Disposal efficiency stats could be helpful, but they're likely to be affected by a range of influences: how well team mates run into space; how much shepherding they do to protect the ball carrier; how often a player gets possession in heavy traffic, etc. So stats may not be that much use for assessing footy IQ?

One thing that may be handy is networking? That is, since recruiters have limits on how many games they can get to, they do have networks of contacts, who report back to them on likely prospects. And I suspect that a few of those reports, will involve something like, "I don't really know what it is about this kid, but he seems to use the ball really well, so I think you should come down and have a look at him".

So, the recruiter would then come down, to process just how well the prospect processes the game.

While I certainly agree that both Gulden and Papley have that special quality that gives them time to make the right choices at the right time. Pendlebury has it, (gulp) Greene has it, Dawson has it. It doesn't matter that they may lack real break away pace, they don't need it because their brain seems to operating at an immeasurably faster speed than those around them. Recall the faking of the handball to Franklin v West Coast, the goal off the ground by Papley, how do they have the time to think like that? Unfortunately, I don't think Franklin is in the same category, Franklin exists on talent, speed, anticipation, determination and his size. His skills are pretty sharp too but I have seen him getting caught in possession too often to believe he has outstanding decision making skills. Bell, on the other hand did something wonderful against West Coast that did inspire me to think that there may be something more. The tap over the top to Heeney(?) when he knew he has about to be obliterated was "specccial!!!".

[liz]

also i do remember it was yourself as one of the early reporters re Wicks and his northern beaches strut and tenacity

Nah, I'll claim picking out Gulden (not hard) but not Wicks. I was a little surprised when he was given a spot on the rookie list after watching him play a NEAFL season as a top up. He's well outperformed what I thought he was capable of.

[707]

Nah, I'll claim picking out Gulden (not hard) but not Wicks. I was a little surprised when he was given a spot on the rookie list after watching him play a NEAFL season as a top up. He's well outperformed what I thought he was capable of.

I remember your post Liz after, if I recall correctly, you saw Errol blitz a game as a 16yo against 18yo's. Think you stuck your neck out and predicted Errol would play R1 2021 for us, or something similar.

The club would have known how good Errol was pre draft and obviously kept very quiet and mumbled about not having suficient points etc, so clubs would let him slide past first round. That he slid so far was an absolute bonus, particularly given how good he has turned out to be. Let's not forget that his height was a big (LOL) factor in that slide.

Early days yet but any academy watchers know if there's likely draftable players in this year's crop?

[dejavoodoo44]

While I certainly agree that both Gulden and Papley have that special quality that gives them time to make the right choices at the right time. Pendlebury has it, (gulp) Greene has it, Dawson has it. It doesn't matter that they may lack real break away pace, they don't need it because their brain seems to operating at an immeasurably faster speed than those around them. Recall the faking of the handball to Franklin v West Coast, the goal off the ground by Papley, how do they have the time to think like that? Unfortunately, I don't think Franklin is in the same category, Franklin exists on talent, speed, anticipation, determination and his size. His skills are pretty sharp too but I have seen him getting caught in possession too often to believe he has outstanding decision making skills. Bell, on the other hand did something wonderful against West Coast that did inspire me to think that there may be something more. The tap over the top to Heeney(?) when he knew he has about to be obliterated was "specccial!!!".

I can see where you're coming from with Buddy, but I think the times that he gets caught, tend to be close to goal and where a team mate has got the ball in his general direction, despite him being outnumbered. Here he's only real option is to somehow try to fashion a shot at goal, even if that doesn't have a high chance of success. Whereas up the field, he's much more likely to hit a team mate with an excellent pass or to create something out of not much.

With Bell, he can do some good things when he plays instinctively. However, I don't think he really sees the game well as a whole. This could be a result of him being a late convert who's still unsure about positioning, when to go for the ball and when to hold back. Possibly being used largely in negating roles or running as a decoy doesn't really help? So, if he's hesitancy is more of an experience thing, then I wouldn't mind seeing him spend a few months in the VFL, playing as a midfielder, with more of a see ball, get ball role. Hopefully, that would help his confidence and positional sense.

[Mr Magoo]

I remember your post Liz after, if I recall correctly, you saw Errol blitz a game as a 16yo against 18yo's. Think you stuck your neck out and predicted Errol would play R1 2021 for us, or something similar.

The club would have known how good Errol was pre draft and obviously kept very quiet and mumbled about not having suficient points etc, so clubs would let him slide past first round. That he slid so far was an absolute bonus, particularly given how good he has turned out to be. Let's not forget that his height was a big (LOL) factor in that slide.

Early days yet but any academy watchers know if there's likely draftable players in this year's crop?

Difficult with this years crop as they are largely untested due to two years of covid with therefore no u16 Nationals the previous year or U17 nationals last year, so while they definitely have a few players who have shown promise , it may be this year that we get to see someone step forward. They had a pretty good opinion of a kid called Billie King - he was playing up in u18s in trial games in his 16s year but otherwise there are a few talented players with no absolute single standouts at this time.

[Auntie.Gerald]

Liz i might have mixed up with Barra?

oops