2023 List Management

[Maltopia]

The fact that Serong barracked for the Swans is irrelevant. I have barracked for them all my life but that hasn't made me any closer to playing for them.

Serong backing the Swans is a factor to consider in regards to flight risk. A player who has barracked for a team their whole live is assumed to want to stay at a club past initial free agency and hardship, more than a player that supported a different team, all other things being equal.

[waswan]

The fact that Serong barracked for the Swans is irrelevant. I have barracked for them all my life but that hasn't made me any closer to playing for them.

I barrack for them too, but I was never in a draft class, never in the changerooms of the team I barracked for only weeks before getting drafted, 2 spots behind the spud they selected

But yes, I agree with you all, we need to move on.

[Markwebbos]

Phew!!

Do people think / hope KB and crew are trying to move up the board? Or do we think next years draft will be better and we should hold both first rounders?

[stevoswan]

It's probably best to move on from this. It's possible to find a few draft clangers for every club where a far better player was passed up for someone who was nowhere near as good. Every draft has a few.

To show how much we're overthinking this, Adelaide did even worse in the 2019 draft: they drafted Fischer McAsey at pick 6 who only played 10 games before being delisted. Serong was not drafted until pick 8.

Yeah, I was just replying to barry from two pages ago. I'm trying to move on.

[stevoswan]

Could you guys help me out. I couldn't find your 2019 posts criticizing our selection of Stephens over Serong. Those posts deserve acclaim and should be highlighted here.

Bit cheeky Ludwig....you know most of us on here are hindsight heroes!

Although I do recall a lot of posters highlighting that Serong was a Swans supporter and I also recall wondering why we went for Stephens over Serong and may have even commented on that.....but I trusted our recruiters judgement. Having said that, how hard did you really check the 2019 posts?

Anyway, it's totally fine and reasonable to say now that they stuffed up....because they absolutely did!

PS: I've since read back the posts following Ludwig's that suggest we 'move on' and will just say I had to respond to his post.....but yes, I will now move on

[liz]

I know the numbers have been crunched as the trades have dropped, but can someone tell me where I am wrong here:

We had 46 players on our 2023 list.
We delisted 6, 3 retired and we traded Stephens. That leaves us 36 from the 2023 list including those not yet re-signed.
We have added 4 new players from other clubs. That pushes the 2024 list back up to 40.
Surely that should leave 6 vacant spots, and with just 3 draft picks available we are still going to be 3 players down on 2023.

I know there are intricacies involving rookie lists etc, but the comments people have been throwing around on this board about things being tight don't seem to ring true, especially around having to cut Reid and/or Wicks or drafting just two players.

As someone pointed out, we've already added Buller and Arnold. So that leaves 4 spots to be filled, which is what has already been stated. One of those spots is a Cat B rookie spot (vacated by Sheather) so there are a limited number of players who can fill that. We then have three spots we can fill in the National and/or Rookie Drafts. It will take some manipulation of the list if all those places are to be made available for the National Draft, meaning it's likely we'll only take two in the National Draft unless Reid or Wicks is cut. Note that either could be cut (as could others currently occupying senior list spots) and then put onto the rookie list, subject to the risk of another club stepping in and taking them first.

[Velour&Ruffles]

Great effort in the trade period. I now look forward to us using our first pick on a little-known, 176cm 68 kg half back flanker with very little exposed form, that all credible observers rated as a third rounder. Why change a longstanding tradition?

[Captain]

Could you guys help me out. I couldn't find your 2019 posts criticizing our selection of Stephens over Serong. Those posts deserve acclaim and should be highlighted here.

I just went through that 2019 thread, interesting reading. No one calling for Serong or slamming Stephens. One poster called Trev slammed Warner…that didn’t age well. In amongst it all, Stevoswan was still arguing though, with Barry as well ????

[Meg]

This is probably answered somewhere above, and I don’t understand the link (if any) between the annual draft and the mid-season draft …….but doesn’t each club have to select three players at the draft?

[stevoswan]

From the '2019 trading, drafting and list management: players and personnel' thread:

Cosmic Wizard nailed it re: Stephens......he was the only one. There was pretty much no mention of Serong, post draft, so maybe that was in the lead up.....but basically no one cared that we didn't draft Serong.....until he started starring for the Dockers.

There was a reason he was rank from 9-14.

He is not as good as the other players!!

CB is officially senile!

Cannot believe this; yet again a player around the 180 cm mark.

Will we every recruit a player around the 190cm mark with a first rounder??

We have third rate rucks so Stephen, and the rest of our mids, can't be giving the ball.

They are not big enough to win it.

Another disaster from our club: another recruit disaster to go with Menzel, etc.

From another post:

What the club says: "I know some people are asking why we didn't bid for Tom Green (at pick No.5) … to a degree, we feel that at that selection we're obliged to take a player that we want. That's what we did. It's up to other people to make their assessments on whether Tom Green should have gone at five, but in our case we didn't think so. We had Dylan Stephens rated before him. It's as simple as that." – Sydney list manager Kinnear Beatson

Way off KB, unfortunately.

An interesting one from Jimitron 5000....his first few predictions turned out to be a bit of a giggle but he got Warner sort of right (just faster than Williams). He was the only one.

Most other posters were confused by Warners selection but I think we can agree, in this case, KB was a genius! As for Taylor, he could have been a Michael O'Laughlin, if only he had Magic's application and dedication.

I'm happy with our selections. I'm not putting any pressure on them but:
Stephens to be a Josh Kelly
Gould to be a Shannon Hurn
Taylor to be a Michael O'Loughlin
Warner to be a Greg Williams.

A lot of posters (a real lot) were super excited by Gould's selection as was I.....alas, it was not to be for Will.

You win some, you lose some.

- - - Updated - - -

....and from ten minutes ago:

I just went through that 2019 thread, interesting reading. No one calling for Serong or slamming Stephens. One poster called Trev slammed Warner…that didn’t age well. In amongst it all, Stevoswan was still arguing though, with Barry as well ????

No Captain, I wasn't arguing with anyone at all (well, not in the nearly thirty pages I checked through) although I did reply to Cosmic Wizards now spot on post with the words "Ho-hum". How wrong was I?!

BTW mate, stop gaslighting about me. It's tiring.

[liz]

This is probably answered somewhere above, and I don’t understand the link (if any) between the annual draft and the mid-season draft …….but doesn’t each club have to select three players at the draft?

Rookie elevations can count towards that minimum of three. I always thought only one elevation could count, meaning every club had to draft at least two in the ND. But then last year I think Gold Coast only took one. Maybe they got special dispensation. Or maybe there are special “Gold Coast rules”.

[SCGonasunnyday]

A funny thing is when you re-read the Stephens draft info he sounds awesome and you would love to have him. Then you remember you have actual real life experience of what happened in the years after. As always picks are overrated compared to actual performance

[Captain]

From the '2019 trading, drafting and list management: players and personnel' thread:

Cosmic Wizard nailed it re: Stephens......he was the only one. There was pretty much no mention of Serong, post draft, so maybe that was in the lead up.....but basically no one cared that we didn't draft Serong.....until he started starring for the Dockers.



From another post:

What the club says: "I know some people are asking why we didn't bid for Tom Green (at pick No.5) … to a degree, we feel that at that selection we're obliged to take a player that we want. That's what we did. It's up to other people to make their assessments on whether Tom Green should have gone at five, but in our case we didn't think so. We had Dylan Stephens rated before him. It's as simple as that." – Sydney list manager Kinnear Beatson

Way off KB, unfortunately.

An interesting one from Jimitron 5000....his first few predictions turned out to be a bit of a giggle but he got Warner sort of right (just faster than Williams). He was the only one.

Most other posters were confused by Warners selection but I think we can agree, in this case, KB was a genius! As for Taylor, he could have been a Michael O'Laughlin, if only he had Magic's application and dedication.



A lot of posters (a real lot) were super excited by Gould's selection as was I.....alas, it was not to be for Will.

You win some, you lose some.

- - - Updated - - -

....and from ten minutes ago:



No Captain, I wasn't arguing with anyone at all (well, not in the nearly thirty pages I checked through) although I did reply to Cosmic Wizards now spot on post with the words "Ho-hum". How wrong was I?!

BTW mate, stop gaslighting about me. It's tiring.

Was referring to you calling Barry ‘sad’ on page 469 of that thread. I was going through all the comments and opinions about who we drafted and it simply made me laugh to come across that and see some things haven’t changed.

Anyway, hindsight is a wonderful thing. We stuffed the pick up but got the Warner one correct.

[The Big Cat]

As someone pointed out, we've already added Buller and Arnold. So that leaves 4 spots to be filled, which is what has already been stated. One of those spots is a Cat B rookie spot (vacated by Sheather) so there are a limited number of players who can fill that. We then have three spots we can fill in the National and/or Rookie Drafts. It will take some manipulation of the list if all those places are to be made available for the National Draft, meaning it's likely we'll only take two in the National Draft unless Reid or Wicks is cut. Note that either could be cut (as could others currently occupying senior list spots) and then put onto the rookie list, subject to the risk of another club stepping in and taking them first.

Actually Liz, Arnold and Buller were counted in the 46 (as per the manual count I did from the Swans website.). Is my problem that Arnold and Buller were ‘exofficio’ due to long term injury of others and not part of the 2023 official list?

[liz]

Actually Liz, Arnold and Buller were counted in the 46 (as per the manual count I did from the Swans website.). Is my problem that Arnold and Buller were ‘exofficio’ due to long term injury of others and not part of the 2023 official list?

The maximum list size at the start of the season is 42 combined senior list and Cat A rookie list, and up to two Cat B rookies.

So by starting with 46, you were already two over the maximum. Reid and McCartin were moved to the inactive list midway through the season to accommodate the recruitment of Arnold and Buller.