Trade Targets


#9732

Thats what I’m saying, we’ve rebuilt the list numerous times over BUT you only seem to be credited with a rebuild if you turnover your list to a successful team. We have had a similar story in terms of draft numbers for the last 20 years but again its the fact that far too many of those draftees haven’t become quality senior players.

There’s a perception that we should have traded out the few quality players we’ve had for more picks but my view has always been that quantity of draft picks hasn’t been the issue. Handing Dodoro extra picks over the last 20 years doesn’t equal a better list then or now.


#9733

I still don’t call that a ‘rebuild’. It is great list management and evolution. For mine, a rebuild requires ‘tearing down to build again’. If there’s no ‘tearing down’ - there’s nothing to rebuild - you’re just maintaining.


#9734

Has anyone else got the email from the club with Ollie Wine’s signature and asking to try and sign a replica and send it back in?

What could that be about?


#9735

I agree. That’s the point I was making. I think rebuild infers a drop down the ladder and stockpiling draft picks. The swans have evolved their list without dropping down the ladder, I don’t buy that we need to trade say a Hurley or Hooker etc to get more draft picks to begin an ascent up the ladder. It’d be really helpful if we had some organic growth from within as other clubs do. Granted the Swans had a leg up with Mills & Heeney and FA purchase of Buddy, Tippett etc. but we’ve had a free kick with Joe under FS but otherwise average list management has meant to this point we haven’t maximised that advantage.


#9736

McNernan was a rookie for us, then upgraded.

So were Ambrose & Bags - so 3 guys currently in the 22. As well as McNeice & Long who are both in calculations.

Rookieing Eades, rather than leaving him on the main list, allowed us to clear a main list spot to use for Dylan clarke, rather than take rookie pick 36. Not sure how anyone can paint that as a negative.


#9737

Because that’s the bias they always go with.


#9738

I think he had the right idea but the wrong examples. Using rookie spots for failed draft picks has been a poor choice such as Steinberg, Hams, Aylett & Long. I can understand why Eades looks the same to those who might not have known that his demotion to the rookie list was strategic.


#9739

Bring 2M Peter in! Is he injured ATM? Isn’t he an Essendon area product?


#9740

But they’re all strategic.

Quite a few of them have been guys with existing contracts - definitely Neagle & Aylett, I think A Long too, but I could be wrong.

In which case it’s weighing up the combination of rookie pick used on the retread + the last guy onto the main list (be it ND pick or FA) vs that retread guy sitting on the main list and using that rookie pick on whoever.

Still reckon easily our biggest list mgmt stuff up over the past however many years is giving extra years on contracts to fringe or backup players.


#9741

I’m not seeing what was strategic about wasting a rookie spot on Steinberg. It should have been perfectly obvious that he was not going to make it so the prudent thing to do is to delist him. Aylett I’m almost certain was delisted after his 2 year contract then re-drafted as a rookie so again a complete waste of a pick. Long I’m not as sure of but he was drafted in 2009 & then rookie drafted in 2011 which would make sense as the initial draft terms are 2 years. I understand fully what we did with Neagle & Eades but the others I believe were more poor decisions than anything resembling good list management.

I agree with you on the contract terms we’ve handed out to fringe players. Having a guy like Jerrett for example on the list when his career was over 2 years ago is really very poor management. Jetta had a year in the same boat & already it looks like another year after this of Myers is going to be a millstone. I’ve assumed that Dodoro is somewhat responsible for these decisions but its never fully qualified.


#9742

Aylett was given a 2 year contract initially and then downgraded to the rookie list after his 1st year. So i’d say that was strategic.
He didn’t play a 3rd year with us


#9743

It gets pointed out about every other month in the Dodoro thread/s, it’s a panel of 5? or something
Disco, snr coach, footy manager, one of the executives, and a HR person?


#9744

I think it was Zaka a few weeks ago in an interview.
He was talking about the different stages of an AFL footballer through their career. I found it pretty interesting. It went abit like this.

He was saying early on when you get to a club, you’re just trying to get a game. 150% effort & intersity because you want to get more game time… you want to impress the coach and the supporters.

Then once you get a few games, you start getting content. You become content with being an AFL footballer. You become content with the lifestyle, money & hanging out with your mates every day. You tend to do just enough to ‘not get dropped’. You want to win, but your more concerned about personal goals and achievements… getting another contract. ‘Playing your role’, etc.

Then you hit a point where your sick of going through the motions… you just want some success. You start thinking about doing more than is required. You start thinking more about the team, and the other players around you because you need to win.

It’s vital for The middle part of a career, that there is experienced players around the club to pull these guys into line… and raise the standards.


#9745

Could do worse than Miles


#9746

anyone else think we should have a look at Jarryd Lyons. looked good when I’ve seen him play this year and is ranked 15th and 18th in the afl for contested possies/game and tackes/game respectively.
but then again wasn’t picked in a team that just lost by 110 points.


#9747

And who are very thin and lightly built


#9748

Does it? I’ve never read that before.


#9749

yes you are correct, his bio stated he was delisted then rookie drafted but there were no details about his contract. We delisted Lucy after 1 year and simply wore his contract on our cap. I’d suggest thats preferential to keeping guys with no future.


#9750

I agree. If they think someone is worthy of delisting in the first place, they shouldn’t re-rookie.
■■■■, offer them a VFL contract for a year if we really feel that bad about it.

I’d rather take a punt on a state league player for a year.


#9751

He was being gifted away from Adelaide at the end of 2016 & I thought it was a no brainer that we should have chased him then. No idea if we showed any interest but he went to GC & had a very good 2017. Now we’d probably have to pay a lot more that we could have & I think he’s got some injury concerns.