List Mgmt. 2023 Draft & Trade Hypotheticals

[Ticky009]

Key Dates:

Trade Period, October 6–18

• Restricted & Unrestricted Free Agency Period: Friday, October 6, 9am – Friday October 13, 5pm (bid matching ends Monday October 16, 5pm)
• Trade Period (1), picks & players: Monday, October 9, 9am – Wednesday October 18, 7.30pm

Quiet Period, October 19–November 20

• Trade Period (2), picks only: Monday, October 23, 9am – Friday November 10, 5pm
• List Lodgement 1*: Tuesday, October 31, 2pm
• Delisted Free Agency Period (1): Wednesday, November 1, 9am – Wednesday November 8, 5pm
• Delisted Free Agency Period (2): Friday, November 10, 9am–5pm
• List Lodgement 2*: Tuesday, November 14, 2pm

Draft Period, November 20–22

• Round 1 of the National Draft: Monday, November 20, time and venue TBA
• Trade Period (3), picks only: Tuesday, November 21, 5.45pm–6.30pm
• Round 2–end of the National Draft: Tuesday, November 21, 7pm until completion
• Rookie Promotions: Tuesday, November 21, after the National Draft
• Delisted Free Agency Period (3): Tuesday, November 21, after the National Draft
• List Lodgement 3*: Wednesday, November 22, 10am (optional; required for those participating in the PSD)
• Pre-Season Draft: Wednesday, November 22, 3pm
• Rookie Draft: Wednesday, November 22, 3.20pm
• Final List Lodgement*: Thursday, November 23, 4pm

* List lodgement dates are yet to be made public, so are approximate based on past history and the requirements of the AFL Rules. When lists are lodged, the number of players on the list must not exceed maximum list sizes. At the same time, clubs must provide the AFL with estimates of total player payments in the current and following year, which must prove the club is not and will not exceed the salary cap. (AFL Rules 5.3, 6.1, 6.8, 7.2, 7.9)

 

[caesar88]

McInerney would be up for trade before Stephens. But there are 10 others I'd chop before either of them.

Huh? Surely this is recency bias speaking. I'm a big fan of Stephens and I'm stoked he found his place in the team, but McInerney has shown far more in his career to date if we're comparing the two.

 

[caesar88]

We can't be losing quality players we've invested in for our long-term future just because we think they're "replaceable."

Having other players on the list who play a similar type and role does not mean they can replace that player's output and performance.

Warner Jr. can not replace Stephens. Hall-Kahan can not replace Hayward. Rankin can not replace Lloyd. Sheldrick can not replace Rowbottom.

There is being optimistic about what our youth waiting in the wings can achieve, and then there is blowing up a potential era of flag contention in order to see what the youth waiting in the wings can achieve.

 

[Punts]

Longmire pretty much canceled out paddy forward and also paddy himself

 

[SGBeach]

No. He's just locked in his spot in the team, why cash out now.

Because some people believe that picks are more valuable than established players.

Hint: These people are morons.

Im not saying thats what we should do. Ive been a bigger supporter than most on here over the last few years when many were calling him a bust.

Its a list management decision. The intricacies of list mgt, we're not privy too. eg, salary cap, how much each player is worth by the Swans and other clubs, how much the Swans think each position is worth (are we prepared to spend $1m on a ruck? etc), how highly the replacement is valued (eg, do the Swans think Corey Warner is going to be as good or better?), short medium and long term strategies.. etc etc. Its all very complex.

If another club offers Stephens ridiculous money that we cant or not prepared to get close to matching, then what? I reckon Stephens wants to stay, I reckon he'll take a pay cut to do so..

Stephens has the highest draft capital out of all the OOC players
Beatson was trying very hard to get an extra 1st round pick this year.. why? maybe because the Swans have a plan to trade in the next Coleman medallist?
How much are other clubs offering him? and how much does that drive up the amount we have to pay him?
How highly do we rate his potential replacement? (If we didn't rate Rowbum, would've we traded out Hewett?)

Stephens is a 'watch this space' for me

 

[momentbymoment]

I think you and I are the only two on here thats thinks this is a chance..
when you consider

• Buddy is a 99% chance of retiring & Reid is a good chance of retiring
• Logan needs support from a mature big man up forward.
• Quality KPFs are very expensive (both picks and $$) to trade and take years to develop from the draft

We're in the window now. We have a former p1 KPF in Paddy already on the list. I reckon if there was a worry about his concussion, he wouldn't be playing footy. We know he can read the play, is a good mark and and a good kick, which gives me confidence that Paddy can be a very good KPF.
I also reckon that 2 x McCartin make our back 6 a bit slow (just my opinion).
If Paddy moves forward, that opens up an intercepting role for Blakey (creating an opening on half back - theres a few could fill that role) or Francis or Gould.

A lot will depend on the development of players like Francis, Gould, Edwards down back.. and Amartey, Mclean up forward. Also who we may trade.

Interesting times to watch the final pieces of our list build

The thing I find interesting about the possibility of Paddy moving forward is that I think he would combine very well with Logan. He seems to play with a maturity that strengthens and empowers those around him which is arguably exactly what our forward line needs.

Time will tell.

 

[rustycrate]

We can't be losing quality players we've invested in for our long-term future just because we think they're "replaceable."

Having other players on the list who play a similar type and role does not mean they can replace that player's output and performance.

Warner Jr. can not replace Stephens. Hall-Kahan can not replace Hayward. Rankin can not replace Lloyd. Sheldrick can not replace Rowbottom.

There is being optimistic about what our youth waiting in the wings can achieve, and then there is blowing up a potential era of flag contention in order to see what the youth waiting in the wings can achieve.

Injuries and form will dictate who plays. You cannot just rule out youth because they are not the incumbents. Its great that we have genuine competition for spots. Everyone is on notice. No one should think they can just roll up and play. It's a healthy competitive situation. If Stephens loses his spot to Warner jnr so be it.

 

[caesar88]

Injuries and form will dictate who plays. You cannot just rule out youth because they are not the incumbents. Its great that we have genuine competition for spots. Everyone is on notice. No one should think they can just roll up and play. It's a healthy competitive situation. If Stephens loses his spot to Warner jnr so be it.

Talking about trading rusty, not team selection.

 

[Dubai Quacker]

We can't be losing quality players we've invested in for our long-term future just because we think they're "replaceable."

Having other players on the list who play a similar type and role does not mean they can replace that player's output and performance.

Warner Jr. can not replace Stephens. Hall-Kahan can not replace Hayward. Rankin can not replace Lloyd. Sheldrick can not replace Rowbottom.

There is being optimistic about what our youth waiting in the wings can achieve, and then there is blowing up a potential era of flag contention in order to see what the youth waiting in the wings can achieve.

“Rankin can not replace Lloyd”…!

Who are you & what have you done with the real caesar88 ???

 

[caesar88]

“Rankin can not replace Lloyd”…!

Who are you & what have you done with the real caesar88 ???

Rest assured DQ, we are still several years away from Norm Smith Rankin's greatness, but it is going to be worth the wait.

 

[rustycrate]

Rest assured DQ, we are still several years away from Norm Smith Rankin's greatness, but it is going to be worth the wait.

I want Sheldrick first.

 

[WillHayward]

Hoping Gould can replace Sir Dane.

 

[SGBeach]

We can't be losing quality players we've invested in for our long-term future just because we think they're "replaceable."

Having other players on the list who play a similar type and role does not mean they can replace that player's output and performance.

Warner Jr. can not replace Stephens. Hall-Kahan can not replace Hayward. Rankin can not replace Lloyd. Sheldrick can not replace Rowbottom.

There is being optimistic about what our youth waiting in the wings can achieve, and then there is blowing up a potential era of flag contention in order to see what the youth waiting in the wings can achieve.

You also said 'we can't replace Hewett'.. Rowbottom has done a pretty good job of that.

I apologise if Ive ruffled anyones feathers by suggesting that Stephens might get traded. I certainly hope he doesn't as Ive been a big fan ever since he kicked his first goal. And watching him come back every pre-season fitter and stronger has only increased my respect for him.

Its a list management decision, and one part of that decision will consider just how good the coaches think HHK, Warner jr, Sheldrick and Rankin are. (The coaches have watched these 1st-3rd year players alot.. us big footy posters have not) There are many other factors the Swans will consider when making any list changes too.

 

[WillHayward]

Not sure we need to trade anyone out.

Buddy, Reid, Parker and Rampe should free up plenty of cap space

 

[caesar88]

You also said 'we can't replace Hewett'.. Rowbottom has done a pretty good job of that.

I apologise if Ive ruffled anyones feathers by suggesting that Stephens might get traded. I certainly hope he doesn't as Ive been a big fan ever since he kicked his first goal. And watching him come back every pre-season fitter and stronger has only increased my respect for him.

Its a list management decision, and one part of that decision will consider just how good the coaches think HHK, Warner jr, Sheldrick and Rankin are. (The coaches have watched these 1st-3rd year players alot.. us big footy posters have not) There are many other factors the Swans will consider when making any list changes too.

Never once said Rowbottom couldn't replace Hewett. I believed he could, and he did. They played the same role with the same effect. That was the problem.

You haven't ruffled feathers by suggesting a possible Stephens trade. Well, not mine anyway. I don't necessarily agree with it given all the reasons people above have mentioned, but that's sorta the point of this thread, to discuss potential trades and outcomes of those trades. I reckon it'd be pretty boring if people weren't prepared to offer their own ideas.

I guess my point is that I don't think the club should be trading out players they have invested years in, who are now finding their feet in our system after ups and downs, just because they're bullish on their younger underlings. The chances of say, Warner Jr. or Mitchell being as good in their first years as Stephens is in his fourth year are slim. Not impossible by any means (hello Gulden debut year), but slim. So you'd be replacing Stephens physically, but not his output and performances, which are really what counts. So it'd be a really risky move by the club IMO, even if they are very confident on the kids coming through.

 

[SGBeach]

Not sure we need to trade anyone out.

Buddy, Reid, Parker and Rampe should free up plenty of cap space

Think you're probably right.. add to that, that we have been paying a lot of 1st - 5th year players (on their 1st and 2nd contracts - the cheapest contracts), so our cap should be looking pretty healthy.
I guess looking forward over the next 5 years (when we'll be seriously competing for the flag), how many of these young crew can we afford? Maybe all of them, but if not all of them, then who goes??
How many players on $600k + can any one list keep?
Time will tell.. but just like when we lost both Dawson and Hewett, and Allirr before that, I reckon as supporters, we might need to brace ourselves

ps.. I think losing Dawson, Hewett and Allirr was partly the result of a 'perfect storm' who's ingredients included Buddys immovable contract, the loss of COLA and Covid cuts. All those things are behind us now and the salary cap is once again increasing

 

[RilesMacca]

I feel Paddy’s best position could be a third tall. A great interceptor when he’s on, but coaches seemed to eliminate him more from the game the second half of last year. So I feel with another key back to go with Tom (hopefully Gould, Francis imo could be an ideal swing man but I think he’ll predominantly be down back), Paddy will be able to take their 3rd best fwd, which will free him up a bit to leave his man and get his intercept game going. Whilst Ramps to take their dangerous small fwd.

 

[Kiama Chris]

I feel Paddy’s best position could be a third tall. A great interceptor when he’s on, but coaches seemed to eliminate him more from the game the second half of last year. So I feel with another key back to go with Tom (hopefully Gould, Francis imo could be an ideal swing man but I think he’ll predominantly be down back), Paddy will be able to take their 3rd best fwd, which will free him up a bit to leave his man and get his intercept game going. Whilst Ramps to take their dangerous small fwd.

We are approaching the time when we need to restructure our back 6 (always 7 for me) like we did when first Ted, then Reg, retired. AGAIN.
People assumed new roles, we often changed our approach, particularly to our exit strategies. Dawson and Campbell came and went, we've added Paddy, Lizard, Fox, Florent and removed Cunningham.
Nothing more certain than that we'll do it and that some of us will be right.
For my money Ramps is on the edge and I've never been a huge fan of Lloyd, despite the coaches' ongoing love, as he's a fairly weak (if brave, no issue there) defender.
My back 7 by the end of the year would be:
Fox Gould McCartinP
Florent McCartinT Blakey Francis
Tom and Gould the KPDs
Fox, Florent and Blakey the attackers
Paddy and Francis the interceptors.
Fox and Florent to handle the smalls defensively.
We'll see I guess.

 

[HighReeve]

Well that is clearly way too tall, rigid and immobile.

Lloyd is annoying but the coaching group are hardly going to drop him after just giving him a new long term contract.

 

[caesar88]

Once you realise that Lloyd is the glue holding the back-line together, it's a lot easier to appreciate why the coaches value him so highly.

His ability to constantly be on the move getting the ball in the defensive half is key to our transitions because he gets the ball out to the more dangerous players, similar to how Pendles was used last year with Daicos, Quaynor etc. Swans fans fell in love with Fox and Florent and Blakey coming out of defence. You'd only need to go back to see how many of their touches came from Lloyd winning it in tough positions and using his composure to get it out. Take him out and then those more dangerous players are having to win it themselves. Not sure we want that.

In fairness, in the first half of last year, Lloyd wasn't doing this. He was a bit of a headless chook along with Cunningham and Rampe and the whole back-line was suffering because of it. He really found his touch in the second half of the year and whaddoyaknow, the back six became incredibly solid. Think about all the incredible defensive performances that group had in the tail end of last year... suffocating Freo and Bulldogs... giving Collingwood nothing... the immense qualifying final performance over Melbourne.

In our last 8 games when our defence was as good as any in the comp, Lloyd got the most B&F votes from the coaches out of any defender. Only three inside mids got more. They far and away saw him as the best player in our back six during that time, despite the fact he was actually getting less of the ball in that period (21.9 disposals) than in the rest of the season (24.7 disposals.)

Pretty clear sign that a lot of his value isn't just what he does with the ball but what he does without it and how he makes those around him better. He's not going anywhere.

 

[rustycrate]

Once you realise that Lloyd is the glue holding the back-line together, it's a lot easier to appreciate why the coaches value him so highly.

His ability to constantly be on the move getting the ball in the defensive half is key to our transitions because he gets the ball out to the more dangerous players, similar to how Pendles was used last year with Daicos, Quaynor etc. Swans fans fell in love with Fox and Florent and Blakey coming out of defence. You'd only need to go back to see how many of their touches came from Lloyd winning it in tough positions and using his composure to get it out. Take him out and then those more dangerous players are having to win it themselves. Not sure we want that.

In fairness, in the first half of last year, Lloyd wasn't doing this. He was a bit of a headless chook along with Cunningham and Rampe and the whole back-line was suffering because of it. He really found his touch in the second half of the year and whaddoyaknow, the back six became incredibly solid. Think about all the incredible defensive performances that group had in the tail end of last year... suffocating Freo and Bulldogs... giving Collingwood nothing... the immense qualifying final performance over Melbourne.

In our last 8 games when our defence was as good as any in the comp, Lloyd got the most B&F votes from the coaches out of any defender. Only three inside mids got more. They far and away saw him as the best player in our back six during that time, despite the fact he was actually getting less of the ball in that period (21.9 disposals) than in the rest of the season (24.7 disposals.)

Pretty clear sign that a lot of his value isn't just what he does with the ball but what he does without it and how he makes those around him better. He's not going anywhere.

I remember watching him in the ressies. He would have his hand on his man in defence and then when we won the ball he spread so fast that he was in the clear to receive the ball. He spread so fast. That is his value to the back half.

 

[ScrewInStuds]

Once you realise that Lloyd is the glue holding the back-line together, it's a lot easier to appreciate why the coaches value him so highly.

Rons.

 

[Callipygian]

I don't write off Paddy moving forward. It makes a lot of sense to me once Buddy leaves. It would also make more sense of the decision to acquire Francis.

KPFs are really hard to find. Paddy is talented enough to do it. I think the concussions are mostly a non-issue otherwise he wouldn't be playing footy.

Playing Paddy down back is helping him find his feet together with his brother, establishing him in the Swans system, giving him the versatility to be swung back if ever we decide to start playing him forward.

Paddy is also the perfect age to play forward. With McDonald and some other strong contested mark, they would make a great forward line.

 

[Grand Uncle Horace]

Paddy won't play forward. Listen to the coach and the player and move on from this facile nonsense.

 

[anotherletdown]

Huh? Surely this is recency bias speaking. I'm a big fan of Stephens and I'm stoked he found his place in the team, but McInerney has shown far more in his career to date if we're comparing the two.

Victorian, not so consistent, depth in position and his age bracket means the buyer would still be paying for potential.

Don't want him gone, just think when everything is factored in he might get us the better value.

 

[Callipygian]

Paddy won't play forward. Listen to the coach and the player and move on from this facile nonsense.

Granted it was Horse's idea to play Paddy down back so that Paddy could get to see the game in front of him. And granted also that Paddy embraced that and said he was happy to be playing down back, especially alongside his brother. None of that means they couldn't move him forward, especially if a need for it arises.

I'm not tipping Paddy to play forward but I definitely don't think we should write it off, especially with the lack of depth we have up forward which will be compounded once Buddy and maybe Reid depart. I, for one, would not be at all surprised to see it and I would be really supportive of it. On the other hand, Paddy is going great down back and still got lots of room for improvement so there's plenty to keep him there.