List Mgmt. 2021 Draft and Trade Hypotheticals

[Ticky009]

Hi everyone, for those interested some great links plus the Big Footy Draft, Trade & Free Agency twitter as per below:

 

[Bloods86]

I heard Conway was pretty raw. May take 4 years + to mature. King is available next year so no.

Yeah Conway is a longer term prospect, just like McAndrew. King will take a while too. In any case, none of them would be quite ready to take over after Hickey, so regardless of how much Ladhams improves (or not) as a pure ruck, he'll likely be our no.1 for at least a year or two, unless we bring in another experienced pure ruck struggling for time elsewhere, before the kids develop.

Van Rooyen is the most advanced KPD/KPF prospect we might get at this draft. Dean and Alleer already play against men, but are more intercept types, and are lighter than JVR. There's a slight worry there for me that it means he's using his relative size to his advantage, and the step up might give us a dose of realism, whereas Bazzo being slighter, his impact as a KPD seems more likely based on pure aptitude. Bazzo would just take longer to mature physically and impact at AFL level. But then JVR might have a steeper learning curve in terms of craft. Still more inclined to go JVR, as if we had to play him sooner, it'd be likely as a 3rd tall at either end, where being more advanced physically and up against the 3rd best defender/forward, means he's still more likely to be able to impact sooner.

 

[robbieando]

I am not so sure about that. Assuming Heeney is added into the mix next year, we will have six capable inside mids: JPK, Parker, Heeney, Mills, Rowbottom and Warner. We generally only run with four main guys getting substantial inside rotations, so two of those players will already be missing out on major minutes on the inside as it is and having to adapt to different roles in the meantime.

Horse's preferred four at the beginning of the year was Parker, Mills and Rowbottom, with JPK on the bench. Let's just say that the doomsday scenario occurs and Mills and JPK pick up where they left off this year and miss games to injury next year. It would be fairly easy to slot Heeney and Warner in with Parker and Rowbottom and have relatively few interruptions to the core inside brigade. Throw in the fact that we also want to increase the minutes of other young mids, like Florent, Gulden, Campbell and Stephens to give us a bit of a different look too.

That's a queue of ten players vying for minutes at the centre bounces next year. And I know that those last few guys are young and developing, but unless we plan on drafting David Mundy, our first year midfielder we draft will be young and developing too.

All of the players you've named bar Stephens are already in our nominal Best 22. Once you go past Stephens our midfield depth outside the Best 22 is basically Taylor, Bell, and Sheather who are not midfielders at the AFL Level. We need to build our midfield depth regardless of what our Best 22 looks like on paper. We need to be able to have talent ready to go as we just don't know what the future holds.

So while any midfielder we draft (at any point in this draft) would be facing a tough task to actually play senior football next year, at the same time they are required for depth purposes projecting two to three years into the future. The same will happen if we draft a Key Defender, they aren't playing year one also.

 

[kickthething]

Anyone else feeling uninspired by the draft this year?

Last draft was exciting. We had a really early pick, we had Campbell and Gulden...

This year all I can think is Dawson is gone and we have a "whatever is left after everyone else takes their first round pick" type selection. Normally I'd be reading phantoms and player profiles. This year I just want the draft over and I'll trust our recruiters to get it right(ish).

For me the big issue is that all the so-called experts are all talking about the same 20-30 kids. Some of these in my mind are very highly touted for being not much more than average. I would love to hear different names spoken about and some real draft analysis. All we get from most quarters, places like Draft Central and the faux expert sites is regurgitated rubbish in the main. It is boring. The draft is becoming a very vanilla thing and the last 2 years have really hurt in Vic especially. The top age class of 2020 has been totally wiped in a real sense and the 2021 boys in Vic at least got some footy under their belt so are a little better off, but the analysis has been underwhelming and a lot of the group think is uninspiring.

 

[Bloods86]

All of the players you've named bar Stephens are already in our nominal Best 22. Once you go past Stephens our midfield depth outside the Best 22 is basically Taylor, Bell, and Sheather who are not midfielders at the AFL Level. We need to build our midfield depth regardless of what our Best 22 looks like on paper. We need to be able to have talent ready to go as we just don't know what the future holds.

So while any midfielder we draft (at any point in this draft) would be facing a tough task to actually play senior football next year, at the same time they are required for depth purposes projecting two to three years into the future. The same will happen if we draft a Key Defender, they aren't playing year one also.

IDK, when the team is fully fit, Campbell is probably out of the best 22 and so is Stephens (based on 2021) - personally I have Campbell in and Wicks out for my Rd1 2022 team, but that proved controversial. Or if one of them is in, Florent is out for many (but not for me). We'd also have mid/wing-capable players in other positions at half-forward or half-back (Heeney, Paps, Wicks, Gulden, Blakey, or even COR/Fox in a break glass scenario). I'm all for using a pick or two on mids, but it's secondary to guaranteeing a KPD somewhere in the national draft, and maybe another in the rookie (or at least 1 KPD, another 3rd tall/interceptor).

Personally, I think the club must really rate our midfield depth to have let Hewett go, so I don't know if they see it as dire as others. If they felt they had no other option due to salary and the thought that Dawson would stay, ok, but it'd still be an odd decision if they were concerned.

I'd say we're definitely picking up an inside mid in Anderson via a late pick or rookie draft, so if we use one of our 3 National picks on a mid (which I don't think anyone is opposing), whether they're inside or outside (probably more my thinking), we go some way in addressing future depth concerns.

 

[caesar88]

All of the players you've named bar Stephens are already in our nominal Best 22. Once you go past Stephens our midfield depth outside the Best 22 is basically Taylor, Bell, and Sheather who are not midfielders at the AFL Level. We need to build our midfield depth regardless of what our Best 22 looks like on paper. We need to be able to have talent ready to go as we just don't know what the future holds.

So while any midfielder we draft (at any point in this draft) would be facing a tough task to actually play senior football next year, at the same time they are required for depth purposes projecting two to three years into the future. The same will happen if we draft a Key Defender, they aren't playing year one also.

I don't disagree about them being more a prospect for 2-3 years into the future. But I think even 2-3 years down the track, it will still be a tough midfield for any draftee to crack, whereas a key defender will have a spot waiting for them when they are ready, since the cupboard is literally bare where that's concerned.

In any case, I'll repeat that I'm absolutely on board with drafting a mid. The only three players I've actually seen much of and really like in this year's draft are all mids (Sonsie, Hobbs and Chesser in that order.) I was responding to the notion that our midfield depth is "non-existent" and that the draftee will take will help with our clearance differential.

 

[robbieando]

Interesting... Maybe I am off on that one then. I guess it's too hard to tell what Dalrymple's philosophy early in the draft is, since he's not really had to do a whole lot where that's concerned! In his time at the Swans he's made a grand total of two first round selections (Stephens in 2019 and Logan last year.)

But I'd also be curious as to what exactly his ordered list of 30 players is based on. For example is it pure ability? Is it positional need? How would he compare a brute 195cm defender with a nuggety 180cm inside mid? Or an athletic ruck prospect with a dynamic small forward? I'm not sure how he would. So his order would probably reflect his preference for the type of player he's after, which in itself would come back to Beatson's outlook of trying to fulfil the club's broader draft objectives across all the picks.

I'm sure they do a helluva lot of cross-referencing and over-ruling of each other's calls, despite the united front they may try to convey. And to be honest, that's exactly how a recruiting team should work IMO. Healthy debate and mutual input to eventually reach a mutual agreement. Have heard some horror stories out of both WA clubs tbh about how their recruitment groups are more like dictatorships that turn into echo chambers come draft night...

Had falling out at the Bulldogs with the Football Manager because the Football Manager wouldn't stop Beverage from interfering in recruiting decisions. So he bases it on ability and not based on need.

 

[Dubai Quacker]

Anyone else feeling uninspired by the draft this year?

Last draft was exciting. We had a really early pick, we had Campbell and Gulden...

This year all I can think is Dawson is gone and we have a "whatever is left after everyone else takes their first round pick" type selection. Normally I'd be reading phantoms and player profiles. This year I just want the draft over and I'll trust our recruiters to get it right(ish).

Watching GWS use Collingwood’s own pick to select Daicos is extra-large popcorn worthy.

 

[rustycrate]

Had falling out at the Bulldogs with the Football Manager because the Football Manager wouldn't stop Beverage from interfering in recruiting decisions. So he bases it on ability and not based on need.

I remember that. Kinnear rang him up and said do you know any good recruiters because we need one. Dalrymple came onboard soon after. Apparently he was overridden on selections.

 

[the hypnotoad]

All we needed to be premiership contenders was not lose Dawson.

Draft won't fix that today.

that's a big call, and i still believe we will be contenders for the next several years, as long as we retain the majority of this core young group ... but you're spot-on, not having dawson is very painful

 

[Bloods_sucker]

The whole Beatson-Dalrymple set up / relationship is an interesting one. Surely they work together on a strategy leading up to the draft and build in some contingencies depending on what cards are dealt on the night. Or does Dalrymple essentially check out after our first pick, then says "over to you Kinnear?"

Having live trading as an option gives Beatson a bit more flexibilty after that point. Wouldn't be surprised if we get involved some picks trading on the night to react to how things play out and who we have our eye on. Possibly for a mid 20's pick this year, we'll see. Think we did that with the Rowbottom pick and Gould pick. Although will be difficult to get the Bulldog's pick 23 this way, as that will be needed earlier for points for Darcy.

 

[hairy biker]

Having live trading as an option gives Beatson a bit more flexibilty after that point. Wouldn't be surprised if we get involved some picks trading on the night to react to how things play out and who we have our eye on. Possibly for a mid 20's pick this year, we'll see. Think we did that with the Rowbottom pick and Gould pick. Although will be difficult to get the Bulldog's pick 23 this way, as that will be needed earlier for points for Darcy.

I think picks in the 20s are going to be prized commodities this year.

It seems very much an open draft after the first few picks and I get the impression on the night pick trading particularly in the late first/second round is going to be quite significant as players drop down the order and clubs move up the draft to select players they rate (particularly Vic players who because of the lack of football may be rated quite differently by different clubs).

 

[caesar88]

Further evidence I may be wrong about our draft strategy of having a handful of objectives we want out of the draft and abiding by that regardless of picks... the Will Gould selection. Easy to forget, but we only took him after Port Adelaide matched our bid on Jackson Mead. A classy mid not too dissimilar to Stephens who we'd already taken; couldn't have been any more different to a brutish intercepting defender in Gould. We ended up with the defender and never did get another polished mid that year. In the event that Port didn't match the bid on Mead, then we wouldn't have ended up with one of Gould, Taylor or Warner, and that changes the make-up of our draft haul quite a bit.

 

[Bloods86]

Further evidence I may be wrong about our draft strategy of having a handful of objectives we want out of the draft and abiding by that regardless of picks... the Will Gould selection. Easy to forget, but we only took him after Port Adelaide matched our bid on Jackson Mead. A classy mid not too dissimilar to Stephens who we'd already taken; couldn't have been any more different to a brutish intercepting defender in Gould. We ended up with the defender and never did get another polished mid that year. In the event that Port didn't match the bid on Mead, then we wouldn't have ended up with one of Gould, Taylor or Warner, and that changes the make-up of our draft haul quite a bit.

Port were always matching that bid, it was the start of his range but no doubt they matched, and we did it as a favour to the Crows as part of our pick swap with them. Have a Port friend who didn't mind the Swans until that point. I got a double F U / Sydney after we moved up, bid on Mead, and then did what we were actually planning and took Gould.

 

[the hypnotoad]

I'm both annoyed at our losses and think they'll have more impact than a lot of revisionist stuff I've read, but also excited for the draft. Given our drafting history, and the apparent levelness of the draft from pick 10 through to 40 apparently, there's plenty to be gained. When you think of players like Rowbottom, McCartin, McInerney, Warner in recent years and the likes of Parker, Goodes earlier on, all roughly within the range of our picks, there's plenty you can get excited about.

yeah, the draft always throws up stories, and there's always an element of excited speculation about most draft picks, certainly with the first 2 picks we have every year ...
but even for the top picks it's then up to them to get going, it's about work and suitability to a team, and a bit about the culture of a club too, for young players ... i reckon it's in our young players that the culture counts, we seem to take time to assess and develop our young players, show patience, there's a sense around the league (and a resentment in some areas) that sydney is a "smart" club ...
mills and dawson have been two recent examples, we seem to be doing it with campbell and mcdonald, despite their high draft rankings, and it's still in progress with the likes of rowbotham and blakey, arguably florent and wicks ... gulden, and to a lesser extent warner and mcinerney, are clearly on a more advanced level from early on ...
all of this is surely a part of our quick return to finals and the club being on its current trajectory ...

 

[Ticky009]

The whole Beatson-Dalrymple set up / relationship is an interesting one. Surely they work together on a strategy leading up to the draft and build in some contingencies depending on what cards are dealt on the night. Or does Dalrymple essentially check out after our first pick, then says "over to you Kinnear?"

Having live trading as an option gives Beatson a bit more flexibilty after that point. Wouldn't be surprised if we get involved some picks trading on the night to react to how things play out and who we have our eye on. Possibly for a mid 20's pick this year, we'll see. Think we did that with the Rowbottom pick and Gould pick. Although will be difficult to get the Bulldog's pick 23 this way, as that will be needed earlier for points for Darcy.

Dalrymple talked about the Swans process between himself and Kinnear some time ago. You can find it at 3:30 mins

 

[robbieando]

Further evidence I may be wrong about our draft strategy of having a handful of objectives we want out of the draft and abiding by that regardless of picks... the Will Gould selection. Easy to forget, but we only took him after Port Adelaide matched our bid on Jackson Mead. A classy mid not too dissimilar to Stephens who we'd already taken; couldn't have been any more different to a brutish intercepting defender in Gould. We ended up with the defender and never did get another polished mid that year. In the event that Port didn't match the bid on Mead, then we wouldn't have ended up with one of Gould, Taylor or Warner, and that changes the make-up of our draft haul quite a bit.

Only other time we have made a bid on a player was when we bid on Issac Cumming before we ended up taking Will Hayward when GWS matched our bid. Again different types of players.

 

[Kiama Chris]

The whole Beatson-Dalrymple set up / relationship is an interesting one. Surely they work together on a strategy leading up to the draft and build in some contingencies depending on what cards are dealt on the night. Or does Dalrymple essentially check out after our first pick, then says "over to you Kinnear?"

Having live trading as an option gives Beatson a bit more flexibilty after that point. Wouldn't be surprised if we get involved some picks trading on the night to react to how things play out and who we have our eye on. Possibly for a mid 20's pick this year, we'll see. Think we did that with the Rowbottom pick and Gould pick. Although will be difficult to get the Bulldog's pick 23 this way, as that will be needed earlier for points for Darcy.

My take is that the entire coaching team, including Beatson and Dalrymple probably workshops the game style, list strengths and weaknesses and recruitment priorities.
It's then up to Beatson and Dalrymple to survey what's on offer and what might best fit in our environment and what might be available at our picks. They will no doubt put forward a plan that includes potential pick swaps that is agreed to by Charlie and Horse. The buck stops with Beatson but I reckon they divvie it up and bring it back together. Nobody second guesses them.
Maybe in real life it doesn't work quite this smoothly but I reckon this is pretty close.

 

[Dubai Quacker]

yeah, the draft always throws up stories, and there's always an element of excited speculation about most draft picks, certainly with the first 2 picks we have every year ...
but even for the top picks it's then up to them to get going, it's about work and suitability to a team, and a bit about the culture of a club too, for young players ... i reckon it's in our young players that the culture counts, we seem to take time to assess and develop our young players, show patience, there's a sense around the league (and a resentment in some areas) that sydney is a "smart" club ...
mills and dawson have been two recent examples, we seem to be doing it with campbell and mcdonald, despite their high draft rankings, and it's still in progress with the likes of rowbotham and blakey, arguably florent and wicks ... gulden, and to a lesser extent warner and mcinerney, are clearly on a more advanced level from early on ...
all of this is surely a part of our quick return to finals and the club being on its current trajectory ...

That Rowbotham looks good to me.

Known as “Beefy” around the club, he nails a lot of 6 pointers, with a definite hint of outswing.

 

[WillHayward]

Anyone else feeling uninspired by the draft this year?

Last draft was exciting. We had a really early pick, we had Campbell and Gulden...

This year all I can think is Dawson is gone and we have a "whatever is left after everyone else takes their first round pick" type selection. Normally I'd be reading phantoms and player profiles. This year I just want the draft over and I'll trust our recruiters to get it right(ish).

Yep. Also feels so dragged out.
I'm flat after that two week "continental tires" trade period where **** all happened.
Wish they would just get it over with.

 

[Ticky009]

Yep. Also feels so dragged out.
I'm flat after that two week "continental tires" trade period where fu** all happened.
Wish they would just get it over with.

Deliberate break due to the HSC. Can't have the draft before the HSC that's for certain.

 

[the hypnotoad]

 

[caesar88]

Did I eat my missus' funky samosas by mistake again or did I read there is a kid with the actual name "Mitchito" in Twomey's form guide?

 

[hairy biker]

Did I eat my missus' funky samosas by mistake again or did I read there is a kid with the actual name "Mitchito" in Twomey's form guide?

Yep known as Mitch.
Name is also spelt Michito.

His mum is of Japanese origin (so qualifies as Next Gen academy player for St Kilda).

I like to think he was named after this Japanese Aussie Rules legend; Michito Sakaki, all 165cm of him.

Michito Sakaki - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Wolftone]

Wasn’t good enough the last time. What’s the point? We have Clarke for that type of fill in if needed.

Clarke is not even in the same league as Partington.

On JAT-L29 using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Clarke is not even in the same league as Partington.

On JAT-L29 using BigFooty.com mobile app

True one is on a list. Partington was shown before he wasn’t good enough. What has he improved? If he’s improved something I’m all ears but I highly doubt it just a solid WAFL standard footballer that’s his level nothing wrong with that