Player Watch #3 Taylor Adams

[Ticky009]

Player Profile:

Drafted by GWS with Pick 13 in the 2011 National Draft, Taylor Adams

3

Taylor Adams

Age

31

Ht

181cm

Wt

85kg

Pos.

M/F

Career

Season

Last 5

D

24.9

5star

K

13.5

5star

HB

11.4

5star

M

4.0

4star

T

4.8

5star

CL

5.0

5star

D

20.4

5star

K

12.4

5star

HB

8.0

4star

M

4.0

4star

T

5.9

5star

CL

5.9

5star

D

18.2

5star

K

11.0

4star

HB

7.2

5star

M

4.4

4star

T

3.0

5star

CL

2.2

4star

made his AFL debut in Round 5 of the 2012 season. After 31 games with the Giants the midfielder moved to Collingwood where he went on to play 10 seasons and five finals campaign for the Magpies. He joins the Sydney Swans with a wealth of experience including a Grand Final appearance in 2018. In 2020 he was named the club’s Best and Fairest and selected in the All-Australian team.


DOB: 20 Sep 1993
Draft: 2011
RECRUITED FROM: Collingwood

 

[zyzzbruh]

People might think its the ol 'one player wouldn't have made a difference' thought. ****ing bullshit, you can take it to the bank Adam's would have made a huge difference in that game. Sometimes all you need is that one contested player feeding your outside mids to help wrestle momentum and confidence. And that's not taking into account his standards as a player to not melt under pressure.

Adam's played all year doing that exact role, complimented out midfield like a glove. Absolutely rinsed Neale in that game, and now he can't even make it as an emergency. Yes we played well v Port but sometimes you need to select the side according to the matchup you've got - we failed not selecting Adams

 

[GoTheSwannies]

We started the season 13-1. Horse had an opportunity to try a few different things (e.g. see how Adams & Parker worked in with the midfield in different ways). Had an opportunity to drop a tall forward and see how it would work with a smaller forward line.

Instead, he stuck with the same team and made minor changes. The team got found out in the grand final.

2024 was a wasted year. Hopefully he spends a bit more time trying different options over the off season and in 2025.

 

[The King!]

I mean a lot here wanted Adams dropped to be fair.

I didn't but I remember some telling me how junk he was. So not like Horse dropped someone every fan wanted in

 

[caesar88]

Adams was acquired for some extra grunt and hardness in and around the contest. The problem is - and I said this during the season, so I am not just piling on in the wake of a GF smashing - I don't think Horse & co were prepared for what adding that grunt and hardness would actually entail, in terms of the make-up of our 22.

They just did not show any inclination to part with any of the players they'd potentially have to part with to fit an additional hard nut into the team.

Pre-season the discussion was who would miss out on a spot out of McInerney, Campbell & Jordon, lest we be one flanker too many. Turned out it would be none of them. There was discussion over who would would win in a potential fight for a spot between the seasoned flanker Lloyd & the rising flanker Roberts. Turned out they'd both get spots. All season the discussion lingered over whether we'd drop a tall, likely either Amartey or McDonald. Nope, all three talls played every game they were fit.

Horse & co made that room and found the necessary spots for those players. They did not do so when it came to the hard nut.

It would be easy to say that this was because by season's end, Adams was simply no world beater, either as a mid or a forward. But then you remember there were plenty of times those players above were no world beaters either.

It begs the question - say we were to acquire someone better than Adams, who offered the same attributes of hardness and grunt as Adams. Are Horse & co going to be willing to cut someone who offers more in terms of outside run or ball use, in order to accommodate this player?

Because when all was said and done, we ended this year with the exact same midfield structure as we had 12 and 24 months earlier, when we knew that wasn't enough, and it ended up being by choice.

 

[Wheresbuddy]

Adams was acquired for some extra grunt and hardness in and around the contest. The problem is - and I said this during the season, so I am not just piling on in the wake of a GF smashing - I don't think Horse & co were prepared for what adding that grunt and hardness would actually entail, in terms of the make-up of our 22.

They just did not show any inclination to part with any of the players they'd potentially have to part with to fit an additional hard nut into the team.

Pre-season the discussion was who would miss out on a spot out of McInerney, Campbell & Jordon, lest we be one flanker too many. Turned out it would be none of them. There was discussion over who would would win in a potential fight for a spot between the seasoned flanker Lloyd & the rising flanker Roberts. Turned out they'd both get spots. All season the discussion lingered over whether we'd drop a tall, likely either Amartey or McDonald. Nope, all three talls played every game they were fit.

Horse & co made that room and found the necessary spots for those players. They did not do so when it came to the hard nut.

It would be easy to say that this was because by season's end, Adams was simply no world beater, either as a mid or a forward. But then you remember there were plenty of times those players above were no world beaters either.

It begs the question - say we were to acquire someone better than Adams, who offered the same attributes of hardness and grunt as Adams. Are Horse & co going to be willing to cut someone who offers more in terms of outside run or ball use, in order to accommodate this player?

Because when all was said and done, we ended this year with the exact same midfield structure as we had 12 and 24 months earlier, when we knew that wasn't enough, and it ended up being by choice.

I think the unexpected rise of Heeney as a fulltime on baller was more the issue for the non selection of Adams as a first choice on baller. Heeney, Chad and Rowie with support from Errol, JMac and Paps had got the job done right up to the GF. They then literally shat their pants on the day. In hindsight, Adams would've been handy and who knows, could've wound back the clock and produced a Norm Smith game to keep us in the contest.

However, our biggest problem on the day, similar to the Port drubbing was just the lack of hardness at the contest, poor two way running and just general apathy. Coupled with ineffectual coaching and ability to adjust on the run, we turned in a performance that would've lead to our defeat by any of the 16 teams not competing on GF day.

As such, I don't think the non selection of Adams is really a big deal. It would be great if it was as that would mean our repeated failure on GF day would be an easy fix. Unfortunately, I suspect our issues are alot more complex.

 

[WillHayward]

I reckon he will ask for a trade

No-one will take him.

I think we need to move on to Sheldrick and Cleary

 

[RedBloodBlackSwan]

People might think its the ol 'one player wouldn't have made a difference' thought. ****ing bullshit, you can take it to the bank Adam's would have made a huge difference in that game. Sometimes all you need is that one contested player feeding your outside mids to help wrestle momentum and confidence. And that's not taking into account his standards as a player to not melt under pressure.

Adam's played all year doing that exact role, complimented out midfield like a glove. Absolutely rinsed Neale in that game, and now he can't even make it as an emergency. Yes we played well v Port but sometimes you need to select the side according to the matchup you've got - we failed not selecting Adams

I will say one thing. Taking away individual output, Adams style of play complimented the team (getting the hard ball gets and enabling others to shine) while Parker’s probably detracted (forward line too slow).

 

[Olian]

It was disappointing his form faded late in the year. He is strong at the ball and can get the ball moving.

Not sure he is a full time mid anymore but he has something to offer in the middle. More so than as a half forward.

 

[caesar88]

I think the unexpected rise of Heeney as a fulltime on baller was more the issue for the non selection of Adams as a first choice on baller. Heeney, Chad and Rowie with support from Errol, JMac and Paps had got the job done right up to the GF. They then literally shat their pants on the day. In hindsight, Adams would've been handy and who knows, could've wound back the clock and produced a Norm Smith game to keep us in the contest.

However, our biggest problem on the day, similar to the Port drubbing was just the lack of hardness at the contest, poor two way running and just general apathy. Coupled with ineffectual coaching and ability to adjust on the run, we turned in a performance that would've lead to our defeat by any of the 16 teams not competing on GF day.

As such, I don't think the non selection of Adams is really a big deal. It would be great if it was as that would mean our repeated failure on GF day would be an easy fix. Unfortunately, I suspect our issues are alot more complex.

For the record I don't think Adams would've made a difference on grand final day.

I think our overall team was not geared towards hardness enough, and I think that is what cost us on grand final day, as it's cost us on other grand final days.

Horse & co didn't really show that they were willing to make hardness and contested stuff a priority at selection, and so I think that bleeds into the ethos of the whole team. We've become about flash and flair in regards to ball movement and the "hard stuff" is left to a small minority.

 

[Wheresbuddy]

For the record I don't think Adams would've made a difference on grand final day.

I think our overall team was not geared towards hardness enough, and I think that is what cost us on grand final day, as it's cost us on other grand final days.

Horse & co didn't really show that they were willing to make hardness and contested stuff a priority at selection, and so I think that bleeds into the ethos of the whole team. We've become about flash and flair in regards to ball movement and the "hard stuff" is left to a small minority.

Agreed

 

[swanssince2002]

I think where people are peeved is that we could have tried anything to stop the 2nd quarter momentum. Or at least make it 25 points or so instead of 46 at HT.

Adams could have been the one that could help them out when we were under siege but at best he would have been the sub anyway so it wouldn't have mattered.

 

[Jewelsbon]

Should have played. We needed the grunt and his toughness. At least HE would have fought it out.

 

[The King!]

For the record I don't think Adams would've made a difference on grand final day.

I think our overall team was not geared towards hardness enough, and I think that is what cost us on grand final day, as it's cost us on other grand final days.

Horse & co didn't really show that they were willing to make hardness and contested stuff a priority at selection, and so I think that bleeds into the ethos of the whole team. We've become about flash and flair in regards to ball movement and the "hard stuff" is left to a small minority.

I know this is the Adams thread but jumping on your point we left the Carlton final last year and come grand final day for all our movement as a club we really only made what changes

- pensioned Parker off to the forward line - basically swapped spots with Heeney was basically forced on him


- Added a different ruckman



- Got Jordon in for Clarke (I know Clarke didn't play the final)

Did we actually change anything of significance at all in the end

 

[caesar88]

I know this is the Adams thread but jumping on your point we left the Carlton final last year and come grand final day for all our movement as a club we really only made what changes

- pensioned Parker off to the forward line - basically swapped spots with Heeney was basically forced on him


- Added a different ruckman



- Got Jordon in for Clarke (I know Clarke didn't play the final)

Did we actually change anything of significance at all in the end

Agreed. All of Heeney, Grundy & Jordon were improvements on the players they replaced, but they were still all just like-for-likes. When it came time to make a big call and change anything - ie. taking out an outside runner for another contested inside player; taking out a tall or medium forward for a smaller pressure forward - Horse & co didn't pull the trigger.