Delisted #32 Jaiden Magor

Remove this Banner Ad

  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #53
Jaiden-Magor-in-action-for-the-Swans-VFL-side-Photo-by-Keith-McInnes.jpg.jpg

Magor was taken as a rookie selection in the 2022 draft from South Adelaide. He established himself as a durable player, managing 36 games in his two seasons with the Swans VFL team, largely across half back.
Click to expand...
www.sydneyswans.com.au

Sydney Swans make three list changes

Official AFL Website of the Sydney Swans Football Club
www.sydneyswans.com.au www.sydneyswans.com.au
 
Last edited:

Log in to remove this ad.

Dubai Quacker said:
Truslove didn’t do him any favours - but nonetheless, just wasn’t quite AFL caliber.
Click to expand...
He wasn't based on what he showed. But I suspect he had a lot more in him than he showed. He was just allowed to get away with playing soft, aimless football for too much of his time here, especially in 2024.
 
caesar88 said:
Potentially unpopular opinion, but another lost to the Truslove regime. Bloke was allergic to moving magnets with the young developing players.
Click to expand...
I would think this is a popular opinion from most reserves watchers.

Initially I wasn't opposed to Magor moving back, because at the time due to KPP injuries, our 'tall forwards' were HKK & Cam Owen.
Get the guy into the game, develop defensive skills etc.

But subsequently he just languished back there and it seemed to me we never properly utilised the skills that had seen us select him in the first place.

I can understand us delisting him as a HBF, but I think there was promise unfulfilled if we had played him in the fwd half.
 
hairy biker said:
but I think there was promise unfulfilled if we had played him in the fwd half.
Click to expand...
I would have liked to have seen him put back forward too in 2024. But even playing HBF with some purpose and urgency would have been good. I don't know if he had what it takes, but he seemed to read the game well, be able to see options and was a reasonable kick.

If you could combine his skill set with the energy of young Rankin, who we delisted a year ago, you might have a pretty good HBFer.
 
In one of the last games he was in a one on one battle in the forward pocket on the boundary, won the ball and with utmost confidence turned the opponent inside out to kick a goal from the boundary. Easily the most talented player of those whose contracts came up this year.

I give Truslove a big fail for not giving him his chance to develop his natural game.

Sent from my Pixel 8 Pro using Tapatalk
 
Jaiden doesn't lack for talent. I think his willingness to adhere to Swans values was the issue. I think he was moved down back to get him to develop show the traits we wanted from him but he didn't develop/show them, and that included his contested/defensive game. [This is based partly on my observation and partly on a casual remark Jaiden made to me during the pre-season and could easily be wrong.] That and the pressure on list spots. Best wishes for the future JM.

As a footnote, have we seen the high water mark of the 'aydens' come and go? First there was Hayden. Then came Braeden. Next was Jaiden. And finally Caiden. From zero to four but has the pendulum turned?
 
hairy biker said:
I would think this is a popular opinion from most reserves watchers.

Initially I wasn't opposed to Magor moving back, because at the time due to KPP injuries, our 'tall forwards' were HKK & Cam Owen.
Get the guy into the game, develop defensive skills etc.

But subsequently he just languished back there and it seemed to me we never properly utilised the skills that had seen us select him in the first place.

I can understand us delisting him as a HBF, but I think there was promise unfulfilled if we had played him in the fwd half.
Click to expand...
Yeah from the list managers perspective, I don't really disagree with any of the delistings in recent years. You can't keep players who aren't showing the right amount of development or improvement around forever.

But in many cases those delistings have felt like foregone conclusions for most of the year, and I think in those cases, where Truslove could've used them as sort of "free hits" to try them in positions and see if they can surprise, he's instead just left them to finish out their seasons with a whimper in the very roles and positions they weren't thriving in to begin with.

Thus our reserves program has felt like a case of anyone who doesn't immediately find their feet after being drafted falls by the wayside, when it used to be great for the players whose developments were more of a slow-burn.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

caesar88 said:
Yeah from the list managers perspective, I don't really disagree with any of the delistings in recent years. You can't keep players who aren't showing the right amount of development or improvement around forever.

But in many cases those delistings have felt like foregone conclusions for most of the year, and I think in those cases, where Truslove could've used them as sort of "free hits" to try them in positions and see if they can surprise, he's instead just left them to finish out their seasons with a whimper in the very roles and positions they weren't thriving in to begin with.

Thus our reserves program has felt like a case of anyone who doesn't immediately find their feet after being drafted falls by the wayside, when it used to be great for the players whose developments were more of a slow-burn.
Click to expand...

I agree with your approach but I don't agree with your analysis. I don't think Magor's delisting was a "foregone conclusion for most of the year". He was out of contract last year and they chose to extend him - they wouldn't have done that if they were sure to be delisting him.

I have personally felt very unsure about which players would be retained and which cut out of those that remained uncontracted. The one I thought was most likely to go (Konstanty) has survived so far. I'm still curious to see whether Konstanty, McAndrew and Kirk are extended. I'm expecting Mitchell to be extended - but nothing has been announced yet, has it?
 
Callipygian said:
I agree with your approach but I don't agree with your analysis. I don't think Magor's delisting was a "foregone conclusion for most of the year". He was out of contract last year and they chose to extend him - they wouldn't have done that if they were sure to be delisting him.

I have personally felt very unsure about which players would be retained and which cut out of those that remained uncontracted. The one I thought was most likely to go (Konstanty) has survived so far. I'm still curious to see whether Konstanty, McAndrew and Kirk are extended. I'm expecting Mitchell to be extended - but nothing has been announced yet, has it?
Click to expand...
As a first-round pick, I think Konstanty has the currency to be traded, so I doubt we'd delist him and let a club pick him up for free. (I could be wrong of course.)

But players like Magor, Vickery etc. needed to show more this year than they did last, but they were played in the same roles as they were last year, when they didn't show enough to begin with. So instead of making inroads in terms of their chances of senior relevance, they go the opposite direction.

So that is where the idea of a 'foregone conclusion' starts to emerge. If you consider there are at least four or five delistings each year, then the players furthest from that senior relevance are the most likely victims.
 
caesar88 said:
Yeah from the list managers perspective, I don't really disagree with any of the delistings in recent years. You can't keep players who aren't showing the right amount of development or improvement around forever.

But in many cases those delistings have felt like foregone conclusions for most of the year, and I think in those cases, where Truslove could've used them as sort of "free hits" to try them in positions and see if they can surprise, he's instead just left them to finish out their seasons with a whimper in the very roles and positions they weren't thriving in to begin with.

Thus our reserves program has felt like a case of anyone who doesn't immediately find their feet after being drafted falls by the wayside, when it used to be great for the players whose developments were more of a slow-burn.
Click to expand...
I agree it's been a problem how we've managed/developed some draftees.

I've mentioned before, as an example, the case of James Bell (under Laidler).
Constantly played in the mids in the 2nds, never likely to play there for any time in the seniors, why not try him as a lockdown small?

Both Laidler & Truslove seemed conflicted as to what their role was as reserves coach.
Individual player development, winning culture etc?
Or of course maybe it was simply neither was good enough.

IMO we need to go back to Rhyce Shaw's time to see success from an individual & team perspective.
For example Sam Murray turned from a late rookie small fwd headed for the chop to a running defender and a 2nd rd pick from Collingwood.
Similarly Jordan Dawson's game was developed very well by Shaw, wing, on ball, flanker and all the better for it.
And at the same time we were winning.

I'll be very interested as to what McVeigh sees as his key role.
My view is that he has been moved to the reserves coach to add to his CV as a guy who coached his own team.
If that's the case then I'd imagine he may have a more result focused attitude.

However the two aspects aren't necessarily conflicted.
For example if we'd moved Magor to the fwds and played Vickery more on the wing, I think both players and the team may have had better outcomes.

And lastly, I (and I think the club) miss ya Rhyce.
 
Dubai Quacker said:
If he played soft, aimless footy - that’s on him.

Players that are good enough show it.
Click to expand...
But when you play in a side that plays soft, aimless footy and no-one is demanding more of you, it’s pretty easy to sink into the morass.

Players who are exceptional might rise up above it, but it’s possible to be talented and on the right track and yet struggle in a poor, flabby team.
 
I was optimistic about Magor when we drafted him. I remember seeing how he was able to kick goals and win a lot of possessions as a forward/mid.

First season I thought he was still physically adjusting to VFL level. Second season he looked like he had bulked up and was better at the contest. I liked his kicking off half back. He was able to execute quite difficult kicks and was our best user in the reserves.

But as Liz says. He needed to push forward to wing or half forward and be an attacking threat. By showcasing his kicking into the forward line and becoming a goal threat.
 
hairy biker said:
I agree it's been a problem how we've managed/developed some draftees.

I've mentioned before, as an example, the case of James Bell (under Laidler).
Constantly played in the mids in the 2nds, never likely to play there for any time in the seniors, why not try him as a lockdown small?

Both Laidler & Truslove seemed conflicted as to what their role was as reserves coach.
Individual player development, winning culture etc?
Or of course maybe it was simply neither was good enough.

IMO we need to go back to Rhyce Shaw's time to see success from an individual & team perspective.
For example Sam Murray turned from a late rookie small fwd headed for the chop to a running defender and a 2nd rd pick from Collingwood.
Similarly Jordan Dawson's game was developed very well by Shaw, wing, on ball, flanker and all the better for it.
And at the same time we were winning.

I'll be very interested as to what McVeigh sees as his key role.
My view is that he has been moved to the reserves coach to add to his CV as a guy who coached his own team.
If that's the case then I'd imagine he may have a more result focused attitude.

However the two aspects aren't necessarily conflicted.
For example if we'd moved Magor to the fwds and played Vickery more on the wing, I think both players and the team may have had better outcomes.

And lastly, I (and I think the club) miss ya Rhyce.
Click to expand...
Right on the mark HB. Rhyce was a very good coach (miss him too) and he had some damn good cattle. Laidler was OK but two other factors here are the reduction in list sizes and switch from NEAFL to VFL. Both have had a serious impact on our ability to field a competitive reserves team with any continuity.
I look forward to the regime of McPointy.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Delisted #32 Jaiden Magor

Similar threads

SwansProudly
Player Watch #32 Hayley Bullas
Replies
4
Views
637
robbieando
robbieando

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top