Mega Thread Best 22 Season 2012

[disgruntled goat]

Malceski will be in the team without a doubt if he is at full fitness. At his best, he is in the top 5 players at the club.

Goodes
Mumford
Kennedy
Reid (arguable, possibly, but either on potential or structure ...)

... that's 4, and I'd argue ROK, Hannebery, Jack, Grundy/Richards (main key defender) would be guaranteed ahead of Malceski ... (and I'm probly forgetting someone) ...

A coupla years ago, when he was fully fit, maybe ... but not these days.

 

[Dangas]

Goodes
Mumford
Kennedy
Reid (arguable, possibly, but either on potential or structure ...)

... that's 4, and I'd argue ROK, Hannebery, Jack, Grundy/Richards (main key defender) would be guaranteed ahead of Malceski ... (and I'm probly forgetting someone) ...

A coupla years ago, when he was fully fit, maybe ... but not these days.

tend to agree, unfortunately the injury to Eski hasn't been the best for him, lost his dazz and flare out of the backline

 

[Swans_01]

Goodes
Mumford
Kennedy
Reid (arguable, possibly, but either on potential or structure ...)

... that's 4, and I'd argue ROK, Hannebery, Jack, Grundy/Richards (main key defender) would be guaranteed ahead of Malceski ... (and I'm probly forgetting someone) ...

A coupla years ago, when he was fully fit, maybe ... but not these days.

What part of my post didn't you understand lol? I wrote at his best, he is in our top 5 players. So if he is at full fitness, he will be in the best 22 without a doubt.

FWIW, I would have:
Goodes
Mumford
Kennedy
ROK
Malceski

In a team that is devoid of footskills, and is statistically one of the worst in the league by foot, it would make no sense for one of the best kicks in the league to not be in the team. Don't forget that he was one of the only Swans to make the AA squad last year and really should have made the team, unfortunately he did his knee in pre-season this year. People were saying at the end of 2008? when he first did his knee that we should trade him for worthless 3rd and 4th round picks. Those same people were singing his praises after his 2010 season. He is a gun at his best.

 

[TheWhiteRhino]

If everyone is at full fitness at the moment:

Goodes
Mumford
Kennedy
Jack
ROK
Richards

Then maybe Malceski, though Reid is close.

 

[Swans_01]

As good as Sam Reid will be and he is one of my favourite players, he is nowhere near the top 5 currently, he couldn't even crack the top 10 in the b&f despite only missing one game. He is very important to the team structurally, however, at this point in time Malceski at his best is better than Reid.

 

[Swans_01]

If everyone is at full fitness at the moment:

Goodes
Mumford
Kennedy
Jack
ROK
Richards

Then maybe Malceski, though Reid is close.

Well that would still put him as 7th best at the club, which would definitely mean he is in the best 22. Malceski is a much better player than Mattner, and will get a game clearly over Armstrong aswell.

 

[disgruntled goat]

Well that would still put him as 7th best at the club, which would definitely mean he is in the best 22. Malceski is a much better player than Mattner, and will get a game clearly over Armstrong aswell.

I'm not suggesting a fully fit Malceski would not make the best 22.

I do believe Armstrong will turn out a very good player for us, and an excellent trade.

The argument about Reid was mostly on potential, but seriously, if we were all picking our best Swans team, who among us here would not pick Reid in the first handful? Base it on whatever you like, I'll base mine on the eye test. I'd pick Goodes and Mumford first two (not even sure what order), Kennedy at three and Reid would be my next pick.

 

[DeadlyAkkuret]

I'd have Goodes then Reid, then Mumford. It would be easier to trade in another ruckman imo than replace Reid as HF.

On to the team, which I'll probably change a thousand times before the season starts.

B: Smith Ted AJ

HB: Shaw Grundy Malceski

C: Hannebery Rohan Jack

HF: O'Keefe Reid White

F: Morton Walsh Bolton

Foll: Mumford, Goodes, Kennedy

Int: Armstrong, Mattner, Pyke, McGlynn

The one I'm not sure of is Jude, can see Parker replacing him if he starts the season slowly, but another big season from B1 wouldn't surprise me. Then you've got Seaby, Spangher, Jetta and LRT who could also come into the equation.

 

[liz]

I'll be very surprised if we ever line up with Reid and White and Walsh in the forward line plus Pyke on the bench. Far too top heavy. Especially when one of our onballers is going to spend a fair amount of time resting in the forward line where he will also "play tall" and you've named Rohan in the centre who is, at this stage, probably closer to a tall half forward than a midfielder.

Not to mention the fact that you've lost / forgotten McVeigh. Even if you don't rate him much, the Swans coaches do.

Two HBFers on the bench is probably also one too many.

Overall, we need more midfield rotations that you have allowed for, so as well as adding McVeigh in the mix, I'd expect to see at least one of Parker / Bird / Mitchell or even Lamb play more games than not.

 

[DeadlyAkkuret]

Yep forgot McVeigh, was thinking about his best position the whole time and in the end forgot to include him at all. Slot him in ahead of White, doesn't matter where as the teams never line up as listed anyway.

Rohan shouldn't strictly be a HF type, his speed and creativity is needed through the middle and if he improves his tank enough over the preseason that's where he should spend most of his time. At the very least rotating between the two positions. I also see Armstrong as more than just a HB, which is why I threw him on the bench.

Finally, talk of how much game time Mitchell and Lamb will get at this stage is purely speculative. They're just as likely to play 5 games as they are 15, so I would hesitate to include them in any starting 22 at this point.

 

[podsy]

hello swans board.. my take on our best 22 for 2012

B: Smith Richards Johnson

HB: Shaw Grundy Malceski

C: Hannebery Kennedy Rohan

HF: O'Keefe Reid McVeigh

F: McGlynn White Bolton

Foll: Mumford, Goodes, Jack

Int: Mitchell, Parker, Walsh, Armstrong

Em (will play footy in 2012): Morton, Bird, Lamb, LRT, Jetta, Pyke

- really rate Parker, Rohan, our youth et al
- want to see what Mitchell can do straight away
- Bird is first drop in case of an injury to the midfield
- White gets another year to prove himself
- I know he will play but I do not rate Mattner at all hence he is not included

 

[HardenUp]

Actually, Pyke was injured, and was then returning from injury, when White was playing the second ruck role. In the early-mid part of the year, when White and Pyke were both fit and firing, it was Pyke that was in the team, not White. Pyke got injured again almost straight away, which sucked, but he'd have stayed in the team all year had he not been.

Coulda, woulda, shoulda. Wasn't.

We started winning games again when White was added to the structure. Sorry to spoil your fantasy with some facts.

 

[HardenUp]

And the last time he got consistent time as the 2nd ruck was in 2010 (injury ruled him out of most of 2011) when he won the club's most improved award. Which would give a good indication of how people at the club rate him.

Yeah, and Bevo was in the team then too, and how do they rate him now?

2010 was also before the spud, I mean sub rule.

Pyke is history. 3 games max next year, then deported.

 

[SM]

Coulda, woulda, shoulda. Wasn't.

We started winning games again when White was added to the structure. Sorry to spoil your fantasy with some facts.

How'd we go at the tail end of 2010 when Pyke was in the team?

 

[BarneyBent]

Coulda, woulda, shoulda. Wasn't.

We started winning games again when White was added to the structure. Sorry to spoil your fantasy with some facts.

Actually, Pyke played two games, for one win, one loss, while White played thirteen games for 6 wins, 7 losses. So White's W:L ratio was worse than Pyke's.

Sorry to spoil your fantasy with some facts.

 

[liz]

Finally, talk of how much game time Mitchell and Lamb will get at this stage is purely speculative. They're just as likely to play 5 games as they are 15, so I would hesitate to include them in any starting 22 at this point.

My suggestion that at least one of them (in a bracket with Bird and Parker) will play more games than not was more of an observation that we need more midfield rotations in the team than you had allowed for.

Other than your starting centre and onball line (which included Rohan, and I don't think he will play much as an onballer in the immediate future), arguably only Bolton, ROK and McGlynn in your team are capable of taking their turn through the middle. Add in McVeigh, as you have now put him in for White. I still think we need another.

I find it incredibly hard to list a best 22 this time of year. I just reckon that, assuming full (or close to it) fitness, it is hard to imagine Mumford, Goodes, ROK, McVeigh, McGlynn, Shaw, Kennedy, Hannebury, Smith and Jack not in the team pretty much every week. Reid can probably be added to that group, unless he suffers "second year blues" and struggles for part of the season.

While others are more likely than not to be in the team, it is easier to make a case for how they could miss out. For instance, there are probably three spots for four tall defenders - Ted, Reg, LRT and AJ. One of them could be in pretty good form and still be forced out. Remember Ted spent much of 2010 not in the "best 22" and really only got his foot back in the door when LRT got injured.

The forward line could be made up of any combination of Reid (close to certain), Spangher, TDL, Rohan, Walsh, Pyke, Lamb, Bolton, LRT (as used this year), White, Nipper, Morton, with a spot also taken by a rotating midfielder.

Mattner, Rohan, Jetta, Malceski and Armstrong will probably be vying for, at most, four spots, possibly just three.

 

[DeadlyAkkuret]

My suggestion that at least one of them (in a bracket with Bird and Parker) will play more games than not was more of an observation that we need more midfield rotations in the team than you had allowed for.

I realised that after I read your post again. I personally want to see Parker play 22 games (form permitting) but it's hard to see Mitchell getting a regular spot in the midfield in his first season. Is Smith a serious chance to be turned into a midfielder next year?

Other than your starting centre and onball line (which included Rohan, and I don't think he will play much as an onballer in the immediate future), arguably only Bolton, ROK and McGlynn in your team are capable of taking their turn through the middle. Add in McVeigh, as you have now put him in for White. I still think we need another.

Same as above, hoping it's Parker or Mitchell (or both) who play a lot of games but it wouldn't shock me to see Jetta get more game time than both of them.

I find it incredibly hard to list a best 22 this time of year. I just reckon that, assuming full (or close to it) fitness, it is hard to imagine Mumford, Goodes, ROK, McVeigh, McGlynn, Shaw, Kennedy, Hannebury, Smith and Jack not in the team pretty much every week. Reid can probably be added to that group, unless he suffers "second year blues" and struggles for part of the season.

That's exactly it, it is incredibly difficult and we're all just taking a stab. I want to see one or two youngsters surprise and become regulars, even if it means a couple of old heads miss out.

The forward line could be made up of any combination of Reid (close to certain), Spangher, TDL, Rohan, Walsh, Pyke, Lamb, Bolton, LRT (as used this year), White, Nipper, Morton, with a spot also taken by a rotating midfielder.

The guy I think can benefit most from this is Jude, he's a surprisingly good kick at goal and at his age he'd probably prolong his career by having quite a few stints up forward.

In my dream scenario Morton and Lamb will be two genuine goal sneaks for us.

Mattner, Rohan, Jetta, Malceski and Armstrong will probably be vying for, at most, four spots, possibly just three.

I think three of those are almost certain to play most games, barring injuries. Rohan, Malceski and Mattner are ahead in my opinion but that could change obviously.

 

[MF]

It just seems so wrong leaving a fit LRT out of the team. Is everyone so certain that Grundy is a better option?

I think LRT's best is better than what we saw from Grundy last season.

I'm not saying I'd definitely have him in, it's 50/50 for mine, but everyone else seems to believe it's a straight forward decision.

 

[Mick Oxlong]

It just seems so wrong leaving a fit LRT out of the team. Is everyone so certain that Grundy is a better option?

I think LRT's best is better than what we saw from Grundy last season.

I'm not saying I'd definitely have him in, it's 50/50 for mine, but everyone else seems to believe it's a straight forward decision.

My opinion is that Grundy is the preferred option...to play alongside LRT and not to replace him! Having said that, the squad looks very strong and there will be some strong competition for spots and therefore a few disappointed, possibly disillusioned players playing in the 2's from week to week. Healthy problem to have and I can't wait for the ball to bounce again...in five long months!

 

[J_Moore]

Yeah I can understand HardenUp not thinking Pyke is the bees knees like some on here do, but some of his criticisms (like his having poor hands, or being a worse ruckman than White) are just wrong. It's a bedford like obsession with a single player.

I don't know why we didn't give Seaby more of a crack at the role this year. Pyke was injured and White was shit. And Seaby was good when he played. I don't care that Seaby is less mobile than White. White generally used his mobility to overrun the ball or lead where it wasn't.

And, yeah, I can see LRT missing games next year, but I think that's unfortunate. It's just you'd assume Grundy still has improvement left in him (LRT continued to improve throughout his mid 20's), where LRT has probably peaked (at a very high level, admittedly).

It's a difficult position the club's in, selection wise. We have a whole lot of serviceable, competitive players. But we need to unearth a few stars.

 

[S120]

Yeh I agree, Malfan. I think it is quite a closely run thing next year with Reg and LRT. Though the fact that the coaches are happy with how LRT plays up forward and in the ruck could work against him in terms of winning that key position defensive spot.

I toss up between to two when I think about our best 22. Sometimes I have LRT in, sometimes I have Reg in. Leaving either out of that best side just seems weird.

 

[Aardvark]

I toss up between to two when I think about our best 22. Sometimes I have LRT in, sometimes I have Reg in. Leaving either out of that best side just seems weird.

Are both of them better than AJ at the moment? Would we be better off with Reg at CHB LRT at FB and Ted playing that 3rd tall defender cut out role he does so very well?

 

[super11]

I think the most exciting thing at the moment is the future, heres a side of 25 and under aged players and IMO i think it would go well against most teams now!

F : Mitch Morton, Tommy Walsh, Trent Dennis-Lane

HF : Gary Rohan, Sam Reid, Jesse White

C : Daniel Hannebery, Luke Parker, Lewis Jetta

HB : Andrejs Everitt, Alex Johnson, Keiren Jack

B : Nick Smith, Heath Grundy, Mathew Spangher

Foll: Shane Mumford, Josh Kennedy, Craig Bird

Int : Tommy Mitchell, Tony Armstrong, Jarrod Moore, Nathan Gordan
Em : Brett Meredith, Dylan McNeil, Eugene Kruger, Campbell Heath ?

I would say we are in good hands and heading in the right direction

 

[super11]

Whoops just realised i missed out Jed Lamb, definately in the 22!

 

[RUNVS]

I realised that after I read your post again. I personally want to see Parker play 22 games (form permitting) but it's hard to see Mitchell getting a regular spot in the midfield in his first season. Is Smith a serious chance to be turned into a midfielder next year?

I disagree as Mitchell plays in a position where he can come in in his first season and make a impact. He isn't a key position player so that means he won't need 2 years in the system just to be able to compete. Mitchell's body will be AFL ready come round 1 of 2012.