WSYD GWS Just Has To Do Some Trades

[doona]

you mean the GC that at the same point last year were 1-14 (having just beaten Richmond by 2 points in Cairns) and had 15 goal losses in 3 of their previous 6?

I think there is a slight difference though in that GC had more experienced players on the list, and the players they got from other clubs were mostly the 25 - 30 year old age bracket.

Where as the players GWS have are like t.scully, p.davis,..... young players that shouldnt be the oldest in the club. GWS f'd up the initial strategy.

 

[J_Moore]

Their depth of promising youngsters is crazy. I watched the Swans/GWS reserves game today, and their 2nds are a massive step up. Very strong for their age.

 

[Lensen]

I think there is a slight difference though in that GC had more experienced players on the list, and the players they got from other clubs were mostly the 25 - 30 year old age bracket.

Where as the players GWS have are like t.scully, p.davis,..... young players that shouldnt be the oldest in the club. GWS f'd up the initial strategy.

the difference is gaz. that's it really. apart from that, the recruits are much of a muchness. this time last year the call was that GWS had picked the right sort of bigger bodied kids and GC went too much down the flanker path

 

[Crawb]

I think there is a slight difference though in that GC had more experienced players on the list, and the players they got from other clubs were mostly the 25 - 30 year old age bracket.

Where as the players GWS have are like t.scully, p.davis,..... young players that shouldnt be the oldest in the club. GWS f'd up the initial strategy.

Short term pain for long term gain. They'll still easily win a premiership before Gold Coast. By the time they're ready Ablett, Rischitelli, Brennan, Brown will be just about done, meanwhile Davis, Scully, Ward will be at their peak.

 

[doona]

the difference is gaz. that's it really. apart from that, the recruits are much of a muchness. this time last year the call was that GWS had picked the right sort of bigger bodied kids and GC went too much down the flanker path

Ablett, Bock, Brennan, Brown, Harbrow, Rischitelli

V

Brogan, Scully, Davis, Cornes, Palmer, McDonald, Ward.


I think these were the initial mature recruits. From GWS, Brogan, McDonald and Cornes were on their last legs.

Scully, Davis, Palmer, Ward were all young players with no leadership abilities to guide the younger players.

Although Gold Coasts intake apart from Ablett were not exceptional players, they brought more leadership to the club and the have recruited more players of the last couple of years like broughton and Murphy.

My opinion, you might disagree though is GWS has to young a list. No one in the 25 - 30 bracket that I think is required, especially nurturing the amount of top draft picks that GWS had.

 

[Topper Harley]

I think there is a slight difference though in that GC had more experienced players on the list, and the players they got from other clubs were mostly the 25 - 30 year old age bracket.

Where as the players GWS have are like t.scully, p.davis,..... young players that shouldnt be the oldest in the club. GWS f'd up the initial strategy.

I don't think GWS ****ed up in their initial strategy, but it did give a giant middle finger to the AFL. They chose to be completely noncompetitive for their first 3 years of existence with the players they recruited. Trading those mini draft picks for further draft picks.

They were only focused on 2017. The first few years for them are nothing but getting games into kids. They don't give a **** if they win, or even if they're competitive.

 

[santa claws]

reckon they wont be giving away good picks for duds.
im hoping sheedy sticks to his guns and the net result is the hidings continue for another couple of yrs before they start to win games.

if this happens they may find it tough to hang onto so many good kids. this imo is the only real chance there is of bringing em back to the pack.

 

[doona]

I don't think GWS screwed up in their initial strategy, but it did give a giant middle finger to the AFL. They chose to be completely noncompetitive for their first 3 years of existence with the players they recruited. Trading those mini draft picks for further draft picks.

They were only focused on 2017. The first few years for them are nothing but getting games into kids. They don't give a **** if they win, or even if they're competitive.

You still need leadership on the field!!!!

It is one area where Melbourne made the mistake of forcing players to retire, trading out senior players etc..... and focusing on just young top end draft picks. Look at where that got them??? (i know there a more problems with melbourne but it was a decisive factor).

A club needs experienced players on the field to guide the youngsters.

For example, Tom Mitchell of the Swans said that in his first game he was being told where to go by the swans senior players, told what to do, he was getting coached on the field. He has hit the ground running!

As A Geelong supporter, all the youth you have blooded since 2007, you cant tell me that coming into a team with quality experienced players didnt help the youngsters to develop into the players they are.

 

[Theo X]

They can have Pedersen, Byrnes, Rodan and Gillies. Great leadership and mature bodies.

 

[Lensen]

Ablett, Bock, Brennan, Brown, Harbrow, Rischitelli

V

Brogan, Scully, Davis, Cornes, Palmer, McDonald, Ward.


I think these were the initial mature recruits. From GWS, Brogan, McDonald and Cornes were on their last legs.

Scully, Davis, Palmer, Ward were all young players with no leadership abilities to guide the younger players.

Although Gold Coasts intake apart from Ablett were not exceptional players, they brought more leadership to the club and the have recruited more players of the last couple of years like broughton and Murphy.

My opinion, you might disagree though is GWS has to young a list. No one in the 25 - 30 bracket that I think is required, especially nurturing the amount of top draft picks that GWS had.

It was, in terms of guys who played before:

G.Ablett, Rischitelli, Harbrow, Bock, Brennan, Fraser, Harris, Krakouer, Iles, Stanley, N.Ablett
vs
Ward, Power, Scully, Davis, Cornes, Palmer, McDonald, Brogan, O'hAilpin

Krakouer, Iles and Stanley were effectively kids anyway, Fraser and Harris on their last legs, and N.Ablett signed pretty much to encourage his brother to sign. Power, Cornes, McDonald, Brogan were on their last legs effectively.

You're right in that the "middle class" recruits of Rischitelli/Harbrow/Bock/Brennan were more experienced than Ward/Scully/Davis/Palmer, but not remarkably so. If you take Gaz out the overall quality of both lists is fairly similar IMO

I do agree with your point that the GWS list was too young, but so was Gold Coast's. But only in terms of being teams in a so-called elite competition - if the only KPI is a premiership capable squad down the line then they've probably made the most of their opportunities. It's a disgraceful blight on an "elite" competition that the shame of being awful has been completely eradicated though, but that's a bigger issue than GWS and GC

 

[LordLucifer]

Yeah I Somewhat agree with what your saying but I think ill leave them be for the moment. There third year really should be telling and no excuses IMO.

Agree with you about the third year, just can't see a major improvement though if they don't get those bigger bodies in the team.

 

[FAILTOSUCCEED]

Maybe Jeremy Cameron. Could squeeze him in on a flank.

He would be your best forward if you got him. He is already better than Riewoldt.

 

[Topper Harley]

You still need leadership on the field!!!!

It is one area where Melbourne made the mistake of forcing players to retire, trading out senior players etc..... and focusing on just young top end draft picks. Look at where that got them??? (i know there a more problems with melbourne but it was a decisive factor).

A club needs experienced players on the field to guide the youngsters.

For example, Tom Mitchell of the Swans said that in his first game he was being told where to go by the swans senior players, told what to do, he was getting coached on the field. He has hit the ground running!

As A Geelong supporter, all the youth you have blooded since 2007, you cant tell me that coming into a team with quality experienced players didnt help the youngsters to develop into the players they are.

They recruited leadership in Power, Cornes, McDonald and Brogan. They were on field leaders only, because their bodies were too shot to go around at a decent level.

 

[Hawkers]

GWS are going to have to lose that sense of entitlement they have before anyone will do business with them

 

[FAILTOSUCCEED]

They can have Pedersen, Byrnes, Rodan and Gillies. Great leadership and mature bodies.

But Rodan is your best player?

 

[Theo X]

But Rodan is your best player?

Only 'cause we traded Gysberts though!

 

[the_slurpee_man]

Carlton need a forward desperately so win win would be something like

Trade 1
GWS - Patton and Hoskin Elliot
Carl - Jamieson, Warnock, Yarran

Trade 2
GWS - Pick 1
Carl - Warnock Robinson and Yarran

GWS would be getting shafted at both of those picks!

 

[PumpyChowdown]

GWS are insane if they pay the assumed price for Buddy. They could trade for 2 or 3 established players and then buy another 2 or 3 out and out guns with the Buddy money. They'd be far more competitive and exciting if they did that rather than relying on L. Franklin.

 

[RUNVS]

GWS need to bring in AT LEAST 5 experienced AFL players during the trade period and during free agency. If they don't then the development of their young players is really going to suffer.

 

[TheSunGod]

you mean the GC that at the same point last year were 1-14 (having just beaten Richmond by 2 points in Cairns) and had 15 goal losses in 3 of their previous 6?

I think he means the Gold Coast who had three 100 point losses in their first year and just one in their second year as opposed to GWS who had five in their first year and three (so far) in their second year. Double the number of 100 point losses.

 

[Hawkers]

GWS are insane if they pay the assumed price for Buddy. They could trade for 2 or 3 established players and then buy another 2 or 3 out and out guns with the Buddy money. They'd be far more competitive and exciting if they did that rather than relying on L. Franklin.

Getting Buddy is about the off-field marketing more than the on-field

 

[KnaveyBlue]

The AFL should have had a heavier hand in forcing them to trade some of their 6 trillion draft picks, instead of sitting idly by while they gathered even more picks via trades.

Now they have a stockpile of super-talented kids who simply aren't ready to compete at AFL level, and it's hurting the franchise's already slim chance at getting a foothold in Sydney.

 

[santa claws]

they have about 13 players on the list about 23 yrs or older.two will retire in brogan and cornes.
without a doubt they need experienced players to help guide the kids. what i would argue is the need to give up good picks and some of their better young players to achieve it.

there will be again plenty of free agents delistings and mature players from state leagues to help in these areas.
i was shocked they did not go after players like moloney and chaplain last yr im sure they will this yr and they wont cost a thing.
one thing that is certain if you want a quality player or very good draft pick from gws you will have to offer up something of quality in return.

i think sheeds and the gws hierachy are approaching a point where they have to weigh up what continued hidings does to their chances of retaining some of the kids they have.as opposed to bringing in some inferior mature players who can lead the way and minimise the on field damage while they the kids develop.

imo if they cant get value for money they will keep their picks and their better players for now and do what they can cheaply as far as mature recruits go.

 

[Lensen]

I think he means the Gold Coast who had three 100 point losses in their first year and just one in their second year as opposed to GWS who had five in their first year and three (so far) in their second year. Double the number of 100 point losses.

if you arbitrarily use 100 point losses as the rider, sure, GWS's year two looks monumentally worse than GC's. if you chose, say, 90 point losses instead, it's 4 all and maybe the difference is closer?

i'm not saying GWS year 2 has been more impressive than GC year 2 - it clearly hasn't. but the difference is exaggerated in peoples' heads by the sizeable improvement GC have made year 3 and the goldfish mentality that pervades how people view footy

 

[Swampfox]

Kevin Sheedy has been in football long enough to know what he needed in the first place