Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
AFLW 2024 - Round 9 - Indigenous Round - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Yeah, forgot about him. Are you saying he's not 190 cm, or he's not a defender?
I've never really understood this KPP obsession that you and Charlie trot out every year. What is a KPP?
Anyhow, sticking to the facts:
The defensive back-up for the Swans is Dempster, Bevan and Vogels (who are all under 24yo). I defy you to name another team with more defensive depth than that.
I've already said that I would have liked to see another goal-kicker to go along with Grundy in the long term. However, it's not that urgent.
Roos has already said that Goodes will move to the forward line later in his career, presumably to replace Hall in due course.
I guess it's obvious we come from different generations. "Smashed" and "hammered" is what Lockett, Dunstall and Ablett did to defenders. Apart from Lloyd and Gehrig, no current forwards have the ability to regularly kick big scores, and having a specialist full-back just to deal with the likes of Lloyd and Gehrig is a luxury few teams can enjoy (as Essendon will find out pretty quickly). Far better to have a team strategy to deal with the spearheads, and run off them as much as possible.
I guess I still see Shaw as our developing ruckman, and I fully expect that he will step up in two years time when Everitt retires. Currie will just be extra insurance.
That isn't a Key Position Defender. Like he is going to line up on Matthew Lloyd anytime soon.
KEY POSITION PLAYER.
Your know the types that hold down the key positions of Full Forward, Centre Half Forward, Centre Half Back and Full Back.
As it is we have the best CHF in the competion in Barry Hall, a flanker playing at Full Forward (which has worked for our gameplan but going forward we really only have Grundy to really both these guys, you have to admit they is NO depth past Grundy).
In defence we have LRT at CHB who is the only Key Position Defender who is the "ideal" body size to play to in a Key Position (and yet look at how much improvement we need for him still) you have Leo Barry at Full Back who is 185cm tall and clearly undersized but is upperbody stength allows him to play above his size. As back up Bolton and Richards are 190cm+ and have the "smarts" to play KP but not every week as they get found every now and again. To back this lot up we have only Vogels as Back Up.
But that's "all-round" depth and players like Dempster, Tadhg, Malckesi add a wonderful dimention to the run off defence, while Bevan along with Crouch take the small forwards. I admit that is as good depth in run off defence and small defenders as any team in the comp, but thats NOT the issue that I (or even Charlie I would think) take up when talking about depth, its the key positions and who'll replace the Leo Barry's and LRT's when injuries and retirement happen??? Other than Vogels the depth is bear unless you rob Peter to pay Paul by playing the likes of Bolton at fullback.
I agree its not urgent in the sense that we need one to go in the team right away, but we need one to have "just in case" and to develop for when that day come when Hall retires. Hence why I like the select of White (attiude problems aside) so much, 198cm 102kg and can play either end of the ground.
If thats the case then we are ********ed. Because a) Goodes has been useless his entire career kicking for goal from a set shot and b) he has played he worst football in a set position (2004 - CHB, 2000, 2001 - CHF). I really can't see this move being a successful one and to be honest a pretty sad way for Goodes to end his career if history repeats.
So I'm sure West Coast would be pretty willing to give up Glass, or Adelaide Rutten or the Bulldogs Harris or the Cats Scarlett. Yeah your right I'm sure none of those specialist FULL BACK's would make us a better team
With Currie and Shaw, good to have 4 rucks on the senior list, 1 on the rookie list and 5 overall. Thats good depth. At least we won't get caught out by injuries to our rucks (quality might be an issue however)
That isn't a Key Position Defender. Like he is going to line up on Matthew Lloyd anytime soon.
Your know the types that hold down the key positions of Full Forward, Centre Half Forward, Centre Half Back and Full Back.
As it is we have the best CHF in the competion in Barry Hall, a flanker playing at Full Forward (which has worked for our gameplan but going forward we really only have Grundy to really both these guys, you have to admit they is NO depth past Grundy).
In defence we have LRT at CHB who is the only Key Position Defender who is the "ideal" body size to play to in a Key Position (and yet look at how much improvement we need for him still) you have Leo Barry at Full Back who is 185cm tall and clearly undersized but is upperbody stength allows him to play above his size. As back up Bolton and Richards are 190cm+ and have the "smarts" to play KP but not every week as they get found every now and again. To back this lot up we have only Vogels as Back Up.
But that's "all-round" depth and players like Dempster, Tadhg, Malckesi add a wonderful dimention to the run off defence, while Bevan along with Crouch take the small forwards. I admit that is as good depth in run off defence and small defenders as any team in the comp, but thats NOT the issue that I (or even Charlie I would think) take up when talking about depth, its the key positions and who'll replace the Leo Barry's and LRT's when injuries and retirement happen??? Other than Vogels the depth is bear unless you rob Peter to pay Paul by playing the likes of Bolton at fullback.
I agree its not urgent in the sense that we need one to go in the team right away, but we need one to have "just in case" and to develop for when that day come when Hall retires. Hence why I like the select of White (attiude problems aside) so much, 198cm 102kg and can play either end of the ground.
If thats the case then we are ********ed. Because a) Goodes has been useless his entire career kicking for goal from a set shot and b) he has played he worst football in a set position (2004 - CHB, 2000, 2001 - CHF). I really can't see this move being a successful one and to be honest a pretty sad way for Goodes to end his career if history repeats.
So I'm sure West Coast would be pretty willing to give up Glass, or Adelaide Rutten or the Bulldogs Harris or the Cats Scarlett. Yeah your right I'm sure none of those specialist FULL BACK's would make us a better team:
Couldn't have said it better myself!
Quite clearly this draft showed that everyone was taking the opportunity to go tall
Dan Hunt plays for the local team I support, West Perth. He had a great year.
I never understood why he was delisted so quickly. He seemed to be on Rocket's radar, but as soon as Roos came in Hunt was out the door.
Of the 18 first round/priority picks, only two were out-and-out defenders.
Nope, he's a defender over 190cm, which is the point I was making.
These positions are pretty much anachronisms in contemporary footy. Clubs stopped trying to draft full-backs a long time ago, and full-forwards are generally looked on as freaks of nature.
There's nothing 'key' about CHB and CHF; they don't even exist at the SCG.
Ah well, we'll have to agree to differ. I believe that Bolton, Richards and Vogel are all capable of playing full-back or CHB in today's game.Capable of course they are and have shown that they can do it, but I doubt that are the ability to play the position for an entire season. Vogels maybe, but Bolton and Richards are better served to our defense in their current roles. After all why "rob Peter to pay Paul" so to speak.
I would be nice to have more depth in the forward line, but I'd much rather recruit a potential gun than a potential depth player.
But in O'Keefe have we recruited a potential gun who'll play senior football in 2007??? If not will he therefore play any serious amount of games and get suitable amount of gametime in 2008??? If not then we have just recruited another depth player for the midfield and hense your logic is pointless.
No, that's not accurate. Goodes kicked 40 goals in a season playing at CHF, and was carrying knee injuries when he played a season in defence.
Oh, 40 Goals, now thats a real promising pointer to a replacement for Hall who kicks twice that many from the same position. I'm sorry but Goodes two seasons as a CHF were not up to the standard required to make me feel "fuzzy" at the prospect of him being the long term replacement for Hall. As for 2004 and the knee injuries that went with it, he was put in that that position to a) protect those injuries and b) then provide run off defense. Regardless of the injuries, even Goodes himself admitted he failed to produce the form required, the injuries were just icing on the cake so to speak.
Sorry, that argument doesn't work either. The only one of those that you'd confidently back to take on Lloyd or Gehrig or Hall would be Matthew Scarlett
Gee, I know you most likely haven't watched a replay of the GF yet but I would back Glass to take Hall and most forwards as well. Rutten while still only young is rarely beaten and Harris is the most underrated Fullback in the comp.
Rutten and Harris are perfect examples of why you don't waste early picks on defenders: Harris was only drafted to make up the numbers (at pick 71) and Rutten missed out altogether in the draft (recruited through the rookie list as a goal-kicker!). Much better to trade for defenders than to try to draft them.
That's if their are any to trade for. Bolton and Richards we got lucky with and they aren't even long term options at fullback, just coverups in case of emergency (but good ones at that). Still I not going to sit here and say "we must take a player from this position", just that we should look at using our 1st Pick once in a while on a key tall (best available, either end of the ground whatever position that is) instead of a midfielder.
But he is never going to line up on a Pavlich or a Lloyd anytime soon now is he and thats the point I'm trying to make. Depth in defence overall is one thing, but depth in the three main areas of defence (small tagging defender, running defender and tall man marking defender) is different and we lack depth in the tall man marking area going forward.
So what we just stop drafting tall player completely and go with midfielders everytime, depsite the fact history has shown we have been able to replace the likes of Kelly, Cresswell and Schwass better than we did in our attempts with Dunkley and Lockett.
Really??? So we forget about those positions because we play at a ground 8 times a year??? Also what about our best forward - Barry Hall, last time I checked he plays better at Centre Half Forward than he does at Full Forward because he has more space to play into and has less players dropping back onto him. So yes they DO exist these day at the SCG esp at the SCG considering the amount of run we get off half back, thus returning the "lost" CHF position to the SCG.
But in O'Keefe have we recruited a potential gun who'll play senior football in 2007??? If not will he therefore play any serious amount of games and get suitable amount of gametime in 2008??? If not then we have just recruited another depth player for the midfield and hense your logic is pointless.
Oh, 40 Goals, now thats a real promising pointer to a replacement for Hall who kicks twice that many from the same position. I'm sorry but Goodes two seasons as a CHF were not up to the standard required to make me feel "fuzzy" at the prospect of him being the long term replacement for Hall.
Gee, I know you most likely haven't watched a replay of the GF yet but I would back Glass to take Hall and most forwards as well. Rutten while still only young is rarely beaten and Harris is the most underrated Fullback in the comp.
Brett Kirk wouldn't of got drafted last weekend, neither would Ben Matthews and Leo Barry probably would of struggled. Yet these guys are the heart and soul of the TEAM.
History indicates that they're likely to be quality young men. History also shows that this recruiting policy is gold.
I'm not disputing that they are good defenders. It doesn't change the fact that it's very rare for any club to risk wasting an early pick on a tall defender.
My concern (apart from our lack of drafting for need) is the lack of early draft success.
In the last 10 years early draft picks have been;
1996 #4 Kinnear
#14 O'Farrell
#17 Warfe
1997 #11 Saddington - was sensational as a winger not a CHB
1998 #3 Fosdike
#4 Fitzgerald - injuries and had to play in Lockett era ( and headcase!)
#8 Bolton. J
1999 #21 Stevens. S - Key forward limited ops in Lockett era
2000 #24 Ablett
2001 #28 Powell
2002 #5 McVeigh
2003 #16 Willoughby
2004 #31 Moore
13 players, only 5 still at the club.
Sure injuries etc play a part, but of those 13 only 1 (J.Bolton) is a walk up start for rd1 2007.
Sure the other 4 (Fosdike, McVeigh, Ablett, Moore) will be thereabouts, but hardly stars.
Now we have picked some gems late in the draft (eg Goodes, O'Keefe), but you have ask how successful is our recruiting if , of the 13 1st/2nd rounders we have selected in the last 10 years, only one would be considered a potential All-Australian going into next season.
You sort of accidently proved my point. We're all stressing about our lack of success with early draft picks when we've won a comp with a whole bunch of guys we've traded first round picks for. And the fact that Kirk, Matthews and Barry came from outside the draft is absolutely no surprise to me. We should be grateful that we haven't relied on the development of our early picks to decide our fate (oh Richmond, how cruel football is). We've probably been at the top end of the ladder for the longest of any side in the last 8 years. That's because we use the draft as a tool, not a resource. If we win the comp this year after trading a pick for Peter Everitt, guess who's the cleverest recruiter in the comp..... again??? The draft has become integral to the way clubs recruit kids, not players. We've been able to use other clubs predisposition for kids to allow us to get players. In bemouning a perceived lack of success with our first round picks, you are conforming to the 'draft culture' that has engulfed the rest of the comp. Without trading away picks and taking chances on roughies, we woulld not be about to challange for the comp, again, for about the 5th year in a row.BUT none of the 3 players you mention are national draft selections.
Kirk is a rookie selection, Barry & Mathews zone selections.
There's nothing 'key' about CHB and CHF; they don't even exist at the SCG.
You sort of accidently proved my point. We're all stressing about our lack of success with early draft picks when we've won a comp with a whole bunch of guys we've traded first round picks for. And the fact that Kirk, Matthews and Barry came from outside the draft is absolutely no surprise to me. We should be grateful that we haven't relied on the development of our early picks to decide our fate (oh Richmond, how cruel football is). We've probably been at the top end of the ladder for the longest of any side in the last 8 years. That's because we use the draft as a tool, not a resource. If we win the comp this year after trading a pick for Peter Everitt, guess who's the cleverest recruiter in the comp..... again??? The draft has become integral to the way clubs recruit kids, not players. We've been able to use other clubs predisposition for kids to allow us to get players. In bemouning a perceived lack of success with our first round picks, you are conforming to the 'draft culture' that has engulfed the rest of the comp. Without trading away picks and taking chances on roughies, we woulld not be about to challange for the comp, again, for about the 5th year in a row.
It's like everyone saying that Geelong or Saint Kilda have the best list in the comp. However, they haven't won a premiership for while and we have. $**@ talent, team success is the only indication of clever recruiting so forgot the kids we could of had and remember the players we've got.
So what is troubling Swans fans is that when we get in to the first round we need to use it on a player who is a 'chance' of being a player you can build your team around for the next 10 years and unless i'm wrong - those are usually KPP.
Brad Johnson is only 22 games away, Ertimus.