Preview Round 21 Swans vs Port Adelaide

[Adnico26Parker]

I'm still struggling with how player(s) out of form get a spot in the team, and the possible flow-on effect that could have on other player(s), who have been pushing their cases for selection, and get nothing.

 

[swanssince2002]

To be fair, the match committee over the past few weeks thought that Mills and Parker would inject some life into the side after the Freo and St Kilda losses. Probably used this opportunity to rotate some players but it hasn't quite worked out.

Then coming up just short against Brisbane which was always going to be tough. A few injuries or players not being 100% and now we are in this predicament. No excuses against the Dogs though, that was bad.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Oh 100% but i think a lot of us believe that he shouldn't be there regardless of Papley being injured or available, as his performances this year haven't been good pressure/tackle wise or good build-up wise

Don’t think we have an option you need small forwards

 

[Kbroome]

Don’t think we have an option you need small forwards

Plenty of options such as Corey Warner or Cleary in the same position and if you wanted to down shift Hayward to a smaller role and try Chad Warner as a more marking target up forward then you could effectively replace him with a midfielder

 

[GoTheSwannies]

Reading Insta which is a different kettle of fish, you really get a sense of why the coaches jobs are so difficult, especially when it comes to selection.

Across the comments, apparently all of Francis, Hamling, Wicks, Warner Jr., Campbell, Sheldrick, Parker, Amartey should all be either in or out.

To be fair, there's a case to be made for each of those players. Most are on the cusp. So there's an argument either way. But I get your point, damned if you do damned of you don't

Hamling & Sheldrick haven't had an opportunity this year and both would be likely inclusions outside if those chosen so far.
Wicks, Campbell & Amartey haven't set the world on fire.
Warner Jr, he's very much on the cusp and will be pushed out by others.
Parker, should start, all other opinions are wrong ;p

 

[zyzzbruh]

How can you be crucial to link up play and have the lowest SI % out of all the main forwards. How can you be the most crucial in link up play when out of the forwards you have the worst Disposals per clanger out of the whole forward setup. So what exactly does he provide if he isn't top in like any categories out of the main forwards?

Also i can add that all three categories that i mentioned he is down on in comparison to 2023

Oh 100% but i think a lot of us believe that he shouldn't be there regardless of Papley being injured or available, as his performances this year haven't been good pressure/tackle wise or good build-up wise

All he has to do is peel off his opponent and get used at some point during a scoring chain on the break to be impactful. Is there any sort of meaningful stat for this?

It's not bloody easy to score goals in a game of footy. In the space of 100 minutes the average is like 10 -15 goals per team. So if Wicks is struggling to get involved for most of the time but manages a couple of chains that leads to a score, that's invaluable. I've taken notice of those moments and hence i don't bother to look at the stat sheet to assess his impact because it ain't going to highlight those moments. Take Wicks out and put in a slower type or inexperienced player, then you probably lose that avenue altogether because you lose the agility and chaos that his presence creates. Like i said, his role is completely reliant on the team playing well - how many times in our run of wins did you notice Wicks having a poor game? I'll answer it for you....rarely. If we play well worthy enough to win, Wicks at the every least will be a decent contributor.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Plenty of options such as Corey Warner or Cleary in the same position and if you wanted to down shift Hayward to a smaller role and try Chad Warner as a more marking target up forward then you could effectively replace him with a midfielder

None are small forwards, all are mids to half forwards. The one may be Hanily but I’m fine in a big game go safe and go with Wicks

 

[Nuggetz]

Reading Insta which is a different kettle of fish, you really get a sense of why the coaches jobs are so difficult, especially when it comes to selection.

Across the comments, apparently all of Francis, Hamling, Wicks, Warner Jr., Campbell, Sheldrick, Parker, Amartey should all be either in or out.

They're all fringe players who will always be up for selection discussion. Our top 6 isn't performing which is the issue. Coaches need to figure out how to get them back into form.

 

[Nuggetz]

Imo mills and Parker will improve after having played a few senior games in the last few weeks. Whether it be injury or suspension, it usually takes players a few consecutive games to build form.

 

[Nuggetz]

I'm.unsure if Adams has been starting in the middle but he could be used more heavily through the midfield in the 1st quarter due to his combination with Grundy which hopefully helps address our 1st quarter issues.

 

[JackHiscoxWasFast]

How can you be crucial to link up play and have the lowest SI % out of all the main forwards. How can you be the most crucial in link up play when out of the forwards you have the worst Disposals per clanger out of the whole forward setup. So what exactly does he provide if he isn't top in like any categories out of the main forwards?

Also i can add that all three categories that i mentioned he is down on in comparison to 2023

G Rohan has built a career and has a premiership medal cos of his ‘implied pressure’.

Won’t come up in your stats sheet, but yeah, it’s a thing.

I like fast players.

 

[Kbroome]

All he has to do is peel off his opponent and get used at some point during a scoring chain on the break to be impactful. Is there any sort of meaningful stat for this?

It's not bloody easy to score goals in a game of footy. In the space of 100 minutes the average is like 10 -15 goals per team. So if Wicks is struggling to get involved for most of the time but manages a couple of chains that leads to a score, that's invaluable. I've taken notice of those moments and hence i don't bother to look at the stat sheet to assess his impact because it ain't going to highlight those moments. Take Wicks out and put in a slower type or inexperienced player, then you probably lose that avenue altogether because you lose the agility and chaos that his presence creates. Like i said, his role is completely reliant on the team playing well - how many times in our run of wins did you notice Wicks having a poor game? I'll answer it for you....rarely. If we play well worthy enough to win, Wicks at the every least will be a decent contributor.

So Sam Wicks is crucial to the offence that has gone from #7 in points scored to clearly #1. Score involvements have increased as a team from 22.2 to 26.8 and yet Wicks's overall output with score involvements has decreased from 4.6 to 4 which has seen his Score involvement % plummet from 20.7% to 14.9%.

 

[Kbroome]

G Rohan has built a career and has a premiership medal cos of his ‘implied pressure’.

Won’t come up in your stats sheet, but yeah, it’s a thing.

I like fast players.

Gary Rohan even past his prime in 2022 still is putting up better pressure numbers than Wicks but also putting up better offensive numbers and is in generally a better side in that Geelong one from 2022

 

[sthmelb_dimmies]

He has been giving up goals for weeks I love him but been awful last couple

Last week he was mismatched on Ugle Hagar and Darcy while he was backstopping Melicans injury.

If you blame Liz for that then it’s pretty unfair

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Last week he was mismatched on Ugle Hagar and Darcy while he was backstopping Melicans injury.

If you blame Liz for that then it’s pretty unfair

More his ridiculous turnovers not his opponent. Hes going at 2-3 brainless episodes a week kicking it straight to the opposition

 

[zyzzbruh]

So Sam Wicks is crucial to the offence that has gone from #7 in points scored to clearly #1. Score involvements have increased as a team from 22.2 to 26.8 and yet Wicks's overall output with score involvements has decreased from 4.6 to 4 which has seen his Score involvement % plummet from 20.7% to 14.9%.

Read into that what you will. You see that as 6% score involvements lost, I see it as a contribution of 14.9%. Plus it's pretty simple maths that if the overall scoring of the team increases, it will dilute individual stats especially when our improvement in scoring has come through the midfield.

What those stats also don't do is define how well a players inclusion affects the overall scoring ability of the team. example: (completely hypothetical) let's say X player replaced him and had 30% score involvements, but the overall scoring ability of the team was reduced that day due to his role not being conducive to our current system - that means his inclusion could have technically made us worse on the day than what we could otherwise be despite good individual numbers.

In saying that, we can go around in circles there's no point arguing over what stats are meaningful anyway when you've got the eye test - and the reality is our best scintillating performances of the last few years have all had Wicks in it running rings around the oppos defenders and being used by his teammates efficiently, bobbing up with his 1 or 2 goals + a couple of important overlap plays resulting in game breaking goals. Wicks ain't the reason we're playing poor atm, but you can be sure the reason why Wicks is playing poorly is because the team is.

AS long the team turns it's form around, history shows Wicks will play well. It's not the other way around. So we're not losing anything by playing a so called 'out of form' wicks. He's basically the weapon the team has been equipped with if they're good enough to use it effectively on the day. If I'm going to judge Wicks, it's on how wasteful he is with those opportunities, whereas you're judging him on how many he is getting which ain't on him.

 

[Dubai Quacker]

Reading Insta which is a different kettle of fish, you really get a sense of why the coaches jobs are so difficult, especially when it comes to selection.

Across the comments, apparently all of Francis, Hamling, Wicks, Warner Jr., Campbell, Sheldrick, Parker, Amartey should all be either in or out.

Fair enough too.

All players need to be either in or out.

 

[Bloods86]

Gary Rohan even past his prime in 2022 still is putting up better pressure numbers than Wicks but also putting up better offensive numbers and is in generally a better side in that Geelong one from 2022

Wicks has beaten Rohan comfortably in average pressure acts across his 4 seasons since settling into seniors contention, including 2022 and this year. I don't really know what you're referring to.

He also had 16 PAs on the weekend, beating Rohan's 10 (before being subbed off in the 3rd) and 8 the week before in a full game.

Wicks is down on form yes, I wouldn't have him in the side at the moment. But I don't think we need to downplay previous good form to think that, or try to pass off others as being better at a certain thing using stats, when the stats show differently. He can definitely regain form to a level where he's in our best 22. He did it last year, and had some good games earlier this season.

 

[Kbroome]

Read into that what you will. You see that as 6% score involvements lost, I see it as a contribution of 14.9%. Plus it's pretty simple maths that if the overall scoring of the team increases, it will dilute individual stats especially when our improvement in scoring has come through the midfield.

What those stats also don't do is define how well a players inclusion affects the overall scoring ability of the team. example: (completely hypothetical) let's say X player replaced him and had 30% score involvements, but the overall scoring ability of the team was reduced that day due to his role not being conducive to our current system - that means his inclusion could have technically made us worse on the day than what we could otherwise be despite good individual numbers.

In saying that, we can go around in circles there's no point arguing over what stats are meaningful anyway when you've got the eye test - and the reality is our best scintillating performances of the last few years have all had Wicks in it running rings around the oppos defenders and being used by his teammates efficiently, bobbing up with his 1 or 2 goals + a couple of important overlap plays resulting in game breaking goals. Wicks ain't the reason we're playing poor atm, but you can be sure the reason why Wicks is playing poorly is because the team is.

AS long the team turns it's form around, history shows Wicks will play well. It's not the other way around. So we're not losing anything by playing a so called 'out of form' wicks. He's basically the weapon the team has been equipped with if they're good enough to use it effectively on the day. If I'm going to judge Wicks, it's on how wasteful he is with those opportunities, whereas you're judging him on how many he is getting which ain't on him.

Everyone here is saying he is out of form and doesn't deserve a spot in the side. Just because he was good 12 months ago doesn't mean he deserves to stay in the side when he is playing worse than the sub who plays 1/4 game time in most games.


Also to everyone out there saying we need Wicks in the side he is key to winning, his worst two statistical seasons have come when we made the grand final and also this season, his best seasons have come when Sydney didn't make it into September or make it past the first week.

So which one is it:
1. Wicks is crucial to Sydney Success?
2. Wicks has mystical pressure that a stat sheet can't record?
3. Need to keep team continuity and not drop out of form players?

 

[caesar88]

Horse clearly wants a small, zippy forward who is physical in the front half. He has picked one of Wicks or Fox in that role in every game this year. That type of player seems to be a non-negotiable for Horse's team, to the point he'd rather a lesser or out-of-form player than someone most agree is quality but who isn't an ideal fit for that role (Parker, Sheldrick, Cleary, etc)

I think he'd be keenly watching Hanily in the reserves though.

 

[Kbroome]

Horse clearly wants a small, zippy forward who is physical in the front half. He has picked one of Wicks or Fox in that role in every game this year. That type of player seems to be a non-negotiable for Horse's team, to the point he'd rather a lesser or out-of-form player than someone most agree is quality but who isn't an ideal fit for that role (Parker, Sheldrick, Cleary, etc)

I think he'd be keenly watching Hanily in the reserves though.

Thats the ultimate thing, Wicks has no impact on games this year, he is just there to be a placeholder, whereas there are 2-3 other guys that could be selected that come from different primary positions that can offer more in terms of a Papley style of goal kicking small rather than Wicks or Fox as a more defensive player

 

[Bloods86]

Horse clearly wants a small, zippy forward who is physical in the front half. He has picked one of Wicks or Fox in that role in every game this year. That type of player seems to be a non-negotiable for Horse's team, to the point he'd rather a lesser or out-of-form player than someone most agree is quality but who isn't an ideal fit for that role (Parker, Sheldrick, Cleary, etc)

I think he'd be keenly watching Hanily in the reserves though.

Yep. Obviously thinks Wicks past runs on the board is more important than an untried Hanily.

I disagree, but that's clearly the logic.

 

[Bloods86]

Thats the ultimate thing, Wicks has no impact on games this year, he is just there to be a placeholder, whereas there are 2-3 other guys that could be selected that come from different primary positions that can offer more in terms of a Papley style of goal kicking small rather than Wicks or Fox as a more defensive player

I wouldn't say all games.

And I would still have Wicks over say Parker in terms of chasing or corraling rebounding defenders.

You gain in some areas, lose in others.

 

[caesar88]

Yep. Obviously thinks Wicks past runs on the board is more important than an untried Hanily.

I disagree, but that's clearly the logic.

I don't think it's about runs on the board. I think it's about the type of player. Fox had less runs on the board as a pressure forward than Wicks, but he still got selected over Wicks in that role earlier in the season.

I really think Horse just won't flinch on having that ground level player who is fast and physical. No matter how quality they may or not be.

Ideally they would be quality, and I'm sure he'd be frustrated that Wicks and Fox are the best he has in that capacity at present. He'd definitely be wanting someone better to emerge.

Like I said earlier, if he wasn't so important to the midfield then Rowbottom would be an ideal candidate. Hard to imagine a player more perfect for it.

 

[zyzzbruh]

Everyone here is saying he is out of form and doesn't deserve a spot in the side. Just because he was good 12 months ago doesn't mean he deserves to stay in the side when he is playing worse than the sub who plays 1/4 game time in most games.


Also to everyone out there saying we need Wicks in the side he is key to winning, his worst two statistical seasons have come when we made the grand final and also this season, his best seasons have come when Sydney didn't make it into September or make it past the first week.

So which one is it:
1. Wicks is crucial to Sydney Success?
2. Wicks has mystical pressure that a stat sheet can't record?
3. Need to keep team continuity and not drop out of form players?

I've explained to you why he is perceived to be out of form, it's clearly going way over your head. And from what i have heard from the average footy fan is that they don't tend to understand the nuisances of the game, and rather look at it superficially (which i don't mean that in a disrespectful way, just that there are some who see the happenings of a game more analytically and on a deeper level - mostly due to playing footy at senior level at some point). So saying 'everyone here' as evidence to validate your point, actually further invalidates it from my perspective lol.

I don't care about his stats, i see a bloke who works his backside off trying to separate from his opponent and create space for his teammates to work into and utilise him (which his teammates have not been doing effectively, hence the stats). I see a bloke who places a hell of a lot of perceived pressure on his opponents, effecting their ability to exit defence comfortably. I also see a bloke who's efforts have broken a game on the scoreboard, via link up/overlap play either directly or indirectly, time and time again. So no, Wicks is not 'out of form', his teammates are. If he was getting opportunities and wasting them, then yes i would say he is out of form. But that is simply not the case. No one questioned his 'form' during our winning streak, that ain't a coincidence.