Who should be considered this week?

[SWANNIES RULE]

Given our poor performance last night I think a few of our reserves need to be considered this week. Here were the results of yesterday's reserves game.....

SYDNEY SWANS
Goal Kickers: H. GRUNDY 5, M. DAVIS 3, E. SHAW 2, L. BRENNAN 2, S. DOYLE, L. ROBERTS-THOMPSON, T. SCHMIDT, S. Rowe, M. Laidlaw, P. FAULKS
Best Players: M. Laidlaw, T. SCHMIDT, H. GRUNDY, M. DAVIS, J. MOORE
__________________________________________________


So it looks like Laidlaw and Schmidt were the stand outs. These guys have been consistently good all year so they really deserve a crack in the seniors, especially Schmidt, who was unfairly dropped in the first place.

So what do you reckon?

 

[natlovestheswans]

I miss Schmidt.

I also love number 50, 52 and 54. Anyone know their names? They are all so cute, well maybe not so much 50 but we have a fun time paying him out.

 

[liz]

So it looks like Laidlaw and Schmidt were the stand outs. These guys have been consistently good all year so they really deserve a crack in the seniors, especially Schmidt, who was unfairly dropped in the first place.

So what do you reckon?

Schmidt was a stand-out. I'm surprised at Laidlaw being named BOG. He had a pretty good second half but I thought he was pretty quiet in the first half. For me, Schmidt was clearly the stand-out.

Grundy got better as the game went on too. I would love to see him get a bit more of a run in the senior team but preferably playing as a true forward target, not the HFF / decoy role he's mostly played at senior level this year.

To achieve that they probably need to shuffle the team around a bit. Maybe get Davis playing further up the ground in the McVeigh role (though not with a tagging job) if he's fit enough. He mostly stayed at home yesterday but coming back from tight hamstrings, maybe that wasn't surprising.

And moving O'Loughlin a bit further out probably wouldn't hurt either. He looks very fit but isn't getting the chance to play one-on-one close to goal so would probably be more value up on a HFF and then running into the forward 50.

 

[scottwade]

I posted this in another thread so I may as well repeat it here, as there seems to be the same discussion.

I said this 3 weeks ago and I'll repeat it; Schmidt is not the answer to our problems.

Schmidt is a clearance player who is as slow as a wet week.
Winning the clearances is not the problem (we beat Essendon 38 - 31).

If we are missing something it is a fast long kicking midfielder; cue Laidlaw.
We need run and carry, Schmidt can't do that. If Laidlaw isn't selected then Moore should be the next option. Moore has the advantage he can also play as a crumbing forward. Although my sense is that Moore may be on the outer with the coaching staff.

 

[Tuco]

Not that he should be considered, but how did LRT look?

 

[grimlock]

Very LRT-esque. Took a couple of pack marks, very solid in defence. Looked lost when he had the ball though.

 

[natlovestheswans]

Not that he should be considered, but how did LRT look?

Unfortunately i missed LRT playing. I got there after 3 quarter time and saw him and got all excited and then he put his robe on and sat on the bench the entire last quarter with Doyle.

 

[liz]

I posted this in another thread so I may as well repeat it here, as there seems to be the same discussion.

I said this 3 weeks ago and I'll repeat it; Schmidt is not the answer to our problems.

Schmidt is a clearance player who is as slow as a wet week.
Winning the clearances is not the problem (we beat Essendon 38 - 31).

If we are missing something it is a fast long kicking midfielder; cue Laidlaw.
We need run and carry, Schmidt can't do that. If Laidlaw isn't selected then Moore should be the next option. Moore has the advantage he can also play as a crumbing forward. Although my sense is that Moore may be on the outer with the coaching staff.

I strongly disagree with this.

Clearances against the Bombers were line-ball. Against the Dogs and Power we were soundly beaten, despite winning far more tap outs and, in the case of the Dogs, a much inferior ruck division.

I think we now have plenty of run and carriers across half-back and the wings - Malceski, Kennelly, C Bolton, Dempster, Fosdike, O'Keefe, Schneider, Davis when he plays up the ground, sometimes even Leapin' Leo. I also think Ablett would be better in this kind of role than in the thick of things, where he can't get the boot to ball quickly enough.

The number of players we have who are good at centre clearances is one - Kirk. Two if you include Goodes but enough has been said of his form this year. Jude has the odd day when he gets a few but almost always when the ball pops out the back, he runs onto it and then kicks forward wildly. Not an overly valuable kind of clearance.

Monty isn't bad at other stoppage clearances but he rarely starts in the middle.

Right now we have - on paper - one of the best ruck divisions in the league but the midfield is not taking full advantage of this. Watch Hawthorn a couple of years ago and see how Mitchell and Spida linked up. We should be aiming to make this an advantage of massive proportions for the short time we have Spida. And hope that next year, once Currie comes up, he benefits from a year's intensive tutorage from Spida.

Getting really good centre clearances - the kind Essendon got in the first 10 minutes of the game, the Roos in the first quarter, Port in the couple of periods where they were making a run - would be the absolute best way to beat the mega flood and take advantage of what should be a very effective forward line.

I don't know if Schmidt will be able to do this at senior level but he certainly can at reserves level and he's the most likely we have to come in and be our Sam Mitchell or Daniel Harris. And until we try him out, we won't know.

Trying someone like Schmidt is exactly what we need to do at the moment, IMO. And not on a flank, in a pocket or across half-back, which is mostly where he's started when he has played senior football this year. He won't be able to do it all game but lets give 'im a go.

 

[Shake down the thunder]

I agree clearances were a problem. Essendon are not a strong clearance team and we hardly moved it forward from the centre bounce with any clear ball. I also recall Spida palming down to two uncontested Bombers in our forward line like it was a training drill whilst our boys watched them from a distance. Aside from kirky and Jude, clearances is where we excel and we are becoming tagger central (who else plays jack, bevan and crouch in the same team! - surely Schmidt was an option that week).

I would also think he has kicked more goals than Ablett, Mcveigh, Amon, Bolton, Kirk to name a few from his limited starts. Surely form should be rewarded - we have a few nearing the end and its time to start to blood some more. Give me a ball winner with smarts (and he has that) over an athlete any day

 

[scottwade]

I strongly disagree with this.

Clearances against the Bombers were line-ball. Against the Dogs and Power we were soundly beaten,

That's simply not correct.
For example. against the Bulldogs we won the clearances 43 - 25.

I think we now have plenty of run and carriers across half-back and the wings - Malceski, Kennelly, C Bolton, Dempster, Fosdike, O'Keefe, Schneider, Davis when he plays up the ground, sometimes even Leapin' Leo. I also think Ablett would be better in this kind of role than in the thick of things, where he can't get the boot to ball quickly enough.

The problem is that most of those players aren't genuine midfielders.
The first four are primarily defenders, O'Keefe & Davis are of most value up forward. Due to his disposal Fosdike is not a great run & carry option.
In truth only Buchanan & Schneider are run & bounce midfielders.
I agree Ablett would be an outside option, but you then lose his in close, run with, attributes.

Laidlaw (and to a lesser extent Moore) is a genuine outside player, with great pace and a huge kick. A player who can find space & use the ball. Exactly what, IMO, the team needs.

The number of players we have who are good at centre clearances is one - Kirk. Two if you include Goodes but enough has been said of his form this year. Jude has the odd day when he gets a few..

Monty isn't bad at other stoppage clearances but he rarely starts in the middle.

The stats clearly indicate that most weeks we win the clearances. The problem we have is the 2nd & 3rd use. I believe we don't have enough midfield line breakers and that is our greatest need, rather than another clearance player.

It should be remembered that Schmidt (admittedly in only 7 AFL games) has a career high 9 kicks in a match. The two other concerns I have regarding Schmidt are his lack of pace (which is much less an issue at ACTAFL level compared to the firsts) and his defensive capabilities. I'm not sure he is a 'two way' player and the Swans team is based on accountability.

Given the poor standard of the ACTAFL I think it is difficult to measure a player's worth. For example Spriggs won the League B&F and was then delisted.
I believe you need to identify specific attributes players potentially bring to the firsts, rather than if they dominate at the reserves level.
In my view the skills, attributes & versatility of Laidlaw & Moore are such that they offer potential as firsts players. I don't believe Schmidt will ever be more than a top up player, given his lack of pace and flexibility.

 

[rancidpants13]

I posted this in another thread so I may as well repeat it here, as there seems to be the same discussion.

I said this 3 weeks ago and I'll repeat it; Schmidt is not the answer to our problems.

Schmidt is a clearance player who is as slow as a wet week.
Winning the clearances is not the problem (we beat Essendon 38 - 31).

If we are missing something it is a fast long kicking midfielder; cue Laidlaw.
We need run and carry, Schmidt can't do that. If Laidlaw isn't selected then Moore should be the next option. Moore has the advantage he can also play as a crumbing forward. Although my sense is that Moore may be on the outer with the coaching staff.

i haven't seen enough of schmidt but from the little i have seen, at least you can't fault his endeavour.....laidlaw sounds like he has pace and skills, and we're sorely lacking in that at the moment....fosdike, amon, jude, et al are making just too many mistakes, and it's even infected the malch....and i'm sick of hearing myself whinge about mcveigh, i'd just like to see him dropped....we have more than enough tagger types, so anything to get away from that....in his first few games, back in 05 i think, moore seemed a real goer, but he's battled (injuries, etc) since then....i would LOVE to see grundy back and yes, playing a target role...also think davis, when fully fit, if that ever happens, must be played closer to the ball, make him live up to all his promises...i udnerstand o'keefe might struggle to be fit this week

and by the way, how's jesse white going?

 

[liz]

The problem is that most of those players aren't genuine midfielders.
The first four are primarily defenders, O'Keefe & Davis are of most value up forward. Due to his disposal Fosdike is not a great run & carry option.
In truth only Buchanan & Schneider are run & bounce midfielders.
I agree Ablett would be an outside option, but you then lose his in close, run with, attributes.

Laidlaw (and to a lesser extent Moore) is a genuine outside player, with great pace and a huge kick. A player who can find space & use the ball. Exactly what, IMO, the team needs.

We're going to have to agree to disagree I suspect.

I don't think it matters much if you designate the likes of Malceski, O'Keefe etc as forwards or defenders. Fact is both spend the games running the length of the field, both providing and receiving and carrying through the middle.

If Laidlaw comes in, he will start on a flank. It is where most prospective midfielders start unless they are true in and unders. And even most of those start in a pocket or on a flank until they have the experience and fitness to truly play on the ball. So Laidlaw is really not going to add anything radically different to what is already in the team. It is just a case of whether you want one more of that type at the expense of an in and under type, or a primarily defensive type.

Who are you proposing Laidlaw should come in for?

 

[scottwade]

Who are you proposing Laidlaw should come in for?

Considering the debate we've had above, it actually wouldn't worry me if we went into the Hawthorn game with the same team as last week.

Having said that I acknowledge McVeigh is down on form & confidence and to my mind, is the most appropriate out.

I don't mind Bevan in the team, against a side like Hawthorn. He gives us added flexibility and is capable of playing on someone like Osborne or picking up a forward flanker . The other advantage is that you can put Bevan on a player without changing our structure (when Kirk was forced to go to Watson last week it meant a chain reaction of match ups took place).

The only other fringe player is Dempster and once again I like him in the team as he can play short or tall and he seems to be gaining in confidence (terrific running goal last week) which hopefully will lead to more possessions down the line.

 

[CAS79]

I don't believe Schmidt will ever be more than a top up player, given his lack of pace and flexibility.

Wow Scotty,

While I note your concerns but I think Tim has the ability to overcome his weaknesses and be a pretty good player for us. He will put his head over the ball and seems to have a good football brain and if the coaching is right the disposal should only get better.

I'll disagree with you on this one.

 

[scottwade]

I'll disagree with you on this one.

With Schmidt I'm beginning to think I'm a bit like the bloke who's marching and his mother says "Look, everybody is out of step, except my Johnny".

 

[liz]

Considering the debate we've had above, it actually wouldn't worry me if we went into the Hawthorn game with the same team as last week.

Having said that I acknowledge McVeigh is down on form & confidence and to my mind, is the most appropriate out.

I don't mind Bevan in the team, against a side like Hawthorn. He gives us added flexibility and is capable of playing on someone like Osborne or picking up a forward flanker . The other advantage is that you can put Bevan on a player without changing our structure (when Kirk was forced to go to Watson last week it meant a chain reaction of match ups took place).

The only other fringe player is Dempster and once again I like him in the team as he can play short or tall and he seems to be gaining in confidence (terrific running goal last week) which hopefully will lead to more possessions down the line.

You wouldn't bring Laidlaw in at the expense of Dempster unless you had serious doubts about Dempster's mid or long term AFL capabilties and wanted to find out about other players. Laidlaw is a long kick but Dempster is longer. Laidlaw is quick but I doubt he's got much on Dempster. Dempster is significantly taller and I suspect has much better endurance - at least at the moment. Plus Dempster has had defensive skills burned into him as well as being able to run and carry, while I've seen no evidence of that from Laidlaw (though it is admittedly hard to tell at ACTAFL level).

I do think that Laidlaw is a better overhead mark than Dempster - probably by some margin and without even taking into account their relative heights. Laidlaw is also at least a reasonable set shot for goal while I can't recall Dempster taking many so have no idea of his capability in that department.

I am not going to say definitively that Dempster will be a better player in the long term than Laidlaw but I have little doubt that at the moment, Dempster is far better equipped to perform any role you might bring Laidlaw into the team to do, other than possibly if you wanted a mid-sized forward (ala Matty Nicks).

If you did want to replace someone like McVeigh (who I suspect is the only one who might be dropped for a newbie - Bevan will only be in line to make way if Crouch is ready to come back), you could achieve that with either Grundy or Schmidt by reshuffling a bit. As I said earlier, I think Ablett would be better value playing a little wider and spending less time at centre bounces. His defensive / tagging ability can still be valuable even if he plays a little more "outside". So bringing Schmidt in to play in the middle could easily be accommodated.

And Grundy has already shown he is the current number one replacement choice for Nick Davis with the coaching panel. If Davis' fitness is good enough after his hammy issue, he is easily able to play in the kind of position that McVeigh has been - ie as an outside midfielder. It doesn't mean we'd lose his goal kicking potential completely, partly because we need midfielders who can also go forward and kick goals (as even McVeigh sometimes does), and because if either Schmidt or Grundy did come in, they'd only play around 60% of the game so the slight reshuffles would come and go as the game progressed.