Trading this year

[liz]

Originally posted by chammond

Who is Quade?

Ryan Quade, nephew of Ricky.

Has been on the "supplementary list" this year, which I think has no official status from an AFL perspective but means he was registered to play with the Swans reserves in the ACTAFL (though he turned out once for his old team, Queanbeyan).

I gather that he narrowly missed out on a rookie spot last year, which is probably why they chose to give him a chance with the reserves. He's a big lump of a lad but I've not seen many signs that he could be AFL potential and he's probably only an outside chance to get a rookie spot in 2006, especially since I expect (or at least hope) that Vogels, Grundy, Shaw and Garruba from this year's rookie crop will be retained in some form on the 2006 list.

[chammond]

Originally posted by liz

I expect (or at least hope) that Vogels, Grundy, Shaw and Garruba from this year's rookie crop will be retained in some form on the 2006 list.

I was possibly reading too much into it, but I got the definite impression last year that Grundy was a moral to get promoted to the senior list after one year as a Rookie . . .

I've noticed that he often kicks goals in the Reserves . . . is he doing enough to get promoted?

[Sean]

Originally posted by chammond
But why on earth would O'Keefe want to go to West Coast? What can they possibly offer him that he can't get playing with Sydney?

Why would Jason Ball, Barry Hall, or anyone for that matter, want to go to Sydney? Players move interstate every year.

Anyway, it was just an example of the type of trade that would benefit us and also be of interest to the other club.

[chammond]

Originally posted by Sean
Why would Jason Ball, Barry Hall, or anyone for that matter, want to go to Sydney? Players move interstate every year.

Anyway, it was just an example of the type of trade that would benefit us and also be of interest to the other club.

That's the point I was trying to make . . . . there were clear reasons why Ball, Hall, Williams etc moved to Sydney, in addition to the clubs' desire to trade.

My comment wasn't meant to be a dig at you . . . I'm interested to know if O'Keefe has a reason to go West . . . if he hasn't, then I can't see how the trade could ever get off the ground.

A trade to bring him back home to Melb would have far more chance of success. Swap for Lappin maybe?

[Sanecow]

Originally posted by chammond
I'm interested to know if O'Keefe has a reason to go West . . .

If they win a flag, maybe?

[DST]

Originally posted by Sanecow
If they win a flag, maybe?

Why would O'Keefe want to go to WA after they win a flag.

Surely it is his intent to win one not play in a team that has won one.

DST

[Sanecow]

Originally posted by DST
Why would O'Keefe want to go to WA after they win a flag.

Surely it is his intent to win one not play in a team that has won one.

DST

Back to Back flags seem pretty common in recent times.

[liz]

Originally posted by chammond
I was possibly reading too much into it, but I got the definite impression last year that Grundy was a moral to get promoted to the senior list after one year as a Rookie . . .

I've noticed that he often kicks goals in the Reserves . . . is he doing enough to get promoted?

Depends on how many senior players they want to get rid off and their perception of draft depth.

Ball will be gone. Nicks too, but his departure only affects total list size (inc rookies) not senior list size, given that he was on the veteran list.

Maxfield is a possible / probable to leave.

Will come down to how many of the walking injured they give up on, and whether the likes of Powell and Sundqvist have another chance up their sleeve.

Given that Grundy would be unlikely to get a senior game unless one of the current regulars was injured, keeping him as a rookie for another year probably makes little difference. If the long-term injury arrives, he can be promoted then.

[Charlie]

Originally posted by liz


Given that Grundy would be unlikely to get a senior game unless one of the current regulars was injured, keeping him as a rookie for another year probably makes little difference.

It probably will to our chances of keeping hm.

[Cabbage]

Originally posted by Cabbage

Mail I have is that some AFL clubs are pretty impressed with some of our mature rookies this year.There were 4 AFL club scouts at last weeks prelim. in Canberra and more due to turn up this week to watch the Swans v Belconnen.
I guess the plus for the other clubs is that our rookies have had 12 months in the AFL system and would possibly be a better chance of stepping up than a fresh 17 year old. So if we don't take some of the better ones, they could be gone!

[Sean]

Originally posted by chammond
That's the point I was trying to make . . . . there were clear reasons why Ball, Hall, Williams etc moved to Sydney, in addition to the clubs' desire to trade.

My comment wasn't meant to be a dig at you . . . I'm interested to know if O'Keefe has a reason to go West . . . if he hasn't, then I can't see how the trade could ever get off the ground.

Trading isn't just about what the players want though. If we went to O'Keefe and said we want to trade him then he would probably accept a move to West Coast if they would pay him enough.

Whilst the desire to return home is often a large factor in trades, more trades go through without that being an issue.

Anyway, it's all hypothetical for now.

[chammond]

Originally posted by Sean
Trading isn't just about what the players want though.

Actually, that raises another interesting point . . . has Sydney ever traded a player who didn't ask to leave? It may have happened, but I can't think of one.

In fact, the Swans usually go out of their way to accommodate players' wishes, including helping delisted players to find their next career.