Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 13 to 21 of 21

Thread: No trades does not a consistent team make

  1. #13
    Travelling Swannie!! mcs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    4,655
    Quote Originally Posted by Ludwig View Post
    As much as I agree that the trade restrictions were totally unjustified, it is a different matter whether they had any significant effect on our team. I have yet to hear a single realistic trade, other than the Patfull one, that we might be blocked from making. The reality is that even if we could have signed Patfull, he is a 30 yo medium defender that plays a lot like Laidler, but has a proven record. He probably would have kept Laidler out of our side and I'm not sure that Patfull is playing any better than Laidler this year. In any case, it would not be of any great significance.

    As for 2015, we can still trade in players in the 350 k range, which is probably about what Teg and Reg are getting. If we were looking for another key defender, Rance would have been nice, but he's not available and we couldn't afford his salary anyway. Generally speaking, any player that could improve our team via a trade is probably beyond our reach more because of the COLA phase out and salary cap issues than direct trade restrictions imposed by the league.

    There's no point in looking outside the club for reasons for our current poor performances. Next year the trade ban and COLA issues will have reached their conclusion and we can then move forward in normal manner. We always new the COLA was going to end someday and there would be some consequences, so there's little point to keep going on about it.
    As harmful as the trade restrictions may be proving to be (this year especially), surely it will leave us in a fairly strong position potentially at the end of 2016. It is what it is sadly - it is ridiculous policy from the AFL, but they have clearly shown in recent years that they are like a political party - reactive to the latest fads going around. We will see it again at the end of the season when they come up with a bunch of changes to try and combat 'congestion', when proper application of the proper rules (in particular the HTB rule) would solve the issue without major rule changes.
    "You get the feeling that like Monty Python's Black Knight, the Swans would regard amputation as merely a flesh wound."

  2. #14
    Travelling Swannie!! mcs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    4,655
    Quote Originally Posted by redsox View Post
    Because the club may have something to hide.

    Too greedy chasing free agents and back loading contracts.

    Jetta will go for nothing and rucks and defence are just going and won't be replaced with players of their former calibre.

    Mitchell and some of the other "up and comers" look ordinary under the pump at the moment

    Premiership window. Closed.

    So bloodthirsty can clear the schedule with the rest of the bandwagon jumpers. True believers hang in there. Or learn the way to spotless.
    Nice rant redsox.......

    What precisely has Mitchell done recently to show he is 'under the pump' - or are you like Longmire, who seems to point the finger at him the first time anything goes wrong (what a ridiculous decision to make him sub yesterday).
    "You get the feeling that like Monty Python's Black Knight, the Swans would regard amputation as merely a flesh wound."

  3. #15
    Since the trade ban story broke, just before the grand final, we have never been the same since. I think the injustice of it has killed morale on and off the field.

  4. #16
    Senior Player
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    1,239
    By the time the trade ban is lifted, Goodes, Shaw, Pyke and maybe Richards will all have retired, leaving us a nice little nest egg that we'll have been banned from spending on players, that we can then use to nab the biggest name free agent that year and thumb our noses at the league. Then go on to win the flag.

  5. #17
    Regular in the Side WauchopeAnalyst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Mid North Coast
    Posts
    833
    Quote Originally Posted by swansrob View Post
    By the time the trade ban is lifted, Goodes, Shaw, Pyke and maybe Richards will all have retired, leaving us a nice little nest egg that we'll have been banned from spending on players, that we can then use to nab the biggest name free agent that year and thumb our noses at the league. Then go on to win the flag.
    For this to work HEENEY, JONES, NANKERVIS and the best of the rest, BJ, HEWETT, NEWMAN, RICHARDS, ROSE, MILLS? and others have to get real game time to allow the development of each player. Not all at one time, but we need to try and give the best kids a run. Unfortunately a lot of injuries for this to happen..or older players playing poorly, most weeks, still gets more games. BIRD is not on of those.

  6. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by mcs View Post
    As harmful as the trade restrictions may be proving to be (this year especially), surely it will leave us in a fairly strong position potentially at the end of 2016. It is what it is sadly - it is ridiculous policy from the AFL, but they have clearly shown in recent years that they are like a political party - reactive to the latest fads going around. We will see it again at the end of the season when they come up with a bunch of changes to try and combat 'congestion', when proper application of the proper rules (in particular the HTB rule) would solve the issue without major rule changes.
    Why will it leave us in a strong position at the end of 2016? I keep hearing this but fail to see it. I think you're reasoning is that by failing to recruit players from other clubs will result in a surplus to spend at the end of the ban? I think you're forgetting that we will have 9.8% less to spend by then.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by barry View Post
    Since the trade ban story broke, just before the grand final, we have never been the same since. I think the injustice of it has killed morale on and off the field.
    +1. I've been thinking that too. Too much of a coincidence if you ask me. It was also coincidental that the AFL notified us in GF week. Couldn't they wait a few more days?

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by swansrob View Post
    By the time the trade ban is lifted, Goodes, Shaw, Pyke and maybe Richards will all have retired, leaving us a nice little nest egg that we'll have been banned from spending on players, that we can then use to nab the biggest name free agent that year and thumb our noses at the league. Then go on to win the flag.
    Goodes used to be on big bucks but I would doubt that he is at the moment. Shaw, Pyke and Richards would all be on below average wages.

  7. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by mcs View Post
    Nice rant redsox.
    What precisely has Mitchell done recently to show he is 'under the pump' - or are you like Longmire, who seems to point the finger at him the first time anything goes wrong (what a ridiculous decision to make him sub yesterday).
    Not just Mitchell. I think the swans moved towards a "recruit" the best and has come at the expense of a tried and proven "develop" the best. As a result some of the players ranked 23-28 on the list don't seem up to it.

    I think the Sydney swans got ahead of themselves in response to the Giants arrival.

    It almost paid the jackpot last year. But a quarter of the cap on two players means trouble. A strategy the cats have avoided ( but look set to abandon Danger-rously)

    I genuinely love the idea of bloods. 2012 was the best exhibit. The step towards the tippet and buddy appears to be a step away from that.

  8. #20
    Clubman
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Sydney's eastside
    Posts
    1,315
    Average wages include the wages of all the senior listed ressies players doesn't it? In that case I very much doubt that Richards is on below average. Wouldn't even be confident in the case of the other two S.S.Bleeder nominated, Shaw and Pyke.

  9. #21
    Senior Player
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Crowland :-(
    Posts
    3,061
    Are we in contention this year? On recent performances maybe not. But lets look at the longer view.

    Disposal aside, we have one of the best midfields going around and next year Heeney will be more full time mid and Mills would appear to be a high quality mid who like Heeney this year may play from R1. Our midfield is also relatively young so we are set for the long term without needing a big injection of new mids. Josh Dunkley may also be recruited. With a locked in midfield we can work on other deficiencies.

    Once the trade ban is off and with no obvious academy targets for next year and with a likely bit of cap space, in the 2016 trade period we can target specific types of players to fix our known problems, ruck, small forward, KPD. As a long shot bonus, AJ may be back for 2017.

    So maybe a couple of years a little further down the ladder but with more valuable ND picks to trade with and still a desirable destination club for targets.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO