A lot can happen with open slather on trading picks, but if things stand as it is now, and Blakey goes at pick 7 or later, then our 3 late picks will actually drop to at least 39-40-41, because Quaynor and Thomas will get matched by Collingwood and North, respectively, with picks after our pick 40, so everyone will drop down 2 slots. But we could move back up to our starting postion if Rhylee West goes to the Buildogs at higher than pick 18, which will be a close one.
Even if Blakey gets bid at pick 6 we should only drop back 3 spots at most with our current pick 40 as several Collingwood and North picks will have dropped out due to academy bid matching.
I initially feared that there might be some malicious bidding when the system was first introduced, because the introduction of the system came in a the toxic environment of punishing the Swans for getting Mils after getting Heeney the year before. But now I see that the list managers form a rather collegial group and are not out to hurt any of their mates, which could lead to retribution down the line. This is why I doubt Blakey will be bid before Pick 7, which is around the consensus of where he should go. If anything, he might drop a few spots. We have a good relationship with both Saint Kilda and GCS who haves picks 4 and 6, and Port is known to want to get a South Australian, which will probably be either Rankine or Rozee, so bidding on Blakey at pick 5 would look malicious.
Now that the Mills' draft is history, I hear there is pressure to change the value points curve to a flatten out the top, which would make it closer the HPN system. Now that Victorian clubs, like Collingwood and North also have academies, they may also get punished by a system designed just to punish the Swans, and we can't have that, can we now?
I probaby made some computation errors. There was too much calculating to work out everything in your head withoug making some mistakes, especially if you're stoned (just saying hypothetically, of course).
I don't think our depth is all that big a problem. I tried to come up with the best team without either the 4 2019 out of contract over 30s, Macca, Reg, Smith and Jack, or the draftees from 2017 and 2018, McCartin, Ling, Stoddart and Blakey. So can we field a good team missing 8 decent players from both ends of the age demographic? Here it is:
FB: Thurlow, Melican, Aliir
HB: O'Riordan, Rampe, Lloyd
C: Mills, Kennedy, Jones
R: Cameron, Parker, Heeney
HF: Hayward, Reid, Dawson
FF: Ronke, Franklin, Papley
INT: Florent, Cunningham, Clarke, Hewett
There's also Naismith and Sinclair not included. So if a club can go into the season with 32 players probably good enough to play AFL football, then it must have some decent depth. It doesn't mean that the club is necessarily even good enought to make the eight, but it does mean that we should be able to select a competitve side if they go out and play solid, hard and spirited footy.
I've seen one phantom draft that had our picks 38-40 landing up past the 50 mark due to the number of FS and academy players taken beforehand. Blakey and Thomas have had most of the attention but there are quite a lot of potential priority access players available to clubs this year. I suspect not as many will be bid upon in the first 40 or so picks as this phantom drafter assumed, but as well as the two mentioned, plus West and Quaynor, there are players like Cameron, Scott, Brownless, Kelly, McFayden, Briggs, Khamis. Predictions of where most of these players will be bid upon seem to vary wildly.
I tried to consider those players most likely to get bids before pick 38. Quaynor and Thomas has to drop back everyone after their matched bids because the first selection either Collingwood or North has is pick 41, so there's no extra caluculating to do, as far as our picks are concerned. Rhylee West is the one that could affect us because he's in the range where the Bulldogs might have to use 2 of their 2nd round picks to match the bid. I didn't consider Khamis, but he is also likely to get a bid before the Bulldogs second 2nd round pick, and if that happens, then it's wash, with the Bulldogs using both second round picks for their 2 priority selection players.
It doesn't really matter if we drop back a slot or 2 if it arises due to a matched bid in the 1st 2 rounds for players that shouldn't get drafted before the 3rd round. Who cares if say Collingwood uses picks in the 50s to match a bid on Kelly at pick 35, and we drop back a slot as a result. It has no effective impact as it's really a 3rd round quality player getting picked early using 3rd round picks. Another wash.
I have no idea how much pick trading will eventuate. If there is a lot, it could have an impact. It will interesting to see the first go around this year.
In our case, though, the problem is our midfield. We got destroyed all year in the inside 50 count. If we win that stat we win the game (well about 90%) of the time. So that's what we need to fix (primarily) and that's why we need maximum talent in the midfield. Hopefully all those coaches are as aware of this as I am
"I'll acknowledge there are more talented teams in the competition but I won't acknowledge that there is a better team in the competition" Paul Roos March 2005
After Blakey, picks 37,38 and 40 are not really worth much. If you get one 100 gamer out of that lot, you're doing well.
I hope we upgrade those to a 20's pick
There's a few things wrong with that observation / suggestion.
If picks 38-40 (as we currently hold) "are not really worth much", why would any other club trade a pick in the 20s in exchange?
If picks in that range "are really not worth much", why do clubs continue to draft players with picks at that range, and much later in the draft (including into the rookie draft)? Clubs would have very short lists if they never drafted players beyond pick 35 or so (or wherever the cut-off for them to be valuable is deemed to be).
If picks in that range really weren't worth much, there are an awful lot of players who've carved out good careers for the Swans (and other teams) who shouldn't even have been drafted. From our current list (just looking at those who've played a more than a handful of senior games) that includes Luke Parker, Heath Grundy, Kieren Jack, Nick Smith, Jake Lloyd, Tom Papley, Ben Ronke, Lewis Melican, Dane Rampe, Aliir Aliir, Callum Sinclair (via West Coast), and Sam Naismith.
And notable recent past players who would never have got their chance include Micky O'Loughlin, Adam Goodes, Ryan O'Keefe, Nick Malceski, Brett Kirk, Marty Mattner (via Adelaide), Adam Schneider, Amon Buchanan etc etc
Still waiting for a few words about Ling, the club speaks more about Stoddard.
I know one played and one didnt but one is also a pick in the 50s which is typically not spoken about with regard to seniors
If he is a flop at 14 gonna be hard to convince me what KB can do with picks in the 40s
Bookmarks