2021 trading, drafting and list management: players and personnel

[The Great One]

I read somewhere once, albeit a while ago, that all clubs have to make a minimum number of list changes at season's end, via drafting,trading, delisting etc.

I thought the minimum number of list changes was 4, and the minimum draft picks to he used was 2. Could someone clarify the rules in this area please.

Traditionally the club is sympathetic to players with big injury history as evidenced by the amount of time AJ was given before ultimately the hard call was made.

In that regard are we going to make a similar decision on Naismith. I suspect so. There seems no choice.

Ling is another on that same path

Those 2 plus Ronke and Gray would appear to me to be the main candidates to be moved on.

[Bangalore Swans]

They are bizarre
I can’t see Parker being anything but a Swan..wash your mouth out with soap those proposing a trade deal for him
Dawson has already said Swans fans should be fairly relaxed about him staying ..that was in a sen interview
Hewett hopefully does stay ..the timing re the baton change from Kennedy is overlapping a little maybe in a year but I think they’ve figured out he’s not just a tagger or a plug in defence …hopefully he has forged some strong links to this club and why would he leave when it’s all ahead of him here ..hopefully we satisfy him contractually
And let’s just see what happens with Stephens ..not every player is impatient to simply get opportunities in first ..didnt it take Dawson quite a long time to graduate to where is now
Maybe Stephens can appreciate of the club and the journey he has to take to get there ..
At the end of the day we’ll keep the good ones who lone this club

- - - Updated - - -



Can we just let go of you ..we won’t be letting go of Parker ..do you see the way he plays for this club and has from the very beginning

For the record I don’t want to see Dawson, Parker, Hewitt or Stephens leave. Unfortunately salary caps force most clubs hands. There are choices to made due to financial constraints. We are simply debating these choices.

I also feel there is a moral obligation from all players in the AFL to each get the best financial deal they can.

I wonder why fans are so selfish to expect players to take financial deals that are far less than what they are worth on the open market so they can maintain a position at the fans club. Fans don’t do the hard training, fans don’t do the hours of physio, fans don’t face the scrutiny and the fans are not walking with pain when they are retired. Players have limited years to earn on field money from playing football. These years need to be maximised. They have children and partners to support. These players are also years behind in their career progression compared to their mates at school. Many players have to start a new career from scratch while their mates from school have already had 8-10 years in the system to advance their careers.

Fans should be happy for players to move on if the result of them moving on is better future prospects and prosperity.

[Faunac8]

For the record I don’t want to see Dawson, Parker, Hewitt or Stephens leave. Unfortunately salary caps force most clubs hands. There are choices to made due to financial constraints. We are simply debating these choices.

I also feel there is a moral obligation from all players in the AFL to each get the best financial deal they can.


I wonder why fans are so selfish to expect players to take financial deals that are far less than what they are worth on the open market so they can maintain a position at the fans club. Fans don’t do the hard training, fans don’t do the hours of physio, fans don’t face the scrutiny and the fans are not walking with pain when they are retired. Players have limited years to earn on field money from playing football. These years need to be maximised. They have children and partners to support. These players are also years behind in their career progression compared to their mates at school. Many players have to start a new career from scratch while their mates from school have already had 8-10 years in the system to advance their careers.

Fans should be happy for players to move on if the result of them moving on is better future prospects and prosperity.

Some interesting views expressed here BS allow me to address a couple of them and provide my thoughts in response.

1) Moral obligation is a big reach whose morals are you using to judge this ? Players just like any other employee have the right to work where they choose and just like everyone else sometimes job satisfaction rates higher than money and they may decide their career movements accordingly. I know personally that I have.
2) Because it’s human nature fans want their teams to be successful and they form an attachment to players who they believe can assist with that goal.
3) If you have been in the AFL system for 8-10 years it’s a fair chance you have enjoyed some reasonable financial compensation over that time and created a profile and cultivated a network that often leads to opportunities that their mates from school can only dream about.
4) I think in general most supporters understand and respect why players do move on they wish them well and don’t begrudge them those opportunities.( see Dan Hannebery and AA as recent examples ) There are some obvious exceptions where the departing players haven’t endeared themselves to the supporters of the club by their actions or comments that they make after they leave ( Tom Mitchell anyone ? )
Possibly you could have prefaced your comments with “some fans” rather than an all encompassing “fans” as not all of us think the same way. Personally I tend to think those supporters with unrealistic expectations or unhealthy attitudes to be in the minority.

[KSAS]

Tom Morris regurgitated the same re Swans salary cap squeeze on Foxtel "AFL Tonight" but specifically highlighting there is a large gap with Luke Parker's contract asking and what the club is offering. Tom is of the opinion if it doesn't get it resolved within the next month, clubs will come hard at Luke & the other OOC players.

He believes our Cap Squeeze has came about with so many young exciting talent emerging on our list & has not ruled out Buddy playing beyond 2022.

Tom's said his sources are speaking with List & Player Managers (but not directory from the club). He also pointed out other clubs are also in Cap Squeeze, namely Pies, Cats, Lions, Eagles, Dogs, Tigers & Port. Crows, Norf & Bombers with the most Cap space to make splash. However there is a thought to keep war chest for 2022 when there is more attractive FA offerings than 2021.

After all that, i still of the opinion no one really knows as the club do play contract negotiations close to their chests (rightly so).

[Roadrunner]

For the record I don’t want to see Dawson, Parker, Hewitt or Stephens leave. Unfortunately salary caps force most clubs hands. There are choices to made due to financial constraints. We are simply debating these choices.

I also feel there is a moral obligation from all players in the AFL to each get the best financial deal they can.

I wonder why fans are so selfish to expect players to take financial deals that are far less than what they are worth on the open market so they can maintain a position at the fans club. Fans don’t do the hard training, fans don’t do the hours of physio, fans don’t face the scrutiny and the fans are not walking with pain when they are retired. Players have limited years to earn on field money from playing football. These years need to be maximised. They have children and partners to support. These players are also years behind in their career progression compared to their mates at school. Many players have to start a new career from scratch while their mates from school have already had 8-10 years in the system to advance their careers.

Fans should be happy for players to move on if the result of them moving on is better future prospects and prosperity.

Bangalore, I don’t see where morality comes into it. In every team there is a high degree of club loyalty as players go to battle with close mates and this creates a special bond. However it is easier these days to change clubs as you can see at the end of a game opposition players are in very friendly discussions with each other, unlike in past eras, and I for one think this is a beautiful thing!

My thinking is that the reason for the majority of players changing clubs is due to better opportunities, like Toby Nankervis. We have some leaving for more money like Tom Mitchell, some leaving for a combination like AA who didn’t want to play in the ruck and Gazza and Hanners for salary cap plus other factors. Of course finances play a role but I suggest not the major one. We lost players like Diesel in the past who wanted to play in a team vying for a premiership. It is sad for us as fans when we lose a top player to an opposition club and even if though we can understand their reasons for leaving, it still hurts like hell!

[Faunac8]

According to the AFL site the only injured player not available for selection that we have currently is Sam Naismith.
Now I’m not 100% sure how accurate that is but I don’t think I can ever remember us only ever having one player listed as injured in fact I don’t think I’ve ever seen any club have such a slim injury list. Is this simply good luck or have we made improvements in our rehab support and medical teams?
The stars are certainly aligning for us this year and to echo another poster on here
I Believe

[Mark26]

[QUOTE=TheBloods;826248]You love Chad , Stephens , Rowbottom etc so much , who do you think is the one taking them under his wing , mentoring them and showing them how its done week in week out ? PARKER

im ttelling you it doesnt matter how talented Chad is , he will not be the player he could be if he loses a shield and a LEADER like Parker so early in his career . They need guidance around them until they are ready to take over for themselves . Losing Parker and Kennedy in back to back years will be trouble for them . I dont want that , surely you dont want that . Its not gonna happen

- - - Updated - - -

I agree about Parker's importance for our young mids. Joey is there leading by example too. If I recall correctly, Parker had to spend some time early in his career as the sub. He had to bide his time and do an apprenticeship. Let's hope some of our young guns have the patience to emulate him.

[Ludwig]

All the trade discussion recently has been about four players (Stephens, Hewitt, Parker and Dawson.

If due to salary cap reasons, I have to keep only two of the four this whom this is my thinking:

Keep - Dawson, Stephen’s

Let go - Parker and Hewitt

I sort of agree that if our backs are up against the wall and we are truly stuck with an immovable salary cap limitation, then Hewett and Parker are the ones we would have to lose.

I can't see Parker leaving unless our offer is really way under what he deserves, which would be an indication of some salary mismanagement by our administration.

Parker would be a huge loss, but clubs find a way to cover these losses. Other players step up and step in, and we would do the same. We are fortunate to have a good young midfield group that can cover the loss of a big part of our on ball brigade and reemerge even stronger.

We should get a 1st round and 2nd round draft picks for Parker and Hewett, so we should get a couple of good players for the future to make up for the loss.

I'm prepared to lose Hewett. I wouldn't want to lose Parker, but if it helps relieve our salary cap problems, and we can keep both Dawson and Stephens, I believe we will come out of this okay.

[AB Swannie]

This is probably going to sound harsher than its intention but I would think that Sam Reid would be the player who would most likely be "sacrificed" if our backs were against the wall. From memory, it was reported that he was on significant money when he signed his deal 5 years ago and so a decent saving could be made there.

I've been on record within these posts that I think we should attempt to keep Hewett but I also don't think he is irreplaceable.

[KTigers]

The thing is of course if losing Parker now is salary cap mismanagement, then so was signing him and Heeney etc to above market
deals years ago. If we didn't have half a dozen or more guys being so well paid now there'd be more in the kitty to keep the likes of
Dawson (and Parker) now and all the rest that need to be resigned next year. It always comes back to the same old chestnut, "You
can't have everything".

[Ludwig]

The thing is of course if losing Parker now is salary cap mismanagement, then so was signing him and Heeney etc to above market
deals years ago. .

That's what I was referring to. It's not this year, but the planning that went before it that has taken us the state of play this year. In truth, the problem goes back to 2012-13 with the signing of Tippett and Franklin, then losing the COLA. We've never quite emerged from that. In more recent times, it was the 3 year Naismith contract that was a big mistake, given he was unfit to play with an ACL reco at the time. What were they thinking?

[707]

Something on the AFL website about the Pies being interested in Stephens