Tom Lynch, the one that got away

[Joffa Burns]

I was in Adelaide last week and saw Tom Lynch at SA Aquatic Centre in Oaklands Park swimming with a child about 2, maybe his son?
He looks about 190cm and about 84kg, not a muscular build, pretty lean and very fit looking.

It got me thinking, what did he play for us, 15 games?
I remember the talk he was a young key forward when we drafted him in the first round.

Looking at him now after 5 or 6 years in the system he is still not built like a key forward and with all due respect to him he is not a crash and bash player and does not play like a KPP.
Did we expect too much from him? Did we play him in a role that was not suited to his capabilities? Did we not give him opportunity?
Some guys are big 190cm, like Matt Maguire who played tall KPP at 191cm and played on the gorillas. Tom is a small 190cm if that makes sense.

Hey may not be a KPP but he is a very good mobile mid size forward with good skills and endurance and has turned out to be a very, very competent footballer.
From memory we got a late second round pick from Adelaide, who did we get with that pick? Very good get by Adelaide. He is like a better, smarter, quicker Tom Lee to me.

Yes the knock on him is he is not the hardest man in the AFL, however Adelaide got a steal and a very good player that we drafted as a first round pick and he seems a solid citizen.

I'd be interested in others opinion of Tom and why we let him go.

[ausfatcat]

didn't let him go he went

played six games showed a bit over three years (enough to keep him around anyway) was never a kpp just couldn't get a look in in a side headed to the granny as a 18 and 19 year old so left.... probably 50/50 trade atm (for a second rnd btw)

[bergholt]

From memory we got a late second round pick from Adelaide, who did we get with that pick?

Newnes:

https://www.draftguru.com.au/players/tom_lynch/1

They're definitely ahead on that one but not by an enormous amount. Will be interesting to see the final washup in ten years or so.

[Wrote for Luck]

he coughs it up constantly.

[Bluthy]

We had a poor development environment for quite a long time. By all accounts Lyon barely spoke to anyone outside his top 24 and we didn't invest in the coaching and skills development to maximise our young talent coming in. Look at the depth we have already in the squad with Richo, Peta and the development environment we have created. Players get good direction and don't get lost in the system they way they might have previously.

But also sometimes players just work at another club for reasons that aren't clear. Maybe he needed a "reboot". Maybe going to a club makes you do a stocktake of where you are at in your career and you really knuckle down. Maybe he's clicked with the club environment and the coaches there. Chemistry is a big thing in footy. Look at Josh Bruce with us. The right guy, in the right position at the right club turns a guy struggling for his career into a 50 goal player. Who'd figure that?

[supersaints]

I was in Adelaide last week and saw Tom Lynch at SA Aquatic Centre in Oaklands Park swimming with a child about 2, maybe his son?
He looks about 190cm and about 84kg, not a muscular build, pretty lean and very fit looking.

That's one he'll of a two year old... Sign him up

[asiu]

nicely read

[skeptic]

Further to this, Tom Lynch is also an example why you need to give players chances and work on developing their game.

Even 2 years after he left, ppl on this forum kept saying: see his productivity is no better with Adelaide then with us

Not every player is good right away. Tom Lynch had potential... We all saw it. As a football club we barely tried to even develop his game. IIRC, he never played 2 games in a row.

It's not the player you start with...

[Moods]

I see this thread as the classic hindsight thread. 'We all saw that Tom Lynch had talent' WTF?????????? I certainly didn't.

Tom Lynch was slow, weak, and could barely kick over a jam tin. When Tom Lynch was at our club I actually questioned the integrity of our recruiting staff. What was it they could possibly have seen in him to draft him as a first rounder???. Someone go back over his handful of games with us, and I challenge anyone to say that they could foresee him becoming a half decent AFL footballer.

By all accounts he was lazy and full of himself at the Saints, and didn't endear himself to coaching staff or the leadership group. I know for a fact that at a saints v pies game at Etihad a supporter told him to pull his head in because he spent most of the first half screaming out sledges at Travis Cloke. Was incredibly immature for a bloke on an AFL list who people could recognise.

I watch him now with incredulousness. The bloke can actually play. He is actually effective in what he does. If he has a son maybe it has caused him to grow up and knuckle down. Who knows, but full credit to him. He will never be a star of the comp, but to play consistently well in the AFL means you can seriously play. Jack Newnes will be a very good player for us but in any event it makes no difference. Tom Lynch turned things around for himself and I have complete respect for him in doing so. I certainly don't begrudge our footy department for letting him go though, as at the the time he was showing nothing and apparently had a poor attitude.

[samuraisaint]

He played his first game on Dustin Fletcher who really turned him outside out that night. Didn't play again for ages and it wrecked his confidence.
Then he goes to Adelaide and plays his first game against fledgeling GWS on a teenager and kicks 10 goals on him, confidence is boosted and apart from injuries has never looked back.
He would have made a good third tall option in our forward line. I just hope Membrey is the answer there. He shows a bit, but so has Lee at times.
Young guys under 22 are still developing physically and the maturation process is slower in taller people. He should have been given more chances as should have a number of our draftees in the 2007-2011 era, but as Finey said on SEN, we were desperate to win a Grand Final and because we didn't there was no leeway to start to develop players. Even in Lyon's last year the club were desperate to win enough games to get a home final, so they couldn't tinker with the side.
And when we were outclassed Rossy 'retired' a lot of the foot soldiers of the past five years. We also ended up losing Walsh, Dawson and Cripps after that.
That 2004-2011 era was enjoyable to experience but the drafting, beginning with Brooks in 004, was really poor, and after the WA Inc recruiting/trading in 2012 which saw us bring in Lee, Dennis-Lane, Markworth and Whiite, while trading Hutchings and Cripps to West Coast has really set us back. I still believe that we have a couple of years of pain ahead of us, particularly when Roo, Montagna, Dempster and Fisher retire. I am also concerned about how the WADA case could impact on us now after the article in the paper yesterday regarding the precedent they have set opening the door for the possible charging of players without positive tests.

[ripplug66]

Further to this, Tom Lynch is also an example why you need to give players chances and work on developing their game.

Even 2 years after he left, ppl on this forum kept saying: see his productivity is no better with Adelaide then with us

Not every player is good right away. Tom Lynch had potential... We all saw it. As a football club we barely tried to even develop his game. IIRC, he never played 2 games in a row.

It's not the player you start with...

I don't get this at all. When do you make hard decisions on players. Was White let go to early or even LJ Conners. Players must show enough to stay on your list not that Lynch wanted to stay anyway. I would be interested in what you class as a good length of time to let players leave. Most who are delisted from all clubs never make it at another club. Did we let Heyne go to early?

Lynch went to Adelaide and in his first year there was poor again. Luckily for him he had a 2 year contract and had a great second year. Injuries got him a game and to his credit he took his chance. Most don't get a chance because of one reason and that is they aren't good enough. Clubs will make bad decisions on a few players but will make a hell of a lot more good decisions on most players.

[saint64]

I would rather have Jack Newnes any day of the week. We were definitely the winners out of this one.

[ripplug66]

He played his first game on Dustin Fletcher who really turned him outside out that night. Didn't play again for ages and it wrecked his confidence.
Then he goes to Adelaide and plays his first game against fledgeling GWS on a teenager and kicks 10 goals on him, confidence is boosted and apart from injuries has never looked back.
He would have made a good third tall option in our forward line. I just hope Membrey is the answer there. He shows a bit, but so has Lee at times.
Young guys under 22 are still developing physically and the maturation process is slower in taller people. He should have been given more chances as should have a number of our draftees in the 2007-2011 era, but as Finey said on SEN, we were desperate to win a Grand Final and because we didn't there was no leeway to start to develop players. Even in Lyon's last year the club were desperate to win enough games to get a home final, so they couldn't tinker with the side.
And when we were outclassed Rossy 'retired' a lot of the foot soldiers of the past five years. We also ended up losing Walsh, Dawson and Cripps after that.
That 2004-2011 era was enjoyable to experience but the drafting, beginning with Brooks in 004, was really poor, and after the WA Inc recruiting/trading in 2012 which saw us bring in Lee, Dennis-Lane, Markworth and Whiite, while trading Hutchings and Cripps to West Coast has really set us back. I still believe that we have a couple of years of pain ahead of us, particularly when Roo, Montagna, Dempster and Fisher retire. I am also concerned about how the WADA case could impact on us now after the article in the paper yesterday regarding the precedent they have set opening the door for the possible charging of players without positive tests.

Those first 2 statements about his footy are completely incorrect. People read that and say what were the Saints thinking. I think if people want to say stuff like that it would be good to get the facts right. There are more incorrect statements as well but the first 2 are clearly incorrect.

[kosifantutti]

I'm not sure what's wrong with the first statement but he had played nine games over more than a year at Adelaide before he kicked 10 against GWS.

[Wrote for Luck]

the point was that he had a breakout game against a urine weak GWS and therefore boosted his confidence and went on to play alright after that.
under Lyon from memory he was played irregularly and maybe not given a proper shot. his lack of speed was exposed at Subiaco and I don't think we saw him again after that. as time went on we didn't see him as a forward and played him mostly down back in the twos where he was sufficient enough at VFL level.
look; he's not a bad size, he's brave enough and works hard, he's got a clean pair of hands, and technically he's fine; but he's too easy to defend against.
I can't remember for sure but as someone already posted if we got Newnes for Lynch as part of the trade, well, I would take that every day of the week.

[samuraisaint]

Just to clarify - My point of the post is to say that Tom had real potential and he wasn't developed. When he went to the Crows he played a break out game early and the confidence which came from that has helped him to become a good player. May be development, may be physical maturity. Newnes is a ripper and I wouldn't trade him for quids, btw.

. Regarding the WA stuff; Letting Cripps go to West Coast at bargain basement was just ridiculous especially as he was already showing something special. We should have played hard ball. Hutchings should have been given more of a go too. And to compound the issues, recruiting players from the WAFL to be our new forward line has not been a success either. And yes; I know White isn't from WA, it is the other two I am referring to. Maybe Lee can make it and become a decent defender, I don't know, we will have to wait and hope.

[White Winmar]

I would rather have Jack Newnes any day of the week. We were definitely the winners out of this one.

Amen to that, brother. Newnes is a future club captain. A sort of "Uber Greary".

[White Winmar]

Regarding the WA stuff; Letting Cripps go to West Coast at bargain basement was just ridiculous especially as he was already showing something special. We should have played hard ball. Hutchings should have been given more of a go too. And to compound the issues, recruiting players from the WAFL to be our new forward line has not been a success either. And yes; I know White isn't from WA, it is the other two I am referring to. Maybe Lee can make it and become a decent defender, I don't know, we will have to wait and hope.[/quote]

We could've played as much hardball with West Coast as we liked. Jamie was never going to go anywhere other than home to W.A and West Coast knew it. To the club's credit, it knew this and even tried to trade him to Fremantle in order to get something reasonable out of the deal. The shockers were not interested. So it was deal with WC on their terms, or lose him for nothing. As far as WC was concerned it was a negotiator's "wet dream". Pity about Jamie. He would've been very handy for us. Not a bad player, especially considering there was no photo of him available at the time he got drafted. He overcame that enormous obstacle, so kudos to him.

[BigMart]

It was either bad drafting or poor development??

Either way a pick 12 was traded for pick 37 after three years in the system
Followed by pick 24 for Pick 43 the next year (after three yrs on the list)

We were lucky enough to pick up Newnes with pick 37
But that was never a guarantee
We did not trade Lynch for Newnes...

[ripplug66]

It was either bad drafting or poor development??

Either way a pick 12 was traded for pick 37 after three years in the system
Followed by pick 24 for Pick 43 the next year (after three yrs on the list)

We were lucky enough to pick up Newnes with pick 37
But that was never a guarantee
We did not trade Lynch for Newnes...

Yes it was either as every single club has.

[kosifantutti]

What draft pick was Tommy Walsh? And what did we get for him?

Stanley?

[BigMart]

What does that comment even mean pluggs

[saynta]

I was in Adelaide last week and saw Tom Lynch at SA Aquatic Centre in Oaklands Park swimming with a child about 2, maybe his son?
He looks about 190cm and about 84kg, not a muscular build, pretty lean and very fit looking.

It got me thinking, what did he play for us, 15 games?
I remember the talk he was a young key forward when we drafted him in the first round.

Looking at him now after 5 or 6 years in the system he is still not built like a key forward and with all due respect to him he is not a crash and bash player and does not play like a KPP.
Did we expect too much from him? Did we play him in a role that was not suited to his capabilities? Did we not give him opportunity?
Some guys are big 190cm, like Matt Maguire who played tall KPP at 191cm and played on the gorillas. Tom is a small 190cm if that makes sense.

Hey may not be a KPP but he is a very good mobile mid size forward with good skills and endurance and has turned out to be a very, very competent footballer.
From memory we got a late second round pick from Adelaide, who did we get with that pick? Very good get by Adelaide. He is like a better, smarter, quicker Tom Lee to me.

Yes the knock on him is he is not the hardest man in the AFL, however Adelaide got a steal and a very good player that we drafted as a first round pick and he seems a solid citizen.

I'd be interested in others opinion of Tom and why we let him go.

191cm actually.

[Richter]

In reality it was both poor drafting by us and a case of Tom being a later developer.

Tom was taken by us at pick 13. Here's a few names of players taken in the next two rounds of picks. Shoenmakers, Schuey, Ballantyne, Trengove, Zaharakis, Suban, Redden, Beams, Hannebery, Shiels, Clarke, Broadbent, Motlop, Robinson, Sloane. I know one can 'cherry-pick' retrospectively when looking at drafts, but those are 15 out of the next 31 names read out and IMO all are better players than Tom. Thankfully, the pick was not wasted though as Jack Newnes has turned out to be a solid performer for us.

In that draft thank goodness for the pick of Rhys Stanley at our next pick, #47, who gave us some solid games and then got cashed in last year for #21 which landed us Hugh Goddard!

[Richter]

It was either bad drafting or poor development??

Either way a pick 12 was traded for pick 37 after three years in the system
Followed by pick 24 for Pick 43 the next year (after three yrs on the list)

We were lucky enough to pick up Newnes with pick 37
But that was never a guarantee
We did not trade Lynch for Newnes...

Yes it was either as every single club has.

And indeed the next pick we got in that draft was Rhys Stanley at #47, who after 6 years of ok games with us, got traded in for #21 which netted us a probable 150+ game key defender in Hugh Goddard!