Jump to content

Retire / Delist - How many and who?


JACKATTACK

How many players would you retire/delist this year and who?  

186 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.


Recommended Posts

Miller's listed on our club page on the AFL website at 194cms & 94 kgs.

I'm just going by what i've read about what some recruiters think. Generally its about 195cm's they're looking for. Its a rough estimate. I'd say 190-192cm's would be considered under-sized for a KPF.

194cm's is close enough to 195cm's ain't it?? Plus, he's a tank. It's not just his height, but his frame and his upper body.

He's a KPF goddamit, but he should be playing in the VFL... :lol:

Alright ill go with that then :P

Edited by Mr Morton
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 165
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

No way will we just delist Jamar.

He's of far more value than Cheney.

Exactly.

I'd retire McDonald, Robbo, Whelan & Wheatley.

Trade Newton, Buckley, Johnson, Bell.

Lets us have 4 picks ND, 1 pick PSD and elevate Valenti & Spencer. 1 more year on rookie list for McKenzie for mine.

You need seven players off the list.

You wont get a serious trade for PJ Bell or Juice.

Buckley is out of contract.

And I would rather have Buckley on the list than Valenti by the length of a racecourse straight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't see us being overly active in trade week. If we're going to be moving up draft spots, teams aren't going to want our phlegm in return. A possibility if we were only looking to use 1, 2, 18 34 and PSD1, would be to trade 34 and 50 for 30 or something similar, to a team who wants to use a pick that late. It's not a massive return, but it could make a little something out of nothing for us. We end up with 1, 2, 18, 30 and PSD 1, while the other team ends up with 14, 34, 46 and 50 instead of 14, 30, 46 and 62. Just a hypothetical though. I've no idea who will even have those picks, likely the Dogs or Crows.

Edited by pantaloons
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Surely if we are aiming to draft a ruckman we will have too many if we don't let one go.

And if we aren't looking to draft a ruckman then we must be looking to develop form within... and personally I think the cupboard is pretty bare.

First, you're assuming we're aiming to draft a ruckman, but I doubt we're going to draft a ruckman with one of our high picks. I'd rookie a ruckman, like I'd have done every year for quite a few now. Even if we do bring in some young rucks, they're likely to be years off the pace, aren't they? PJ and Meesen will be out of contract soon.

Second, Jamar's our number 1 ruckman by a long, long way. Meesen's only had people in raptures because he played okay when they thought he wasn't fit to play 2nds at my local Club. PJ's had plenty of opportunities to take the #1 ruck spot in a weak side without great ruck stocks and hasn't been able to do so (I don't think he's a #2 ruck either, as he hasn't been able to find a niche anywhere else). Spencer is very raw. Even if you wanted to get rid of Jamar - and that's IMHO quite silly - why would we just delist him?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't see us being overly active in trade week. If we're going to be moving up draft spots, teams aren't going to want our phlegm in return. A possibility if we were only looking to use 1, 2, 18 34 and PSD1, would be to trade 34 and 50 for 30 or something similar, to a team who wants to use a pick that late. It's not a massive return, but it could make a little something out of nothing for us. We end up with 1, 2, 18, 30 and PSD 1, while the other team ends up with 16, 34, 46 and 50 instead of 16, 30, 46 and 62. Just a hypothetical though. I've no idea who will even have those picks, likely Geelong or Collingwood.

I like your thinking. Moving up positions in the draft should be our only priority during trade week. I don't see the need for us to be looking for other players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, say our 3rd round pick (e.g P34...) & one of those 4 players... for a P19?

It's a nice idea and I would love for it to happen, but could you honestly say that you'd be enticed by that if you're another team's list manager? I think we'd actually have to give up a player the other team could use instead of just our deadwood unfortunately...

Yeah I mentioned on another thread that would be nice if we could gradualy move our way up the draft table, but as you said would be difficult as other teams may not be enticed.

For example if all teams held their positions at the moment would be fantastic if we could do

Newton & pick 34 to Geelong for pick 32.

Bell & pick 32 to Adelaide for pick 27.

Johnson & pick 27 to Sydney for pick 24.

Buckley & pick 24 to North Melbourne for pick 21.

Would be fantstic but a long shot at the same time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like your thinking. Moving up positions in the draft should be our only priority during trade week. I don't see the need for us to be looking for other players.

Except for the fact that other teams looking to trade with us would be hoping for exactly the same.

They are not going to come to us with the view to snatching our hapless full forward who can't get a game or our 3rd string ruckman in the bottom side.

Our most valuable commodity is draft picks and that is what other teams will be focusing on.

Any trade propositions would end in stalemates as they try to convince us to part with a pick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Given the our likely priority pick coming soon we may have to make room for some new players, who would you get rid of, and how many?

Obviously there are a few players there that do not deserve to be even considered for delisting, but I thought I should throw them up anyway.

I have taken trading out as an option because that might allow us to free up some spots on the list, and therefore make this poll difficult to work out.

Bruce is coming out of contract and should be included in the options here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Bell, PJ and Newton are contracted next year.

Those 3 players are the exact definition of list cloggers.

Let's hope we trade these 3 for a packet of chips.

And the only way we'll delist Jamar is if we trade for an experienced ruckman in Charman or Seaby.

Edited by Bring-Back-Powell
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't see us being overly active in trade week. If we're going to be moving up draft spots, teams aren't going to want our phlegm in return. A possibility if we were only looking to use 1, 2, 18 34 and PSD1, would be to trade 34 and 50 for 30 or something similar, to a team who wants to use a pick that late. It's not a massive return, but it could make a little something out of nothing for us. We end up with 1, 2, 18, 30 and PSD 1, while the other team ends up with 14, 34, 46 and 50 instead of 14, 30, 46 and 62. Just a hypothetical though. I've no idea who will even have those picks, likely the Dogs or Crows.

Not a bad scenario given who is out of contract and who is still under contract (ie. PJ, Newton, Bell). Unless they delist someone like Buckley, Picks 1,2,18,34 and PSD#1 could be the only picks meaning 5 changes - assuming there is no trades. Your idea of trading picks 34 and 50 for 30 is not a bad idea, and something similar has been done before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First, you're assuming we're aiming to draft a ruckman, but I doubt we're going to draft a ruckman with one of our high picks. I'd rookie a ruckman, like I'd have done every year for quite a few now. Even if we do bring in some young rucks, they're likely to be years off the pace, aren't they? PJ and Meesen will be out of contract soon.

Second, Jamar's our number 1 ruckman by a long, long way. Meesen's only had people in raptures because he played okay when they thought he wasn't fit to play 2nds at my local Club. PJ's had plenty of opportunities to take the #1 ruck spot in a weak side without great ruck stocks and hasn't been able to do so (I don't think he's a #2 ruck either, as he hasn't been able to find a niche anywhere else). Spencer is very raw. Even if you wanted to get rid of Jamar - and that's IMHO quite silly - why would we just delist him?

Agree with all of that.

I reckon we are short a ruckman on our list. And given the lack of quality we lack about 2 good rucks to be optimal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im inclined to think we'll delist 6...possibly seven. makes way for 4 ( poss 5 , but doubtful given depth ) in draft... possibly a pickup in the PSD..and one or 2 rookies depending on PSD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bruce is coming out of contract and should be included in the options here.

Contract expires end of 2010.

And the only way we'll delist Jamar is if we trade for an experienced ruckman in Charman or Seaby.

I would hope we dont do either measure

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've picked 7 positions to clear .

Draft to Rnd 4, picks 1&2, 2ndRnd, 3rdRnd, 4thRnd. 5 draftees + 2 rookie elevations, McKenzie + Spencer.

That clears the rookie list of 2 spots & I think we need to clear a further 3 rookie spots.

5 rookies would be nice, especially with the thinning draft this year, because there may be some more speculative rookie picks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bell, PJ and Newton are contracted next year.

Rhino, if you've recorded the contract status of the players, as you seem to have, you could be helpfull to your fellow Demonlanders by simply posting them. No need to hide them from us just to hit us with them at a later time. One good turn,,, & all that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we need 5 spots for drafting: ND 1,2,18,34 and PSD 1

And potentially upgrade Spencer, unless we can keep him as a 3rd year rookie

Does anyone know the rules for this?

My understanding is that if a club does not upgrade a rookie player to its senior list at the end of their second year, they are eligible for any club to be picked in the ND or PSD. If no club picks them up in these drafts, the club then has an option for them to be rookied for a 3rd year. This takes place after the PSD but before the rookie draft.

I am not sure about this, so would appreciate it if anyone could clarify it.

Edited by IWAP
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Contract status taken from an old thread - updated Morton's but 2 others unknown and possibly some re-signings (Dunn and Moloney) since then.

Not necessarily correct...

Matthew Bate - October 2010

Daniel Bell - October 2010

Cameron Bruce - October 2010

Kyle Cheney - October 2009

Aaron Davey - October 2009

Lynden Dunn - ?

James Frawley - October 2010

Colin Garland - October 2010

Brad Green - October 2011

Jack Grimes - October 2009

Mark Jamar - October 2009

Paul Johnson - October 2010

Nathan Jones - October 2010

Addam Maric - October 2009

James McDonald - October 2009

Brock McLean - October 2009

Tom McNamara - October 2009

John Meesen - October 2009

Brad Miller - October 2009

Brent Moloney - ?

Cale Morton - October 2011

Michael Newton - October 2010

Ricky Petterd - October 2010

Russell Robertson - October 2009

Colin Sylvia - October 2009

Matthew Whelan - October 2009

Matthew Warnock ?

Jared Rivers ?

Austin Wonaeamirri ?

Stefan Martin ?

Clint Bartram ?

Simon Buckley ?

Paul Wheatley ?

Jack Watts ?

Liam Jurrah ?

Sam Blease ?

James Strauss ?

Neville Jetta ?

Jamie Bennell ?

Rohan Bail ?

Anyone else ?

Thanks CTD, I've started a file to record the contract status, it helps doesn't it to know this info. Cheers mate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Rhino, if you've recorded the contract status of the players, as you seem to have, you could be helpfull to your fellow Demonlanders by simply posting them. No need to hide them from us just to hit us with them at a later time. One good turn,,, & all that.

I havent. I am aware of some of the players disposition.

Mind you, nothing I have said is new. Its been stated a number of times on other threads by others in the know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I havent. I am aware of some of the players disposition.

Mind you, nothing I have said is new. Its been stated a number of times on other threads by others in the know.

Yeah, thanks mate, I've got that above.

In the past you've seemed to be on the ball re contracts & that side of things, so I assumed you had them recorded. Thanks again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First, you're assuming we're aiming to draft a ruckman, but I doubt we're going to draft a ruckman with one of our high picks. I'd rookie a ruckman, like I'd have done every year for quite a few now. Even if we do bring in some young rucks, they're likely to be years off the pace, aren't they? PJ and Meesen will be out of contract soon.

Second, Jamar's our number 1 ruckman by a long, long way. Meesen's only had people in raptures because he played okay when they thought he wasn't fit to play 2nds at my local Club. PJ's had plenty of opportunities to take the #1 ruck spot in a weak side without great ruck stocks and hasn't been able to do so (I don't think he's a #2 ruck either, as he hasn't been able to find a niche anywhere else). Spencer is very raw. Even if you wanted to get rid of Jamar - and that's IMHO quite silly - why would we just delist him?

Spot on. There's room for one more on the rookie list IMO.

And potentially upgrade Spencer, unless we can keep him as a 3rd year rookie

Does anyone know the rules for this?

My understanding is that if a club does not upgrade a rookie player to its senior list at the end of their second year, they are eligible for any club to be picked in the ND or PSD. If no club picks them up in these drafts, the club then has an option for them to be rookied for a 3rd year. This takes place after the PSD but before the rookie draft.

I am not sure about this, so would appreciate it if anyone could clarify it.

I think you are correct.

I remember reading somewhere a long time ago that a player can be kept on the rookie list for a third season if they are from interstate? Being from QLD, that would mean Jake is eligible for one more year on the RL, if that indeed were correct.

That said, i believe/hope we'll be upgrading Jake and drafting another ruckman to the RL at season end. Chances are he'll be required for the #2 ruck role early next year, and is probably ahead of both PJ and Meesen for that spot, even at this early, raw, stage of his development.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah I mentioned on another thread that would be nice if we could gradualy move our way up the draft table, but as you said would be difficult as other teams may not be enticed.

For example if all teams held their positions at the moment would be fantastic if we could do

Newton & pick 34 to Geelong for pick 32.

Bell & pick 32 to Adelaide for pick 27.

Johnson & pick 27 to Sydney for pick 24.

Buckley & pick 24 to North Melbourne for pick 21.

Would be fantstic but a long shot at the same time.

ha ha..Some blockbuster deals there... :lol:

I really like your line of thinking, but essentially clubs would just laugh in our faces i think..

None of those players will add anything to any other list in the competion, maybe Buckley at a pinch. But the rest?? no way. It's just one more player you have to offload in a years time...

Admittedly, those 2nd round picks aren't exactly gold at this stage, I would still think we'd have to part with 'something' to entice an up-grade...

Perhaps Nathan Jones and pick 18 for pick 8??? I dunno...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we need 5 spots for drafting: ND 1,2,18,34 and PSD 1

And potentially upgrade Spencer, unless we can keep him as a 3rd year rookie

Does anyone know the rules for this?

My understanding is that if a club does not upgrade a rookie player to its senior list at the end of their second year, they are eligible for any club to be picked in the ND or PSD. If no club picks them up in these drafts, the club then has an option for them to be rookied for a 3rd year. This takes place after the PSD but before the rookie draft.

I am not sure about this, so would appreciate it if anyone could clarify it.

Yeah thats my understanding of the new rookie rules but im also not 100% sure,its just what ive heard

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Demonland Forums  

  • Match Previews, Reports & Articles  

    THE HUNTER by The Oracle

    Something struck me as I sat on the couch watching the tragedy of North Melbourne’s attempt to beat Collingwood unfold on Sunday afternoon at the MCG.    It was three quarter time, the scoreboard had the Pies on 12.7.79, a respectable 63.16% in terms of goal kicking ratio. Meanwhile, the Roos’ 18.2.110 was off the charts at 90.00% shooting accuracy. I was thinking at the same time of Melbourne’s final score only six days before, a woeful 6.15.51 or 28.57% against Collingwood’s 14.5.89

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Melbourne Demons 8

    FROZEN by Whispering Jack

    Who would have thought?    Collingwood had a depleted side with several star players out injured, Max Gawn was in stellar form, Christian Petracca at the top of his game and Simon Goodwin was about to pull off a masterstroke in setting Alex Neal-Bullen onto him to do a fantastic job in subduing the Magpies' best player. Goody had his charges primed to respond robustly to the challenge of turning around their disappointing performance against Fremantle in Alice Springs. And if not that, t

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Melbourne Demons 7

    TURNAROUND by KC from Casey

    The Casey Demons won their first game at home this year in the traditional King’s Birthday Weekend clash with Collingwood VFL on Sunday in a dramatic turnaround on recent form that breathed new life into the beleaguered club’s season. The Demons led from the start to record a 52-point victory. It was their highest score and biggest winning margin by far for the 2024 season. Under cloudy but calm conditions for Casey Fields, the home side, wearing the old Springvale guernsey as a mark of res

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Casey Articles

    PREGAME: Rd 15 vs North Melbourne

    After two disappointing back to back losses the Demons have the bye in Round 14 and then face perennial cellar dweller North Melbourne at the MCG on Saturday night in Round 15. Who comes in and who goes out?

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Melbourne Demons 452

    PODCAST: Rd 13 vs Collingwood

    The Demonland Podcast will air LIVE on Tuesday, 11th June @ 8:30pm. Join George, Binman & I as we analyse the Demons loss at the MCG against the Magpies in the Round 13 on Kings Birthday. You questions and comments are a huge part of our podcast so please post anything you want to ask or say below and we'll give you a shout out on the show. If you would like to leave us a voicemail please call 03 9016 3666 and don't worry no body answers so you don't have to talk to a human. L

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Melbourne Demons 36

    VOTES: Rd 13 vs Collingwood

    Captain Max Gawn has a considerable lead over reigning champion Christian Petracca in the Demonland Player of the Year Award. Steven May, Alex Neal-Bullen & Jack Viney make up the Top 5. Your votes for the loss against the Magpies. 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1.

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Melbourne Demons 41

    POSTGAME: Rd 13 vs Collingwood

    Once again inaccuracy and inefficiency going inside 50 rears it's ugly head as the Demons suffered their second loss on the trot and their fourth loss in five games as they go down to the Pies by 38 points on Kings Birthday at the MCG.

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Melbourne Demons 415

    GAMEDAY: Rd 13 vs Collingwood

    It's Game Day and the Demons are once again faced with a classic 8 point game against a traditional rival on King's Birthday at the MCG. A famous victory will see them reclaim a place in the Top 8 whereas a loss will be another blow for their finals credentials.

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Melbourne Demons 941

    BOILED LOLLIES by The Oracle

    In the space of a month Melbourne has gone from chocolates to boiled lollies in terms of its standing as a candidate for the AFL premiership.  The club faces its moment of truth against a badly bruised up Collingwood at the MCG. A win will give it some respite but even then, it won’t be regarded particularly well being against an opponent carrying the burden of an injured playing list. A loss would be a disaster. The Demons have gone from a six/two win/loss ratio and a strong percentag

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Match Previews 3
  • Tell a friend

    Love Demonland? Tell a friend!

×
×
  • Create New...