Jump to content

Room on list

Featured Replies

Posted

Im not sure if there is another thread concerning this, but how many players do we have on our list at the moment?

Robbo is gone, Wheatley is gone, Whelan is gone, Mclean is gone

Does that mean we need to delist another 2 assuming we want 5 from National Draft and 1 from PSD?

And who is out of contract?

 
  • Author

nope? no one can help? haha

we will use picks 1,2,11,18,34 and PSD1 so two more players will be gone.

 

I agree that Melb will use 6 picks.

But, correct me if I'm wrong, if we want to keep Valenti do we have to open up another spot on our list as he can no longer remain on the rookie list?

Could be very tough on young Shane if so.

Edited by Captain Jack

The minimum I believe you have to draft is 3 from the National Draft. So far we have 4 free spots on the list. Therefore we could only draft 1 more (pick 18) if our list remained as is.

This would mean no PSD pick, and no promotion of final-year rookies Spencer and/or Valenti (pending possible rookie list changes tbc).

You'd think they'd not pass on pick 34, would promote one of those two rookies and would take the best uncontracted in the PSD (as has been noted on Schwabbys tweets), therefore at least 3 more players will go.


This has been done to death, daveytrain, that's probably why there haven't been many replies.

We know Bell, Newton, Miller, Jamar are contracted. I also think Dunn is contracted.

I think Bartram is OOC, I also think PJ is OOC (have no proof). Given we've re-signed Miller and Jamar, I wonder if that leaves the option of de-listing PJ?

McNamara is another possible de-listing. Not my choice, I think he's good, but he is out of contract and hasn't set the world on fire.

  • Author

Ahhh k

Can you pay out a players contract to free some room on the list?

Can you pay out a players contract to free some room on the list?

I'm no expert on issues like this, but we paid out Nathan Carroll when he still had a year to go on his contract. It is possible, but not something that is regularly done.

 
McNamara is another possible de-listing. Not my choice, I think he's good, but he is out of contract and hasn't set the world on fire.

We can re-rookie de-listed players can't we?

And I would think Buckley (if uncontracted, which I don't know) would be another in the gun here.


Ahhh k

Can you pay out a players contract to free some room on the list?

Yes, but under EXTREME circumstances, and these are not those.

One of our players would have to go on a Fev-like rampage for that.

I also believe Cheney is in contention to not be offered a new contract, not that I necessarily agree with it.

This would mean no PSD pick, and no promotion of final-year rookies Spencer and/or Valenti (pending possible rookie list changes tbc).

The third year rookie rule would be good for us allowing Spencer to stay on the rookie list for 1 more year but I think Valenti has no chane of staying on the list.

This has been done to death, daveytrain, that's probably why there haven't been many replies.

We know Bell, Newton, Miller, Jamar are contracted. I also think Dunn is contracted.

I think Bartram is OOC, I also think PJ is OOC (have no proof). Given we've re-signed Miller and Jamar, I wonder if that leaves the option of de-listing PJ?

McNamara is another possible de-listing. Not my choice, I think he's good, but he is out of contract and hasn't set the world on fire.

PJ is contracted.

Buckley Bartram McNamara and Cheney will be wondering.

Miller and Jamr recently re contracted for one year.

If we get Ball, Valenti will not be at Melb next year.

If we dont get Ball then the same outcome.

Spencer will be elevated.

McNamara could be delited but re rookied.

Cheney and Bartram are most exposed here.

Spencer is the only one I would promote; sorry about that Valenti.

1,2,11,18,34 and psd1 will be used. 7 spots must be available, at least.

3 more to go.

Spencer will be elevated.

I don't see the need to elevate Spencer at all considering there is a 3rd year option. If the ND is shallow + GC having 5 first picks in rookie draft, Spencer should spend another year to develop on the rookie list.

Using Pick 50 in ND and keeping JS as a rookie is much better then promoting Spencer and using rookie pick 88.

Edited by jacey


Spencer will be elevated.

McNamara could be delited but re rookied.

Cheney and Bartram are most exposed here.

Spencer doesn't have to be elevated yet. McNamara probably will be delisted and hopefully rookied back and one of Cheney or Bartram could be delisted. Couple of lucky players left on the list with a year left on their contract.

If we passed on pick 34 only one need be delisted. More than likely though we will use the pick and another player will be delisted.

Spencer is the only one I would promote; sorry about that Valenti.

1,2,11,18,34 and psd1 will be used. 7 spots must be available, at least.

3 more to go.

Maybe my maths are stuffed but you have got 6 picks and 7 spots. Why?

I don't see the need to elevate Spencer at all considering there is a 3rd year option.

I don't think it has been clarified yet. ATM 3rd year's have to be internationlas.

Edited by BROCKSTAR5

Maybe my maths are stuffed but you have got 6 picks and 7 spots. Why?

6 picks and he wants Spencer elevated to senior list

6 picks and he wants Spencer elevated to senior list

Sorry , I missed that.


I'm no expert on issues like this, but we paid out Nathan Carroll when he still had a year to go on his contract. It is possible, but not something that is regularly done.

Yes, but you remember what Carroll was like? Paying out Carroll was something that needed to be done.

Correct.

However, at present I reckon Spencer is in front of Meesen and PJ.

Only skimmed through the thread but do you mean in terms of player ability at the present time?

 
  • Author

I personally think Cheney cannot be delisted. I think he has shown some excellent signs in a pretty poor year. Im a big supporter of the guy and would hate for us to let me go.

Bartram may have had his chance, Valenti is a good VFL player but doubt will do much more. But thats all i can think of.

If it wasnt for contracts, miller, bell, newton would be shown the door

If it wasnt for contracts, miller, bell, newton would be shown the door

Miller isn't in the same boat as the other two......

If they wanted Brad gone this year then he would be, given his contract was up at the end of 09, but instead the club chose to he re-sign him.

I do however agree with you on Bell and Newton.


Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Featured Content

  • PREVIEW: North Melbourne

    Can you believe it? After a long period of years over which Melbourne has dominated in matches against North Melbourne, the Demons are looking down the barrel at two defeats at the hands of the Kangaroos in the same season. And if that eventuates, it will come hot on the heels of an identical result against the Gold Coast Suns. How have the might fallen? There is a slight difference in that North Melbourne are not yet in the same place as Gold Coast. Like Melbourne, they are currently situated in the lower half of the ladder and though they did achieve a significant upset when the teams met earlier in the season, their subsequent form has been equally unimpressive and inconsistent. 

      • Thanks
    • 0 replies
  • REPORT: Adelaide

    The atmosphere at the Melbourne Football Club at the beginning of the season was aspirational following an injury-plagued year in 2024. Coach Simon Goodwin had lofty expectations with the return of key players, the anticipated improvement from a maturing group with a few years of experience under their belts, and some exceptional young talent also joining the ranks. All of that went by the wayside as the team failed to click into action early on. It rallied briefly with a new strategy but has fallen again with five more  consecutive defeats. 

      • Clap
      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 0 replies
  • CASEY: Coburg

    The Casey Demons returned to their home ground which was once a graveyard for opposing teams but they managed to gift the four points on offer to Coburg with yet another of their trademark displays of inaccuracy in front of goals and some undisciplined football that earned the displeasure of the umpires late in the game. The home team was welcomed by a small crowd at Casey Fields and looked right at home as it dominated the first three quarters and led for all bar the last five minutes of the game. In the end, they came away with nothing, despite winning everywhere but on the scoreboard and the free kick count.

      • Thanks
    • 0 replies
  • PREGAME: Rd 18 vs North Melbourne

    After four weeks on the road the Demons make their long awaited return to the MCG next Sunday to play in a classic late season dead rubber against the North Melbourne Kangaroos. Who comes in and who comes out?

      • Thanks
    • 190 replies
  • POSTGAME: Rd 17 vs Adelaide

    The Demons were wasteful early before putting the foot down early in the 2nd quarter but they chased tail for the remainder of the match. They could not get their first use of the footy after half time and when they did poor skills, execution and decision making let them down.

      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 246 replies
  • PODCAST: Rd 17 vs Adelaide

    The Demonland Podcast will air LIVE on Monday, 7th July @ 8:00pm. Join Binman & I as we dissect the Dees disappointing loss to the Crows.
    Your 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.
    Listen LIVE: https://demonland.com/

      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 28 replies