Jump to content

Tom McDonald?

DeeSpencer
in Melbourne Demons

Featured Replies

To me he's not for sale.

Of course you wouldn't want to lose him, but if it came down to having no way to keep him we would need to look at the best deal possible

  • Quote
    •  

    To me he's not for sale.

    of course he...for the right price, the right trade etc.

    He's good , hes not AA , he has flaws. Certainly not on the unreplacable list by any means..

    That some are saying he needs a classier player alongside to give off to suggest we mightnt have the right player in the first place. Hes certainly amongst our best , but quite frankly were arent that good .

    I think ideals as "not for sale " need to be tempered with a realistic appreciation of where were are...or more the point where we're not.

  • Quote

    of course he...for the right price, the right trade etc.

    He's good , hes not AA , he has flaws. Certainly not on the unreplacable list by any means..

    That some are saying he needs a classier player alongside to give off to suggest we mightnt have the right player in the first place. Hes certainly amongst our best , but quite frankly were arent that good .

    I think ideals as "not for sale " need to be tempered with a realistic appreciation of where were are...or more the point where we're not.

    If we were to trade McDonald it would be to bring in a player like McDonald.

    I know where we are - but it does not involve trading a 21 year old tall defender with the talent of McDonald.

  • Quote
    •  

    If we were to trade McDonald it would be to bring in a player like McDonald.

    I know where we are - but it does not involve trading a 21 year ould tall defender with the talent of McDonald.

    not necessarily. Who knows how any trades evolve at a particular juncture.

    Mac needs a run with to finish off his workm Why not get players who dont. You know...improve.

    T mac would not be high on anyones replacement list and thats fair enough but to suggest hes " hands off" is laughable.

  • Quote

    not necessarily. Who knows how any trades evolve at a particular juncture.

    Mac needs a run with to finish off his workm Why not get players who dont. You know...improve.

    T mac would not be high on anyones replacement list and thats fair enough but to suggest hes " hands off" is laughable.

    Even more laughable is the notion that you can build a list by trading players as young and talented as McDonald.

  • Quote
    • Like 3

    Even more laughable is the notion that you can build a list by trading players as young and talented as McDonald.

    more laughable is that you not consider such outright.

    Good teams know when to move. Youve got blinkers on.

  • Quote

    He's hands off at this moment in time BB.

    We've got a big bodied guerrilla defender who may be leaving our club at seasons end and our list is hardly full of great one-on-one defenders so I think it's fair to say he's on the untouchables list for this season..

    It may be a different case if our list was teaming with top end KPP backmen but T Mac has shown his worth as a standout close checking defender. As others have pointed out, if we had some elite rebound half back flankers with elite skills coming out of our backline, Tom would be made to look a lot better than he is as he'd be assigned to play to his strengths and not worry about being the rebound player himself. We all know about his decision making/kicking deficiencies.

    Edited by stevethemanjordan

  • Quote
    • Like 4

    more laughable is that you not consider such outright.

    Good teams know when to move. Youve got blinkers on.

    I really don't.

    I said at the start of the season that we might be in a position to lobby for a Priority Pick at the end of this season - I know where our list is.

    But holding onto your kids is such a must in our current state. As stmj says - losing Frawley is eased by McDonald's presence. If they both leave we are not progressing in 2015.

  • Quote
    •  

    You hang on to...interesting desperative context... to whom ever only for as long as they are the best option.

    Im not suggesting shopping him around but youd be silly to never listen to offers.

  • Quote

    I think BB is right no one is untouchable its just whether deal is right or not. I want him to stay but if we offered the right deal we would be stupid not to look at it. These things need to be looked a in the context of the drat and any other deals on offer and that cant be done till you know whats available s righ now no one is untouchable. On things for sure we wont get better unless we change and you wont just be able to off load duds.

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    There's the "you have to be open minded to any offers in case the deal of a lifetime falls on your lap" view that bub and co put forward, and then there's the "be a little bit realistic about what he's worth in a trade vs what he's worth to our team" view that rpfc and stmj have cast.

    Of course I'd trade Tom for Gaz Jr, but in reality I'd be staggered if we were offered a deal that landed us a player more valuable to us than our best 'gorilla' defender. I consider myself in the "I'm open minded for offers but as sceptical as could possibly be that we'd get anything that would make us a significantly better side so I wouldn't waste any time on it" camp.

  • Quote
    • Like 7

    Some people seem to think it's possible to build a team full of perfect players. It's just not.

    I understand the aspiration to improve and get as frustrated by TMac's disposal as the next guy, but our improvement will be much greater if we get rid of any number of the 'not up to it' players on the list and not a highly capable, 21yo key position player.

    Where do we find this amazing young lock down KPD with elite disposal anyway? Gee whiz.

  • Quote

    I really don't.

    I said at the start of the season that we might be in a position to lobby for a Priority Pick at the end of this season - I know where our list is.

    But holding onto your kids is such a must in our current state. As stmj says - losing Frawley is eased by McDonald's presence. If they both leave we are not progressing in 2015.

    Agree. Chip will leave and Tom must stay.

    As to the PP, the excuse Mark Evans gave for us not getting one, as well as the unsaid closeness to the tanking issue, was that we had Clark and Hogan to come back. If we lose the experienced big bodied Chip, a pick will not replace him for a few years while the kid develops and Clark is gone and Hogan has a back issue. On top of that we will have had another year, about 8 in a row where we have been poor and at the bottom of the ladder. I would be in there now seeking one and telling him if we don't qualify, then no one ever will again. I would go hard as a pick would be tradeable and may get us another experienced player or two.

  • Quote

    Tom is an integral part of our spine right now, and a key 'building block' for the future. He is young and developing and will only get better with experience, continued tutelage from Roos and Co. and as we accumulate a bit of talent around him.

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    Agree. Chip will leave and Tom must stay.

    As to the PP, the excuse Mark Evans gave for us not getting one, as well as the unsaid closeness to the tanking issue, was that we had Clark and Hogan to come back. If we lose the experienced big bodied Chip, a pick will not replace him for a few years while the kid develops and Clark is gone and Hogan has a back issue. On top of that we will have had another year, about 8 in a row where we have been poor and at the bottom of the ladder. I would be in there now seeking one and telling him if we don't qualify, then no one ever will again. I would go hard as a pick would be tradeable and may get us another experienced player or two.

    Mate, I would love us to privately lobby for a PP (even publically lobby for one) - and for the good of the league; St Kilda is going to need one soon. The Lions need one now. If we end up 5 and 17 after going 6 and 38 the two years before that and DON'T get a PP it almost removes it as a device to equalise the league.

    Top 5 picks are golden if you have half a clue and I still think we should 'qualify' (if people don't like me saying 'deserve') for one.

    I would love to know what Peter Jackson is thinking about this issue.

  • Quote

    People complaining about Tom McDonald are just lining themselves up for participation in the 2016 'humble pie' thread.

    Anyway, an overall disposal efficiency of 73% for Tom isn't horrendous, but there is definitely a clanger problem throughout our defence.

    Mcdonald 2.4

    Garland 2.4

    Dunn 2.3

    On the other hand, for the 1%ers count -

    McDonald 9.7

    Garland 4.9

    Dunn 4.6

    I think we can persevere with the young fella a bit longer.

  • Quote
    • Like 6

    Agree. Chip will leave and Tom must stay.

    As to the PP, the excuse Mark Evans gave for us not getting one, as well as the unsaid closeness to the tanking issue, was that we had Clark and Hogan to come back. If we lose the experienced big bodied Chip, a pick will not replace him for a few years while the kid develops and Clark is gone and Hogan has a back issue. On top of that we will have had another year, about 8 in a row where we have been poor and at the bottom of the ladder. I would be in there now seeking one and telling him if we don't qualify, then no one ever will again. I would go hard as a pick would be tradeable and may get us another experienced player or two.

    Agree and I would be very surprised if we weren't pushing for it already 'Redleg'. Gillon seemed open to the idea last year.

  • Quote

    Cant see us and a PP being ever in the same room. Not sure if anyone else will ever get one again either

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    People complaining about Tom McDonald are just lining themselves up for participation in the 2016 'humble pie' thread.

    Anyway, an overall disposal efficiency of 73% for Tom isn't horrendous, but there is definitely a clanger problem throughout our defence.

    Mcdonald 2.4

    Garland 2.4

    Dunn 2.3

    On the other hand, for the 1%ers count -

    McDonald 9.7

    Garland 4.9

    Dunn 4.6

    I think we can persevere with the young fella a bit longer.

    Tom is a ripper. I would love him to hang around. I think your right that people get hung up on a couple of clangers. grimes is the perfect example. Regularly cops a flogging for a clanger or two but this season he averages 71% disposal effieciency and 1.7 clanger a game from 19.5 disposals. FFS Gary Ablet is 69% and 4.2 clangers a game from 32 disposals.

  • Quote

    Tom is a ripper. I would love him to hang around. I think your right that people get hung up on a couple of clangers. grimes is the perfect example. Regularly cops a flogging for a clanger or two but this season he averages 71% disposal effieciency and 1.7 clanger a game from 19.5 disposals. FFS Gary Ablet is 69% and 4.2 clangers a game from 32 disposals.

    You'll find it's because that 1.7 clanger a game usually results in a score from a turnover, which in turn then stands out more than a normal clanger that doesn't result in anything but just a turn over further up the ground.. Ablett will have more clangers because he has more clearances, he will get boot to ball to kick it out of congestion only to land in the hands of an opponent. It's like a heart surgeon making that one big mistake that sticks out at work as someone died, versus someone who makes more errors but those errors are less damaging.

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    Tom is a ripper. I would love him to hang around. I think your right that people get hung up on a couple of clangers. grimes is the perfect example. Regularly cops a flogging for a clanger or two but this season he averages 71% disposal effieciency and 1.7 clanger a game from 19.5 disposals. FFS Gary Ablet is 69% and 4.2 clangers a game from 32 disposals.

    and i think people need to look at the game in conjunction with stats. I think Tommy Mac is a beauty but the part of his game that needs attention is his disposal and decision making. He is actually better when is he is instinctive and has little time to think about his disposal. The more time he has the more he worries me. Grimes flaw in his game is the same and needs to improve - I don't need a figure of 71% to tell me that.

  • Quote
    •  

    and i think people need to look at the game in conjunction with stats. I think Tommy Mac is a beauty but the part of his game that needs attention is his disposal and decision making. He is actually better when is he is instinctive and has little time to think about his disposal. The more time he has the more he worries me. Grimes flaw in his game is the same and needs to improve - I don't need a figure of 71% to tell me that.

    I could be sarcastic here and suggest these are minor considerations. but theyre not

    Seriously if theyre not fixed...well

  • Quote

    I think Tommy Mac is a beauty but the part of his game that needs attention is his disposal and decision making.

    Is it that bad really? He's probably "bottom quartile" in the AFL (and someone has to be) and I know he has a funny action, but in the error riddled game just gone, I don't recall any Tom McDonald howlers, and he was involved in the game plenty.

    It's probably a case of being way overplayed amongst supporters because a small number of very bad errors stick in people's mind and skews their perspective.

  • Quote
    • Like 2

    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...
    Go to topic listing

    Featured Content

    • GAMEDAY: Collingwood

      It's Game Day and the Demons face a monumental task as they take on the top-of-the-table Magpies in one of the biggest games on the Dees calendar: the King's Birthday Big Freeze MND match. Can the Demons defy the odds and claim a massive scalp to keep their finals hopes alive?

        • Like
      • 38 replies
      Demonland

    • CASEY: Collingwood

      It was freezing cold at Mission Whitten Stadium where only the brave came out in the rain to watch a game that turned out to be as miserable as the weather.
      The Casey Demons secured their third consecutive victory, earning the four premiership points and credit for defeating a highly regarded Collingwood side, but achieved little else. Apart perhaps from setting the scene for Monday’s big game at the MCG and the Ice Challenge that precedes it.
      Neither team showcased significant skill in the bleak and greasy conditions, at a location that was far from either’s home territory. Even the field umpires forgot where they were and experienced a challenging evening, but no further comment is necessary.

        • Like
      • 4 replies
      Demonland

    • NON-MFC: Round 13

      Follow all the action from every Round 13 clash excluding the Dees as the 2025 AFL Premiership Season rolls on. With Melbourne playing in the final match of the round on King's Birthday, all eyes turn to the rest of the competition. Who are you tipping to win? And more importantly, which results best serve the Demons’ finals aspirations? Join the discussion and keep track of the matches that could shape the ladder and impact our run to September.

      • 216 replies
      Demonland

    • PREVIEW: Collingwood

      Having convincingly defeated last year’s premier and decisively outplayed the runner-up with 8.2 in the final quarter, nothing epitomized the Melbourne Football Club’s performance more than its 1.12 final half, particularly the eight consecutive behinds in the last term, against a struggling St Kilda team in the midst of a dismal losing streak. Just when stability and consistency were anticipated within the Demon ranks, they delivered a quintessential performance marked by instability and ill-conceived decisions, with the most striking aspect being their inaccuracy in kicking for goal, which suggested a lack of preparation (instead of sleeping in their hotel in Alice, were they having a night on the turps) rather than a well-rested team. Let’s face it - this kicking disease that makes them look like raw amateurs is becoming a millstone around the team’s neck.

      • 1 reply
      Demonland

    • CASEY: Sydney

      The Casey Demons were always expected to emerge victorious in their matchup against the lowly-ranked Sydney Swans at picturesque Tramway Oval, situated in the shadows of the SCG in Moore Park. They dominated the proceedings in the opening two and a half quarters of the game but had little to show for it. This was primarily due to their own sloppy errors in a low-standard game that produced a number of crowded mauls reminiscent of the rugby game popular in old Sydney Town. However, when the Swans tired, as teams often do when they turn games into ugly defensive contests, Casey lifted the standard of its own play and … it was off to the races. Not to nearby Randwick but to a different race with an objective of piling on goal after goal on the way to a mammoth victory. At the 25-minute mark of the third quarter, the Demons held a slender 14-point lead over the Swans, who are ahead on the ladder of only the previous week's opposition, the ailing Bullants. Forty minutes later, they had more than fully compensated for the sloppiness of their earlier play with a decisive 94-point victory, that culminated in a rousing finish which yielded thirteen unanswered goals. Kicks hit their targets, the ball found itself going through the middle and every player made a contribution.

      • 1 reply
      Demonland

    • REPORT: St. Kilda

      Hands up if you thought, like me, at half-time in yesterday’s game at TIO Traeger Park, Alice Springs that Melbourne’s disposal around the ground and, in particular, its kicking inaccuracy in front of the goals couldn’t get any worse. Well, it did. And what’s even more damning for the Melbourne Football Club is that the game against St Kilda and its resurgence from the bottomless pit of its miserable start to the season wasn’t just lost through poor conversion for goal but rather in the 15 minutes when the entire team went into a slumber and was mugged by the out-of-form Saints. Their six goals two behinds (one goal less than the Demons managed for the whole game) weaved a path of destruction from which they were unable to recover. Ross Lyon’s astute use of pressure to contain the situation once they had asserted their grip on the game, and Melbourne’s self-destructive wastefulness, assured that outcome. The old adage about the insanity of repeatedly doing something and expecting a different result, was out there. Two years ago, the score line in Melbourne’s loss to the Giants at this same ground was 5 goals 15 behinds - a ratio of one goal per four scoring shots - was perfectly replicated with yesterday’s 7 goals 21 behinds. 
      This has been going on for a while and opens up a number of questions. I’ll put forward a few that come to mind from this performance. The obvious first question is whether the club can find a suitable coach to instruct players on proper kicking techniques or is this a skill that can no longer be developed at this stage of the development of our playing group? Another concern is the team's ability to counter an opponent's dominance during a run on as exemplified by the Saints in the first quarter. Did the Demons underestimate their opponents, considering St Kilda's goals during this period were scored by relatively unknown forwards? Furthermore, given the modest attendance of 6,721 at TIO Traeger Park and the team's poor past performances at this venue, is it prudent to prioritize financial gain over potentially sacrificing valuable premiership points by relinquishing home ground advantage, notwithstanding the cultural significance of the team's connection to the Red Centre? 

        • Like
      • 4 replies
      Demonland
    View All