Jump to content

Featured Replies

Druggies will be laughing at us. I'm disappointed we are helping them discard the dirty 34. I'm full of doubt about this, I hope this cowboy Goodwin doesn't unravel all our hard work!

 

Yeah I tend to agree. The consensus is that outside of the top 25, there really isn't much at all. Melksham isn't much of a player, it is a bad deal. It is a bad deal even before taking WADA repercussions into account. I highly doubt that trade gets confirmed early in trade week.

Our 2nd pick will be outside the top 25 with concessions for free agency. Therefore a good deal,

For some reason, one I have never been able to understand, ever since I first saw Melksham play in 2011, I have always and inexplicably rated him. There's just something about the little things he does that suggests there's a player in there. Long kick, good in the contest, good team player. Hopefully we can turn his career around

 

If the 4-year deal is heavily weighted to match payments rather than base salary, it would be a good insurance covering time suspended, while also offering Melksham some career certainty.

As for trade value... I dislike giving up picks in that top 25 range for players who aren't likely to make a major difference. I've long believed that the most efficient draft approach is 'high-low'. Be involved in the hunt for top-end talent at one end, then shamelessly turnover experimental, speculative, mature-age and 'possible' players on short contracts at the other end. The middle of the draft is much less likely to get you a major player than the top end, while actually not being that much better than the bottom end better when it comes to accumulating role-players and stalwarts.

Also worth noting the 'future picks' option and the fact that with a lot of retirements coming through they'll likely be going deep in drafts this year and next.

But for us, we seem to do a lot of our list-filling with mature players, and after another likely major cull this year I think we'll be quieter for list turnover at the end of 2016.

Would anyone else rather trade two third-round picks than one second rounder? Call it pick 43 (2015) and 47 (2016) vs pick 25 this year?

Melksham has many of the attributes of a number of our better midfielders. He gets his head over the ball, he is very good at moving the ball forward out the middle, he tackles well and in addition to these skills he has a long left foot kick. I think somebody once said something about Roos really liking left footers.


I hope that's not true, pick 40 in a really shallow draft doesn't make the fact we are giving up our second round pick for Melksham any better.

there is no certainty with the draft, we have certainly taken a lot of garbage players with early picks and a lot of team have had great success with late picks, it comes down to spotting possible talent then developing it. we hopefully have the recruiters to spot it and the coaches to now develop them.

Melksham has many of the attributes of a number of our better midfielders. He gets his head over the ball, he is very good at moving the ball forward out the middle, he tackles well and in addition to these skills he has a long left foot kick. I think somebody once said something about Roos really liking left footers.

Pity he's not a left-footer.

 


I'm over being angry at this coz I don't have the energy.

Welcome milkshake. May you prove goody a genius.


Does Melksham become a tagger to free up Bernie as the skilled outside mid we've been looking for.

Would prefer Bugg for that role.

Melksham is a mixture of good and bad, but his good bits of play are the type that we really lack and are hard to get. He has good pace and excellent movement in contests, which allows him to break out of contests into space and move the ball quickly.

The best teams can break into space and that's where a lot of the scoring now comes from. Melksham can do some things that make you rip your hair out but he has a skill that we lack, in an age group that is important.

If he becomes the quality midfielder he was drafted to be then great, but if not he becomes a mature role player to bring a unique skill to our team.

 

Aren't we doing a straight swap for Dawes (who reportedly is out the door)? Seems like he would be handy for them with Carlisle going! If we hadn't been so hasty to delist Fitzy, then he could have been added for steak knives.

Aren't we doing a straight swap for Dawes (who reportedly is out the door)? Seems like he would be handy for them with Carlisle going! If we hadn't been so hasty to delist Fitzy, then he could have been added for steak knives.

Read this type of thing every year, you are kidding yourself if you think it's a hasty decision. Fitz is not steak knives, he has zero value trade wise.

Edited by DavidNeitz9


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...

Featured Content

  • REPORT: Gold Coast

    From the start, Melbourne’s performance against the Gold Coast Suns at Peoples First Stadium was nothing short of a massive botch up and it came down in the first instance to poor preparation. Rather than adequately preparing the team for battle against an opponent potentially on the skids after suffering three consecutive losses, the Demons looking anything but sharp and ready to play in the opening minutes of the game. By way of contrast, the Suns demonstrated a clear sense of purpose and will to win. From the very first bounce of the ball they were back to where they left off earlier in the season in Round Three when the teams met at the MCG. They ran rings around the Demons and finished the game off with a dominant six goal final term. This time, they produced another dominant quarter to start the game, restricting Melbourne to a solitary point to lead by six goals at the first break, by which time, the game was all but over.

      • Clap
      • Thanks
    • 0 replies
  • CASEY: Gold Coast

    Coming off four consecutive victories and with a team filled with 17 AFL listed players, the Casey Demons took to their early morning encounter with the lowly Gold Coast Suns at People First Stadium with the swagger of a team that thought a win was inevitable. They were smashing it for the first twenty minutes of the game after Tom Fullarton booted the first two goals but they then descended into an abyss of frustrating poor form and lackadaisical effort that saw the swagger and the early arrogance disappear by quarter time when their lead was overtaken by a more intense and committed opponent. The Suns continued to apply the pressure in the second quarter and got out to a three goal lead in mid term before the Demons fought back. A late goal to the home side before the half time bell saw them ten points up at the break and another surge in the third quarter saw them comfortably up with a 23 point lead at the final break.

    • 0 replies
  • PREGAME: Rd 17 vs Adelaide

    With their season all over bar the shouting the Demons head back on the road for the third week in a row as they return to Adelaide to take on the Crows. Who comes in and who goes out?

    • 57 replies
  • POSTGAME: Rd 16 vs Gold Coast

    The Demons did not come to play from the opening bounce and let the Gold Coast kick the first 5 goals of the match. They then outscored the Suns for the next 3 quarters but it was too little too late and their season is now effectively over.

      • Sad
      • Like
    • 231 replies
  • VOTES: Rd 16 vs Gold Coast

    Max Gawn has a massive lead in the Demonland Player of the Year award ahead of Jake Bowey, Christian Petracca, Clayton Oliver and Kysaiah Pickett. Your votes please. 6, 5, 4, 3, 2 & 1.

      • Thanks
    • 40 replies
  • GAMEDAY: Rd 16 vs Gold Coast

    It's Game Day and the Demons are back on the road again and this may be the last roll of the dice to get their 2025 season back on track as they take on the Gold Coast Suns at People First Stadium.

      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 546 replies