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

  • 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
  • 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? 

    • 4 replies
  • PREGAME: Collingwood

    After a disappointing loss in Alice Springs the Demons return to the MCG to take on the Magpies in the annual King's Birthday Big Freeze for MND game. Who comes in and who goes out?

      • Like
    • 141 replies
  • PODCAST: St. Kilda

    The Demonland Podcast will air LIVE on Monday, 2nd June @ 8:00pm. Join Binman, George & I as we have a chat with former Demon ruckman Jeff White about his YouTube channel First Use where he dissects ruck setups and contests. We'll then discuss the Dees disappointing loss to the Saints in Alice Springs.
    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/

      • Angry
      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 39 replies
  • POSTGAME: St. Kilda

    After kicking the first goal of the match the Demons were always playing catch up against the Saints in Alice Spring and could never make the most of their inside 50 entries to wrestle back the lead.

      • Angry
    • 318 replies
  • VOTES: St. Kilda

    Max Gawn still has a massive lead in the Demonland Player of the Year award as Christian Petracca, Jake Bowey, Clayton Oliver & Kozzy Pickett round out the Top 5. Your votes please. 6, 5, 4, 3, 2 & 1

      • Like
    • 31 replies