Jump to content

Chris Dawes on the table

Featured Replies

What we should take away is that the club is apparently prepared to say sayonara.

My how this place has changed. Thank god

 

Do people not want trade rumours here or something? Facebook was references. Viewer discretion advised but it actually came from channel 7

doesn't matter really where it comes from. What is the germ...who sees it..who hears it ?

In this day its all......good

Just go with the flow :)

WOW. Facebook say "yes"!!!

I must say Chris has been very underwhelming, but given the dumping of Tunnelball, he may be needed in 2016, unless a replacement has already been arranged.

Interesting weeks ahead.

 

WOW. Facebook say "yes"!!!

I must say Chris has been very underwhelming, but given the dumping of Tunnelball, he may be needed in 2016, unless a replacement has already been arranged.

Interesting weeks ahead.

I still wouldn't be surprised to see Fitz thrown a lifeline in the rookie draft.

Scenario 1: Trade Dawes for ND75 and pay $200k of his salary to the Lions/Dockers/InsertTeamHere.

Scenario 2: Delist Dawes and pay out his salary for 2016 of ~$500k.

Scenario 3: Dawes stays and competes with Pedersen/Frost/InsertRecruitHere for the 2nd tall/Ruck option in 2016.

I just don't see any other scenario happening other than #3...


Scenario 1: Trade Dawes for ND75 and pay $200k of his salary to the Lions/Dockers/InsertTeamHere.

Scenario 2: Delist Dawes and pay out his salary for 2016 of ~$500k.

Scenario 3: Dawes stays and competes with Pedersen/Frost/InsertRecruitHere for the 2nd tall/Ruck option in 2016.

I just don't see any other scenario happening other than #3...

Scenario 4 : A team that needs a forward like the Bombers or Dockers might seek him. In the Bombers case we are looking at one of their players already. With Fletcher and Carlisle gone, they need Hurley and Hooker down back and that leaves only Joe as a key forward.

One door closes another Daw opens

Maybe we are just trading him to free up some cash? Does that work in the AFL? If we trade him for a third round pick that we probably won't use would that remove his contact from our books?

 

Maybe we're just getting serious

Scenario 1: Trade Dawes for ND75 and pay $200k of his salary to the Lions/Dockers/InsertTeamHere.

Scenario 2: Delist Dawes and pay out his salary for 2016 of ~$500k.

Scenario 3: Dawes stays and competes with Pedersen/Frost/InsertRecruitHere for the 2nd tall/Ruck option in 2016.

I just don't see any other scenario happening other than #3...

And if his contract was front loaded?

I always thought Pederson offered more in both marking prowess and goal kicking ability .

Also believed Fitzy or Frost added a little more X factor ,as well as Wattsy so far as having some impact on the scoreboard.

Dawesy competed well, but in the end never took enough marks in kicked enough goals.

In the last round when we had Oscar down back, I thought Dunn looked really good up forward.

Edited by DeeZee

What's the point apart from dumping his contract on another team?

I'd have thought it would be better to keep him and then when his contract is up, let him walk. At least we get service out of him whereas trading him will get is a pick in the 40s-50s range which won't benefit us much now.

Pederson is a better option on half the coin.

Dawes' salary makes him untradeable unless he's going to a team in a rebuild focus specifically looking to top up its cap and then have room once his contract is up.

We just won't get something in return that is worth it even in light of his massive contract.

Edited by praha

Must admit...Didn't think we'd trade him.

Interesting days indeed

There are several players that will NEVER play in the MFC's next Grand final team, Dawes is one of them.

Given that, what point then does it serve to keep him?

There are several players that will NEVER play in the MFC's next Grand final team, Dawes is one of them.

Given that, what point then does it serve to keep him?

Terrible argument.


There are several players that will NEVER play in the MFC's next Grand final team, Dawes is one of them.

Given that, what point then does it serve to keep him?

I hate this constantly regurgitated statement. It's such a trite comment. It was done to death when Bailey took over by the "Let's Tank" sycophants on here. You may as well say that about every player over 28 including Vince, because it's highly unlikely that he'll play in a GF at Melbourne.

I'd love Dawes to be traded because he's physically washed up as a player and contributes little, and not because he'll never play in a GF for us.

Saw it on a Facebook trade page. You might as well have just said "I made this up completely". It might not be your fabrication but it's certainly someone's.

I really doubt the club is looking to trade Dawes.

Wow, I'm really amazed that someone would be surprised the Club would want to try and offload Dawes.

Can mods please add (rumour) to thread title.

I hate this constantly regurgitated statement. It's such a trite comment. It was done to death when Bailey took over by the "Let's Tank" sycophants on here. You may as well say that about every player over 28 including Vince, because it's highly unlikely that he'll play in a GF at Melbourne.

I'd love Dawes to be traded because he's physically washed up as a player and contributes little, and not because he'll never play in a GF for us.

Hey mo, hardly trite given you then back up what I'm saying.

With a "physically washed up... contributes little" player playing at CHF for the MFC, will we get to a GF?

(that was rhetorical btw)

But the answer is "NO" so my statement was spot on Einstein. :rolleyes:

Currency for Dawes is low, so if he is on the move expect to be short changed.

We are limited for forward options especially with Howe likely to move. I don't see any great value in trading Dawes unless it is a piece of a bigger deal.


Currency for Dawes is low, so if he is on the move expect to be short changed.

We are limited for forward options especially with Howe likely to move. I don't see any great value in trading Dawes unless it is a piece of a bigger deal.

There must be something happening behind the scenes that we're not aware off.

There must be something happening behind the scenes that we're not aware off.

I reckon you're on to it, Al.

 

I reckon you're on to it, Al.

Weve all been thinking big fish....mid....which stands to reason. We made a play for Lynch and fell short. We all subscribed to playing Dawes out of necessity.

Have we all missed something?

Edited by Bombay Airconditioning


Archived

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

Featured Content

  • GAMEDAY: Rd 17 vs Adelaide

    It's Game Day and the Demons are back on the road for their 3rd interstate game in 4 weeks as they face a fit and firing Crows at Adelaide Oval. With finals now out of our grasps what are you hoping from the Dees today?

      • Thanks
    • 58 replies
  • WHAT’S NEXT? by The Oracle

    What’s next for a beleagured Melbourne Football Club down in form and confidence, facing  intense criticism and disapproval over some underwhelming recent performances and in the midst of a four game losing streak? Why, it’s Adelaide which boasts the best percentage in the AFL and has won six of its last seven games. The Crows are hot and not only that, the game is at the Adelaide Oval; yet another away fixture and the third in a row at a venue outside of Victoria. One of the problems the Demons have these days is that they rarely have the luxury of true home ground advantage, something they have enjoyed just once since mid April. 

      • Thanks
    • 2 replies
  • 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?

      • Thanks
    • 213 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