Jump to content

Featured Replies

  • Author
4 minutes ago, Superunknown said:

Some very good discussion here

Soooo

Out Brayshaw

In Langdon, Amon, Young? (or trade for King)

Am I reading that right?

Some at the edges trades, not to say they're not important, but this seems to address some apparent glaring issues.

I reckon we could get those players without losing Brayshaw as it stands. Definitely seems like there's a decent chance we'll split our pick though, there's at least 3 clubs who could come to that party IMO.

 
1 hour ago, Moonshadow said:

Out: Brayshaw, pick 20

In: Langdon, Hill or Cerra

Swap of later picks

Isn't Hill basically off the St Kilda?

3 minutes ago, Superunknown said:

Isn't Hill basically off the St Kilda?

Cant blame a bloke from hoping he joins us!

 
5 hours ago, Lord Nev said:

We also have Sparrow, Jones, Petracca & vB as players who can play that role proficiently.

Way to underline my point. Jones is on last legs, Sparrow has played all of 2 games, Vandenberg can barely get through a training session without breaking down. Petracca has potential to play more midfield minutes but can’t seem to improve on his tank five years into his career. 

Brayshaw would leave a huge hole in our midfield. Robbing Peter to pay Paul is not the answer.

  • Author
9 minutes ago, GetJonnoPatton said:

Way to underline my point. Jones is on last legs, Sparrow has played all of 2 games, Vandenberg can barely get through a training session without breaking down. Petracca has potential to play more midfield minutes but can’t seem to improve on his tank five years into his career. 

Brayshaw would leave a huge hole in our midfield. Robbing Peter to pay Paul is not the answer.

I'm glad you listed all our wing depth in your above post too...

But you're right, doesn't seem like outside players are very important in the AFL now hey?  ?‍♂️

We're ranked 4th in contested possessions. 14th for uncontested possessions.

It's not hard to work out what our weakness is.


10 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

I'm glad you listed all our wing depth in your above post too...

But you're right, doesn't seem like outside players are very important in the AFL now hey?  ?‍♂️

We're ranked 4th in contested possessions. 14th for uncontested possessions.

It's not hard to work out what our weakness is.

So improve the weakness. Why does it have to come at the cost of Brayshaw? Doesn’t make sense.

  • Author
1 hour ago, GetJonnoPatton said:

So improve the weakness. Why does it have to come at the cost of Brayshaw? Doesn’t make sense.

I'm not saying it HAS to be Brayshaw. To me he just seems the most likely out of Viney, Harmes, Oliver and he to be traded, and one that holds a reasonably high value even after a poor year.

As much as many people try to put forward the scenarios, we won't be able to trade any combination of our depth players to get a high quality outside player back.

Even once we lock in Langdon, we still have the issue of trying to fit 4 players into 3 spots. I'm not sure how we solve that given we didn't see any improvement in the disposal or running work of Viney, Oliver and Gus, and I don't think Harmes to the backline is something we're going to roll with next year.

9 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

I'm not saying it HAS to be Brayshaw. To me he just seems the most likely out of Viney, Harmes, Oliver and he to be traded, and one that holds a reasonably high value even after a poor year.

As much as many people try to put forward the scenarios, we won't be able to trade any combination of our depth players to get a high quality outside player back.

Even once we lock in Langdon, we still have the issue of trying to fit 4 players into 3 spots. I'm not sure how we solve that given we didn't see any improvement in the disposal or running work of Viney, Oliver and Gus, and I don't think Harmes to the backline is something we're going to roll with next year.

There’s more than one way to swim a lap.

Trade pick 3 to GWS for picks 12, 14 and a decent player. Along with pick 20 (likely Langdon) there’s more than enough cachet to go a long way to addressing the outside midfield problem. 

Four inside midfielders is not an excessive number. Ideally you want a balance of four inside and four outside in your rotation. 

 
  • Author
1 hour ago, GetJonnoPatton said:

There’s more than one way to swim a lap.

Trade pick 3 to GWS for picks 12, 14 and a decent player. Along with pick 20 (likely Langdon) there’s more than enough cachet to go a long way to addressing the outside midfield problem. 

Four inside midfielders is not an excessive number. Ideally you want a balance of four inside and four outside in your rotation. 

The problem is that none of them are capable as outside players. It's not just the number of them, it's that they're just not versatile. Maybe it's something that can change, but it hasn't even looked close to doing that so far, and playing Gus on the outside this year was a horrible failure. Personally I'd trade Viney before Gus if we had to trade one, but I just can't see it happening and trying to be somewhat realistic.

I'm not sure 18 year olds are the answer to our speed, endurance and skill issues. The latter two especially generally take a time to develop at AFL level. I'm all for splitting the pick this year and GWS seem to be the front runner, though don't discount North or Port who potentially may look to maximise their separate picks.

Not that they're trades I'm keen on, but hypothetically we could also look at:

Picks 3 and 39 for Picks 8, 26 and Higgins (North).

Pick 3 for 10, 27 and Amon (Port).

Judging by the industry commentary around it's not considered a great draft at this stage, especially after the first 2 picks, so need to consider that with our thought process as well. And in saying that, there's also the potential we look to split our picks between drafts, trading pick 3 for a first rounder from this year and next.

Completely agree that our supposed midfield depth is highly overrated and said so only a few days ago.

Viney is the only one I'd ever considering trading at this stage, but last year's final series should remind us just how good Jack can be.

We need to strengthen our midfield with a couple of good outsider runners and users, and hope that we can pick up a gun free agent mid in the next 2-3 years.

Sparrow might be okay, but talking about him as decent midfield depth (at this stage) is plainly ridiculous. 

You need 10 or so good players that can go through the middle. Collingwood's midfield is a perfect example.

Edited by A F


42 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

Picks 3 and 39 for Picks 8, 26 and Higgins (North).

Pick 3 for 10, 27 and Amon (Port).

The first scenario I’d consider, no way the second.

Keep in mind we don’t only have to take 18yo’s with draft picks. We can trade them for players. That’s why I like ...

- Pick 3 to GWS for picks 12, 14 and Patton.

- Pick 21 to Freo for Ed Langdon

- Pick 14 to Freo for Brad Hill

- Pick  12 draft best available 18yo

Out: Picks 3, 20

In: Patton, Langdon, Hill, pick 12

  • Author
9 hours ago, GetJonnoPatton said:

The first scenario I’d consider, no way the second.

Keep in mind we don’t only have to take 18yo’s with draft picks. We can trade them for players. That’s why I like ...

- Pick 3 to GWS for picks 12, 14 and Patton.

- Pick 21 to Freo for Ed Langdon

- Pick 14 to Freo for Brad Hill

- Pick  12 draft best available 18yo

Out: Picks 3, 20

In: Patton, Langdon, Hill, pick 12

Neither of the scenarios I listed are ones I would want to do, but I'm putting forward some realistic options that aren't just about what I think, if that makes sense?

I like the ambition, but realistically we won't get that much done in the trade period. It's generally one 'big' trade and a few little pick swaps etc. Hill has already ruled out the Dees too.

  • Author
9 hours ago, A F said:

Sparrow might be okay, but talking about him as decent midfield depth (at this stage) is plainly ridiculous.

Don't think it's "plainly ridiculous" to suggest a player who broke through for a couple of games before injury in his first year can be considered depth.

1 minute ago, Lord Nev said:

Hill has already ruled out the Dees too.

Direct quote?

Clubs, managers, journos, fans throwing out a lot of spin at the moment. 

Remember that Hill is under contract. If we throw pick 12 on the table and other clubs can’t get close to it, watch Peter Bell dig his heels in. 

There’ll be plenty of scope to make moves if we split our first pick with GWS. Hell don’t even be surprised if we chuck a decent player on the table to get things moving.

2 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

Don't think it's "plainly ridiculous" to suggest a player who broke through for a couple of games before injury in his first year can be considered depth.

You didn’t throw his name up as depth but as a bonafide first 22 player on the inside midfield rotation. He’s played TWO games. 


  • Author
1 hour ago, GetJonnoPatton said:

Direct quote?

Clubs, managers, journos, fans throwing out a lot of spin at the moment. 

Remember that Hill is under contract. If we throw pick 12 on the table and other clubs can’t get close to it, watch Peter Bell dig his heels in. 

There’ll be plenty of scope to make moves if we split our first pick with GWS. Hell don’t even be surprised if we chuck a decent player on the table to get things moving.

 

  • Author
1 hour ago, GetJonnoPatton said:

You didn’t throw his name up as depth but as a bonafide first 22 player on the inside midfield rotation. He’s played TWO games. 

No, I didn't.

Read it again, and this time read it properly, especially noting the "we also have..."

 

 

14 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

No, I didn't.

Read it again, and this time read it properly, especially noting the "we also have..."

 

 

2 games.

T-W-O.

17 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

No, I didn't.

Read it again, and this time read it properly, especially noting the "we also have..."

 

 

You would have to take Sparrow and VB out of that list.

Sparrow hasn't even bedded himself down as a VFL level mid yet and VB can't get on the park...


  • Author
1 minute ago, rjay said:

You would have to take Sparrow and VB out of that list.

Sparrow hasn't even bedded himself down as a VFL level mid yet and VB can't get on the park...

Sparrow debuted in his first year, then missed the second half of the year with injury.

 

  • Author
12 minutes ago, GetJonnoPatton said:

Tom Brown is Brad Hill’s spokesman? Who knew ?

You're welcome to post a media report that says he's chosen Melbourne.

Trying to have a grown up conversation with you Matsuo, would appreciate if you did the same.

 
5 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

You're welcome to post a media report that says he's chosen Melbourne.

Trying to have a grown up conversation with you Matsuo, would appreciate if you did the same.

I asked for a direct quote. You quoted Tim Brown. And you’re talking about maturity. Please. 

Who is Matsuo?

9 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

Sparrow debuted in his first year, then missed the second half of the year with injury.

 

As a defensive forward, not a mid.

He's not proven at any senior level as a mid so shouldn't be brought into the conversation yet...


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

  • 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.

      • Like
    • 86 replies
  • 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
  • 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?

      • Sad
      • Love
      • Like
    • 316 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/

      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 47 replies