Jump to content

Featured Replies

9 hours ago, Moonshadow said:

I thought I remember Mahoney claiming last year after the trading period that we had space for another big name this year?

Yep, and there's been a couple of articles during the year saying that too, maybe we already have other players lined up that will fill up some of that space?

 
10 hours ago, John Demonic said:

So I don't think we necessarily have to move on Brayshaw to acquire Hill.

Yeah possibly. I would rather keep Gus if we can, I like him a lot, I'm not suggesting a trade because he's no good but because he has value and plays a role we seem to have lots of depth in. My thinking was more along the lines of trading Gus (inside mid) and our 2nd round pick for Langdon, Hill (outside mids) and a 3rd round pick. That way we also keep pick 2 (or whatever it ends up being) and we instantly change the dynamic of our midfield.

 
25 minutes ago, Matsuo Basho said:

Possibly the most deluded post I've ever read.

Hi all, I'm back.

Thankfully there is at least one person with a sane head at the MFC and we will be pursuing Brad Hill with vigor.

You just had a month off for baiting and sniping. Last public warning for you. Permanent ban next time for farting in the wrong direction.

  • Author
1 minute ago, Demonland said:

You just had a month off for baiting and sniping. Last public warning for you. Permanent ban next time for farting in the wrong direction.

Will try my best Boss. 

George on the Outer banned me a month ago I felt for no good cause. Did not even give me the courtesy to explain why it happened.


Side note: Freo play Geel (H), StK (A), Ess (H) and Port (A). They're no guarantee to win any of them.. depending on other results (including Melb vs Syd) they could still fall as far as 15th and really take the value out of a potential trade where we slide back in the first round. 

 

 

25 minutes ago, Demonland said:

You just had a month off for baiting and sniping. Last public warning for you. Permanent ban next time for farting in the wrong direction.

To be honest I think some of the other stuff/insults other people post are much worse.

Im in for Brad Hill, no use saying he costs to much when he is the exact player we have lacked for a long time. 

I am also in for young talent, we haven't acquired enough top end talent my opinion, so can we turn Pick 2 in to 2 picks inside the top 10?  i have no idea who might have multiple picks inside the top 10 but thats the way this might please everyone.

 
9 minutes ago, Superunknown said:

To be honest I think some of the other stuff/insults other people post are much worse.

Me thinks you might be new around these parts...

In cop speak MB has form. And lots of of it. An like many with form any number of aliases. 

The fact that his very first line after yet another suspension (it weren't me guvna, i've been fitted up) was 'Possibly the most deluded post I've ever read' should give a bit of insight into a poster who is a serial baiter. A master baiter if you will.

What's weird is i have him ignore and that first post bypassed it but thankfully is now back in place.

Can i take this opportunity to remind people of a previous health warning i read here:

Please do not quote MB, or if you must do so delete text. Research shows his posts can cause lasting cognitive damage.

Just saw on twitter that Pick 2 and Pick 20 - Freo

Hill & Pick 7 - Demons.

would deal.


  • Author
6 minutes ago, Demon3 said:

Just saw on twitter that Pick 2 and Pick 20 - Freo

Hill & Pick 7 - Demons.

would deal.

“Just saw on Twitter” is a fairly broad statement. Who said it exactly? 

  • Author
33 minutes ago, Superunknown said:

To be honest I think some of the other stuff/insults other people post are much worse.

Thank you. 

Just now, Matsuo Basho said:

“Just saw on Twitter” is a fairly broad statement. Who said it exactly? 

It is, Sorry, no one of any note, it was just a reply to a question from AFL trade account. Thought it seemed like a pretty logical deal.

16 minutes ago, Demon3 said:

Just saw on twitter that Pick 2 and Pick 20 - Freo

Hill & Pick 7 - Demons.

would deal.

I think it depends where you value Hill. Just did the points equiv calculator and for that to be an even trade, Brad Hill is valued at pick 6. So 6+7 for 2+20. He might be worth that much to us, but he was traded for what, pick 23* sorry or so in 2016? Surely he is now around a pick 10-15? But given Noah Anderson is touted to be a superstar, you just can't do it. If GCS get PP and we end up with pick 3, then it might be worth doing. But you'd want another Freo pick coming back.

I reckon i'd still prefer the 2020 first round pick gamble. Back ourselves to move up the ladder and maybe ask for Freo's 2nd round pick in return to cushion against disaster. Personally if we're down the bottom of the ladder next year then i''m probably out, cant follow the club anymore, selfish as it is. So why not go the next years pick (for my benefit in the short term)

Edited by John Demonic

  • Author
12 minutes ago, Demon3 said:

It is, Sorry, no one of any note, it was just a reply to a question from AFL trade account. Thought it seemed like a pretty logical deal.

All for pursuing Brad Hill but like Johnny Demonic that deal looks a bit unhealthy to me. I too would take the gamble of higher finish in 2020 and offer them our future first rounder with second rounder coming back our way. 

We’ve got bigger fish to fry with pick 2 which will end up being pick 3 after Suns PP1 allocation. (See my Ben Brown thread).

Edited by Matsuo Basho


14 minutes ago, Demon3 said:

Just saw on twitter that Pick 2 and Pick 20 - Freo

Hill & Pick 7 - Demons.

would deal.

Tempting.  Just remembering the Josh Kelly trade outcome so a little cautious.  

Pick 2 is Anderson or Rowell. Serious guns. 

6 minutes ago, John Demonic said:

I think it depends where you value Hill. Just did the points equiv calculator and for that to be an even trade, Brad Hill is valued at pick 6. So 6+7 for 2+20. He might be worth that much to us, but he was traded for what, pick 23* sorry or so in 2016? Surely he is now around a pick 10-15? But given Noah Anderson is touted to be a superstar, you just can't do it. If GCS get PP and we end up with pick 3, then it might be worth doing. But you'd want another Freo pick coming back.

I reckon i'd still prefer the 2020 first round pick gamble. Back ourselves to move up the ladder and maybe ask for Freo's 2nd round pick in return to cushion against disaster. Personally if we're down the bottom of the ladder next year then i''m probably out, cant follow the club anymore, selfish as it is. So why not go the next years pick (for my benefit)

Yep, thats a perfect summation and great discussions. Im no expert on points so its a good explanation. And i would happily give up a future first rounder.

2 minutes ago, spirit of norm smith said:

Tempting.  Just remembering the Josh Kelly trade outcome so a little cautious.  

Pick 2 is Anderson or Rowell. Serious guns. 

Yeah you are spot on would love Anderson, so probably future first rounder for Hill,

2 minutes ago, Matsuo Basho said:

All for pursuing Brad Hill but like Johnny Demonic that deal looks a big unhealthy to me. I too would take the gamble of higher finish in 2020 and offer them our future first rounder with second rounder coming back our way. 

We’ve got bigger fish to fry with pick 2 which will end up being pick 3 after Suns PP1 allocation. (See my Ben Brown thread).

Yep, all good and valid points. My understanding is that Picks 1 7 @ are clear standouts, then its throw a blanket over the rest, if suns get PP1 (Which i doubt they will, but you seem very confident and have no reason not to believe you) then is Pick 3 different to Pick 7?


  • Author
5 minutes ago, spirit of norm smith said:

Tempting.  Just remembering the Josh Kelly trade outcome so a little cautious.  

Pick 2 is Anderson or Rowell. Serious guns. 

SofNS you’re not accepting that Suns will be given PP1 by the AFL? You’re going to be disappointed. Lock it in.

Rowell and Anderson are off our radar unless we finish dead last. Still a possibility I guess!

Edited by Matsuo Basho

  • Author
2 minutes ago, Demon3 said:

Yep, all good and valid points. My understanding is that Picks 1 7 @ are clear standouts, then its throw a blanket over the rest, if suns get PP1 (Which i doubt they will, but you seem very confident and have no reason not to believe you) then is Pick 3 different to Pick 7?

Well it is if a particular club has their eye on a certain kid right up the pointy end. Rowell and Anderson have caught all the hype but there’s a lot to play out there prior to the draft. 

Some great players have been drafted at pick 3 or 4. Buddy, Bontempelli, Judd etc etc

4 minutes ago, Demon3 said:

Yep, all good and valid points. My understanding is that Picks 1 7 @ are clear standouts, then its throw a blanket over the rest, if suns get PP1 (Which i doubt they will, but you seem very confident and have no reason not to believe you) then is Pick 3 different to Pick 7?

so who is available and looking like picks 3 to 7 if Anderson and Rowell are stand outs

 
2 minutes ago, Kent said:

so who is available and looking like picks 3 to 7 if Anderson and Rowell are stand outs

Im not really across who the kids are and where they stand in the order, but i only know that the top 2 are the standouts.

4 minutes ago, Matsuo Basho said:

Well it is if a particular club has their eye on a certain kid right up the pointy end. Rowell and Anderson have caught all the hype but there’s a lot to play out there prior to the draft. 

Some great players have been drafted at pick 3 or 4. Buddy, Bontempelli, Judd etc etc

Yeah of course, but they could all have gone at No 1, it seems to me this draft is a race in 2 then the rest, the Judd draft was super draft. Hop ether is a Bont or a Judd available at 3.


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.

    • 27 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?

    • 235 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/

    • 47 replies