Jump to content

Featured Replies

Lever has played one good year with the Crows as a third tall, (easy stuff) in his career. 

May trade (smacked of panic)

 
15 hours ago, olisik said:

 

We could’ve drafted Stocker (or traded it for Pick 3 this year), with our 2018 pick, Tim Kelly with 2017 pick and made a play for Lynch with the 800K cap space.

What would your response have been if we drafted Tim Kelly, then after 2 years organised a trade back West (which is exactly what will happen this year)?

Not many more narrow-sighted posters on here.  Correction, there isn't any more.

Lever is playing his role well enough  being rushed back into the side after a half a game with Casey.  He is getting better with game time and his ACL is standing up to the pressures of Afl footy. Two more games to go and that is all you can hope for Lever to finish off the season well.

IMO he'll be fine and there is no doubt that he is a vital cog to our cause.  

 

Side note: 

Rare occurrence but overall this has been the most rational response from posters to a topic I've ever come across. Kudos DL people. No dummy spitting here just considered rational responses.

I have been in the anti-Lever trade camp, not for trading to get him, but for paying so much for him. I am convinced and others are well within their right to disagree with it, that he does not have many great qualities as a footballer. I watched him really closely on Saturday, his game was ok, but he relies on his big spoils a lot as he is obviously not 100% fit, and that was to the detriment of the team at least 3 times, and cost us a couple goals and he also has the turning circle of fairstar the funship. His kicking is average, at best and his 1 on 1 skills are also average. His marking is fantastic, his courage is great, his reading of the play is good, as i have said, he is Marty Hore, but 10 times more expensive.

I hope he can have a great pre-season, get some muscle on, work out his place in the team and prove me wrong, but its been a less than ideal purchase for the price we paid.

Edited by Demon3


19 hours ago, Matsuo Basho said:

Two first round picks was ridiculous. You pay that for a top 25 player in the comp. Maybe. It’s debatable that Lever is even in the top 75. And he’s injury prone. This trade has cost us the opportunity to bring in a young gun like a Duursma or an Ollie Florent. Who’s making these decisions? Mahoney and Goodwin? It’s disgraceful.

Please go back to whatever team you really support. 

 
4 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Hard to argue with a lot of that, I would pick Frost and Hore before i pick Lever.. May is culpable for his poor pre season, its really come back to bite him.

The rot started in R1 at Half time when no one stood up for Max, that's when you knew the club had very little fight in them.

Are we seriously potting a bloke who has:

  • Just come off a year long break from an ACL injury;
  • Hasn't completed a pre-season; 
  • Has played less than 20 games for the club; and
  • Is playing in a backline that has been both putrid and had a load of pressure put on them from a one way midfield, not to mention the revolving door of VFL players. 

I'll reserve judgement for when we have at least have half the list fit and he has had a decent run at it.  Young and smart intercepting defenders with leadership qualities don't grow on trees. 

Apologies if someone else has already pointed this out, I haven't read all the posts in this thread.


2 hours ago, poita said:

If Lever was anywhere near as good as his reputation would suggest, he would (arguably) be worth what we paid for him. But the reality is that he is currently a mediocre player in a mediocre team, and there is a fair argument that we overpaid.

Plus his kicking is putrid.

 

Fortunately, the recruiters don't rate a player based upon output when just coming back from a long term injury. They will be looking at the next 8-10 years of Lever in our backline. He was seen as the best young defender in the comp when we traded picks 10 and 19 for him. He'll be well worth it, IMO 

18 minutes ago, AllMyTeamsAreWank said:

Are we seriously potting a bloke who has:

  • Just come off a year long break from an ACL injury;
  • Hasn't completed a pre-season; 
  • Has played less than 20 games for the club; and
  • Is playing in a backline that has been both putrid and had a load of pressure put on them from a one way midfield, not to mention the revolving door of VFL players. 

I'll reserve judgement for when we have at least have half the list fit and he has had a decent run at it.  Young and smart intercepting defenders with leadership qualities don't grow on trees. 

Apologies if someone else has already pointed this out, I haven't read all the posts in this thread.

I do not seeing any potting. just  some comments on his skill, ability and facts. He is 195cm, cannot play one on one and had one good year with the crows as a third tall. Probably the easiest position on the ground. I was keen to get him and are happy we have him but never expected to pay what we did, either in terms of picks or $$$$.

13 minutes ago, Sorry kids said:

I do not seeing any potting. just  some comments on his skill, ability and facts. He is 195cm, cannot play one on one and had one good year with the crows as a third tall. Probably the easiest position on the ground. I was keen to get him and are happy we have him but never expected to pay what we did, either in terms of picks or $$$$.

Again, I think its disingenuous to be commenting on his skills and ability given the circumstances. Lever has hardly had the opportunity to demonstrate his wares at this club in his current tenure. Posters on here seem to have a very short memory as I recall him starting to hit some pretty good form prior to his knee injury against the dogs. It's no secret that a player's skills will suffer when they are running around the ground stuffed from a lack of fitness and game time. He definitely is not on his own here. 


EDIT: Also worth pointing out that Lever played one VFL game before returning from injury and injured himself again. In my honest opinion, they should have delayed hsi return by another month. I'm not Dave Misson though...

Edited by AllMyTeamsAreWank

9 minutes ago, AllMyTeamsAreWank said:

Again, I think its disingenuous to be commenting on his skills and ability given the circumstances. Lever has hardly had the opportunity to demonstrate his wares at this club in his current tenure. Posters on here seem to have a very short memory as I recall him starting to hit some pretty good form prior to his knee injury against the dogs. It's no secret that a player's skills will suffer when they are running around the ground stuffed from a lack of fitness and game time. He definitely is not on his own here. 


EDIT: Also worth pointing out that Lever played one VFL game before returning from injury and injured himself again. In my honest opinion, they should have delayed hsi return by another month. I'm not Dave Misson though...

So you ignore his body of work at the Crows.  I say it was very ordinary, bar one year. That is what we recruited him based on and a lot of rar, rar about his leadership qualities.  And he did not have a purple patch last year, just a bit of improvement for a few weeks on a poor underwhelming start where supporters saw we had recruited a loose third tall rather than a gun key back. reminds me of the Collingwood  Cloke who dominated as a loose third tall who dominated for a few years more than a Mc Govern clone.

19 hours ago, Moonshadow said:

dead-horse.jpg

I can't be certain from this angle, but I'm pretty sure this is the horse I backed in last year's Melbourne Cup.


18 hours ago, olisik said:

 

We could’ve drafted Stocker (or traded it for Pick 3 this year), with our 2018 pick, Tim Kelly with 2017 pick and made a play for Lynch with the 800K cap space.

I don't agree with the Lever trade but your option in brackets would be a disaster!

Pick 2 and Stocker for pick 3 ?

19 hours ago, olisik said:

That’s if we drafted those players. Was plenty of other available players such as Tim Kelly, Liam Ryan, Petrucelli ect available in the draft when these selections were made. 

Based on our record do you have the remotest faith we would have picked them?

5 hours ago, Watts the matter said:

I don't agree with the Lever trade but your option in brackets would be a disaster!

Pick 2 and Stocker for pick 3 ?

I meant we would have had pick 2 and 3 this year.

The pick we gave to Adelaide was traded to Carlton for Stocker (Trade initiated by Carlton so they would’ve initiated it with us instead). In return, Adelaide got Carlton’s 2019 first rounder (Pick 3).

Adelaide now hold Pick 3 in this years draft instead of us due to the Lever trade.

 

Edited by olisik

6 hours ago, Moonshadow said:

Fortunately, the recruiters don't rate a player based upon output when just coming back from a long term injury. They will be looking at the next 8-10 years of Lever in our backline. He was seen as the best young defender in the comp when we traded picks 10 and 19 for him. He'll be well worth it, IMO 

Can’t remember what we got for Jeremy Howe when he walked out but the price we have paid for that is Lever and the picks and $ he cost us. I doubt we would have chased Lever if we had Howe. 

13 minutes ago, Earl Hood said:

Can’t remember what we got for Jeremy Howe when he walked out but the price we have paid for that is Lever and the picks and $ he cost us. I doubt we would have chased Lever if we had Howe. 

We got Ben Kennedy in return. We also lost Toumpas in that same trade.

Edited by olisik


34 minutes ago, olisik said:

I meant we would have had pick 2 and 3 this year.

The pick we gave to Adelaide was traded to Carlton for Stocker (Trade initiated by Carlton so they would’ve initiated it with us instead). In return, Adelaide got Carlton’s 2019 first rounder (Pick 3).

Adelaide now hold Pick 3 in this years draft instead of us due to the Lever trade.

 

No, Adelaide also swapped their 2019 first rounder in this deal. Would have been a disaster trade.

56 minutes ago, olisik said:

We got Ben Kennedy in return. We also lost Toumpas in that same trade.

Oh dear, so ziltch for Howe and all the costs to replace him. And don’t start me on the unfortunate Toumpas selection. Never saw what attributes would have made him most pundits pick 3, we were not alone. Not big, not fast, no X factor that I saw but why go on about that typical lost draft opportunity at that time. 

10 hours ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Garry Lyon has become a Dees hater. Perhaps Olisik is his name on Demonland. His comments are equally helpful.

 
3 minutes ago, Skin Deeamond said:

Garry Lyon has become a Dees hater. Perhaps Olisik is his name on Demonland. His comments are equally helpful.

Commentator commentating. It can’t be! Article hits the nail on the head. 

2 hours ago, Earl Hood said:

Can’t remember what we got for Jeremy Howe when he walked out but the price we have paid for that is Lever and the picks and $ he cost us. I doubt we would have chased Lever if we had Howe. 

Howe wanted to play forward whereas he was playing back for us. Buckley signed him to play forward, but quickly realised he can only play as a back. Go figure!


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

  • GAMEDAY: Collingwood

    It's Game Day and the Demons face a monumental task as they take on the top-of-the-table Magpies in one of the biggest games on the Dees calendar: the King's Birthday Big Freeze MND match. Can the Demons defy the odds and claim a massive scalp to keep their finals hopes alive?

      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 104 replies
  • CASEY: Collingwood

    It was freezing cold at Mission Whitten Stadium where only the brave came out in the rain to watch a game that turned out to be as miserable as the weather.
    The Casey Demons secured their third consecutive victory, earning the four premiership points and credit for defeating a highly regarded Collingwood side, but achieved little else. Apart perhaps from setting the scene for Monday’s big game at the MCG and the Ice Challenge that precedes it.
    Neither team showcased significant skill in the bleak and greasy conditions, at a location that was far from either’s home territory. Even the field umpires forgot where they were and experienced a challenging evening, but no further comment is necessary.

      • Thanks
    • 4 replies
  • 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.

      • Thanks
    • 216 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.

      • Thanks
    • 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.

      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 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? 

      • Thanks
    • 4 replies