Jump to content

POLL 259 members have voted

  1. 1. Should the Demons split their Pick 3 by trading it for 2 First Round Picks

Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Featured Replies

26 minutes ago, Dee Watcher said:

Splitting the pick is only being considered for short terms results with Goodwin and Mahoney trying to save there jobs! 

We should be taking a top 3 pick and locking him away as we've traded for a few mature types in recent years with a less than stellar track record of actually getting it right!

 

Exactly. I'd rather draft a single 8 or 9 player, as opposed to two 6's.

 

What are peoples thoughts on this? Not sure how doable this is but it was a fun exercise. Leaves us with a pretty good draft position and addresses a few of our major deficiencies (outside mids and small forwards) 

 

Pick 2, future second and 56 traded to GWS for 11, 13 and Hatley (or caldwell) 

38 for Amon 

20 for Langdon 

Pick 13  and ANB to Crows for 21 and 26 

Pick 26 and 74 to Lions for Lewis Taylor and pick 35

Pick 35 To richmond for Butler   

Jamie Elliot - FA 

Adam Tomlinson - FA 

Rookie List:  KK, O Baker, J Smith 

 

IN: Elliot, Tomlinson, Langdon, Amon, Hatley, Taylor, Butler, Picks 11 21   

Out: Pick 2, 20, 38 and future 2nd JKH, Lewis, Garlett, Stretch, Wagner x 2 , ANB, Keilty, Maynard

 

 

 

1 minute ago, Brenno said:

IN: Elliot, Tomlinson, Langdon, Amon, Hatley, Taylor, Butler, Picks 11 21   

 

Out: Pick 2, 20, 38 and future 2nd JKH, Lewis, Garlett, Stretch, Wagner x 2 , ANB, Keilty, Maynard

 

Sure, when it looks like that.

Doubt it though, as too many moves and counter moves would have to happen

 

GWS are going to do what it takes to get our top pick. The up side for them is massive, 2 top 5 draft picks guaranteed and one of them Green. We should get 11 & 13 plus anyone we like not in their top 15, possibly even Hately. That might be a stretch but we should push hard, we have the whip hand. 

10 minutes ago, FlashInThePan said:

GWS are going to do what it takes to get our top pick. The up side for them is massive, 2 top 5 draft picks guaranteed and one of them Green. We should get 11 & 13 plus anyone we like not in their top 15, possibly even Hately. That might be a stretch but we should push hard, we have the whip hand. 

Spot on, but I reckon GWS will probably want to move on a senior player with a bigger or longer contact. Hartley and ohallaran are 1st year players so on the minimal contacts for next year and they'll want to free up more cap space, not sure who we should ask for but I agree it'll be more than just 13 and 15. 

I'll assume GC get pick 2 and we are serious about splitting pick 3 (2234).

The talk is that GWS will trade 12 (1268) and 14 (1161) = (2429) which looks like equitable value.  This is so they can take pick 3 before they have to match a bid on Tom Green who may be bid on as early as pick 4 (2034 with a 20% discount = 1627).  The problem with this theory is that GWS doesn't have 2nd or 4th rounders and its next picks are 49 (287), 75 (0) and 85 (0).  That leaves them a long way short of 1627 and would put them in a big deficit of 1340 in 2020 - equivalent to pick 11 (1329) - likely to be around their 1st pick next year. 

GWS will be desperate to trade in some mid range picks this year to make up the shortfall on Green.  We could be in a strong position to bundle in some later picks for a good GWS player that we fancy.

 

I can see this playing out a bunch of ways that could be good for us, here is my favourite. We take Tomlinson as a free agent on moderate coin, they get roughly a late second round compensation pick for that. We trade them our pick 2(3) and 38 for their 11(12) and 13(14) and Hately. They end up with Green (and enough points to afford him) and pick 3. We end up with 12, 14, Tomlinson and Hately. Obviously we trade 20 for Langdon and either go to the draft with 12 and 14 or trade them to another club that wants to split in order to get high enough to pick up Ash... I love fantasy drafting, when reality doesn't get in the way everything looks rosey :)

I’m concerned at the fact that we haven’t had a single Rising Star nomination in the past three seasons. This is has been brought about in part by the fact that we have traded out three first round draft picks. Meanwhile, have already been overtaken by other clubs who have picked and played young players. The legacy of our policy may not serve us well in the long run.

We need to get young kids of quality onto the list. 


30 minutes ago, Chelly said:

I’m concerned at the fact that we haven’t had a single Rising Star nomination in the past three seasons. This is has been brought about in part by the fact that we have traded out three first round draft picks. Meanwhile, have already been overtaken by other clubs who have picked and played young players. The legacy of our policy may not serve us well in the long run.

We need to get young kids of quality onto the list. 

Same feeling here. I think we need a few young players coming through either this year or next

50 minutes ago, Chelly said:

I’m concerned at the fact that we haven’t had a single Rising Star nomination in the past three seasons. This is has been brought about in part by the fact that we have traded out three first round draft picks. Meanwhile, have already been overtaken by other clubs who have picked and played young players. The legacy of our policy may not serve us well in the long run.

We need to get young kids of quality onto the list. 

 

Which is why splitting pick 2 is prudent.

1 hour ago, Chelly said:

I’m concerned at the fact that we haven’t had a single Rising Star nomination in the past three seasons. This is has been brought about in part by the fact that we have traded out three first round draft picks. Meanwhile, have already been overtaken by other clubs who have picked and played young players. The legacy of our policy may not serve us well in the long run.

We need to get young kids of quality onto the list. 

 We've made some picks and traded others to get to this window that we are in right now. A bubble of players in the 22-26yo range. This year should have been the beginning of some thing awesome... whoops. The last couple of years we were trading to fill gaps not going to the draft for rising stars. 

If we trade in Langdon that will be another in that same bracket, Lever was certainly that. I think the strategy is to go back to the draft in the middle of that window to refresh the list with kids while using the lure of more silverware to top up with free agents. Let's hope this year was just a blip. 

1 hour ago, Chelly said:

I’m concerned at the fact that we haven’t had a single Rising Star nomination in the past three seasons. This is has been brought about in part by the fact that we have traded out three first round draft picks. Meanwhile, have already been overtaken by other clubs who have picked and played young players. The legacy of our policy may not serve us well in the long run.

We need to get young kids of quality onto the list. 

No doubt that is correct and the question for the FD, given mistakes made in drafting, can we get good players at the split picks. 

23 hours ago, Fifty-5 said:

I'll assume GC get pick 2 and we are serious about splitting pick 3 (2234).

The talk is that GWS will trade 12 (1268) and 14 (1161) = (2429) which looks like equitable value.  This is so they can take pick 3 before they have to match a bid on Tom Green who may be bid on as early as pick 4 (2034 with a 20% discount = 1627).  The problem with this theory is that GWS doesn't have 2nd or 4th rounders and its next picks are 49 (287), 75 (0) and 85 (0).  That leaves them a long way short of 1627 and would put them in a big deficit of 1340 in 2020 - equivalent to pick 11 (1329) - likely to be around their 1st pick next year. 

GWS will be desperate to trade in some mid range picks this year to make up the shortfall on Green.  We could be in a strong position to bundle in some later picks for a good GWS player that we fancy.

This stuff makes my eyes glaze over. I'm impressed with the level of understanding others have on Demonland about how the points system works. More importantly, though, it seems that our club is one of the leaders in understanding it and have made some smart decisions making extracting value before other clubs caught up. I hope we're still front runners in our understanding of the system. 


2 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

This stuff makes my eyes glaze over. I'm impressed with the level of understanding others have on Demonland about how the points system works. More importantly, though, it seems that our club is one of the leaders in understanding it and have made some smart decisions making extracting value before other clubs caught up. I hope we're still front runners in our understanding of the system. 

 

On 8/31/2019 at 1:31 PM, Demon Disciple said:

Sure, when it looks like that.

Doubt it though, as too many moves and counter moves would have to happen

Well yeah, It might not be that straightforward. Just trying to explore the best way to maximise the impact that pick 2 can offer us. 

I don't think any of these hypotheticals are overly unrealistic though. 

 

 

On 8/31/2019 at 4:25 PM, FlashInThePan said:

GWS are going to do what it takes to get our top pick. The up side for them is massive, 2 top 5 draft picks guaranteed and one of them Green. We should get 11 & 13 plus anyone we like not in their top 15, possibly even Hately. That might be a stretch but we should push hard, we have the whip hand. 

This. For once we have the upper hand. We should target a good player or two, to go with the picks. I don't know a great deal about their list, but small forward(s) & outside mid(s) should be the target. We should see how far we can push them.

I’m studying the markov model and Einstein’s theory of relativity.  They are easier to understand then some of the trades.  Not the logic but the complexity!!!  Like a scientist, it may blow up but you have to keep in trying.  I like the 7 players traded in proposals. 


really like Caldwell. would happily do 11, 13 and Caldwell for 3 

even Bobby Hill looks a good player. 

 

Edited by Patches O’houlihan

On 9/1/2019 at 7:41 AM, Chelly said:

I’m concerned at the fact that we haven’t had a single Rising Star nomination in the past three seasons. This is has been brought about in part by the fact that we have traded out three first round draft picks. Meanwhile, have already been overtaken by other clubs who have picked and played young players. The legacy of our policy may not serve us well in the long run.

We need to get young kids of quality onto the list. 

Sparrow, Jordon and Nitzer are all young players, if I remember they were ‘bottom age’.  I suppose we had an expectation that our list would be strong and healthy, and would take us forward this year.  I suspect they were being smart and topping up for 2020, without expectation that any of these kids would even get a look in in 2019.  It didnt quite go that way, and we were forced to play about 40 players from the list.  In a normal year, chandler, sparrow and so many others would have been only developing their craft at Casey.  I would prefer no ‘Rising stars’ and instead have a solid list that delivers a flag.  If we still think these guys are high quality, we could easily split this pick.  The deals being touted here with GWS could be very good for us, especially if it brings a list-improving (not clogging) player.

2 hours ago, Patches O’houlihan said:

really like Caldwell. would happily do 11, 13 and Caldwell for 3 

even Bobby Hill looks a good player. 

 

Bobby Hill looks like the type of player we should be going after - small forward/outside mid/x-factor

 

I'm curious to see what we want/will get out of GWS if we do end up going down the split path with them. 12 and 14 alone isn't going to cut it for pick 3 and it's worth noting that if they and the bombers progress through those picks could end up as 14 & 15 or worse.  

I would look at some of these players.

Daniels

Himmelberg

Caldwell

Hately

Bonar

 

My suggestion would be;

Out: 3

In: 12, 14, Caldwell

Ideally i'd prefer to go after Himmelberg or Hately but doubt GWS would part with these players and multiple first rounders. I'd then look at trading 12 and 14 to Sydney with pick 24 coming back to us (values Papley at Pick 7). Maybe overs but Papley is exactly the player our team needs. Due to his contract situation it was reported that it would take two first rounders to satisfy them and our position with GWS could allow us to trump Carlton.

Overall

Out: 3 

In: Papley, Caldwell, Pick 24

Leaves us with no first round draft picks but if we truly don't rate this draft then that's not important and we don't have to use one until next year anyway. Or we can get creative and look at either trading a player or future picks for a 2019 first rounder.

It's always a tricky one to work out, you're really weighing up one player vs 2-3 but is that one likely to be a star. guys like Ash, Serong and Young i think will be very good players, but i'm not sure if they're future superstars 

we may get someone like Kemp to slide through to pick 11 given his injury, 

so realistically we're weighing up Lachie Ash potentially who i think is the best player outside of the top 2 in the draft and very much what we need. and a combination of 

Dylan Stephens - very good outside midfielder, reminds me a bit of Polec - SA lad so Port may be keen the pick before. 

Cody Weightman - talented but raw small forward who can do some pretty incredible things at times, and fills a need 

and someone like Jye Caldwell or Ian Hill potentially. 

guys like Flanders won't be there at those picks of the Giants so a few of the players that would really appeal are likely to be gone. 

In conclusion, i would be reasonably comfortable either way though splitting the pick gives us the chance to add two very talented outside mids (i prefer Ian Hill from the Giants as steak knives) and a very talented small forward, or keeping it and grabbing someone like Lachie Ash gives us a talented outside midfielder to complement Ed Langdon on the opposite wing and add to the core of top end talent we have. 


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
    • 170 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/

      • Clap
      • Love
      • Like
    • 46 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.

      • Like
    • 328 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