Jump to content

Featured Replies

 

My thought was that, as soon as I saw he was delisted, there would be a thread about him on Demonland. 

No from me. 

Edited by Wiseblood

Would rather his running power on a wing over anyone else we have. Could be a good plug for a couple of years for a packet of chips. 

Certainly helps with our obvious inside/outside imbalance. 

Maybe he's the perfect moneyball trade. 

Edited by stevethemanjordan

 

I think the club is beyond getting a player at 30 years of age. But if he landed in our lap for minimum chips why not.

Edited by Win4theAges

DFA- absolutely.

 

 


  • Author
12 minutes ago, Wiseblood said:

My thought was that, as soon as I saw he was delisted, there would be a thread about him on Demonland. 

No from me. 

My thoughts exactly, although thought there could be merit in getting a replacement 30+ year old premiership player on the list!

Probably a backup option in case the Langdon / Tomlinson (if we’re getting him for the wing) deals fall over

 
5 minutes ago, Gawn's Beard said:

My thoughts exactly, although thought there could be merit in getting a replacement 30+ year old premiership player on the list!

Probably a backup option in case the Langdon / Tomlinson (if we’re getting him for the wing) deals fall over

Wow - I had no idea he was that old!  Where have the years gone?!

 

 


1 minute ago, TeamPlayedFine39 said:

Wow - I had no idea he was that old!  Where have the years gone?!

 

 

Jesus h chr ist!!! He’s 30?! He just came into the league as the next new you gun!! That’s nuts.

And Uhm no thanks, he’s lost the pace for the game and his skills have never been that great. 

Yes as a DFA, absolute upgrade on players we’ve already delisted and Stretch, JKH and Wagner. Let’s remember that our bottom six getting a game are very ordinary, I base how we’re looking at these six. Not every player we bring in can be a star but they can be an upgrade on our lower end players. 

Edited by Ethan Tremblay

For those with short memories here is the 2007 draft in which master was taken, There are some interesting names and he was taken pick 3 just before Cale Morton. McEvoy at 9 and Dangerfield at 10 with Rioli at 12 wow. Shows that the gems can be later than expected. Furthermore Tarrant at 15 harry taylor 17 and Alex Rance 18. For me I think we can do better than Masten

38979750_ScreenShot2019-09-17at8_12_52pm.png.6d44f23e640c6c5ac60416163a4cb7df.png


26 minutes ago, Moonshadow said:

Wasn't he part of the Judd trade?

Yup.

I believe West Coast asked for picks 1 and 3 for Judd.  When Carlton refused, they asked for 3 and Kennedy.

49 minutes ago, Older demon said:

For those with short memories here is the 2007 draft in which master was taken, There are some interesting names and he was taken pick 3 just before Cale Morton. McEvoy at 9 and Dangerfield at 10 with Rioli at 12 wow. Shows that the gems can be later than expected. Furthermore Tarrant at 15 harry taylor 17 and Alex Rance 18. For me I think we can do better than Masten

38979750_ScreenShot2019-09-17at8_12_52pm.png.6d44f23e640c6c5ac60416163a4cb7df.png

Gee a lot of clubs misjudged talent i that draft... or was it just development?

54 minutes ago, Older demon said:

For those with short memories here is the 2007 draft in which master was taken, There are some interesting names and he was taken pick 3 just before Cale Morton. McEvoy at 9 and Dangerfield at 10 with Rioli at 12 wow. Shows that the gems can be later than expected. Furthermore Tarrant at 15 harry taylor 17 and Alex Rance 18. For me I think we can do better than Masten

38979750_ScreenShot2019-09-17at8_12_52pm.png.6d44f23e640c6c5ac60416163a4cb7df.png

Cale Morton.... forgot about him. Looking at the top 10 players he wasn’t the only dud. 

9 minutes ago, Nelo said:

Cale Morton.... forgot about him. Looking at the top 10 players he wasn’t the only dud. 

Thats what I was talking about.10 onwards is some decent talent

  • Demonland changed the title to The Chris Masten Thread
1 hour ago, Older demon said:

For those with short memories here is the 2007 draft in which master was taken, There are some interesting names and he was taken pick 3 just before Cale Morton. McEvoy at 9 and Dangerfield at 10 with Rioli at 12 wow. Shows that the gems can be later than expected. Furthermore Tarrant at 15 harry taylor 17 and Alex Rance 18. For me I think we can do better than Masten

38979750_ScreenShot2019-09-17at8_12_52pm.png.6d44f23e640c6c5ac60416163a4cb7df.png

Look at all those names we poo pooed to get Morton.

We're our own worst enemy.


1 hour ago, Ethan Tremblay said:

Yes as a DFA, absolute upgrade on players we’ve already delisted and Stretch, JKH and Wagner. Let’s remember that our bottom six getting a game are very ordinary, I base how we’re looking at these six. Not every player we bring in can be a star but they can be an upgrade on our lower end players. 

When you take out Hurn and Jetta kicking it to you and take out the options of kicking it to Kennedy and Darling are we sure Masten is better than JKH and Stretch?

The basic stats on this year say he wasn't.

Upgrading the bottom end of the list is smart if you're upgrading to an AFL quality player, I'm not sure Masten still is one. I'd probably stick with one of our own guys who's still young enough to improve or take a chance with the draft.

5 minutes ago, Demonland said:

Look at all those names we poo pooed to get Morton.

We're our own worst enemy.

We should be rewarded for not screwing with the careers of Dangerfield, Rioli or Rance. Morton had a heap of talent and no development.

52 minutes ago, Darkhorse72 said:

Thats what I was talking about.10 onwards is some decent talent

Yeah for sure. Got substantially better from pick 10 onwards. 

 
1 hour ago, TeamPlayedFine39 said:

Yup.

I believe West Coast asked for picks 1 and 3 for Judd.  When Carlton refused, they asked for 3 and Kennedy.

My memory is 3 + 21 and Kennedy?

 

have I lost it?

 

Edit

Hmmmm, maybe it was 3 + 21 + Kennedy for Judd and crap pick?

Edited by faultydet


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?

      • Haha
    • 715 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.

    • 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
      • Like
    • 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.

    • 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