Jump to content

Are we plotting a late heist?

Demonland
in Melbourne Demons

Featured Replies

13 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

GWS can get Green without pick 3 and without using pick 6.  They just need to make sure they have enough points after 6 to get him. 

How?  Live pick trading, some fast footwork and trust that another team will honour pre-arranged live pick deals!

It happened last year during 'live pick trade'.  Several clubs (eg Sydney with WCE) traded out their high pick when their academy player was called and used later picks.  As soon as they drafted the acadamy player they live traded back in a high draft pick at around the same level as the one they traded out minutes earlier.  Thereby avoided using a high pick for their player. 

That is powerful stuff and a lot more teams will be using that loophole this year. 

Back to GWS and Green.  Assume he is bid at pick 3.  GWS immediately trade out pick 6 hypothetically to Geelong for 14 and 18 then use their later picks on Green.  As soon as they have Green they can trade 14, 18 or whatever to a team with a pick higher up the order or just keep them if they think their second choice player will fall to 14. 

Note: future picks can also be traded during live trade. 

I reckon there is a lot of jostling to go on pick trading for the next 6 weeks.  Lots of live pick trade scenarios will be negotiated in advance of the draft with other teams.

giphy.gif.6166f482b923036b2a36474445f36d93.gif

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    • Haha 4
     

    Strategy this year has been excellent. Players early then draft position later.

  • Quote
    • Like 3
     

    So if this is true we’ve turned 3, 26 and 50 this year into 6 and 8. Feels like slight overs for mine but happy to see what we do with them before losing my mind

  • Quote
    31 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

    GWS can get Green without pick 3 and without using pick 6.  They just need to make sure they have enough points after 6 to get him. 

    How?  Live pick trading, some fast footwork and trust that another team will honour pre-arranged live pick deals!

    It happened last year during 'live pick trade'.  Several clubs (eg Sydney with WCE) traded out their high pick when their academy player was called and used later picks.  As soon as they drafted the acadamy player they live traded back in a high draft pick at around the same level as the one they traded out minutes earlier.  Thereby avoided using a high pick for their player. 

    That is powerful stuff and a lot more teams will be using that loophole this year. 

    Back to GWS and Green.  Assume he is bid at pick 3.  GWS immediately trade out pick 6 hypothetically to Geelong for 14 and 18 then use their later picks on Green.  As soon as they have Green they can trade 14, 18 or whatever to a team with a pick higher up the order or just keep them if they think their second choice player will fall to 14. 

    Note: future picks can also be traded during live trade. 

    I reckon there is a lot of jostling to go on pick trading for the next 6 weeks.  Lots of live pick trade scenarios will be negotiated in advance of the draft with other teams.

    Edit:  Just realised in this hypotetical GWS would need to use 14 and 18 for Green.  So a poor example but the principle still holds.

    IIRC this loophole has been closed. 

    https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/afl-to-make-changes-to-academy-draft-rules-20190710-p525yi.html

  • Quote
    • Thanks 1

    3 minutes ago, Demonland said:

     

    I know we’d probably win points-wise by trading pick 3 to pick 6 and their 1st round next year, however what would we conceivably benefit from getting a pick that is like to be in the 14-18 range next year?  I cant see us taking that to the draft considering we’ve already traded out of it. Only way I see it is we’re keen to package that up with the following years 1st round to go for a decent player.

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    2 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

    IIRC this loophole has been closed. 

    https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/afl-to-make-changes-to-academy-draft-rules-20190710-p525yi.html

    Thank you.  Missed that.  Apologies for the red herring.

    Its a significant loophole to close.

    Really puts the pressure on GWS (and others) to do the pick swaps before draft night.

    Edited by Lucifer's Hero

  • Quote
    5 minutes ago, Murph1524 said:

    So if this is true we’ve turned 3, 26 and 50 this year into 6 and 8. Feels like slight overs for mine but happy to see what we do with them before losing my mind

    But we still don't have a lively small forward or a KPF which we desperatly need

  • Quote
    •  

    All so confusing yet exciting. Hoping there’s a forward landing at our doorstep later out of this. 

  • Quote

    1 hour ago, Fifty-5 said:

    I agree we'd like more but tell me how they'll match a bid for Green at say pick 5.  What picks will they use? I think 40 needs to be one of them. 

    They can use future picks can't they (rollover to next year?)

  • Quote
    26 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

    They can use future picks can't they (rollover to next year?)

    Yes they can but the discussed scenario includes losing their 2020 1st rounder to us so they'd be down to later picks which would wipe out their 2020 draft. If they have academy players then they'd be in trouble paying for them.

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    I think what we'll find is that it'll be more like:
    Pick 3 for Pick 6 and GWS 1st rounder next year.  Maybe even another pick thrown in there by GWS.  

    This will allow for GWS to get two top 3 pick players for the equivalent of Pick 6, a future 1st and something else(maybe).
    This will allow us to get Pick 6 and Pick 8 for Pick 3.  Still maintain a 1st rounder next year.

    Anything after 1st round, I think both teams acknowledge is very speculative and a lottery.  

    Now what we do with pick 6 and 8 and maybe GWS 1st next year intrigues me.  I would love to turn these 3 picks into a combination of Papley, Brad Crouch, Daniher etc.  Whether that is possible, I don't know.  But I wouldn't put it past Mahoney.  

  • Quote

    The deal with North yesterday didn’t need to happen this window so would suggest we have plans for it

  • Quote
    • Like 2

    Why help GWS out anyway when we are potentially competing against them for what we hope is a top 4 spot next year. I'd say, heres pick 3, we want finlayson, pick 6, then take 6 and 8 to the draft.

    Tomlinson, Langdon, Finlayson, Pick 6 and pick 8. Not a bad day out for only losing Frost.

    A pick in the 20-30 range next year in a shallow draft is useless.

    Edited by SFebes

  • Quote
    • Like 3

    Pick 3 for pick 6 and a future pick is a horrible trade for us. i would be staggered if we actually made that trade. 

    we have GWS bent over a barrel and desperate for that pick. 

    we simply have to get a ready made best 22 player who can help us next year or take that pick to the draft.

  • Quote
    • Like 12
    3 minutes ago, SFebes said:

    Why help GWS out anyway when we are potentially competing against them for what we hope is a top 4 spot next year. I'd say, heres pick 3, we want finlayson, pick 6, then take 6 and 8 to the draft.

    Tomlinson, Langdon, Finlayson, Pick 6 and pick 8. Not a bad day out for only losing Frost.

    A pick in the 20-30 range next year in a shallow draft is useless.

    Adding to that could we be chasing Papley with 8, as is being mooted by trade media. Carlton were offering 9 but wanted something back.

    We could also seek something back. Carlton were talking Swans 2nd rounder.  Carlton can't do the deal until Bombers agree on Daniher.

    8 is better than 9 as part of the Bombers deal.

    Papley apparently is not stuck on Carlton, but rather getting back to Victoria.

    It could all end with us having Papley, Finlayson/Caldwell or another GWS player and 6 and say a pick in the 20's.

    Then again it could be another unforeseen pick swap.

    Lastly it could just be us with 3 and 8.

    Together with Langdon and Tomlinson that would be an amazing trade period for us.

     

  • Quote
    • Like 2
    4 minutes ago, Redleg said:

    Adding to that could we be chasing Papley with 8, as is being mooted by trade media. Carlton were offering 9 but wanted something back.

    We could also seek something back. Carlton were talking Swans 2nd rounder.  Carlton can't do the deal until Bombers agree on Daniher.

    8 is better than 9 as part of the Bombers deal.

    Papley apparently is not stuck on Carlton, but rather getting back to Victoria.

    It could all end with us having Papley, Finlayson/Caldwell or another GWS player and 6 and say a pick in the 20's.

    Then again it could be another unforeseen pick swap.

    Lastly it could just be us with 3 and 8.

    Together with Langdon and Tomlinson that would be an amazing trade period for us.

     

    I'd much rather any of those scenarios mentioned than a devalued pick that we can't use for a year. We have the hand at the moment to bully GWS into giving us something we want. It would be stupidity to relent and give in to what they want.

  • Quote
    • Like 2

    Personally i am very happy with Langdon, Tomlinson (less so) 3 and 8 and if he passes due diligence Sam Murray as a DFA.

    Hopefully our best "recruits" will be internal ones who were lost to 2018.

  • Quote

    11 minutes ago, Redleg said:

    Adding to that could we be chasing Papley with 8, as is being mooted by trade media. Carlton were offering 9 but wanted something back.

    We could also seek something back. Carlton were talking Swans 2nd rounder.  Carlton can't do the deal until Bombers agree on Daniher.

    8 is better than 9 as part of the Bombers deal.

    Papley apparently is not stuck on Carlton, but rather getting back to Victoria.

    It could all end with us having Papley, Finlayson/Caldwell or another GWS player and 6 and say a pick in the 20's.

    Then again it could be another unforeseen pick swap.

    Lastly it could just be us with 3 and 8.

    Together with Langdon and Tomlinson that would be an amazing trade period for us.

     

    One i'd be seriously looking at is Issac Smith. i think we really lack on field leadership, and he addresses a need as well

     

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    We should keep pick 3 and split 8 maybe get Josh Bruce and another 2 guns in the draft

    Edited by Rednblueriseing

  • Quote
    46 minutes ago, Patches O’houlihan said:

    One i'd be seriously looking at is Issac Smith. i think we really lack on field leadership, and he addresses a need as well

     

    Issac isn't worth a high pick though.  So unless we are in a split via swap of pick / player deal, and soon, that's not even viable as it stands.  If he was part of a deal that's already been in play and discussions well under way?  Possibly.

    Edited by Rusty Nails

  • Quote
    •  
    1 hour ago, Redleg said:

    Adding to that could we be chasing Papley with 8, as is being mooted by trade media. Carlton were offering 9 but wanted something back.

    We could also seek something back. Carlton were talking Swans 2nd rounder.  Carlton can't do the deal until Bombers agree on Daniher.

    8 is better than 9 as part of the Bombers deal.

    Papley apparently is not stuck on Carlton, but rather getting back to Victoria.

    It could all end with us having Papley, Finlayson/Caldwell or another GWS player and 6 and say a pick in the 20's.

    Then again it could be another unforeseen pick swap.

    Lastly it could just be us with 3 and 8.

    Together with Langdon and Tomlinson that would be an amazing trade period for us.

     

    Maybe I'm on my own here but I don't get the hype on Papley, perhaps I just haven't watched many Swans games either this year. It seems we want Weightman so buggered if I know.

  • Quote
    • Like 2

    Any deal with GWS shifting our pick 3 back to 6 needs to come with an agreement from GWS that they won't choose who we want at 6. e.g. If we're dropping back to pick 6 because we think pick 3 is too high for Stephens (just guessing a name), but then GWS use pick 3 on Stephens, we lose out on getting the player we wanted.

    We don't hold all the cards here, yes we have the good ones, but certainly not all of them.

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    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...
    Go to topic listing

    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.

        • Thanks
        • Like
      • 1 reply
      Demonland

    • 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
      Demonland

    • 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?

        • Thanks
      • 191 replies
      Demonland

    • 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
      • 47 replies
      Demonland

    • 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.

        • Thanks
        • Like
      • 330 replies
      Demonland

    • 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

        • Thanks
        • Like
      • 31 replies
      Demonland
    View All