Jump to content

Road to the draft with Jason Taylor

dazzledavey36
dazzledavey36
in Melbourne Demons

Featured Replies

1 hour ago, Davos said:

Perhaps I misheard, but I reckon he said Jackson is right in the mix at pick 3. I think Twomey must have heard a few rumours, because he was very quick to ask the Jackson question.

Just my interpretation reading between the lines Davos.

Also, he would be taking a mega risk on Jackson at 3 when he is rated nowhere that and made the 'we won't be bloody stupid' point when he went on to say if there is a 0.5% risk of losing a preferred player in a pick swap (trading lower) then it aint happening.

Under that proviso there is not a chance in hell's kitchen he (we) will use pick 3 on Jackson plus put his career at risk by taking such a huge gamble (with 3).  Sounds too experienced to be making such a blunder regardless.  The only possibility he might is if he has no say in the decision (mostly coach driven), highly unlikely imv.

Edited by Rusty Nails

  • Quote
    • Like 2
     

    Surely the Jackson talk is more about getting Freo to take him at pick 7 instead of someone we want because no way are we taking him at 3.

  • Quote
    • Like 6
    • Thanks 3
     
    • Author
    3 minutes ago, chookrat said:

    Words! 

    Yeah not sure what you're trying to get at, but cool..

  • Quote
    • Thanks 1

    Robertson is another in and under midfielder, I don’t see him being that brilliant that we can’t not pick him, just more of what we have. I’ve been in Young’s camp at 3, nothing’s changed that. At 8 I’ve been interested in Kemp or Ash, but I wouldn’t be to unhappy with Jackson if they believe he can impact as a forward. Only 28 more days to guess ??

  • Quote

    39 minutes ago, Rusty Nails said:

    Just my interpretation reading between the lines Davos.

    Also, he would be taking a mega risk on Jackson at 3 when he is rated nowhere that and made the 'we won't be bloody stupid' point when he went on to say if there is a 0.5% risk of losing a preferred player in a pick swap (trading lower) then it aint happening.

    Under that proviso there is not a chance in hell's kitchen he (we) will use pick 3 on Jackson plus put his career at risk by taking such a huge gamble (with 3).  Sounds too experienced to be making such a blunder regardless.  The only possibility he might is if he has no say in the decision (mostly coach driven), highly unlikely imv.

    Interesting reading between the lines. JT says 3 players are in the mix at pick 3. Twomey: Is Luke Jackson in that mix? JT: 'Yeah he'd be in that mix I'd say'. It could certainly be bluffing, but it sounded pretty honest to me. And if we wanted to take him at 8 then you'd downplay any interest. Bluffing only makes sense if you're keen to get a trade.

    Who is rating him nowhere near 3? The mock drafts that have him around 10-15 is where Oliver and Bont were rated at this time in their draft years. The media and greater public always go with the high possession mids and goal kickers early whilst the recruiters are looking at other players. We've seen reports GWS, Freo and possibly Carl are all keen on him, it's not like he's come from nowhere. Should a team not have drafted Dangerfield, Rioli, Cripps with pick 3 because they weren't rated as pick 3 by the consensus?

    Here's my interpretation: The pick swap with North doubles our chances of getting a ready made player. It's exactly the kind of move you'd make if you were considering a 199cm kid with one of your picks.

    Edited by DeeSpencer

  • Quote
    • Like 3
     
    48 minutes ago, chookrat said:

    Words! 

    you've got a scratch on the record @chookrat, keeps jumping and repeating. ;)

  • Quote
    • Thanks 1
    5 hours ago, dazzledavey36 said:

    Interesting how he mentioned Robertson and Kemp around that pick 8 mark.

    I honestly think without the bid of Green at the 3 its out of Jackson and Young.

    Young and Jackson is a much better pub....

  • Quote

    56 minutes ago, chookrat said:

    Words! 

     

    51 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

    Yeah not sure what you're trying to get at, but cool..

     

    42 minutes ago, JakovichScissorKick said:

    Would you prefer he did the interview in morse code?

     

    Personally I wont be convinced until I see an interprative dance number.

    "But how does pick three make you feeeeeeeeel, on the insiiiiiide?  Now show it, shoooow me what pick three feels like. Share your draft story with the word!"

     

  • Quote
    • Haha 1
    52 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

    Interesting reading between the lines. JT says 3 players are in the mix at pick 3. Twomey: Is Luke Jackson in that mix? JT: 'Yeah he'd be in that mix I'd say'. It could certainly be bluffing, but it sounded pretty honest to me. And if we wanted to take him at 8 then you'd downplay any interest. Bluffing only makes sense if you're keen to get a trade.

    Who is rating him nowhere near 3? The mock drafts that have him around 10-15 is where Oliver and Bont were rated at this time in their draft years. The media and greater public always go with the high possession mids and goal kickers early whilst the recruiters are looking at other players. We've seen reports GWS, Freo and possibly Carl are all keen on him, it's not like he's come from nowhere. Should a team not have drafted Dangerfield, Rioli, Cripps with pick 3 because they weren't rated as pick 3 by the consensus?

    Here's my interpretation: The pick swap with North doubles our chances of getting a ready made player. It's exactly the kind of move you'd make if you were considering a 199cm kid with one of your picks.

    If we were talking a Cripps, Danger, Rioli type DS then yes.  Taylor/Goody won't risk 3 on a gangly Ruckman trying to transition from a completely different sport that's shown a bit of good form towards the end of a carnival and who 'might' also make a transition to a forward!

    There's a big difference between taking a calculated risk vs throwing caution to the wind.  I don't see any other club showing keen interest in him as a top 5/6 forward candidate and i think many would be even more cautious now after the Cox experiment.  That's not to say others won't be interested, but certainly not in the top 10 and certainly not with a predominantly forward role in mind.  A ruckman pushing forward occasionaly who is in the mix with a club in need of his type (ie; mostly rucking) around 11 to 15?  Sure.

  • Quote
    • Like 3

    Sounds like we’re trying to encourage Freo to take Jackson prior to our pick 8, so as to ensure we get who we really want I.e. Kemp, etc... at 8.

    Edited by PaulRB

  • Quote
    • Like 5
    1 hour ago, PaulRB said:

    Sounds like we’re trying to encourage Freo to take Jackson prior to our pick 8, so as to ensure we get who we really want I.e. Kemp, etc... at 8.

    Quite possible RB.  Freo need a Sandilands replacement and he is a WA boy.  Kemp coming back ready for 2021 to fill Chunk's role.

    Edited by Rusty Nails

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    6 hours ago, Redleg said:

    I wonder if he is saying Jackson to force Freo to deal on 8 with a promise not to take Jackson.

    That's what I was thinking too. I reckon we'll bid on Green, which will be matched by GWS, and we'll take Young at 3. I wouldn't be surprised to see us bid on Henry at 8 and have that matched by Freo, and we end up taking Kemp.

    5 hours ago, Davos said:

    Perhaps I misheard, but I reckon he said Jackson is right in the mix at pick 3. I think Twomey must have heard a few rumours, because he was very quick to ask the Jackson question.

    We rarely leak, so I reckon it's more likely we've let it be known that Jackson is in the mix.

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    14 minutes ago, A F said:

    We rarely leak, so I reckon it's more likely we've let it be known that Jackson is in the mix.

    This.

    There’s no way we are taking Jackson at 3, and this whole interview was disingenuous. 

    I can’t recall, but when we picked Oliver out of the sky I bet Taylor wasn’t on Trade Radio saying ‘yeah, got this big fat Shep kid in mind, you’ll all laugh when we pick him but he’ll probably win a Brownlow’.

    He’s just throwing up names that sound plausible. Sure, we might take one, but he’s hardly going on a Podcast and giving away our drafting strategy...

     

  • Quote
    • Like 2
    • Thanks 1

    Did I hear right, that Jackson has also played as a genuine midfielder (ie not as a ruckman)?

    A 199cm midfielder?

    I like the highlights real and still think he would be a good investment, not sure about No 3 though

  • Quote

    After listening to the Taylor podcast. 
     

    If we keep Pick 3. We will bid on Green with GWS to match. We then take Young!

    However, I think the more likely scenario will be to swap Pick 3 for Freo’s 7 & 10. Therefore, Pick 7 = best available, Pick 8 = Luke Jackson & Pick 10 = Cody Weightman

  • Quote
    • Like 2
    3 hours ago, Rusty Nails said:

    If we were talking a Cripps, Danger, Rioli type DS then yes.  Taylor/Goody won't risk 3 on a gangly Ruckman trying to transition from a completely different sport that's shown a bit of good form towards the end of a carnival and who 'might' also make a transition to a forward!

    There's a big difference between taking a calculated risk vs throwing caution to the wind.  I don't see any other club showing keen interest in him as a top 5/6 forward candidate and i think many would be even more cautious now after the Cox experiment.  That's not to say others won't be interested, but certainly not in the top 10 and certainly not with a predominantly forward role in mind.  A ruckman pushing forward occasionaly who is in the mix with a club in need of his type (ie; mostly rucking) around 11 to 15?  Sure.

    He was 1 vote off winning the Larke medal for best player in the national champs! More than just a bit of good form.

    And he’ll start as a forward was all Taylor said, no real difference to a young mid starting as a forward like Serong, Kemp and Flanders probably do.

    I think people need to get their heads around this being genuine. May not end up that way but there’s enough there for me.

    No 18 year old should be drafted for needs. Mids and smalls might do more earlier but even guys like Petracca and Cam Rayner were big projects in terms of fitness and went top 2.

  • Quote

    6 hours ago, DeeSpencer said:

    He was 1 vote off winning the Larke medal for best player in the national champs! More than just a bit of good form.

    And he’ll start as a forward was all Taylor said, no real difference to a young mid starting as a forward like Serong, Kemp and Flanders probably do.

    I think people need to get their heads around this being genuine. May not end up that way but there’s enough there for me.

    No 18 year old should be drafted for needs. Mids and smalls might do more earlier but even guys like Petracca and Cam Rayner were big projects in terms of fitness and went top 2.

    We'll agree to disagree on this one DS.

    I can't see a newb ruckman being picked in the top 10 but then again stranger things have happened.  And it is the MFC.

  • Quote

    Taylor discussing trading for pick 8 and the comprised 2020 draft:

    Deduction one: we’re targeting a specific player.

    5.40: ‘Because it’s compromised, we thought it might have been a good opportunity, and we liked a player in the (whoops, stutter) . . . in the range . . . umm . . . for this year, so (recovers composure) . . . It’s a simple as that, we’re not targeting a specific player.”

    Deduction two: That specific player isn’t ready-made.

    5.50: It’s just getting in another early draft selection, getting them in a year earlier and get going.

    Taylor discussing pick 3 and there being about three players in the mix

    Deduction three: Luke Jackson isn’t one of those players (at 3).

    Leading question: is Luke Jackson in that mix?

    Taylor (super-casual): ‘Yeah, he’d be in that mix, I’d say, umm-

    (Long discussion of flexible traits) ‘. . . he’s a unique player in that sense, but obviously there’s other players that have got some high-end qualities in their game.’

    As has been mentioned, Taylor then refers to not outsmarting yourself at pick 3, and picking the best player. The following discussion, on the lessons learnt from earlier early picks at the MFC (2014 and 2016), is super-fascinating for its nuances. I won’t speculate, but it starts at 12.50.

    Selective quotes: ‘I take myself back to home interviews, or one-on-one interviews, and the little things where you think I wish I would have asked that, maybe found that out a bit different . . . They take time to mature, players . . .  They get challenged, you want to make sure they’re up for the challenge.’

  • Quote
    • Like 2
     
    7 hours ago, Dee tention said:

    After listening to the Taylor podcast. 
     

    If we keep Pick 3. We will bid on Green with GWS to match. We then take Young!

    However, I think the more likely scenario will be to swap Pick 3 for Freo’s 7 & 10. Therefore, Pick 7 = best available, Pick 8 = Luke Jackson & Pick 10 = Cody Weightman

    Just my view from the Taylor podcast...

    Pick 3 wont be swapped.  Pick 8 is live depending on what is available (in our preferred mix) and what options present on the night.

    Kemp would appear to be on the agenda but if missed it wouldn't surprise me if we then attempted to swap for say 11 (Stephens/Jackson) and a 30s/40s pick.  My dream picks under that scenario would be Stephens / Pickett but sadly i doubt Pickett is even on our radar.

  • Quote
    • Like 2
    10 hours ago, PaulRB said:

    Sounds like we’re trying to encourage Freo to take Jackson prior to our pick 8, so as to ensure we get who we really want I.e. Kemp, etc... at 8.

    I think Robertson may be the target 

    Take Young at 3 having put it out there you're keen on Young and Jackson. Also mention Kemp with Robertson 

    Freo would love Robertson and Jackson and may gamble on taking Jackson with 7 and us taking Kemp

  • Quote
    • Like 4
    • Love 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

    • PREVIEW: Brisbane

      And just like that, we’re Narrm again. Even though the annual AFL Sir Doug Nicholls Round which commemorates the contributions of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander culture to our game has been a welcome addition to our calendar for ten years, more lately it has been a portent of tough times ahead for we beleaguered Narrm supporters. Ever since the club broke through for its historic 2021 premiership, this has become a troubling time of the year for the club. For example, it all began when Melbourne rebranded itself as Narrm across the two rounds of the Sir Doug Nicholls Round to become the first club to adopt an Indigenous club name especially for the occasion. It won its first outing under the brand against lowly North Melbourne to go to 10 wins and no losses but not without a struggle or a major injury to  star winger Ed Langdon who broke his ribs and missed several weeks. In the following week, still as Narrm, the team’s 17 game winning streak came to an end at the hands of the Dockers. That came along with more injuries, a plague that remained with them for the remainder of the season until, beset by injuries, the Dees were eliminated from the finals in straight sets. It was even worse last year, when Narrm inexplicably lowered its colours in Perth to the Waalit Marawar Eagles. Oh, the shame of it all! At least this year, if there is a corner to turn around, it has to be in the direction of something better. To that end, I produced a special pre-game chant in the local Narrm language - “nam mi:wi winnamun katjil prolin ambi ngamar thamelin amb” which roughly translated is “every heart beats true for the red and the blue.” >y belief is that if all of the Narrm faithful recite it long enough, then it might prove to be the only way to beat the Brisbane Lions at the Gabba on Sunday. The Lions are coming off a disappointing draw at Marvel Stadium against a North Melbourne team that lacks the ability and know how to win games (except when playing Melbourne). Brisbane are, however, a different kettle of fish at home and have very few positional weaknesses. They are a midfield powerhouse, strong in defence and have plenty of forward options, particularly their small and medium sized players, to kick a winning score this week after the sting of last week’s below par performance.

        • Thanks
        • Like
      • 5 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • REPORT: Hawthorn

      There was a time during the current Melbourne cycle that goes back to before the premiership when the club was the toughest to beat in the fourth quarter. The Demons were not only hard to beat at any time but it was virtually impossible to get the better them when scores were close at three quarter time. It was only three or four years ago but they were fit, strong and resilient in body and mind. Sadly, those days are over. This has been the case since the club fell off its pedestal about 12 months ago after it beat Geelong and then lost to Carlton. In both instances, Melbourne put together strong, stirring final quarters, one that resulted in victory, the other, in defeat. Since then, the drop off has been dramatic to the point where it can neither pull off victory in close matches, nor can it even go down in defeat  gallantly.

        • Clap
        • Thanks
        • Like
      • 0 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • CASEY: Footscray

      At twenty-four minutes into the third term of the game between the Casey Demons and Footscray VFL at Whitten Oval, the visitors were coasting. They were winning all over the ground, had the ascendancy in the ruck battles and held a 26 point lead on a day perfect for football. What could go wrong? Everything. The Bulldogs moved into overdrive in the last five minutes of the term and booted three straight goals to reduce the margin to a highly retrievable eight points at the last break. Bouyed by that effort, their confidence was on a high level during the interval and they ran all over the despondent Demons and kicked another five goals to lead by a comfortable margin of four goals deep into the final term before Paddy Cross kicked a couple of too late goals for a despondent Casey. A testament to their lack of pressure in the latter stages of the game was the fact that Footscray’s last ten scoring shots were nine goals and one rushed behind. Things might have been different for the Demons who went into the game after last week’s bye with 12 AFL listed players. Blake Howes was held over for the AFL game but two others, Jack Billings and Taj Woewodin (not officially listed as injured) were also missing and they could have been handy at the end. Another mystery of the current VFL system.

        • Thanks
      • 0 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • PREGAME: Brisbane

      The Demons head back out on the road in Round 10 when they travel to Queensland to take on the reigning Premiers and the top of the table Lions who look very formidable. Can the Dees cause a massive upset? Who comes in and who goes out?

        • Thanks
        • Like
      • 136 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • PODCAST: Hawthorn

      The Demonland Podcast will air LIVE on Monday, 12th May @ 8:00pm. Join Binman, George & I as we dissect the Demons loss to the Hawks. 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. If you would like to leave us a voicemail please call 03 9016 3666 and don't worry no body answers so you don't have to talk to a human.

        • Clap
        • Thanks
        • Like
      • 52 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • POSTGAME: Hawthorn

      Wayward kicking for goal, dump kicks inside 50 and some baffling umpiring all contributed to the Dees not getting out to an an early lead that may have impacted the result. At the end of the day the Demons were just not good enough and let the Hawks run away with their first win against the Demons in 7 years.

        • Clap
        • Love
        • Like
      • 376 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland
    View All