Jump to content

What to do with Pick 10?

Dees247
Dees247
in Melbourne Demons

Featured Replies

I don’t get why we would do 10 & 28 for the cats 2 picks. Why wouldn’t we have just done 8 for those 2 picks? Same result...

  • Quote
    • Like 5
     
    3 minutes ago, Gawn's Beard said:

    I don’t get why we would do 10 & 28 for the cats 2 picks. Why wouldn’t we have just done 8 for those 2 picks? Same result...

    Was wondering this, maybe they insisted on getting 2 picks back?

  • Quote
    8 hours ago, Dees247 said:

    Herald Sun are reporting that we are now going to split 10!

    Was the same article that was up a day earlier saying we’d split 8 and take Jackson at 3 just substituting pick 10 for 8. Not sure if it’s based on further intel that we’ll split 10. 

  • Quote
    • Like 1
     

    can someone explain what's happened/happening? it's not on The Age website, and I don't read the Hun on principle (I'm also in NNSW so no access to a copy of the Hun)

    So we gave away 8 for what?

    I want to be wrong but I got a bad feeling about this Dr Jones

  • Quote
    • Like 2

    This all feels like the club is trying to be too clever for its own good. Trading away future picks, splitting picks and then splitting them again, etc.

    We can't afford to take risks in this draft. Just pick the best player/s with the picks we have and move on. Stop trying to outsmart everyone else for minimal gains. 

  • Quote
    • Like 3
    • Haha 1

    3 minutes ago, Superunknown said:

    can someone explain what's happened/happening? it's not on The Age website, and I don't read the Hun on principle (I'm also in NNSW so no access to a copy of the Hun)

    So we gave away 8 for what?

    You can check the Foxsports website instead. Or maybe try the Advertiser or Courier Mail perhaps. The Daily Telegraph is pretty average, but as a broadsheet the Australian is a respectable paper. If not, Mungo will probably have a write-up in the Echo in the coming days. 

    *We traded pick 8 for Fremantle's pick 10 and 28. 

  • Quote
    4 minutes ago, Skuit said:

    You can check the Foxsports website instead. Or maybe try the Advertiser or Courier Mail perhaps. The Daily Telegraph is pretty average, but as a broadsheet the Australian is a respectable paper. If not, Mungo will probably have a write-up in the Echo in the coming days. 

    *We traded pick 8 for Fremantle's pick 10 and 28. 

    Thanks for cutting to the chase.

     

    Edited by Superunknown

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    Take 3, 10, 28 all to draft.

    At 10, take whoever is leftover out of Kemp, Stephens, Serong, Ash. Young is now off the cards for us it seems unfortunately.

    I’d be disappointed if we split pick 10 again into more lower picks, as I think we need elite talent and the pool generally thins out quickly heading into the teens.

     

  • Quote
    • Like 11
     
    1 hour ago, ChaserJ said:

    Was the same article that was up a day earlier saying we’d split 8 and take Jackson at 3 just substituting pick 10 for 8. Not sure if it’s based on further intel that we’ll split 10. 

    I thought the same thing. Pretty sure it's an error in the article, as they just updated the original article from pre pick swap. I don't think they meant to suggest we are pick swapping pick 10

  • Quote
    15 minutes ago, Lord Travis said:

    Take 3, 10, 28 all to draft.

    At 10, take whoever is leftover out of Kemp, Stephens, Serong, Ash. Young is now off the cards for us it seems unfortunately.

    I’d be disappointed if we split pick 10 again into more lower picks, as I think we need elite talent and the pool generally thins out quickly heading into the teens.

     

    Ash will go before 10 imv.  Probably missed that boat along with Young if you believe all the noise on Jackson.

    Serong a possibility.  Kemp should be there.

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    I'll add my voice to the 'don't split 10' chorus (don't think it's on the cards anyway).

    My reading is that there seem to be a group of 8-10 players that are hard to split after Rowell and Anderson. As others have mentioned, it's looking likely that at least one of Kemp, Stevens , Ash, Serong or even Young will slide to 10 - all of which have been firmly in the top 5 discussion since the championships. 

    Geelong recruiters aren't slouches - if they want 10, it's for a reason.

  • Quote
    • Like 3
    • Author

    Cal was on SEN today, saying that we might split 10 today or Wednesday. He mentioned for 15 & 20. Not sure how to feel about that. I have to assume we get Weightman at 15?

    Edited by Dees247

  • Quote
    • Shocked 1
    1 minute ago, Dees247 said:

    Cal was on SEN today, saying that we might split 8 today or Wednesday. He mentioned for 15 & 20. Not sure how to feel about that. I have to assume we get Weightman at 15?

    It’s pick 10 now. So that would be a trade with Gold Coast then. I wonder who we’re targeting with those picks.

    Can effectively rule out any of Young/Ash/Stephens and probably Kemp will be gone by then too.

    Kemp and Weightman would be ideal with 15 and 20.

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    • Author
    10 minutes ago, ben russell said:

    It’s pick 10 now. So that would be a trade with Gold Coast then. I wonder who we’re targeting with those picks.

    Can effectively rule out any of Young/Ash/Stephens and probably Kemp will be gone by then too.

    Kemp and Weightman would be ideal with 15 and 20.

    Sorry, just to be clear, I did mean pick 10 ?

    Edited by Dees247

  • Quote

    Just take teh 3 picks my god, we need really the best talent we can get, i still think taking Jackson at 3 is a mistake, but use 10, to get the next best available of who hasn't already been drafted and pick 28 is chance to take more of a speculative pick. Lets not mess around anymore, Bennell is the risk we are taking, bank the talent and get on with it.

  • Quote
    • Like 3

    Lets trade pick 97 for 3, 10 and 28. That way we will get some news for the AFL.

  • Quote
    • Like 2
    35 minutes ago, Dees247 said:

    Cal was on SEN today, saying that we might split 10 today or Wednesday. He mentioned for 15 & 20. Not sure how to feel about that. I have to assume we get Weightman at 15?

    I wonder if they would do 10 for 15 and 20. There was talk they might not even use their pick 20. Or was this scenario having us including 28?

    Then we could look to use 20 and 28 to see if it's possible to move back up.

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    38 minutes ago, Dees247 said:

    Cal was on SEN today, saying that we might split 10 today or Wednesday. He mentioned for 15 & 20. Not sure how to feel about that. I have to assume we get Weightman at 15?

    we would only do it if the guy we want will be there at 15. if they're set on Weightman for example it make sense to improve that third pick as much as possible

     

  • Quote
    2 hours ago, Lord Travis said:

    Take 3, 10, 28 all to draft.

    At 10, take whoever is leftover out of Kemp, Stephens, Serong, Ash. Young is now off the cards for us it seems unfortunately.

    I’d be disappointed if we split pick 10 again into more lower picks, as I think we need elite talent and the pool generally thins out quickly heading into the teens.

     

    I’m not giving up on Young until Luke Jackson’s name is called out or the club release something before next week stating their intentions. 

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    12 hours ago, Dees247 said:

    Herald Sun are reporting that we are now going to split 10!

    Better not miss out on Kemp, Stephens, Ash or a slider for the sake of picking up midgets.

  • Quote
    • Like 2

    • Author
    29 minutes ago, Watts the matter said:

    I wonder if they would do 10 for 15 and 20. There was talk they might not even use their pick 20. Or was this scenario having us including 28?

    Then we could look to use 20 and 28 to see if it's possible to move back up.

    They only mentioned trading 10

  • Quote

    Bear with me.

    The two later picks could equal pick 4. Any set worth more points than pick 4 would become more valuable to GWS, if we clarified we would be bidding on Green and assuming they planned to match...

  • Quote
    • Like 3
    • Love 1
    • Shocked 1
    1 hour ago, Reevesy said:

    Bear with me.

    The two later picks could equal pick 4. Any set worth more points than pick 4 would become more valuable to GWS, if we clarified we would be bidding on Green and assuming they planned to match...

    Trying to follow... are you saying GWS might trade pick 4 for two of our picks?

  • Quote
    •  

    Indeed. On draft night, if we bid on Green at 3 and GWS wish to match, they have 5 minutes to trade away 4 or have it consumed. At this point the pick number becomes less relevant than the attached points. It would be more valuable to GWS to have 12 and 18 than 4, for example.

  • Quote
    • Like 2
    • Love 2
    1 hour ago, Reevesy said:

    Bear with me.

    The two later picks could equal pick 4. Any set worth more points than pick 4 would become more valuable to GWS, if we clarified we would be bidding on Green and assuming they planned to match...

     

    20 minutes ago, Reevesy said:

    Indeed. On draft night, if we bid on Green at 3 and GWS wish to match, they have 5 minutes to trade away 4 or have it consumed. At this point the pick number becomes less relevant than the attached points. It would be more valuable to GWS to have 12 and 18 than 4, for example.

    I like it...

    Potential to take 3, 4 and 28 to the draft.

    That would be a smart move if we could pull it off! I would think another team would be able to trump us here though! 

  • 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

    • 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.

      • 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.

      • 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?

        • Clap
        • Like
      • 124 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.

      • 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.

        • Like
      • 354 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • VOTES: Hawthorn

      After 3 fantastic week Max Gawn has a massive lead in the Demonland Player of the Year award from Jake Bowey, Christian Petracca, Kade Chandler and Ed Langdon who round out the Top Five. Your votes please. 6, 5, 4, 3, 2 & 1.

      • 34 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland
    View All