Jump to content

Featured Replies

ALREADY DELISTED

Bennell, Dunkley, C. Wagner, J. Wagner

LIKELY TO GET DELISTED

O. McDonald 

LIKELY TO BE TRADED

Hannan, Preuss

POTENTIAL TO BE TRADED

T. McDonald, Jetta, Neal-Bullen

 
1 hour ago, Wiseblood said:

Just to go with this, I think it was Jon Ralph who tweeted that Essendon were trumping Carlton by offering their Pick 7 in any swap deals that might come up so Carlton can't do it with their #8 pick.  How petty can you get?

And I totally agree with everything you said above.  

Just for the laughs I hope Essendon do split their picks and then Carlton find another trading partner anyway. Still rooting for Saad to walk through to the PSD and be picked up by North.

Wrong thread

Edited by Lucifer's Hero

 

So a nice tradable draft haul in 2020 now:

  • 2020: 26 (729), 31 (606), 33 (563), 43 (378), 50 (273), 68 (59), 69 (49)
  • 2021: 1st, 3rd, 4th

Something has to give for Ben Brown

Dogs

  • 2020 14 (1161), 41 (412), 54 (220) = 1793.  If JUH gets bid at pick 1 they need 2400. So they're ~600 short.
14 minutes ago, Pollyanna said:

So a nice tradable draft haul in 2020 now:

  • 2020: 26 (729), 31 (606), 33 (563), 43 (378), 50 (273), 68 (59), 69 (49)
  • 2021: 1st, 3rd, 4th

Something has to give for Ben Brown

Dogs

  • 2020 14 (1161), 41 (412), 54 (220) = 1793.  If JUH gets bid at pick 1 they need 2400. So they're ~600 short.

Thanks P.  So is it a matter of the Dogs trading 14 for something that with their current picks can get them to 2400?

I.e. if they trade 14 to us, we give them 26 (729), 31 (606), 43 (378), 68 (59) which along with picks 41 (412) and 54 (220) gets them to 2,404?


4 minutes ago, deelusions from afar said:

Thanks P.  So is it a matter of the Dogs trading 14 for something that with their current picks can get them to 2400?

I.e. if they trade 14 to us, we give them 26 (729), 31 (606), 43 (378), 68 (59) which along with picks 41 (412) and 54 (220) gets them to 2,404?

Yes that would work, but it would be generous of us.  However they need to have as many list vacancies as they have picks going into the draft so that may be tough for them to have 6 vacancies.

The other option open to them is to go into points deficit in 2021 if they use all their 2020 picks.  Freo did this 2019 to 2020 - the deficit comes off the first pick so Freo's 2020 1st rounder has been pushed back a couple of slots by that.

On 11/6/2020 at 6:26 PM, MadAsHell said:

ALREADY DELISTED Bennell, Dunkley, C. Wagner, J. Wagner   LIKELY TO GET DELISTED. O.McDonald   TRADED  Hannan, Preuss  POTENTIAL TO BE TRADED T.McDonald 

Updated on the above.  
Given 45 (44+cat b Bradtke) on list for 2020 then we remove 7 (assume Tmcd stays).  
Add Ben Brown, thats 39 (38+Bradtke) on list.

AFL says 42+cat b. So can add 4 from the draft or DFA pool. 
 

With trades done and dusted and the first Club lists due on Friday (and another the following Friday) I'd expect some announcements for our OOC players this week.

State of the Nation, mfc view:

  • Current List is 40.  (36 Senior players, 3 'A' Rookies and 1 'B' Rookie)
  • Our OOC players:  3 Seniors:  Bedford, Jordon, OMc.  4 Rookies:  M. Brown 'A', Lockhart 'A', Chandler 'A' and Bradtke 'B'
  • Allowed List in 2021 is 44:  (Max of 38 Senior players, and up to 6 rookies (total of A+B).
  • Spots available is 4:  2 Senior spots and 2 rookie spot
  • Potentially 5 draft picks (18, 19, 28, 50, 89). 
  • Clubs need to take only one player at this years draft.
  • The advantage of rookies is the first $80K of their sal is not included in the sal cap.  so up to a $480k sal cap buffer.
  • afaik if we want to keep Lockhart we need to promote him to the seniors as rules don't allow 3 years as a rookie.  We can use pick 89 for this.
  • Mahoney said we would keep a list spot open eg DFA, PSSP, mid season drafts.  This would probably be a rookie spot. 

If I had to guess on our OOC players:

  •  Bedford and maybe OMac rookied. 
  • Lockhart promoted using pick 89. 
  • M Brown and Chandler delisted. 
  • Bradtke retained. 

This would give us an additional 1 senior spot (total of 3) and 1 additional rookie spot (total of 3).  That should cover our draftees, DFA's and a spare list spot.  And, draft picks 18, 19, 28 and 50 swapped in some way to give us 3 picks for draftees, taking 3 senior spots available.

Footnote:  Hope my logic and arithmetic is right:cool:

 

 
8 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

With trades done and dusted and the first Club lists due on Friday (and another the following Friday) I'd expect some announcements for our OOC players this week.

State of the Nation, mfc view:

  • Current List is 40.  (36 Senior players, 3 'A' Rookies and 1 'B' Rookie)
  • Our OOC players:  3 Seniors:  Bedford, Jordon, OMc.  4 Rookies:  M. Brown 'A', Lockhart 'A', Chandler 'A' and Bradtke 'B'
  • Allowed List in 2021 is 44:  (Max of 38 Senior players, and up to 6 rookies (total of A+B).
  • Spots available is 4:  2 Senior spots and 2 rookie spot
  • Potentially 5 draft picks (18, 19, 28, 50, 89). 
  • Clubs need to take only one player at this years draft.
  • The advantage of rookies is the first $80K of their sal is not included in the sal cap.  so up to a $480k sal cap buffer.
  • afaik if we want to keep Lockhart we need to promote him to the seniors as rules don't allow 3 years as a rookie.  We can use pick 89 for this.
  • Mahoney said we would keep a list spot open eg DFA, PSSP, mid season drafts.  This would probably be a rookie spot. 

If I had to guess on our OOC players:

  •  Bedford and maybe OMac rookied. 
  • Lockhart promoted using pick 89. 
  • M Brown and Chandler delisted. 
  • Bradtke retained. 

This would give us an additional 1 senior spot (total of 3) and 1 additional rookie spot (total of 3).  That should cover our draftees, DFA's and a spare list spot.  And, draft picks 18, 19, 28 and 50 swapped in some way to give us 3 picks for draftees, taking 3 senior spots available.

Footnote:  Hope my logic and arithmetic is right:cool:

 

you're definitely allowed to be a rookie for 3 years i thought. isn't it after 3 you have to make a decision up or out?

imo

Chandler, MBrown, Lockhart all rerookied

OMac delisted

Nietschke, Bedford, Jordon all retained as Snr listed players

Bradtke retained as B

that fills 35snr players and 3A 1B rookies allowing us to pick up 3 players with currently 18, 19, 28, 50 however i expect one more trade up the first round order and then we have 1A spot to look at a delisted FA.

if i had to make a call on one rookie to be delisted alongside OMac it would definitely be Chandler as i dont see him getting senior opportunities next year due to numerous options as a small forward. we would then delist nietschke and re-rookie him and take all 4 picks in the draft passing at 89

Edited by Turner

2 minutes ago, Turner said:

you're definitely allowed to be a rookie for 3 years i thought. isn't it after 3 you have to make a decision up or out?

"Under the little-known AFL rule, if a player is offered a third year on the rookie list he can reject it and automatically become a free agent and move to his club of choice".  roos-to-use-little-known-rule-to-poach-bulldogs-defender


1 minute ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

"Under the little-known AFL rule, if a player is offered a third year on the rookie list he can reject it and automatically become a free agent and move to his club of choice".  roos-to-use-little-known-rule-to-poach-bulldogs-defender

yeh i get that but you're not going to reject another year if its the only chance u have of playing afl footy? 

lockhart will get promoted next year coz we're going to see a fair few drop off the senior list for sure

KK spot will be the one we hold for Mid season draft, I think someone mentioned that he can be removed off our list for this, similar to what Richmond did with Grigg to get Marlon Pickett

I think Nietschke will be held onto as a rookie

OMAC Delist

Chandler Delist, cant see them keeping both Bedford and Chandler

 

 

Delisted:  J Wagner, C Wagner (r), Dunkley (r) 

Retired: Bennell (r)

Traded Out: Hannan, Preuss 

Traded In: Ben Brown  -> 45-5 = 40

I would also delist O McDonald and Chandler (r) -> 40-2 = 38

Nietschke to move to rookie list alongside Lockhart and Mitch Brown with Bradtke - Cat B  

Allow 6 more additions - 18, 19, 28 & 50  + DFA + rookie pick 10 (44 on list as 39 primary list + 4 rookie A + 1 rookie Cat B)

I'll email the club asking for a membership refund if they waste list spots on Mitch Brown and Oscar McDonald. I'd keep the young guys for a proper look at them under VFL conditions. Whether they go on the rookie list or even off the list entirely then back on as supplemental players once we retire KK might depend on draft picks and whether we find delisted players worth an immediate shot.


On 11/17/2020 at 2:36 PM, spirit of norm smith said:

Delisted:  J Wagner, C Wagner (r), Dunkley (r) 

Retired: Bennell (r)

Traded Out: Hannan, Preuss 

Traded In: Ben Brown  -> 45-5 = 40

I would also delist O McDonald and Chandler (r) -> 40-2 = 38

Nietschke to move to rookie list alongside Lockhart and Mitch Brown with Bradtke - Cat B  

Allow 6 more additions - 18, 19, 28 & 50  + DFA + rookie pick 10 (44 on list as 39 primary list + 4 rookie A + 1 rookie Cat B)

Bingo

15 hours ago, Whispering_Jack said:

Aaron Nietschke has been delisted with a guarantee of being placed on the rookie list.

Unless someone else gets in first, which I know is unlikely given his injuries.


The Age confirms we’ll be keeping Mitch Brown. Utterly stupid decision. A 5th string key forward who doesn’t compete in the air or pressure on the ground. Another wasted list spot. 
 

How are we ever going to improve if we don’t turn over the list? We’ve got to start taking some chances on youth and untested players. Even if the odds they succeed are low at least we’ve tried some options. 

Don't mind Brown sticking around as cover for another year.

2 Brownlow Votes last season! 

1 hour ago, DeeSpencer said:

The Age confirms we’ll be keeping Mitch Brown. Utterly stupid decision. A 5th string key forward who doesn’t compete in the air or pressure on the ground. Another wasted list spot. 
 

How are we ever going to improve if we don’t turn over the list? We’ve got to start taking some chances on youth and untested players. Even if the odds they succeed are low at least we’ve tried some options. 

he's fourth string, definitely ahead of TMac if u go on last seasons form, also doubling up as ruck support its necessary to have ample talls as its impossible to have the same flexibility as u can with mids/forwards covering for each other when theres a stack of injuries without completely restructuring ur setup which obviously has repercussions 

 

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

  • PREVIEW: Gold Coast

    The Gold Coast Suns find themselves outside of the top eight for the first time since Round 1 with pressure is mounting on the entire organisation. Their coach Damien Hardwick expressed his frustration at his team’s condition last week by making a middle-finger gesture on television that earned him a fine for his troubles. He showed his desperation by claiming that Fox should pick up the tab.  There’s little doubt the Suns have shown improvement in 2025, and their position on the ladder is influenced to some extent by having played fewer games than their rivals for a playoff role at the end of the season, courtesy of the disruption caused by Cyclone Alfred in March.  However, they are following the same trajectory that hindered the club in past years whenever they appeared to be nearing their potential. As a consequence, that Hardwick gesture should be considered as more than a mere behavioral lapse. It’s a distress signal that does not bode well for the Queenslanders. While the Suns are eager to remain in contention with the top eight, Melbourne faces its own crisis, which is similarly deep-seated but in a much different way. After recovering from a disappointing start to the season and nearing a return to respectability among its peer clubs, the Demons have experienced a decline in status, driven by the fact that while their form has been reasonable (see their performance against the ladder leader in the Kings Birthday match), their conversion in front of goal is poor enough to rank last in the competition. Furthermore, their opponents find them exceptionally easy to score against. As a result, they have effectively eliminated themselves from the finals race and are again positioned to finish in the bottom half of the ladder.

      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 4 replies
  • NON-MFC: Round 15

    As the Demons head into their Bye Round, it's time to turn our attention to the other matches being played. Which teams are you tipping this week? And which results would be most favourable for the Demons if we can manage to turn our season around? Follow all the non-Melbourne games here and join the conversation as the ladder continues to take shape.

      • Like
    • 284 replies
  • REPORT: Port Adelaide

    Of course, it’s not the backline, you might argue and you would probably be right. It’s the boot studder (do they still have them?), the midfield, the recruiting staff, the forward line, the kicking coach, the Board, the interchange bench, the supporters, the folk at Casey, the head coach and the club psychologist  It’s all of them and all of us for having expectations that were sufficiently high to have believed three weeks ago that a restoration of the Melbourne team to a position where we might still be in contention for a finals berth when the time for the midseason bye arrived. Now let’s look at what happened over the period of time since Melbourne overwhelmed the Sydney Swans at the MCG in late May when it kicked 8.2 to 5.3 in the final quarter (and that was after scoring 3.8 to two straight goals in the second term). 

      • Clap
      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 3 replies
  • CASEY: Essendon

    Casey’s unbeaten run was extended for at least another fortnight after the Demons overran a persistent Essendon line up by 29 points at ETU Stadium in Port Melbourne last night. After conceding the first goal of the evening, Casey went on a scoring spree from about ten minutes in, with five unanswered majors with its fleet of midsized runners headed by the much improved Paddy Cross who kicked two in quick succession and livewire Ricky Mentha who also kicked an early goal. Leading the charge was recruit of the year, Riley Bonner while Bailey Laurie continued his impressive vein of form. With Tom Campbell missing from the lineup, Will Verrall stepped up to the plate demonstrating his improvement under the veteran ruckman’s tutelage. The Demons were looking comfortable for much of the second quarter and held a 25-point lead until the Bombers struck back with two goals in the shadows of half time. On the other side of the main break their revival continued with first three goals of the half. Harry Sharp, who had been quiet scrambled in the Demons’ first score of the third term to bring the margin back to a single point at the 17 minute mark and the game became an arm-wrestle for the remainder of the quarter and into the final moments of the last.

      • Clap
    • 0 replies
  • PREGAME: Gold Coast

    The Demons have the Bye next week but then are on the road once again when they come up against the Gold Coast Suns on the Gold Coast in what could be a last ditch effort to salvage their season. Who comes in and who comes out?

      • Thanks
    • 315 replies
  • PODCAST: Port Adelaide

    The Demonland Podcast will air LIVE on Monday, 16th June @ 8:00pm. Join Binman, George & I as we dissect the Dees disappointing loss to the Power.
    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
    • 33 replies