Jump to content

Farewell Mitch Hannan

Demonland
Demonland
in Melbourne Demons

Featured Replies

2 hours ago, Pollyanna said:

You seem to be totally ignoring that the Dogs need points for JUH.  There is no way they're trading 41 unless they have sufficient points from somewhere.

The dogs will need about 2400 points, to cover the bid.  There current first pick is about 1150 points, if we can get a mid 30s pick for Preuss, plus our pick 25 we could offer these and hannan for dogs first round and future third round.  Offer north this future 3rd round for Brown

  • Quote
    • Like 1
     
    8 minutes ago, drdrake said:

    The dogs will need about 2400 points, to cover the bid.  There current first pick is about 1150 points, if we can get a mid 30s pick for Preuss, plus our pick 25 we could offer these and hannan for dogs first round and future third round.  Offer north this future 3rd round for Brown

    In that deal they'd want enough points to cover JUH 2400pts PLUS Hannan to make it worth their while. AFAIK 25 + 30 is nowhere near enough.

  • Quote
    27 minutes ago, drdrake said:

    The dogs will need about 2400 points, to cover the bid.  There current first pick is about 1150 points, if we can get a mid 30s pick for Preuss, plus our pick 25 we could offer these and hannan for dogs first round and future third round.  Offer north this future 3rd round for Brown

    Yes I am trying to get through this. Assume dogs need to match #1 discount for JUH.  They have pick 14 (1141) then use picks 26 (729) 30 (629) off the Dees to collate enough points. Dees would want to trade Hannan and 26 and 30 for Dogs 2021 1st round and 3rd round.  It’s all too complex but Dogs might be tempted. 

  • Quote
    •  
    3 hours ago, Pollyanna said:

    In that deal they'd want enough points to cover JUH 2400pts PLUS Hannan to make it worth their while. AFAIK 25 + 30 is nowhere near enough.

    We don't need to cover the 2400 points only the value of pick 14, 1141 points.  As Spirit of Norm Smith mentioned pick 25 and 30 gives them 1358 points so really we should be asking for pick 14 and future second round pick for picks 25 and 30 plus Hannan.  If you use points as a basis say Dogs have pick 30 next year that we get 629 points, take off the 217 points we gave them as overs it will work out to be equal  to  pick 41 in next years draft.  Pick 41 is about right trade for Hannan.  

    It enables the dogs to get closer to the 2400 points they need. They are a mile off having enough points to cover the bid, as it stands now they only have 1773 points, they need to get more picks in, you don't really want your first round next year being effected unless they have a F/S pick next year.

  • Quote
    45 minutes ago, drdrake said:

    We don't need to cover the 2400 points only the value of pick 14, 1141 points.  As Spirit of Norm Smith mentioned pick 25 and 30 gives them 1358 points so really we should be asking for pick 14 and future second round pick for picks 25 and 30 plus Hannan.  If you use points as a basis say Dogs have pick 30 next year that we get 629 points, take off the 217 points we gave them as overs it will work out to be equal  to  pick 41 in next years draft.  Pick 41 is about right trade for Hannan.  

    It enables the dogs to get closer to the 2400 points they need. They are a mile off having enough points to cover the bid, as it stands now they only have 1773 points, they need to get more picks in, you don't really want your first round next year being effected unless they have a F/S pick next year.

    Yes you're right we don't need to cover the entire 2400 for just 14 but they will want to get there with whatever deal they do that includes that pick because that's their main leverage and they'll need to make a verydecent points profit, otherwise just use it and get a 2nd or some 3rds elsewhere.

    They'll want a deal that goes close to making up that 600 point deficit.

    Edited by Pollyanna

  • Quote

    56 minutes ago, Pollyanna said:

    Yes you're right we don't need to cover the entire 2400 for just 14 but they will want to get there with whatever deal they do that includes that pick because that's their main leverage and they'll need to make a verydecent points profit, otherwise just use it and get a 2nd or some 3rds elsewhere.

    They'll want a deal that goes close to making up that 600 point deficit.

    It is us trading them a player not the other way around.  To make up their points they need to trade a player, no club will offer the overs they need to make up points, the deal mentioned gives the 217 more points then there current pick is worth.

  • Quote
    6 hours ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

    Given that we're going to get bugger all for him, do we just delist him and let the Dogs pick him up for free as a delisted free agency.

    Don't we need to reduce our list size anyway?

    Except that MFC have offered Mitch a contract for 2 years. The dogs upped the ante by offering 3 so it isn't obvious that we planned to send hime to the draft. On the other hand Oscar was not offered a contract and may well end up in the pre season draft.

  • Quote

    I think what I'd be trying to do is:

    26 +  68/69 + Hannan for a future first.

    Why? Because the Dogs need points this year but not next year. Let's say that their first round pick next year is the same (ie, 14). That equates to them giving up approximately pick 44 for Hannan, but crucially it allows the Dogs to increase their draft points this year by 788. That will be important given that they need to use about 2000 for JUH. 

    Importantly for us, it also allows us to have a pick in a much more valuable draft (ie, next year). A lot of teams want future picks and we'll have two first rounders which, more than anything, gives us a lot of currency for trade both this year and next.

  • Quote
    • Like 8
     

    How about bombers send first to us, future first to doggies.  We send Hannan and a second rounder to Doggies. Doggies send Dunkley to bombers? A few scrappy back pick exchanges between bombers and doggies to increase points.

  • Quote
    16 hours ago, Axis of Bob said:

    I think what I'd be trying to do is:

    26 +  68/69 + Hannan for a future first.

    Why? Because the Dogs need points this year but not next year. Let's say that their first round pick next year is the same (ie, 14). That equates to them giving up approximately pick 44 for Hannan, but crucially it allows the Dogs to increase their draft points this year by 788. That will be important given that they need to use about 2000 for JUH. 

    Importantly for us, it also allows us to have a pick in a much more valuable draft (ie, next year). A lot of teams want future picks and we'll have two first rounders which, more than anything, gives us a lot of currency for trade both this year and next.

    The Dogs dont want picks this year (early picks anyway) so I cant see them do it for future first, IMO they are more likely to do a similar deal for this years first.

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    17 hours ago, Axis of Bob said:

    I think what I'd be trying to do is:

    26 +  68/69 + Hannan for a future first.

    Why? Because the Dogs need points this year but not next year. Let's say that their first round pick next year is the same (ie, 14). That equates to them giving up approximately pick 44 for Hannan, but crucially it allows the Dogs to increase their draft points this year by 788. That will be important given that they need to use about 2000 for JUH. 

    Importantly for us, it also allows us to have a pick in a much more valuable draft (ie, next year). A lot of teams want future picks and we'll have two first rounders which, more than anything, gives us a lot of currency for trade both this year and next.

    Sounds good AB, what are the chances of it happening?

  • Quote
    On 10/14/2020 at 5:23 AM, Travy14 said:

    Offer him and Hunt for picks,  which we should chuck at Collingwood for Phillips, who should be top priority. Close second being Brown/Cameron/Hogan/Mihochek.

    We don't need Hannan and Hunt.  We have Melksham, Fritcsh, Smith, Vanders, Harmes who can play that role. 

    I would have Hunt any day over Melk. Unfortunately for this great player his best footy is behind him.. Hunt is still young and has a future.  I am not impressed with Smith either as I feel he is another O Mc .

  • Quote
    • Like 2

    I like this bolded bit from Sam Power of Bulldogs:

    https://www.afl.com.au/news/523866/dogs-still-want-dunkley-but-open-to-different-situations-

    • Melbourne forward Mitch Hannan: "It's really encouraging he has indicated he wants to come … but we've got a bit to work through there. That's one we'll work through over the next week."

    Hopefully we can something decent for losing Hannan.

  • Quote
    22 hours ago, drdrake said:

    We don't need to cover the 2400 points only the value of pick 14, 1141 points.  As Spirit of Norm Smith mentioned pick 25 and 30 gives them 1358 points so really we should be asking for pick 14 and future second round pick for picks 25 and 30 plus Hannan.  If you use points as a basis say Dogs have pick 30 next year that we get 629 points, take off the 217 points we gave them as overs it will work out to be equal  to  pick 41 in next years draft.  Pick 41 is about right trade for Hannan.  

    It enables the dogs to get closer to the 2400 points they need. They are a mile off having enough points to cover the bid, as it stands now they only have 1773 points, they need to get more picks in, you don't really want your first round next year being effected unless they have a F/S pick next year.

    I'm really glad Victoria seems to have got its Covid under control. That allows the supercomputer which was being used to do all that modelling to be given back to the AFL to allow these deals to be properly assessed and calculated. 

  • Quote
    • Haha 2
    30 minutes ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

    I like this bolded bit from Sam Power of Bulldogs:

    https://www.afl.com.au/news/523866/dogs-still-want-dunkley-but-open-to-different-situations-

    • Melbourne forward Mitch Hannan: "It's really encouraging he has indicated he wants to come … but we've got a bit to work through there. That's one we'll work through over the next week."

    Hopefully we can something decent for losing Hannan.

    Just send them the YouTube link of the goal from the 2018 final against Geelong and we should get two first rounders for him.

  • Quote
    • Haha 1

    3 hours ago, Ohio USA - David said:

    I would have Hunt any day over Melk. Unfortunately for this great player his best footy is behind him.. Hunt is still young and has a future.  I am not impressed with Smith either as I feel he is another O Mc .

    What role Travy 14 ? HFF?  or HBF ?
    rather a difference in skill and output between Fritsch and Smith at Zhang forward.

    Also Harmes Vanders and Melkshske  in 2020. All  are about the same for form in decline.
    Keep Hunty Who can kick Multiple  goals and get an early/ mid 3 Rd rounder fir Mitch.

     

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    20 hours ago, Wiseblood said:

    Just send them the YouTube link of the goal from the 2018 final against Geelong and we should get two first rounders for him.

    No that would be Collingwood, they have mastered the over paying trick.

  • Quote
    On 11/6/2020 at 2:54 PM, 58er said:

    What role Travy 14 ? HFF?  or HBF ?
    rather a difference in skill and output between Fritsch and Smith at Zhang forward.

    Also Harmes Vanders and Melkshske  in 2020. All  are about the same for form in decline.
    Keep Hunty Who can kick Multiple  goals and get an early/ mid 3 Rd rounder fir Mitch.

     

    Wasn't me who said that.  I wouldn't have Hunt or melksham in our b22.

    We are shocking by foot going inside 50, we shoukd be going hard at phillips. Or polec. Hunt has been at the club for 7 years now.  He is what he is, handy depth but that's it.

    Smith shouldn't have been given another contract 

  • Quote
    • Like 2
    On 11/5/2020 at 11:24 PM, 58er said:

    What role Travy 14 ? HFF?  or HBF ?
    rather a difference in skill and output between Fritsch and Smith at Zhang forward.

    Also Harmes Vanders and Melkshske  in 2020. All  are about the same for form in decline.
    Keep Hunty Who can kick Multiple  goals and get an early/ mid 3 Rd rounder fir Mitch.

     

    well said...agree. Hunt has years left compared with Melk ( who I really like as a player but every player has their Big day in retirement )

  • Quote
    2 hours ago, Ohio USA - David said:

    well said...agree. Hunt has years left compared with Melk ( who I really like as a player but every player has their Big day in retirement )

    Melksham this year was very ineffectual. I hope if he gets a game next year it's because his form warrants it, same with Jones if he deserves a game he might make it to 300. We must stop picking players who aren't performing regardless of whether they are mates with the coach or if they are close to a milestone. It's a team game, the team comes first.

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    On 11/7/2020 at 6:52 AM, Travy14 said:

    Wasn't me who said that.  I wouldn't have Hunt or Melksham in our b22.

    We are shocking by foot going inside 50, we should be going hard at Phillips. Or Polec. Hunt has been at the club for 7 years now.  He is what he is, handy depth but that's it.

    Smith shouldn't have been given another contract 

    Smith should be delisted. 

    His AF scores in 2020 were : (by round) 17,20,20,14,28,26,26, for a total of 151

    Hunts AF scores in 2020 were : (By round ) 54,27,30,15,36,53, for a total of 215  for less games.  

    Frankly Smith is turning into another O Mc and offers very little to the Team structure of the future

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    My guess is the trade will be Hannan + 68 for a future 3rd pick.

    68 should come into the 50's and provide the doggies with more points this year for their academy selection while a future 3rd gives us trading flexibility as replacing that future 3rd round pick we traded to the lions allows us to trade our future first if we so wish.

  • Quote
    • Like 3
    On 11/7/2020 at 9:52 PM, Travy14 said:

    Wasn't me who said that.  I wouldn't have Hunt or melksham in our b22.

    We are shocking by foot going inside 50, we shoukd be going hard at phillips. Or polec. Hunt has been at the club for 7 years now.  He is what he is, handy depth but that's it.

    Smith shouldn't have been given another contract 

    Tracy 14 you said no Hunt or Hannan on 14/10. 
    then said Vanders  Smith  Fritsch Melky could all play HForward role 

    I am saying Fritsch 's talent is far better than Smiths and the rest are in decline.

    Plus retain Hunt who can kick multiple goals from HF and I think will improve in 2021.

  • Quote
    •  
    4 hours ago, Ohio USA - David said:

    Smith should be delisted. 

    His AF scores in 2020 were : (by round) 17,20,20,14,28,26,26, for a total of 151

    Hunts AF scores in 2020 were : (By round ) 54,27,30,15,36,53, for a total of 215  for less games.  

    Frankly Smith is turning into another O Mc and offers very little to the Team structure of the future

    AF scores are not a sound basis for comparison particularly when they are playing different roles.

  • Quote
    • Like 5
    • Sad 1
    1 hour ago, Pollyanna said:

    AF scores are not a sound basis for comparison particularly when they are playing different roles.

    And particularly when fantasy points are given for goals which, generally, are not available to defenders.

  • Quote
    • Like 2

    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

    • NON-MFC: Round 05

      Gather Round is here, kicking off with a Thursday night blockbuster as Adelaide faces Geelong. The Crows will be out for redemption after a controversial loss last week. Saturday starts with the Magpies taking on the Swans. Collingwood will be eager to cement their spot in the top eight, while Sydney is hot on their heels. In the Barossa Valley, two rising sides go head-to-head in a fascinating battle to prove they're the real deal. Later, Carlton and West Coast face off at Adelaide Oval, both desperate to notch their first win of the season. The action then shifts to Norwood, where the undefeated Lions will aim to keep their streak alive against the Bulldogs. Sunday’s games begin in the Barossa with Richmond up against Fremantle. In Norwood, the Saints will be looking to take a scalp when they come up against the Giants. The round concludes with a fiery rematch of last year's semi-final, as the Hawks seek revenge for their narrow loss to Port Adelaide. Who are you tipping this week and what are the best results for the Demons besides us winning?

      • 10 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • CASEY: Geelong

      There was a time in the second quarter of the game at the Cattery on Friday afternoon when the Casey Demons threatened to take the game apart against the Cats. The Demons had been well on top early but were struggling to convert their ascendancy over the ground until Tom Fullarton’s burst of three goals in the space of eight minutes on the way to a five goal haul and his best game for the club since arriving from Brisbane at the end of 2023. He was leading, marking and otherwise giving his opponents a merry dance as Casey grabbed a three goal lead in the blink of an eye. Fullarton has now kicked ten goals in Casey’s three matches and, with Melbourne’s forward conversion woes, he is definitely in with a chance to get his first game with the club in next week’s Gather Round in Adelaide. Despite the tall forward’s efforts - he finished with 19 disposals and eight marks and had four hit outs as back up to Will Verrall in the second half - it wasn’t enough as Geelong reigned in the lead through persistent attacks and eventually clawed their way to the lead early in the last and held it till they achieved the end aim of victory.

      • 0 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • REPORT: Geelong

      I was disappointed to hear Goody say at his post match presser after the team’s 39 point defeat against Geelong that "we're getting high quality entry, just poor execution" because Melbourne’s problems extend far beyond that after its 0 - 4 start to the 2025 football season. There are clearly problems with poor execution, some of which were evident well before the current season and were in play when the Demons met the Cats in early May last year and beat them in a near top-of-the-table clash that saw both sides sitting comfortably in the top four after round eight. Since that game, the Demons’ performances have been positively Third World with only five wins in 19 games with a no longer majestic midfield and a dysfunctional forward line that has become too easy for opposing coaches to counter. This is an area of their game that is currently being played out as if they were all completely panic-stricken.

      • 0 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • PREGAME: Essendon

      Facing the very real and daunting prospect of starting the season with five straight losses, the Demons head to South Australia for the annual Gather Round, where they’ll take on the Bombers in search of their first win of the year. Who comes in, and who comes out?

      • 212 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • NON-MFC: Round 04

      Round 4 kicks off with a blockbuster on Thursday night as traditional rivals Collingwood and Carlton clash at the MCG, with the Magpies looking to assert themselves as early-season contenders and the Blues seeking their first win of the season. Saturday opens with Gold Coast hosting Adelaide, a key test for the Suns as they aim to back up their big win last week, while the Crows will be looking to keep their perfect record intact. Reigning wooden spooners Richmond have the daunting task of facing reigning premiers Brisbane at the ‘G and the Lions will be eager to reaffirm their premiership credentials after a patchy start. Saturday night sees North Melbourne take on Sydney at Marvel Stadium, with the Swans looking to build on their first win of the season last week against a rebuilding Roos outfit. Sunday’s action begins with GWS hosting West Coast at ENGIE Stadium, a game that could get ugly very early for the visitors. Port Adelaide vs St Kilda at Adelaide Oval looms as a interesting clash, with both clubs form being very hard to read. The round wraps up with Fremantle taking on the Western Bulldogs at Optus Stadium in what could be a fierce contest between two sides with top-eight ambitions. Who are you tipping this week and what are the best results for the Demons besides us winning?

      • 273 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • PODCAST: Geelong

      The Demonland Podcast will air LIVE on Monday, 7th April @ the all new time of 8:00pm. Join Binman, George & I as we dissect another Demons loss at Kardinia Park to the Cats in the Round 04. 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.

        • Thanks
        • Like
      • 62 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland
    View All