Jump to content

Another Season for Mitch Brown


Demonland

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, DeeSpencer said:

So if the list is turning over so much next year then why not get a head start on looking for players to fill those spots now?

The list didn’t turn over last year and now hasn’t this year. So for 2 years we’ve been kicking it down the road. If we didn’t keep the Wagnii we could’ve had a better replacement for them in hand.

Free agents. More Tomlinson and Byrnes? Great!  No first round pick either.

I’m hardly a Hunt and I’m surprised we gave him 2 years, who else wanted him? But at least he has raw speed and age still on his side. If he did put it together he’d be a player. I’d rather gamble on upside that keep a player who won’t perform against good opposition and is a long way down the order. 

I don’t think anyone was saying you were DS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/18/2020 at 4:39 PM, DeeSpencer said:

10 replies and all of them positive. You're all nuts.

He was picked twice and dropped twice before he was picked a 3rd time and the season finished  before he had time to be dropped again.

He's soft. He doesn't do the number 1 non negotiable for any key forward which is to bring the ball to ground. He doesn't defend either. He will lead up and take nothing marks on the wing but that's not a key forwards job and it means he's not where we need a big man which is competing for long kicks.

Ben Brown, Weid, Jackson and even Petty should all be ahead of him. Which means he's 5th in line, a position we could easily cover with Tom McDonald if things get that desperate, which is very unlikely.

We'll get to the end of the season and he'll retire after maybe 2-5 meaningless games if we have a terrible run with injury and everyone will wonder why we don't have the right depth of outside runners or skilled flanker types. And this is why. We're just burning through list spots on nothing footballers rather than churning the list looking for that diamond in the rough. 

You are really becoming a negative so and so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like him no star but he can give us some back up when times get tough. He deserves to be on the list and 1 more year won't hurt hard to see him get another year though.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, DeeSpencer said:

 

We aren’t turning the list over and it’s just killing our 15-25 depth by not finding more guys. Instead we have these guys who are 30-35 battlers just wasting space. 

Agree with this. We are anything but ruthless when it comes to list management. One of M. Brown or TMac should have gone when we knew B. Brown was coming.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


4 hours ago, dee-tox said:

Agree with this. We are anything but ruthless when it comes to list management. One of M. Brown or TMac should have gone when we knew B. Brown was coming.

We tried to trade TMac out.  No takers...so how do you move him on then?

The list management dilemma is: is M.Brown probably better than pick 69 in a compromised draft?  Because that is what becomes the option if we were to delist him.  We have certainty about Brown, not about such a low pick, and if that pick fails, we have to keep him on the list for 2 years. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, DeeSpencer said:

A nice pick up with a mid 2nd round pick. Why hasn’t Jason Taylor been given a serious chance with the rookie draft and a good deep haul of picks for years now?

He can find more Harmes’ and Vanders but we won’t give him the picks. Instead it’s Mitch Brown’s 

#LetJTcook 

The inference from your post is that Taylor has had to do his job with one hand tied behind his back.

Isn't the alternative possible? Wouldn't Taylor be consulted on list management decisions and if he believes he can do better with the rookie draft and a "good deep haul of picks" than the trading strategy we've used, wouldn't his opinion carry some weight? Do we know he's not consulted, or, if he is, that he's ignored as you seem to imply?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, george_on_the_outer said:

We tried to trade TMac out.  No takers...so how do you move him on then?

The list management dilemma is: is M.Brown probably better than pick 69 in a compromised draft?  Because that is what becomes the option if we were to delist him.  We have certainty about Brown, not about such a low pick, and if that pick fails, we have to keep him on the list for 2 years. 

Yep, George I get this but from a list management postion we have M Brown, B Brown, tMac, Weed, Jackson and Petty as tall forwards. You can probably only play two at a time in this day and age, even though TMac and Petty can be tall back reserves and Jackson can ruck for short periods. How many tall forward reserves can stay before it starts impacting your list? We need flankers with skills. I'd rather take the punt with a diamond in the rough and lessen your salary cap than keep six guys fighting for two spots...

 

Edited by dee-tox
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, dee-tox said:

Yep, George I get this but from a list management postion we have M Brown, B Brown, tMac, Weed, Jackson and Petty as tall forwards. You can probably only play two at a time in this day and age, even though TMac and Petty can be tall back reserves and Jackson can ruck for short periods. How many tall forward reserves can stay before it starts impacting your list? We need flankers with skills. I'd rather take the punt with a diamond in the rough and lessen your salary cap than keep six guys fighting for two spots...

 

yep Detox

You assume of course that TMac and Petty will come back 

That, at this point, is purely conjecture in my opinion

There is currently only hope that TMac and Petty will figure next year

If you are sure that they will that's great,but for me, I would rather assume the worst and as the club has continue with Mitch as a back up

Makes sense to me!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, dee-tox said:

Yep, George I get this but from a list management postion we have M Brown, B Brown, tMac, Weed, Jackson and Petty as tall forwards. You can probably only play two at a time in this day and age, even though TMac and Petty can be tall back reserves and Jackson can ruck for short periods. How many tall forward reserves can stay before it starts impacting your list? We need flankers with skills. I'd rather take the punt with a diamond in the rough and lessen your salary cap than keep six guys fighting for two spots...

 

You're presuming that the likes of McDonald and Petty are only playing forward.  I'd be very surprised if TMc in particular doesn't spend all of the preseason with the backs, and Petty might just do the same.

And with regards lessening the salary cap - Mitch Brown would be costing us bugger all.  Him being on our list isn't impacting much at all.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/19/2020 at 6:01 AM, Radar Detector said:

Seems to be an unpopular opinion, but I agree with much of this. I think Mitch Brown has played a role when required but with Ben Brown coming in and TMac staying, I expected him to be an immediate delist. That he isn’t means that we have one less place for a runner which is even more significant in a year of declining list spots.
 

Personally, I find the fact that we couldn’t find a spot for Tom Phillips but are holding onto this type of player totally baffling.

Do you know that we didn't make a play for Phillips?  Maybe Tom didn't want to come to us.  Maybe we looked at his salary and thought that we could find better value through the draft this year.  Maybe we are happy to use 2021 to see how the likes of Baker, Rivers, Sparrow, Jordan, Hore and Neita come on.

I find it baffling when people get baffled by list management decisions that they have no idea about.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Chazz said:

 

And with regards lessening the salary cap - Mitch Brown would be costing us bugger all.  Him being on our list isn't impacting much at all.

Fair enough and good points raised but even 200 k can make a difference in overall salary cap. We need to keep Oliver, Petracca, etc next year...

M. Brown is maybe on 300k?

In tMac's case he is reported to be on 700k. 

There is money to be saved. It all adds up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, dee-tox said:

Yep, George I get this but from a list management postion we have M Brown, B Brown, tMac, Weed, Jackson and Petty as tall forwards. You can probably only play two at a time in this day and age, even though TMac and Petty can be tall back reserves and Jackson can ruck for short periods. How many tall forward reserves can stay before it starts impacting your list? We need flankers with skills. I'd rather take the punt with a diamond in the rough and lessen your salary cap than keep six guys fighting for two spots...

idk why everyone is so outraged by keeping mbrown, petty is absolutely going back next year potentially tmac too and tomlinson back to a wing over pre season and into the opening month. and if we delist mbrown we're going to have to draft a mature ruck anyway so we may as well follow the st kilda model of playing two flexible ruck/forwards instead particularly bcoz we need to manage jacksons load in the ruck

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, dee-tox said:

Fair enough and good points raised but even 200 k can make a difference in overall salary cap. We need to keep Oliver, Petracca, etc next year...

M. Brown is maybe on 300k?

In tMac's case he is reported to be on 700k. 

There is money to be saved. It all adds up.

Which top-line players have we lost because of Brown's 1 year extension?  Their salary, as well as Brown's, has already been worked out for 2021.  It's a non issue.

They tried to save money by offering TMc up, but there was no interest in him.  And it's actually got nothing to do with the fors/againsts of re-signing Brown.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, george_on_the_outer said:

We tried to trade TMac out.  No takers...so how do you move him on then?

The list management dilemma is: is M.Brown probably better than pick 69 in a compromised draft?  Because that is what becomes the option if we were to delist him.  We have certainty about Brown, not about such a low pick, and if that pick fails, we have to keep him on the list for 2 years. 

Brown is a rookie, we can replace him with a player on a 1 year deal 

3 hours ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

The inference from your post is that Taylor has had to do his job with one hand tied behind his back.

Isn't the alternative possible? Wouldn't Taylor be consulted on list management decisions and if he believes he can do better with the rookie draft and a "good deep haul of picks" than the trading strategy we've used, wouldn't his opinion carry some weight? Do we know he's not consulted, or, if he is, that he's ignored as you seem to imply?

 

Valid point. Taylor has spoken in year previous about the depths of various drafts. But he was at the Pies when they nailed some rookie picks. The Tigers recent run has come from some great rookie finds.

At this stage he went 3 from 3 on top picks last year and at this stage he’s looking at taking 3 of 4 solid picks in this draft. 
 

Ben Brown nearly got on the Pies list before he played in the VFL. Fritsch and Lockhart were bought to Casey for a reason. Same with big Oscar McInerny. JT would have a deep list of high upside prospects, I want to see more dice rolls 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I generally agree with @DeeSpencer it seems a waste of a list spot keeping Mitch Brown on.  We've brought on Ben Brown, exited OMac, retained TMac and hopefully Petty is fit.  Mitch Brown seems superfluous and if we're relying on him we'll already be in hard place.

Unless they plan on trying to use him as ruck back-up which would be a big ask as @Hannibal Inc. has pointed out - he's a long way off being competitive.  I'd prefer we rookie listed some genuine State league ruck back-up.

The other factor that we don't have insight into is the player dynamics off-field - as a mature head he may be a steady, calming, advisory influence who pays his way off-field at a cheap price a la Jetts and Jones.

In that light for me it's not that big of a deal and definitely not evidence of a cultural deficit at the club.  Look TMac's and OMac's response to being open for trade and delisted - they both commented that the club was very supportive and professional - that's 100x more culturally important than ruthlessly cutting player number 35 on the list.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think experienced depth players like Mitch Brown are worth retaining on minimum wages. Particularly as we don't know the length of the season yet and there are question marks over the fitness of Petty and TMac. Our KPP and ruck depth is Gawn, Jackson, Ben Brown, TMac, Weideman, May, Lever, Petty and Mitch Brown. Plus potentially Bradtke and Tomlinson and Hore and Smith. That doesn't seem excessive for 6-7 spots in the 22, albeit we may draft more.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't mind Mitch, like most on here I don't think he'll play much unless we cop injuries but he's a good depth option to have for another season. You have to admire a guy who is willing to bust himself for another gruelling pre-season and potentially play one of the toughest sports in the world for not much money...what would he be on, $80-90K base? Would be about the lowest paid 30 year old in the comp.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Ron Burgundy said:

Not best 22 though.

 

Name your 22 for the exercise. If Tmac is out someone is in right? And Petty is injured and the jury is out on Weiderman.
So why not keep Mitch for insurance

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/19/2020 at 8:18 PM, loges said:

Did the ball get to full forward?

My point exactly. He should have moved himself into the midfield or defense and taken on some responsibility as captain, rather than hide in the forward line

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Demonland Forums  

  • Match Previews, Reports & Articles  

    REDEEMING by Meggs

    It was such a balmy spring evening for this mid-week BNCA Pink Lady match at our favourite venue Ikon Park between two teams that had not won a game since round one.   After last week’s insipid bombing, the DeeArmy banner correctly deemanded that our players ‘go in hard, go in strong, go in fighting’, and girl they sure did!   The first quarter goals by Alyssa Bannan and Alyssia Pisano were simply stunning, and it was 4 goals to nil by half-time.   Kudos to Mick Stinear.

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    AFLW Melbourne Demons

    REDEEM by Meggs

    How will Mick Stinear and his dwindling list of fit and available Demons respond to last week’s 65-point capitulation to the Bombers, the team’s biggest loss in history?   As a minimum he will expect genuine effort from all of his players when Melbourne takes on the GWS Giants at Ikon Park this Thursday.  Happily, the ground remains a favourite Melbourne venue of players and spectators alike and will provide an opportunity for the Demons to redeem themselves. Injuries to star play

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    AFLW Melbourne Demons

    EASYBEATS by Meggs

    A beautiful sunny Friday afternoon, with a light breeze and a strong Windy Hill crowd set the scene, inviting one team to seize the day and take the important four points on offer. For the Demons it was not a good Friday, easily beaten by an all-time largest losing margin of 65 points.   Essendon threw themselves into action today, winning most of the contests and had three early goals with Daria Bannister on fire.  In contrast the Demons were dropping marks, hesitant in close and comm

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    AFLW Melbourne Demons 9

    DEFUSE THE BOMBERS by Meggs

    Last Saturday’s crushing loss to Fremantle, after being three goals ahead at three quarter time, should be motivation enough to bounce back for this very winnable Round 5 clash at Windy Hill. A first-time venue for the Melbourne AFLW team, this should be a familiar suburban, windy, footy environment for the players.   Essendon were brave and competitive last week against ladder leader Adelaide at Sturt’s home ground. A familiar name, Maddison Gay, was the Bombers best player with

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    AFLW Melbourne Demons 33

    BLOW THE SIREN by Meggs

    Fremantle hosted the Demons on a sunny 20-degree Saturdayafternoon winning the toss and electing to defend in the first quarter against the 3-goal breeze favouring the Parry Street end. There was method here, as this would give the comeback queens, the Dockers, last use of the breeze. The Melbourne Coach had promised an improved performance, and we did start better than previous weeks, winning the ball out of the middle, using the breeze advantage and connecting to the forwards. 

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    AFLW Melbourne Demons

    GETAWAY by Meggs

    Calling all fit players. Expect every available Melbourne player to board the Virgin cross-continent flight to Perth for this Round 4 clash on Saturday afternoon at Fremantle Oval. It promises to be keenly contested, though Fremantle is the bookies clear favourite.  If we lose, finals could be remoter than Rottnest Island especially following on from the Dees 50-point dismantlement by North Melbourne last Sunday.  There are 8 remaining matches, over the next 7 weeks.  To Meggs’

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    AFLW Melbourne Demons

    DRUBBING by Meggs

    With Casey Fields basking in sunshine, an enthusiastic throng of young Demons fans formed a guard of honour for the evergreen and much admired 75-gamer Paxy Paxman. As the home team ran out to play, Paxy’s banner promised that the Demons would bounce back from last week’s loss to Brisbane and reign supreme.   Disappointingly, the Kangaroos dominated the match to win by 50 points, but our Paxy certainly did her bit.  She was clearly our best player, sweeping well in defence.

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    AFLW Melbourne Demons 4

    GARNER STRENGTH by Meggs

    In keeping with our tough draw theme, Week 3 sees Melbourne take on flag favourites, North Melbourne, at Casey Fields this Sunday at 1:05pm.  The weather forecast looks dry, a coolish 14 degrees and will be characteristically gusty.  Remember when Casey Fields was considered our fortress?  The Demons have lost two of their past three matches at the Field of Dreams, so opposition teams commute down the Princes Highway with more optimism these days.  The Dees held the highe

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    AFLW Melbourne Demons 1

    ALLY’S FIELDS by Meggs

    It was a sunny morning at Casey Fields, as Demon supporters young and old formed a guard of honour for fan favourite and 50-gamer Alyssa Bannan.  Banno’s banner stated the speedster was the ‘fastest 50 games’ by an AFLW player ever.   For Dees supporters, today was not our day and unfortunately not for Banno either. A couple of opportunities emerged for our number 6 but alas there was no sizzle.   Brisbane atoned for last week’s record loss to North Melbourne, comprehensively out

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    AFLW Melbourne Demons 1
  • Tell a friend

    Love Demonland? Tell a friend!

×
×
  • Create New...