Jump to content

Trade and Free Agency rumours

Random Task
Random Task
in Melbourne Demons

Featured Replies

  On 08/10/2022 at 10:24, McQueen said:

The AFL just now [censored] canning the idea of letting the Power use their pics - their future pics - is just them manipulating the competition again…. Jason Horne Francis is going to be made an example of.

Is this the beginning of the AFL trying to place more contract emphasis on high draft picks maintaining their obligations when they sign on the dotted line? 

You cannot change Rules Mid Trading Season. That is not on

  • Quote
    • Thanks 1
     
      On 08/10/2022 at 11:18, Sir Why You Little said:

    You cannot change Rules Mid Trading Season. That is not on

    Contrary to your response… that’s exactly what they do. 😕

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    • Angry 1
      On 08/10/2022 at 11:39, McQueen said:

    Contrary to your response… that’s exactly what they do. 😕

    Doesn’t make it right and it shouldn’t happen. 
    Amend the Rules at the end of Trading for next year. 
    i would guess Salary Dumping would have the AFL rather concerned right now, that could get right out of control 

  • Quote
    • Like 2
     
      On 08/10/2022 at 11:51, Sir Why You Little said:

    Doesn’t make it right and it shouldn’t happen. 
    Amend the Rules at the end of Trading for next year. 
    i would guess Salary Dumping would have the AFL rather concerned right now, that could get right out of control 

    Nothing is hard and fast. 
     

    But these DH’s are making this comp so contrived. 

  • Quote
    • Thanks 1
      On 08/10/2022 at 12:13, McQueen said:

    Nothing is hard and fast. 
     

    But these DH’s are making this comp so contrived. 

    Agreed. And we must call them out 

    Jeelong getting pick 7 is outrageous 

  • Quote
    • Like 1

      On 08/10/2022 at 12:50, Sir Why You Little said:

    Agreed. And we must call them out 

    Jeelong getting pick 7 is outrageous 

    They are taking on $1.6m for a player GC is happy to let go.

    I personally would not want that in our window. Yes, the pick is alluring but what other talent are they missing out on.

    They are obviously managing their cap well but they have no stars in their prime so of course they can.

    I hate Geelong but I don’t think there is nefarious play at work here; just tossers winning flags.

  • Quote
    • Like 2
      On 08/10/2022 at 11:51, Sir Why You Little said:

    Doesn’t make it right and it shouldn’t happen. 
    Amend the Rules at the end of Trading for next year. 
    i would guess Salary Dumping would have the AFL rather concerned right now, that could get right out of control 

    It was created by the AFL, and now it is being exploited by teams who can manipulate the salary cap.

    The bit that stinks the most for me (and yes the MFC will do it as well), is how the cats can take on a contract and smooth out the terms. The contract should be honoured in full under the current terms.

    If that is possible why is pick 7 required to be traded out? Its a joke. The AFL is a joke when it comes to integrity of the competition.

    Edited by Cheap Seats

  • Quote
    • Like 5
    • Thanks 1
      On 08/10/2022 at 12:13, McQueen said:

    Nothing is hard and fast. 
     

    But these DH’s are making this comp so contrived. 

    And then in a couple of months, will put the icing on the contrivance cake when they release their FIXture

  • Quote
    • Like 3
     

    Looks like we are taking only 2 players in the draft and only trading in Grundy.

    Unless someone else is traded out, we will need to delist one more, most likely Baker.

    It seems we are looking to give our young players at Casey every chance and maybe preparing to target someone next year, by making salary cap space and having extra future picks. 

  • Quote
    • Like 6
      On 08/10/2022 at 22:06, Redleg said:

    Looks like we are taking only 2 players in the draft and only trading in Grundy.

    Unless someone else is traded out, we will need to delist one more, most likely Baker.

    It seems we are looking to give our young players at Casey every chance and maybe preparing to target someone next year, by making salary cap space and having extra future picks. 

    I think we're currently on track there Red. 4 out of the primary (Jackson, Bedford, Rosman, Hunt), 2 in (Grundy and Chandler upgrade) and 2 picks

  • Quote
    • Like 5

      On 08/10/2022 at 22:32, old55 said:

    I think we're currently on track there Red. 4 out of the primary (Jackson, Bedford, Rosman, Hunt), 2 in (Grundy and Chandler upgrade) and 2 picks

    Yes,  I made a mistake thinking Turner needed an upgrade.

    I wonder if we would take Rosman as a rookie if available.

     

  • Quote
    • Like 1
      On 08/10/2022 at 22:41, Redleg said:

    Yes,  I made a mistake thinking Turner needed an upgrade.

    I wonder if we would take Rosman as a rookie if available.

     

    Doesn't sound like we will. We thanked him for his contribution 

  • Quote
    • Like 1
      On 08/10/2022 at 22:51, old55 said:

    Doesn't sound like we will. We thanked him for his contribution 

    Pity, he was one I thought could kick on and his height and versatility would have been handy.

  • Quote
    • Like 4
      On 08/10/2022 at 19:13, rpfc said:

     

    I hate Geelong but I don’t think there is nefarious play at work here; just tossers winning flags.

    It's not often you see nefarious and tossers in the same sentence.  An apt description nonetheless. 

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    • Haha 1
      On 08/10/2022 at 22:32, old55 said:

    I think we're currently on track there Red. 4 out of the primary (Jackson, Bedford, Rosman, Hunt), 2 in (Grundy and Chandler upgrade) and 2 picks

    I’m happy with this. There just isn’t the talent we need available this year. If a speedy skilful outside mid or a star key forward was available we would go for it. I’d clear Oskar Baker’s spot and draft a developing ruck, but otherwise, Grundy, 2 top picks and the Chandler upgrade and go to work on improving from within. 

  • Quote
    • Like 3

      On 08/10/2022 at 22:06, Redleg said:

    Looks like we are taking only 2 players in the draft and only trading in Grundy.

    Unless someone else is traded out, we will need to delist one more, most likely Baker.

    It seems we are looking to give our young players at Casey every chance and maybe preparing to target someone next year, by making salary cap space and having extra future picks. 

    So if we don't get Hunter, we'll re-sign Baker.

  • Quote
    • Like 1
      On 08/10/2022 at 21:48, Cheap Seats said:

    It was created by the AFL, and now it is being exploited by teams who can manipulate the salary cap.

    The bit that stinks the most for me (and yes the MFC will do it as well), is how the cats can take on a contract and smooth out the terms. The contract should be honoured in full under the current terms.

    If that is possible why is pick 7 required to be traded out? Its a joke. The AFL is a joke when it comes to integrity of the competition.

    .

    Edited by xman97
    Sorry, wrong person reply

  • Quote
      On 08/10/2022 at 22:06, Redleg said:

    Looks like we are taking only 2 players in the draft and only trading in Grundy.

    Unless someone else is traded out, we will need to delist one more, most likely Baker.

    It seems we are looking to give our young players at Casey every chance and maybe preparing to target someone next year, by making salary cap space and having extra future picks. 

    I've heard this a couple of times. Has anyone heard the club say we're only taking 2 picks?

    I'm genuinely interested, as I've got them taking 3 or 4! If Chandler takes a primary list spot without us replacing his list spot, we've then got only 42 instead of 43 players like we had this year. Before the covid rules, you had to have 44 players all up excluding Cat B rookies. I've heard the covid rules are being scrapped, but I haven't heard if clubs are allowed to have less than 44 from 2023. If clubs do have to go back to 44 players, we'd need to add 4 in the draft, 2 rookie and Grundy. If Baker gets delisted, that's another we have to add.

    That would make it 38 Primary List / 6 CAT A Rookies. 38 was the minimum primary list players you could have. You could also do 39 primary and 5 rookie, or 40 and 4 to make up that 44. 

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    I don't see under any circumstance why we should re-sign Baker.

    Another ruckman on our list is more important than a wingman/half back, who wasn't considered for selection this year.

  • Quote
    • Like 10
      On 08/10/2022 at 23:57, xman97 said:

    I've heard this a couple of times. Has anyone heard the club say we're only taking 2 picks?

    On Trade Radio, Cal said we would only be using two picks

  • Quote
    • Like 2

      On 09/10/2022 at 00:58, Matt said:

    On Trade Radio, Cal said we would only be using two picks

    Ok cheers. He's normally credible. It's either clubs can have less than the normal 44 players, or Cal is wrong in his calculations. Another scenario is the AFL has changed it's stance on the minimum 38 primary list spots. Maybe we're doing a 36 primary and 8 rookie. In that case, we'd be taking 4 in the rookie draft!

  • Quote
    • Like 2
      On 08/10/2022 at 19:13, rpfc said:

    They are taking on $1.6m for a player GC is happy to let go.

    I personally would not want that in our window. Yes, the pick is alluring but what other talent are they missing out on.

    They are obviously managing their cap well but they have no stars in their prime so of course they can.

    I hate Geelong but I don’t think there is nefarious play at work here; just tossers winning flags.

    Which they’re converting to a 4 x 600, a decent salary but maybe 250-300 per year extra. 
     

    The dodgy part of the deal to me is Geelong having inside knowledge of every teams cap as their CEO was at the league office a year ago.

    And of course the Suns continued incompetence. They could’ve split their pick 7 with us or another side and sent Bowes to market with pick 15 or so. Plenty of clubs would’ve still taken him. Yet they don’t seem to have any idea how to negotiate 

  • Quote
    • Like 7
      On 08/10/2022 at 19:13, rpfc said:

    They are taking on $1.6m for a player GC is happy to let go.

    I personally would not want that in our window. Yes, the pick is alluring but what other talent are they missing out on.

    They are obviously managing their cap well but they have no stars in their prime so of course they can.

    I hate Geelong but I don’t think there is nefarious play at work here; just tossers winning flags.

    Jeelong should not be in a position to be able to pay that money for a nobody player with their current list. 
    It cannot be above board. 

  • Quote
    • Like 3
    • Thanks 1
    • Vomit 1
     
      On 09/10/2022 at 01:32, Sir Why You Little said:

    Jeelong should not be in a position to be able to pay that money for a nobody player with their current list. 
    It cannot be above board. 

    Getting the OK to pay it as $400k per year for 4 makes it easy. Totally wrong for HQ to allow though.

  • Quote
    • Angry 1
      On 09/10/2022 at 01:51, Clintosaurus said:

    Getting the OK to pay it as $400k per year for 4 makes it easy. Totally wrong for HQ to allow though.

    Bowes is not going to accept that.

    Maybe more like $600k per year for 3 years. He gets another year and another $200k.

  • 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

    • 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
      • 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.

        • 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
      • 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.

        • Thanks
      • 34 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland
    View All