Jump to content

Featured Replies

4 hours ago, bandicoot said:

Pick 2 is better than 6 and 11 is laughable. Most clubs will take 2 top 10 picks over 1

Yeah right, like last time we had pick 2. Christian Petracca or Caleb Marchbank plus Liam Duggan? You must be laughing so hard!

 
7 hours ago, bandicoot said:

Pick 2 is better than 6 and 11 is laughable. Most clubs will take 2 top 10 picks over 1

What planet are you on? haha

7 hours ago, bandicoot said:

Pick 2 is better than 6 and 11 is laughable. Most clubs will take 2 top 10 picks over 1

Ha! That's gold!

 
15 hours ago, old55 said:

Yeah right, like last time we had pick 2. Christian Petracca or Caleb Marchbank plus Liam Duggan? You must be laughing so hard!

Agree with your but it depends which year is highlighted.

The following year, 2015 it was:

  • pick 2 Schache - now on his 3rd club
  • pick 6 Francis - traded to Sydney for a very late pick.
  • pick 11 Milera - still with the Crows

As we all know the draft is a lottery...!!

Edit:  corrected Matera to Milera

Edited by Lucifers Hero

I think we have two clubs (NM and WC) playing chicken at the moment to see who will give way first. I think we leave them alone and do our own thing and see what happens.

Would the Hawks be willing to trade their pick 4 (and a guarantee we would not pick Watson) for pick 6 and our future first? 

We then have a nice hand at the draft - 4 and 11, which I'd be happy with - but it may also make WC be a bit more inclined to relinquish Pick 1 (certainly more so than our previous offer to them) if WC's main aim is to be more certain of getting Curtin and another good first round player. So, if we are lucky, it might net us Pick 1.

 


24 minutes ago, Lucifers Hero said:

Agree with your but it depends which year is highlighted.

The following year, 2015 it was:

  • pick 2 Schache - now on his 3rd club
  • pick 6 Francis - traded to Sydney for a very late pick.
  • pick 11 Matera - still with the Crows

As we all know the draft is a lottery...!!

Exactly, it depends on the players we think are going to available at the picks.  If we trade 6 and 11 for 2 it's because we think 2 will be a star.  Making the blanket statement that 6 and 11 are always better than 2 is what is laughable.

2 hours ago, Lucifers Hero said:

Agree with your but it depends which year is highlighted.

The following year, 2015 it was:

  • pick 2 Schache - now on his 3rd club
  • pick 6 Francis - traded to Sydney for a very late pick.
  • pick 11 Matera - still with the Crows

As we all know the draft is a lottery...!!


Milera?

On 30/10/2023 at 15:44, rpfc said:

6 and 11.

Two ‘Top Ten’ picks.

Two Top TEN picks.

TWO Top Ten Picks.

nathan fillion castle GIF

i think people see 11 as a "top ten pick" because of the 2 gold coast academy kids and potentially even the bulldogs f/s

so its kind of like pick 9 if you were to take the GC academy kids out

 
2 minutes ago, FrothiesLiam said:

i think people see 11 as a "top ten pick" because of the 2 gold coast academy kids and potentially even the bulldogs f/s

so its kind of like pick 9 if you were to take the GC academy kids out

Ummm, that makes our ND11 into ND13 or ND14…

 

Also this whole question is about getting one the best ten kids and ND11 won’t before the academy players and it won’t after. 


Just now, demoncat said:

More info from the article linked:

D5EDB9ED-9B98-45C4-9884-474663E02FF7.thumb.jpeg.092fb1780a81232fd60991ee07f71f86.jpeg

Unclear whether the above makes West Coast more likely to accept our offer, but suggests at the very least North would be unwilling to offer anything further (which I personally agree with from their list build perspective)

On 30/10/2023 at 16:49, Neil Crompton said:

I think we have two clubs (NM and WC) playing chicken at the moment to see who will give way first. I think we leave them alone and do our own thing and see what happens.

Would the Hawks be willing to trade their pick 4 (and a guarantee we would not pick Watson) for pick 6 and our future first? 

We then have a nice hand at the draft - 4 and 11, which I'd be happy with - but it may also make WC be a bit more inclined to relinquish Pick 1 (certainly more so than our previous offer to them) if WC's main aim is to be more certain of getting Curtin and another good first round player. So, if we are lucky, it might net us Pick 1.

 

Wouldn’t work because if we didn’t take Watson at 4 the Dogs would take him at 5

1 hour ago, demoncat said:

More info from the article linked:

D5EDB9ED-9B98-45C4-9884-474663E02FF7.thumb.jpeg.092fb1780a81232fd60991ee07f71f86.jpeg

Essentially means West Coast are taking pick 1 to draft. Norths offer is better than ours, and ours is already overs IMO. We're better off taking what we have to draft. A shame as Reid looks to be a potential game breaking star of the future, but it would be unwise to over commit for one player.

Let's say we wind up with Sanders at 6, Windsor at 11, Brown at 42, and our future first is round pick 15 as an example. If we use the moneyball math idea,

Reid is a 10/10
Sanders is 9/10
Windsor is 7/10
Brown is 4/10
Future first is 6/10.

26 beats 10, but it's just about what's better for the list at that point in time. If it was just 6 and 11 I'd consider it. To add future firsts and other picks tips it too far the other way. If West Coast won't accept 2+15+17, then it's extremely unlikely they will accept 6+11+42+future first. And I hope they don't. it's overs.

Time to move on from pick 1/Reid.

38 minutes ago, Lord Travis said:

Essentially means West Coast are taking pick 1 to draft. Norths offer is better than ours, and ours is already overs IMO. We're better off taking what we have to draft. A shame as Reid looks to be a potential game breaking star of the future, but it would be unwise to over commit for one player.

Let's say we wind up with Sanders at 6, Windsor at 11, Brown at 42, and our future first is round pick 15 as an example. If we use the moneyball math idea,

Reid is a 10/10
Sanders is 9/10
Windsor is 7/10
Brown is 4/10
Future first is 6/10.

26 beats 10, but it's just about what's better for the list at that point in time. If it was just 6 and 11 I'd consider it. To add future firsts and other picks tips it too far the other way. If West Coast won't accept 2+15+17, then it's extremely unlikely they will accept 6+11+42+future first. And I hope they don't. it's overs.

Time to move on from pick 1/Reid.

I don't think you can use that arithmetic methodology directly on this issue.  Following that logic, it would be better to have O.Baker (4/10), S.Weideman (4/10), K.Turner (2/10), D.Smith (2/10) and F.Rosman (2/10) than C.Petracca (10/10).  The point is that Petracca and Reid (allegedly) are in a whole higher echelon than all those other players.


42 minutes ago, Lord Travis said:

Essentially means West Coast are taking pick 1 to draft. Norths offer is better than ours, and ours is already overs IMO. We're better off taking what we have to draft. A shame as Reid looks to be a potential game breaking star of the future, but it would be unwise to over commit for one player.

Let's say we wind up with Sanders at 6, Windsor at 11, Brown at 42, and our future first is round pick 15 as an example. If we use the moneyball math idea,

Reid is a 10/10
Sanders is 9/10
Windsor is 7/10
Brown is 4/10
Future first is 6/10.

26 beats 10, but it's just about what's better for the list at that point in time. If it was just 6 and 11 I'd consider it. To add future firsts and other picks tips it too far the other way. If West Coast won't accept 2+15+17, then it's extremely unlikely they will accept 6+11+42+future first. And I hope they don't. it's overs.

Time to move on from pick 1/Reid.

I tend to agree, although would be more than happy if they took our current offer

But surely they need to split pick 1 right?

Totally understand them holding out for the best offer - as they should - but at the end of the day I think they’re in the same position as North in needing as much high end talent as possible over the next few years

The only way they get that in this draft is by splitting 1 

Their fans might disagree, but I’d still be taking ours or Norths offer come draft night…

 

7 minutes ago, Deemac said:

I reckon we will truly trade up to get Dursma if we can’t get Reid 

I think we'll definitely attempt to get Duursma but not sure North will be fun to deal with.

West Coast would be wanting more from North than us. They will know who will be available at our picks and it's their decision if the players are enough. They may also be in a position next year if they get our F1 to bundle up with theirs to get pick 1 next year. Finn O'Sullivan looks like he will be really good. Unless they finish last and get him anyway.

1 hour ago, Clintosaurus said:

West Coast would be wanting more from North than us. They will know who will be available at our picks and it's their decision if the players are enough. They may also be in a position next year if they get our F1 to bundle up with theirs to get pick 1 next year. Finn O'Sullivan looks like he will be really good. Unless they finish last and get him anyway.

 

I agree

 

NM need to keep those picks and keep on the rebuild phase, Reid isn't changing the results

 

As for us, Reid will be a great pickup who will play Rnd 1


So West Coast want the moon and the stars for pick one, do they?

I'd be willing to do my bit for the mighty Demons and moon them.

2 hours ago, Demonstone said:

So West Coast want the moon and the stars for pick one, do they?

I'd be willing to do my bit for the mighty Demons and moon them.

I will go one better and show them my black hole 😁

14 hours ago, demoncat said:

I tend to agree, although would be more than happy if they took our current offer

But surely they need to split pick 1 right?

Totally understand them holding out for the best offer - as they should - but at the end of the day I think they’re in the same position as North in needing as much high end talent as possible over the next few years

The only way they get that in this draft is by splitting 1 

Their fans might disagree, but I’d still be taking ours or Norths offer come draft night…

 

Spot on.

No doubt WC are holding out for us to trade with North. I’m guessing a leak of our offer for pick 3 comes out before the draft. And it’ll be a deal North will refuse.

Maybe we’ll find a way to move up slightly. Geel or Hawthorn with our f1.

Either way, I agree we’re more likely to benefit from a single elite pick than WC or North who need many to build.

 

Would hope we’d wait until after pick 1 was taken to execute a trade for p3 or 4.


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

  • REPORT: Fremantle

    For this year’s Easter Saturday game at the MCG, Simon Goodwin and his Demons wound the clock back a few years to wipe out the horrible memories of last season’s twin thrashings at the hands of the Dockers. And it was about time! Melbourne’s indomitable skipper Max Gawn put in a mammoth performance in shutting out his immediate opponent Sean Darcy in the ruck and around the ground and was a colossus at the end when the game was there to be won or lost. It was won by 16.11.107 to 14.13.97. There was the battery-charged Easter Bunny in Kysaiah Pickett running anyone wearing purple ragged, whether at midfield stoppages or around the big sticks. He finish with a five goal haul.

    • 0 replies
    Demonland
  • CASEY: UWS Giants

    The Casey Demons took on an undefeated UWS Giants outfit at their own home ground on a beautiful autumn day but found themselves completely out of their depth going down by 53 points against a well-drilled and fair superior combination. Despite having 15 AFL listed players at their disposal - far more than in their earlier matches this season - the Demons were never really in the game and suffered their second defeat in a row after their bright start to the season when they drew with the Kangaroos, beat the Suns and matched the Cats for most of the day on their own dung heap at Corio Bay. The Giants were a different proposition altogether. They had a very slight wind advantage in the opening quarter but were too quick off the mark for the Demons, tearing the game apart by the half way mark of the term when they kicked the first five goals with clean and direct football.

    • 0 replies
    Demonland
  • PREGAME: Richmond

    The Dees are back at the MCG on Thursday for the annual blockbuster ANZAC Eve game against the Tigers. Can the Demons win back to back games for the first time since Rounds 17 & 18 last season? Who comes in and who goes out?

      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 147 replies
    Demonland
  • PODCAST: Fremantle

    The Demonland Podcast will air LIVE on TUESDAY, 22nd April @ 8:00pm. Join Binman, George & I as we analyse the Demons first win for the year against the Dockers. 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
    • 41 replies
    Demonland
  • POSTGAME: Fremantle

    A undermanned Dees showed some heart and desperation to put the Fremantle Dockers to the sword as they claimed their first victory for the season winning by 10 points at the MCG.

      • Clap
      • Haha
      • Love
      • Like
    • 447 replies
    Demonland
  • VOTES: Fremantle

    Max Gawn is leading the Demonland Player of the Year award from Christian Petracca followed by Ed Langdon, Jake Bowey & Clayton Oliver. Your votes for our first victory for the season. 6, 5, 4, 3, 2 & 1.

      • Like
    • 57 replies
    Demonland