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: Gold Coast

    From the start, Melbourne’s performance against the Gold Coast Suns at Peoples First Stadium was nothing short of a massive botch up and it came down in the first instance to poor preparation. Rather than adequately preparing the team for battle against an opponent potentially on the skids after suffering three consecutive losses, the Demons looking anything but sharp and ready to play in the opening minutes of the game. By way of contrast, the Suns demonstrated a clear sense of purpose and will to win. From the very first bounce of the ball they were back to where they left off earlier in the season in Round Three when the teams met at the MCG. They ran rings around the Demons and finished the game off with a dominant six goal final term. This time, they produced another dominant quarter to start the game, restricting Melbourne to a solitary point to lead by six goals at the first break, by which time, the game was all but over.

      • Clap
      • Thanks
    • 0 replies
  • CASEY: Gold Coast

    Coming off four consecutive victories and with a team filled with 17 AFL listed players, the Casey Demons took to their early morning encounter with the lowly Gold Coast Suns at People First Stadium with the swagger of a team that thought a win was inevitable. They were smashing it for the first twenty minutes of the game after Tom Fullarton booted the first two goals but they then descended into an abyss of frustrating poor form and lackadaisical effort that saw the swagger and the early arrogance disappear by quarter time when their lead was overtaken by a more intense and committed opponent. The Suns continued to apply the pressure in the second quarter and got out to a three goal lead in mid term before the Demons fought back. A late goal to the home side before the half time bell saw them ten points up at the break and another surge in the third quarter saw them comfortably up with a 23 point lead at the final break.

    • 0 replies
  • PREGAME: Rd 17 vs Adelaide

    With their season all over bar the shouting the Demons head back on the road for the third week in a row as they return to Adelaide to take on the Crows. Who comes in and who goes out?

    • 57 replies
  • POSTGAME: Rd 16 vs Gold Coast

    The Demons did not come to play from the opening bounce and let the Gold Coast kick the first 5 goals of the match. They then outscored the Suns for the next 3 quarters but it was too little too late and their season is now effectively over.

      • Sad
      • Like
    • 230 replies
  • VOTES: Rd 16 vs Gold Coast

    Max Gawn has a massive lead in the Demonland Player of the Year award ahead of Jake Bowey, Christian Petracca, Clayton Oliver and Kysaiah Pickett. Your votes please. 6, 5, 4, 3, 2 & 1.

      • Thanks
    • 37 replies
  • GAMEDAY: Rd 16 vs Gold Coast

    It's Game Day and the Demons are back on the road again and this may be the last roll of the dice to get their 2025 season back on track as they take on the Gold Coast Suns at People First Stadium.

      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 546 replies