Jump to content

The Pick 1 Thread

Demonland
Demonland
in Melbourne Demons

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!

  • Quote
    • Like 4
    • Haha 2
     
    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

  • Quote
    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!

  • Quote
    •  
    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

  • Quote

    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.

     

  • Quote
    • Like 2

    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.

  • Quote
    • Like 3
    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?

  • Quote
    • Thanks 1
    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

  • Quote
    •  
    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. 

  • Quote
    • Like 3

    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)

  • Quote
    • Like 3
    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

  • Quote
    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.

  • Quote
    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.

  • Quote
    • Like 9

    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…

     

  • Quote
    • Clap 2
    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.

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    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.

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    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

  • Quote

    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.

  • Quote
    • Haha 2
    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 😁

  • Quote
    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.

  • Quote
    • Like 1
     

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

  • 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 11

      Round 11, the second week of The Sir Doug Nicholls Round, kicks off on Thursday night with the Cats hosting the Bulldogs at Kardinia Park. Geelong will be looking to to continue their decade long dominance over the Bulldogs, while the Dogs aim to take another big scalp as they surge up the ladder. On Friday night it's he Dreamtime at the 'G clash between Essendon and Richmond. The Bombers will want to avoid another embarrassing performance against a lowly side whilst the Tigers will be keen to avenge a disappointing loss to the Kangaroos. Saturday footy kicks off as the Blues face the Giants in a pivotal clash for both clubs. Carlton need to turn around their up and down season while GWS will be eager to bounce back and reassert themselves as a September threat. At twilight sees the Hawks taking on the Lions at the G. Hawthorn need to cement themselves in the Top 4 but they’ll need to be at their best to challenge a Brisbane side eager to respond after last week’s crushing loss to the Dees on their home turf. The first of the Saturday night double headers opens with North Melbourne up against the high-flying Magpies. The Roos will need a near-perfect performance to trouble a Collingwood side sitting atop the ladder.

      • 3 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • PREVIEW: Sydney

      The two teams competing at the MCG on Sunday afternoon have each traversed a long and arduous path since their previous encounter on a sweltering March evening in Sydney a season and a half ago. Both experienced periods of success at various times last year. The Demons ran out of steam in midseason while the Swans went on to narrowly miss the ultimate prize in the sport. Now, they find themselves outside of finals contention as the season approaches the halfway mark. The winner this week will remain in contact with the leading pack, while the loser may well find itself on a precipice, staring into the abyss. The current season has presented numerous challenges for most clubs, particularly those positioned in the middle tier. The Essendon experience in suffering a significant 91-point loss to the Bulldogs, just one week after defeating the Swans, may not be typical, but it illustrates the unpredictability of outcomes under the league’s present set up. 

      • 3 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • REPORT: Brisbane

      “Max Gawn has been the heart and soul of the Dees for years now, but this recent recovery from a terrible start has been driven by him. He was everywhere again, and with the game in the balance, he took several key marks to keep the ball in the Dees forward half.” - The Monday Knee Jerk Reaction: Round Ten Of course, it wasn’t the efforts of one man that caused this monumental upset, but rather the work of the coach and his assistants and the other 22 players who took the ground, notably the likes of Jake Melksham, Christian Petracca, Clayton Oliver and Kozzie Pickett but Max has been magnificent in taking ownership of his team and its welfare under the fire of a calamitous 0-5 start to the season. On Sunday, he provided the leadership that was needed to face up to the reigning premier and top of the ladder Brisbane Lions on their home turf and to prevail after a slow start, during which the hosts led by as much as 24 points in the second quarter. Titus O’Reily is normally comedic in his descriptions of the football but this time, he was being deadly serious. The Demons have come from a long way back and, although they still sit in the bottom third of the AFL pack, there’s a light at the end of the tunnel as they look to drive home the momentum inspired in the past four or five weeks by Max the Magnificent who was under such great pressure in those dark, early days of the season.

      • 0 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • CASEY: Southport

      The Southport Sharks came to Casey. They saw and they conquered a team with 16 AFL-listed players who, for the most part, wasted their time on the ground and failed to earn their keep. For the first half, the Sharks were kept in the game by the Demons’ poor use of the football, it’s disposal getting worse the closer the team got to its own goal and moreover, it got worse as the game progressed. Make no mistake, Casey was far and away the better team in the first half, it was winning the ruck duels through Tom Campbell’s solid performance but it was the scoreboard that told the story.

      • 3 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • PREGAME: Sydney

      Just a game and percentage outside the Top 8, the Demons return to Melbourne to face the Sydney Swans at the MCG, with a golden opportunity to build on the momentum from toppling the reigning premiers on their own turf. Who comes in, and who makes way?

        • Thanks
      • 250 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • PODCAST: Brisbane

      The Demonland Podcast will air LIVE on Monday, 12th May @ 8:00pm. Join Binman, George & I as we analyse a famous victory by the Demons over the Lions at the Gabba.
      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.
      Listen LIVE: https://demonland.com/

        • Like
      • 35 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland
    View All