Jump to content

The Pick 3 Thread

Mach5
in Melbourne Demons

Featured Replies

Posted

I’ll start by assuming North would keep pick 2 off the table, refusing to let anyone pick ahead of them. 

I’d set up a poll if I knew how.

Would you trade pick 6, 11 & a F1/2 for pick 3?

It might give North the pieces to find a way to satisfy WC for pick 1. And I think we fell in love with Duursma a long time ago when he trained on with us.

I’d do it.
The players likely to be there at 6 & 11 don’t fill me with confidence.

No guts, no glory.

  • Quote
    • Like 2
    • Shocked 1
    • Vomit 1
     

    3 firsts to move 3 spots up the order? No chance

    6 & 11 for 3 & 17? Yep 

  • Quote
    • Like 10
    • Thanks 1
    • Sad 1
    4 minutes ago, Mach5 said:

    Would you trade pick 6, 11 & a F1/2 for pick 3?

    I wouldn't even trade 6+11 for 3, let alone throwing in future picks.

    It's not worth losing pick 11 to move up 3 spots. Pick 11 is a good pick and higher than we're likely to have again for a few years if we remain competitive. It will net us a good KPD (O'Sullivan, Murphy) or outside midfielder (Wilson, Windsor) for the next decade. Losing a 200 game type just to have a crack at Duursma instead of Sanders/Watson/Curtin seems mental to me. 

  • Quote
    • Like 8
    • Thanks 1
     

    I don’t think North trade us 3, not when they have so many picks.

    It would be WC trading us 3 after swapping 1 with North. 

    I’m also on board with 6, Future 1 and 42 for 3, but not a fan of 6 and 11 and certainly not convinced by the need to trade 3 early picks. 

    We need 2 quality kids coming in if we can get them 

  • Quote
    • Like 3
    • Thanks 1

    More top picks the better, closer to 1, if the draft is "Shallow" why go back to 17.

    Trust them to get 2 great players for 6/11

     

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    I think North will either give up 2+3 for 1, or far more likely, use 2 and 3 on Duursma and McKercher 

    On top of their current crop, those two will help set them up for success over the next 10 years; that is, if North can maintain stability and not implode again

    Edited by Stiff Arm

  • Quote
    • Like 1
     
    15 minutes ago, Stiff Arm said:

    I think North will either give up 2+3 for 1, or far more likely, use 2 and 3 on Duursma and McKercher 

    On top of their current crop, those two will help set them up for success over the next 10 years; that is, if North can maintain stability and not implode again

    I don't think North Melbourne will use picks 2 and 3 for Mid Fielders. North Melbourne need to recruit a Key Defender. O'Sullivan, Curtin and Murphy will be gone by pick 11 or 12. 

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    55 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

    I’m also on board with 6, Future 1 and 42 for 3,

    Not sure how appealing our future 1st is with two end-of-1st round picks coming their way next year courtesy of AFL handout

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    37 minutes ago, The Jackson FIX said:

    Not sure how appealing our future 1st is with two end-of-1st round picks coming their way next year courtesy of AFL handout

    They've already traded those picks out to Gold Coast and Sydney. They needed to otherwise the AFL could have revoked them if they improved next year.

    They don't have any extra future picks as it currently stands.

    Edited by Nascent

  • Quote
    • Like 2
    9 minutes ago, Nascent said:

    They've already traded those picks out to Gold Coast and Sydney. They needed to otherwise the AFL could have revoked them if they improved next year.

    They don't have any extra future picks as it currebtly stands.

    Amazing the AFL let them trade them out if they were conditional 

  • Quote
    • Like 4
    1 minute ago, The Jackson FIX said:

    Amazing the AFL let them trade them out if they were conditional 

    I'm not sure why the AFL didn't just state that those picks must be on-traded in the first place. It's pretty much what they implied.

  • Quote
    • Like 5

    If pick 1 is out of the question, the only deal I could see us doing between now and the draft is one to bag another top 10 selection using our pick 11 and a future first. Pick 7 (GWS) or pick 8 (Geelong) would probably be the likely candidates. I suppose it'll depend on who we're after on draft night.

    Edited by Demon Jack

  • Quote
    • Like 4
    1 hour ago, The Jackson FIX said:

    Amazing the AFL let them trade them out if they were conditional 

    They were conditional to make them trade them out, but at the same time not be held to ransom like last year when they 'had to' trade them.

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    4 hours ago, Mach5 said:

    I’ll start by assuming North would keep pick 2 off the table, refusing to let anyone pick ahead of them. 

    I’d set up a poll if I knew how.

    Would you trade pick 6, 11 & a F1/2 for pick 3?

    It might give North the pieces to find a way to satisfy WC for pick 1. And I think we fell in love with Duursma a long time ago when he trained on with us.

    I’d do it.
    The players likely to be there at 6 & 11 don’t fill me with confidence.

    No guts, no glory.

    On the contrary I don’t have the confidence in Duursma as he has only seemed to play ordinary at Casey in any matches when given the opportunity. Don’t think we are blinkered or in denial like yourself. All of the “ experts “ are very keen on about 7 top choices. 

    Others such as Curtin Caddy Wilson Windsor and the full back options are my preference for 6 and 11 to add class and ability to our needs on our  list.

    Not having seen players live except for highlights can be unfair so I am sure JT and TL will do the job for us superbly as usual.

    Your assessment of North keeping pick 2 and 3 being traded to us for our package is really a very crazy long shot and crucifies our chances of getting two very good players instead of only one ie your choice Duursma. 

    Why worry about North when there is a class of seven players ( not only Duursma) at the top plus additional needy options for a draft pick for us at 11 as well. 

    The only up trade we should consider is for us to WC for Reid as the choice IMO. Let’s not complicate it when the solution seems a simple NO to a rather wasted and restricted choice of a poll of fantasy rather than fact. 

    Of course we all have our favourites and it is open to opinion always where draft choices are considered.

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    8 hours ago, Mach5 said:

    I’ll start by assuming North would keep pick 2 off the table, refusing to let anyone pick ahead of them. 

    I’d set up a poll if I knew how.

    Would you trade pick 6, 11 & a F1/2 for pick 3?

    It might give North the pieces to find a way to satisfy WC for pick 1. And I think we fell in love with Duursma a long time ago when he trained on with us.

    I’d do it.
    The players likely to be there at 6 & 11 don’t fill me with confidence.

    No guts, no glory.

    Sorry cannot agree, this is a strong draft hand, and with 2 early pucks as is we stand a better chance this year to gain good talent through our masterful recruiter's hands, 2 into 1 does not go. 

    Look at Caddy, Archer, and William Green who I reckon is a great ruck prospect.

  • Quote
    • Like 2

    To me, ND3 is like a Merlot.

    I did not do all that death riding and trading for a Merlot.

    paul giamatti fucking merlot GIF by Sideways - The Play

  • Quote
    • Like 2
    • Haha 6
    • Clap 1
    6 hours ago, 58er said:

     

    Of course we all have our favourites and it is open to opinion always where draft choices are considered.

    So does JT and i'll back him in. If we make a play for 1 or 3 it will be for a good reason.

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    10 hours ago, Stiff Arm said:

    I think North will either give up 2+3 for 1, or far more likely, use 2 and 3 on Duursma and McKercher 

    On top of their current crop, those two will help set them up for success over the next 10 years; that is, if North can maintain stability and not implode again

    North now have a lot of list spots to fill and about 5-6 picks under 18, with 2 and 3 included.

    As a strategy I agree, instead of losing most of them for one player, they could set themselves up long term by using them.

    If they get Reid, are they going to fill 6 or more list spots with players drafted beyond say pick 23.

    It makes no sense,

    It makes more sense to use a high pick and split the other, getting say 6 and 11 from us and giving them even more high end talent.

    We are in a slightly different situation, with a good list, that only needs cherry picked talent, here and there.

    Whether we are chasing 1 or 3, or keep 6 & 11, is up to our list managers.

    If we want Duursma, 3 is fine if North get 1, but if they don’t, he is not guaranteed at 3. So I would think if 3 is the target, it only happens in a 3 way deal with North and WC.

    Not knowing the real potential of the draftees, my opinion is an uninformed one, but from the outside, purely based on depth of talent, I would prefer keeping 6 & 11 and trying to maybe upgrade 11 a little, unless of course, JT thinks Duursma or someone else will be a champion,

    Edited by Redleg

  • Quote
    • Like 2

    4 hours ago, David-Demon said:

    Sorry cannot agree, this is a strong draft hand, and with 2 early pucks as is we stand a better chance this year to gain good talent through our masterful recruiter's hands, 2 into 1 does not go. 

    Look at Caddy, Archer, and William Green who I reckon is a great ruck prospect.

    Green or Archer probably won’t feature but I agree 2 picks are far better than one. 

  • Quote
    • Like 2
    9 hours ago, 58er said:

    On the contrary I don’t have the confidence in Duursma as he has only seemed to play ordinary at Casey in any matches when given the opportunity. Don’t think we are blinkered or in denial like yourself. All of the “ experts “ are very keen on about 7 top choices. 

    I don't think I could agree less.

    Duursma has that rare knack of making footy look easy.  A bit like Mark Waugh with cricket and Federer with tennis.

    Duursma reeks of class with his movement, kicking and marking.

    He didn't ''star'' for Casey in 2 games as a 17 year old, but even then his talent was evident.  When he develops the size of an AFL player he's going to be an elite footballer.

    If possible I'd move up to pick 3 to make sure of him.

  • Quote
    • Like 4
     
    • Author
    12 hours ago, The Jackson FIX said:

    Amazing the AFL let them trade them out if they were conditional 


    It’s the AFL’s way of making them be traded without devaluing the picks in negotiations, e.g. “you have to trade these, you can’t keep them, so we are lowballing you because you have to accept”

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    17 hours ago, DeeSpencer said:

    I'm also on board with 6, Future 1 and 42 for 3, but not a fan of 6 and 11 and certainly not convinced by the need to trade 3 early picks. 

    We need 2 quality kids coming in if we can get them 

    I like this plan. We paid heavily for 11 presumably because we think it's ahead of a quality cliff, let's use it.

  • Quote
    • Like 2
    • Thanks 1

    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

    • PREVIEW: Gold Coast

      The Gold Coast Suns find themselves outside of the top eight for the first time since Round 1 with pressure is mounting on the entire organisation. Their coach Damien Hardwick expressed his frustration at his team’s condition last week by making a middle-finger gesture on television that earned him a fine for his troubles. He showed his desperation by claiming that Fox should pick up the tab.  There’s little doubt the Suns have shown improvement in 2025, and their position on the ladder is influenced to some extent by having played fewer games than their rivals for a playoff role at the end of the season, courtesy of the disruption caused by Cyclone Alfred in March.  However, they are following the same trajectory that hindered the club in past years whenever they appeared to be nearing their potential. As a consequence, that Hardwick gesture should be considered as more than a mere behavioral lapse. It’s a distress signal that does not bode well for the Queenslanders. While the Suns are eager to remain in contention with the top eight, Melbourne faces its own crisis, which is similarly deep-seated but in a much different way. After recovering from a disappointing start to the season and nearing a return to respectability among its peer clubs, the Demons have experienced a decline in status, driven by the fact that while their form has been reasonable (see their performance against the ladder leader in the Kings Birthday match), their conversion in front of goal is poor enough to rank last in the competition. Furthermore, their opponents find them exceptionally easy to score against. As a result, they have effectively eliminated themselves from the finals race and are again positioned to finish in the bottom half of the ladder.

      • 4 replies
      Demonland

    • NON-MFC: Round 15

      As the Demons head into their Bye Round, it's time to turn our attention to the other matches being played. Which teams are you tipping this week? And which results would be most favourable for the Demons if we can manage to turn our season around? Follow all the non-Melbourne games here and join the conversation as the ladder continues to take shape.

      • 284 replies
      Demonland

    • REPORT: Port Adelaide

      Of course, it’s not the backline, you might argue and you would probably be right. It’s the boot studder (do they still have them?), the midfield, the recruiting staff, the forward line, the kicking coach, the Board, the interchange bench, the supporters, the folk at Casey, the head coach and the club psychologist  It’s all of them and all of us for having expectations that were sufficiently high to have believed three weeks ago that a restoration of the Melbourne team to a position where we might still be in contention for a finals berth when the time for the midseason bye arrived. Now let’s look at what happened over the period of time since Melbourne overwhelmed the Sydney Swans at the MCG in late May when it kicked 8.2 to 5.3 in the final quarter (and that was after scoring 3.8 to two straight goals in the second term). 

      • 3 replies
      Demonland

    • CASEY: Essendon

      Casey’s unbeaten run was extended for at least another fortnight after the Demons overran a persistent Essendon line up by 29 points at ETU Stadium in Port Melbourne last night. After conceding the first goal of the evening, Casey went on a scoring spree from about ten minutes in, with five unanswered majors with its fleet of midsized runners headed by the much improved Paddy Cross who kicked two in quick succession and livewire Ricky Mentha who also kicked an early goal. Leading the charge was recruit of the year, Riley Bonner while Bailey Laurie continued his impressive vein of form. With Tom Campbell missing from the lineup, Will Verrall stepped up to the plate demonstrating his improvement under the veteran ruckman’s tutelage. The Demons were looking comfortable for much of the second quarter and held a 25-point lead until the Bombers struck back with two goals in the shadows of half time. On the other side of the main break their revival continued with first three goals of the half. Harry Sharp, who had been quiet scrambled in the Demons’ first score of the third term to bring the margin back to a single point at the 17 minute mark and the game became an arm-wrestle for the remainder of the quarter and into the final moments of the last.

      • 0 replies
      Demonland

    • PREGAME: Gold Coast

      The Demons have the Bye next week but then are on the road once again when they come up against the Gold Coast Suns on the Gold Coast in what could be a last ditch effort to salvage their season. Who comes in and who comes out?

        • Shocked
        • Like
      • 316 replies
      Demonland

    • PODCAST: Port Adelaide

      The Demonland Podcast will air LIVE on Monday, 16th June @ 8:00pm. Join Binman, George & I as we dissect the Dees disappointing loss to the Power.
      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/

        • Clap
        • Like
      • 33 replies
      Demonland
    View All