Jump to content

Dan Houston

dazzledavey36
in Melbourne Demons

Featured Replies

I can't see a scenario where we trade out our first round pick and not get back into the first round of this draft. We know we need mids, this draft is stacked with them, and JT is the master of picking mids. 

This may well be the best draft hand we will have in a long while, especially if we rise up the ladder next season and then Tassie comes in. 

I would be quite shocked if we gave away our first rounder for a 28 year old half back, as much as I highly rate Houston and can completely understand where he fits into our side.

  • Quote
    • Like 9
    • Clap 1
     

    On Saturday night we need to be on our best behaviour and avoid this game being a complete mess if he's seriously considering the Dees.

    I can't imagine the impression we're going to leave him if we get tonked.

    And why is he considering leaving Port? Homesick?

  • Quote
    2 hours ago, CatFishPig said:

    Send a future first.

    Our future first could quite easily be around pick 6-8 in the last year before Tasmania enters.

    No thanks

    bottoming out for twenty odd years is something we've all seen and has nearly killed this club

  • Quote
    • Like 2
     

    Geelong landed Dangerfield at 25 years of age for Dean Gore (who?) pick 9 and 28.

    I am in disbelief posters think even one high first round draft pick is 'fair' for a 28 year old half back who was a rookie pick!

    The talk of two first round picks is just the dumbest thing I've ever heard and was made up by Sam Landsberg when he was spit balling and nonsense and having a guess at what their asking price would be. Nobody knows what's going on. 

    If the reports of him wanting to come home are true, then we will not be giving up two first round draft picks and if we gave up any, it'd have to be a late first roundee with a swap that saw our second rounder improve for this year. 

    He's on a three year contract, there simply must be something going on for him back home which is why people have us as landing him but it means we have the upper hand. 

  • Quote
    • Like 6
    • Clap 1
    10 minutes ago, middleagedemon said:

    The talk of two first round picks is just the dumbest thing I've ever heard and was made up by Sam Landsberg when he was spit balling and nonsense and having a guess at what their asking price would be. Nobody knows what's going on. 

    Landsberg sounds like a schoolkid on that show midweek tackle.

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    • Haha 1

    • Author

    Cal Twomey said that he thinks he'll be playing at Melbourne next year and it will take our pick 7 and next years first as a starting point.

    I'll be absolutely mortified with the club if we part with pick 7 for a 28 year old half back flanker and next years first.

     

  • Quote
    • Like 11
    8 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

    Cal Twomey said that he thinks he'll be playing at Melbourne next year and it will take our pick 7 and next years first as a starting point.

    I'll be absolutely mortified with the club if we part with pick 7 for a 28 year old half back flanker and next years first.

     

    Agreed. Happy to trade a first for him but 2025 first would be my offer

  • Quote
    • Like 2
    4 hours ago, middleagedemon said:

    Geelong landed Dangerfield at 25 years of age for Dean Gore (who?) pick 9 and 28.

    I am in disbelief posters think even one high first round draft pick is 'fair' for a 28 year old half back who was a rookie pick!

    The talk of two first round picks is just the dumbest thing I've ever heard and was made up by Sam Landsberg when he was spit balling and nonsense and having a guess at what their asking price would be. Nobody knows what's going on. 

    If the reports of him wanting to come home are true, then we will not be giving up two first round draft picks and if we gave up any, it'd have to be a late first roundee with a swap that saw our second rounder improve for this year. 

    He's on a three year contract, there simply must be something going on for him back home which is why people have us as landing him but it means we have the upper hand. 

    It's admirable that you're arguing for us to give up the bare minimum and get back more. You really have the Dees best wishes in your heart. Unfortunately that's not how it works. We don't have the upper hand at all. Port will just keep him if they don't get a high value. Why would Port give away their AA half back for a kid who's not even in the top 10 of players in this or next years draft? Would you do that trade last year for a 27 year old Jake Lever? Or just keep him?

    IF we split our first rounder and only offer a late pick in the teens, then it's not us who will be improving our other picks as you mentioned, but them. And dramatically.

    As for the talk of two firsts. It was Callum Twomey on gettable that first mentioned it. He's far more reputable than one of SEN's talkback hosts. Although I think He just rates Houston that highly and doesn't have any knowledge on any dealings between clubs. Edit: Got him confused with Sam Edmund lol. 

    Edited by John Demonic

  • Quote
    •  
    19 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

    Cal Twomey said that he thinks he'll be playing at Melbourne next year and it will take our pick 7 and next years first as a starting point.

    I'll be absolutely mortified with the club if we part with pick 7 for a 28 year old half back flanker and next years first.

     

    Yeah I’d only do that trade if Georgiades came with him too.

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    4 hours ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

    On Saturday night we need to be on our best behaviour and avoid this game being a complete mess if he's seriously considering the Dees.

    I can't imagine the impression we're going to leave him if we get tonked.

    And why is he considering leaving Port? Homesick?

    If he is so intellectually limited as to decide whether he comes to us based on a single game at the end of a down year for us then I don’t want him 

  • Quote
    • Like 2
    • Haha 1
    • Clap 1

    6 minutes ago, Smokey said:

    If he is so intellectually limited as to decide whether he comes to us based on a single game at the end of a down year for us then I don’t want him 

    Think we’ve beaten them more times than lost in the last 3-4 years, so I’m sure that’s fresh in his mind

  • Quote
    • Like 2
    On 05/08/2024 at 12:49, adonski said:

    Imagine if Tim Lamb put forward the suggestion to trade Fritta, he'd be walked to his car

  • Quote
    7 minutes ago, layzie said:

    This is a joke right? Pick 7 and a future first for a 1 time AA? 

    If I was to defend Twomey or Landburger, it would be that their podcast is so short and time limited that they're not going to get into the intricacies of pick and player swaps going both ways to make it more amenable to both parties. He's going to give a ballpark amount based on his value. So of course we shouldn't do that trade UNLESS something mouth watering is coming back either a player or their first round pick if they make a prelim which I think they the might be willing to give up

    eg Pick7+F1+F2 for Houston+Pick 15*

    Edited by John Demonic

  • Quote
    • Thanks 1

    On 05/08/2024 at 22:55, Demonsterative said:

    I hope this is tongue in cheek John! Not some inside knowledge.. 

    There are rumours swirling about Fritta. 

  • Quote
    • Shocked 2
    45 minutes ago, John Demonic said:

    It's admirable that you're arguing for us to give up the bare minimum and get back more. You really have the Dees best wishes in your heart. Unfortunately that's not how it works. We don't have the upper hand at all. Port will just keep him if they don't get a high value. Why would Port give away their AA half back for a kid who's not even in the top 10 of players in this or next years draft? Would you do that trade last year for a 27 year old Jake Lever? Or just keep him?

    IF we split our first rounder and only offer a late pick in the teens, then it's not us who will be improving our other picks as you mentioned, but them. And dramatically.

    As for the talk of two firsts. It was Callum Twomey on gettable that first mentioned it. He's far more reputable than one of SEN's talkback hosts. Although I think He just rates Houston that highly and doesn't have any knowledge on any dealings between clubs. Edit: Got him confused with Sam Edmund lol. 

    I'm arguing that we shouldn't be and won't be giving up anywhere near what is being suggested and I'm basing that off what has gone before us where a past player, (Dangerfield), a three time AA to that point at 25 years of age only cost Geelong a fringe player, pick 9 and 28. Geelong received  Dangerfield and third round pick in exchange, (so yes I would expect something back if we were giving up two first rounders).

    Whenever a player wants to 'go home' and especially for personal reasons, the club will not hold said player at ransom. Which is why I think the talk of us giving up two first rounders is ridiculous. I don't care what Cal Twomey or Sam Landsberg say, they're guessing. 

    I will genuinely rip my membership in half if we give what is likely to be pick 6 away for Houston. It's ludicrous. 

  • Quote
    • Like 3
    • Thanks 1
    6 minutes ago, John Demonic said:

    If I was to defend Twomey or Landburger, it would be that their podcast is so short and time limited that they're not going to get into the intricacies of pick and player swaps going both ways to make it more amenable to both parties. He's going to give a ballpark amount based on his value. So of course we shouldn't do that trade UNLESS something mouth watering is coming back either a player or their first round pick if they make a prelim which I think they the might be willing to give up

    eg Pick7+F1+F2 for Houston+Pick 15*

    Maybe it literally was a starting point?

  • Quote
    5 minutes ago, Demons11 said:

    There are rumours swirling about Fritta. 

    Careful, you'll be called names and labelled a liar by a particular poster on here. The outrage and demands of retraction will be all over every thread

    🙄

  • Quote
    • Clap 2

    Port are just posturing. Perspective required.

    Geez, we got pick 13 plus a future 1st round pick from Freo for Jackson. We just got lucky Freo had a [censored] season and we got an early 1st rounder.

    Jackson is a young "generational player". With respect as Dan is a good player he is really at 28 years old next season and a flanker not worth more than a mid to late 1st rounder.

    " Fremantle have secured generational talent Luke Jackson in a blockbuster trade with Melbourne, sending two first round selections to the Demons plus a swap of later picks. As well as Jackson, Fremantle receive picks 44 and 67 in exchange for pick 13, Fremantle’s 2023 first round pick and 2023 second round pick."

     

    Edited by manny100

  • Quote
    • Like 3

    20 minutes ago, middleagedemon said:

    I'm arguing that we shouldn't be and won't be giving up anywhere near what is being suggested and I'm basing that off what has gone before us where a past player, (Dangerfield), a three time AA to that point at 25 years of age only cost Geelong a fringe player, pick 9 and 28. Geelong received  Dangerfield and third round pick in exchange, (so yes I would expect something back if we were giving up two first rounders).

    Whenever a player wants to 'go home' and especially for personal reasons, the club will not hold said player at ransom. Which is why I think the talk of us giving up two first rounders is ridiculous. I don't care what Cal Twomey or Sam Landsberg say, they're guessing. 

    I will genuinely rip my membership in half if we give what is likely to be pick 6 away for Houston. It's ludicrous. 

    Fair enough. Although wasn't he a restricted free agent ? Had something to do with Adelaide wanting something better than Pick 15 compo but also Geelong not giving away too much, given he could be had for free a year later. 

    Can't think of another comparable trade. I do echo your sentiments about wanting something back  but maybe we're all guessing about Port and his relationship. Maybe Houston doesn't mind waiting a year or two to move, so they'll hold out for a good deal. I'm forgetting but wasn't it an Essendon player that got held to the contract and traded a year later? Daniher?

    Edit: Josh Dunkley! He was held to "ransom" and the club and player didn't seem to care. And got on with business for a year until the next trade period.

    Edited by John Demonic

  • Quote
    2 minutes ago, John Demonic said:

    Fair enough. Although wasn't he a restricted free agent ? Had something to do with Adelaide wanting something better than Pick 15 compo but also Geelong not giving away too much, given he could be had for free a year later. 

    Can't think of another comparable trade. I do echo your sentiments but maybe we're all guessing about Port and his relationship. Maybe Houston doesn't mind waiting a year or two to move, so they'll hold out for a good deal. I'm forgetting but wasn't it an Essendon player that got held to the contract and traded a year later? Daniher? Few other examples.

    It is hard to compare because when a player is OOC  then the club is a little at the mercy of the club nominated, whereas as Houston is contracted Port don’t have to trade. I think a lot will come down to Port’s plans with incoming players and their salary cap, so we may negotiate a bit harder if we feel they need his salary off their books to secure their target.

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    It's likely the AFL will bring in the trading of future 2026 picks this year. If that's the case, I'd be landing Houston and then using the other first rounders to be getting at least 1 2024 first rounder.

  • Quote
    •  
    1 minute ago, Binmans PA said:

    It's likely the AFL will bring in the trading of future 2026 picks this year. If that's the case, I'd be landing Houston and then using the other first rounders to be getting at least 1 2024 first rounder.

    Or we can just do a Geelong and hardly use any picks for the next 10 years

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    25 minutes ago, Demons11 said:

    There are rumours swirling about Fritta. 

    That he wants out or we want him out? 

  • Quote

    • 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 13

      Follow all the action from every Round 13 clash excluding the Dees as the 2025 AFL Premiership Season rolls on. With Melbourne playing in the final match of the round on King's Birthday, all eyes turn to the rest of the competition. Who are you tipping to win? And more importantly, which results best serve the Demons’ finals aspirations? Join the discussion and keep track of the matches that could shape the ladder and impact our run to September.

        • Clap
        • Like
      • 39 replies
      Demonland

    • PREVIEW: Collingwood

      Having convincingly defeated last year’s premier and decisively outplayed the runner-up with 8.2 in the final quarter, nothing epitomized the Melbourne Football Club’s performance more than its 1.12 final half, particularly the eight consecutive behinds in the last term, against a struggling St Kilda team in the midst of a dismal losing streak. Just when stability and consistency were anticipated within the Demon ranks, they delivered a quintessential performance marked by instability and ill-conceived decisions, with the most striking aspect being their inaccuracy in kicking for goal, which suggested a lack of preparation (instead of sleeping in their hotel in Alice, were they having a night on the turps) rather than a well-rested team. Let’s face it - this kicking disease that makes them look like raw amateurs is becoming a millstone around the team’s neck.

        • Like
      • 1 reply
      Demonland

    • CASEY: Sydney

      The Casey Demons were always expected to emerge victorious in their matchup against the lowly-ranked Sydney Swans at picturesque Tramway Oval, situated in the shadows of the SCG in Moore Park. They dominated the proceedings in the opening two and a half quarters of the game but had little to show for it. This was primarily due to their own sloppy errors in a low-standard game that produced a number of crowded mauls reminiscent of the rugby game popular in old Sydney Town. However, when the Swans tired, as teams often do when they turn games into ugly defensive contests, Casey lifted the standard of its own play and … it was off to the races. Not to nearby Randwick but to a different race with an objective of piling on goal after goal on the way to a mammoth victory. At the 25-minute mark of the third quarter, the Demons held a slender 14-point lead over the Swans, who are ahead on the ladder of only the previous week's opposition, the ailing Bullants. Forty minutes later, they had more than fully compensated for the sloppiness of their earlier play with a decisive 94-point victory, that culminated in a rousing finish which yielded thirteen unanswered goals. Kicks hit their targets, the ball found itself going through the middle and every player made a contribution.

        • Like
      • 1 reply
      Demonland

    • REPORT: St. Kilda

      Hands up if you thought, like me, at half-time in yesterday’s game at TIO Traeger Park, Alice Springs that Melbourne’s disposal around the ground and, in particular, its kicking inaccuracy in front of the goals couldn’t get any worse. Well, it did. And what’s even more damning for the Melbourne Football Club is that the game against St Kilda and its resurgence from the bottomless pit of its miserable start to the season wasn’t just lost through poor conversion for goal but rather in the 15 minutes when the entire team went into a slumber and was mugged by the out-of-form Saints. Their six goals two behinds (one goal less than the Demons managed for the whole game) weaved a path of destruction from which they were unable to recover. Ross Lyon’s astute use of pressure to contain the situation once they had asserted their grip on the game, and Melbourne’s self-destructive wastefulness, assured that outcome. The old adage about the insanity of repeatedly doing something and expecting a different result, was out there. Two years ago, the score line in Melbourne’s loss to the Giants at this same ground was 5 goals 15 behinds - a ratio of one goal per four scoring shots - was perfectly replicated with yesterday’s 7 goals 21 behinds. 
      This has been going on for a while and opens up a number of questions. I’ll put forward a few that come to mind from this performance. The obvious first question is whether the club can find a suitable coach to instruct players on proper kicking techniques or is this a skill that can no longer be developed at this stage of the development of our playing group? Another concern is the team's ability to counter an opponent's dominance during a run on as exemplified by the Saints in the first quarter. Did the Demons underestimate their opponents, considering St Kilda's goals during this period were scored by relatively unknown forwards? Furthermore, given the modest attendance of 6,721 at TIO Traeger Park and the team's poor past performances at this venue, is it prudent to prioritize financial gain over potentially sacrificing valuable premiership points by relinquishing home ground advantage, notwithstanding the cultural significance of the team's connection to the Red Centre? 

        • Like
      • 4 replies
      Demonland

    • PREGAME: Collingwood

      After a disappointing loss in Alice Springs the Demons return to the MCG to take on the Magpies in the annual King's Birthday Big Freeze for MND game. Who comes in and who goes out?

        • Like
      • 251 replies
      Demonland

    • PODCAST: St. Kilda

      The Demonland Podcast will air LIVE on Monday, 2nd June @ 8:00pm. Join Binman, George & I as we have a chat with former Demon ruckman Jeff White about his YouTube channel First Use where he dissects ruck setups and contests. We'll then discuss the Dees disappointing loss to the Saints in Alice Springs.
      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/

        • Thanks
        • Like
      • 47 replies
      Demonland
    View All