Jump to content

Featured Replies

1 minute ago, spirit of norm smith said:

I think once we traded out the future 1st pick, then we cannot trade out the future 2nd round pick. 



I am unclear on this as Hawks traded their 2025 picks to get Barrass. 

The Hawks sent across a future first-round pick, a future second-round pick and a future third-round pick to the Eagles while securing the 29-year-old premiership player and West Coast's future fourth-round pick in the deal.

 

I’m pretty sure you just need the league to sign off on it. 

 
8 minutes ago, Roost it far said:

I’m pretty sure you just need the league to sign off on it. 

Ok so providing you are Carlton, Collingwood, Geelong, Essendon or Hawks, it’s all fine.  

15 minutes ago, spirit of norm smith said:

I think once we traded out the future 1st pick, then we cannot trade out the future 2nd round pick. 



I am unclear on this as Hawks traded their 2025 picks to get Barrass. 

The Hawks sent across a future first-round pick, a future second-round pick and a future third-round pick to the Eagles while securing the 29-year-old premiership player and West Coast's future fourth-round pick in the deal.

 

I think that it was allowed because they had two 2025 first round picks.

Tbh I don’t know why they put those restrictions. Clubs should be allowed to do what they want with all picks and wear the consequences if they get it wrong.

 

The Saints 2 picks are really interesting, would they offer up 7 and 8 to Norf for 2 and 22? 

if they hold those picks they're on record as wanting midfield class, but i think a King/Armstrong combination would be really tempting for them 

5 minutes ago, Ted Lasso said:

The Saints 2 picks are really interesting, would they offer up 7 and 8 to Norf for 2 and 22? 

if they hold those picks they're on record as wanting midfield class, but i think a King/Armstrong combination would be really tempting for them 

They can get a Smilie/Reid/Trainor/Armstrong possibly Tauru combo for 7&8. They need that. I'd be happy with those two picks in the hand if I was them. 


56 minutes ago, DistrACTION Jackson said:

I think that it was allowed because they had two 2025 first round picks.

Tbh I don’t know why they put those restrictions. Clubs should be allowed to do what they want with all picks and wear the consequences if they get it wrong.

Yep they got Carlton’s future first.

Next year teams can trade two years in advance and I think less restrictions on the rounds of picks. I don’t mind the way it keeps teams from selling too much but it’s too restrictive as is 

22 minutes ago, Mouseymoo said:

They can get a Smilie/Reid/Trainor/Armstrong possibly Tauru combo for 7&8. They need that. I'd be happy with those two picks in the hand if I was them. 

Going backwards with pick 8 is the rumour, possibly to GWS or Richmond.

I think that’s sensible if get a premium for it. I’m sure we are thinking the same with 9 but I suspect it will take a monster deal to move more than a few spots.

1 hour ago, Ted Lasso said:

The Saints 2 picks are really interesting, would they offer up 7 and 8 to Norf for 2 and 22? 

if they hold those picks they're on record as wanting midfield class, but i think a King/Armstrong combination would be really tempting for them 

That would be madness.

 

Another one people probably won’t be happy with. Has us taking:

5: Reid

9: Armstrong

9 minutes ago, 2021 said:

Another one people probably won’t be happy with. Has us taking:

5: Reid

9: Armstrong

No thanks. Armstrong a big . I honestly think he’s the 4th most attractive KP prospect in this draft, behind Tauru, Trainor and Shanahan. Place the trust in JVR and Jeffo. Reid at 9 wouldn’t be disastrous, but not my first choice. 


On 30/10/2024 at 16:30, spirit of norm smith said:

@Ted Lasso yes we are nearly aligned. 

#5… likely Smith or Langford.  Either is a great addition.  👏👏👏


However in outcome , I can’t see the Dees taking both Smith & Reid. 


in your scenario, at “9”, I think it’s either Allan, Lindsay or Travaglia.  
If Smith at 5, I’d take Allan at 9.  They would compliment each other perfectly in a future midfield. Allan can play half back or strong inside midfield role.  
If Langford at 5, then it’s either Lindsay or Travaglia as the best choice.  Again players added that present inside power and outside running.   

I’m not keen on Armstrong at 5 or 9. Nor Reid.  Both are good youngsters but I think others are better as well as fit the future structure. 

1 hour ago, 2021 said:

Another one people probably won’t be happy with. Has us taking:

5: Reid

9: Armstrong

Reid looks pretty good. Admittedly I’ve only seen his highlight reel but he comes across with outstanding skill and footy smarts. He is another one that could be anything. Would be great to get him at 9

33 minutes ago, old55 said:

ABC draft ranking, it's not a phantom draft. Not too many surprises or new information 

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-11-06/2024-afl-draft-rankings-top-30-ashcroft-draper-smith/104562052

Whilst not a phantom their order would have us getting  Lalor and Tauru which I would not have an issue with (though probably prefer Allan at 9 even with the alleged go home factor). 

Edited by Lil_red_fire_engine


1 hour ago, BangBnagBang said:

Mostly very good. Prediction is Langford at “5” and Reid at “9”.   Happy with Langford. Reid is a very good and smart player however I prefer Allan or Lindsay if that’s the available players for that choice.  

16 minutes ago, spirit of norm smith said:

Mostly very good. Prediction is Langford at “5” and Reid at “9”.   Happy with Langford. Reid is a very good and smart player however I prefer Allan or Lindsay if that’s the available players for that choice.  

Would personally be really happy with this outcome, one of the best outcomes for us IMO. 2 players with elite footy IQ, skills, and flexibility to play all over the ground. I’m a massive fan of Reid, he still has tackle breaking and evasive ability at his size to offset his lack of leg speed and think he will best suited to set the game up off half back. I’d be happy with Allan at 9 as well but Lindsay I’m not a massive fan of.

I'd prefer Lindsay @ 9 if we're going another mid. Would like some pace to offset Langfords lack of pure break-away speed.. 


2 hours ago, Mouseymoo said:

I'd prefer Lindsay @ 9 if we're going another mid. Would like some pace to offset Langfords lack of pure break-away speed.. 

Lindsay is an elite ball user. Not sure if you could say that about anyone in our current midfield or our list. 

1 hour ago, Beetle said:

Smith (6) and Armstrong (11)

Davis going to GWS at 25, yet they haven’t even spoken to him 

1 hour ago, spirit of norm smith said:

Lindsay is an elite ball user. Not sure if you could say that about anyone in our current midfield or our list. 

The Duke ? Salo? McVee ? 

 
2 hours ago, spirit of norm smith said:

Lindsay is an elite ball user. Not sure if you could say that about anyone in our current midfield or our list. 

From what I’ve seen he’s an elite ball user when he has time and space. However when under pressure his decision making is quite panicky and doesn’t deal with physicality well. Just in my opinion is why I like Reid more than Lindsay because he deals with pressure much better and his disposal is just as elite. Lindsay is quicker than Reid but I still wouldn’t say Lindsay is “quick”.

1 hour ago, 58er said:

The Duke ? Salo? McVee ? 

No.


Salem is certainly up and under kicks. Certainly not sharp in the last 3 years. Often kicked it 15 metres sideways. Windsor is too early to call. I would say he runs and gets metres etc and love that but disposal efficiency this year was low at around 55% 
Mcvee was composed and assured but I wouldn’t say his kicking is elite.  Definitely good with ball in hand and around the 70/75% level. 

We need midfielders with high kicking efficiency to deliver forward connection

Edited by spirit of norm smith
Our


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

  • 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.

    • 17 replies
  • 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.

    • 1 reply
  • 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.

    • 1 reply
  • 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
  • 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?

      • Thumb Down
    • 232 replies
  • 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