Jump to content

Featured Replies

He’s not coming 

At least we’ve got a 32 yo ruckman, who can’t get a game with anyone else

 
6 minutes ago, Billy said:

He’s not coming 

At least we’ve got a 32 yo ruckman, who can’t get a game with anyone else

How do you know this?

Remembering Derksen himself is a mid season rookie pick up who hasn't managed a senior game so we shouldn't be too upset.

Edited by Roost it far

44 minutes ago, Billy said:

He’s not coming 

At least we’ve got a 32 yo ruckman, who can’t get a game with anyone else

Yep as competent backup to Max, on minimum wage, happy to toil away in the 2’s. Something we’ve been crying out for for years. He’s not supposed to be Polly Farmer.

 
1 minute ago, Dee Boys said:

Yep as competent backup to Max, on minimum wage, happy to toil away in the 2’s. Something we’ve been crying out for for years. He’s not supposed to be Polly Farmer.

We are crying out for a 2nd ruck/forward to relieve JVR of ruck duties, as well as a backup ruckman who is happy to toil in the 2's.

3 hours ago, Lord Travis said:

Future fourth should get it done.

Unlikely I reckon. From next year fourth rounder picks are worth zero draft points.


3 hours ago, Elwood 3184 said:

The Giants recruited Wade Derksen in the 2022 AFL Mid-Season Rookie Draft so he’s been at the club for 2½ seasons without gaining senior selection. If they think he’s so precious then fine, keep him but really, is there much point?

Harry Petty had barely played before 2021 and was a vital part of the flag.

Not saying Derk’s on that level but they probably lose Leek Aleer next year and then won’t have any key defensive depth after that.

They might lose Derksen too but at least they’d have all year to try to convince him to stay.

If I were GWS I’d need more compelling personal reasons than I’ve seen currently OR to find cheap tall defensive depth. Without either of those I’m keeping him. 

6 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

Harry Petty had barely played before 2021 and was a vital part of the flag.

Not saying Derk’s on that level but they probably lose Leek Aleer next year and then won’t have any key defensive depth after that.

They might lose Derksen too but at least they’d have all year to try to convince him to stay.

If I were GWS I’d need more compelling personal reasons than I’ve seen currently OR to find cheap tall defensive depth. Without either of those I’m keeping him. 

They've got 3 picks in the top 20 this year. Picking a suitable Derksen replacement shouldn't be too hard. I'd hope a 3rd rounder will get it done or perhaps a F2 if Lamb wants to continue to overpay

Edited by Roost it far

On 30/09/2024 at 19:36, buck_nekkid said:

I once got sand under my derkskin…..

Haha just saw this, very funny… I always thought the derksen was that dangly bit at the back of your mouth?

 
33 minutes ago, Roost it far said:

They've got 3 picks in the top 20 this year. Picking a suitable Derksen replacement shouldn't be too hard. I'd hope a 3rd rounder will get it done or perhaps a F2 if Lamb wants to continue to overpay

Picking their next young key defender is something they can probably do but it doesn’t help them win a flag in the next 2-4 years. 

Lamb overpaid for McAdam given he was out of contract and could’ve walked. Very different scenario for someone in contract.

7 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

Picking their next young key defender is something they can probably do but it doesn’t help them win a flag in the next 2-4 years. 

Lamb overpaid for McAdam given he was out of contract and could’ve walked. Very different scenario for someone in contract.

Do you think Derksen helps them that much? I see him as surplus to their needs. My guess is they’ll let him go but are quite rightly using the loss of Cummings as a way to increase his value. If they can snare pick 25 from us they’d be laughing, along with most of the comp towards us atm. 


6 minutes ago, Roost it far said:

Do you think Derksen helps them that much? I see him as surplus to their needs. My guess is they’ll let him go but are quite rightly using the loss of Cummings as a way to increase his value. If they can snare pick 25 from us they’d be laughing, along with most of the comp towards us atm. 

For a normal club you’d hold out for an early 3rd and call it a win. But GWS now have 3 extra picks from players leaving and perhaps Stone too, so that pick is a waste of time for them.

Or, they find a ready made replacement. But the ready made key back replacement list is yuck.

If they get a second out of us they probably do it for compassionate reasons. Maybe we can convince them for a 3rd

I agree about the early second. There’s no way we should do that.

55 minutes ago, Roost it far said:

Do you think Derksen helps them that much? I see him as surplus to their needs. My guess is they’ll let him go but are quite rightly using the loss of Cummings as a way to increase his value. If they can snare pick 25 from us they’d be laughing, along with most of the comp towards us atm. 

He is a very valuable player to them as they only have Hogan, Riccardi, Cadman, Gruzewski, Buckley, Taylor, Himmelberg and Brown ahead of him and  he hasn’t managed a game in his 2 years at the club.

Yep, he is a must to hang onto, given they have no salary cap issues and he is their most valuable key position player.

 

Heard the interview with Jason McCartney this morning.

He was very adamant that Derksen would not be traded.

Disappointing as I was one who was excited with his potential and ability. 

3 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Heard the interview with Jason McCartney this morning.

He was very adamant that Derksen would not be traded.

Disappointing as I was one who was excited with his potential and ability. 

He is talking sh-t.

He should stick to chesting/bumping opposition players during games.

Edited by Redleg

2 hours ago, DeeSpencer said:

Harry Petty had barely played before 2021 and was a vital part of the flag.

Not saying Derk’s on that level but they probably lose Leek Aleer next year and then won’t have any key defensive depth after that.

They might lose Derksen too but at least they’d have all year to try to convince him to stay.

If I were GWS I’d need more compelling personal reasons than I’ve seen currently OR to find cheap tall defensive depth. Without either of those I’m keeping him. 

Yep PETTY IN THE BACKLNE BUT Goodwin has no idea! Anyway Derky Wadeloss is NO LOSS, Hasn't played a bloody game... GIVE ME JEFFO ANYDAY!

Edited by picket fence


13 hours ago, Roost it far said:

How do you know this?

Remembering Derksen himself is a mid season rookie pick up who hasn't managed a senior game so we shouldn't be too upset.

You make some outlandish statements RIF 

He has a good profile for no AFL games so far and is very versatile in ruck back or forward. 

Probably equivalent or ahead of Jeffo in experience. Good size also. 
Hope we can lure him for next year.

19 minutes ago, 58er said:

You make some outlandish statements RIF 

He has a good profile for no AFL games so far and is very versatile in ruck back or forward. 

Probably equivalent or ahead of Jeffo in experience. Good size also. 
Hope we can lure him for next year.

His CV reminds me of a slight downgrade on Fullerton 

Not sure it’s a big deal either way but I will be furious if we hand over pick 25 for this bloke 

Edited by Sydee

26 minutes ago, Sydee said:

His CV reminds me of a slight downgrade on Fullerton 

Not sure it’s a big deal either way but I will be furious if we hand over pick 25 for this bloke 

That’s what McCartney is probably pushing for a better deal than his profile demands.

We are quick to trade players for unders and are probably seen as a soft touch and then pay overs to trade in to get the deal done.

Imagine paying what you get for Nibbler for an untried player of 23 years old. 3rd in our B and F last night and a Premiership player who never misses a game for a maybe. 

We traded Bedford for 44 and he is now a regular in their team and as described by them one of their most important tagging/pressure/goal assist players.

Edited by Redleg


1 hour ago, Pipefitter said:

Come on Derk, trot out the “family reasons”.

Pretty sure that's the main reason for the trade. 

Just had twins and there is zero family support for them up in Sydney where as Wade has family down in Melbourne. 

1 minute ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Pretty sure that's the main reason for the trade. 

Just had twins and there is zero family support for them up in Sydney where as Wade has family down in Melbourne. 

Pretty sure he will be a Dee, McCartney just posturing.

11 hours ago, Redleg said:

He is a very valuable player to them as they only have Hogan, Riccardi, Cadman, Gruzewski, Buckley, Taylor, Himmelberg and Brown ahead of him and  he hasn’t managed a game in his 2 years at the club.

Yep, he is a must to hang onto, given they have no salary cap issues and he is their most valuable key position player.

 

Agree. Derksen is a good young player but the Giants are stacked with tall forwards and tall defenders. They should honour his request.   He’s family support should be recognized by the Giants.  Dees should keep asking the question.  

 
12 hours ago, Roost it far said:

Do you think Derksen helps them that much? I see him as surplus to their needs. My guess is they’ll let him go but are quite rightly using the loss of Cummings as a way to increase his value. If they can snare pick 25 from us they’d be laughing, along with most of the comp towards us atm. 

Their list manager (can't remember his name) was on Gettable about a month ago and mentioned what a bargain Toby Bedford was. Perhaps they are going back for seconds and trying to ramp up the price. My preference is that they GAGF.

Every year there are fringe player swho wants to leave, but the clubs who hold them label them as a "required player".

They always end up being traded, often on the last day and for late picks.

It'll get done.


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

  • GAMEDAY: Collingwood

    It's Game Day and the Demons face a monumental task as they take on the top-of-the-table Magpies in one of the biggest games on the Dees calendar: the King's Birthday Big Freeze MND match. Can the Demons defy the odds and claim a massive scalp to keep their finals hopes alive?

      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 615 replies
  • CASEY: Collingwood

    It was freezing cold at Mission Whitten Stadium where only the brave came out in the rain to watch a game that turned out to be as miserable as the weather.
    The Casey Demons secured their third consecutive victory, earning the four premiership points and credit for defeating a highly regarded Collingwood side, but achieved little else. Apart perhaps from setting the scene for Monday’s big game at the MCG and the Ice Challenge that precedes it.
    Neither team showcased significant skill in the bleak and greasy conditions, at a location that was far from either’s home territory. Even the field umpires forgot where they were and experienced a challenging evening, but no further comment is necessary.

      • Thanks
    • 4 replies
  • 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.

      • Thanks
    • 216 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.

      • Thanks
    • 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.

      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 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? 

      • Thanks
    • 4 replies