Jake Melksham


#2401

No way that Melksham will ever have an “easier ride” than what he experienced at Essendon.


#2402
No way that Melksham will ever have an "easier ride" than what he experienced at Essendon.

Jack Watts has played 115 of 154 games since drafting (112 of 132 since his 2nd year)…


#2403
No way that Melksham will ever have an "easier ride" than what he experienced at Essendon.

Jack Watts has played 115 of 154 games since drafting (112 of 132 since his 2nd year)…

I think he might have been in the best twice in that time.


#2404

Had a baby girl

Congratulations Jake.


#2405

Will have more time to devote to being a Dad. Not all bad for young Jake.


#2406

Well gee, been forced out of the game for a year. Reckons he’s pretty happy with the extra 2 years on the contract on more coin that Melbourne offered, particularly with the new kid.

From memory, someone posted at the time that he was in tears when he informed the club he was leaving. Didn’t want to leave but the contract terms being offered by Melbourne were simply way too better than what we were offering for it to make sense for him to stay.


#2407
Well gee, been forced out of the game for a year. Reckons he's pretty happy with the extra 2 years on the contract on more coin that Melbourne offered, particularly with the new kid.

From memory, someone posted at the time that he was in tears when he informed the club he was leaving. Didn’t want to leave but the contract terms being offered by Melbourne were simply way too better than what we were offering for it to make sense for him to stay.

Well gee, been forced out of the game for a year. Reckons he's pretty happy with the extra 2 years on the contract on more coin that Melbourne offered, particularly with the new kid.

From memory, someone posted at the time that he was in tears when he informed the club he was leaving. Didn’t want to leave but the contract terms being offered by Melbourne were simply way too better than what we were offering for it to make sense for him to stay.


Sounds about right. I had him as a list clogger but even for those who thought he was a good player, if you get offered a 4-year deal you have to take it and thank them for their service. Same deal with Gus, 4 year deal is too good to pass up so well done to them.

#2408
Well gee, been forced out of the game for a year. Reckons he's pretty happy with the extra 2 years on the contract on more coin that Melbourne offered, particularly with the new kid.

From memory, someone posted at the time that he was in tears when he informed the club he was leaving. Didn’t want to leave but the contract terms being offered by Melbourne were simply way too better than what we were offering for it to make sense for him to stay.

Sounds about right. I had him as a list clogger but even for those who thought he was a good player, if you get offered a 4-year deal you have to take it and thank them for their service. Same deal with Gus, 4 year deal is too good to pass up so well done to them.

In the context of being a new dad it made total sense to take the deal.

Enjoy your baby girl Jake, your partner should appreciate the extra support you can give her this year, see you out there next year!


#2409
Well gee, been forced out of the game for a year. Reckons he's pretty happy with the extra 2 years on the contract on more coin that Melbourne offered, particularly with the new kid.

From memory, someone posted at the time that he was in tears when he informed the club he was leaving. Didn’t want to leave but the contract terms being offered by Melbourne were simply way too better than what we were offering for it to make sense for him to stay.

Well gee, been forced out of the game for a year. Reckons he's pretty happy with the extra 2 years on the contract on more coin that Melbourne offered, particularly with the new kid.

From memory, someone posted at the time that he was in tears when he informed the club he was leaving. Didn’t want to leave but the contract terms being offered by Melbourne were simply way too better than what we were offering for it to make sense for him to stay.


Sounds about right. I had him as a list clogger but even for those who thought he was a good player, if you get offered a 4-year deal you have to take it and thank them for their service. Same deal with Gus, 4 year deal is too good to pass up so well done to them.

brings up a good side theory that clubs seeking to buy players should always be weary of the current club not willing to match their contract terms on offer.

All power to melk and gus and any other player who’s gotten a better deal by going elsewhere, but it really should have been a red flag to other clubs (and should be to us to when chasing other clubs players) that if a club that knows a player inside and out is only willing to offer 2 years at a certain price, they know something that they aren’t letting on.

Of the players who have left recently none have really gone on to improve beyond what they were producing at Essendon, they produce similar or below, yet they’ve gone out and had better deals thrown at them.
again more power to em in this changing trading/free agency market, just buyer definitely beware.


#2410
Well gee, been forced out of the game for a year. Reckons he's pretty happy with the extra 2 years on the contract on more coin that Melbourne offered, particularly with the new kid.

From memory, someone posted at the time that he was in tears when he informed the club he was leaving. Didn’t want to leave but the contract terms being offered by Melbourne were simply way too better than what we were offering for it to make sense for him to stay.

Well gee, been forced out of the game for a year. Reckons he's pretty happy with the extra 2 years on the contract on more coin that Melbourne offered, particularly with the new kid.

From memory, someone posted at the time that he was in tears when he informed the club he was leaving. Didn’t want to leave but the contract terms being offered by Melbourne were simply way too better than what we were offering for it to make sense for him to stay.


Sounds about right. I had him as a list clogger but even for those who thought he was a good player, if you get offered a 4-year deal you have to take it and thank them for their service. Same deal with Gus, 4 year deal is too good to pass up so well done to them.

brings up a good side theory that clubs seeking to buy players should always be weary of the current club not willing to match their contract terms on offer.

All power to melk and gus and any other player who’s gotten a better deal by going elsewhere, but it really should have been a red flag to other clubs (and should be to us to when chasing other clubs players) that if a club that knows a player inside and out is only willing to offer 2 years at a certain price, they know something that they aren’t letting on.

Of the players who have left recently none have really gone on to improve beyond what they were producing at Essendon, they produce similar or below, yet they’ve gone out and had better deals thrown at them.
again more power to em in this changing trading/free agency market, just buyer definitely beware.

You mean like maybe that player doesn’t fit with their new game plan, or maybe they are rebalancing their age demographic, or some other reason apart from ‘this guy is ■■■■’, or ‘this guy has lost it’?


#2411
Well gee, been forced out of the game for a year. Reckons he's pretty happy with the extra 2 years on the contract on more coin that Melbourne offered, particularly with the new kid.

From memory, someone posted at the time that he was in tears when he informed the club he was leaving. Didn’t want to leave but the contract terms being offered by Melbourne were simply way too better than what we were offering for it to make sense for him to stay.

Well gee, been forced out of the game for a year. Reckons he's pretty happy with the extra 2 years on the contract on more coin that Melbourne offered, particularly with the new kid.

From memory, someone posted at the time that he was in tears when he informed the club he was leaving. Didn’t want to leave but the contract terms being offered by Melbourne were simply way too better than what we were offering for it to make sense for him to stay.


Sounds about right. I had him as a list clogger but even for those who thought he was a good player, if you get offered a 4-year deal you have to take it and thank them for their service. Same deal with Gus, 4 year deal is too good to pass up so well done to them.

brings up a good side theory that clubs seeking to buy players should always be weary of the current club not willing to match their contract terms on offer.

All power to melk and gus and any other player who’s gotten a better deal by going elsewhere, but it really should have been a red flag to other clubs (and should be to us to when chasing other clubs players) that if a club that knows a player inside and out is only willing to offer 2 years at a certain price, they know something that they aren’t letting on.

Of the players who have left recently none have really gone on to improve beyond what they were producing at Essendon, they produce similar or below, yet they’ve gone out and had better deals thrown at them.
again more power to em in this changing trading/free agency market, just buyer definitely beware.

You mean like maybe that player doesn’t fit with their new game plan, or maybe they are rebalancing their age demographic, or some other reason apart from ‘this guy is ■■■■’, or ‘this guy has lost it’?


Needs a change of scenery or there could be salary cap issues.

Also keep in mind that to get someone away from their current club that you will have to pay above market value and to keep them, you can probably pay just below market value (assuming they don’t have an ASADA investigation hanging over their head, fuck you paddy Ryder you cunt)


#2412
Well gee, been forced out of the game for a year. Reckons he's pretty happy with the extra 2 years on the contract on more coin that Melbourne offered, particularly with the new kid.

From memory, someone posted at the time that he was in tears when he informed the club he was leaving. Didn’t want to leave but the contract terms being offered by Melbourne were simply way too better than what we were offering for it to make sense for him to stay.

Well gee, been forced out of the game for a year. Reckons he's pretty happy with the extra 2 years on the contract on more coin that Melbourne offered, particularly with the new kid.

From memory, someone posted at the time that he was in tears when he informed the club he was leaving. Didn’t want to leave but the contract terms being offered by Melbourne were simply way too better than what we were offering for it to make sense for him to stay.


Sounds about right. I had him as a list clogger but even for those who thought he was a good player, if you get offered a 4-year deal you have to take it and thank them for their service. Same deal with Gus, 4 year deal is too good to pass up so well done to them.

brings up a good side theory that clubs seeking to buy players should always be weary of the current club not willing to match their contract terms on offer.

All power to melk and gus and any other player who’s gotten a better deal by going elsewhere, but it really should have been a red flag to other clubs (and should be to us to when chasing other clubs players) that if a club that knows a player inside and out is only willing to offer 2 years at a certain price, they know something that they aren’t letting on.

Of the players who have left recently none have really gone on to improve beyond what they were producing at Essendon, they produce similar or below, yet they’ve gone out and had better deals thrown at them.
again more power to em in this changing trading/free agency market, just buyer definitely beware.

You mean like maybe that player doesn’t fit with their new game plan, or maybe they are rebalancing their age demographic, or some other reason apart from ‘this guy is ■■■■’, or ‘this guy has lost it’?

I imagine if Goodwin wasn’t at Melbourne, melbourne wouldn’t have chased him, very few other clubs would have, and he’d prolly still be at this club.

It’s not about this guy is ■■■■, or lost it.
It’s about the club saying we think this guy offers this this and this and we value it at 2 years at x amount of dollars.

like people said with the Saints and carlisle with the drug stuff, it’s definitely buyer beware.

it’s not limited to our club either, both buying and selling, it’s just easier to point out examples with this club cos we follow it more.

I mean will Chris Yarran be better at Richmond than the blues ? sure he’ll have his sublime games, as well as his mediocre ones, but will it equal out to the same as what he produced at carlton or better or worse ?

Jarryd waite is still Jarrdy waite.

outside of youngsters who swap clubs probably within 2-3 years of their original draft, and out and out superstars, the middle range of players who swap clubs very rarely improve on what the originally offered at their first club.

my original point was more to do with the intricacies of trading and that and getting it right, moreso than player x is ■■■■.


#2413
Well gee, been forced out of the game for a year. Reckons he's pretty happy with the extra 2 years on the contract on more coin that Melbourne offered, particularly with the new kid.

From memory, someone posted at the time that he was in tears when he informed the club he was leaving. Didn’t want to leave but the contract terms being offered by Melbourne were simply way too better than what we were offering for it to make sense for him to stay.

Well gee, been forced out of the game for a year. Reckons he's pretty happy with the extra 2 years on the contract on more coin that Melbourne offered, particularly with the new kid.

From memory, someone posted at the time that he was in tears when he informed the club he was leaving. Didn’t want to leave but the contract terms being offered by Melbourne were simply way too better than what we were offering for it to make sense for him to stay.


Sounds about right. I had him as a list clogger but even for those who thought he was a good player, if you get offered a 4-year deal you have to take it and thank them for their service. Same deal with Gus, 4 year deal is too good to pass up so well done to them.

brings up a good side theory that clubs seeking to buy players should always be weary of the current club not willing to match their contract terms on offer.

All power to melk and gus and any other player who’s gotten a better deal by going elsewhere, but it really should have been a red flag to other clubs (and should be to us to when chasing other clubs players) that if a club that knows a player inside and out is only willing to offer 2 years at a certain price, they know something that they aren’t letting on.

Of the players who have left recently none have really gone on to improve beyond what they were producing at Essendon, they produce similar or below, yet they’ve gone out and had better deals thrown at them.
again more power to em in this changing trading/free agency market, just buyer definitely beware.

You mean like maybe that player doesn’t fit with their new game plan, or maybe they are rebalancing their age demographic, or some other reason apart from ‘this guy is ■■■■’, or ‘this guy has lost it’?

I imagine if Goodwin wasn’t at Melbourne, melbourne wouldn’t have chased him, very few other clubs would have, and he’d prolly still be at this club.

It’s not about this guy is ■■■■, or lost it.
It’s about the club saying we think this guy offers this this and this and we value it at 2 years at x amount of dollars.

like people said with the Saints and carlisle with the drug stuff, it’s definitely buyer beware.

it’s not limited to our club either, both buying and selling, it’s just easier to point out examples with this club cos we follow it more.

I mean will Chris Yarran be better at Richmond than the blues ? sure he’ll have his sublime games, as well as his mediocre ones, but will it equal out to the same as what he produced at carlton or better or worse ?

Jarryd waite is still Jarrdy waite.

outside of youngsters who swap clubs probably within 2-3 years of their original draft, and out and out superstars, the middle range of players who swap clubs very rarely improve on what the originally offered at their first club.

my original point was more to do with the intricacies of trading and that and getting it right, moreso than player x is ■■■■.

You are seeing the value of a player as a stand-alone unit, rather than a piece to a puzzle, or a compliment to a team.


#2414
Well gee, been forced out of the game for a year. Reckons he's pretty happy with the extra 2 years on the contract on more coin that Melbourne offered, particularly with the new kid.

From memory, someone posted at the time that he was in tears when he informed the club he was leaving. Didn’t want to leave but the contract terms being offered by Melbourne were simply way too better than what we were offering for it to make sense for him to stay.

Well gee, been forced out of the game for a year. Reckons he's pretty happy with the extra 2 years on the contract on more coin that Melbourne offered, particularly with the new kid.

From memory, someone posted at the time that he was in tears when he informed the club he was leaving. Didn’t want to leave but the contract terms being offered by Melbourne were simply way too better than what we were offering for it to make sense for him to stay.


Sounds about right. I had him as a list clogger but even for those who thought he was a good player, if you get offered a 4-year deal you have to take it and thank them for their service. Same deal with Gus, 4 year deal is too good to pass up so well done to them.

brings up a good side theory that clubs seeking to buy players should always be weary of the current club not willing to match their contract terms on offer.

All power to melk and gus and any other player who’s gotten a better deal by going elsewhere, but it really should have been a red flag to other clubs (and should be to us to when chasing other clubs players) that if a club that knows a player inside and out is only willing to offer 2 years at a certain price, they know something that they aren’t letting on.

Of the players who have left recently none have really gone on to improve beyond what they were producing at Essendon, they produce similar or below, yet they’ve gone out and had better deals thrown at them.
again more power to em in this changing trading/free agency market, just buyer definitely beware.

You mean like maybe that player doesn’t fit with their new game plan, or maybe they are rebalancing their age demographic, or some other reason apart from ‘this guy is ■■■■’, or ‘this guy has lost it’?

I imagine if Goodwin wasn’t at Melbourne, melbourne wouldn’t have chased him, very few other clubs would have, and he’d prolly still be at this club.

It’s not about this guy is ■■■■, or lost it.
It’s about the club saying we think this guy offers this this and this and we value it at 2 years at x amount of dollars.

like people said with the Saints and carlisle with the drug stuff, it’s definitely buyer beware.

it’s not limited to our club either, both buying and selling, it’s just easier to point out examples with this club cos we follow it more.

I mean will Chris Yarran be better at Richmond than the blues ? sure he’ll have his sublime games, as well as his mediocre ones, but will it equal out to the same as what he produced at carlton or better or worse ?

Jarryd waite is still Jarrdy waite.

outside of youngsters who swap clubs probably within 2-3 years of their original draft, and out and out superstars, the middle range of players who swap clubs very rarely improve on what the originally offered at their first club.

my original point was more to do with the intricacies of trading and that and getting it right, moreso than player x is ■■■■.

I think it'd be hard to argue North didn't get value for Waite last year.

#2415

.


#2416
.

Was it necessary to be so pointed?


#2417

Ha. Tried posting a pic on my tablet but wouldn’t work


#2418
Well gee, been forced out of the game for a year. Reckons he's pretty happy with the extra 2 years on the contract on more coin that Melbourne offered, particularly with the new kid.

From memory, someone posted at the time that he was in tears when he informed the club he was leaving. Didn’t want to leave but the contract terms being offered by Melbourne were simply way too better than what we were offering for it to make sense for him to stay.

Well gee, been forced out of the game for a year. Reckons he's pretty happy with the extra 2 years on the contract on more coin that Melbourne offered, particularly with the new kid.

From memory, someone posted at the time that he was in tears when he informed the club he was leaving. Didn’t want to leave but the contract terms being offered by Melbourne were simply way too better than what we were offering for it to make sense for him to stay.


Sounds about right. I had him as a list clogger but even for those who thought he was a good player, if you get offered a 4-year deal you have to take it and thank them for their service. Same deal with Gus, 4 year deal is too good to pass up so well done to them.

brings up a good side theory that clubs seeking to buy players should always be weary of the current club not willing to match their contract terms on offer.

All power to melk and gus and any other player who’s gotten a better deal by going elsewhere, but it really should have been a red flag to other clubs (and should be to us to when chasing other clubs players) that if a club that knows a player inside and out is only willing to offer 2 years at a certain price, they know something that they aren’t letting on.

Of the players who have left recently none have really gone on to improve beyond what they were producing at Essendon, they produce similar or below, yet they’ve gone out and had better deals thrown at them.
again more power to em in this changing trading/free agency market, just buyer definitely beware.

You mean like maybe that player doesn’t fit with their new game plan, or maybe they are rebalancing their age demographic, or some other reason apart from ‘this guy is ■■■■’, or ‘this guy has lost it’?

I imagine if Goodwin wasn’t at Melbourne, melbourne wouldn’t have chased him, very few other clubs would have, and he’d prolly still be at this club.

It’s not about this guy is ■■■■, or lost it.
It’s about the club saying we think this guy offers this this and this and we value it at 2 years at x amount of dollars.

like people said with the Saints and carlisle with the drug stuff, it’s definitely buyer beware.

it’s not limited to our club either, both buying and selling, it’s just easier to point out examples with this club cos we follow it more.

I mean will Chris Yarran be better at Richmond than the blues ? sure he’ll have his sublime games, as well as his mediocre ones, but will it equal out to the same as what he produced at carlton or better or worse ?

Jarryd waite is still Jarrdy waite.

outside of youngsters who swap clubs probably within 2-3 years of their original draft, and out and out superstars, the middle range of players who swap clubs very rarely improve on what the originally offered at their first club.

my original point was more to do with the intricacies of trading and that and getting it right, moreso than player x is ■■■■.

David Hale
Matthew Spangher
Kyle Cheney
Sam Jacobs
Stefan Martin
Zac Dawson
Josh Gibson
Ben McEvoy
Brent Guerra
Jonathan Seglar
Matt White
Jay Schultz
Rhys Shaw
Darren Jolly
Jeremy Laidlar
Josh Kennedy
Ben McGlynn
Craig Bolton
Ted Richards
Josh Hill
Steven Armstrong

One thing I’ll say, Hawks and Swans have done very well on trades of mid-range players


#2419

Eddie betts


#2420

Gary Ablett Snr
Gary Ablett Jnr

they did ok at their second clubs

and then of coarse Gavin Wanganeen