Farewell Luke Jackson

[Willmoy1947 3,765]

Boys don't really do much around the  house, I know, especially if they like footy.

[CHF 2,587]

Earlier on this season I posted on this thread information that came to me from a usually reliable contact that the deal was all but settled and that Luke would sign within two weeks an extension of two years. That, of course, did not happen. Since then I have not bothered to post on this thread the whispers that I have heard. So many of them were conflicting and sounded more like wishes than a reflection of the true situation.

My reading of all that I have heard is that, while there is a very, very good offer on the table from Freo for Luke, it is not a done deal. The main problem is Freo will have trouble meeting our requested asking price and that Luke is reluctant to consider a WC offer.

This may end up in the Dees getting a deal across the line for a 2 year deal while Freo get their ducks in line for a reasonable deal.

This is purely my conjecture. I do not think anyone outside the MFC have any real idea of what is going on as lips are sealed on this and there are no real leaks.

Good to see and good that it is not really a distraction with the new Finals season coming up.

[rjay 23,883]

1 hour ago, dazzledavey36 said:

completely fooled everyone on demonland back in 2014/2015

Not me...but I get your point, there were many true believers.

[Gawndy the Great 7,299]

21 hours ago, mo64 said:

Nick Daicos goes 1 and Jackson is not even close. I'd take Sam Darcy at 2. And there are numerous other players that have played more consistently better football than Jackson, such as Serong, Young and Noah Anderson.

I’d give you Daicos, but Young, Serong, Anderson are all a dime a dozen. 

LJ is playing well above the benchmark for his age and position. And that is rarity, which makes him so valuable. 

[In Harmes Way 7,482]

4 hours ago, Redleg said:

There are a lot of strategically placed rules in the AFL, like the rule that makes the Dees play at Cats ground 29 times in last 30 years while Blues, Bombers, Pies and Tigers never see the place. Another rule is the one that allows Cats to play bottom 2 sides twice and hardly play any top sides twice.

Do you think Stephen Hocking will call Scotty's brother and orchestrate another AFL master stroke intervention to get Luke Jackson down to the cattery?

[Redleg 37,520]

1 hour ago, CHF said:

Earlier on this season I posted on this thread information that came to me from a usually reliable contact that the deal was all but settled and that Luke would sign within two weeks an extension of two years. That, of course, did not happen. Since then I have not bothered to post on this thread the whispers that I have heard. So many of them were conflicting and sounded more like wishes than a reflection of the true situation.

My reading of all that I have heard is that, while there is a very, very good offer on the table from Freo for Luke, it is not a done deal. The main problem is Freo will have trouble meeting our requested asking price and that Luke is reluctant to consider a WC offer.

This may end up in the Dees getting a deal across the line for a 2 year deal while Freo get their ducks in line for a reasonable deal.

This is purely my conjecture. I do not think anyone outside the MFC have any real idea of what is going on as lips are sealed on this and there are no real leaks.

Good to see and good that it is not really a distraction with the new Finals season coming up.

The thing that is interesting to me, is our interest in Grundy. If LJ stays, I am sure we wouldn’t consider him.

We are not the sort of club to mislead a player and that makes me think we have done an in principle deal with Freo, or are close to doing one.

IMO if we had any hope we could keep LJ, we wouldn’t be talking to Grundy.

We may have already made a commitment to Grundy and he to us and if so that would have to mean we have given up on keeping LJ.

That is my reading of the tea 🫖  leaves at this point.

Then again.

[Redleg 37,520]

11 minutes ago, In Harmes Way said:

Do you think Stephen Hocking will call Scotty's brother and orchestrate another AFL master stroke intervention to get Luke Jackson down to the cattery?

That may be even beyond the Scott brothers.

[adonski 9,104]

Reckon Grundy and Jackson would get along like a house on fire 

Grundy would take Jacko to tag some trains, Jacko would take Grundy to Seaworld

It'd be a beautiful relationship

 

[CHF 2,587]

41 minutes ago, Redleg said:

The thing that is interesting to me, is our interest in Grundy. If LJ stays, I am sure we wouldn’t consider him.

We are not the sort of club to mislead a player and that makes me think we have done an in principle deal with Freo, or are close to doing one.

IMO if we had any hope we could keep LJ, we wouldn’t be talking to Grundy.

We may have already made a commitment to Grundy and he to us and if so that would have to mean we have given up on keeping LJ.

That is my reading of the tea 🫖  leaves at this point.

Then again.

Yeah Red, that could well be the case. However, I am sure we are talking to a number of players to ensure we have a few options in place depending on what plays out. It is just that the Grundy meeting became public knowledge. 

[Bay Riffin 1,413]

5 hours ago, Jjrogan said:

If Lobb moves to WB, Freo will get pick 11 (Finals dependant). 

So pick 11 + pick 14 + next year's Freo first rounder (with 2nd going back maybe). 

3 first rounders is probably around the mark and equivalent to a top 3 pick + top 10 pick.  Freo's argument will be theres the adequate draft capital/value, its up to us to convert into top whatever.  (this should be the minimum imo)

As an aside, drafting in recent years has been very, very good across all clubs. Very few misses. 3 picks in the top 20 will likely land us some talent or the capital to acquire a King, Mckay etc. 

yeah nah - future picks arent great when we are red hot in the window now. I can't see how Freo do this. and I reckon Lobb will be a matching second rounder. He's older and it will be a middle of the road contract by the Doggies.

[Lord Nev 13,511]

21 minutes ago, Bay Riffin said:

yeah nah - future picks arent great when we are red hot in the window now.

We're also red hot in the salary cap. We may opt for picks more in the next couple of years than we have in the last couple.

 

[Nascent 7,223]

7 hours ago, Demon3 said:

Spot on, and there is no doubt it has to be a top 6 pick and another under pick 15. Again, how this happens no one really knows. I suggest Luke is very keen to get to Freo, and that it will happen, even though West Coast are sniffing. History says most get to the team they want to (with a couple exceptions - Cerra last year being one). Its going to be really challenging to get what we deserve in my opinion with out Freo having the collateral to get inside the top 10, let alone the top 5/6. 

Whatever ends up happening, I wouldn't be surprised to see our future first thrown into the mix to climb as high into the first round this year as possible. 2 x first rounders from freo and 1 from us to get a top 5 and mid first or something along those lines.

There looks to be multiple teams that will acquire first round picks that could assist us/freo. Adelaide losing Rankin, Dogs potentially losing Dunkley and GWS losing Taranto, Hopper and Bruhn. There should be enough picks in the first round changing hands that should provide us opportunity.

 

[Demons1858 1,657]

3 hours ago, Bay Riffin said:

yeah nah - future picks arent great when we are red hot in the window now. I can't see how Freo do this. and I reckon Lobb will be a matching second rounder. He's older and it will be a middle of the road contract by the Doggies.

future picks are fine, we just swap them with another club for current picks ... we've been do it every year

[rpfc 27,406]

9 hours ago, Lord Nev said:

We're also red hot in the salary cap. We may opt for picks more in the next couple of years than we have in the last couple.

 

Don’t know about this, if we can afford to keep LJ/take on Grundy we have space… plus the cap goes up $600k next year from a report I heard on Sportsday. Shift Weideman and Tomlinson and you have more.

[Lord Nev 13,511]

25 minutes ago, rpfc said:

Don’t know about this, if we can afford to keep LJ/take on Grundy we have space… plus the cap goes up $600k next year from a report I heard on Sportsday. Shift Weideman and Tomlinson and you have more.

The LJ budget space becomes the Grundy budget space I suppose.

Weid is a fair chance to be traded (if we find anyone interested), but his wage off the books won't make any difference at all, he'd be on very very little. Tommo still contracted and handy depth, won't be going anywhere. There may be other players who make way though. But if you think about who we've re-signed the last 2 years and who we have to sign the next 2, it makes sense we'd be mostly looking at the draft for now.

[Roger Mellie 3,485]

On 8/28/2022 at 10:19 PM, mo64 said:

Nick Daicos goes 1 and Jackson is not even close. I'd take Sam Darcy at 2. And there are numerous other players that have played more consistently better football than Jackson, such as Serong, Young and Noah Anderson.

Why don't you compare apples with apples when lamenting Jackson's footballing ability/consistency?

He's in his third year and has just clocked up 50 games - not bad for a ruck!

Lets compare him with say Darcy Cameron - he's also just clocked up 50 games. The difference is, he was drafted in 2016 and debuted in 2018. Sam Draper, also drafted in 2016, is up to 43 games. Sean Darcy, also from the 2016 draft, tops the lot with 81 games. I'm sure in hindsight, many would have picked Sean Darcy a hell of a lot higher than pick 38. Imagine Jackson's tally after 6 years in the system.

I don't believe it's reasonable to demand consistency from a third year ruck that's already way ahead of the pack. so long as he continues to develop and improve. His game's looking pretty good at the pointy end of the season too.

 

[layzie 28,543]

It's bananas in the first place to be considering taking on Grundy and his whopper contract.

However it is a whole bushel of bananas to suggest we keep Jackson AND get Grundy in as well. 

[Binmans PA 25,921]

11 hours ago, Redleg said:

The thing that is interesting to me, is our interest in Grundy. If LJ stays, I am sure we wouldn’t consider him.

We are not the sort of club to mislead a player and that makes me think we have done an in principle deal with Freo, or are close to doing one.

IMO if we had any hope we could keep LJ, we wouldn’t be talking to Grundy.

We may have already made a commitment to Grundy and he to us and if so that would have to mean we have given up on keeping LJ.

That is my reading of the tea 🫖  leaves at this point.

Then again.

I think we'd be professional enough to say, Brody, if LJ leaves, we'd love to have you on board, otherwise we won't have the cap space.

And he goes, I'm happy to stay at the Pies, but if a deal eventuates for LJ, I'm happy to nominate Melbourne too.

This is a perfectly reasonable position.

Clubs have to be able to plan contingencies and with players nominating at season's end, clubs have to do some alternative groundwork before this time so they're not left hopping.

Edited August 29, 2022 by A F

[Macca 16,173]

1 minute ago, layzie said:

It's bananas in the first place to be considering taking on Grundy and his whopper contract.

Not if the strategy is to play 2 first 18 rucks in the same team

And when we drafted Jackson that was the path that we undertook.  So replacing Jackson with Grundy just continues on that same path.  And Grundy is a proven ruckman

Either Jackson or Grundy will/would be paid quite well (as well as Gawn) The talk is that the Pies can pay a percentage of Grundy's contract ongoing and if all it takes is a swap of draft picks to acquire Grundy, he comes cheap

The FD/MC decided long ago that we were not going to use Gawn as the sole ruckman.  Remembering that Gawn will be a 31yo going into next season

The way I see it, going into 2023 Gawn would have 2 or 3 years left and Grundy 5 or 6 years left.  When Gawn retires we replace him with another starting 18 ruckman to work with Grundy (or Jackson)

That's of course if we continue down the path of playing 2 first 18 ruckman in the same team

[layzie 28,543]

2 minutes ago, Macca said:

Not if the strategy is to play 2 first 18 rucks in the same team

And when we drafted Jackson that was the path that we undertook.  So replacing Jackson with Grundy just continues on that same path.  And Grundy is a proven ruckman

Either Jackson or Grundy will/would be paid quite well (as well as Gawn) The talk is that the Pies can pay a percentage of Grundy's contract ongoing and if all it takes is a swap of draft picks to acquire Grundy, he comes cheap

The FD/MC decided long ago that we were not going to use Gawn as the sole ruckman.  Remembering that Gawn will be a 31yo going into next season

The way I see it, going into 2023 Gawn would have 2 or 3 years left and Grundy 5 or 6 years left.  When Gawn retires we replace him with another starting 18 ruckman to work with Grundy (or Jackson)

That's of course if we continue down the path of playing 2 first 18 ruckman in the same team

I'm just not sure Macca. There's been some excellent cases put forward such as yours and they all make good sense. There is no reason why a tandem can't work between Gawn and Grundy but I can't help but feel that there's a bit of sqaure peg round hole about this one. Or maybe, round peg but the hole hasn't been drilled yet. 

Grundy is younger than Gawn yes, but only by a couple of years and I'm not convinced that he's any less banged up. 

I'm not inflexible though and I could come around to this way of thinking when trade period is here. At this stage I would love to save a bit of money to throw at someone who can help us up forward, but if Collingwood are happy to pay a decent chunk then you'd be crazy not to look at him. 

[Macca 16,173]

32 minutes ago, A F said:

I think we'd be professional enough to say, Brody, if LJ leaves, we'd love to have you on board, otherwise we won't have the cap space.

And he goes, I'm happy to stay at the Lies, but if a deal eventuates for LJ, I'm happy to nominate Melbourne too.

This is a perfectly reasonable position.

Clubs have to be able to plan contingencies and with players nominating at seasons end, clubs have to do some alternative groundwork before this time so they're not left hopping.

And we have interviewed Grundy (that is public knowledge) so I it stands to reason that there is a fair chance that an in-principle trade has possibly been agreed to for Jackson's services

Let's face it, it would be hard to believe that Jackson possibly being on the move has just been a lot of talk.  Where there's smoke, there's fire and all that

So logically, Grundy therefore steps in as the replacement for Jackson

The thinking around footy clubs (and the supporters) is to just play one ruckman with another tall used in a chop-out role

But by contrast, Gawn played mainly forward against the Lions in r23 but he rucked in at least 40% of the ground and had 26 hit outs.  That's playing a large role as a ruckman yet LJ was the main man

Edited August 29, 2022 by Macca

[Macca 16,173]

16 minutes ago, layzie said:

I'm just not sure Macca. There's been some excellent cases put forward such as yours and they all make good sense. There is no reason why a tandem can't work between Gawn and Grundy but I can't help but feel that there's a bit of sqaure peg round hole about this one. Or maybe, round peg but the hole hasn't been drilled yet. 

Grundy is younger than Gawn yes, but only by a couple of years and I'm not convinced that he's any less banged up. 

I'm not inflexible though and I could come around to this way of thinking when trade period is here. At this stage I would love to save a bit of money to throw at someone who can help us up forward, but if Collingwood are happy to pay a decent chunk then you'd be crazy not to look at him. 

I reckon it's fairly obvious that we will replace LJ with another bona-fide starting 18 ruckman if LJ is traded

Why else would we quite openly interview Grundy?  And I see the 3 years difference in age between Gawn & Grundy as a positive.  We get Grundy for 5 or 6 years and after 3 years of having Grundy as a ruckman we replace Gawn with another bona-fide ruckman or an understudy

Another smooth change over much like the smooth change over between Jackson & Grundy (if LJ leaves)

Of course something can always go wrong but any type of recruiting has an element of risk

Against all that is has been our general recruiting in the last decade - first rate

We are in very good hands and if ever there was a time to trust, it's now

Edited August 29, 2022 by Macca

[Binmans PA 25,921]

20 minutes ago, Macca said:

... there is a fair chance that an in-principle trade has possibly been agreed to for Jackson's services.

I'm not so sure...

[Demon3 2,541]

We will be very keen to get top end talent in. Our list profile is in a great spot, out top end talent are young and coming into there prime years. Ironically, our greatest priority will be a ruckman as Max is getting on, so Losing Jackson is twofold. our last 2 drafts highest pick has been pick 19 i think.. and our first pick this year is in the 30s.. that's a 3 year hole of no real genuine a grade picks. I know drafting is subjective, but the top 10 really does offer the best chance to keep a consistent evolving a grade list. 

Also that's why Freo will be very hard pressed to satisfy what we will ask for, and then for them to get inside the top 10 may take other clubs and that may take time, which might hold up other moves we are keen to make, because, Jackson's wage will be the gauge to see what we can offer other players. P

Lots to play out for us to get the 2 picks inside the first round (1 of those to be top 5/6) that we want. 

[Kent 2,578]

2 minutes ago, A F said:

I'm not so sure...

There is zero evidence for that !