Jump to content

Featured Replies

11 minutes ago, Demonstone said:

Yet if Grundy ends up at Geelong some posters (not looking at you) will whinge that they have all the luck!

At $700,000 they can have him

That is an absurd figure for an injury prone 29 year old

 
27 minutes ago, Demon17 said:

Do you seriously reckon Jason Taylor will be outplayed on this?

I don't. The one thing I'm certain of the deal will suit us. I love the idea of the Pies paying us to have an AA standard player they no longer want.  Due diligence needed of course to minimise our risk of further health issues.

How much involvement will JT have though? He is more drafting than trading, Josh Mahoney used to be our trading guru - is that Alan Richardson now?

27 minutes ago, Demon17 said:

Do you seriously reckon Jason Taylor will be outplayed on this?

I don't. The one thing I'm certain of the deal will suit us. I love the idea of the Pies paying us to have an AA standard player they no longer want.  Due diligence needed of course to minimise our risk of further health issues.

Let The Filth pay $700,000 a year. And the MFC pay $300,000

Then it is a good deal. 

 
1 minute ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Let The Filth pay $700,000 a year. And the MFC pay $300,000

Then it is a good deal. 

Would rather the filth keep him the next 5 and be obligated in paying his $1m/year salary

21 minutes ago, Demonstone said:

Yet if Grundy ends up at Geelong some posters (not looking at you) will whinge that they have all the luck!

I will be laughing, you can react however way you like


Seriously hope we.come to our senses on this.  Has Deesaster written allover this one.

Picket needs to jump the Fence at the next training session and pay Goody a visit.  I'm happy to pass by the Queen Market for the assist...

man jumping GIF

52 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

At $700,000 they can have him

That is an absurd figure for an injury prone 29 year old

Not that I'm advocating for him, not super keen, but he's 28 and this is the first year he's missed a large amount of games through injury.

17 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

Not that I'm advocating for him, not super keen, but he's 28 and this is the first year he's missed a large amount of games through injury.

Agree and his stats aren't too bad for those that love them. Played nearly every game since his second season. Only played 6 games before injury this year, so a light year for his body.

I am sure the rationale is to let him do all the heavy lifting and extend Max's career.

If you got another 5 years out of both of them, that would be a great result.

If we ended up paying him $600k-$650k a year and give up a lowish pick, for an AA ruckman, who prolongs Max's career into the bargain, that is again another great result.

Imagine a fesh and fit Max coming into a finals series, he could be a match winner like the  2021 PF.

Brodie Grundy

Born:15-Apr-1994 (Debut:19y 103d Last:28y 10d)

Height:203 cm Weight:100 kg

VFL/AFL: 12223rd player to appear, 882nd most games played, 1754th most goals kicked
Collingwood: 1110th player to appear, 57th most games played, 140th most goals kicked
 

Year   Team   #   GM   W-D-L   KI   MK   HB   DI   GL   BH   HO   TK   RB   IF   CL   CG   FF   FA   BR   CP   UP   CM   MI   1%   BO   GA  
Totals 177 89-2-86 1406 615 1674 3080 60 55 5629 741 193 382 722 653 307 314 64 1784 1371 158 51 406 30 53
Averages 17.70 50.85% 7.94 3.47 9.46 17.40 0.34 0.31 31.80 4.19 1.09 2.16 4.08 3.69 1.73 1.77 0.38 10.08 7.75 0.89 0.29 2.29 0.17 0.30
2013 Collingwood 35 7 4-0-3 35 18 53 88 1 3 151 22 3 15 17 22 8 16   52 42 3 3 13   1
2014 Collingwood 4 15 8-0-7 73 36 79 152 3 8 272 51 16 28 24 47 11 29   77 79 11 7 29 1 7
2015 Collingwood 4 19 9-0-10 156 66 137 293 8 3 462 85 24 34 61 61 28 30   154 137 9 5 30 1 6
2016 Collingwood 4 21 9-0-12 190 81 197 387 11 8 548 92 20 43 81 85 39 39 7 205 194 14 10 49 6 5
2017 Collingwood 4 20 9-1-10 166 73 202 368 4 5 714 78 27 42 81 74 26 26 2 197 172 17 3 45 3 5
2018 Collingwood 4 26 17-0-9 206 92 319 525 9 8 1038 134 28 61 138 91 55 43 17 318 223 32 5 73 8 9
2019 Collingwood 4 24 16-0-8 237 105 274 511 7 11 1022 104 28 50 146 102 53 47 23 329 202 29 4 64 4 4
2020 Collingwood 4 19 10-1-8 105 57 168 273 3 3 593 68 14 37 61 48 43 28 6 169 110 20 5 41 2 6
2021 Collingwood 4 20 4-0-16 185 72 197 382 12 6 647 84 28 49 80 92 31 43 9 218 174 20 9 42 3 5
2022 Collingwood 4 6 3-0-3 53 15 48 101 2   182 23 5 23 33 31 13 13   65 38 3   20 2 5

Edited by Redleg

 
2 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Why would we be screwed? Our midfield is strong enough that they should be able to break even at minimum at centre clearance. In fact we have lost centre clearances a number of times the last two years despite having a dominant ruck and midfield! You just need a big body who can compete and bring the ball to ground for our mids and running players. Just compete around the ground and don't get outmarked.

We are blessed to have Max with some of his around the ground work but the ruck position is the most overvalued position in footy.

Except when you don't have a ruckman that can play the position properly

Without Max & Jackson this week we'd be back to Weideman (in a must-win game) That's already happened this season as well

So Jackson looks like he's on the move and Max will be 31 going in to next season.  And Max has the odd injury concern

I can see why we would pursue Grundy as he's a bona-fide ruckman who has been an All-Australian twice with 2 Copeland Trophies to his name.  Going into next season as a 28yo with about 5 years left

He won't cost much in trade value (a swap of late round picks), the Pies would be paying a fair slice of his salary (in a salary that we might have been paying LJ) and we need another ruckman who can play the main role (not just a back-up)

We can also draft or trade for a couple of ruckmen who can act as reserve ruckman (Weideman could be one of those 2)

Fact is that we would be bringing in at least 2 ruckmen in the off-season to replace LJ (if he's gone) and Majak Daw anyway

So why not a ready made, plug in and play ruckman like Grundy? 

I'm not concerned about the money as we would have had the money put aside for LJ anyway (all-up, probably about the same amount)

And you'd have to say that right now, Grundy is a big upgrade on LJ in terms of pure rucking ability

25 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

Not that I'm advocating for him, not super keen, but he's 28 and this is the first year he's missed a large amount of games through injury.

He will be 29 next year and the injury he has sustained is serious 

I wouldn’t be paying that much for him 


10 minutes ago, Redleg said:

Agree and his stats aren't too bad for those that love them. Played nearly every game since his second season. Only played 6 games before injury this year, so a light year for his body.

I am sure the rationale is to let him do all the heavy lifting and extend Max's career.

If you got another 5 years out of both of them, that would be a great result.

If we ended up paying him $600k-$650k a year and give up a lowish pick, for an AA ruckman, who prolongs Max's career into the bargain, that is again another great result.

Imagine a fesh and fit Max coming into a finals series, he could be a match winner like the  2021 PF.

Brodie Grundy

Born:15-Apr-1994 (Debut:19y 103d Last:28y 10d)

Height:203 cm Weight:100 kg

VFL/AFL: 12223rd player to appear, 882nd most games played, 1754th most goals kicked
Collingwood: 1110th player to appear, 57th most games played, 140th most goals kicked
 

Year   Team   #   GM   W-D-L   KI   MK   HB   DI   GL   BH   HO   TK   RB   IF   CL   CG   FF   FA   BR   CP   UP   CM   MI   1%   BO   GA  
Totals 177 89-2-86 1406 615 1674 3080 60 55 5629 741 193 382 722 653 307 314 64 1784 1371 158 51 406 30 53
Averages 17.70 50.85% 7.94 3.47 9.46 17.40 0.34 0.31 31.80 4.19 1.09 2.16 4.08 3.69 1.73 1.77 0.38 10.08 7.75 0.89 0.29 2.29 0.17 0.30
2013 Collingwood 35 7 4-0-3 35 18 53 88 1 3 151 22 3 15 17 22 8 16   52 42 3 3 13   1
2014 Collingwood 4 15 8-0-7 73 36 79 152 3 8 272 51 16 28 24 47 11 29   77 79 11 7 29 1 7
2015 Collingwood 4 19 9-0-10 156 66 137 293 8 3 462 85 24 34 61 61 28 30   154 137 9 5 30 1 6
2016 Collingwood 4 21 9-0-12 190 81 197 387 11 8 548 92 20 43 81 85 39 39 7 205 194 14 10 49 6 5
2017 Collingwood 4 20 9-1-10 166 73 202 368 4 5 714 78 27 42 81 74 26 26 2 197 172 17 3 45 3 5
2018 Collingwood 4 26 17-0-9 206 92 319 525 9 8 1038 134 28 61 138 91 55 43 17 318 223 32 5 73 8 9
2019 Collingwood 4 24 16-0-8 237 105 274 511 7 11 1022 104 28 50 146 102 53 47 23 329 202 29 4 64 4 4
2020 Collingwood 4 19 10-1-8 105 57 168 273 3 3 593 68 14 37 61 48 43 28 6 169 110 20 5 41 2 6
2021 Collingwood 4 20 4-0-16 185 72 197 382 12 6 647 84 28 49 80 92 31 43 9 218 174 20 9 42 3 5
2022 Collingwood 4 6 3-0-3 53 15 48 101 2   182 23 5 23 33 31 13 13   65 38 3   20 2 5

The stats that Grundy accumulated under Buckley's coaching are irrelevant. For those who play Fantasy Football know that Grundy was awarded "Pig Status", an honour that's been bestowed on very few. Tom Mitchell and Tom Rockliff also received this accolade. All 3 would rack up meaningless stats win, lose or draw. Under Buckley, the Pies played a high possession game. Under McRae they play a more daring game. Grundy is excess to their needs.

The only way we should be taking on a large part of his contract is if the Pies give us a 1st or 2nd rd pick. Something similar to the Will Brodie Suns/Dockers trade. If the Pies can't move Grundy's contract, they'll struggle to keep DeGoey or recruit some of their targets. I don't see why we should be giving the Pies a leg up.

I like the idea, mostly because it seems to be the opposite of the consensus around here.

Get in Grundy! If nothing else the game day thread will be filled with fury, finger pointing and rant. So probably not that different.

Not having a good ruck division is fine ..... if you set up your team to not rely on good rucks. 

But we have Max Gawn, one of the best rucks in recent memory. We have set up a game around his ability to win contests and help others win contests. So we have set up a team around his ability to dominate the ball in the air where other teams cannot. It's one of our great advantages as a team. 

A lot of great rucks haven't won flags because their teams haven't been good enough to exploit their skills in a way that wins flags. We don't. We rely on Max's ability to win big contests when we're out of options, which allows us to play defensively. Our game needs good rucks and the FD seem to be doubling down on that. 

Max is the best ruckman in the game. He has won a flag.

19 hours ago, MrFreeze said:

The prospect of making this deal is looking worse and worse 

Imagine trading out Jacko and a first rounder and getting grundy on a monster contract at the end of this 🤮

History of injuries, age, doubt that we'll get 5 years from him. Handy, at best, now and in the future. Nothing more. We'd do better elsewhere, particularly if we could find a young forward or two who might also lend a rucking hand. We have developing talent at Casey and that is some bright future (across the ground) to relish and blood into the big time. Grundy just won't improve any more, but it is conceded that he has been a great footballer. We'd get 40 more more goals per season if we could teach Max to kick - and develop a leading forward line from the talent already there. 

 

Gawn and Grundy would be quite a weapon.  My problem is Grundy was one of the best players in the competition.  Then he got that mega deal and has been poor since.  


23 minutes ago, Axis of Bob said:

Not having a good ruck division is fine ..... if you set up your team to not rely on good rucks. 

But we have Max Gawn, one of the best rucks in recent memory. We have set up a game around his ability to win contests and help others win contests. So we have set up a team around his ability to dominate the ball in the air where other teams cannot. It's one of our great advantages as a team. 

A lot of great rucks haven't won flags because their teams haven't been good enough to exploit their skills in a way that wins flags. We don't. We rely on Max's ability to win big contests when we're out of options, which allows us to play defensively. Our game needs good rucks and the FD seem to be doubling down on that. 

Max is the best ruckman in the game. He has won a flag.

Correct. Max is the best ruckman in the game. So what percentage of game time does Max get as the number 1 ruck when Grundy plays?

What differentiates Max to Grundy is his ability to take contested marks down back or in the forward line as a pure ruckman. Grundy is not a great contested mark. Max is also an excellent runner for his size, and can push forward or back from the contest, whereas Grundy gets from stoppage to stoppage.

Max and Grundy are different players. Max is far more impactful. Why take the pre-eminent ruckman out of his best position for extended periods of the game?

Edited by mo64

2 hours ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Let The Filth pay $700,000 a year. And the MFC pay $300,000

Then it is a good deal. 

Now way any 5 year deal would be "a good deal" given his injury history.  Maybe 3 years with us paying 30%, and the Mugpies paying 70% for the 3 years, then 100% for the final two years after he limps off and away.

53 minutes ago, mo64 said:

The stats that Grundy accumulated under Buckley's coaching are irrelevant. For those who play Fantasy Football know that Grundy was awarded "Pig Status", an honour that's been bestowed on very few. Tom Mitchell and Tom Rockliff also received this accolade. All 3 would rack up meaningless stats win, lose or draw. Under Buckley, the Pies played a high possession game. Under McRae they play a more daring game. Grundy is excess to their needs.

The only way we should be taking on a large part of his contract is if the Pies give us a 1st or 2nd rd pick. Something similar to the Will Brodie Suns/Dockers trade. If the Pies can't move Grundy's contract, they'll struggle to keep DeGoey or recruit some of their targets. I don't see why we should be giving the Pies a leg up.

No dramas, Max can probably play against him at the Cats or Port, as they are apparently very interested too.

I am not advocating we get Grundy, but surely he would be better than a less talented, less experienced ruckman, who will probably cost us about $200k less and may not help Max as much as he can. I don't see any other AA ruckmen rushing over to us.

What is the value of having Max for a couple more years and maybe fitter and fresher in finals? It's also interesting that Max seems to be in favour of getting him across to us and met with him and our FD.

I am sure JT and TL will make the right decision.

10 minutes ago, monoccular said:

Now way any 5 year deal would be "a good deal" given his injury history.  Maybe 3 years with us paying 30%, and the Mugpies paying 70% for the 3 years, then 100% for the final two years after he limps off and away.

His injury history is playing nearly every game since his second season and only really being injured this year.

Let's not rewrite history.

We hold the cards, if the Pies want to facilitate Tarnato, Hill, etc trades they'll effectively have to trade Grundy for pick 50 I reckon


2 hours ago, Demonstone said:

MFC trades for Grundy:  It's a terrible decision.  He's injury prone/too old/contract is too long/$ too big.

GFC trades for Grundy:  It's a great decision.  They keep doing this and never bottom out.  I hate Geelong.

Both can be right though.

Grundy plays best as a solo ruckman and we have Gawn on our list. Geelong don't currently have the same talent in the ruck. He would make them a lot better and might make us worse.

The plan might be a 70/30 split (Grundy70%/Gawn 30%) for on ball ruckwork with Max doing all the ruck work in the forward line pushing up to high half forward

Grundy then drops back or hovers around the middle with that split

And vice-versa when it's roles reversed.  The only sticking point might be if Grundy provides any value in the forward line but that could be off-set somewhat if we go back to playing 2 big-bodied KPF's along with Fritsch as the 3rd forward

Remembering that we went into the finals last year with Ben Brown, T-Mac & Fritsch as the mainstays with Gawn or Jackson floating forward as another marking target.  A flag resulted with that forward line set-up

So in that instance, Grundy would become a dangerous forward with the opposition endeavouring to match up our talls.  And he's a big, imposing lad

The club will want to develop JVR but I'd be surprised if we don't pursue a decent KF (with some experience) in the off-season

Getting Grundy across might just be the 1st or 2nd part of the puzzle (as we may well know what we are getting for LJ and that trade value for LJ might be already earmarked)

List management would have started quite a while ago

Max Gawn only had 56% CBA's against Collingwood for 31 disposals & 10 marks

He will rack up the pill regardless of the role he plays, such is his work rate & marking ability

Reckon Grundy will do the bulk of the heavy lifting in the middle and Gawn will remain a 20+ disposal per game player

Edited by adonski

 
6 minutes ago, adonski said:

Max Gawn only had 56% CBA's against Collingwood for 31 disposals & 10 marks

He will rack up the pill regardless of the role he plays, such is his work rate & marking ability

Reckon Grundy will do the bulk of the heavy lifting in the middle and Gawn will remain a 20+ disposal per game player

Just need Gawn to take a few more marks in the goal square to make sure of them....


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

  • PREVIEW: Essendon

    As the focus of the AFL moves exclusively to South Australia for Gather Round, the question is raised as to what are we going to get from the  Melbourne Football Club this weekend? Will it be a repeat of the slop fest of the last three weeks that have seen the team score a measly 174 points and concede 310 or will a return to the City of Churches and the scene where they performed at their best in 2024 act as a wakeup call and bring them out of their early season reverie?  Or will the sleepy Dees treat their fans to a reenactment of their lazy effort from the first Gather Round of two years ago when they allowed the Bombers to trample all over them on a soggy and wet Adelaide Oval? The two examples from above tell us how fickle form can be in football. Last year, a committed group of players turned up in Adelaide with a businesslike mindset. They had a plan, went in confidently and hard for the football and kicked winning scores against both home teams in a difficult environment for visitors. And they repeated that sort of effort later in the season when they played Essendon at the MCG.

      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 0 replies
    Demonland
  • PREGAME: Essendon

    Facing the very real and daunting prospect of starting the season with five straight losses, the Demons head to South Australia for the annual Gather Round, where they’ll take on the Bombers in search of their first win of the year. Who comes in, and who comes out?

      • Thanks
    • 489 replies
    Demonland
  • NON-MFC: Round 05

    Gather Round is here, kicking off with a Thursday night blockbuster as Adelaide faces Geelong. The Crows will be out for redemption after a controversial loss last week. Saturday starts with the Magpies taking on the Swans. Collingwood will be eager to cement their spot in the top eight, while Sydney is hot on their heels. In the Barossa Valley, two rising sides go head-to-head in a fascinating battle to prove they're the real deal. Later, Carlton and West Coast face off at Adelaide Oval, both desperate to notch their first win of the season. The action then shifts to Norwood, where the undefeated Lions will aim to keep their streak alive against the Bulldogs. Sunday’s games begin in the Barossa with Richmond up against Fremantle. In Norwood, the Saints will be looking to take a scalp when they come up against the Giants. The round concludes with a fiery rematch of last year's semi-final, as the Hawks seek revenge for their narrow loss to Port Adelaide. Who are you tipping this week and what are the best results for the Demons besides us winning?

      • Thanks
    • 188 replies
    Demonland
  • CASEY: Geelong

    There was a time in the second quarter of the game at the Cattery on Friday afternoon when the Casey Demons threatened to take the game apart against the Cats. The Demons had been well on top early but were struggling to convert their ascendancy over the ground until Tom Fullarton’s burst of three goals in the space of eight minutes on the way to a five goal haul and his best game for the club since arriving from Brisbane at the end of 2023. He was leading, marking and otherwise giving his opponents a merry dance as Casey grabbed a three goal lead in the blink of an eye. Fullarton has now kicked ten goals in Casey’s three matches and, with Melbourne’s forward conversion woes, he is definitely in with a chance to get his first game with the club in next week’s Gather Round in Adelaide. Despite the tall forward’s efforts - he finished with 19 disposals and eight marks and had four hit outs as back up to Will Verrall in the second half - it wasn’t enough as Geelong reigned in the lead through persistent attacks and eventually clawed their way to the lead early in the last and held it till they achieved the end aim of victory.

      • Like
    • 0 replies
    Demonland
  • REPORT: Geelong

    I was disappointed to hear Goody say at his post match presser after the team’s 39 point defeat against Geelong that "we're getting high quality entry, just poor execution" because Melbourne’s problems extend far beyond that after its 0 - 4 start to the 2025 football season. There are clearly problems with poor execution, some of which were evident well before the current season and were in play when the Demons met the Cats in early May last year and beat them in a near top-of-the-table clash that saw both sides sitting comfortably in the top four after round eight. Since that game, the Demons’ performances have been positively Third World with only five wins in 19 games with a no longer majestic midfield and a dysfunctional forward line that has become too easy for opposing coaches to counter. This is an area of their game that is currently being played out as if they were all completely panic-stricken.

      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 0 replies
    Demonland
  • NON-MFC: Round 04

    Round 4 kicks off with a blockbuster on Thursday night as traditional rivals Collingwood and Carlton clash at the MCG, with the Magpies looking to assert themselves as early-season contenders and the Blues seeking their first win of the season. Saturday opens with Gold Coast hosting Adelaide, a key test for the Suns as they aim to back up their big win last week, while the Crows will be looking to keep their perfect record intact. Reigning wooden spooners Richmond have the daunting task of facing reigning premiers Brisbane at the ‘G and the Lions will be eager to reaffirm their premiership credentials after a patchy start. Saturday night sees North Melbourne take on Sydney at Marvel Stadium, with the Swans looking to build on their first win of the season last week against a rebuilding Roos outfit. Sunday’s action begins with GWS hosting West Coast at ENGIE Stadium, a game that could get ugly very early for the visitors. Port Adelaide vs St Kilda at Adelaide Oval looms as a interesting clash, with both clubs form being very hard to read. The round wraps up with Fremantle taking on the Western Bulldogs at Optus Stadium in what could be a fierce contest between two sides with top-eight ambitions. Who are you tipping this week and what are the best results for the Demons besides us winning?

      • Thanks
    • 273 replies
    Demonland