Jump to content

Featured Replies

It worries me that no other club are interested in Grundy. Why is that?

 

We are buying the pig with warts and know what we are getting.  Long term contract that will require considerable salary top up from the Pus.  Injured, not first 22.  Think a third rounder, salary dump and a bag of stale twisties should do it.  Otherwise Col can keep him and have his salary block a number of ins they are seeking this year.

3 minutes ago, Demonstone said:

Oooooh, I've been "champed"!  Thanks DZ, you've made my day.  :D

You may want to google that 😉

 
2 minutes ago, BDA said:

It worries me that no other club are interested in Grundy. Why is that?

Different stages of the window and different views on rucks I suspect plus he's not cheap.

Frankly I question the worth of two similar style rucks but Goodwin is paid to make these decisions

I thought that Geelong was in contention for his services, but I don't know what became of that.  

Too young for them, perhaps.


Just now, Diamond_Jim said:

Different stages of the window and different views on rucks I suspect plus he's not cheap.

Frankly I question the worth of two similar style rucks but Goodwin is paid to make these decisions

I'm always suspicious when there's only one taker. Could be a bargain or could be a dud

A second rounder and pies pay $300k of his salary otherwise the deal is too expensive imv

He was coming back from a knee injury and then had stress fractures of his ankle.

As long as our medicos give him the all clear I’m ok with it as he is 28 and if he can get back to full fitness could be handy for us,  especially during this window of the next 3 years in that quest for another flag.

10 minutes ago, BDA said:

It worries me that no other club are interested in Grundy. Why is that?

He's made it pretty clear he wants to stay in Melbourne. That's ruled both Port and Geelong out.

Of the other Melbourne Clubs:

Collingwood need the cap space

Bulldogs have English and don't play a second ruck

Bombers have Draper and don't play a second ruck

Blues are happy not playing a genuine ruck, and have cap space tied up in HBFs moonlighting as mids

St Kilda have Marshall

Tigers have the Nank and don't play a second ruck

North have Goldy

We are hellbent on a second ruck. I don't think it works with two genuine first rucks; but we will see

 
36 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

Is he a smart tap ruck - no, the pies consistently struggled to get value from his taps

Can he play forward - no

Does he take a lot of contested marks around the ground - not really

Is he so skilled that his habit of racking up a huge amount of the ball really is useful - no.

Wow!  Really? Thanks, he had me fooled.

Give back your 2 AA's and your 2 Copelands ya dud!

What if.. and here me out here, Grundy is a great pick up, has a burning desire to resume as a great ruckman and prove the footy world wrong. with this year the first since 2014 that he played less than 19 games for the season.. so for a ruckman.. pretty durable.. in fact

Brodie - games since 20014-2022 = 170 

Max - games since 2014-2022 = 164

 

his 6 games this year he averaged 16.8 disposals and 30 hit outs..

Max for the season -18.9 disposals and 27 hitouts..

 

Both are extremely endurable athletes

The average wage in AFL is around $400k or a bit under. we pay him $750 per year for 5.. say we get 3 great years out of him, and a couple where he is slowing down and allows the junior ruckman to progress when the average wage has gone up significantly.

 

I think its a calculated decision to recruit him. Yep, we might give up a high pick, but sometimes that's ok, we have young talent, Grundy is a proven acquisition. 


A fit Grundy is probably a top 30 player in the competition but we are the one club in the afl that could add him to our list and not get any improvement to our best 22. Is a Gawn/Grundy pairing better than Gawn/TMac? Definitely better in the ruck but definitely worse resting forward. 

15 minutes ago, DeeZee said:

He was coming back from a knee injury and then had stress fractures of his ankle.

As long as our medicos give him the all clear I’m ok with it as he is 28 and if he can get back to full fitness could be handy for us,  especially during this window of the next 3 years in that quest for another flag.

Hoping we can make it to the next page of his thread without someone thinking it will be funny to mention "the Richmond doctor"

7 minutes ago, Fat Tony said:

A fit Grundy is probably a top 30 player in the competition but we are the one club in the afl that could add him to our list and not get any improvement to our best 22. Is a Gawn/Grundy pairing better than Gawn/TMac? Definitely better in the ruck but definitely worse resting forward. 

I would say definitively Grundy will offer more than Jackson did in the ruck, and around the ground, and possibly more than Jackson did if he goes fwd.

Edited by Demon3

29 minutes ago, DeeZee said:

You may want to google that 😉

Someone give me a knife to cut through all this testosterone!

2 minutes ago, Demon3 said:

I would say definitively Grundy will offer more than Jackson did in the ruck, and around the ground, and possibly more than Jackson did if he goes fwd.

He has kicked only 60 goals in 177 games. He’s a very good player - in the ruck. But he’s not a good forward. And we already have a great ruckman who is an average key forward. Grundy or Gawn will be in the forward line for 60% of the game. 


9 minutes ago, Fat Tony said:

He has kicked only 60 goals in 177 games. He’s a very good player - in the ruck. But he’s not a good forward. And we already have a great ruckman who is an average key forward. Grundy or Gawn will be in the forward line for 60% of the game. 

Yes, this fascination to make our AA ruckman a forward is lost on me, I can understand him training his replacement but Grundy is only a year younger. We should either target a young developing ruckman who can also get better as a target or a forward who can ruck. 

I don’t understand investing in another established ruckman in their last 4 years of AFL footy.

16 minutes ago, Fat Tony said:

He has kicked only 60 goals in 177 games. He’s a very good player - in the ruck. But he’s not a good forward. And we already have a great ruckman who is an average key forward. Grundy or Gawn will be in the forward line for 60% of the game. 

i agree with that, i was more leaning towards what are we getting with Gundy v what we are losing with Jackson.. and its not much in my opinion. 

Do agree with the Fwd conundrum though..  time will tell and i think we will get a good look at it.

56 minutes ago, BDA said:

It worries me that no other club are interested in Grundy. Why is that?

Who says no other club is interested? 

20 minutes ago, Fat Tony said:

He has kicked only 60 goals in 177 games. He’s a very good player - in the ruck. But he’s not a good forward. And we already have a great ruckman who is an average key forward. Grundy or Gawn will be in the forward line for 60% of the game. 

He was the number 1 ruck at Collingwood and probably 80 if not 90% of his playing time in the ruck, so how do you know he can’t play forward? 

2 minutes ago, Demons11 said:

Who says no other club is interested? 

Per media reports tagged in this thread. apparently we have a free run at him


Just now, BDA said:

Per media reports tagged in this thread. apparently we have a free run at him

He has already said no to Port and Geelong are also chasing him 

18 minutes ago, Fat Tony said:

He has kicked only 60 goals in 177 games. He’s a very good player - in the ruck. But he’s not a good forward. And we already have a great ruckman who is an average key forward. Grundy or Gawn will be in the forward line for 60% of the game. 

One of the biggest areas of concern was our forward pressure. So the thought of having a forward line comprising of either Gawn or Grundy with the following is utterly head scratching:

T. Mac, Brown, Fritsch

T. Mac, JVR, Fritsch

 

25 minutes ago, Fat Tony said:

He has kicked only 60 goals in 177 games. He’s a very good player - in the ruck. But he’s not a good forward. And we already have a great ruckman who is an average key forward. Grundy or Gawn will be in the forward line for 60% of the game. 

My take on the club getting Grundy is to always have a fresh, fit AA ruckman on the ground at all times. This year Gawn was on the ground 89%, Grundy 82%. Nic Nat plays less than 70% game time. Both Grundy and Gawn were injury affected this year due to workload, so not only less effective when they played, but also lost games to injury. 

How about we give both around 70-75% ground time so they will always have a fitness, as well as an ability, advantage over their opponent.  This leaves one of them in the forward half around 40-50% of the time making it a bit less predictable up there. I expect it will also prolong the careers of both players.

Edited by Crystal Dees
spelling

 
1 minute ago, Demons11 said:

Geelong are also chasing him 

I thought they pulled out

Just now, BDA said:

I thought they pulled out

Probably because he told them no as he did to Port


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.

      • Haha
    • 25 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? 

    • 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?

      • Clap
    • 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/

      • Clap
    • 47 replies