12 minutes ago, rpfc said:

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.

Strange direction the club might be taking. They both will probably retire at the same time. Would rather play Weed as a second ruck/forward and target another KPF. But what do we know we are only supporters who thought the forward line wasn't working and our kicking was crap.

1 minute ago, Demons11 said:

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

Geelong pulled out. It's just us.

And if Grundy was capable as a forward, do you really think that a club that is lacking key forwards would be so desperate to get rid of him?

Our club has shown over the last 6-8 years an ability to draft and trade in the right players and I have full faith that they will make the right decision on Grundy.  If the bloke is fit, he is gun and will offer so much around the ball. 

4 minutes ago, Demons11 said:

Probably because he told them no as he did to Port

Fair enough if that is whats been reported

1 minute ago, mo64 said:

Geelong pulled out. It's just us.

And if Grundy was capable as a forward, do you really think that a club that is lacking key forwards would be so desperate to get rid of him?

They are salary dumping and I’m not saying he is coming to us as a forward, he will play mainly Ruck and pinch hit forward.  He will also be a great target around the ground 

There's little doubt that getting Grundy means more of the Goodwin boundary line to pocket system.

Bit like ordering a diesel driven car as electric cars come on the market..... Timing

2 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

There's little doubt that getting Grundy means more of the Goodwin boundary line to pocket system.

Bit like ordering a diesel driven car as electric cars come on the market..... Timing

That second line makes absolutely zero sense.

As does the recruitment of Grundy.

5 minutes ago, Crystal Dees said:

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.

So you want to rob us of 15% of Gawn's game time in the ruck, even though he's the best ruckman in the comp? Grundy is not equal to Gawn. Grundy is a past AA ruckman, not current.

And the argument that Grundy will prolong Max's career is pie in the sky. 

Who needs flags lol? Some of the best comedy happens on the trading board.

2 minutes ago, mo64 said:

So you want to rob us of 15% of Gawn's game time in the ruck, even though he's the best ruckman in the comp? Grundy is not equal to Gawn. Grundy is a past AA ruckman, not current.

And the argument that Grundy will prolong Max's career is pie in the sky. 

You don't think not having to play Gawn injured and running him into the ground each week won't improve his effectiveness or longevity? 

We will have to agree to disagree on that.

As we will on Grundy's value. Still 2nd best ruckman in AFL.

26 minutes ago, cantstandyasam said:

Strange direction the club might be taking.

Or completely ahead of the curve with strategy.

1 hour ago, Crystal Dees said:

Wow!  Really? Thanks, he had me fooled.

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

At his best - a very good player due to his mobility and follow up at ground level. And he ability to play 85% in the ruck.

If he’s lost any significant amount of that mobility he won’t be as valuable. That was made clear in 2020/2021. If he’s asked to play forward his value drops yet again 

Everyone assumes that a 2nd ruck must play fwd. we looked significantly better last year with Gawn behind the ball. Just a thought on how 2AA quality rucks could work. 

They will most likely tweak the game plan next year anyway and who knows, the second Ruck may play loose in defense?

Petty and Van Rooyen forward.

Anything could happen

Edited September 13, 20222 yr by DeeZee

3 minutes ago, DeeZee said:

They will mist likely tweak the game plan next year anyway and who knows, the second Ruck may play loose in defense?

Petty and Van Rooyen forward.

Anything could happen

I like that, with Turner getting more gametime as well

Petty and the big Rootilio would be the ideal forward pairing 

I'd have to keep switching display pictures every second day 

Edited September 13, 20222 yr by adonski

18 minutes ago, Steve13 said:

Everyone assumes that a 2nd ruck must play fwd. we looked significantly better last year with Gawn behind the ball. Just a thought on how 2AA quality rucks could work. 

Was just thinking this

Either floating back snaffling marks as max was wont to do last year IIRC (and early this year before we moved him fwd to not kick goals )

Edited September 13, 20222 yr by Superunknown

17 minutes ago, DeeZee said:

They will mist likely tweak the game plan next year anyway and who knows, the second Ruck may play loose in defense?

Petty and Van Rooyen forward.

Anything could happen

Agreed. I think Petty will go Forward 

Grundy may play the same type of game Stynes played years ago from half back

1 hour ago, Demons11 said:

They are salary dumping and I’m not saying he is coming to us as a forward, he will play mainly Ruck and pinch hit forward.  He will also be a great target around the ground 

Given SG has stated a couple of times that he likes Max as a forward, this may be the future for us. Max playing forward and Grundy rucking around the ground. I don't particularly like it but we need to bring in another ruck should Max goes down with injury. We couldn't have Weid rucking full time week in, week out for too long.

I’m yo-yo-ing on this one almost daily.  Today, I’m for it.

The current scuttlebutt suggests that we’re after a low and a high first round picks in exchange for Jackson.  Using the late first round pick on Grundy shores up the immediate future, with the earlier first rounder shoring up the future. 

I understand the comments about Grundy being a ‘past’ AA Ruckman but he was comfortably in the top five players in the league only 3-4 years ago.  That’s ability doesn’t come knocking often.

 

58 minutes ago, Steve13 said:

Everyone assumes that a 2nd ruck must play fwd. we looked significantly better last year with Gawn behind the ball. Just a thought on how 2AA quality rucks could work. 

Agree with that Steve - exactly what I was thinking 

but - we’ll need to clean up our inside 50 entries and forward 50 craft next year for this trade to make us a significant threat next year….

which I think we will 😊

1 hour ago, Dee Zephyr said:

Who needs flags lol? Some of the best comedy happens on the trading board.

More Zingers than KFC.

7 hours ago, Gorgoroth said:

It’s not that I don’t want or rate Grundy, I don’t want us to give up a first rounder for a 29yr old whose position is not the biggest need for us. 

There is no way we would hand over a 1st round pick for a 29 year old.  I could see us offering $700k x 5 years and a second round pick or player.

1 hour ago, Steve13 said:

Everyone assumes that a 2nd ruck must play fwd. we looked significantly better last year with Gawn behind the ball. Just a thought on how 2AA quality rucks could work. 

Or we do what we did this year, but even more so, with kicking it to the pocket, creating stoppages inside 50 then having either Gawn or Grundy doing the ruck work there...

3 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

Or we do what we did this year, but even more so, with kicking it to the pocket, creating stoppages inside 50 then having either Gawn or Grundy doing the ruck work there...

...or having one of our forwards ruck and having Gawn and/or Grundy marking outside 50 for repeat entries.