Farewell Brodie Grundy

[dee-tox 4,830]

Couple of observations.

Grundy isn't very strong overhead. Even at Collingwood contested marks were not really his thing.

His tap work and ability to get involved with ground balls and linking up is his strength. But if he is doing this, what is Max doing?

We were often top heavy in the forward line and opposition teams waltzed the ball out of their defence. On the other side against Essendon, Phillips and Draper ran hard to provide a deep option in the forward line and neither Grundy or Gawn could go or went with him.

Edited August 24, 2023 by dee-tox

[Binmans PA 26,596]

55 minutes ago, dee-tox said:

Couple of observations.

Grundy isn't very strong overhead. Even at Collingwood contested marks were not really his thing.

His tap work and ability to get involved with ground balls and linking up is his strength. But if he is doing this, what is Max doing?

We were often top heavy in the forward line and opposition teams waltzed the ball out of their defence. On the other side against Essendon, Phillips and Draper ran hard to provide a deep option in the forward line and neither Grundy or Gawn could go or went with him.

It was a bit harder for Max given he wasn't playing.

[Great Northern Summer 689]

9 hours ago, Dingo said:

I read in this morning’s Age he has just bought a house and is completing a Masters. So 

he ain’t planing to leave.

What is he doing his Masters in please?

Exec MBA

[Mach5 4,490]

18 hours ago, ChaserJ said:

I suspect you’re right on that @rpfc, my first thought when she gave the info she had was that it was either Brodie’s agent or one of the clubs pursuing that had informed her.

The speculation on the trade cost sounded like this was the preference of a buyer (as opposed to what an MFC source would have claimed the cost would be). Was too specific to be a thought bubble from Caro.

Therein lies the beauty of the specificity; it lends the appearance of credibility, even when the specifics were most likely pure supposition.

Caro is a well-researched fortune teller.

[Whispering_Jack 28,097]

Classic Mixed Media - on the one hand, the Fox Footy website is claiming that Melbourne is talking to rival clubs about Brodie Grundy

Dees begin Grundy talks with three clubs

and on the other,

‘He’s got four years’: Melbourne coach Simon Goodwin quashes Brody Grundy trade talk

[MO FINE 147]

10 minutes ago, Whispering_Jack said:

Classic Mixed Media - on the one hand, the Fox Footy website is claiming that Melbourne is talking to rival clubs about Brodie Grundy

Dees begin Grundy talks with three clubs

and on the other,

‘He’s got four years’: Melbourne coach Simon Goodwin quashes Brody Grundy trade talk

The demand for Grundy is well and truly out there. If we can manage a trade that effectively leaves us with a younger senior ruckman who is prepared to play the understudy to Max then it will be most likely be done.

[Redleg 38,198]

7 hours ago, Binmans PA said:

It was a bit harder for Max given he wasn't playing.

That’s a poor excuse for not manning up.

[leave it to deever 16,445]

Feel a little sorry for Grundy.

I also think Max and Goody do as well.

He was probably lured with the promise of playing equal time.

I imagine though they were quite open about his role in playing forward. 

Just one of those things that sounded good but didn't pan out .

I also thought all the talk of not being able to make him a fwd was negative but it seems to be true.

 

 

[mo64 5,273]

37 minutes ago, Whispering_Jack said:

Classic Mixed Media - on the one hand, the Fox Footy website is claiming that Melbourne is talking to rival clubs about Brodie Grundy

Dees begin Grundy talks with three clubs

and on the other,

‘He’s got four years’: Melbourne coach Simon Goodwin quashes Brody Grundy trade talk

Whilst we're still in contention this year, and Max could potentially get injured, Goodwin can't dishearten Grundy by openly talking about trading him.

I tend to believe the former rather than the latter. 

[MrFreeze 1,567]

2 hours ago, mo64 said:

Whilst we're still in contention this year, and Max could potentially get injured, Goodwin can't dishearten Grundy by openly talking about trading him.

I tend to believe the former rather than the latter. 

Goodwin will continue to state Brodie is a required player. Any suggestion we would be happy to push him out would immediately lower his value, as it did for Collingwood. 

I do believe internally we are happy to have him as a back up ruck for Max as we have no pressing cap issues. As such, if another contender wants to pull him out and/or Brodie requests a trade, we may be happy to facilitate, for a much more favourable price for us. 

5D chess from Goody 

[Nascent 7,563]

Barrett suggesting Port are favourites in his inaccurately named "sliding doors" article.

Also is surprisingly positive about the clubs re-singing of goodwin and our resolve in response to a recent muckracker.

[dazzledavey36 49,588]

1 hour ago, Nascent said:

Barrett suggesting Port are favourites in his inaccurately named "sliding doors" article.

Also is surprisingly positive about the clubs re-singing of goodwin and our resolve in response to a recent muckracker.

Aligns well with @goodwindees info also.

[Jaded No More 59,543]

Port have no draft leverage at all. So they’ll have to give us a player and it has to be more than Georgiadis 

Will take Butters if I must 😂

[Roost it far 6,279]

The club holds the cards, we’re also a good club, if Grundy wants to leave we’ll facilitate a trade. We’ll only pay some of his salary if it nets us a useable draft selection in the top 20. The only way he stays if he is happy to play second fiddle to Gawn next year. The club won’t hold him to a contract if he wants to play elsewhere, we’re not that club. Player welfare is a high priority at the Dee’s. 

[beelzebub 22,593]

8 hours ago, Roost it far said:

The club holds the cards, we’re also a good club, if Grundy wants to leave we’ll facilitate a trade. We’ll only pay some of his salary if it nets us a useable draft selection in the top 20. The only way he stays if he is happy to play second fiddle to Gawn next year. The club won’t hold him to a contract if he wants to play elsewhere, we’re not that club. Player welfare is a high priority at the Dee’s. 

Contracts can be rewritten.   Contracts are technically void once they cease to facilitate the benefits to both parties as intended.

This may not be the case with Brodie but if he was want to away... ...it might be all bets off as far as we're constrained.  He may move on at a renegotiated $$..  not a definite..its a maybe/possibility. 

I very much doubt we'll be liable for a cent 

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

I am in the camp that Grundy should be playing, I like two rucks because the risk of Gawn going down is too high and Grundy was the reason we got back into the game against Carlton.

However, the AFL has a long way to go in terms of how teams use trade assets.

Grundy is a trade asset, we have him under contract so can maximise the return if we do decide to trade him.

People calling the trade a failure are clueless, imagine if we didn’t have him  after Gawn did his knee? Furthermore if we do trade him we will get a lot more than what we gave up to get him.

Edited August 25, 2023 by Clint Bizkit

[Demon17 4,693]

11 hours ago, beelzebub said:

Contracts can be rewritten.   Contracts are technically void once they cease to facilitate the benefits to both parties as intended.

This may not be the case with Brodie but if he was want to away... ...it might be all bets off as far as we're constrained.  He may move on at a renegotiated $$..  not a definite..its a maybe/possibility. 

I very much doubt we'll be liable for a cent 

Only technically void if both parties agree.

Dee's have absolute power in this outcome.

For once.

[David-Demon 514]

On 8/24/2023 at 5:38 PM, Whispering_Jack said:

Classic Mixed Media - on the one hand, the Fox Footy website is claiming that Melbourne is talking to rival clubs about Brodie Grundy

Dees begin Grundy talks with three clubs

and on the other,

‘He’s got four years’: Melbourne coach Simon Goodwin quashes Brody Grundy trade talk

It's difficult to determine who is right. Goody should, I believe support his players the way he is doing now, any difference would be irresponsible. On the other hand, it may well play out for other Clubs to increase their desperation "offer" for a player who obviously has a lot of talent. The trade period will settle that argument, just so long we come out the winner in the end whether it be we retain Grundy or trade him. 

[Demon17 4,693]

18 minutes ago, Clint Bizkit said:

I am in the camp that Grundy should be playing, I like two rucks because the risk of Gawn going down is too high and Grundy was the reason we got back into the game against Carlton.

However, the AFL has a long way to go in terms of how teams use trade assets.

Grundy is a trade asset, we have him under contract so can maximise the return if we do decide to trade him.

People calling the trade a failure are clueless, imagine if we didn’t have him  after Gawn did his knee? Furthermore if we do trade him we will get a lite more than what we gave up to get him.

Spot on. Grundy held the fort early this season after lions game.

[mo64 5,273]

24 minutes ago, Clint Bizkit said:

I am in the camp that Grundy should be playing, I like two rucks because the risk of Gawn going down is too high and Grundy was the reason we got back into the game against Carlton.

However, the AFL has a long way to go in terms of how teams use trade assets.

Grundy is a trade asset, we have him under contract so can maximise the return if we do decide to trade him.

People calling the trade a failure are clueless, imagine if we didn’t have him  after Gawn did his knee? Furthermore if we do trade him we will get a lite more than what we gave up to get him.

Your summising that if we didn't get Grundy, we wouldn't have got someone else. Grundy was hardly spectacular in Max's absence, and borderline average when playing with Max.

Keiren Briggs was the Giants 3rd choice ruckman when the season started, and is now their clear no.1. There are ruckmen on AFL lists who just need the chance to show that they are capable. And history has proven that. 

Grundy is a trade asset, but we won't get much more than what we paid. And we have to trade him this off-season. If his 2024 season is replicated at the Dees, by 2025 he will be a 31yo ruckman who has hardly played senior football for 3 years, with 3 years remaining on his contract. He will become a massive liability on our books. 

[Roost it far 6,279]

1 hour ago, mo64 said:

Your summising that if we didn't get Grundy, we wouldn't have got someone else. Grundy was hardly spectacular in Max's absence, and borderline average when playing with Max.

Keiren Briggs was the Giants 3rd choice ruckman when the season started, and is now their clear no.1. There are ruckmen on AFL lists who just need the chance to show that they are capable. And history has proven that. 

Grundy is a trade asset, but we won't get much more than what we paid. And we have to trade him this off-season. If his 2024 season is replicated at the Dees, by 2025 he will be a 31yo ruckman who has hardly played senior football for 3 years, with 3 years remaining on his contract. He will become a massive liability on our books. 

If Grundy is on our books at the end of next season he'll likely be about to have his last few seasons as our Number 1 ruck, that's about as far from a liability as you can get.  If Grundy leaves which appears likely and we can't find back up for Max, it's likely Schache will get serious AFL minutes. I'm not enthusiastic about that. I'm in the keep Grundy if we can camp.

In saying that I'd be happy with Georgiades for Grundy and PA pay all his contract.

Edited August 25, 2023 by Roost it far

[rpfc 27,662]

1 hour ago, Roost it far said:

If Grundy is on our books at the end of next season he'll likely be about to have his last few seasons as our Number 1 ruck, that's about as far from a liability as you can get.  If Grundy leaves which appears likely and we can't find back up for Max, it's likely Schache will get serious AFL minutes. I'm not enthusiastic about that. I'm in the keep Grundy if we can camp.

In saying that I'd be happy with Georgiades for Grundy and PA pay all his contract.

Then we are asking a 31 year old who hasn’t played first ruck for two years to ramp up back to 5th gear…

 

[old55 21,780]

3 hours ago, mo64 said:

Your summising that if we didn't get Grundy, we wouldn't have got someone else. Grundy was hardly spectacular in Max's absence, and borderline average when playing with Max.

Keiren Briggs was the Giants 3rd choice ruckman when the season started, and is now their clear no.1. There are ruckmen on AFL lists who just need the chance to show that they are capable. And history has proven that. 

Kieren Briggs signed a 2 year contract at GWS at the end of 2022, he wasn't available to us last year.

https://www.zerohanger.com/giants-ruckman-kieren-briggs-re-signs-126716/

[Roost it far 6,279]

50 minutes ago, rpfc said:

Then we are asking a 31 year old who hasn’t played first ruck for two years to ramp up back to 5th gear…

 

If he stays, which I think is unlikely, he’ll get plenty of game time. It’s not as though Max is playing 27-28 games next year

[layzie 30,065]

I don't see Grundy staying here. No delusion please.