Farewell Brodie Grundy

[Wrecker46 2,969]

I hope Sydney pay pick 25 for Adams. There is no way we are taking less for Grundy who they need more and doesn't have re-occuring soft tissue injuries.

[Demonland 72,164]

 

[Dee Viney Intervention 1,938]

I would hope that we are not making any contribution to his salary if he is traded

[DistrACTION Jackson 8,728]

7 minutes ago, Demonland said:

 

Isn't too complicated in my view.

2 x AA ruckman wants to join club with no ruckman

[Rhino 56]

On 10/5/2023 at 6:45 PM, YesitwasaWin4theAges said:

I think we need to get another club interested to get a higher premium from the Swans. 

How bout Geelong maybe we can rock tease them a bit to get a bit of talk around Grunds.

Swans are the biggest bunch of vultures who prey on the misfortune of players from other clubs and want players for unders everytime.

Absolute Scrooge's.

100% right Would Reid be a good get or is he cooked???

[beelzebub 23,350]

16 minutes ago, Demonland said:

 

No it's not...or arguably yes...it's a deal so it get done like any other deal according to values/currency/argy bargy..   But is this THAT complicated....NO....  Doing up shoes laces for Purple...is complicated

[beelzebub 23,350]

15 hours ago, Diamond_Jim said:

Collingwood managed without a ruckman for around six weeks. They won 5 IIRC

Rucks can be covered

It's not winning the tap...it's winning the clearance..   can we as a club please get around this concept....

[Macca 16,961]

2 hours ago, beelzebub said:

WE aren't paying 700k..   that's the point here

 

I think you'll find we are (or were)

Pies $300k

[Macca 16,961]

The Swans opening offer of 46 and us having Schache as the sub before Grundy was quire pointed

If we somehow get a pick in the 20's we might be liable to pay some of Grundy's salary (as the Pies did)

[jumbo returns 6,741]

Take 46 and run

Didn't work out - move on

[Willmoy1947 4,085]

It's not Melbourne's fault that Sydney allowed their last ruckman to retire, before they went out to get another one.

[Katrina Dee Fan 3,665]

With both Collingwood and Melbourne wanting pick 25 for Adams and Grundy respectively, I can't see Sydney getting both.  Both Melbourne and Collingwood have told these players that they are required players and a trade would only happen for the right price.  This could be interesting.

Funnily enough, last night when I mentioned this on a Facebook thread some Sydney nufty said the deal could be done if Sydney and Melbourne do a straight swap of pics - 14 and 25 for 12, 27 and Grundy.  I asked him if he though Melbourne would be that stupid to go with that, given they'd be basically giving Grundy away under that scenario.  Strangely enough he hasn't responded.

Too many [censored] supporters. 

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

It will be interesting to see if Sydney use him in the ruck or instead just have no one in the ruck, or better still let their star midfielder take the ruck duties while Grundy sits in the stands uninjured.

[Katrina Dee Fan 3,665]

14 minutes ago, Macca said:

The Swans opening offer of 46 and us having Schache as the sub before Grundy was quire pointed

If we somehow get a pick in the 20's we might be liable to pay some of Grundy's salary (as the Pies did)

Not according to Collingwood, who yesterday said their deal was with Grundy, not Melbourne or Sydney.  Collingwood would still be liable.

[Wrecker46 2,969]

@Macca you keep tying the draft pick we reciece with some kind of inverse relationship to the proportion (if any) of salary we pay. 

Is this common?

I would have thought the more you value someone the more willing you are to pay their salary and offer a better pick not one going the opposite to the other. 

Understand there has to be a balancing act with a range of factors just interested is this how trades work nowdays?

[Macca 16,961]

6 minutes ago, Katrina Dee Fan said:

Not according to Collingwood, who yesterday said their deal was with Grundy, not Melbourne or Sydney.  Collingwood would still be liable.

Of course the Pies are still liable

I'm talking about paying a percentage of $700k if we want a better placed draft pick (in theory)

My reading of the deal is that the Swans need Grundy but we need him off the books  ... so a compromised solution could be reached

[Macca 16,961]

4 minutes ago, Wrecker46 said:

@Macca you keep tying the draft pick we reciece with some kind of inverse relationship to the proportion (if any) of salary we pay. 

Is this common?

I would have thought the more you value someone the more willing you are to pay their salary and offer a better pick not one going the opposite to the other. 

Understand there has to be a balancing act with a range of factors just interested is this how trades work nowdays?

Yes but equally, do we value Grundy?

If so, how on earth does Schache get preferred to Grundy?

[Willmoy1947 4,085]

So we got a "not even goodwill" out of handing JJ to them amicably, you know what i mean.

[old dee 23,787]

3 minutes ago, Macca said:

Yes but equally, do we value Grundy?

If so, how on earth does Schache get preferred to Grundy?

And then not get used when our KPF’s were poor on the day. That will go down in history as a wonder of the 21st century Macca.

[Macca 16,961]

5 minutes ago, old dee said:

And then not get used when our KPF’s were poor on the day. That will go down in history as a wonder of the 21st century Macca.

Grundy turns 30 early next year and is on a combined $4Million deal for 4 years ($300k covered by the Pies)

If we were in need of a first choice ruckman would we be prepared to pay that amount of money plus give away a pick in 20's?  

For a 30yo ruckman with limitations? Can't play back or forward?

A pick in the 30's is probably going to happen

[Gawndy the Great 9,011]

1 minute ago, Macca said:

Grundy turns 30 early next year and is on a combined $4Million deal for 4 years ($300k covered by the Pies)

If we were in need of a first choice ruckman would we be prepared to pay that amount of money plus give away a pick in 20's?  

For a 30yo ruckman with limitations? Can't play back or forward?

A pick in the 30's is probably going to happen

Yes - if we didn’t have a ruckman to field and wanted a premium ruckman. Supply & Demand. 

[Robbie57 2,020]

Very poor negotiation on the part of Sydney. An offer like that send all the wrong messages to the market.  We are perfectly entitled to say to Grundy's management, we try to help players out and do quick and fair deals (see JJ and Harmes) and we have tried a fair deal for Brody but we are not going to be treated with contempt, Brody can take it up with the Swans.

[deejammin' 2,370]

22 minutes ago, Macca said:

Grundy turns 30 early next year and is on a combined $4Million deal for 4 years ($300k covered by the Pies)

If we were in need of a first choice ruckman would we be prepared to pay that amount of money plus give away a pick in 20's?  

For a 30yo ruckman with limitations? Can't play back or forward?

A pick in the 30's is probably going to happen

We got Grundy for pick 27 as a 29 year old who hadn’t played a game of footy for almost a year and was still injured while we had the best ruckman in the game on our list. Collingwood rated him BEHIND Cameron and Cox on their list. 

Sydney have no ruckman, we have no quality mature backup ruckman, we don’t have a problem with cap space, we are likely to replace Hibberd, Dunstan, Harmes with young draftees, giving us MORE cap space.

We don’t HAVE to trade Grundy, if he wants to sook he can sit in the stands for a year on a million dollars and we have backup if the unthinkable happened and Max got injured, at which stage Grundy would probably get all “I love the Dees” “demon symbol on forehead” again and play well.

Sydney have to offer us something that makes us want to move him, we don’t make our opponents better for nothing and contrary to the media speculation, we don’t owe Brodie anything, he’s had every chance and would have every chance again next year if he stayed and showed a willingness to work on his flaws. 

Edited October 10, 2023 by deejammin'

[Macca 16,961]

19 minutes ago, Gawndy the Great said:

Yes - if we didn’t have a ruckman to field and wanted a premium ruckman. Supply & Demand. 

Well Sydney don't rank him too highly as they've only offered pick 46

The question is ... do Sydney want him that badly?  

[old dee 23,787]

21 minutes ago, Macca said:

Grundy turns 30 early next year and is on a combined $4Million deal for 4 years ($300k covered by the Pies)

If we were in need of a first choice ruckman would we be prepared to pay that amount of money plus give away a pick in 20's?  

For a 30yo ruckman with limitations? Can't play back or forward?

A pick in the 30's is probably going to happen

If we had no ruckman probably Macca, that’s the situation the Swans find themselves in. It will get done eventually.