Jump to content

Featured Replies

Collingwood would be mad to let him go.  Cameron had a nice 5 week patch mid season but he's been exposed the last few games - Gawn took him apart, and Hickey completely dominated him on Sunday.  

 
On 8/14/2022 at 12:55 AM, mo64 said:

Our last bad trades were in the Roos era, and quite a few involved Collingwood. Traded Howe for Ben Kennedy. Basically gave them Lynden Dunn for nothing. And we traded for Heritier Lumumba. I don't want us to add to that list.

The Howe trade isn't so bad in that we got pick 29 back which became part of the pick trade package with GCS that enabled us to get Oliver. 

There were other aspects of the Coll and the GCS trades which I've left out to not overly complicate the end result of the Howe trade.  I can come back and list them if anyone wants to know all the permutations.  But the bottom line is we got Oliver.

26 minutes ago, Lucifers Hero said:

The Howe trade isn't so bad in that we got pick 29 back which became part of the pick trade package with GCS that enabled us to get Oliver. 

There were other aspects of the Coll and the GCS trades which I've left out to not overly complicate the end result of the Howe trade.  I can come back and list them if anyone wants to know all the permutations.  But the bottom line is we got Oliver.

It sure was complicated

https://www.draftguru.com.au/trades/2015-jeremy-howe-ben-kennedy-paul-seedsman-jimmy-toumpas

 
10 hours ago, Swooper1987 said:

Collingwood would be mad to let him go.  Cameron had a nice 5 week patch mid season but he's been exposed the last few games - Gawn took him apart, and Hickey completely dominated him on Sunday.  

Gawn took Cameron apart and we lost. Finlayson got completely dominated by Draper. Hit out numbers were something like 60-10, and the Bombers lost by a trillion.

A dominant ruckman is only as good as his midfield, and can be easily neutralised. 

 


17 minutes ago, mo64 said:

Gawn took Cameron apart and we lost. Finlayson got completely dominated by Draper. Hit out numbers were something like 60-10, and the Bombers lost by a trillion.

A dominant ruckman is only as good as his midfield, and can be easily neutralised. 

 

So moral of the story, do we need to spend big for Grundy?

27 minutes ago, mo64 said:

Gawn took Cameron apart and we lost. Finlayson got completely dominated by Draper. Hit out numbers were something like 60-10, and the Bombers lost by a trillion.

A dominant ruckman is only as good as his midfield, and can be easily neutralised. 

 

I don't think a dominant ruckman is easily neutralized at all, and Collingwood are a much better side with a much greater chance of winning big games with Grundy in the ruck and Cameron the back up.  There was a game when Ablett kicked 14 for Geelong and they still lost.  There are often many reasons why a team loses.  A dominant ruckman helps not hinders.

The race for him is gearing up.

Reported that Hawks becoming keen to replace McEvoy.  GWS interested.  Geelong reportedly very keen.  Then there is us.

Grundy may prefer Geelong or the Hawks where he is THE man now rather than sharing with Max.

With this competition Pies should come out of it fairly well.

 

If I were Grundy I'd rather come to Melbourne, but maybe I'm biased. 🤣

22 minutes ago, A F said:

If I were Grundy I'd rather come to Melbourne, but maybe I'm biased. 🤣

Yes, Adam your bias is showing🙂

Grundy may feel he is playing second fiddle/understundy if he joins us. And he may not want to spend a chunk of his time playing fwd.

If I had to guess one of the three, all other things being equal:  Hawks.

Edited by Lucifers Hero


16 minutes ago, Lucifers Hero said:

The race for him is gearing up.

Reported that Hawks becoming keen to replace McEvoy.  GWS interested.  Geelong reportedly very keen.  Then there is us.

Grundy may prefer Geelong or the Hawks where he is THE man now rather than sharing with Max.

With this competition Pies should come out of it fairly well.

The others would be able to offer/pay a lot more than us. Let him go and save the little cap space we have for a forward or young gun

8 minutes ago, DubDee said:

The others would be able to offer/pay a lot more than us. Let him go and save the little cap space we have for a forward or young gun

Not so sure about other clubs being willing to pay a lot more.

Like us they can all smell blood in the water after the Treloar fiasco.

Pies have said they'll pay $300k but it's the contract length that will drive the price. 

Add to that no increased TV revenue means no increase of any meaningful amount in the salary cap.

Could we see a variable deal based on games played and other KPI's. Probably not but the risk sharing formula will be interesting

17 minutes ago, Lucifers Hero said:

Yes, Adam your bias is showing🙂

Grundy may feel he is playing second fiddle/understundy if he joins us. And he may not want to spend a chunk of his time playing fwd.

If I had to guess one of the three, all other things being equal:  Hawks.

Haha, I'm sure it is, mate, however, Grundy would be playing first banana and Max playing second banana. That's the pitch to him I reckon, with Max providing relief.

If we can win another flag this year and Geelong falter, I think we'll be the far more appealing destination between Geelong and Hawthorn. 

On 8/17/2022 at 9:08 AM, Swooper1987 said:

I don't think a dominant ruckman is easily neutralized at all, and Collingwood are a much better side with a much greater chance of winning big games with Grundy in the ruck and Cameron the back up.  There was a game when Ablett kicked 14 for Geelong and they still lost.  There are often many reasons why a team loses.  A dominant ruckman helps not hinders.

Based on that, Grundy could be the difference between the Pies winning a flag or not. So why are they so keen to get rid rid of him? If they're paying $300k of his salary going forward, they believe that a player on $700k offers more to the club than Grundy.

And Goody said after the Crows game, when we were missing Gawn and Jackson, that it's easy to play around getting beaten in the hit-outs. 

 


4 minutes ago, mo64 said:

Based on that, Grundy could be the difference between the Pies winning a flag or not. So why are they so keen to get rid rid of him? If they're paying $300k of his salary going forward, they believe that a player on $700k offers more to the club than Grundy.

And Goody said after the Crows game, when we were missing Gawn and Jackson, that it's easy to play around getting beaten in the hit-outs. 

 

Did he though?

And there's a difference between working around it and not being able to exploit the midfield talent we have because we don't have a genuine ruckman...

2 minutes ago, A F said:

Did he though?

And there's a difference between working around it and not being able to exploit the midfield talent we have because we don't have a genuine ruckman...

For a long period of time we've had AA ruckmen, starting with Stynes, White, Jamar and Gawn. The only time we've dominated clearances was once Max had Oliver, Petracca and Viney.

We still have the best ruckman, so paying Grundy $700k for 5 years is a waste of cap space. Jackson on that money is a different kettle of fish, because Jackson over the next 5 years has a greater ceiling than Grundy.

Discussion of the 5 contenders for Grundy:  a-trade-shootout-is-set-to-erupt-over-7m-star

It talks about how deals might get done in draft picks and raises the idea of a player being part of the deal and the players the contending clubs might attract Collingwood. 

Regarding mfc interest: 

"Although Melbourne reportedly doesn’t necessarily view Grundy as a priority and could target a younger, cheaper option..."

Perhaps we are cooling on Grundy...

 

ps, it mentions Weideman as a possible player to include in a trade but please don't turn this into a Weideman thread; there are others for that....

Edited by Lucifers Hero

35 minutes ago, Lucifers Hero said:

Discussion of the 5 contenders for Grundy:  a-trade-shootout-is-set-to-erupt-over-7m-star

It talks about how deals might get done in draft picks and raises the idea of a player being part of the deal and the players the contending clubs might attract Collingwood. 

Regarding mfc interest: 

"Although Melbourne reportedly doesn’t necessarily view Grundy as a priority and could target a younger, cheaper option..."

Perhaps we are cooling on Grundy...

 

ps, it mentions Weideman as a possible player to include in a trade but please don't turn this into a Weideman thread; there are others for that....

His injury worries me….

Please let Grundy go the Giants. We can pickup a cheaper and healthier option from others who will be likely available.  It’s just not making sense to me. 
(And I still want LJ to sign on … albeit it’s a low chance !  )


If Collingwood can do this deal for $300k and get back a late first rounder .......... speechless

300k is the price of a player bordering on the lower end of a clubs bottom 6 of best 22

I assume the Magpie forums are full of how Brodie will do the right thing for the club and go where the Pies can get the best deal

2 hours ago, Lucifers Hero said:

Discussion of the 5 contenders for Grundy:  a-trade-shootout-is-set-to-erupt-over-7m-star

It talks about how deals might get done in draft picks and raises the idea of a player being part of the deal and the players the contending clubs might attract Collingwood. 

Regarding mfc interest: 

"Although Melbourne reportedly doesn’t necessarily view Grundy as a priority and could target a younger, cheaper option..."

Perhaps we are cooling on Grundy...

 

ps, it mentions Weideman as a possible player to include in a trade but please don't turn this into a Weideman thread; there are others for that....

Could be just lowering the price talk, we are mildly interested, if it works good, if not we move on. Meanwhile Grundy will tell Pies it’s either Club X or I stay a Pie.

 

I can see the contract being done in a way that doesn't 'break the bank' in terms of TPP $ or trade.

Contract $

Lets say it averages at $700k per year which is about what we would pay Jackson if he signed for the another 2/3 years.  But then Jackson's $ would probably be closer to the $1.m mark.  We save that with Grundy.

He has six years ie end of 2027 left when he will be 34.

Grundy's Vic options seem to be Hawthorn, Geelong and Melbourne.  Hawks can fit him in to their TPP structure.  Geelong are said to back end his contract when Danger, Selwood, Hawkins etc are gone. 

We can do a bit of both:

  • Pay him the $700k for the next few years that we would save on Jackson.
  • If necessary back end the rest:
    • In three years ie end of 2025 some more expensive players will be gone:  May, Gawn, McDonald, Brown. 
    • In the next 2-4 years if Lever, Viney, Salem, Fritsch sign on again it will be for less $.
    • We don't have a lot of 'stars' coming through to compete with Grundy for $ after 2025.
    • As it is a new contract so we can have KPI's eg play X games in the latter years.

My concern is more around his age and seeing out his contract and having two #1 ruckman of similar age/capability in the side.

Trade:

If Coll want a first round pick we can give them the equivalent of 17/18 with our picks 35 and 41.

Anyway, I read a report recently that Grundy isn't our top priority.

Edited by Lucifers Hero

Grundy is contracted so he gets to choose where he goes. GWS (say) might make the best offer but Grundy can just say “Melbourne or I stay”. If Collingwood want to move him on it’s Grundy’s choice if and where he goes. 


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

  • PODCAST: Essendon

    The Demonland Podcast will air LIVE on Monday, 14th April @ the all new time of 8:00pm. Join Binman, George & I as we dissect another Demons loss at Kardinia Park to the Cats in the Round 04. 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. If you would like to leave us a voicemail please call 03 9016 3666 and don't worry no body answers so you don't have to talk to a human.

      • Thanks
    • 28 replies
    Demonland
  • PREGAME: Fremantle

    The Demons return home to the MCG in search of their first win for the 2025 Premiership season when they take on the Fremantle Dockers on Saturday afternoon. Who comes in and who goes out?

      • Thanks
    • 60 replies
    Demonland
  • VOTES: Essendon

    Max Gawn leads the Demonland Player of the Year ahead of Clayton Oliver, Christian Petracca, Kade Chandler and Jake Bowey. Your votes please. 6, 5, 4, 3, 2 & 1.

      • Thanks
    • 22 replies
    Demonland
  • POSTGAME: Essendon

    Despite a spirited third quarter surge, the Demons have slumped to their worst start to a season since 2012, remaining winless and second last on the ladder after a 39-point defeat to Essendon at Adelaide Oval in Gather Round.

      • Vomit
      • Sad
      • Thanks
    • 252 replies
    Demonland
  • GAMEDAY: Essendon

    It’s Game Day, and the Demons are staring down the barrel of an 0-5 start for the first time since 2012 as they take on Essendon at Adelaide Oval for Gather Round. In that forgettable season, Melbourne finally broke their drought by toppling the Bombers. Can lightning strike twice? Will the Dees turn their nightmare start around and breathe life back into 2025?

      • Like
    • 723 replies
    Demonland
  • 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