Farewell Brodie Grundy

[Redleg 37,556]

1 hour ago, rpfc said:

You know it doesn’t work like that. But if people want to waste their summers thinking we were ‘only a forward pocket away’ go for it.

I won’t be thinking that for one second.

[DeeSpencer 23,107]

6 hours ago, A F said:

We're more direct when we're turning the ball over closer to goal, which is directly related to pressure from half forwards and mids. This is what so many don't seem to understand.

And half backs! Even Geelong who love to drop 15 players behind the ball most of the time will have Bews, Zuthrie or even Kolo try to seal off a half forward to prevent a defensive exit.

We need to keep our slow play defensive grid but add more bite on transition 

[old55 21,259]

10 hours ago, Abyssal said:

Stengle            53 goals   (25 games)

Neal-Bullen        9 goals  (23 games)

You're not comparing the right players. It's Stengle and Grundy in this thread.

Edited September 24, 2022 by old55

[spirit of norm smith 12,886]

Is the strategy to get Grundy to try to extend Gawns career so he’s not so “wrecked”.  Or does Max already have an injury that he carried for the 2022 season. Grundy will be 29 and Max 31 at the start of next year. Perhaps each can remarkably extend out their careers together.  

[old55 21,259]

2 minutes ago, spirit of norm smith said:

Is the strategy to get Grundy to try to extend Gawns career so he’s not so “wrecked”.  Or does Max already have an injury that he carried for the 2022 season. Grundy will be 29 and Max 31 at the start of next year. Perhaps each can remarkably extend out their careers together.  

This is the most likely explanation.

Edited September 24, 2022 by old55

[Binmans PA 25,986]

1 hour ago, DeeSpencer said:

And half backs! Even Geelong who love to drop 15 players behind the ball most of the time will have Bews, Zuthrie or even Kolo try to seal off a half forward to prevent a defensive exit.

We need to keep our slow play defensive grid but add more bite on transition 

Agreed.

Adding Bowey to the defensive set up and giving him licence to go hard and fast will improve us immensely. And a fit Salem.

[xman97 108]

I'm sure most of you know, but going by a few comments, there's a few people on here that don't know how a salary dump works with trade value. These pick numbers are what I think, and are obviously up for debate, but the example of how salary dumps work is this.

Lets say the true value both clubs see Grundy is a Pick 21. (This is disregarding his salary, or any salary dump. This is just based on his age and ability etc).

IF Collingwood are paying $300k per year, it would mean that Pick 21 slides down to about 16.

IF Collingwood don't pay any of his salary, That Pick 21 slides up to about 35.

Lets say a team like North that have plenty of salary cap space. They would do the reverse on what we would be doing and paying all of Grundy's salary, which would mean Collingwood get a worse pick. Lets say Pick 35. 

[Palace Dees 1,995]

I was thinking about the Collingwood/Grundy negotiations. Eg. What draft pick, how much Collingwood pay etc. It seemed to me that the figure bandied around is $300k pa from Collingwood and I figure a pick around #18 is a fair cost to us. But what picks will we actually have in the end? 

Could the AFL Draft Value be used in negotiations? The calculation could be a base of $100k and a simple multiplication of points x 200 = $ extra paid by Collingwood. For example my valuation of pick 18 will cost $100k base  plus 985 x 200 (197k) = total cost of $297k pa

Should they demand pick 12 for example then they contribute $353.6k ($100k + 1268 x 200 = $253,600)

Pick 25 will cost them just $251.2k

Follow? 

It may look a little convoluted at first but it really isn't and may be a fair solution. 

Thoughts?

[Rednblueriseing 649]

14 minutes ago, xman97 said:

I'm sure most of you know, but going by a few comments, there's a few people on here that don't know how a salary dump works with trade value. These pick numbers are what I think, and are obviously up for debate, but the example of how salary dumps work is this.

Lets say the true value both clubs see Grundy is a Pick 21. (This is disregarding his salary, or any salary dump. This is just based on his age and ability etc).

IF Collingwood are paying $300k per year, it would mean that Pick 21 slides down to about 16.

IF Collingwood don't pay any of his salary, That Pick 21 slides up to about 35.

Lets say a team like North that have plenty of salary cap space. They would do the reverse on what we would be doing and paying all of Grundy's salary, which would mean Collingwood get a worse pick. Lets say Pick 35. 

The fact he will be 29 next year and has injury issues that even if he over comes them you'll probably get 2 above average years out of him before he starts to naturally decline, I wouldn't say his worth no more than a pick 30ish. Than take into account his salary and id be looking at pick 35 to 40

Edited September 25, 2022 by Rednblueriseing

[Palace Dees 1,995]

🤣🤣🤣

Seems we are on a similar wave length xman97

[Engorged Onion 9,255]

15 minutes ago, xman97 said:

I'm sure most of you know, but going by a few comments, there's a few people on here that don't know how a salary dump works with trade value. These pick numbers are what I think, and are obviously up for debate, but the example of how salary dumps work is this.

Lets say the true value both clubs see Grundy is a Pick 21. (This is disregarding his salary, or any salary dump. This is just based on his age and ability etc).

IF Collingwood are paying $300k per year, it would mean that Pick 21 slides down to about 16.

IF Collingwood don't pay any of his salary, That Pick 21 slides up to about 35.

Lets say a team like North that have plenty of salary cap space. They would do the reverse on what we would be doing and paying all of Grundy's salary, which would mean Collingwood get a worse pick. Lets say Pick 35. 

Thanks for that @xman97 is this a direct way of interpreting it via how I assume the NBA works?

I am so naive in this area.

 

[xman97 108]

13 minutes ago, Rednblueriseing said:

The fact he will be 29 next year and has injury issues that even if he over comes them you'll probably get 2 above average years out of him before he starts to naturally decline, I wouldn't say his worth no more than a pick 30ish. Than take into account his salary and id be looking at pick 35 to 40

His injuries that he's had this year aren't career defining injuries. 

On the pick discussion. It seems you're not quite getting how the salary dump works. In your example saying that he's worth a pick 30. It means his trade value for Melbourne would be lower (lets say 25), and not higher (like you stated at 35 to 40). This is because Collingwood are paying part of his salary. 

[mo64 5,209]

5 minutes ago, xman97 said:

I'm sure most of you know, but going by a few comments, there's a few people on here that don't know how a salary dump works with trade value. These pick numbers are what I think, and are obviously up for debate, but the example of how salary dumps work is this.

Lets say the true value both clubs see Grundy is a Pick 21. (This is disregarding his salary, or any salary dump. This is just based on his age and ability etc).

IF Collingwood are paying $300k per year, it would mean that Pick 21 slides down to about 16.

IF Collingwood don't pay any of his salary, That Pick 21 slides up to about 35.

Lets say a team like North that have plenty of salary cap space. They would do the reverse on what we would be doing and paying all of Grundy's salary, which would mean Collingwood get a worse pick. Lets say Pick 35. 

The Pies need Grundy off their books in order to re-sign De Goey and get all their trade targets in. They see that as more desirable than keeping Grundy. That automatically decreases his true value significantly. You also haven't factored in that he's coming off 2 long term injuries, and the length of his contract, which is a negative.

By my reckoning, his true value is a Pick 40.

And no club in their right mind would take on Grundy's full contract and give up pick 35. The Pies would need to pony up a pick for that to happen.

If you want a comparison of what a salary dump should look like, Russell Westbrook at the LA Lakers is a classic case. He has won a league MVP and relatively his personal accomplishments exceed that of Grundy. But he's on a bad contract and is a bad on court fit for the Lakers. Other clubs are asking for 2 1st round picks to take Westbrook off the Lakers hands. Westbrooks perceived talent is not a consideration, and that's how the Grundy deal should be negotiated.

[mo64 5,209]

17 minutes ago, Engorged Onion said:

Thanks for that @xman97 is this a direct way of interpreting it via how I assume the NBA works?

I am so naive in this area.

 

That's not how it works in the NBA. Refer above and Russell Westbrook.

[rpfc 27,432]

8 minutes ago, mo64 said:

The Pies need Grundy off their books in order to re-sign De Goey and get all their trade targets in. They see that as more desirable than keeping Grundy. That automatically decreases his true value significantly. You also haven't factored in that he's coming off 2 long term injuries, and the length of his contract, which is a negative.

By my reckoning, his true value is a Pick 40.

And no club in their right mind would take on Grundy's full contract and give up pick 35. The Pies would need to pony up a pick for that to happen.

If you want a comparison of what a salary dump should look like, Russell Westbrook at the LA Lakers is a classic case. He has won a league MVP and relatively his personal accomplishments exceed that of Grundy. But he's on a bad contract and is a bad on court fit for the Lakers. Other clubs are asking for 2 1st round picks to take Westbrook off the Lakers hands. Westbrooks perceived talent is not a consideration, and that's how the Grundy deal should be negotiated.

well put, and also, some teams cap space is more valuable than others if, let’s say, they have 4 players they want to bring in hinging on getting $700k off the books quickly.

[xman97 108]

3 minutes ago, mo64 said:

The Pies need Grundy off their books in order to re-sign De Goey and get all their trade targets in. They see that as more desirable than keeping Grundy. That automatically decreases his true value significantly. You also haven't factored in that he's coming off 2 long term injuries, and the length of his contract, which is a negative.

By my reckoning, his true value is a Pick 40.

And no club in their right mind would take on Grundy's full contract and give up pick 35. The Pies would need to pony up a pick for that to happen.

If you want a comparison of what a salary dump should look like, Russell Westbrook at the LA Lakers is a classic case. He has won a league MVP and relatively his personal accomplishments exceed that of Grundy. But he's on a bad contract and is a bad on court fit for the Lakers. Other clubs are asking for 2 1st round picks to take Westbrook off the Lakers hands. Westbrooks perceived talent is not a consideration, and that's how the Grundy deal should be negotiated.

The point of my post was to explain a salary dump trade to those who don't understand that if the club that's selling pays part of the salary, then the club that's buying gives up a pick slightly higher, not lower.

What pick he's worth is up for debate. I just gave examples.

In terms of his injuries, they aren't career defining injuries. Injuries happen. That's footy. A PCL is a 3 month injury. Ruckman have them all the time. Jarrod Witts is 30yrs old, had an ACL last year (12 month injury). This year he was in the All Australian squad of 40, at 30 years of age. Injuries heal. Grundy is an elite Ruckman and history shows us that elite players at 29yrs old are normally late 1st rounders.

Westbrook has an attitude problem as well as his salary. He's a problem to have around the club. He's just a jerk! With Grundy's case, it's just his salary that's the problem. Seeing they've appointed Graham Wright last year, they want the Hawthorn model of their success years of having the salary cap hit of their ruck stocks at 1 million in total. That's their list strategy. They've had Cameron and Cox step up this year and want Grundy's salary portion to go towards a key forward (McStay). 

You have to compare apples with apples.

 

[Slartibartfast 15,757]

In my view the key factor that is being missed, or ignored, in much of this discussion is the most important question - what is Grundy worth to us?  Many thought we paid too much for May and Lever.  Nobody thought that in October last year.

We are not privy to the "deal", if in fact there is one yet.  We don't know the structure of Grundy's salary, we don't know the extent or impact of his injury on his likely future performance and we don't know what his role will be in the team and how we plan to use him and Gawny next year.  We don't know how banged up Gawny is.

What we do know is we've made excellent decisions in the past (Langdon, May, Lever, Melksham, Hibberd, Watts, Hogan) and there is little reason to doubt what we do this year.  Whatever we give up for Grundy will not be based on how it will help Collingwood, it will be based on how it will help us.

Many, understandably, think we have Collingwood over a barrell and want to screw them to the wall.  But I don't think we do business like that, I think we'll look at what we need and we'll pay a price to get it that we are happy with.  We are not going to be too worried about whether we give up (say) pick 20 or 30 for Grundy because the reality is we know we need him we won't lose that deal for 10 spots in the draft.

[Nascent 7,228]

All the noise is we'll be giving up a first rounder for him which is disappointing but I'll reserve my judgement until the trades are done.

Wouldn't surprise me if it gets a bit convoluted with multiple pick swaps.

One hypothetical I could see being somewhat reasonable is as follows...

Say we get a top 10 pick and Freos 13 for Jackson. We could trade 13 and 32 for Grundy and 16. This values grundy at pick 26 and we maintain 2 x first round selection at the expense of a 2nd round pick which we may not use.

[Ugottobekidding 915]

If we get Grundy, it will allow us to mix up our rucks a little and provide more uncertainty for the opposition like Jackson provided 2021. 

[SA Red n Blue 48]

On 9/24/2022 at 12:13 AM, Matt said:

Hopefully, we get 2 firsts, and an early second from Freo. Maybe Freo get one of Norths seconds. We could then give that early second to the Pies. That would be my hope. But as I’ve said before, I heard ages ago from someone close to the Pies that it will be a first. Hoping they’re wrong though

Not being critical of you but there is no way in earth we get 2 x first rounders plus an early 2nd rounder for a bloke that isn’t a specialist in any one position, nor an established A-Grader. At very best we get 1 first rounder & then their 2nd rounder, but I suspect it won’t even be that. He has sulked & wants to run to mummy & he’s said nothing, so he won’t be pushing for the Dees to be rewarded. We hold no cards in the deal as there is no way we don’t let him go to Freo for what they offer.
In regards to Grundy again I suspect we give up that 1st rounder that we get from Freo as we have overplayed out hand, met him in public & announced to the world that we want him & will take him. Collingwood know we are desperate for him, so even though it’s a dump, we won’t risk not taking him. Also people will say it’s overs but they’re also the same nuffies that said the Lever deal was massive overs & that we got screwed in the deal. End of the day that trade won us a premiership & if the same happens with Grundy it can’t in any way be considered overs. I don’t care if it means we don’t get a young kid that probably gets cut or maybe makes our team in 5 years time, I want more premierships while in our window.

[Palace Dees 1,995]

https://www.sen.com.au/news/2022/09/25/grundy-not-far-behind-treloar-like-dissatisfaction-with-collingwood-trade/

[buck_nekkid 5,475]

New item in the demons shop Grundy Reg Grundies?

[Wilson7 2,474]

5 hours ago, Slartibartfast said:

In my view the key factor that is being missed, or ignored, in much of this discussion is the most important question - what is Grundy worth to us?  Many thought we paid too much for May and Lever.  Nobody thought that in October last year.

We are not privy to the "deal", if in fact there is one yet.  We don't know the structure of Grundy's salary, we don't know the extent or impact of his injury on his likely future performance and we don't know what his role will be in the team and how we plan to use him and Gawny next year.  We don't know how banged up Gawny is.

What we do know is we've made excellent decisions in the past (Langdon, May, Lever, Melksham, Hibberd, Watts, Hogan) and there is little reason to doubt what we do this year.  Whatever we give up for Grundy will not be based on how it will help Collingwood, it will be based on how it will help us.

Many, understandably, think we have Collingwood over a barrell and want to screw them to the wall.  But I don't think we do business like that, I think we'll look at what we need and we'll pay a price to get it that we are happy with.  We are not going to be too worried about whether we give up (say) pick 20 or 30 for Grundy because the reality is we know we need him we won't lose that deal for 10 spots in the draft.

There were many that were upset at the Lever Trade, i doubt anyone is now

Jake Lever, NDS 36 (37-Harrison Petty) & 2018 Rd 3 NDS 46, traded by Adelaide for NDS 10 (Lochie O’Brien), 2018 Rd 1 NDS 16 (19-Liam Stocker) & 2018 Rd 4 NDS 73 (67-Robbie Young)

[Demonland 64,736]

 

[Binmans PA 25,986]

Seems a bit PRry from Grundy's side.

I can totally believe he's angry with Collingwood, but surely that anger has now become about getting to Melbourne, without getting smashed by Collingwood supporters.

Edited September 25, 2022 by A F