mo64

1 hour ago, DeeSpencer said:

 Chandler is - relative to position as a small forward - slow. If he was even close to Bedford’s pace he would be a quality afl player.

If Chandler is slow then Spargo is glacial. 

IMO pace is more beneficial for defensive effort than attacking. 

Getting Grundy rules out getting a developed/developing ruckman from another club in the foreseeable future.

The only developing ruckman we'd have at the club is Weid, and he would most likely seek opportunities elsewhere if he continues to develop. We'll probably rookie another younger ruckman, but with our 5 year commitment to Grundy, they'll want out as well.

Getting Grundy is such a short-sighted move.

37 minutes ago, Demon Disciple said:

Rodman has been delisted and Mitch Brown has retired, per the mfc website

This will allow him to spend more time with Kim Jong-un.

I went to a couple of finals of a strong suburban league, but not a regular follower. There was a few ex AFL players running around in the GF, including Nev Jetta. Hard to comment on the standard of the GF because the ground (Cramer St. Preston) was like the old Lakeside oval.

But the first comment the premiership coach made referred to how hard it had been during and post Covid lockdowns. This was coming from a coach of a powerhouse, so I can't imagine how tough it has been for the 100s of other suburban/country clubs.

The premiership side was primarily made up of young players that came through their juniors, plus a couple of ex AFL players. It's probably easier for suburban clubs to retain local juniors than it is for country clubs.

I don't mind some of the suggestions. But you were complaining about senior players holding back the development of young players at Casey. Jack Newnes would be a classic example of just that. He got the flick from St. Kilda, can't get a game at the Blues, but you think he could be in our best 22. Personally I prefer JJ as our wingman, and see how Howes and Woey develop.

If another club is willing to take a punt on Tomlinson, I'd be happy for us to move him and open up some salary cap room. 

Post ACL, Tomlinson hasn't looked good as a 1-1 defender or as a mobile intercept defender. Moving forward, Turner looks like far better depth.

If we have any intentions of playing Petty forward, we'd keep Tomlinson.

3 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

He played 1 game last year against North in round 5 as a forward/ruck. Tell me how that influenced his season this year?

Oops, I'm confusing De Konning with Kolodjashnij. It was Kolo who looked out of his depth in the final against us. 

30 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

Disagree. Stewart is awesome, and Cameron’s had a fantastic year. But Selwood and Danger flash in and out and Hawkins is excellent but only at one thing - plonking himself 30 out from goal and winning a one on one. Takes a lot of system around him.

Guthrie, Blicavs and Atkins have been the consistent driving forces of their midfield this year. Their small forwards have been excellent. And whilst Stewart (pick 40 btw) is the key to their backline they’re no name guys all do the job.

Its all irrelevant though. I’m not looking for stars. We’re looking to upgrade or create more competition for our bottom 6 

I agree with what you're saying, but it will need a change of philosophy from our coaches and match committee. Our reluctance to drop out of form players, or rest banged up players, meant that in form VFL players like Chandler and JVR were not rewarded. 

Sam De Konning looked out of his depth at times last year, but the Cats persisted with him. I feel we missed an opportunity to blood JVR this year.

4 minutes ago, grazman said:

Not sure why the Pies are chasing Frampton.  He's  got less credits in the bank than his namesake Peter whose only hit was Frampton Comes Alive ... and that was pretty disappointing in itself. 

What about his time in Humble Pie?

In the off season I saw him in a pub with Joel Smith and Fritsch, so he still has mates at the club.

Bit rough that only one kid gets a footy.

1 hour ago, FlashInThePan said:

I can think of a ton of set plays that would be available to us with 2 very mobile 200+cm marking targets on the ground. Plays that no other team could do.

 People seem to limit their thinking on a resting ruck to deep forward or deep back. To me having Max there for the kick out target or the next kick is his real value in attack. In defence, his ability to intercept transition kicks is where he shines.

As an example, if you added Grundy on the ground with he and Max on the defensive side of either wing at a kick out, not only would they not know who to defend, the non receiving ruckman could transition forward and toward the corridor for a comparatively safe inboard 45 kick that would absolutely open up the ground and provide new leading lanes for our forwards.

 Since they are both excellent tap ruckman dropping an interceptor behind play to quell a run of goals would not cost us at the stoppage.

 If you have 2 dominant marking targets in the middle of the ground, you don’t necessarily need a pack marking forward, you can much more easily open up the ground and start attacks from the fat side rather than having to stay down the line on one wing.

i have no idea how serious we are about Grundy but I can see many ways this could work for us if we get him.

Last night's game was a blueprint on how to beat us. When the Swans moved the ball quickly and avoided kicking long, they dominated. Once they tired, the Pies were able to run the ball and they dominated. We got found out by both these teams.

I can't imagine having both Grundy and Gawn on the ground in the 2nd half of games will solve the issues we faced this year. We need to change things up and become more mobile. I wouldn't bet on Grundy being mobile at his age and post injuries. 

53 minutes ago, NeveroddoreveN said:

Man....if we had pick 5 quite simply he would have been a Melbourne player.   No way we court players without being ableto pay them appropriately.  This is always about draft picks.....same as Jackson will be......who cares how much either WC or Freo offer him, just give us the best deal!

Big on numbers, low on common sense, fmd.

Sorry to get personal but ffs stop banging on about last years trade deals when you clearly have no clue either way about it.

Pot calling kettle black.

3 hours ago, Caligula's cohort said:

We are bringing in Grundy because we currently have only 1 ruckman on our list. As for Gunston, the only reason he would come to Melbourne would be to chase a premiership in the last year or two of his playing career and wouldn't demand a large salary. Second to that, we don't know if Melbourne are chasing him, it's only been mentioned by a particular poster here who let's face it doesn't have the best record going around on DL... and lastly Hibbo and Melk may possibly yet retire or play on one more year for peanuts to chase a flag next year. So really signing Hibbo, Melk and possibly Gunston/ Grundy wouldn't hurt our cap at all. But if you add yet another A grader as speculated then we simply can't afford that player. 

P.S how did you know we had Cerra? did he nominate us? I think you will find it is you who is factually wrong... with respect. 

Correct. Blues had Cerra well before season's end. We made a late play but never a chance.

6 minutes ago, 2021 Premiers said:

Dannie Seow, Paul Ridley & Robert Pyman

I forgot Steven Pitt. I still think he should have been a late inclusion in the 2000 GF instead of Ben Beams.

47 minutes ago, durango said:

Most of the Collingwood players we got were players which they did not need and unlikely to ever be All Australians past or future unlike Grundy.

Grundy is virtually a clone of Jackson but much older, provided the club does a check on his fitness and injury he should be good for at least 4-5 years.

Grundy is under contract, and the Pies want him gone. That's the definition of a player they do not need.

And Grundy is nothing like Jackson. Jackson can sprint forward of the contest, which is something that Grundy cannot. Under Buckley, it was easy for Grundy to accumulate possessions. The only thing they have in common is that neither are good contested marks.

22 minutes ago, Pink Freud said:

Why not go for both Gunston & McKay? After all, Brown’s productivity has dropped below acceptable of late and we haven’t managed to get T.Mac on the field. Both getting older, slowing down and injured. They might be on their last legs next year. 

How do we fit Grundy, Gunston and McKay under our salary cap? We might have allocated some cap space for Jackson, but who knows whether that was used for Gus.

If we think that Brown and T Mac are on their last legs next year, why bring on more aging players like Grundy and Gunston, who have both had long term injuries in the past 2 years.

I'd go all in for McKay, take a fly on Gunston as an UFA, and get a cheap Meek as part of Jackson deal.

43 minutes ago, Monbon said:

Wayne Gordon (RIP), Henry Coles were about the only 2 ex Collingwood players who arrived at Melbourne who did us proud. Dawes and Lumumba tried their butts off, but Dawes was simply a one-dimensional footballer, Lumumba's attention drifted elsewhere.

You can add Phil Carman to the list of ex Colly Wobbler duds. Long may the Colly Wobbler curse span tonight.

And John Dellamarta 

9 minutes ago, Demons11 said:

How can he possibly be a better option than Grundy? Grundy is a multiple all Australian and best and fairest winner and Meek is a WAFL player. 

There's a difference between being a better player and a better option. There are more reasons for Meek being the better option than there are for Grundy.

3 minutes ago, Demon Disciple said:

Yeah no. Not even if they swapped in Butters for Duursma, would I do it

Agree. Butters is a very good footballer, but is best suited as an on-baller. He doesn't replace Kozzie .

Getting Gunston makes perfect sense, but it makes no sense re-signing Melksham if that was the case.

And the only key forward that GNF is alluding to, who would get demonlanders knickers in a knot is Taylor Walker.

11 minutes ago, djr said:

I never said he was on $600 - $700 a year. We don't know, and neither do you. Back in August, all I was speculating on was the price MFC would pay to buy out Grundy's contract in order to acquire a high draft pick from Collingwood. I think we do have some leverage if the contract is back ended.

The argument that the four remaining teams don't have a second ruckman and therefore we are wrong having two elite ruckmen is silly. It was only last year that we won the premiership thanks to this point of difference. And it will be again when we have a fit and healthy list and a redefined forward structure.

 

We do know. If Grundy's contract was back ended, the Pies wouldn't have had to salary dump last year. Grundy's salary was the primary reason. 

1 hour ago, Red and Blue realist said:

Another small thing picking up Grundy will help with is his ability to spend a lot more time on the ground than what Jackson did, that's understandable with a younger player mind you, but if Grundy can spend another 10% or so, time on ground, that's another 12-15 minutes bench time per game that can be used for our on-ballers. Both Max and Grundy have very high average time on ground stats for ruckmen, and if they were played/rested forward more then this might even increase. We could then refresh our explosive/impact players more. 

That's a bit simplistic. You still need team balance, so having 2 pure ruckmen on the ground for large percentages may not help us win. It made sense with Jackson, because he's more of an on-baller than a traditional ruckman.

But if you want to give our explosive mids more rest, you should be looking at Spargo and Sparrow, who average between 65-70% game time, which is the lowest in our side.

41 minutes ago, grazman said:

and if you believe Colin Young,  Peter Bell told Rory Lobb at the end of the trade period last year that they would organise a trade for him this year and has now backtracked on that.  Interesting tactics

TBH, I wouldn't trust Colin Young. He was trying to get both Bobby Hill and Lobb to break their contracts last year. 

I don't blame Bell for standing his ground. At the moment, everything is in the favour of the players/managers. Good to see a club stand it's ground.

Having said that, the Lobb trade is interesting. With the development of JUH and Sam Darcy, I reckon the Dogs have gone cold on Lobb, and are only interested if it's a salary dump. They've probably offered a token pick, which doesn't give Freo any reason to trade Lobb. 

9 minutes ago, djr said:

I understand what you are saying and you make good points but our premiership window is now and bringing in a 28 year old player like Grundy at the right price would be a good investment. My point from back in August was that if the bulk of his contract has already been paid and he is only receiving $600 - $700k a year going forward then the club might consider taking over his full contract if Collingwood handed over their first / second round pick. Its pure conjecture. We don't know the structure of his contract. I would be surprised if its linear. Perhaps it is backended, in which case Collingwood has a problem.

 

Grundy is not on $600-$700 a year going forward, and if he was, Collingwood isn't handing over a pick for us to take on his contract.

And I don't see how Grundy makes us better. The 4 remaining teams in the finals have got there with either a 2nd string or a journeyman ruckman. Having a dominant ruckman isn't a prerequisite for success.