Traded Brodie Grundy [Traded to Melbourne for #27]

[MisterMarcus]

Except Coll know Grundys body is fine and so will get a good deal, or not trade.

So we come back once again to the fundamental question....WHY is he up for trade?

The spin from Pies fans about "moving him on to improve our list and bring in other players" doesn't make any sense. He's not some bit-part dime-a-dozen type who you could understand Collingwood "moving on to improve our list". He's a guy they were so desperate to keep and so critical to their team that they offered him a monster deal. Now they're seemingly happy to let him go to bring in a bunch of role-players?

If the salary cap is fine AND his body isn't breaking down AND he has no other off-field time bombs that will go off AND Collingwood are happy to keep him AND he's going to get back to his best.......why are Collingwood even talking about moving him on?

 

[Orange crush]

Assuming Melbourne get pick 13 as part of the Jackson trade with Freo, who would say no to this?

Collingwood get picks 13, 41, 63. Melbourne get Grundy, 47, 48
Rates Grundy as pick 15 with draft points (take that how you want) which I feel is about fair value considering the circumstances for both teams.

I’d assume Collingwood pay his salary in such a case

 

[No SPIN]

So we come back once again to the fundamental question....WHY is he up for trade?

The spin from Pies fans about "moving him on to improve our list and bring in other players" doesn't make any sense. He's not some bit-part dime-a-dozen type who you could understand Collingwood "moving on to improve our list". He's a guy they were so desperate to keep and so critical to their team that they offered him a monster deal. Now they're seemingly happy to let him go to bring in a bunch of role-players?

If the salary cap is fine AND his body isn't breaking down AND he has no other off-field time bombs that will go off AND Collingwood are happy to keep him AND he's going to get back to his best.......why are Collingwood even talking about moving him on?

I’ve already answered this question.
It’s pragmatism- if we get the right deal AND Grundy is happy to leave then all good.
Everyone has a price.
If you think the vacuous arguments to low ball Grundy, you and others are offering are being repeated, in the trade talks, you would be sadly mistaken.

 

[Mich0]

Logue over Grundy - you’ve just embarrassed yourself beyond redemption.
Wow just wow.

You got to be kidding mate. It wasn’t a surprise Logue had more suitors then Grundy and as Logue being a swing man can play in more positions then Grundy and has more strings to his bow.

Would take Logue playing 85% game time down back over 7-8 years over a banged up Grundy playing 50% game time in the ruck for 2-3 years any day of the week.

It’s comical you would think Grundy has higher value then Logue. Freo desperately want to keep Logue, can’t say the same about Collingwood/Grundy.

Grundy is being pushed out like Ben Brown was who also had injury issues and went for pick 28 and I am sure we can all agree he has never gotten back to his best which is the same risk that needs to be factored in with Grundy.

Logue trade will function as a bench mark for this trade.

 

[MisterMarcus]

It’s pragmatism- if we get the right deal AND Grundy is happy to leave then all good.

But again....why?

This is a player you deemed so essential and valuable that you gave him a massive 7 year deal. A couple of years later it's "eh, if he wants to go it's all good, no worries "

Something significant has changed in that time. People are going to be seriously wondering what it is.

 

[iameviljez]

If the salary cap is fine AND his body isn't breaking down AND he has no other off-field time bombs that will go off AND Collingwood are happy to keep him AND he's going to get back to his best.......why are Collingwood even talking about moving him on?

Completely agree. He is a best and fairest winner (twice), an All-Australian (twice), and, at 28 years of age, should be in the prime of his career.

As much as Darcy Cameron's a good player, the odds are against him ever being that good.

There's another question - not just why is he so clearly up for trade, but, with premiership in the offing, why on earth is he not getting picked?

 

[danster168]

There is no evidence he has lost his mobility, and he is an aerobic beast.
Therefore 5 years is not an issue when looking at the number of less talented Ruckman still playing at 32, and Goldstein is 34.

He could easily play fwd if trained accordingly (especially given he’s far more mobile and athletic than most Ruckman.)
Just like McDonald was turned from an average bqckman to a capable forward.

If the Melb list manager tries your tactics to bring down the price, he’ll be laughed out of the room.

I believe he has lost his mobility. but each to their own.

With regards to your last sentence, I'm happy to be laughed out of the room by Collingwood but rest assured the Collingwood team would be the only people laughing.

So I'd offer pick 32 and offer 500k a season. Nothing more. His mobility is overrated. Darcy Cameron is more mobile, significantly younger and a significantly better forward. And that's why Collingwood are happy to move Grundy on.

The fact that you say Grundy could simply 'learn to become a forward' shows that you overrate Grundy. Over his 11 year career, he's shown nothing up forward. And neither has Gawn. Neither of them are forwards. He doesn't solve our problems. I would've much preferred Ollie Henry.

 

[iameviljez]

The fact that you say Grundy could simply 'learn to become a forward' shows that you overrate Grundy. Over his 11 year career, he's shown nothing up forward. And neither has Gawn. Neither of them are forwards.

Constantly we hear that ruckmen can "learn to become forwards" and constantly it never works. Either they play as forwards from a young age - like David Hale or Brendon Lade - or, like Michael Gardiner and Luke Jackson, they get exposed pretty quickly as fish out of water.

 

[Mich0]

Even Logue isn’t the best forward but I would still rather him play up forward than Grundy.

 

[Gee Class Loco]

If you think this is Treloar all over again then you are kidding yourself.

If you think it isn't you're KIDDING THYSELF. Talk about SPIN. plenty here.

 

[No SPIN]

I believe he has lost his mobility. but each to their own.

With regards to your last sentence, I'm happy to be laughed out of the room by Collingwood but rest assured the Collingwood team would be the only people laughing.

So I'd offer pick 32 and offer 500k a season. Nothing more. His mobility is overrated. Darcy Cameron is more mobile, significantly younger and a significantly better forward. And that's why Collingwood are happy to move Grundy on.

The fact that you say Grundy could simply 'learn to become a forward' shows that you overrate Grundy. Over his 11 year career, he's shown nothing up forward. And neither has Gawn. Neither of them are forwards. He doesn't solve our problems. I would've much preferred Ollie Henry.

Cameron’s mobility better than Grundy? You don’t watch much football obviously. Leigh Mathews rating Grundy the most valuable player in the game, because he Rucks and get midfielder stats, ridicules your claim.
And McDonald as a crap back man was turned into a fwd, but Grundy with his athleticism can’t?
No one’s buying that furphy.

Pay up to stay in the flag window - that’s the only decision that makes sense for Melb.

 

[Bianconeri]

The fact that you say Grundy could simply 'learn to become a forward' shows that you overrate Grundy.

Don’t get me started on this.

 

[Bianconeri]

And McDonald as a crap back man was turned into a fwd, but Grundy with his athleticism can’t?

What athleticism?

 

[old55]

As I posted earlier, it will be a late 1st for Grundy with Collingwood picking up 30%. That's a fair deal.

Two years ago J.Cameron was one year younger than Grundy is now and went for 13, 15 and 20 with 2 F2nds back, and GWS weren't paying any salary.

If the boot was on the other foot MFC fans would want a late 1st for Max.

 

[iameviljez]

If you think this is Treloar all over again then you are kidding yourself.

It's not completely Treloar, but it has a similarity or three.

There's no doubt in my mind that Grundy is being shopped around to get his salary off the books. If he was being paid his current worth, or if Collingwood had the room to acquire its trade targets (McStay et al), then I have no doubt Grundy would stay.

But the difference is that there doesn't seem to be this unpleasant, fabricated psychological pressure to make his staying at Collingwood untenable. To be fair, it seems to be a pretty mutual parting.

What I don't get is why Grundy doesn't go to Hawthorn, the Dogs, Carlton or Geelong - Victorian-based clubs who are all crying out for an A-grade ruckman.

 

[PieLebo87]

Even Logue isn’t the best forward but I would still rather him play up forward than Grundy.

Not a completely wacky question, but one that should be asked is what’s happening with Gawn? Why would a club with the best ruckman in the game be going after Brodie Grundy?

Everyone is fixating on Grundy but if I’m a Dees supporter, I’m concerned about what’s happening with Gawn for them to be going out and chasing a high prized ruckman that’s 28. It’s definitely not a long term strategy to replace Gawn, so there must be concerns.

 

[No SPIN]

Even Logue isn’t the best forward but I would still rather him play up forward than Grundy.

This your direct quote - just embarrassing.

“Personally I rate a 24 year old fit (who is also under PSD threat) Logue over Banged up Grundy so I am being generous here or need a 3rd rounder coming back.”

And the back peddling above proves the point.

You have no credibility.

 

[PieLebo87]

As I posted earlier, it will be a late 1st for Grundy with Collingwood picking up 30%. That's a fair deal.

Two years ago J.Cameron was one year younger than Grundy is now and went for 13, 15 and 20 with 2 F2nds back, and GWS weren't paying any salary.

If the boot was on the other foot MFC fans would want a late 1st for Max.

I can see the Dees chucking in a 2nd with the Pies giving something back to minimise the cost of Grundy or a 3rd from the Dees.

 

[No SPIN]

What athleticism?

Ask Leigh Mathews - who said Grundy was AFL’s MVP

 

[iameviljez]

Not a completely wacky question, but one that should be asked is what’s happening with Gawn? Why would a club with the best ruckman in the game be going after Brodie Grundy?

Nothing's wrong with him (apart from being 31 at the start of next year), but everything is wrong with Melbourne's decision making. They are convinced that they need a direct replacement for Luke Jackson, but what they really need is someone like Paddy Ryder who can pinch hit both forward and in the ruck.

 

[Tulip]

As I posted earlier, it will be a late 1st for Grundy with Collingwood picking up 30%. That's a fair deal.

Two years ago J.Cameron was one year younger than Grundy is now and went for 13, 15 and 20 with 2 F2nds back, and GWS weren't paying any salary.

If the boot was on the other foot MFC fans would want a late 1st for Max.

1. Max is a better player than Grundy
2. Collingwood wants him out
3. Even with Collingwood paying some salary he's still on stupid money
4. He's been injured all year

But hey, if our list management team is ****ing dumb enough to spunk a teens pick on a guy who we don't need and who plays his best footy in a position we are covered by the best in the league then good luck to Collingwood. Grundy and Gawn are both terrible forwards, this will blow up in our face big time.

 

[Tulip]

Not a completely wacky question, but one that should be asked is what’s happening with Gawn? Why would a club with the best ruckman in the game be going after Brodie Grundy?

Everyone is fixating on Grundy but if I’m a Dees supporter, I’m concerned about what’s happening with Gawn for them to be going out and chasing a high prized ruckman that’s 28. It’s definitely not a long term strategy to replace Gawn, so there must be concerns.

Concerns about what?

 

[PieLebo87]

Nothing's wrong with him (apart from being 31 at the start of next year), but everything is wrong with Melbourne's decision making. They are convinced that they need a direct replacement for Luke Jackson, but what they really need is someone like Paddy Ryder who can pinch hit both forward and in the ruck.

Grundy isn’t a direct replacement for Jackson as his primary position is ruck/midfielder. He doesn’t have a secondary, so I don’t subscribe to the narrative on here that he is a direct replacement for Jackson because he just isn’t like for like.

As I said, when you’ve got the #1 ruckman in the game, you don’t just go out and recruit a 28 year old ruckman on decent coin. There’s gotta be more to it. If Grundy was 23-24, I’d agree with you, but he ain’t.

 

[Bianconeri]

Ask Leigh Mathews - who said Grundy was AFL’s MVP

How long ago was that? Because he hasn’t shown much athleticism since 2019.

Even at his peak he was never athletic compared to most key forwards he was only athletic to compared to most big hulking ruckmen.

 

[PieLebo87]

Concerns about what?

He has been less durable in the last 12 months and has clearly laboured/carrying something. Why else would they be going out for a 28 year old ruckman who can’t play forward or defence?

Grundy’s sole position is as a ruckman, which is also Gawn’s.