Traded Brodie Grundy [Traded to Melbourne for #27]

Remove this Banner Ad

There's been speculation about Grundy leaving for a while now, and I personally haven't seen very much "Hands off, he's ours!!" pushback from Collingwood.

You'd think if they still saw him as the crucial long-term key plank of their team, like they did a few years ago, they'd be aggressively shutting down any trade rumours at every opportunity.
Nah I know he’s gone, but everyone, particularly Melbourne supporters seem to drive the agenda Collingwood can’t wait to get rid of him as some sort of justification for why he should cost nothing more than a bag of chips.

It is a moot point - if a club is interested, they’re interested, irrespective of how that interest was instigated/initiated.
 
The major issue Collingwood has is that, similarly with Treloar, they have burned bridges to the point that keeping Grundy is not a feasible option.

They want to bring in McStay, Hill, Fiorini and Frampton - as well as tie down De Goey's contract. I assume that this isn't possible with Grundy still on the books. They have refused to play him in the side, and told him that he's not a wanted player at his exit interview.
Source?
 
Its still such a moronic thing, I can't believe it. Losing Grundy to get in McStay. Geelong should trade out Jeremy Cameron so they can get Zane Cordy.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Multiple sources saying that Grundy has been told he's out at his exit interview, but here is one: Lion can unlock $4.5m deal amid play for Hawk; meeting ensures Grundy’s exit: Trade Whispers

Same source talks about all four trade targets.

As to the amount of room left in the Collingwood cap - nobody outside the club knows for sure because salaries aren't published, but given the aggression with which they have pushed out high-paid players...
I’m talking about the part where you said Collingwood ‘refused’ to play him. You said that - where’s the evidence?
 
I’m talking about the part where you said Collingwood ‘refused’ to play him. You said that - where’s the evidence?

I thought/assumed Grundy has been injured for weeks, that's why Fly and the Pies didn't play in the finals

I think if they can somehow manage to keep Henry, even by sacrificing Grundy, that is a win for Collingwood.
 

Well to be fair, we don't know what the Grundy to Melbourne trade will look like either, I do believe it will be for one of the first rounders The Dees get from Freo, but it is not set in stone .
 
I don’t get how moving on Grundy solves the pies cap issues. With all the players they’re targeting won’t they be back in cap strife. And they’ll need to have space to resign Nick Daicos soon enough who will one day command 750k plus.

Grundy leaving frees up 700k. Henry leaving probably frees up 120k

300k on Fiorini, Gc pays the rest
500k on Mcstay
150k (base) on Frampton
150k (base) on Hill

So basically their cap is still *ed even after losing Grundy and Henry.

And hill will be on more than base and mcstay on more than 500 so i find it weird too.
 
Even with the contract being subsidised (let’s go with the widely reported $300k) - I do not want $3.5m of cap over the next 5 seasons tied up on an injury prone ruckman in his twilight years. That is list suicide.

I am not posturing here, I will be genuinely filthy at the club if it happens.

Prepare to be filthy.
 
Imaging poor Darcy Cameron does his ACL in early March. The melts will be beautiful, absolutely mind boggling why they are shopping him around. Guys a superstar.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Well to be fair, we don't know what the Grundy to Melbourne trade will look like either, I do believe it will be for one of the first rounders The Dees get from Freo, but it is not set in stone .
  • Will be 29 at the start of next year
  • Coming off a major injury
  • Form has been declining for 2+ years
  • Club has encouraged him to look elsewhere
  • Trade is for salary dump purposes and is necessary for a host of other acquisitions

As good as Grundy was at his peak, I just don't see a first-rounder being involved in the trade. Maybe if there was something else coming back to Melbourne, but even so, imagine the Dees will be trying to keep those deals separate.

With the new rules coming in regarding salary dumps, it's going to be a bit of an adjustment for fans. Look at the NBA for instance, where teams send quality draft picks with the player they're offloading, rather than receive them. We're not there yet, but fans will need to adjust soon to good players being shifted out for not much at all when caps are tight.
 
Last edited:
I thought/assumed Grundy has been injured for weeks, that's why Fly and the Pies didn't play in the finals

I think if they can somehow manage to keep Henry, even by sacrificing Grundy, that is a win for Collingwood.
I would absolutely take that, but fairly certain Henry is gone too. Hope I’m wrong though.
 
Dees can legit offer up a 2nd rounder. Then sit on that offer all trade period without any pressure to move.

Collingwood will need to move on it as they have other deals dependant on it going through.

Dees can wait until the last minute of the last day if they want to
We can hold off on McStay until our demands are met re Grundy, and if you play cutesy’s we can just **** it, I think we’ll just keep him.
 
We can hold off on McStay until our demands are met re Grundy, and if you play cutesy’s we can just * it, I think we’ll just keep him.

Trades don't really work that way, Collingwood have clearly committed to McStay and when that happens, the trade is done more often than not, otherwise that club gets a bad reputation. And everyone already knows Collingwood are trying to get rid of Grundy, it is at that point where it is probably impossible to keep him.
 
So based on that article, and what you’re saying is you’ll be taking on his full contract. If that’s the case, the draft return will absolutely be disappointing, but expected.

If you believe you’ll be getting him for just $600k a year with minimal return in compensation, then you’re the one who’ll be disappointed.
Nail, bang, head.
 
Trades don't really work that way, Collingwood have clearly committed to McStay and when that happens, the trade is done more often than not, otherwise that club gets a bad reputation. And everyone already knows Collingwood are trying to get rid of Grundy, it is at that point where it is probably impossible to keep him.
Spite is as good a reason as any to keep a player :)
 
Trades don't really work that way, Collingwood have clearly committed to McStay and when that happens, the trade is done more often than not, otherwise that club gets a bad reputation. And everyone already knows Collingwood are trying to get rid of Grundy, it is at that point where it is probably impossible to keep him.
Bad reputation? How do they sign McStay if they don’t have the cap space for it? So the club has to accept being bent over the barrel to ‘uphold its reputation’ in another trade scenario? That’s an odd way of looking at it.

Pies will honour the offer if it fits their cap by receiving an appropriate offer for an existing player.

Anyway, obsolete argument, as it’ll all play out irrespective of what we’ve all said on here.
 
I honestly think we’re shopping him around because his contract has or has the potential to create friction within the team, ‘You’re giving the spud Grundy 1 million a year and this is all you’re offering me? Get ****ed’ type of thing.

End of the day I believe we gave Grundy the choice of taking a substantial haircut or seeking a trade, money or your mates Brodie? Money thanks.
 
I honestly think we’re shopping him around because his contract has or has the potential to create friction within the team, ‘You’re giving the spud Grundy 1 million a year and this is all you’re offering me? Get *ed’ type of thing.

End of the day I believe we gave Grundy the choice of taking a substantial haircut or seeking a trade, money or your mates Brodie? Money thanks.
You'd be getting rid of Degoey if that was the case
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Traded Brodie Grundy [Traded to Melbourne for #27]

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top