Traded Brodie Grundy [traded to Sydney for #46 and F2]

[Jonts]

I am here.

So what’s the benefit of that 1.4M? Whose our target genius?

How is that cash sitting in a bank account going to help our on field performance in 2024?

When in history have the Dees gone out and got a player to pay 1.4M to in the trade period?

And before you say we can pickup for 2025, we have Tmac/Brown/Tomlinson who also out of contract would give us another 1.2M next year if we have any new targets. (Which we have never in our history brought in players that demand that alone in an off season, let alone combined 2.6M).

I will repeat, we do not need the cap space in 2024.

Here's a list foryou (who says it has to 1 player too)

Also
History doesnt mean much as its the first year of a new EA so its all inflated
Also
If the rumblings are true you can trade cap space in the upcoming future and clubs are prepping for that

AFL Out of Contract Players in 2024

List of AFL players coming out of contract at the end of 2024.

www.footywire.com

 

[VinnieB]

He played more senior games and kicked more senior goals in 2023 then in 2022

He had a longer riskier contract in 2022 then he does in 2023

He was pushed out in 2022 where as Dees happy to hold in 2023

He had injury clouds in 2022 where he is fit in 2023

But yeah, worth more in 2022 right? Lol

Less AFL games / goals + injury clouds + riskier contract + being pushed out = higher value to some in here.

Comical

1. He was injured for a good length of the season. Injury wasn't career ending. Completed medical with flying colours (although he did look a little limited as the season went on in 2023).
2. He played fewer games and played more time forward. So, combined that with spending more time as a forward, yes he should have kicked more goals. Only kciked 10 goals over 17 games v 2 goals over 6.
3. Never got dropped to the VFL previous years.
4. Coach never told the media he couldn't play forward and needed to be taught how to.
5. Dumped after only 12 months. Not wanted. Desn't fit in with Melbourne. Inferior ruckman to old man Gawn.
6. Riskier contract? You mean he has now 1 less year than 12 montsh ago?
7. Getting older.
8. Not considered good enough to play finals even when the number 1 ruckman was carrying an injury.
9. Schache preferred over Grundy as a forward and backup ruck in a semi final haha!!!

Somehow, he has become a worse player than when he left Collingwood 12 months ago.

 

[Mich0]

Here's a list foryou (who says it has to 1 player too)

Also
History doesnt mean much as its the first year of a new EA so its all inflated
Also
If the rumblings are true you can trade cap space in the upcoming future and clubs are prepping for that

AFL Out of Contract Players in 2024

List of AFL players coming out of contract at the end of 2024.

www.footywire.com

How are out of contract players in 2024 going to help us in 2024?

Also as I said, the assumption we need cap space is basically saying Dees are not just going to have there biggest off season of spending EVER in 2024, but DOUBLE there biggest off season ever with that cap space in terms of spending.

The chance of that occurring for any club are next to zilch. But yeah let’s keep running with it because it suits the narrative Grundy is worth a pick in 30s instead of 20s

 

[Jonts]

How are out of contract players in 2024 going to help us in 2024?

Also as I said, the assumption we need cap space is basically saying Dees are not just going to have there biggest off season of spending EVER in 2024, but DOUBLE there biggest off season ever with that cap space in terms of spending.

The chance of that occurring for any club are next to zilch. But yeah let’s keep running with it because it suits the narrative Grundy is worth a pick in 30s instead of 20s

Its not me personally clearing the cap space
Its about realising the wasted cap space in 2023, removing that that in 2024 and utilising it better in the future
Thats literally the name of the game

 

[Mich0]

Its not me personally clearing the cap space
Its about realising the wasted cap space in 2023, removing that that in 2024 and utilising it better in the future
Thats literally the name of the game

When is cap sitting in a bank better than being used on talent?

If Gawn does his hammy in round 1 2024, how is having cash in the bank going to help us?

It’s a stretch to say we are desperate for cap space. As mentioned by Tim Lamb, we are happy to hold Grundy.

 

[Jonts]

When is cap sitting in a bank better than being used on talent?

If Gawn does his hammy in round 1 2024, how is having cash in the bank going to help us?

It’s a stretch to say we are desperate for cap space. As mentioned by Tim Lamb, we are happy to hold Grundy.

You know you can also overload the cap if you under spend?
So thats when (what's been around for decade+)

I never said desperate?

 

[Mich0]

You know you can also overload the cap if you under spend?
So thats when (what's been around for decade+)

I never said desperate?

I am aware of all this but the point of cap space is for talent, not to sit in a bank account.

If there is talent available now to spend it on in 2024, when we are in our window, fair enough, but I am yet to hear any validated reports of Dees targeting a player with 1.4M

 

[Jonts]

I am aware of all this but the point of cap space is for talent, not to sit in a bank account.

If there is talent available now to spend it on in 2024, when we are in our window, fair enough, but I am yet to hear any validated reports of Dees targeting a player with 1.4M

Tom Morris on SEN this morning

How is cap space that attracts talent in 2025 (on a budget say that didnt exist if it was vacant in 2024) not cap space for talent?

 

[danster168]

When is cap sitting in a bank better than being used on talent?

If Gawn does his hammy in round 1 2024, how is having cash in the bank going to help us?

It’s a stretch to say we are desperate for cap space. As mentioned by Tim Lamb, we are happy to hold Grundy.

Are you really that gullible to think that we are happy to hold Grundy? That is beyond ridiculous. You really think we are happy to hold a guy who derailed our season, played like trash whenever given the chance, a guy we decided wasn't in our best 22, a guy who has a big contract, a guy who would be playing vfl all of next season. You think we'd be happy to hold him? Come on now. Wake up. You know that the recruiting managers are always going to say that they're happy to keep them because they don't want to lower their bargaining power. This is obvious to everyone.

 

[Mich0]

Are you really that gullible to think that we are happy to hold Grundy? That is beyond ridiculous. You really think we are happy to hold a guy who derailed our season, played like trash whenever given the chance, a guy we decided wasn't in our best 22, a guy who has a big contract, a guy who would be playing vfl all of next season. You think we'd be happy to hold him? Come on now. Wake up. You know that the recruiting managers are always going to say that they're happy to keep them because they don't want to lower their bargaining power. This is obvious to everyone.

He didn’t derail our season, our shit forwardline did. Grundy didn’t kick 17 behinds in a final.

That’s not on Grundy and unfair to say so.

 

[YeoShuey]

but you didn't offer that. you offered 46.

I’m sure I read yesterday that they offered Pick 33, the Dees rejected as they wanted Pick 23 for him. Did the story get changed?

 

[danster168]

He didn’t derail our season, our s**t forwardline did. Grundy didn’t kick 17 behinds in a final.

That’s not on Grundy and unfair to say so.

correct. He didn't because he wasn't even in our best 22.

 

[Mich0]

correct. He didn't because he wasn't even in our best 22.

Sitting behind 6 x AA ruckman / premiership captain.

Every other ruckman in the country would also have been in the same seat.

 

[danster168]

Sitting behind 6 x AA ruckman / premiership captain.

Every other ruckman in the country would also have been in the same seat.

correct. And he'd be sitting behind him next year also...but we'd be happy to keep him? You're contradicting yourself.

 

[Mich0]

correct. And he'd be sitting behind him next year also...but we'd be happy to keep him? You're contradicting yourself.

Not if old mate Gawn injures himself, like he probably has every year for the last 5 and is more likely to in 2024 then any other year.

You would rather cash doing **** all in a bank account somewhere instead?

As I said, if we got no targets to spend that cash, we should hang onto Grundy. If anything we will need him even more come 2025.

 

[dmac_55]

I think it was suggesting Pies could voluntarily increase the subsidy to assist with the Adams trade.

Wright was clear we have to honour the deal as it stands but he'd likely agree to that variation.

How is this allowed if true?

So they trade Grundy and agree to pay $X per year towards his contract.
Then decide to change the $X one year later so they can benefit in getting a better deal for Taylor Adams?

This stinks

 

[danster168]

Not if old mate Gawn injures himself, like he probably has every year for the last 5 and is more likely to in 2024 then any other year.

You would rather cash doing * all in a bank account somewhere instead?

As I said, if we got no targets to spend that cash, we should hang onto Grundy. If anything we will need him even more come 2025.

JVR was better in the ruck as a back up than Grundy. Hell I reckon Will Verrall would be just as good. Yes, I'd much prefer to get Grundy off the books. He's going to be cooked by 32 so it's essentially 1.1 m a season. because there's no way he'll be afl standard in the last 2 years of his contract.

 

[Jonts]

How is this allowed if true?

So they trade Grundy and agree to pay $X per year towards his contract.
Then decide to change the $X one year later so they can benefit in getting a better deal for Taylor Adams?

This stinks

Mate the VFL just let North trade a pick that was up for review

Its ameuter hour

 

[Mich0]

Mate the VFL just let North trade a pick that was up for review

Its ameuter hour

Think that was the whole point of those picks. To pressure them to trade.

 

[DeathlyAccurate]

Mate the VFL just let North trade a pick that was up for review

Its ameuter hour

That was the point of those picks.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[dmac_55]

Mate the VFL just let North trade a pick that was up for review

Its ameuter hour

I don't understand how a third club not involved can have a say in trade negotiations and contracts.

Just wild that this is even allowed.

Pies essentially could be trading cap space out of thin air, Taylor Adams for a better pick.

This whole scenario just shows that Brody Grundy is worth NOTHING, he is still a salary dump and the demons are just trying to minimize losses and get a pick in the late 40's and not have to carry the bag (contract)

 

[Jonts]

That was the point of those picks.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Except they had picks with that provision last year so why not say that?

 

[The Tilt]

I don't understand how a third club not involved can have a say in trade negotiations and contracts.

Just wild that this is even allowed.

Pies essentially could be trading cap space out of thin air, Taylor Adams for a better pick.

This whole scenario just shows that Brody Grundy is worth NOTHING, he is still a salary dump and the demons are just trying to minimize losses and get a pick in the late 40's and not have to carry the bag (contract)

In theory it would be 3-way trade, with picks exchanged b/w Collingwood and Melbourne. Not sure that justifies Collingwood being allowed to increase the share of Grundy’s salary that they pay in exchange for a better pick for Adams, but we’ll see.

Keep in mind, Barrett may be talking nonsense. Lot of airspace to fill during trade period.

 

[VinnieB]

I’m sure I read yesterday that they offered Pick 33, the Dees rejected as they wanted Pick 23 for him. Did the story get changed?

No, they offered pick 46 which was rejected.

 

[YeoShuey]

No, they offered pick 46 which was rejected.

The story makes more sense then.

I think Pick 46 is very fair value for Grundy though. Not worth Pick 33. It looks like Melbourne are trying to rip them off.