List Mgmt. COLLINGWOOD Trade and F/A Discussion 2023

[sr36]

This place would have absolutely blown up over it! I was one of the few on here critical of the deal in 2020 and talked him up as a trade option early in 2022, but even I would have struggled to wrap my head around that trade. My guess is Bucks added some mayo on the story of the FD deciding to trade him.

Unless people are talking about a different interview, what I interpreted Bucks saying was just that they discussed moving him on as a serious option, but then "found" enough money to keep him. It seems to have since become Eddie over-riding the FD.

 

[Bianconeri]

This place would have absolutely blown up over it! I was one of the few on here critical of the deal in 2020 and talked him up as a trade option early in 2022, but even I would have struggled to wrap my head around that trade. My guess is Bucks added some mayo on the story of the FD deciding to trade him.

After what he dished up in the 2019 prelim it would have down easier than you think.

 

[Jen2310]

Could take one in PSD. Would that avoid a 2 year contract obligation?

Probably would, yeah. PSD players would be a year. But thats generally not used most of the time.

 

[Jafo]

Did we do it dirty on Checkers for the time we kept him on the Rookie list?

Given whilst well earnt, Leggy makes our senior list after a year as a Rookie.

Or was it other personnel at the time (2018-2020) that kept him as a rookie.

 

[saverio36]

Yeah BF would have melted, particularly the “we must retain him at any cost” crowd.
Honestly I would have struggled to get my head around it at the time as well, but knowing what we know now about our cap issues and what we had to do in 2020 in order to fix that, is it really so hard to believe that Bucks is telling the truth? Clearly we couldn’t afford what he was demanding at the time, so moving him on at his peak value would have been the most logical thing to do from a FD perspective, regardless of the howls of anguish they’d receive from the supporter base in the short term.

I remember an interview last year with ? Ned Guy saying they spent most of the year assuming he’d leave and doing a lot of research into possible trade options as a replacement

 

[saverio36]

Did we do it dirty on Checkers for the time we kept him on the Rookie list?

Given whilst well earnt, Leggy makes our senior list after a year as a Rookie.

Or was it other personnel at the time (2018-2020) that kept him as a rookie.

“Checkers, stop skipping leg day and we’ll consider getting you onto the senior list’

 

[sr36]

They had to fill the senior list, probably had no other pro scout options and didn’t want a 4th ND pick

I meant Markov's only done 1 year on the rookie list -wouldn't you upgrade someone whose nearly done their rookie list time so that you've got more options next year?

 

[cfc19902010]

He become a big mill stone around Collingwood's neck from 2011 onwards. Did great work in his early tenure.

And he had his finger prints on the beams titanic return

 

[DIDAIC0S]

Judging from recent comments from Bucks, the only reason Brodie got that contract is because Ed came in over the top. He and the footy dept had actually come to the decision to trade him rather than give him that contract.

Have heard from reliable source that we were ready to look for a replacement.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[localfootylegend23]

I meant Markov's only done 1 year on the rookie list -wouldn't you upgrade someone whose nearly done their rookie list time so that you've got more options next year?

I reckon its great, reward Leggy properly on a great year, if we have the means

 

[magpies42]

Beat up. He doesn’t sound like he is staying at GC though. Standard lines for a soon to be departing player.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

We traded any trade capital for Schultz.

 

[lethalburns]

Hindsight is a wonderful thing. We won the flag in 2023 and everything that happened before got us here.

Everything was and is as it was meant to be.

 

[ThePheonix]

Hindsight is a wonderful thing. We won the flag in 2023 and everything that happened before got us here.

Everything was and is as it was meant to be.

Profound

 

[sr36]

I reckon its great, reward Leggy properly on a great year, if we have the means

What's the reward?

 

[neilk]

What's the reward?

Upgrade to senior list.

 

[spartan-magpie]

2017 round 8 TAC Cup scout report on Sam Sofronidis.

Need to get him and Nathan Philactides to club.


I’m still waiting for the Karnezis replacement. I reckon he would have been a star under a flys tutelage.

 

[Horaceg]

Hindsight is a wonderful thing. We won the flag in 2023 and everything that happened before got us here.

Everything was and is as it was meant to be.

Yep, exactly this, we want to win flags, still pretty pumped about this year.

 

[sr36]

Upgrade to senior list.

It's meaningless

 

[Scodog10]

Unless people are talking about a different interview, what I interpreted Bucks saying was just that they discussed moving him on as a serious option, but then "found" enough money to keep him. It seems to have since become Eddie over-riding the FD.

The interview I listened to and read the transcript of suggested to me the decision was made by the FD to offload him and the board overrode that by “finding the money”. As I said I believe Buckley has added mayo across the breadth of that interview. My guess is it was unintentional and if you spoke to others like Guy, Hine and the footy exec (not sure if it was Licuria) you might get different feedback.

The Collingwood football department was at the time happy to let Grundy go for the price the Crows were offering, but the board said the club needed to find a way to keep him.

Buckley reveals that a decision to part pays with Grundy had been made, but ultimately the club decided to retain his services for the future.

“That’s about right,” he concluded.

“But it wasn’t so much about what we were going to get, and what we weren’t going to get.

“The proposition was we can’t afford to keep everyone so we needed to make a hard decision (to let him go) and then that hard decision was made, but we didn’t follow through with it.”

“Hindsight is a wonderful thing”: Making sense of the Brodie Grundy situation

He is now at a third AFL club.

www.sen.com.au

 

[Scodog10]

I meant Markov's only done 1 year on the rookie list -wouldn't you upgrade someone who’s nearly done their rookie list time so that you've got more options next year?

This is all speculation obviously, but my guesses in response to the above would be that Markov’s contract isn’t as straight forward as it’s been reported and is likely a 1 year deal with easy triggers for a 2nd year. There’s also the possibility that Markov’s management negotiated him onto the senior list.

That said in the context of your post above you’re right there doesn’t seem to be a tangible positive difference between Begg or Markov on the senior list, but there is a tangible negative difference in losing the rookie discount.

 

[Apex36]

We traded any trade capital for Schultz.

A lot can happen in 12 months. We could easily find ourselves with something significant if a player decides to move.

 

[Scodog10]

After what he dished up in the 2019 prelim it would have down easier than you think.

Feel free to share posts of people prepared to trade him on the back of his reaming of Mumford, but this is categorically untrue, IMO. I have no doubt there was a small faction on board with the thought of not requiring a strong ruck group to win a premiership, but those people overlooked why Grundy was so successful in that Collingwood mix which was his impact as a 5th mid.

The problem for Collingwood and Grundy was he lost that mongrel in the contest post the 7 year contract being signed along with the change in how we played. For me 2019 Grundy in this Collingwood mix would be a hard read because he’d be terrible for our transition game, but fantastic for our contest. I’m sure he wouldn’t be the dual AA and B&F winner of years past, but I think he’d be an upgrade on Cameron/ Cox. Melbourne and Sydney though have been solid choices in game style (the Dees move was poor because of the ruck depth).

 

[Scodog10]

A lot can happen in 12 months. We could easily find ourselves with something significant if a player decides to move.

In the draft thread they’re moaning about moving Ginnivan on. They don’t get the system.

 

[petrie pie]

What is the system when it means you get very little return for what could turn out to be a valuable asset one aged 20.
A player who may play for another decade and 200 games yeah I think we were hard by even if we did flag.

 

[Bianconeri]

Feel free to share posts of people prepared to trade him on the back of his reaming of Mumford, but this is categorically untrue, IMO. I have no doubt there was a small faction on board with the thought of not requiring a strong ruck group to win a premiership, but those people overlooked why Grundy was so successful in that Collingwood mix which was his impact as a 5th mid.

The problem for Collingwood and Grundy was he lost that mongrel in the contest post the 7 year contract being signed along with the change in how we played. For me 2019 Grundy in this Collingwood mix would be a hard read because he’d be terrible for our transition game, but fantastic for our contest. I’m sure he wouldn’t be the dual AA and B&F winner of years past, but I think he’d be an upgrade on Cameron/ Cox. Melbourne and Sydney though have been solid choices in game style (the Dees move was poor because of the ruck depth).

This board is usually reactive to moves rather than proactively suggesting them. Anti Ginnivan sentiment was at its highest on here once his trade started to heat up. If a Grundy trade started heating up back then his the prelim and even the 18 GF would be used to defend the move. There was a small faction against Grundy, a small faction that defended the clubs moves no matter what and a small faction that would have creamed themselves over two first rounders. They would have combined to form a decent opposition view to the keep Grundy at all costs crowd.

For mine the problem was its Grundy was for the money and length he was asking for you’d expect him to be a match winner in those games. Losing his mongrel, the game changing and our style changing just exacerbated the issue.

I think even today’s Grundy is an upgrade on Cameron and Cox. Cameron at his marking best is better but that only comes out once every three-four games and neither can ruck the whole game. Grundy still offers greater consistency, can ruck 90% tog and doesn’t get smashed by the opposition ruck. We’ve got more bang for our buck moving him on though and I think there’s still improvement in the Cameron and Cox as rucks.