Pivo
Brownlow Medallist
I couldn't be bothered getting into the debate about Grundy V Thurlow as I have already been there and done that late last year.
However, as a fan of Grundy, I think his games to date has shown that this myth that all ruckmen should be left until the 3rd round in the draft because they take too long to develop is pretty naive.
I don't think you should pass over a player just because he is classed as "a ruckman".
Besides, Dawson Simpson and Trent West have been on our list for years. So why do we really care that it might take some time to develop a ruckman anyway??
Grundy has held his own against Hawthorn and Sydney. He does all the things you want a ruckman to do; wins or breaks even at the stoppage, has good tap-work and has gives second efforts.
He also gets around the ground to provide an option, is pretty good below his knees and, I think, has the ability to play as a tall forward (and I base this on seeing him at junior level as well as the games he has currently played in the AFL).
I'm sure there are a few sides that are now wondering if passing him over was the right thing to do.
For the record, I really like Thurlow so I'm very, very comfortable with him and his selection.
However, if you are shrugging off Grundy because he plays for another club or because we chose Thurlow over him, don't. Grundy (like Thurlow) can play. It is just he wasn't the right fit for us at draft time.
Yes, some rucks will take a bit longer to develop. However, there are also kids like Grundy (and Leuenberger before him) that have "it" and, as I believe quality ruckman are harder to come by than midfielders or flankers, then sometimes you just need to take the punt.
So, why didn't we?? As another poster mentioned, the fact we secured McIntosh pretty much put paid to us going for Grundy.
A list with McIntosh, West, Simpson, Vardy and then Blicavs being used in ruck pretty much ensured there wasn't any room for another ruckman like Grundy.
However, as a fan of Grundy, I think his games to date has shown that this myth that all ruckmen should be left until the 3rd round in the draft because they take too long to develop is pretty naive.
I don't think you should pass over a player just because he is classed as "a ruckman".
Besides, Dawson Simpson and Trent West have been on our list for years. So why do we really care that it might take some time to develop a ruckman anyway??
Grundy has held his own against Hawthorn and Sydney. He does all the things you want a ruckman to do; wins or breaks even at the stoppage, has good tap-work and has gives second efforts.
He also gets around the ground to provide an option, is pretty good below his knees and, I think, has the ability to play as a tall forward (and I base this on seeing him at junior level as well as the games he has currently played in the AFL).
I'm sure there are a few sides that are now wondering if passing him over was the right thing to do.
For the record, I really like Thurlow so I'm very, very comfortable with him and his selection.
However, if you are shrugging off Grundy because he plays for another club or because we chose Thurlow over him, don't. Grundy (like Thurlow) can play. It is just he wasn't the right fit for us at draft time.
Yes, some rucks will take a bit longer to develop. However, there are also kids like Grundy (and Leuenberger before him) that have "it" and, as I believe quality ruckman are harder to come by than midfielders or flankers, then sometimes you just need to take the punt.
So, why didn't we?? As another poster mentioned, the fact we secured McIntosh pretty much put paid to us going for Grundy.
A list with McIntosh, West, Simpson, Vardy and then Blicavs being used in ruck pretty much ensured there wasn't any room for another ruckman like Grundy.