Opinion Mumford v Duncan

[Jon Douglas]

Well its been a few years now since we lost Shane Mumford to a big spending Swans.

I was pretty pissed off we lost Mumford who I saw as a big aggressive ruckman - who could be a 150 + first ruckman for us.

We got pick 28 compensation for Shane.

Now that a fair time has past it is possible to say who who got the better of the deal.

Sure we are short on fit ruckman and we might still need another one to make a certainty of our successful dynasty going forward. Forgeting the positions they play - who is the better player now and most likley to have a better career with their respective clubs ?

I am starting to think myself we have got the better deal as I reckon Duncan is a very good young player who will even get better. In otherwords I reckon we have at least broken even and probably got the better player.

Also maybe we got the player with better attitude and will cause less concerns over the next 5 + years - and that is for me also a consideration in ranking the two players.

Mitch Duncan - 58 senior games 56 goals.

Shane Mumford - 84 senior games 32 goals (pretty good for a ruckman).

What to the Big Footy Cat fans think ?

 

[supahoops]

Win-Win

 

[Geelong_Gen]

duncan is a skilled player

 

[Generalissimo]

Both are very good players. I think in terms of talent, Duncan is the superior player. But tallish, goalkicking midfielders are not exactly a rarity in the AFL while superb ruckmen are harder to come by. Both sides could consider themselves winners.

 

[Turbocat]

Not an ideal matchup. kick it wide to flank and let Duncan run to it.

 

[Geelong_Gen]

no need to worry weve got mcintosh

 

[Geelong_Gen]

and mumy doesnt move like he used to

 

[JUBJUB]

Win-Win

End of thread with that comment

 

[The Casey Cat]

and mumy doesnt move like he used to

This. Something is up with him this year and is possibly attitude related. Was always happy with Duncan (kicked 2 or 3 telling goals in a close match against the Hawks in his first or second game) and understood we could not keep Mumford after the massive offer from the Swans.

 

[tonxi]

On long term future potential, I say Duncan. Mumford looks like the ends is already in sight. Maybe the physical style he employs is taking a toll far earlier than expected. If he was still at Geelong, we would still be short a ruckman.

Both are premiership players, as well. However if the Hawks weren't so inept...

Just lucky they were. They're barely tolerable as it is.

 

[Hot Tin Roof]

Win-Win

....

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

We'll be better long-term (the new ruck rules seriously hurt the Mumford-types), but they don't win the 2012 premiership without Mumford as their #1 ruckman. Both teams end up happy. Good trade.

 

[Son_Of_God29]

Really have to say Win-Win Mitch will play 200 games for the club and has looked a class act and Mummy got them to the Premiership last year even if the GF wasn't his best game

 

[Partridge]

We'll be better long-term (the new ruck rules seriously hurt the Mumford-types), but they don't win the 2012 premiership without Mumford as their #1 ruckman. Both teams end up happy. Good trade.

Disagree entirely MC. He was barely sighted and close to worst on ground. He had no bearing on that result at all.

 

[Partridge]

I am starting to think myself we have got the better deal as I reckon Duncan is a very good young player who will even get better. In otherwords I reckon we have at least broken even and probably got the better player.

Also maybe we got the player with better attitude and will cause less concerns over the next 5 + years - and that is for me also a consideration in ranking the two players.

Mitch Duncan - 58 senior games 56 goals.

Shane Mumford - 84 senior games 32 goals (pretty good for a ruckman).

What to the Big Footy Cat fans think ?

No contest. Mitch Duncan is the better player now, and is only going to get better. I'm not sure Mumford is going to get any better, and seems to be injured/not fit quite a lot. Certainly that excuse is made for him all the time. Lots of hype, but nowhere near as good as some think.

I am very, very happy with Duncan thanks very much. We're not going to regret it.

 

[Turbocat]

Funny that Mumford contract is due and he will looks to be asking for another 4 years. Good luck , maybe he should ask Tippet for some spare change

 

[Partridge]

Funny that Mumford contract is due and he will looks to be asking for another 4 years. Good luck , maybe he should ask Tippet for some spare change

Be interesting if he shops himself around. Again.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

Disagree entirely MC. He was barely sighted and close to worst on ground. He had no bearing on that result at all.

That result? Sure.

But they had 18 other wins during the season, 13 of which he played in. They lost three of eight in the games that he missed and were comprehensively belted in the ruck in all three. And if they'd lost another game, they wouldn't have finished in the top four.

Saying that Sydney doesn't win the 2012 premiership without Mumford is the same as saying that we don't win the 2011 premiership without Pods.

 

[DanA]

Pick 28 is aweful compensation for Mumford. We just beat the odds and got a good player.

 

[darren forssman]

tim duncan all the way.

 

[cats_09]

Funny that Mumford contract is due and he will looks to be asking for another 4 years. Good luck , maybe he should ask Tippet for some spare change

Not sure he is worth the risk of a 4yr contract; so far in his career he has only played 20 games in a season once (a little unlucky to finish on 18 games for the Cats in 09, but still..), statistically he is currently having his worse season since joining the Swans, ave hitouts, disposals, marks, goals, tackles all at the lowest in 4 years, while he is ave more behinds, frees for & frees against (career ave of 1.7 against, last year 1.5 this season he is at 3.1 which is a decent jump for that category).

Considering he turns 27 in July and that he hasn't had the best run with injuries/fitness over recent years, if I was Sydney I would offer him either a 3yr deal or even a 2yr deal and optional 3rd yr - if his body is up to footy in 3 years the last year is activated, otherwise the Swans haven't over committed themselves.

 

[meto]

Both are very good players. I think in terms of talent, Duncan is the superior player. But tallish, goalkicking midfielders are not exactly a rarity in the AFL while superb ruckmen are harder to come by. Both sides could consider themselves winners.

"We ain't to tall" in the midfield last time I checked. Mitch is a welcome inclusion.

 

[topic97]

tim duncan all the way.

Lmfao.
Im glad we dont have to pay our Duncan anywhere near what Tim Duncan is paid!! He would be the only player in the team!!

I agree with the second post win - win.
Neither have their downside for their positions.
One of the rare times where a trade has come out almost equal.

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

Forgeting the positions they play - who is the better player now and most likley to have a better career with their respective clubs ?
Mitch Duncan - 58 senior games 56 goals.

Shane Mumford - 84 senior games 32 goals (pretty good for a ruckman).

Don't forget to add a Premiership for each! Actually, it's like the Sean Denham/Johnny Barnes win/win trade we did with Essendon back in the early 1990's. Of course Barnsey never won a Premiership with us (played in three Grand Finals and then won one with bloody Essendon in 2000!) while 'Dunny Brush' won one for the Dons in 1993

 

[footscore]

Funny that Mumford contract is due and he will looks to be asking for another 4 years. Good luck , maybe he should ask Tippet for some spare change

pretty sure Vlad won't mind if Sydney cheat the salary cap just as long as it means they hold onto their rucks and remain a strong club for 3-5 years time.

It's very good for business having Sydney up and running.