Of which Collingwood will pay 300k a year, so yes, it is quite literally a steal.
-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
General Trade Discussion 2022
- Thread starter tigersnake
- Start date
We aren’t comparing Taranto and Hopper vs Grundy.
Collingwood will pay part of of grundys salary if they get what they want for him, otherwise they will offload him and his salary for anything they can get.
As far as finals performances go, Taranto has more than held his own. In a losing grand final in his 3rd year I think Taranto was gws best player. In a losing grand final in grundys what 6th year he got 10 touches?
I don’t see Mitchell and Taranto as even close as similar footballers, but each to there own.
Was feeling a little depressed reading some of the analysis of the deal we did today, so I took meself off to the 2016 Draft thread thingo and found myself in a sort of parallel universe.
Wouldn't ya know it, some of the same posters who *smile* canned the Dion deal are virtually using identical terminology for the Taranto deal which is pretty funny in hindsight.
No need to name names.... YOU people know who you are
So my theory is, we know what happened next so I'll just parallel park my arse in this universe until next Grand Final day to see us win it!
Wouldn't ya know it, some of the same posters who *smile* canned the Dion deal are virtually using identical terminology for the Taranto deal which is pretty funny in hindsight.
No need to name names.... YOU people know who you are
So my theory is, we know what happened next so I'll just parallel park my arse in this universe until next Grand Final day to see us win it!
Because as a ruck combination with Nank it just won't work. They are almost identical in style.
1) It has been proven they both need to play number 1 ruck to get the most of them. We saw with Nank this year when we tried to play Soldo as number 1 ruck alongside him he gives nothing as a forward. In fact a liability. Grundy is the same.
2) They are both work horses who thrive on workload and working their opponents into the ground. Splitting duties and ruck time takes this asset away.
3) They are the same age - 28. They will both be slowing down at the same time.
4) Team harmony. If you play Grundy as number 1 ruck. Because of the above reasons Nank probably won't get a game. Doing this to your recently made captain, standard setter with his physicality and spiritial leader is not a smart play.
5) Salary cap. Spending another $700K a year on a position you already have Nank and Soldo on good money isn't smart business. Especially when your midfield is very light on. It's why the Melbourne move doesn't appear to be a good play by them. Especially when they have no key forwards to rely on next year. Gawn and Grundy won't help there.
6) Length of contract. He'll be 33 into the last year of a sizeable contract. Very risky at that age for a ruckman.
Grundy is a very good footballer who would fit the right team who needs a clear number 1 ruck. For the above reasons just not us.
$700,000 for a ruckman for the next five years is a steal? Come off it. Look at basically every other club to win a flag the last 10 years bar the Demons and look at the money invested in the ruck division. Basically slightly above replacement level players.
One more final add on the Grundy thing.
We have the great Sampilands coming through. There is our star ruckman for the next decade anyway!!!
We have the great Sampilands coming through. There is our star ruckman for the next decade anyway!!!
I think you are overestimating Nank's durability, two rucks are always better than one, the leadership aspect might also be overstated, Gawn is effectively the spiritual leader at Melbourne but they are happy to take on Grundy, chances are you extend the shelf life of both players when the dust settles.
As to why Collingwood are letting him go? No idea, it seems like one of those trades that will come back to bite unless there's a lingering injury, but I doubt Melbourne would take him on if he was too battered.
Apparently the “formula” they are working with now dictates that Grundy is massively overpaid as a ruckman and that holistically they can’t manage the list in accordance with this formula whilst he remains there on that contract.
Note: not a salary cap issue but a strategic planning issue.
Last edited:
we
Gawn will almost be 35 when his contact ends. Grundy what 33 when his ends?
Without going through the history books, have ruckman of that age been dominant enough to command a 1 million dollar or over salary yearly?
How much can you actually extend the life of a 28 and 31 year old ruckman though?
Gawn will almost be 35 when his contact ends. Grundy what 33 when his ends?
Without going through the history books, have ruckman of that age been dominant enough to command a 1 million dollar or over salary yearly?
It's 700k for the buyer, but granted, 1 million for a ruck was stupid, he's fair weight now however & good value. I think rucks can play on well into their 30s if managed well, time will tell as to whether Nank can shoulder that load in isolation.
For me this is the kicker. The return on rucks have dropped.
Four rucks in the prelims, The Big O, Hickey, Stanley, Cameron. Average wage of what?
No research Bully, but what modern ruck has dominated over 30?
People are still yet to realise how good Samson can be. For me he is the one who could replace Jack in 12 months time. He can play forward and ruck. For me the biggest hidden gem on our list.
Untouchable.
Surely they are getting McStay as a forward so not exactly like for like
Nank can definitely not shoulder the load by himself I think we all know that, but I think at least the last 10 premierships tell us rucks are far from the most important on the ground.
