Sooo, will YOU Booo Grundy ?
Moderator: bbmods
Yes McStay has been soft tonight. Outmarked easily by mid sized defenders.
This decision by our club is a weird one. What could Wright, who is an excellent operator, possibly see in him??
It’s not even the Grundy v McStay conversation - even McStay in as an independent addition to the list regardless of the Grundy situation is a very odd one…. He’s crap!!
This decision by our club is a weird one. What could Wright, who is an excellent operator, possibly see in him??
It’s not even the Grundy v McStay conversation - even McStay in as an independent addition to the list regardless of the Grundy situation is a very odd one…. He’s crap!!
Beware the swooping Magpie.
- Piesnchess
- Posts: 26205
- Joined: Mon Jun 09, 2008 4:24 pm
- Has liked: 230 times
- Been liked: 94 times
uncanny wrote:Agreed. Surely this changes their minds on recruiting him.
+ 3, this Mcstay does not impress me one iota, we would be **** to give up Grundy for this jerk, it cannot happen now, grossly overrated by Wrighty, for sure.
Poverty exists not because we cannot feed the poor, but because we cannot satisfy the rich.
Chess and Vodka are born brothers. - Russian proverb.
Chess and Vodka are born brothers. - Russian proverb.
- Jezza
- Posts: 29545
- Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2010 11:28 pm
- Location: Ponsford End
- Has liked: 271 times
- Been liked: 356 times
"Jerk"? Why?Piesnchess wrote:uncanny wrote:Agreed. Surely this changes their minds on recruiting him.
+ 3, this Mcstay does not impress me one iota, we would be **** to give up Grundy for this jerk, it cannot happen now, grossly overrated by Wrighty, for sure.
| 1902 | 1903 | 1910 | 1917 | 1919 | 1927 | 1928 | 1929 | 1930 | 1935 | 1936 | 1953 | 1958 | 1990 | 2010 | 2023 |
- Piesnchess
- Posts: 26205
- Joined: Mon Jun 09, 2008 4:24 pm
- Has liked: 230 times
- Been liked: 94 times
- eddiesmith
- Posts: 12394
- Joined: Tue Nov 23, 2004 12:21 am
- Location: Lexus Centre
- Has liked: 11 times
- Been liked: 24 times
McStay is clearly independent to the Grundy situation but some have tried to latch onto it every time he has a poor game to make it seem like it’s a straight swap and we’d be mad to consider it.
They are right, which is why it isn’t…
Clearly Grundy being moved in is because the club realised he was surplus to our needs after the performance of Cox and Cameron and saw an opportunity to create some space for an a grader we actually need. We’ve already missed out on one or two this year, so hopefully they just put it in the bank and start chasing someone now for next season.
Or we can keep Grundy, keep our cap $@&^# and McStay and Frampton really are the best we could ever hope for over the next 5 years.
They are right, which is why it isn’t…
Clearly Grundy being moved in is because the club realised he was surplus to our needs after the performance of Cox and Cameron and saw an opportunity to create some space for an a grader we actually need. We’ve already missed out on one or two this year, so hopefully they just put it in the bank and start chasing someone now for next season.
Or we can keep Grundy, keep our cap $@&^# and McStay and Frampton really are the best we could ever hope for over the next 5 years.
-
- Posts: 20842
- Joined: Tue May 15, 2007 1:14 pm
Last week Brisbane and McStay played very well. Last night they were very poor. To judge McStay in that game is silly. Next Charlie Cameron and Lachie Neal are rubbish too in that criteria.
The issue is not trading Grundy for McStay. The issue is Grundy currently costs “us” too much because of the overs a previous administration chose to pay him. This necessarily impacts on the pies ability to have choices with respect to maintaining current players and the ability to attract new players. This has been stated many times earlier by other posters.
The issue is not trading Grundy for McStay. The issue is Grundy currently costs “us” too much because of the overs a previous administration chose to pay him. This necessarily impacts on the pies ability to have choices with respect to maintaining current players and the ability to attract new players. This has been stated many times earlier by other posters.
“I even went as far as becoming a Southern Baptist until I realised they didn’t keep ‘em under long enough” Kinky Friedman
The problem is, from a purely salary cap perspective, if we end up paying close to $300,000 of Grundy's million dollar salary plus a reported $650,000 to McStay, then we have only 'saved' around $50,000. That part of it clearly makes no sense.watt price tully wrote:Last week Brisbane and McStay played very well. Last night they were very poor. To judge McStay in that game is silly. Next Charlie Cameron and Lachie Neal are rubbish too in that criteria.
The issue is not trading Grundy for McStay. The issue is Grundy currently costs “us” too much because of the overs a previous administration chose to pay him. This necessarily impacts on the pies ability to have choices with respect to maintaining current players and the ability to attract new players. This has been stated many times earlier by other posters.
- themonk
- Posts: 2225
- Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2004 4:12 pm
WPT, nice try mate but some just don't get it, they see things in isolation and make decisions in the moment.RudeBoy wrote:The problem is, from a purely salary cap perspective, if we end up paying close to $300,000 of Grundy's million dollar salary plus a reported $650,000 to McStay, then we have only 'saved' around $50,000. That part of it clearly makes no sense.watt price tully wrote:Last week Brisbane and McStay played very well. Last night they were very poor. To judge McStay in that game is silly. Next Charlie Cameron and Lachie Neal are rubbish too in that criteria.
The issue is not trading Grundy for McStay. The issue is Grundy currently costs “us” too much because of the overs a previous administration chose to pay him. This necessarily impacts on the pies ability to have choices with respect to maintaining current players and the ability to attract new players. This has been stated many times earlier by other posters.
Forget long term strategy
- What'sinaname
- Posts: 20136
- Joined: Sat May 29, 2010 10:00 pm
- Location: Living rent free
- Has liked: 8 times
- Been liked: 35 times
I am glad you didn't delist Leon Davis after the 2002 GF.burnsy17 wrote:Yes McStay has been soft tonight. Outmarked easily by mid sized defenders.
This decision by our club is a weird one. What could Wright, who is an excellent operator, possibly see in him??
It’s not even the Grundy v McStay conversation - even McStay in as an independent addition to the list regardless of the Grundy situation is a very odd one…. He’s crap!!
- warburton lad
- Posts: 2786
- Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2003 10:47 am
- Has liked: 1 time
- Been liked: 60 times
A few observations:
* firstly, I am in the 'Keep Grundy' camp because his best is very good and I think that he can regain his very best form after a horror 2022 with injuries.
*secondly, all of Cameron, Cox and Grundy deliver different attributes to the team: Grundy is excellent at roaming the ground as a 200cm ruck rover if you will; both Cox and Cameron are capable of multiple goal returns when resting forward; none of the three could be regarded as an elite 'tap-ruckman'; Cameron and Cox are very capable marking around the ground.
* thirdly, salary-cap space is an issue for all 18 clubs. My perception of what our club is trying to do here is make a balanced call on whether to trade Grundy (freeing up cap-space) or to convince Grundy of the merits of remaining on the same money (total), but extend his contract by another year this dropping his annual salary for the next five years from $950 (approx) to around a more manageable $800 pa (approx). but adding another year. These are the sacrifices some players at some clubs make to chase the player/s necessary to win a flag- Naturally, there is no legal obligation for Grundy to take a pay cut such as this.
*finally, Grundy has given excellent service for the majority of his time in Black & White. It is not his fault that the previous Board/List Management team at Collingwood offered him the huge contract. Whilst he and his manager would have been involved in the negotiations that led to the seven year contract, at the end of the day, the Magpies made the legal offer which Grundy agreed to.
Whichever way this goes, I will always be grateful for the way Grundy helped to lead the team to the 2018 Grand Final and that thrilling goal that he kicked in that famous win over the Tigers with 4 seconds left in the match.
Floreat Pica comrades.
* firstly, I am in the 'Keep Grundy' camp because his best is very good and I think that he can regain his very best form after a horror 2022 with injuries.
*secondly, all of Cameron, Cox and Grundy deliver different attributes to the team: Grundy is excellent at roaming the ground as a 200cm ruck rover if you will; both Cox and Cameron are capable of multiple goal returns when resting forward; none of the three could be regarded as an elite 'tap-ruckman'; Cameron and Cox are very capable marking around the ground.
* thirdly, salary-cap space is an issue for all 18 clubs. My perception of what our club is trying to do here is make a balanced call on whether to trade Grundy (freeing up cap-space) or to convince Grundy of the merits of remaining on the same money (total), but extend his contract by another year this dropping his annual salary for the next five years from $950 (approx) to around a more manageable $800 pa (approx). but adding another year. These are the sacrifices some players at some clubs make to chase the player/s necessary to win a flag- Naturally, there is no legal obligation for Grundy to take a pay cut such as this.
*finally, Grundy has given excellent service for the majority of his time in Black & White. It is not his fault that the previous Board/List Management team at Collingwood offered him the huge contract. Whilst he and his manager would have been involved in the negotiations that led to the seven year contract, at the end of the day, the Magpies made the legal offer which Grundy agreed to.
Whichever way this goes, I will always be grateful for the way Grundy helped to lead the team to the 2018 Grand Final and that thrilling goal that he kicked in that famous win over the Tigers with 4 seconds left in the match.
Floreat Pica comrades.
Firm in the belief that number 17 flag is only months away...
- Big T
- Posts: 10228
- Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2003 1:31 am
- Location: Torino, Italy
- Has liked: 6 times
- Been liked: 82 times
Nailed itwarburton lad wrote:A few observations:
* firstly, I am in the 'Keep Grundy' camp because his best is very good and I think that he can regain his very best form after a horror 2022 with injuries.
*secondly, all of Cameron, Cox and Grundy deliver different attributes to the team: Grundy is excellent at roaming the ground as a 200cm ruck rover if you will; both Cox and Cameron are capable of multiple goal returns when resting forward; none of the three could be regarded as an elite 'tap-ruckman'; Cameron and Cox are very capable marking around the ground.
* thirdly, salary-cap space is an issue for all 18 clubs. My perception of what our club is trying to do here is make a balanced call on whether to trade Grundy (freeing up cap-space) or to convince Grundy of the merits of remaining on the same money (total), but extend his contract by another year this dropping his annual salary for the next five years from $950 (approx) to around a more manageable $800 pa (approx). but adding another year. These are the sacrifices some players at some clubs make to chase the player/s necessary to win a flag- Naturally, there is no legal obligation for Grundy to take a pay cut such as this.
*finally, Grundy has given excellent service for the majority of his time in Black & White. It is not his fault that the previous Board/List Management team at Collingwood offered him the huge contract. Whilst he and his manager would have been involved in the negotiations that led to the seven year contract, at the end of the day, the Magpies made the legal offer which Grundy agreed to.
Whichever way this goes, I will always be grateful for the way Grundy helped to lead the team to the 2018 Grand Final and that thrilling goal that he kicked in that famous win over the Tigers with 4 seconds left in the match.
Floreat Pica comrades.
Buon Giorno
-
- Posts: 20842
- Joined: Tue May 15, 2007 1:14 pm
That’s true too assuming the amounts are correct. However, the other parts of a deal might lie in such things as draft picks, value adding in relation to draft picks and swaps and say a sliding scale of Grundy co-payment.RudeBoy wrote:The problem is, from a purely salary cap perspective, if we end up paying close to $300,000 of Grundy's million dollar salary plus a reported $650,000 to McStay, then we have only 'saved' around $50,000. That part of it clearly makes no sense.watt price tully wrote:Last week Brisbane and McStay played very well. Last night they were very poor. To judge McStay in that game is silly. Next Charlie Cameron and Lachie Neal are rubbish too in that criteria.
The issue is not trading Grundy for McStay. The issue is Grundy currently costs “us” too much because of the overs a previous administration chose to pay him. This necessarily impacts on the pies ability to have choices with respect to maintaining current players and the ability to attract new players. This has been stated many times earlier by other posters.
Let me get my people to speak with your people
“I even went as far as becoming a Southern Baptist until I realised they didn’t keep ‘em under long enough” Kinky Friedman