Can we Afford both De Goey and Grundy and Moore

JB1975

Premium Platinum
Joined
Feb 26, 2015
Posts
4,217
Likes
9,970
Location
Elsewhere
AFL Club
Collingwood
Agree. In addition to his 5 consecutive AA teams (2010-14), there has only been one season since (2017) that he hasn't made the squad. Might argue this is a fairly objective measure of him still being top 10-15 mids in the comp.
And he missed at least one-quarter of 2017 through injury, so we can't hold that against him too much.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Saintly Viewed

Richard Condon
Joined
Aug 10, 2015
Posts
43,869
Likes
34,772
AFL Club
Collingwood
Agree. In addition to his 5 consecutive AA teams (2010-14), there has only been one season since (2017) that he hasn't made the squad. Might argue this is a fairly objective measure of him still being top 10-15 mids in the comp.
Last season he was in final 40 of AA.

Maybe if he was playing for hawthorn there might be more drooling at his game. Who knows? Got me flummoxed.
 

sr36

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 20, 2009
Posts
11,157
Likes
14,385
Location
Vietnam
AFL Club
Collingwood
Ablett who you mention now has always had the forward craft in addition to the midfield craft and still even today can do either to an elite standard. He's a freak and the best since Buckley.

Your mentions of Selwood and Mitchell work in with my point.

Selwood while he's not receiving forwards minutes this year (in my view he should be rotated there more rather than being relegated to playing outside so much) has actually proven a very effective forward when he has rotated through there as he often did in 2013/2014. My view is Geelong aren't utilising him correctly. He does his best work on the inside, but like with Dangerfield, he needs to be rotated forward. And he like Dangerfield can actually play deep in the front half and do damage (something Pendlebury has never developed). So my view very much is that Selwood does have a second position he can and should play some minutes in.

Sam Mitchell later also developed a second position and he's another where again he's a freak of an inside player but in his final (was it two seasons? - happy to be fact checked on how many years he did this) he spent a lot of time playing across a back flank. And he looked really good with his ball use exceptional. Collingwood to their credit tried the same with Pendlebury but while Mitchell as effective in this role, Pendlebury was ineffective and was unable to have any kind of impact in the position..
Sam Mitchell played loose man in defence. Pendles can and has done that, but club's weren't stupid enough to allow him to be loose. Selwood did some good stuff up forward at his peak, not in his later years. Your points aren't relevant in a discussion about longevity.
 

Knightmare

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Sep 22, 2010
Posts
16,022
Likes
13,967
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Chicago Bulls
Sam Mitchell played loose man in defence. Pendles can and has done that, but club's weren't stupid enough to allow him to be loose. Selwood did some good stuff up forward at his peak, not in his later years. Your points aren't relevant in a discussion about longevity.
I disagree with you re. relevance.

The move may have allowed Mitchell an extra year/for his body to hold up better over those last year.

With Selwood because he's not playing forward it doesn't yet have relevance, but it may if they make that move with him. Overall I just don't see him being well utilised. It's taking away from his strengths completely. He needs to be primarily an inside mid and he should be getting decent minutes up forward so as to give Geelong's other mids their minutes. If he can again show he can play forward in addition to just midfield, absolutely that's going to help him extend his career because playing purely midfield does take a toll on the body.
 

Saintly Viewed

Richard Condon
Joined
Aug 10, 2015
Posts
43,869
Likes
34,772
AFL Club
Collingwood
Too much talk of exceptions to rules.

League wide, are most players overall getting to about 30 and tumbling down?

Or is it valid only for certain clubs?

Are we as a club opposite to the norm? Or particularly poor in the ageing process?

Or are we just plucking out the exceptions like Boomer Harvey or Burgoyne and extrapolating far too much?

Interesting discussion.
 

Saintly Viewed

Richard Condon
Joined
Aug 10, 2015
Posts
43,869
Likes
34,772
AFL Club
Collingwood
I should point out my instinct tells me too many of our players age poorly.

That it happens to a Toovey or Macaffer I’m totally meh about. Medium players come and go.

But out better players?

Though i always thought Swan was on track to smash 30 plus in age but for a freak foot injury.
 

sr36

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 20, 2009
Posts
11,157
Likes
14,385
Location
Vietnam
AFL Club
Collingwood
I disagree with you re. relevance.

The move may have allowed Mitchell an extra year/for his body to hold up better over those last year.

With Selwood because he's not playing forward it doesn't yet have relevance, but it may if they make that move with him. Overall I just don't see him being well utilised. It's taking away from his strengths completely. He needs to be primarily an inside mid and he should be getting decent minutes up forward so as to give Geelong's other mids their minutes. If he can again show he can play forward in addition to just midfield, absolutely that's going to help him extend his career because playing purely midfield does take a toll on the body.
I'll be shocked if Selwood moves forward. The cats have just revitalised their game by bringing in a couple of very quick pressure forwards. Like Pendles, he may have a couple of attributes to make him a decent forward, but not enough to compensate for the lack of pace and subsequent pressure. If you are correct and the pies have an ongoing issue with player longevity, Pendles is the exception, Pendles is approaching three hundred games at an incredibly high level. It's a magnificent feat of longevity, particularly as he isnt physically blessed. Will he need to play 400 for you to not use him as an example that the Pies have a longevity issue?
 

DopeMaster

Fair Legend
Joined
Apr 24, 2013
Posts
541
Likes
962
AFL Club
Collingwood
He just thinks outside the box, that's why we love him. I think even he knows such trades will never happen. He's just shooting the **** hypothetically.
Absolutely, and he brings a whole lot to the board as a result.

You never trade away a few of your best players for youngsters and picks when you’re in a premiership window though. It’s bloody hard to get into contention, and trading that away to maybe get back in contention down the track is no way to run a club.
 

jackcass

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Oct 8, 2007
Posts
16,278
Likes
13,781
Location
Bendigo
AFL Club
Collingwood
Depends who replaced him, maybe our midfield would have a better chance if their ruckman wasn't feeding the opposition so easily

He gets a lot of taps, but you would think if your ruck was winning the hitouts 58-6 or whatever it was, with our midfield the clearances would be well in our favour? So whats going wrong?

Also doesnt kick many goals for a big guy, hell all his goals are probably from taking the ball out of the ruck

He is a dominant ruckman in terms of hitout stats, but he is incredibly overrated
What are his hitouts to advantage stats relative to others?
 

jackcass

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Oct 8, 2007
Posts
16,278
Likes
13,781
Location
Bendigo
AFL Club
Collingwood
7 mill over 7 years for Grundy is cheap by today's salary cap let alone considering future increases. Could easily command 1.2 to 1.5 now. Do what many other clubs have done over the past decade and make it tomorrow's problem via back ending the deal if need be.
That's the only real consideration really isn't it. Not a lot different than affording players like Pendles and Cloke under a $10m TPC a few years back on their circa $800k salaries. It'll work out a bit like Treloar where the final year or 2 of his contract were relatively cheap by league standards. A $1m payday in a $12m TPC seems a lot but we could realistically expect to see the TPC push well beyond $15m in 7 years time so as a % it becomes far more palatable. It could also still include some graduated build up for another year or 2 and some level of decline in the last year or 2 rather than a simplistic $1m x7 which gets you into already prescribed TPC growth and further lowers the impact in later years. The only real issue is the 7 year tenure and associated risks.
 

jackcass

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Oct 8, 2007
Posts
16,278
Likes
13,781
Location
Bendigo
AFL Club
Collingwood
Last edited:

(Log in to remove this ad.)

jackcass

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Oct 8, 2007
Posts
16,278
Likes
13,781
Location
Bendigo
AFL Club
Collingwood
Geelong and Hawthorn lost Ablett/Franklin and a whole bunch of players in the best 15-22. Maybe we will need to lose someone that big to keep everything together? We know our salary cap is at breaking point after getting Beams, and I don't see any significant relief any time soon while the younger players demand rises
Those players weren't willing to play for less as with their team mates. Both Geelong and Hawthorn would have preferred to retain them. I don't think either Grundy or JDG have that mercenary trait.
 

sr36

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 20, 2009
Posts
11,157
Likes
14,385
Location
Vietnam
AFL Club
Collingwood
The numbers of players that have not gone beyond 30 or so is an issue. Agree, far too many.
Though quite a few named, Blair, Fasolo, Anthony, Dawes, Toovey, Wellingham, are just medium talent and quite a few had (have opportunities) at other clubs. Yet the cliff still beckoned and they jumped.
That said, can only improve.

I’m a bit more bullish on Scott and see him as elite. Still.
His display on Thursday was the most evident but he still directs traffic we’ll week in and week out.
Though I just don’t see him as Brownlow contending.
Too many many days are now competing so it will be hard to snatch a Brownlow.

Of our players in the next year or so that could win a Brownlow might be Treloar, De Goey, Sidey, Grundy.
Agree, except I'd change the verb tense to the past.

In the past, under MM, there seemed to be a culture of dividing the list into developing players and senior players. Developing players tended to make rapid prgoress, whilst senior players seemed to be ignored to get on with whatever was working for them. Development time wasn't put into them and off-field hi jinx (apologies) were ignored - both probably contributing to shortened careers.

Early signs suggest this time has passed and a weakness has become a strength. Bucks doesn't do a press conference without talking about ongoing improvement from everyone in the organisation. Development and on-going improvement is the creed he's lived his own life by and the mantra that he never stops preaching. The early signs suggest it's working. Sidebottom just had far away his best ever season at an age that many of the blokes of the past had already declined, as did a few others like Thomas and Crisp. Pendlebury is still a very good player at age 31. Mayne in his 30s has re-invented himself as a wingman. Dunn and Roughhead have become more solid players since arriving towards the end of their careers into our new system that pushes ongoing development. I just can't see any signs of KMs suggestion that longevity is still an issue. I think he's simply him looking for evidence to support his belief that our recent history will repeat. It's a common practice amongst data analysts as the assumption of historical patterns repeating is at the core of analytics. It works really well when other factors don't change, but when we've had an obvious culture change designed around continual development, it's silly to assume that there will be no change to our historical pattern of longevity That's what I believe and hope anyway.
 

Bay Pie

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Sep 28, 2006
Posts
10,864
Likes
6,060
Location
QLD
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
LA Lakers, NE Patriots
Agree, except I'd change the verb tense to the past.

In the past, under MM, there seemed to be a culture of dividing the list into developing players and senior players. Developing players tended to make rapid prgoress, whilst senior players seemed to be ignored to get on with whatever was working for them. Development time wasn't put into them and off-field hi jinx (apologies) were ignored - both probably contributing to shortened careers.

Early signs suggest this time has passed and a weakness has become a strength. Bucks doesn't do a press conference without talking about ongoing improvement from everyone in the organisation. Development and on-going improvement is the creed he's lived his own life by and the mantra that he never stops preaching. The early signs suggest it's working. Sidebottom just had far away his best ever season at an age that many of the blokes of the past had already declined, as did a few others like Thomas and Crisp. Pendlebury is still a very good player at age 31. Mayne in his 30s has re-invented himself as a wingman. Dunn and Roughhead have become more solid players since arriving towards the end of their careers into our new system that pushes ongoing development. I just can't see any signs of KMs suggestion that longevity is still an issue. I think he's simply him looking for evidence to support his belief that our recent history will repeat. It's a common practice amongst data analysts as the assumption of historical patterns repeating is at the core of analytics. It works really well when other factors don't change, but when we've had an obvious culture change designed around continual development, it's silly to assume that there will be no change to our historical pattern of longevity That's what I believe and hope anyway.
Pendles will break our games played record. Then Sidey will break Pendles record. There's some decent longevity.
 

sr36

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 20, 2009
Posts
11,157
Likes
14,385
Location
Vietnam
AFL Club
Collingwood
We will afford them. It just might mean we can't go for any big money free agents and maybe be weaker in other areas but the two of them are match winners so we can't afford not to afford them.
JDG is good, but it'd be pretty speculative to offer the sort of money that Grundy will command.
 

Saintly Viewed

Richard Condon
Joined
Aug 10, 2015
Posts
43,869
Likes
34,772
AFL Club
Collingwood
Unless there is the mother of all offers top flight players tend to stay at their clubs.

Unless there is a deeper underlying reason they or the club want them to leave.

Eg: home sickness; Danger wanting to live in his special place; a breakdown in player relationship....

We’ll keep them all if we and they wish, just like all clubs do.



[notwithstanding GWS and their poor salary cap maintainance]
 

sr36

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 20, 2009
Posts
11,157
Likes
14,385
Location
Vietnam
AFL Club
Collingwood
Unless there is the mother of all offers top flight players tend to stay at their clubs.

Unless there is a deeper underlying reason they or the club want them to leave.

Eg: home sickness; Danger wanting to live in his special place; a breakdown in player relationship....

We’ll keep them all if we and they wish, just like all clubs do.



[notwithstanding GWS and their poor salary cap maintainance]
They stars are on such big money that they're going to be set up financially whether they stay or go, so if they're happy where they are, money's not likely to push them out. Most of the tim chasing the extra dollars is simply going to make them say goodbye to their mates and is often likely to reduce their chances of success.
 

Shpeshal Ed

I see you on televishaaaaan!
Joined
Sep 17, 2007
Posts
23,407
Likes
20,748
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Man. U, Chicago Bulls, Ολυμπιακός
If we have to pick between one or the other (hopefully it doesn't come down to that) then it's imperative Grundy be the priority.

1) Collingwood flags go hand in hand with Collingwood having one of the comps best ruckman at the time
2) Truly great ruckman are a crapload harder to come by than mid/forwards
 

Damon_3388

Hall of Famer
Joined
Jun 23, 2008
Posts
30,906
Likes
23,606
Location
Headed for Kirribilli House
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Norwood, Everton, Detroit Red Wings
With Wells reducing his final year of his contract to match payments and incentives post the last list lodgement this would give us a solid $400-450k extra this year. That allows for a roll over to the following year based on the rules of the game.
After next year Mayne probably doesn’t play and that’s estimated at a $500k , so without any other massive list changes and natural retirements we look ok.
With Pendles having say 2 more years it allows us a bit of back ending De-Goey and Grundys contracts.
Winning a flag helps in players taking unders.
Seir is a big one that we maybe forced to pay forward next year based on demand as he’s the natural replacement for Pendles.
Our you mids of Daicos , Brown & Brown will be prime in 12-24 months or no good.
Varcoe, Greenwood, Goldsack and Dunn's contracts are all expiring at the end of this year too, potentially giving us further room to move if some or all aren't retained or don't play on.
 

sr36

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 20, 2009
Posts
11,157
Likes
14,385
Location
Vietnam
AFL Club
Collingwood
Varcoe, Greenwood, Goldsack and Dunn's contracts are all expiring at the end of this year too, potentially giving us further room to move if some or all aren't retained or don't play on.
Varcoe and Greenwood are probably on decent money. The other two would be pretty close to minimum chips, I would have thought.
 
Top Bottom