Traded Bryce Gibbs [traded to Adelaide] - (cont. in Part 2)

[Capt Hindsight]

Some classic Bigfooty entertainment going on in this thread.
Hopefully Adelaide don't stop going after Gibbs and ruin the fun.
Can't let the Hawks dominate all the trade threads.

 

[craig crowing]

The 'right thing' works two ways. Carlton have placed a valuation on Gibbs and the onus is on AFC to meet it or provide a viable alternative. I say the exact same thing about HFC with O'Meara. Matthew Llyod questioned the other day why so many people look at trades as a win only for their club. You have to loose something to get quality in. If Gibbs isn't quality then don't go after him plain and simple. Just go get Tom Rockliff for a pick in the 30s....

Firstly obviously we would like him especially as he wants to return home to both his and her families, but never expected that we had to go in reverse to achieve that.
No like many others even Gibbs supporters like me agree with you now to go for Rockliff and another young mid possibly from GWS surplus.
Maybe out gross over paying to get Menzel has not helped here thinking can screw us over again.

 

[1970crow]

Interested in your thoughts on Betts?

Was worth the extra $50k you wouldn't pay him. Forward leaves shit team that can't score for a team that scores at will, therefore mids must be improved when doing the same. Yeh, nice logic chief.

 

[F_therest]

People are still living in the dark ages when determining a players value.

Eg Just because Tom Mitchell went for pick 14, does not mean Gibbs is only worth pick 13.

Firstly, i think most people believe Mitchell went for unders.

Secondly, you have to factor in a players worth TO THE TEAMS INVOLVED IN THE TRADE...not just their pure value.

Sydney are in a different situation to Carlton...they have a tighish salary cap and they basically said their value of Tom Mitchell is diminished due to the fact they have a star studded midfield...with Heeney & Mills to pick up the slack in the years to come. Therefore, they could afford to lose Mitchell.

Carlton on the other hand, has a terrible midfield, with Gibbs being 1 of our 3 good mids (Gibbs, Murphy, Cripps). We are extremely shallow in this area, hence losing Gibbs would be a MASIVE blow for us. Therefore, Gibbs' worth is extremely high FOR CARLTON and much more than pick 13.
Sure, we might be willing to accept it if we had a tight salary cap and had 6 midfield guns anyway to cover him like Sydney do, but the fact is we don't.

 

[Capt Hindsight]

Therefore, Gibbs' worth is extremely high FOR CARLTON and much more than pick 13.

Well what is Gibbs worth then?

 

[bmaurizio]

Was worth the extra $50k you wouldn't pay him. Forward leaves shit team that can't score for a team that scores at will, therefore mids much be improved when doing the same. Yeh, nice logic chief.

Like the cockiness Crow supporters show wih possibly three ex Baggers playing evey week in 2017 and hoping another breaks through.
Gibbs will be the most expensive of the lot you can bank on that , hopefully will make for the others.

 

[Bostonian]

Well what is Gibbs worth then?

101 pages of inane back and forth posts.

 

[bmaurizio]

Well what is Gibbs worth then?

A pick in the top 10 and 20 or pick 13 and 2017 1st rounder at least.
Go Baggers

 

[F_therest]

Well what is Gibbs worth then?

As SOS and McKay have said, we will only accept a deal that benefits us and makes us a better team.

Gibbs for pick 13 does not improve us...by losing one of our only good mids for a pick in the teens we're likely to get worse.

Hence the rumours are we are asking for pick 13 and someone better than Lyons...like a Crouch, McGovern, Cameron.
While i admit that seems fanciful and would be overs for Carlton, it reflects Gibbs' importance to OUR team.

What about Gibbs for one of the Crouch brothers straight swap? (assuming they agree to join Carlton)

 

[PoultryinMotion]

I like how I come here, actually talk about this topic in a non troll manner, and you still bring up Port and say crap like that. Nice to know the obsession is well and truly alive even in the off-season. And for the record, no, no they wouldn't be best 22 here. You might like to think that but no.



I might actually do that.

If Crows had the injuries Power had this year those 4 players would

Yes but he is not going to get 13 plus top players or 2nd rounder with 13 .
So he doesn't get anything because there is no point in giving more than 13 for 28 yr old could have been star, maybe might be player.
I don't want Lyons to go top Carlton I want the 2 nd round pick we will get from GC or North.
I would put deadline of Tuesday lunch for deal or we move on , which is not good for Bryce and he will love to be back at club that could have done right thing.

Interesting non-use of "a" and "the" in all that waffle CC.! Anyway time will tell whether the Crows management share your views. It would be great for all concerned if it's sorted one way or another by stumps on Tuesday.

 

[Danger in Texas]

As SOS and McKay have said, we will only accept a deal that benefits us and makes us a better team.

Gibbs for pick 13 does not improve us...by losing one of our only good mids for a pick in the teens we're likely to get worse.

Hence the rumours are we are asking for pick 13 and someone better than Lyons...like a Crouch, McGovern, Cameron.
While i admit that seems fanciful and would be overs for Carlton, it reflects Gibbs' importance to OUR team.

What about Gibbs for one of the Crouch brothers straight swap? (assuming they agree to join Carlton)

Defeats the purpose for us. We're aiming to IMPROVE our midfield, you don't do that by taking away one of your most promising ones.

The deal will be for picks. The picks will benefit you guys in the long run as it will improve your team for when you are challenging. Win-win situation.

 

[Big_Luch]

Was worth the extra $50k you wouldn't pay him. Forward leaves shit team that can't score for a team that scores at will, therefore mids much be improved when doing the same. Yeh, nice logic chief.

Your logic was a good player doesn't get more productive/better playing in a better team.

Cmon champ.

 

[F_therest]

Defeats the purpose for us. We're aiming to IMPROVE our midfield, you don't do that by taking away one of your most promising ones.

The deal will be for picks. The picks will benefit you guys in the long run as it will improve your team for when you are challenging. Win-win situation.

I can see that being the case in the end...even if we want a mature player as part of the deal.

Im sure we will disagree, but i think Gibbs is worth pick 13 and 2017 1st...maybe with us sending 2017 second or third round back as well.

If you back yourself, 2017 1st should be pick 15-18 which isnt anything amazing.

People like to bring up Beams and Dangerfield (who yes were worth more than Gibbs), but both of them got a TOP 8 pick...along with a early second and a fringe player.

big different between that and pick 13 and say, 16.

Plus our second in 2017 will probably be early 20's so not a massive downgrade.

 

[Vlad the Impaler]

I agree - except on Lyons; I'm a huge fan, and have been for a few years - he might not suit your needs, but he's a good footballer. According to Champion Data, he's actually better than good - and almost good enough to be a straight swap with Gibbs (based on their measures - and the respective ages); but I'm not going that far

I think it'll get done.

I think 13 is fair value; and a lot more valuable for you, than Gibbs is. I wouldn't be surprised if a Kelly/Dear/Grigg type was involved as a sweetener. Kelly would fit a need, and has proven he's a decent player, Grigg can't seem to get a game here so a fresh start would do him good; Dear actually looks quite good, a lot of potential, could turn out to be a good player.

But that will be the bonus - 13 will be the core of the deal, the other stuff will be minor (it's not going to be McGovern or Cameron - that's crazy talk).

Both Clubs have a good history of trading - we're fortunate that Jacobs developed as he did, but we paid reasonable value at the time. Trades last year look well in your favour, but, Again, the value was about right.

I'd be surprised if a deal wasn't done.

I also know a bit about Bolton (I've mentioned this on your board); he is massive on club culture, left to right and top to bottom - if Gibbs doesn't want to be there (and I know it's family reasons - but we don't know how intense the desire is); I would be surprised if Bolton would keep him there and let #13 slip away.



He was a gun until he had an injury prone year and you guys let him go cheap?

 

[1970crow]

Yeah we're a D grade team that has supplied the Crows 2 starting 22 players and you think you can now get another.
The Crows surely realise they can't keep comming back to the well for very good players and pay nicks.
I think the deal will be done early next week for fair compensation to all and it will greater than pick 13.

D grade isn't a knock, it's just where you are at the moment. We've just had a fringe and delisted player both finish in your top 10. Think about that for a second or two. I have no issue paying a fair price for Gibbs. But he's not an elite player or even a league wide A grader, he sits amongst the next level down. I understand he's contracted and that means your fall back position is keeping him. But that doesn't mean we lock ourselves in to overpay.

If you're expecting 2 firsts, I doubt the deal will get done because it's well overs for a 28yo B grade mid. I doubt we're offering much more than 13, we don't seem to be pushing players out in any meaningful manner. So there's a chance that whatever is going on the table is already there.

 

[Danger in Texas]

I can see that being the case in the end...even if we want a mature player as part of the deal.

Im sure we will disagree, but i think Gibbs is worth pick 13 and 2017 1st...maybe with us sending 2017 second or third round back as well.

If you back yourself, 2017 1st should be pick 15-18 which isnt anything amazing.

People like to bring up Beams and Dangerfield (who yes were worth more than Gibbs), but both of them got a TOP 8 pick...along with a early second and a fringe player.

big different between that and pick 13 and say, 16.

Plus our second in 2017 will probably be early 20's so not a massive downgrade.

Honestly, I wouldn't be unhappy if the deal was two firsts for Gibbs and your second THIS year (wouldn't be happy either, though). Allows us to still get a very good prospect that Ogilvie rates in what is considered a deep draft. Or it allows us to chase Rockliff.

Would not accept anything more that you ask of us, though.

 

[Capt Hindsight]

101 pages of inane back and forth posts.

Well Played

A pick in the top 10 and 20 or pick 13 and 2017 1st rounder at least.
Go Baggers

Can't see Adelaide giving up two 1st round picks. They also don't have a top 10 pick or a way of getting one easily.

As SOS and McKay have said, we will only accept a deal that benefits us and makes us a better team.

Gibbs for pick 13 does not improve us...by losing one of our only good mids for a pick in the teens we're likely to get worse.

Hence the rumours are we are asking for pick 13 and someone better than Lyons...like a Crouch, McGovern, Cameron.
While i admit that seems fanciful and would be overs for Carlton, it reflects Gibbs' importance to OUR team.

What about Gibbs for one of the Crouch brothers straight swap? (assuming they agree to join Carlton)

Considering Brad Crouch's 2016 season i would do that trade.

 

[Cleric]

Didn't mention Jacobs or Betts. You guys jumped at Menzel because of his talent. Your board thought it a great deal.

Once again I was responding to someone who suggested we owed you something for Kerridge.

Needs to be read in context.

We dont owe each other anything.
I think both clubs have done ok with trades.

 

[1970crow]

The 'right thing' works two ways. Carlton have placed a valuation on Gibbs and the onus is on AFC to meet it or provide a viable alternative. I say the exact same thing about HFC with O'Meara. Matthew Llyod questioned the other day why so many people look at trades as a win only for their club. You have to loose something to get quality in. If Gibbs isn't quality then don't go after him plain and simple. Just go get Tom Rockliff for a pick in the 30s....

You assess the value of a player, whether it's Gibbs or a fringe player for depth, and that's what you offer. Not every deal can get done if the parties value the asset too differently. It's no more the buyers responsibility to up their offer than it is the seller's to drop their price. I'd say our offer is on the table, it's either good enough or it isn't. We might have a bit more to give, but it mightn't be enough to satisfy Carlton. Why would we overpay?

 

[Vlad the Impaler]

Lyons a straight swap for Gibbs, almost, Dean Gore then is a straight swap for Dangerfield almost The real man running the Crows Mark Riccuito didnt even mention Lyons as part of his midfield setup for the future, praised the Crouch boys and Wigg and said the Crows need more quality mids but said nothing about Lyons who they seem happy to shop around. Lyons was woeful in the last final and couldnt get near the ball so lets get real about his worth. He is a steak knife and thats all he is, so all the Crows fans who keep selling Lyons as some quality unit need to revisit that last final he played and stop making out he is some quality merchandise that makes the Gibbs deal complete.
Same with Ellis-Yolmen and all those other Crows SANFL hackers whose names get mentioned.

 

[1970crow]

People are still living in the dark ages when determining a players value.

Eg Just because Tom Mitchell went for pick 14, does not mean Gibbs is only worth pick 13.

Firstly, i think most people believe Mitchell went for unders.

Secondly, you have to factor in a players worth TO THE TEAMS INVOLVED IN THE TRADE...not just their pure value.

Sydney are in a different situation to Carlton...they have a tighish salary cap and they basically said their value of Tom Mitchell is diminished due to the fact they have a star studded midfield...with Heeney & Mills to pick up the slack in the years to come. Therefore, they could afford to lose Mitchell.

Carlton on the other hand, has a terrible midfield, with Gibbs being 1 of our 3 good mids (Gibbs, Murphy, Cripps). We are extremely shallow in this area, hence losing Gibbs would be a MASIVE blow for us. Therefore, Gibbs' worth is extremely high FOR CARLTON and much more than pick 13.
Sure, we might be willing to accept it if we had a tight salary cap and had 6 midfield guns anyway to cover him like Sydney do, but the fact is we don't.

Gibbs also wants out for personal reasons and yet you seem to not want to factor that into your value system. Seems a significant blind spot to have.

 

[King Elvis]

Considering Brad Crouch's 2016 season i would do that trade.

You'd trade a 22 yo pick 3, who in his first year was a top 15 midfielder for half of it?

And you'd do that after an injury interrupted year, when his value is lowest?

People are still living in the dark ages when determining a players value.

Eg Just because Tom Mitchell went for pick 14, does not mean Gibbs is only worth pick 13.

Firstly, i think most people believe Mitchell went for unders.

Secondly, you have to factor in a players worth TO THE TEAMS INVOLVED IN THE TRADE...not just their pure value.

Sydney are in a different situation to Carlton...they have a tighish salary cap and they basically said their value of Tom Mitchell is diminished due to the fact they have a star studded midfield...with Heeney & Mills to pick up the slack in the years to come. Therefore, they could afford to lose Mitchell.

Carlton on the other hand, has a terrible midfield, with Gibbs being 1 of our 3 good mids (Gibbs, Murphy, Cripps). We are extremely shallow in this area, hence losing Gibbs would be a MASIVE blow for us. Therefore, Gibbs' worth is extremely high FOR CARLTON and much more than pick 13.
Sure, we might be willing to accept it if we had a tight salary cap and had 6 midfield guns anyway to cover him like Sydney do, but the fact is we don't.

Who would #13 get you?

Is Gibbs going to be worth more for 3 years, than a potential 10 year gun player would be?

 

[marty36]

Some classic Bigfooty entertainment going on in this thread.
Hopefully Adelaide don't stop going after Gibbs and ruin the fun.
Can't let the Hawks dominate all the trade threads.

Would be more fun if it lasts to two minutes to go for a game of chicken

 

[old55]

13 + 2017 1st for Gibbs + 25 gets it done.

 

[1970crow]

As SOS and McKay have said, we will only accept a deal that benefits us and makes us a better team.

Gibbs for pick 13 does not improve us...by losing one of our only good mids for a pick in the teens we're likely to get worse.

Hence the rumours are we are asking for pick 13 and someone better than Lyons...like a Crouch, McGovern, Cameron.
While i admit that seems fanciful and would be overs for Carlton, it reflects Gibbs' importance to OUR team.

What about Gibbs for one of the Crouch brothers straight swap? (assuming they agree to join Carlton)

Wouldn't swap for either Crouch straight up. Matt is an inside ball winner that is about the fastest accumulator per minute in the entire league. Brad's been injured but is a true inside/outside type with very good pace when up and going. Both have many years ahead of them and adding Bryce at the expense of either leaves us no better off. They're the 2 best extractors in our side, losing either to add outside power would be counterproductive. I can understand why Brad isn't rated externally, most have seen little and forgotten his pre-injury output.