Josh Gibson

[The Big O]

Didn't see much of PM this year and just wondering how Gibson went. Watched a bit of him playing in the back pocket. Is this his position and will we be seeing more of him this year?

 

[mark73]

Didn't see much of PM this year and just wondering how Gibson went. Watched a bit of him playing in the back pocket. Is this his position and will we be seeing more of him this year?

He did ok but it is doubtful he will remain unless they pick him up in the draft.There are some players who were given a 2 year rookie deal but he wasn't one of them so unless they use a pick on him,which is doubtful IMO,then we have probably seen the last of him at the Kangaroos.

 

[cobba]

we are stupid if we dont get him

 

[Z_K]

He did ok but it is doubtful he will remain unless they pick him up in the draft.There are some players who were given a 2 year rookie deal but he wasn't one of them so unless they use a pick on him,which is doubtful IMO,then we have probably seen the last of him at the Kangaroos.

Huh??

He was sensational this year. Probably equal with Hamish as the best performed North listed player for Port, especially late in the year where he was clearly Port's best player.

Great hands, strong, quick enough, poised, classy and a ripping left foot. I reckon we would be frickin mental not to at least try to get him on the list.

 

[windsock]

I would have thought Josh was a big chance of at least staying on the rookie list.

 

[franjon]

Huh??

He was sensational this year. Probably equal with Hamish as the best performed North listed player for Port, especially late in the year where he was clearly Port's best player.

Great hands, strong, quick enough, poised, classy and a ripping left foot. I reckon we would be frickin mental not to at least try to get him on the list.

(Great hands, strong, quick enough, poised, classy and a ripping left foot)I agree ,but at VFL level.
There is a huge gap between AFL and VFL, I hope Gibson can make the leap,but I,m not so sure he can

 

[razor]

(Great hands, strong, quick enough, poised, classy and a ripping left foot)I agree ,but at VFL level.
There is a huge gap between AFL and VFL, I hope Gibson can make the leap,but I,m not so sure he can

have we seen him at AFL level?? if he doesnt play for us next year he will play AFL somewhere else guaranteed

 

[franjon]

have we seen him at AFL level?? if he doesnt play for us next year he will play AFL somewhere else guaranteed

That is what the "experts" were saying last year sport.

 

[Event Horizon]

That is what the "experts" were saying last year sport.

But we picked him and didn't give him a chance.
I see him as a replacement for Sinclair as our running defender, freeing Sinclair up for other roles.

 

[mark73]

I would have thought Josh was a big chance of at least staying on the rookie list.

Can players be re-rookie listed ? I'm not sure he can actually "stay" on the rookie list but may be a chance to be taken again this year.Don't get me wrong as Northbhoy did,I think he has great attributes,but he is too short to be a KPP and I'm not sure who he will dislodge from the side.They can't all get a game,and at the moment he is sort of in the Michael Firrito mould and even Gibsons' greatest supporters would have to admit thats not very likely.
If I am wrong,then I will by all means stand corrected.

 

[year of the roo]

Gibson will be promoted to the senior list and can hopefully apply enough pressure on the likes of Sinclair, Pratt and Makepeace to keep them honest and perhaps move them further up the ground.

If we get rid of him, Laidley has simply lost it. Another year on the rookie list at the very least.

 

[F/D]

He is a better option than Sinclair.

 

[year of the roo]

He is a better option than Sinclair.

Oh dear...

Look I rate Gibson very highly and I don't rate Sinclair as high as some, but that statement is simply not true. Laidley wouldn't agree either as Gibson didn't get 1 game last year whilst Sinclair played every game (or close to it).

 

[F/D]

Oh dear...

Look I rate Gibson very highly and I don't rate Sinclair as high as some, but that statement is simply not true. Laidley wouldn't agree either as Gibson didn't get 1 game last year whilst Sinclair played every game (or close to it).

Gibson is a better option.

Sinclair squibs contests, isnt a natural defender and his kicking, which some rate highly, was terrible this year.

PS: I meant on a back flank if you didnt get me.

 

[year of the roo]

Gibson is a better option.

Sinclair squibs contests, isnt a natural defender and his kicking, which some rate highly, was terrible this year.

PS: I meant on a back flank if you didnt get me.

In the future I agree that Gibson will possibly become a better player than Sinclair is/was, but right now an untried rookie listed player is not a better option than a guy who hasn't been dropped in 3 years.

 

[F/D]

In the future I agree that Gibson will possibly become a better player than Sinclair is/was, but right now an untried rookie listed player is not a better option than a guy who hasn't been dropped in 3 years.

"Hasnt been dropped in 3 years" is not an achievement to be proud of.

If that was the case, Petrie would be pretty happy with himself.

Laidley just doesnt play the youngsters, now we are relying on them to make an impact...on what? Trotter 3 games? Hamish 1 game? Smith a couple, granted his very young, Schwarze 0?

Laidley seems to want a premiership NOW, and I dont think it's going to happen.

Gibson has a better kick, just as fast, much stronger body and seems to know alot about this game.

With experience, and I hope that experience will come this year, he will become a far better player than Sinclair.

 

[year of the roo]

"Hasnt been dropped in 3 years" is not an achievement to be proud of.

Yes it is. Given the scrutiny of players in the modern era it is a tremendous achievement. He wasn't even close to being dropped in this time either, unlike Petrie.

Laidley just doesnt play the youngsters, now we are relying on them to make an impact

Are we? My impression is that we still rely almost entirely on our senior players. I don't think we are relying on our youngsters at all.

Gibson has a better kick, just as fast, much stronger body and seems to know alot about this game.

With experience, and I hope that experience will come this year, he will become a far better player than Sinclair.

Agree 100%.

 

[F/D]

Yes it is. Given the scrutiny of players in the modern era it is a tremendous achievement. He wasn't even close to being dropped in this time either, unlike Petrie.


Are we? My impression is that we still rely almost entirely on our senior players. I don't think we are relying on our youngsters at all.


Agree 100%.

For us to go futher next year we have to play youngsters, so would you want youngsters who have played 20 odd games or just the one or 2?

We need this crop to play well, IE: Grima, Urch, Hamish, Hale, Wells, Smith, for us to become a chance for the Cup.

We are relying heaps on them.

 

[year of the roo]

For us to go futher next year we have to play youngsters, so would you want youngsters who have played 20 odd games or just the one or 2?

We need this crop to play well, IE: Grima, Urch, Hamish, Hale, Wells, Smith, for us to become a chance for the Cup.

We are relying heaps on them.

Those players you mentioned (aside from Wells) will not be the difference between us being a decent side or an excellent side next year. They will all play a handful of games, but the Harvey's, Grant and Simpson's will still be the go to men. If just one of them steps up and becomes a solid regular contributor next year, we have done well.

I think you expect too much of these guys too early. Not everyone is going to develop into a player as quickly as Judd, or even as well as Wells has. Lower your expectations a little and you won't get as disappointed.

 

[mattyc2422]

He did ok but it is doubtful he will remain unless they pick him up in the draft.There are some players who were given a 2 year rookie deal but he wasn't one of them so unless they use a pick on him,which is doubtful IMO,then we have probably seen the last of him at the Kangaroos.

Regardless, you don't need to use a draft pick on him. You can either promote him to the senior list or come to an agreement in that he remains on the rookie list again.

 

[The Zebra]

Laidley seems to want a premiership NOW,

If this is the case, we should sack the filthy bastard.

 

[F/D]

Those players you mentioned (aside from Wells) will not be the difference between us being a decent side or an excellent side next year. They will all play a handful of games, but the Harvey's, Grant and Simpson's will still be the go to men. If just one of them steps up and becomes a solid regular contributor next year, we have done well.

I think you expect too much of these guys too early. Not everyone is going to develop into a player as quickly as Judd, or even as well as Wells has. Lower your expectations a little and you won't get as disappointed.

These are my expectations of these youngsters.

Wells: 22 games top 3 BnF
Hamish: Around 8-12 games
Grima: 15+ if he has no injuries
Urch: 15+
Smith: 5-10 games
Hale: 15-22 games top 10 BnF
Chad Jones: 10+ games
Trotter: 15+

Is that really too much to expect?

Considering:
Wells played 21 games
Hamish 1 this year
Grima 2-3 games this year
Urch I think about 2-3 or 4
Smith about 2
Hale had alot of games played this year
Jones = 0
Trotter 2 games


If you consider that and if my expectations come true, well then you'd think these youngsters would play a part next year.

Instead of the Micky Stevens and Lance Picioanes, the Urchs and Grimas will be our back ups next year with Smith to play a role down back with Trots.

I dunno if I'm expecting too much, but thats what I would want.

 

[Groucho]

Regardless, you don't need to use a draft pick on him. You can either promote him to the senior list or come to an agreement in that he remains on the rookie list again.

Yeah that's right. Should at least be given another year on the rookie list if not promoted. I believe all our rookies were only given 1 year contracts and I read on TSK (?) that Thewlis has already been given his marching orders. Perkins will probably get promoted and McMahon may be given another year on the rookie list as he's still very young and played most of the year with Port seconds, even though he probably warranted a few more senior matches.

 

[Z_K]

I dunno if I'm expecting too much, but thats what I would want.

Sounds about right to me.

Of course, some will excede those and some fall away but IMO, what you have there is about what the club would expect I reckon. Injury free of course.

 

[Tas]

Unless we pickup some extremely talented kids in the rookie draft I would expect Gibson to be elevated. I saw a fair few Port Melbourne games and he has had a very good year, he has the look of a natural footballer yet has the athletic attributes required in this day and age.

He has the 'potential' of being a very good rookie elevation.

The club may wish to leave him on the rookie list if they believe he wont get the opportunity to break into the senior squad in 2006. If you elevate and they don't play any senior games you are basically paying them twice as much for nothing.

I'd like to see how he goes in the pre-season, I want to see the hunger to play AFL football over this pre-season otherwise he will be a 2007+ candidate.