List Mgmt. The Bryce Gibbs trade has set our club back 5 years.

Remove this Banner Ad

1970crow said:
If Reid knew and that knowledge influenced our decision to get him so his old client could earn an extra few hundred gorillas then I’d want Reid in leg irons.
Click to expand...
Probably more to get him out of Melbourne than more cash.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
 

Log in to remove this ad.

skittlebrew said:
It's clear you don't even remotely understand the term.

You are a persistent troll, I'll give you that.
Click to expand...


You are right, I will never get back the past hour or so I have incurred discussing this topic with you. I will never ever recover that time.
 
The Gibbs trade was not the only "error" in this space that stands out.....

Swapping 2 first round trades for Gibbs (yes - I know there was more involved - but that's the crux of it), was only half of the problem in this space.
The other error was the other trade with Carlton. We effectively gave up another two first rounders for Carlton's first round pick in 2020 (the rationale is that we got Carton's first round pick - but gave up one of our first rounders last year plus pick 19 (the first second round) which in a VERY strong draft year is probably equal to a first round pick in 2020).

All in all - in terms of first round picks - these trades have landed us Gibbs and 1 first round pick at a cost of 4 first round picks. That's nearly a fifth of a team. All the "spoils" of trading Lever, McGovern and Charlie wasted.

Then - we need look at the 'Camp". Obviously that was fatal it was also scapegoating the players for a management mistake....
management knew the 2017 final was in trouble - the team was divided over the fact they knew Lever was leaving. Divided teams do not win Grand Finals. They crack under pressure. The loss had nothing to do with they player's mental fortitude - it had a lot to do with football common sense.

After that - we need look at our midfield tactics (too predictable, too easy to defend).
We have a good defence but nobody has a chance when the centre clearance comes in at speed, we have a a forward line that is capable - but simply does not get delivery.

it's not a question of "fast players" (or "inside players v outside players") it's a matter that out tactics are always to have the ball come down from the tap at the ruckman's feet.
For an opposition side - it's always easier to close a circle into a scrum than otherwise.
 
Last edited:
skittlebrew said:
I don't know what you think sunk costs mean but it's very clear you have your own specific definition which no one else shares.
Click to expand...

You know, that stuff called money?

Yeah, money? All that money, that time, energy, the man hours setting up and building your product and brand, the financial stuff before you actually start trading. Yeah, before you starting heading in a direction towards profitability. You know, that stuff. That is sunk cost.

I actually don’t think you know what sunk costs are!
 
Morning_Fog said:
You know, that stuff called money?

Yeah, money? All that money, that time, energy, the man hours setting up and building your product and brand, the financial stuff before you actually start trading. Yeah, before you starting heading in a direction towards profitability. You know, that stuff. That is sunk cost.

I actually don’t think you know what sunk costs are!
Click to expand...

Maybe you're not a complete lost cause? Yay!

So one could deduce that all the resources put into getting Gibbs to the club could be considered a sunk cost given our inability to recover them? Would that be an accurate conclusion?
 
A Dose Of Reality said:
The Gibbs trade was not the only "error" in this space that stands out.....

Swapping 2 first round trades for Gibbs (yes - I know there was more involved - but that's the crux of it), was only half of the problem in this space.
The other error was the other trade with Carlton. We effectively gave up another two first rounders for Carlton's first round pick in 2020 (the rationale is that we got Carton's first round pick - but gave up one of our first rounders last year plus pick 19 (the first second round) which in a VERY strong draft year is probably equal to a first round pick in 2020).

All in all - in terms of first round picks - these trades have landed us Gibbs and 1 first round pick at a cost of 4 first round picks. That's nearly a fifth of a team. All the "spoils" of trading Lever, McGovern and Charlie wasted.

Then - we need look at the 'Camp". Obviously that was fatal it was also scapegoating the players for a management mistake....
management knew the 2017 final was in trouble - the team was divided over the fact they knew Lever was leaving. Divided teams do not win Grand Finals. They crack under pressure. The loss had nothing to do with they player's mental fortitude - it had a lot to do with football common sense.

After that - we need look at our midfield tactics (too predictable, too easy to defend).
We have a good defence but nobody has a chance when the centre clearance comes in at speed, we have a a forward line that is capable - but simply does not get delivery.

it's not a question of "fast players" (or "inside players v outside players") it's a matter that out tactics are always to have the ball come down from the tap at the ruckman's feet.
For an opposition side - it's always easier to close a circle into a scrum than otherwise.
Click to expand...
You do the Carlton pick swap every day of the week.

The Gibbs trade on the other hand. I said at the time we should not touch it and unfortunately here we are. Gibbs was never the missing piece for us. He was a PR stunt that has failed massively.
 
skittlebrew said:
Maybe you're not a complete lost cause? Yay!

So one could deduce that all the resources put into getting Gibbs to the club could be considered a sunk cost given our inability to recover them? Would that be an accurate conclusion?
Click to expand...


Not really.

If you were only selling potato chips, you could use that analogy. However, since you are selling potato chips, ice creams, soft drinks and chocolate bars you can help bridge tht gap but having a greater profit margin on a different product. That will help defer any loss you have had.

We made a gain on Lever and McGovern but a loss on Gibbs. The 3 deals can help us break even.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Rory Walkerfield said:
You do the Carlton pick swap every day of the week.

The Gibbs trade on the other hand. I said at the time we should not touch it and unfortunately here we are. Gibbs was never the missing piece for us. He was a PR stunt that has failed massively.
Click to expand...

You might do the Carlton trade swap - but I wouldn't. I can see how it might be seen as a good trade though - but only if we are comparing draft years that are of the same standard.

However, I think it's basically trading 2 potentially very good players in a very strong draft and getting one back from a less strong draft.
Strong consideration to the fact that we have an ageing list - and few of our draftees (from the past couple of years) are demanding selection.
 
Morning_Fog said:
Not really.

If you were only selling potato chips, you could use that analogy. However, since you are selling potato chips, ice creams, soft drinks and chocolate bars you can help bridge tht gap but having a greater profit margin on a different product. That will help defer any loss you have had.

We made a gain on Lever and McGovern but a loss on Gibbs. The 3 deals can help us break even.
Click to expand...

No you can apply it to anything, it's a broad term. Resources that are unrecoverable are sunk costs.

We're talking about sunk costs incurred in the recruitment of Gibbs. The Lever and McGovern trades are irrelevant to the statement I made.
 
A Dose Of Reality said:
Even then - we give up pick 19 from a very strong draft year - so we can move up 4 places in a less strong draft year.
Click to expand...
Actually, IMO #19 from last year should be equivalent to at least #16 this year once you exclude the Academy matched picks last year. Even so, and even if Rowell & Anderson look out of our reach, #3 this year gives us the opportunity to pick the best of the rest of the top rated midfielders - something I think we'd consider doing any year.

If we do manage to get several good picks from players leaving like Keath, Greenie, etc and we had picks #8, #16, #21, #26 and other r1/r2 picks towards the end of trade week, I would think trading up for #3 for a blue chip mid would be something we couldn't say yes to quick enough.
 
Still too early to say Gibbs Deal has set us Back 5 years. or even set us back,
He Cost us 2017 pick 10 (Lochie Obrien), 16 (ed Richards), and 73 (Angus Schumacher) plus 2018 2nd rd pick 33(James Jordan)
We received Gibbs pick 77, 2018 2nd rd, and 2018 3rd rd.
We did not use Pick 77,
2018 2nd rd (24) was swapped with GWS for pick 30 (Will Hamill) and 2019 Carlton 2nd rd, (21),
2018 3rd rd pick 44 (Justin McInerny) was used with picks 26, 28 from Carlton reMcGovern to get pick 13 from Sydney, = McHenry

So far we have received Gibbs, Will Hamill with 1/3 of McHenry, and 2019 pick 21, and on paper missed out on Lochie Obrien, Ed Richards, Angus Schumacher and James Jordan

So In Hindsight is Is that a setback

Remember Gibbs under a new Coaching Structure can turn his season around and we get 2-3 years,
 
ad victoriam said:
Still too early to say Gibbs Deal has set us Back 5 years. or even set us back,
He Cost us 2017 pick 10 (Lochie Obrien), 16 (ed Richards), and 73 (Angus Schumacher) plus 2018 2nd rd pick 33(James Jordan)
We received Gibbs pick 77, 2018 2nd rd, and 2018 3rd rd.
We did not use Pick 77,
2018 2nd rd (24) was swapped with GWS for pick 30 (Will Hamill) and 2019 Carlton 2nd rd, (21),
2018 3rd rd pick 44 (Justin McInerny) was used with picks 26, 28 from Carlton reMcGovern to get pick 13 from Sydney, = McHenry

So far we have received Gibbs, Will Hamill with 1/3 of McHenry, and 2019 pick 21, and on paper missed out on Lochie Obrien, Ed Richards, Angus Schumacher and James Jordan

So In Hindsight is Is that a setback

Remember Gibbs under a new Coaching Structure can turn his season around and we get 2-3 years,
Click to expand...
You can’t talk about the players we’ve missed out on like that as we may not have selected the same players.

But Richards is a quality player
 
A Dose Of Reality said:
Even then - we give up pick 19 from a very strong draft year - so we can move up 4 places in a less strong draft year.
Click to expand...
Its all well and good to look at trades with hindsight, but the Gibbs and Carlton pick swaps were done with the idea that we were going to play finals the following years. 2017 we make it to the GF and then add A good quality ready to go mid, if you could foresee that the camp would be an utter disaster putting players offside, we'd lose B.Crouch for the season and have as many injuries as we did, you would take the picks to the draft. The pick swap is similar, the club thought they would play finals and Carlton wouldn't get too far up the ladder. The swap doesn't look as good now because we capitulated at the bye but we still have the highest draft pick we've ever had.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

List Mgmt. The Bryce Gibbs trade has set our club back 5 years.

Similar threads

C
Review #AFL Logic - Trading picks 2 years ahead
Replies
13
Views
618
Carmo
C
adelaidecrows
Roast This is our worst ever season in club history!
2 3
Replies
60
Views
2K
DJ75
DJ75
GreyCrow
  • Poll
Prediction Gold Jacket Club Champion: October 5th
2
Replies
45
Views
2K
Kane McGoodwin
Kane McGoodwin
Panther Blood
Prediction Laird to be traded
2 3
Replies
70
Views
3K
cleanhands
C
Cleric
  • Poll
List Mgmt. Has the list management done a good job?
2 3
Replies
69
Views
2K
rabidcrow
R
jamesclean
  • Poll
Preview R17: Changes vs. Brisbane: Back to the Future
20 21 22 23 24
Replies
598
Views
22K
Greenfinger
Greenfinger
El Doederino
Things more aggressive than our recruitment strategy
2 3 4 5
Replies
108
Views
3K
Thrillthorpe7
Thrillthorpe7

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top