Bryce Gibbs to Hawthorn?

[cs61]

I don't think people are meh about these players. People are meh about having to pay 700-800k per year for them, making them amongst our highest paid players. I doubt anyone at Hawthorn would be meh about getting them at 300-400k, but, especially with Gibbs, that is simply not likely to happen.

I also think it is risky to assume we can turn any player into a gun. Look at Gibson, Hale and Burgoyne. All of them had shown quite a bit to that point, but were discontent with their team. Sure, they prospered in our team, but they had already shown the ability to do everything they do now. Gunston is a bit different, as he was always going to be a gun, and Adelaide were rightly annoyed to lose him.

I don't think we could turn 'any' player into a gun. But our record with Hale, Guerra, Gilham, Puopolo types such we get the most out of guys with limited talent.

Now look at Gibbs. We have no real need for outside players with good disposal. Sure, it's great to add more, but we have more pressing needs.

Getting a gun free agent in their prime makes it easier to go after needs, not harder, as you keep a year of draft picks to use as you wish.

To suddenly turn him into an inside player, or a tough player, when he hasn't really shown too much ability to do either, is a risk to take. Is the risk worth it for 400k per year? Probably because at minimum we have a good outside player, who has shown quite a bit at that role. Is it worth it for 700k per year? Not a chance, and it would surely piss off a lot of players who will be far more important to the team, but are getting paid far less.

This is all hypothetical, but what Hawthorn does as well or better than anyone is getting our players playing to their strengths, and improving their weaknesses, to find a role in our game plan. If Puopolo, Hill, Smith, Cheney etc, with all their limitations, can already be fitting in so well, there is no doubt that someone that talent of Gibbs would find a role.

We should absolutely be having a crack at a free agent with the cash buddy has opened up by leaving. That was supposed to be a major benefit in him leaving wasn't it, that we could poach a couple of players through free agency? It surprises me supporters aren't wanting to be more aggressive about it. It goes without saying we wouldn't pay anyone who asks for ridiculous amounts of money to come over, they'd have to be wanting success not money. I'm not in a position to know if those are of interest to either Frawley or Gibbs.

 

[Maybloomer]

Hawthorn will look for and take a player that suits specific and pre-determined criteria. It won't necessarily take the "best player" available.
I think that has a lot to do with the success of its current structure.

 

[OhhhhhCyril]

Not with that haircut...
Would really need to show something from now till the end of the season I would think for us to show serious interest. Would rather the hawks buy a genuine midfielder with the cash we have laying around.

What's the word on beams? Would pay 750-800k for him.

 

[Goodo73]

replacement for Hodge

An utter impossibility!!

 

[Collins-Langford-Ayres]

Not for what he would cost us.

Would be a better player at Hawthorn than at the Blues.

 

[MC_9]

People can't get over their opposition player bias and can't picture what players could become with a chance of clubs. Its the same as when Hale came over, many only saw him as the player struggling to get a game for a team outside the 8, rather than what he could be at Hawthorn.

Gibbs has absolutely no support at Carlton, and its not clear what his role is. Put support around him, and put him into a game style where you can focus on his strengths, he would improve significantly.

No idea who we after in the off season, as there are many options available to us, but as if we wouldn't turn someone the talent of Gibbs into a gun player.

I can't believe there are players the quality of Gibbs and Frawley available in free agency, and lots of people are "meh" about it.

100% agree. It happens every time we look at getting someone from another club. Lake was too old, Gibson too undersized, Burgoyne knees shot, Hale a spud.

People assume just because he plays for Carlton he must be a spud. Every single player that has come to Hawthorn in the last 6 years have become a significantly better player (with the exception of maybe Burgoyne), than they were at their old club. I have no reason to believe that the same thing won't happen with Gibbs or Frawley if they join.

Obviously it will have to fit within the clubs payment structure. The club will determine where the player fits into the payment structure. If Gibbs or Frawley are happy, then we should defiantly go for it. If not we move on.

 

[Prudster]

I don't think we could turn 'any' player into a gun. But our record with Hale, Guerra, Gilham, Puopolo types such we get the most out of guys with limited talent.



Getting a gun free agent in their prime makes it easier to go after needs, not harder, as you keep a year of draft picks to use as you wish.



This is all hypothetical, but what Hawthorn does as well or better than anyone is getting our players playing to their strengths, and improving their weaknesses, to find a role in our game plan. If Puopolo, Hill, Smith, Cheney etc, with all their limitations, can already be fitting in so well, there is no doubt that someone that talent of Gibbs would find a role.

We should absolutely be having a crack at a free agent with the cash buddy has opened up by leaving. That was supposed to be a major benefit in him leaving wasn't it, that we could poach a couple of players through free agency? It surprises me supporters aren't wanting to be more aggressive about it. It goes without saying we wouldn't pay anyone who asks for ridiculous amounts of money to come over, they'd have to be wanting success not money. I'm not in a position to know if those are of interest to either Frawley or Gibbs.

I think there is a massive difference between Hale, Guerra, Gilham and Puopolo compared to Gibbs. We didn't change any of those player significantly, we simply saw their strengths, and tried to work that into our game plan. It's not like Guerra went from being weak to suddenly being a touch guy. All of these players had shown what they had to offer, and we built upon it. Unless we are getting Gibbs as a relatively outside player, then we would have to try and change Gibbs significantly, which is not something we did with any of your examples.

I'm not sure that getting a free agent makes it easier to go for needs. For one thing, how likely is it that we will pick up the next generation of Hodge's, Mitchell's, Burgoyne's, etc. from pick 18+. This is what we need to replace in the coming years, and getting Gibbs doesn't really help with this, and would potentially tie up a fair chunk of the salary cap.

I agree that we do improve our players weaknesses, but guys like Birchall, Suckling, Hill, Smith, etc. fulfill our needs for outside players (albeit most play contested ball better than Gibbs as well), and i just don't see why getting this guy in on 600-700k is going to advance the team. I see it like Sydney getting Franklin. They already had Goodes, Tippett, Reid on big money, so why not use the money to shore up their weaknesses.

The biggest thing that a lot of people seem to be overlooking with Gibbs, is that he won't come cheap because he's a restricted free agent. If we get him for 400-500k per year, Carlton get SFA for compensation. Given their situation, i would match that if i were them, simply because it may force us to trade for Gibbs, and they'd get better compo. That means really the only way we are going to get him just for money, is to pay him 600-700k per year, which i am not at all comfortable with

 

[The Kipster]

I would rather get pubic lice than that down hill skier.

Look to our own not that fecken SPUD!

 

[maxsmart]

forget about the overall impression over the years and look at how he has performed against hawthorn to know whether clarkson would be interested or not. From my memory he has performed quite well against us and has got a lot of contested ball as well, particularly the last 2 times we have played them- remember they were beating us easily in the midfield last year with Gibbs being the main man until Hodgey impacted the contest late in the 3rd.

 

[H2F]

We have a tough team full of warriors. You introduce one blouse and that lead tough culture goes out the window.

No chance

 

[Argy]

We have a tough team full of warriors. You introduce one blouse and that lead tough culture goes out the window.

No chance

The Swans have shown what happens to "culture" as soon as you take it for granted.

 

[Dr.J]

We've got our targets locked and loaded for next season - Gibbs aint one of them.
That said neither was McEvoy

If Gibbs fell into our laps well and good but that's just not going to happen with Carlton in it's current state of dis-repair

 

[savagelunchbox]

If you gave Gibbs a $50 contract with $100K incentives for every time he went when it was his turn, he would still only cost the club's salary cap $50.

 

[H2F]

Dangerfield or someone like that.

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

Would you like Bryce at Hawthorn? I dont think it would be a horrible move. He was a number one pick and at his best plays good football. He could add some polish to the midfield we will need when Burgoyne/Hodge/Sewell/Mitch retire

Richard Tambling was Pick 4.


What number a player gets picked has no benefit to his eventual output. Gibbs has been nothing more than a good average player. He's completely forgettable.

People assume he's going to become a superstar, and that it's fully within his capability because he went early in the draft.

If he's not up to it by now, then he probably isn't up to it.

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

We've got our targets locked and loaded for next season - Gibbs aint one of them.
That said neither was McEvoy

If Gibbs fell into our laps well and good but that's just not going to happen with Carlton in it's current state of dis-repair

Yeah I'm not buying it either. Hawthorn don't let this sort of thing slip. They pounce unsuspectingly.

All this story tells me is that we're definitely not going to end up with Bryce Gibbs at Hawthorn.

 

[tige19]

300k max

This I highly disagree with.

Statistically Gibbs has always been in the top 10 -15% of players, I know statistics only tell part of the story but we are talking about a guy who is yet to hit his prime and has consistently performed well at the highest level. Carlton are at their best when this guy is on and looking at the Richmond game a few weeks back he almost single handily won them the game when he finally got his hand on the ball in the last qtr, as soon as Gibbs turned on Carlton looked like taking the game, he was tackling and kicking goals and looked a million bucks.

If I was to choose 1 out Frawley and Gibbs I'd take Gibbs hands down, we seem to manage well in defence and our mids work extremely hard to help the defenders.

Worth 500k-550k

 

[tige19]

Misconception that Gibbs is soft, that is simply not the case. Most guys that play AFL footy are not soft, some guys look laconic and have shirked issues at times but iv'e seen plenty of tough footballers do that.

He would be an asset to our team, anyone who thinks otherwise are surely taking the miccy. In saying that I don't believe there is any chance at all in us getting him.

 

[Randy Campbell]

The more people say no here, the more I think yes it could work and we could make him a premiership player.

 

[crazywildhorse]

Gibbs is got a little versatility, he can play back and in the midfield on supercoach, which is handy.

 

[Spursfan]

The biggest thing that a lot of people seem to be overlooking with Gibbs, is that he won't come cheap because he's a restricted free agent. If we get him for 400-500k per year, Carlton get SFA for compensation. Given their situation, i would match that if i were them, simply because it may force us to trade for Gibbs, and they'd get better compo. That means really the only way we are going to get him just for money, is to pay him 600-700k per year, which i am not at all comfortable with

Hang on wouldn't they likely get a 1st round compo pick if he left via FA ? Given they are shambles and are likely to finish in the bottom 4 that would be a lot better pick than we could give them.

 

[Goodo73]

Richard Tambling was Pick 3.

#4. Ryan Griffen was #3.

 

[Prudster]

Hang on wouldn't they likely get a 1st round compo pick if he left via FA ? Given they are shambles and are likely to finish in the bottom 4 that would be a lot better pick than we could give them.

If he came to us for 400k per year, they would get far lower than that. If he accepted a low amount at Hawthorn, Carlton could match it, because he is a restricted free agent, and hope that Hawthorn trade for him, which may net them our first rounder. All hypothetical of course, but if you are Carlton, letting him go for less than you are offering him would be disastrous, especially if they got a crappy pick in return.

EDIT: If he goes to another club for 700-800k, then yes, they will get a good pick, but he won't be getting that kind of money at Hawthorn.

 

[dermott]

I suspect Gibbs is likely to stay at Carlton or move to one of the Adelaide clubs.
However it is quite entertaining to read the eminently predictable knee jerk reactions to any unsubstantiated rumour that surfaces.
1 call him soft or a downhill skier.
2 say he has been ruined by the poor culture at his existing club
3 say his reputed "asking price" is too much for a downhill skier and will cause unrest among our existing players.
4 say we have a greater need for a different type of player.
5 nominate another player who is not a free agent nor out of contract, and say we should be chasing him. However, don't explain how we can get him.
6 say we should draft our recruits not trade nor chase free agents.
7 forget that you were vehemently opposed to us getting Burgoyne, Hale, Gibson, McEvoy et al.
No doubt there is something that I have missed so feel free to add to the list.

 

[Rioli magic]

8. too old/wrong age