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

[slashin_velvet]

You could be right, but they should have gone hard ball like Carlton did on Gibbs, that made the trade possible by being amicable there is no way Dangerfield was only worth a 1st and 2nd rounder. Look what you wanted for Gibbs and sorry to say Gibbs has half the ability of Dangerfield as 99% of football supporters would agree

No - Adelaide did what they could given the circumstances - had you locked him in on a longer term contract, you could have requested more in a trade or kept him at the club. Unfortunately for you guys he was foresighted enough to not take a longer term deal which would make it harder to get home. Fortunately for us - Gibbs was not so smart.

In terms of ability - whilst saying Gibb's is half as good might be an exaggeration - Danger is clearly a superior player - one of the best in the game IMO. Gibbs has never reached the levels Danger has (either at the Crows or Geelong). That doesn't mean we should have compromised our position going forward just because you guys were unable to manage your list in a way that allowed you to either retain players or get value.

 

[Monkey King]

You could be right, but they should have gone hard ball like Carlton did on Gibbs, that made the trade possible by being amicable there is no way Dangerfield was only worth a 1st and 2nd rounder. Look what you wanted for Gibbs and sorry to say Gibbs has half the ability of Dangerfield as 99% of football supporters would agree

LOL. Danger must've had well over a thousand disposals last season I'm guessing

The fact is, Adelaide were never in the position to with Dangerfield anything like what Carlton did with Gibbs. Dangerfield was a Free Agent and there was nothing you could do to stop him leaving. The Crows didn't act amicably, they pushed for the outcome that delivered them the highest return they could possibly get out of the situation. Of course, had he been under contract, you would have decided it was worth more to keep him, which is what Carlton did with Gibbs, but that was never an option for you.

 

[marty36]

LOL. Danger must've had well over a thousand disposals last season I'm guessing

The fact is, Adelaide were never in the position to with Dangerfield anything like what Carlton did with Gibbs. Dangerfield was a Free Agent and there was nothing you could do to stop him leaving. The Crows didn't act amicably, they pushed for the outcome that delivered them the highest return they could possibly get out of the situation. Of course, had he been under contract, you would have decided it was worth more to keep him, which is what Carlton did with Gibbs, but that was never an option for you.

You do realise how the RFA rules work don't you, yes he could leave but would need to enter the national draft if Adelaide had actually pushed the issue

 

[Monkey King]

You do realise how the RFA rules work don't you, yes he could leave but would need to enter the national draft if Adelaide had actually pushed the issue

"The Crows didn't act amicably, they pushed for the outcome that delivered them the highest return they could possibly get out of the situation."

I have no idea how you think this contradicts anything I posted.

 

[marty36]

"The Crows didn't act amicably, they pushed for the outcome that delivered them the highest return they could possibly get out of the situation."

I have no idea how you think this contradicts anything I posted.

Did they match an offer, or are you making up stuff?

 

[Monkey King]

Did they match an offer, or are you making up stuff?

What are you even talking about? Had the Crows let Dangerfield walk under FA the compensation would have been less than the trade. Had they forced him into the draft, even less again. The Crows simply played the game of getting the best return they possibly could under the circumstances they were in.

 

[marty36]

What are you even talking about? Had the Crows let Dangerfield walk under FA the compensation would have been less than the trade. Had they forced him into the draft, even less again. The Crows simply played the game of getting the best return they possibly could under the circumstances they were in.

They obviously didn't play it we'll enough as he didn't want to go anywhere but Geelong, yes they could have lost out like Port did with Nick Stevens by forcing him into the draft but it would have sent a message and it appeared on the outside that Geelong had committed to Danger.

 

[slashin_velvet]

What are you even talking about? Had the Crows let Dangerfield walk under FA the compensation would have been less than the trade. Had they forced him into the draft, even less again. The Crows simply played the game of getting the best return they possibly could under the circumstances they were in.

He's getting caught up on technicalities that no-one is really suggesting

 

[slashin_velvet]

They obviously didn't play it we'll enough as he didn't want to go anywhere but Geelong, yes they could have lost out like Port did with Nick Stevens by forcing him into the draft but it would have sent a message and it appeared on the outside that Geelong had committed to Danger.

Danger could have put a bounty on his head like Luke Ball did and make it a 1 year deal worth 3 million - and if Geelong picked him up - then they could mutually agree to extend his contract for a much smaller amount in subsequent years, alternatively, any club dumb enough to take him could pay him a massive amount for a year before he went back to the draft.

 

[marty36]

Danger could have put a bounty on his head like Luke Ball did and make it a 1 year deal worth 3 million - and if Geelong picked him up - then they could mutually agree to extend his contract for a much smaller amount in subsequent years, alternatively, any club dumb enough to take him could pay him a massive amount for a year before he went back to the draft.

Oh so you are suggesting that Geekong could break the AFL rules and risk sanctions

Fair enough

 

[Monkey King]

They obviously didn't play it we'll enough as he didn't want to go anywhere but Geelong, yes they could have lost out like Port did with Nick Stevens by forcing him into the draft but it would have sent a message and it appeared on the outside that Geelong had committed to Danger.

I disagree. The Crows played the best they could in terms of getting the highest return out of unfavourable circumstances. But pretending their accepting the trade was somehow a favour to Dangerfield is bollocks. A pure self interest play and completely fair enough too.

And none of this has anything to do with Gibbs. Had you locked Dangerfield up under contract like Gibbs was, you surely would have considered yourselves better off with Dangerfield than the picks on offer and rightfully passed on the trade. As it stands with Gibbs, your club thought it would be better off with Gibbs than pick 15 and chips and Carlton just happened to feel the same way.

 

[slashin_velvet]

Oh so you are suggesting that Geekong could break the AFL rules and risk sanctions

Fair enough

I don't think it would have gotten to that point, but you guys clearly weren't willing to take that risk yourselves.

 

[Frank Grimes]

We are 1 year into a 5 year rebuild. It won't take much longer to see the direction we're headed in, and there is only 1 direction for us to go: Up.

I'm not saying that Carlton's rebuild is one, but there are many rebuilds which don't work out (as a Richmond supporter I should know). I would say more rebuilds don't work out compared to ones which do. To move clubs on the premise of "we're rebuilding and going to be competing for a premiership in 4-5 years" requires a lot a faith. I have never seen a club or their supporters say "we are on the wrong path" while in the middle of a rebuild. It's one of those things which becomes apparent over time.

 

[Asgardian]

This thread has become sentient

 

[marty36]

This thread has become sentient

It is rather pointless but it is off season

 

[BluesRule]

So now Gibbs will likely stay a Carlton player for the rest of his career, where do Adelaide go now to get cheap superstars (like Jacobs and Betts) to bolster their team?

 

[Donakebab]

So now Gibbs will likely stay a Carlton player for the rest of his career, where do Adelaide go now to get cheap superstars (like Jacobs and Betts) to bolster their team?

Implying Gibbs is a superstar.

 

[Danger in Texas]

So now Gibbs will likely stay a Carlton player for the rest of his career, where do Adelaide go now to get cheap superstars (like Jacobs and Betts) to bolster their team?

Why did you feel the need to bump this thread?

 

[marty36]

So now Gibbs will likely stay a Carlton player for the rest of his career, where do Adelaide go now to get cheap superstars (like Jacobs and Betts) to bolster their team?

Have you recruited any other SA lads we can entice home?

 

[BluesRule]

Implying Gibbs is a superstar.

Love the Gibbs

 

[BluesRule]

Why did you feel the need to bump this thread?

Sorry, my bad but it came up on page 1 Must be a slow off season

 

[1990crow]

Why did you feel the need to bump this thread?

Feels so superior holding a player who would prefer to be somewhere else. Yeah well done. Could have a first rounder running around for them in 5 years time when they're actually back in the top 8 instead of Gibbs for 2-3 years.

 

[BluesRule]

Have you recruited any other SA lads we can entice home?

Rowe is a best 22 player. What will you trade?

 

[BluesRule]

Feels so superior holding a player who would prefer to be somewhere else. Yeah well done. Could have a first rounder running around for them in 5 years time when they're actually back in the top 8 instead of Gibbs for 2-3 years.

Wow it does still hurt!

I hope he has a big year to demonstrate his 'real' value.

 

[Dc9798]

And here we go again on this thread