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

[Drewie11]

Fair enough. The fringe comment was more about chasing Himmelberg I suppose. So perhaps revise my comment to - uncontracted players not strictly required by their clubs; this is probably about where the Crows price point is going by recent history.

I must have missed something. When did Adelaide chase an uncontracted Himmelberg?

 

[Danger in Texas]

I must have missed something. When did Adelaide chase an uncontracted Himmelberg?

Pretty sure someone posted it on our board that we were chasing him

 

[Drewie11]

Pretty sure someone posted it on our board that we were chasing him

Oh so we are getting Fyfe then because I've seen that posted on our board also.

Awesome we are getting Fyfe, we are getting fyfe

 

[Danger in Texas]

Oh so we are getting Fyfe then because I've seen that posted on our board also.

Awesome we are getting Fyfe, we are getting fyfe

Oh, so you're that type of poster. Was just food for thought, but it's no use discussing these things with a pessimist, carry on

 

[slashin_velvet]

This reply had nothing to do with my quote???

Its relevant because when trading for a player - only looking at their future value to you is not the correct way to determine whether you can achieve a successful trade. If you're only going to consider what they're worth to you, then only target non best 22 players. When you target a top 3 player, you pay more than what their worth when they're contracted. I don't see how its not relevant. You're suggesting a players value is only their prospective value to a team, and I'm suggesting paying only what a player is worth to a stronger side will not get a deal done in a case where a player is contracted.

 

[slashin_velvet]

If the reason you didn't trade Gibbs was because you were upset by what Reid said, then that is poor business practice.

You don't understand my point, and you're twisting my words.

Its not about being upset by reid, its that him announcing the intentions to trade gibbs put unnecessary pressure on the Marchbank deal, as GWS were then holding out for a better pick than they ended up getting. Would have meant we traded Gibbs for Marchbank in the end - which is why the Marchbank deal went to the wire. Reid sabotaging our deal meant we had to ask more for Gibbs to get what we felt was his true value - what you had offered would have been absorbed in the Marchbank deal (which would have been bad business by carlton).

 

[Monkey King]

I must have missed something. When did Adelaide chase an uncontracted Himmelberg?

You have missed something. Look two or three posts above my initial post.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Its relevant because when trading for a player - only looking at their future value to you is not the correct way to determine whether you can achieve a successful trade. If you're only going to consider what they're worth to you, then only target non best 22 players. When you target a top 3 player, you pay more than what their worth when they're contracted. I don't see how its not relevant. You're suggesting a players value is only their prospective value to a team, and I'm suggesting paying only what a player is worth to a stronger side will not get a deal done in a case where a player is contracted.

You have completely gone off track from the conversation...

 

[slashin_velvet]

You have completely gone off track from the conversation...

Good chat

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

You don't understand my point, and you're twisting my words.

Its not about being upset by reid, its that him announcing the intentions to trade gibbs put unnecessary pressure on the Marchbank deal, as GWS were then holding out for a better pick than they ended up getting. Would have meant we traded Gibbs for Marchbank in the end - which is why the Marchbank deal went to the wire. Reid sabotaging our deal meant we had to ask more for Gibbs to get what we felt was his true value - what you had offered would have been absorbed in the Marchbank deal (which would have been bad business by carlton).

There was no twisting of the words - your quote was that the trade would have got done if Reid hasn't spoken up. Are you now retracting this? Its either a yes or no... not something that can be twisted.

 

[slashin_velvet]

There was no twisting of the words - your quote was that the trade would have got done if Reid hasn't spoken up. Are you now retracting this? Its either a yes or no... not something that can be twisted.

If you actually read my posts, you'd understand the context. I'm not retracting anything, just pointing out how you've yet again failed to interpret the words in the context put forward.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

If you actually read my posts, you'd understand the context. I'm not retracting anything, just pointing out how you've yet again failed to interpret the words in the context put forward.

What you said is the blues would have done the deal if not for Reid opening his mouth.

That is effectively staying SOS's ego stopped a deal that would have otherwise gone through.

I find this hard to believe as more a case you valued him higher,

 

[Monkey King]

If Gibbs was uncontracted, no doubt the deal would have got over the line. There were only two options for him - Adelaide (his preferred option) or Carlton, which meant had he gone to the PSD, he would be a Crow. Nonetheless, a deal would have been done.

But, that wasn't the case, and we all move on to other things. I'm personally hoping we can go after an uncontracted Rockliff this year, but that's only my hope.

One thing that didn't help here was Carlton having front loaded his contract and planning accordingly, hence him leaving wasn't even going to offer much extra cap space and we were left unprepared to replace him. Really not in our best interest to let him go unless something compelling was offered. Just poor timing I guess.

I'm not sure on Rockliff given he seems from an outsiders perspective to be a bit of a polarising personality. You guys should be chasing a flag and would want to be sure not to upset the apple cart. If he gets through the season okay maybe you could look at Melbourne's Jack Trengove. Potential quality player for cheap if he could get his body right.

 

[slashin_velvet]

What you said is the blues would have done the deal if not for Reid opening his mouth.

That is effectively staying SOS's ego stopped a deal that would have otherwise gone through.

I find this hard to believe as more a case you valued him higher,

My dog can comprehend better than you.

 

[HumanMeatball]

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?

But betts is better then Gibbs?

 

[Elite Crow]

My comment was that the Crows should stick to targeting uncontracted fringe players, which was then revised to "uncontracted players not strictly required by their clubs", given it seems that's about where their price point is at. It's a solid assessment too; even a Crows poster pretty much agreed with it. Had Gibbs been uncontracted, I dare say the Crows offer would have been closer to getting the trade over the line.

What you responded with was some factually incorrect drivel about Carlton not being involved in any trades except for GWS players. This is either right or wrong. And it was wrong. Whether any player traded in made the All Australian squad or didn't play a single game is of no relevance. Now you ask others to tell you who Carlton traded in, something I'd suggest you should have had a handle on before you posted your drivel.

So when I made the comment about GWS you took it literally? Seriously? Do you honestly think I thought you hadn't traded with other clubs except for GWS even though a year ago you traded for Kerridge from my own club?

My comment was in response to you claiming we should stick to trading in fringe players, which I took as an attempt to be cute. Hence my GWS fringe jibe. What I should have said was "you've traded in fringe players from GWS and other clubs, but not quality players so maybe you should worry about yourself".

 

[Monkey King]

So when I made the comment about GWS you took it literally?

Say what you mean; mean what you say. It's not my task to decifer literal meaning from childish kick backs.

I wasn't having a dig at your club. It was an honest assessment. Uncontracted non-core players seem more where your club's price point is at. Player's under long term contract, who are key players for their clubs, are probably going cost more than what both club and supporters are willing to pay. So better to chase trades where you have some leverage to get a cheaper deal.

Personally, I think Reid and co. erred in thinking that Gibbs' request offered them such leverage, when actually, it didn't. The referencing of the Mitchell trade as establishing Gibbs' market value supports this idea, similar to how some Adelaide posters in this thread have referenced the Dangerfield trade. It's a different ball game.

As for Carlton, we have been approaching trades in a similar fashion. We aren't having a tilt at premiership contention any time soon and need to hit each draft as hard as we reasonably can, so paying a premium for established quality players isn't really on our radar. Instead, we've been going for uncontracted non-core players in a younger age bracket, that might become part of the side in years to come.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

My dog can comprehend better than you.

Either you believe what Reid said to the media stopped the trade from happening or you are retracting the statement as the trade wouldn't have gone through any way.

It's a simple yes or no, which you are now refusing to clarify as your posts have been caught out...

Perhaps you could check with your dog lol...

 

[slashin_velvet]

Either you believe what Reid said to the media stopped the trade from happening or you are retracting the statement as the trade wouldn't have gone through any way.

It's a simple yes or no, which you are now refusing to clarify as your posts have been caught out...

Perhaps you could check with your dog lol...

I'll say it one more time:
- Carlton was negotiating with GWS for Marchbank
- They wanted a 2016 first round pick, but we wouldn't give them 5
- We knew Touhy was leaving and we were trying to package him up to get a first for gws
- Reids announcement to the press convinced GWS that we would trade Gibbs and sabotaged the agreement we had, because they were holding out for that pick which would be better than anything Geelong could offer.

It's not about being upset or holding a grudge (which is how you've tried to twist my comments), it's that the announcement actually diminished the value in the trade as we would simply have to pass those picks elsewhere instead of the more favourable deal we had structured. This is evidenced by the fact that the gws deal didn't go through until gws knew for sure you guys weren't trading for Gibbs.

Funnily enough I thought we had gone through all this on your team board after the trade, and stumbled upon your posts agreeing with my point.

Imo, Reid should have played the trade through the media once it was known that the Blues were requesting ridiculous overs & refusing to budge... but doing it day 1 was just putting the other party offside, before negotiations have even begun. Really poor imo.

The question was there an opportunity lost to land Gibbs by our forward negotiation style that put Carlton offside? Or would it have no difference to Carlton wanting massive overs - we will probably never know.

 

[Elite Crow]

Say what you mean; mean what you say. It's not my task to decifer literal meaning from childish kick backs.

I wasn't having a dig at your club. It was an honest assessment. Uncontracted non-core players seem more where your club's price point is at. Player's under long term contract, who are key players for their clubs, are probably going cost more than what both club and supporters are willing to pay. So better to chase trades where you have some leverage to get a cheaper deal.

Personally, I think Reid and co. erred in thinking that Gibbs' request offered them such leverage, when actually, it didn't. The referencing of the Mitchell trade as establishing Gibbs' market value supports this idea, similar to how some Adelaide posters in this thread have referenced the Dangerfield trade. It's a different ball game.

As for Carlton, we have been approaching trades in a similar fashion. We aren't having a tilt at premiership contention any time soon and need to hit each draft as hard as we reasonably can, so paying a premium for established quality players isn't really on our radar. Instead, we've been going for uncontracted non-core players in a younger age bracket, that might become part of the side in years to come.

So what's going to help your next premiership contention, a first round draft pick or Gibbs?

 

[1990crow]

So what's going to help your next premiership contention, a first round draft pick or Gibbs?

And will he walk at the end of this year regardless for much less than we offered this year?

 

[slashin_velvet]

So what's going to help your next premiership contention, a first round draft pick or Gibbs?

I guess the exact same question needs to be asked by crows supporters.

For us, potentially both could have an equivalent impact. Gibbs could help our next premiership by guiding our youth and being a mentor, also relieving pressure on young kids new to the game.

A high end first round pick (top 5ish) would probably help get us closer, but a pick closer to 15 in one of the more even drafts, not so sure. Doedee or Gallucci aren't players I'd be saying are any more of a certainty to drag a team into contention.

 

[Monkey King]

So what's going to help your next premiership contention, a first round draft pick or Gibbs?

A pick 15 player with no guarantee of making it or Gibbs? At this point I would say Gibbs undoubtedly. Emma Quayle hit it on the head when she cautioned that going too young too fast can stifle a developing list. Gibbs is one of our most consistent and durable players and one of our best and most important too. He's a leader of the club and we have no ready replacement. His loss could have caused big headaches for Carlton moving forward. At least now the club has time to plan and younger players have a year longer to develop without the immediate stress of Gibbs' sudden loss falling on their shoulders.

And will he walk at the end of this year regardless for much less than we offered this year?

He doesn't have the option to "walk". He's under contract for the upcoming season, the season after that and the season after that. You can offer whatever you like, but if Carlton decide they're better off with Gibbs than what you offer, he'll happily stay at the Blues just like last time.

 

[Danger in Texas]

One thing that didn't help here was Carlton having front loaded his contract and planning accordingly, hence him leaving wasn't even going to offer much extra cap space and we were left unprepared to replace him. Really not in our best interest to let him go unless something compelling was offered. Just poor timing I guess.

I'm not sure on Rockliff given he seems from an outsiders perspective to be a bit of a polarising personality. You guys should be chasing a flag and would want to be sure not to upset the apple cart. If he gets through the season okay maybe you could look at Melbourne's Jack Trengove. Potential quality player for cheap if he could get his body right.

Yeah, it's really a case of the circumstances making it unappealing for both teams.

Honestly, I'd be hoping that we'd have a strong enough culture to pull the likes of Rockliff into line (which I think we do at present). That said, he doesn't seem as bad as, say, a Dustin Martin, and I think he'd only improve us. Trengove I'm really not sure about, I don't know if he can get back to his best form with the injuries he's had. What we need is a proven star (one that is uncontracted, too). Whether the AFC sees that as a need is a different story.

 

[marty36]

I guess the exact same question needs to be asked by crows supporters.

For us, potentially both could have an equivalent impact. Gibbs could help our next premiership by guiding our youth and being a mentor, also relieving pressure on young kids new to the game.

A high end first round pick (top 5ish) would probably help get us closer, but a pick closer to 15 in one of the more even drafts, not so sure. Doedee or Gallucci aren't players I'd be saying are any more of a certainty to drag a team into contention.

I agree taking the heat of players is a debate on why Gibbs should have been kept but not mentoring, if you want a mentor for the players, Gibbs isnt your man, go hire Pavlich as an assistant or an ex player who shows an enormous amount of leadership imagine getting bartel as an assistant. There are many players out there they make Gibbs look like an amatuer in terms of mentoring.

Carlton didnt and shouldnt have let Gibbs break a contract unless someone was prepared to pay overs, Adelaide wasnt prepared to pay overs and nor would any club so it was always going to be a non event.

Adelaide did the rght thing and put it out there to see if Carlton would buckle under pressure, which they didnt