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

Status
Not open for further replies.

(Log in to remove this ad.)

davis_756

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
May 24, 2008
Posts
9,042
Likes
3,414
Location
unknown
AFL Club
Carlton
LOL you really have lost it havnt you

Firstly regarding the sleep / child comment that was well advanced into the conversation and not prior to asking you for a constructive reply

Where did you get #17 without trading Gibbs ? After all this is about how a trade can be done without gibbs being traded
So you are rating Devon Smith 24 years old pick 14 + Matt Kennedy 20 year old #13 as valued at #20 + #39 but expecting 2 1st rounders for a 29 year old Gibbs

What doesn't make sense about my question here ?
I could easily note your troll baits right through the conversation but why bother when you put one in the post asking me to tell you where you have, you never asked me to list everything you had done and frankly we don't have that much time.

Your original post I responded to was a bait suggesting Carlton were desperate to trade Gibbs when we aren't. I gave you the trade scenario without trading Gibbs, 20 + 39 for Smith and Kennedy, which will happen whether you like it or not, you disagree that trade will work ill wait until the trade is done and see who is correct.

No one is suggesting two first round picks for Gibbs, once again making shit up to suit your argument you are now having with your own opinion. Got anything else or are we done here?
 

davis_756

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
May 24, 2008
Posts
9,042
Likes
3,414
Location
unknown
AFL Club
Carlton
Maybe they should, you'd have had either Jake Kelly or Jarryd Lyons with our 14. Kelly has had a great year and Lyons showed he's a very good mid when played in there.
And we would have had Cripps carrying an entire midfield of kids while injured for most of the season and broke him down, the only way offloading Gibbs makes sense is to replace him with Rockliff and then add a kid with the draft pick so in that sense rockliff + 17 is far far better then Lyons + 14.

Gibbs won't be traded without Rockliff coming in, it makes no sense to expose a bunch of kids to the heavy lifting in the middle with no senior bodies to chop them out.
 

Pure_Ownage

Premium Platinum
Joined
Nov 26, 2008
Posts
33,648
Likes
30,882
Location
PODS fan club office
AFL Club
Geelong
GWS will be dealing with multiple clubs in trade week, there's plenty of ways for them to get into the first round that don't involve Carlton.

Without picks from Gibbs, a possible Kennedy trade could be 2018 2nd & 2017 3rd for Kennedy, Smith, Griffen & 2017 3rd. Take Smith out (which most Carlton supporters would be more than comfortable with) and it's straight swap, Kennedy for next year's second. Expect a complicated package deal because that's Silvagni's thing.

None of this is wishful thinking, it's based on Plowman, Sumner, Philips and Lamb + 2015 pick 8 for 2015 pick 28 and 2016 pick 15, and the aforementioned 2017 Marchbank, Pickett and 2017 2nd round pick for 2017 Geelong first + later picks with a 'separate' trade of Palmer for pick 135. There's plenty of way to skin this particular cat, as you'll find out when the deal goes down with minimal fuss in a few weeks' time.
Those trades happened because gws needed to reduce their list size this year they don't and they need high picks because their 1st rounder got stripped. You won't get a package deal for a bunch of late picks.
 

davis_756

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
May 24, 2008
Posts
9,042
Likes
3,414
Location
unknown
AFL Club
Carlton
Those trades happened because gws needed to reduce their list size this year they don't and they need high picks because their 1st rounder got stripped. You won't get a package deal for a bunch of late picks.
They did it to reduce cap pressure as the half dozen 1st round picks renegotiate higher salaries each year, that really hasn't changed much drafting a kid on base salary as opposed to paying griffen 500k+ allows them to pay off more of kelly/shiel type contracts and hold those players together for longer.

They don't have a normal cycle where as older players decline the money is free'd up for the up and comers, instead they have lots of up and comers and deciding which ones to keep and which ones to offload to replace with base salary draftees is their best list management decision.
 

Pure_Ownage

Premium Platinum
Joined
Nov 26, 2008
Posts
33,648
Likes
30,882
Location
PODS fan club office
AFL Club
Geelong
They did it to reduce cap pressure as the half dozen 1st round picks renegotiate higher salaries each year, that really hasn't changed much drafting a kid on base salary as opposed to paying griffen 500k+ allows them to pay off more of kelly/shiel type contracts and hold those players together for longer.

They don't have a normal cycle where as older players decline the money is free'd up for the up and comers, instead they have lots of up and comers and deciding which ones to keep and which ones to offload to replace with base salary draftees is their best list management decision.
Griffen would have been heavily frontloaded so i doubt he is on much $ in 2018 and there is nothing to indicate he wants to go back to vic.

If they are to trade smith and kennedy to you it will take much more than the stuff you are talking about.
 

Doro

Club Legend
Joined
Sep 22, 2011
Posts
2,593
Likes
3,404
Location
62 West Wallaby St.
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
Wensleydale Wanderers
Griffen would have been heavily frontloaded so i doubt he is on much $ in 2018 and there is nothing to indicate he wants to go back to vic.

If they are to trade smith and kennedy to you it will take much more than the stuff you are talking about.
The re-signing of Kelly and Hopper in the last few weeks might have taken the Giants a little close to cap limit for next year?(pure speculation). Shedding the Griffen wage when he's unlikely to produce much on field may have made this possible.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Sin City

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
May 29, 2009
Posts
28,751
Likes
7,015
Location
Winterfell
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
LA Lakers
As much as it's gonna be hilarious watching this thread blow up over the next few days I still don't think Gibbs would've been the difference between winning and losing the grand final. I actually don't think Dangerfield, Fyfe or Kennedy would be either.

The 2017 Tigers are playing a style perfect for finals, similar to the Swans. High pressure, physical, contested footy. The Crows are more of a skillful team with great ball movement. They look awesome when they're on top but they can be shut completely out of a game by a team like Richmond. Don't see how having Gibbs would change this.

Obviously I believe a player like Gibbs would make them a much stronger team but I think their playing list is already strong enough, they need to play a style more like the Tigers in September.

That said, it is gonna be ******* hilarious watching this thread blow up :D
 
Last edited:

bmaurizio

Premiership Player
Joined
Aug 11, 2004
Posts
3,645
Likes
3,714
Location
Singapore
AFL Club
Carlton
So many reasons why the Crows lost today most obvious the MCG.
Gibbs has certainly retained his important value for the Crows
especially with some aging stars and may lose a few quality kids, they'll help if they want a flag in the two years.
 

Yoda_

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
May 6, 2007
Posts
24,613
Likes
11,272
Location
South East Suburbs
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Tottenham Hotspurs, Melbourne Vixen
It's petty

But it's BF
It's not like it used to be around here where a civil conversation actually enticed appropriate debate. Nowadays, civil conversation ends with someone getting a temp ban and a car whilst the other salivates in his moral victory after a slandering match between said poster.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom