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

[The Old Dark Navy's]

I find it kinda confusing that they were happy to bring in picks or youngsters for their other good players, but for some reason Gibbs is untouchable.

Because:

1. He is heaps better than those we traded out.

2. He is one of our best in a position we have no depth in.

3. Those senior players are gone and we need to keep an experienced core.

4. We have brought in heaps of youth by trading those players so getting heaps more is not as big a priority.

5. We need to start winning games.

 

[james Dean]

The logic is completely independent of if a player is contracted or not.
I know that increases their price somewhat, but has absolutely nothing to do with the strategy.

It has everything to do with it, here you go I know this has been explained multiple times but I will break it down for you

• Bryce Gibbs is contracted with Carlton until 2019.
• Carlton do not want to trade Bryce Gibbs
• If a club wants to get a contracted and required player they have to pay over the market value for that player for the player's club to even consider the deal.

Do you understand?

 

[Cleric]

Its looking less and less likely Gibbs comes to Adelaide.
Apparently Adelaide have not approached either Bryce or Carlton.

 

[BluesRule]

Gibbs is better than all the others we let go, and he is also contracted. Not at all similar.

Correct. We ultimately got pick #8 from Henderson. And Gibbs is better than that. Once Adelaide up the ante a deal should get done.

 

[La Dispute]

Oh dear.
Oh me oh my. Stop...just stop.

Those 3 guys would be starting 22 players for Carlton for the last 5 years.

Not at present. Docherty, Simpson and Byrne are all better players than Seedsman and Otten, who are average.

 

[DangerSloane]

Not at present. Docherty, Simpson and Byrne are all better players than Seedsman and Otten, who are average.

Who is Byrne?
That irish bloke? Nahhhhhhh

Seedsman doesnt really play half back either, like the players you've named.

Otten I could understand. He was only in because Gov was out and has to be the slowest player in the league by some distance (though a few knee recons will do that)

 

[DangerSloane]

It has everything to do with it, here you go I know this has been explained multiple times but I will break it down for you

• Bryce Gibbs is contracted with Carlton until 2019.
• Carlton do not want to trade Bryce Gibbs
• If a club wants to get a contracted and required player they have to pay over the market value for that player for the player's club to even consider the deal.

Do you understand?

Of course I understand.

I will explain it again for you. What you have said is totally correct.
What you have said has NOTHING to do with getting value for a player when they hold value themselves.

The price is higher for a contracted player, yes we all get that. Still has zilch to do with the trading/drafting strategy.

 

[DangerSloane]

Its looking less and less likely Gibbs comes to Adelaide.
Apparently Adelaide have not approached either Bryce or Carlton.

Its interesting, both parties saying nothing is happening but it keeps resurfacing.
Who is running with it?

 

[james Dean]

Of course I understand.

I will explain it again for you. What you have said is totally correct.
What you have said has NOTHING to do with getting value for a player when they hold value themselves.

The price is higher for a contracted player, yes we all get that. Still has zilch to do with the trading/drafting strategy.

What strategy are you talking about?

The only players we have traded out are players who are out of contract and wanted to leave.

 

[Brighton_Diggins]

"We're not trading Bryce, he's got two years left on his contract," Blues list manager Stephen Silvagni told the AFL website.

"Bryce hasn't come to us to be traded, he's contracted for two years and that's where it sits.

reported yesterday?

 

[Monkey King]

I mean of the top 5 none of them are great. Plowman does a job and Kedge runs hard. But realistically once you get better neither are best 22.

They were all acquired for less value than pick 28. Not sure anyone expected they’d be “great”. Reckon you’re dead wrong on Plowman though. Solid best 22 moving into the future. Finished 7th in the BnF. Kerridge will be gone soon. Phillips will be around for a while. He’s not a bad ruckman. Worked out well for Carlton.

The contract status has ZERO bearing on this strategy.

Incorrect, if you’re assuming that the Henderson trade was driven by strategy.

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

The logic is completely independent of if a player is contracted or not.
I know that increases their price somewhat, but has absolutely nothing to do with the strategy.

Point is with Henderson and Thohy you got rid of gun mid-aged players to get young talent through the door. It has worked wonders according to the posts in here. Yet when theres an opportunity to further that development here everybody is totally against it.

Tuohy played in a position that we had adequate coverage for. His contract was up for renewal and our revised pay structure meant that we couldn't offer him as much as he wanted, or as much as he could get elsewhere. He had enough value that allowed us to get the currency required to obtain other targets. The pros outweighed the cons.
Henderson was a valuable player down back, but was required up forward and didn't quite have the same impact on the ground. For whatever reasons, he then decided that he no longer wanted to play for us, so he literally STOPPED playing for us, even when he was name din the side and took to the field. He made his own position untenable and we were probably lucky to get as much as we did for him. As it turns out, we have been able to fill his defensive role with Rowe, Marchbank, ASOS and Jones all proving to be as good, if not better. His role as a forward probably hasn't really been filled yet, but he wasn't that great at it and we turned that pick into McKay, who has shown some good signs in only two games and has big raps internally.

Gibbs plays a position that we are thin in and brings experience and leadership to a young side. He is not easily replaced and has proven that he is an ultimate professional in the face of a failed trade. We might be able to get more games into Polson, for instance, if he were to go, but that puts added pressure on Cripps, SPS, Fisher, Cuningham, Curnow and Boekhorst. While we are rebuilding, we also need to start winning more games and being competitive. We had 5-7 games this year where we were leading or close to it in the last quarter only to go on and lose. Take away our 3 biggest losses for the year and our average losing margin was only around 19 points or something. Replacing Gibbs with another kid or two doesn't help that.

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

Its looking less and less likely Gibbs comes to Adelaide.
Apparently Adelaide have not approached either Bryce or Carlton.

It would appear it is now unlikey that Gibbs will be traded. Apprently Adelaide have not asked for him, proberbly wont, and dont value him as even a first rounder now.

Hopefully the rumours of him staying are true.
Apparently the Crows have dropped interest and Gibbs hadnt heard from them.

So you keep saying. Yet rumours persist that SOS and Reid are talking behind closed doors.

 

[Cleric]

So you keep saying. Yet rumours persist that SOS and Reid are talking behind closed doors.

We will see.

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

We will see.

Well not really. I'm not saying that a deal is about to happen and even if nothing happens, it doesn't mean they haven't been talking.

 

[DangerSloane]

Tuohy played in a position that we had adequate coverage for. His contract was up for renewal and our revised pay structure meant that we couldn't offer him as much as he wanted, or as much as he could get elsewhere. He had enough value that allowed us to get the currency required to obtain other targets. The pros outweighed the cons.
Henderson was a valuable player down back, but was required up forward and didn't quite have the same impact on the ground. For whatever reasons, he then decided that he no longer wanted to play for us, so he literally STOPPED playing for us, even when he was name din the side and took to the field. He made his own position untenable and we were probably lucky to get as much as we did for him. As it turns out, we have been able to fill his defensive role with Rowe, Marchbank, ASOS and Jones all proving to be as good, if not better. His role as a forward probably hasn't really been filled yet, but he wasn't that great at it and we turned that pick into McKay, who has shown some good signs in only two games and has big raps internally.

Gibbs plays a position that we are thin in and brings experience and leadership to a young side. He is not easily replaced and has proven that he is an ultimate professional in the face of a failed trade. We might be able to get more games into Polson, for instance, if he were to go, but that puts added pressure on Cripps, SPS, Fisher, Cuningham, Curnow and Boekhorst. While we are rebuilding, we also need to start winning more games and being competitive. We had 5-7 games this year where we were leading or close to it in the last quarter only to go on and lose. Take away our 3 biggest losses for the year and our average losing margin was only around 19 points or something. Replacing Gibbs with another kid or two doesn't help that.

Very good post. Thanks for the explanation.
A lesson on discussion without having to be a knob, kudos.

With regards to the last few lines, do the Carlton players really feel that much pressure to win games at the moment? I get the feeling that Bolton wants to see the right things done and development evident, regardless of the result. I mean obviously you want to win as much as possible, but it really is kinda irrelevant whether you win 3 or 7 games in 2018. Not to supporters, but to the club internally.

 

[DangerSloane]

They were all acquired for less value than pick 28. Not sure anyone expected they’d be “great”. Reckon you’re dead wrong on Plowman though. Solid best 22 moving into the future. Finished 7th in the BnF. Kerridge will be gone soon. Phillips will be around for a while. He’s not a bad ruckman. Worked out well for Carlton.



Incorrect, if you’re assuming that the Henderson trade was driven by strategy.

The strategy is the strategy.
Individual players and contracts dont come in to it.
Its a general theory...

 

[DangerSloane]

"We're not trading Bryce, he's got two years left on his contract," Blues list manager Stephen Silvagni told the AFL website.

"Bryce hasn't come to us to be traded, he's contracted for two years and that's where it sits.

reported yesterday?

Theres too much chatter to not be some kinda talks happening.
Whether something gets done is another story.

 

[La Dispute]

With regards to the last few lines, do the Carlton players really feel that much pressure to win games at the moment? I get the feeling that Bolton wants to see the right things done and development evident, regardless of the result. I mean obviously you want to win as much as possible, but it really is kinda irrelevant whether you win 3 or 7 games in 2018. Not to supporters, but to the club internally.

We would want to win more games than in the last few years, which have been about setting cultural expectations and recalibrating our football department.

We were happy to take a step backwards this year in the pursuit of extra development for our younger players, but I don't think we'd be content finishing 16th next year. That's why it's such a difficult decision we've got with Gibbs, who is undoubtably our most complete midfielder and a stalwart of the club. There's going to be a residual effect one way or another - it's just hard to gauge what it will be.

On one hand we're light on for big-bodied experienced midfielders, on the other hand we're in an aggressive reset and our main focus is bringing talented young players in.

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

Very good post. Thanks for the explanation.
A lesson on discussion without having to be a knob, kudos.

With regards to the last few lines, do the Carlton players really feel that much pressure to win games at the moment? I get the feeling that Bolton wants to see the right things done and development evident, regardless of the result. I mean obviously you want to win as much as possible, but it really is kinda irrelevant whether you win 3 or 7 games in 2018. Not to supporters, but to the club internally.

Not so much pressure to win (although most would be hoping for 10 wins at a minimum next year), but the added pressure of carrying his load, both in terms of output and leadership and the added burdons of that on 18/22yo mostly with less than 50 games.

3 wins would be a disaster. 7 would be an absolute minimum. The improvement now needs to start coming with some extra wins. There will obviously be other internal measures as well, but those games that we faded out of in the 4th this year, we need to try and split down the middle and work out how to win those.
Look at games like the Geelong win in 2016 where Gibbs had 34 touches, 2 goals, 7 tackles, 9 clearances and 9 score involvements and was literally throwing up on the ground after the game after losing Murphy and someone else early.
This year against North in a game that we should have won, with 38, 3 goals. The win against GC with 43 and 2 goals, 10 tackles, 7 i50s and 7 clearances.
Another close one against you guys with 30, 2 goals, 15 tackles and 7 clearances.
Not sure any of our young guys can quite step up like that just yet and who do they learn that off if he goes?

 

[van peebles]

Clubs seem drawn to the fact of having a 300 game player that has served the club with distinction.
Bryce and carlton seem to be welded to that theory since he arrived.
Old heads make sure those types stay to collect club legend status.
For this reason its not the move for either to make.

 

[DangerSloane]

Not so much pressure to win (although most would be hoping for 10 wins at a minimum next year), but the added pressure of carrying his load, both in terms of output and leadership and the added burdons of that on 18/22yo mostly with less than 50 games.

3 wins would be a disaster. 7 would be an absolute minimum. The improvement now needs to start coming with some extra wins. There will obviously be other internal measures as well, but those games that we faded out of in the 4th this year, we need to try and split down the middle and work out how to win those.
Look at games like the Geelong win in 2016 where Gibbs had 34 touches, 2 goals, 7 tackles, 9 clearances and 9 score involvements and was literally throwing up on the ground after the game after losing Murphy and someone else early.
This year against North in a game that we should have won, with 38, 3 goals. The win against GC with 43 and 2 goals, 10 tackles, 7 i50s and 7 clearances.
Another close one against you guys with 30, 2 goals, 15 tackles and 7 clearances.
Not sure any of our young guys can quite step up like that just yet and who do they learn that off if he goes?

Cant argue with any of that.
He's a very good player, which is why we're after him even at his age and with no personal accolades.

We dont have anything to offer in return for leadership either, so its not like we could help fill that void.
Was hoping you'd get Rockliff and then probably it becomes more likely.

 

[DangerSloane]

We would want to win more games than in the last few years, which have been about setting cultural expectations and recalibrating our football department.

We were happy to take a step backwards this year in the pursuit of extra development for our younger players, but I don't think we'd be content finishing 16th next year. That's why it's such a difficult decision we've got with Gibbs, who is undoubtably our most complete midfielder and a stalwart of the club. There's going to be a residual effect one way or another - it's just hard to gauge what it will be.

On one hand we're light on for big-bodied experienced midfielders, on the other hand we're in an aggressive reset and our main focus is bringing talented young players in.

This is the thing im finding. Some supporters are getting impatient, while others realise you're still a way off.
Just disappointing you couldnt nail one of your potential recruits. Would've made it a lot easier to let Gibbs go.

 

[SexyBlueGirl]

Clubs seem drawn to the fact of having a 300 game player that has served the club with distinction.
Bryce and carlton seem to be welded to that theory since he arrived.
Old heads make sure those types stay to collect club legend status.
For this reason its not the move for either to make.

From old dark navy blue to froot loop, you'd really want a flag.

 

[Monkey King]

The strategy is the strategy.
Individual players and contracts dont come in to it.
Its a general theory...

Of course individual players and contracts come into it. How could you possibly execute a sound list building strategy without accounting for the role each player has at the club, the stage and tragectory of their career/development and the timeline under which you’ve secured their services? That would be haphazard.