Roast Bryce Gibbs

[GROTTO]

Reid took the risk that Carlton would have finish bottom 2, even better if it was bottom and it worked out that way so thanks Carlton....again.
And most supporters see it that the club traded 2 1st rounder, but you need to look at the trade more closely and a lot of supporters didn't.

I have always suspected when Reid took the deal he did it with the expectation that Carlton would still be a bottom 4 Club, I would say it was more of a calculated risk than gamble.

Whereas SOS gambled, he gambled that Carlton would obviously rise up the ladder out of the bottom 6 and he also gambled that the Crows would fail and not only not make the 8 but be around Carlton's ladder position. He gambled and failed.

Most neutral supporters who follows AFL, would say that the Crows making the 8 and Carlton being in the bottom 4 would be a reasonable conclusion to arrive at when it was first examined back late last year.

 

[Golumless]

Technically yes, but logically it isn't if you view pick 21 in a strong draft as the same (if not better) then pick 16 (would have been pick 17 if not for the GWS draft sanction) in a weak draft.
That's why we did the trade as we had a very low 1st rounder in a weak draft and took the gamble that Carlton will finish bottom 2 in a strong draft (preferably last which they did), and we did get lucky as there were only 2 FA compensation pick that affected it in Lynch and Lycett.
I've had this debate already with you guys here and over there with the Carlton guys and you and them still don't get it.

Strong draft, and weak draft ratings are completely irrelevant noise.

It's 10 + 16 + 33(f) + 73 -> Gibbs + 24(f) + 44(f) + 77

I'm more inclined to say it was a first and a handful of downgraded picks for Gibbs, but that is still damn close to 2 first rounders.

 

[GROTTO]

Strong draft, and weak draft ratings are completely irrelevant noise.

+1

In addition it takes a few years to asses the quality of the draft.

 

[ABAB]

Strong draft, and weak draft ratings are completely irrelevant noise.

It's 10 + 16 + 33(f) + 73 -> Gibbs + 24(f) + 44(f) + 77

I'm more inclined to say it was a first and a handful of downgraded picks for Gibbs, but that is still damn close to 2 first rounders.

Not irrelevant at all, but very smart. And its no where near to 2 1st rounder, it's pick 10 and downgrade of 5 pick from 16 and 12 pick from 28, those are no where near a 1st rounder equivalent.

 

[Golumless]

Not irrelevant at all, but very smart.

No it is completely irrelevant. Draft strength is rather meaningless thing used for hype and nothing more. Especially once your past ~ pick 15 as draft strength tends to be based off the top few prospects. At pick 24 we're picking more project players or someone to plug holes you don't want to put a lot of collateral in (so every position bar midfield and KPP).

You've lost any argument the second you think draft strength means something.

 

[ABAB]

No it is completely irrelevant. Draft strength is rather meaningless thing used for hype and nothing more. Especially once your past ~ pick 15 as draft strength tends to be based off the top few prospects. At pick 24 we're picking more project players or someone to plug holes you don't want to put a lot of collateral in (so every position bar midfield and KPP).

You've lost any argument the second you think draft strength means something.

Well....pick 10 and downgrade of 5 pick from 16 and 12 pick from 28, those downgrade are no where near a 2 1st rounder equivalent, how about that "argument". And analytically there are big difference in those picks from a weak to a strong draft.

 

[Sanders]

I think SOS is the problem gambler

 

[Elite Crow]

Pyke today:

“It could take Bryce 3-4 weeks to get back, he’s got some stuff to sort out/work on” then he chucked in “about his footy”

If it’s footy related it could be corrected in a week.

This is Don trying to give Gibbs some space without the constant “will he play this week”, not sure it will work though.

He must be in a very bad place.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Pyke today:

“It could take Bryce 3-4 weeks to get back, he’s got some stuff to sort out/work on” then he chucked in “about his footy”

If it’s footy related it could be corrected in a week.

This is Don trying to give Gibbs some space without the constant “will he play this week”, not sure it will work though.

He must be in a very bad place.

So why don't we give him a complete break this week away from footy with the bye following... to give him proper space.

 

[Elite Crow]

So why don't we give him a complete break this week away from footy with the bye following... to give him proper space.

It could be that he wants to keep playing, it might actually help him mentally.

Also if he does get through it and he hasn’t played for a month then he will need another 2-3 weeks of sanfl to find form.

 

[GROTTO]

So why don't we give him a complete break this week away from footy with the bye following... to give him proper space.

I would have thought a person in his predicament would need a sense of balance, whether that is playing all the time in AFL or SANFL. I cant help but feel dropping him then bringing him back a few times would have been good for him.

Lets not forget, Gibbs is an experienced mature player its not like him missing a few weeks is going to be critical in terms of skills and gametime, like compared to say a Berg or Jones.

 

[GROTTO]

It could be that he wants to keep playing, it might actually help him mentally.

Also if he does get through it and he hasn’t played for a month then he will need another 2-3 weeks of sanfl to find form.

After over 250 games, I dont feel missing a fortnight would effect him to find form. Arguably the mental break may even give him the confidence.

Though what you said also has merit maybe a week or two away then a week in the SANFL to get his groove without the pressure of AFL.

 

[douglyzia]

Take Gibbs and pick 10 out of the equation and then look at the trade. No club in its right mind would make that trade which means it's not all cancelling out like you claim.

Did we lose the trade given that we're not currently playing him, and if he doesn't play again for the club? Yes.

Was it as bad a trade as some are making it out to be (i.e. two first round draft picks)? No.

However, there's still a few more rounds in the season and next year for him to come good. It wouldn't even be an issue if we were playing him and he was in some decent form. But unfortunately, we're not.

 

[1970crow]

Pyke today:

“It could take Bryce 3-4 weeks to get back, he’s got some stuff to sort out/work on” then he chucked in “about his footy”

If it’s footy related it could be corrected in a week.

This is Don trying to give Gibbs some space without the constant “will he play this week”, not sure it will work though.

He must be in a very bad place.

Sounds like rubbish. Why has he been in and out on a weekly basis and his footy issue now requires 3-4 weeks to rectify? I suppose most supporters lap it up, so it’s probably reasonable to bare face lie.

 

[GROTTO]

Sounds like rubbish. Why has he been in and out on a weekly basis and his footy issue now requires 3-4 weeks to rectify? I suppose most supporters lap it up, so it’s probably reasonable to bare face lie.

We have "supporters" that view everything at the Club as perfect and run smoothly.

 

[Crow_68]

Did we lose the trade given that we're not currently playing him, and if he doesn't play again for the club? Yes.

Was it as bad a trade as some are making it out to be (i.e. two first round draft picks)? No.

However, there's still a few more rounds in the season and next year for him to come good. It wouldn't even be an issue if we were playing him and he was in some decent form. But unfortunately, we're not.

When you weigh it all up, essentially Lochie O’Brien, Matthew Kennedy, Tom de Koning for Gibbs, Will Hamill and 2019 2nd rounder (pick 19).

No, we did not lose that trade.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Johnny Rutten]

When you weigh it all up, essentially Lochie O’Brien, Matthew Kennedy, Tom de Koning for Gibbs, Will Hamill and 2019 2nd rounder (pick 19).

No, we did not lose that trade.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

Your point is fair enough, but I think it's more about what Hamish Ogilvie could have done with picks 10 and 16, rather than what Carlton did with them.

 

[Elite Crow]

Sounds like rubbish. Why has he been in and out on a weekly basis and his footy issue now requires 3-4 weeks to rectify? I suppose most supporters lap it up, so it’s probably reasonable to bare face lie.

Of course it’s a lie, they clearly don’t want to come out and admit the gambling story.

 

[Golumless]

When you weigh it all up, essentially Lochie O’Brien, Matthew Kennedy, Tom de Koning for Gibbs, Will Hamill and 2019 2nd rounder (pick 19).

No, we did not lose that trade.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

Who you pick doesn't matter. Picks aren't auto assigned to a player. That's also ignoring someone like a Lachie O'Brien could be looking like a jet in our system.

 

[Mismatched]

It could be that he wants to keep playing, it might actually help him mentally.

Yeah I think this is the key. The Football industry seems to project this idea that if you have mental health issues (for which gambling disorders are intrinsically linked), you need to “go away and fight the illness” or “sort your life out” away from football.

In the “real world” people can’t afford to just take time off work to do this and it’s actually bad for people to withdraw from their regular day to day activities. Working/exercising is well established to be effective in treating mental health. Yet people want Gibbs to take time off away from football. If he has gambling debts, he may require money and guess what? For Gibbs, football pays the bills.

Assuming it’s not the “spotlight” or “stress of elite sport” that is Gibbs main issue, playing football and being in and around a supportive environment is probably a good thing.

The issue is if it’s affecting performance and he’s not up to standard, then he may need to be dropped, but doesn’t mean he should step away altogether.

 

[Mego Red]

No it is completely irrelevant. Draft strength is rather meaningless thing used for hype and nothing more. Especially once your past ~ pick 15 as draft strength tends to be based off the top few prospects. At pick 24 we're picking more project players or someone to plug holes you don't want to put a lot of collateral in (so every position bar midfield and KPP).

You've lost any argument the second you think draft strength means something.

That's an incredibly naive point of view.

We held an asset that was considered more valuable - a pick in a draft that the industry considered to be higher quality.

The value we received for it PROVES that. It was traded for more than its list price.

Draft strength is obviously not a myth. The clubs last year had a lot of players that they were motivated to get - from GWS giving up serious assets to get Hill, or Carlton doing the same to get Stocker.

Reid traded to get an asset in a draft year where he wanted more presence.

 

[Mego Red]

We have "supporters" that view everything at the Club as perfect and run smoothly.

And we have supporters that assume everything must be lies and incompetence.

 

[Sanders]

Yeah I think this is the key. The Football industry seems to project this idea that if you have mental health issues (for which gambling disorders are intrinsically linked), you need to “go away and fight the illness” or “sort your life out” away from football.

In the “real world” people can’t afford to just take time off work to do this and it’s actually bad for people to withdraw from their regular day to day activities. Working/exercising is well established to be effective in treating mental health. Yet people want Gibbs to take time off away from football. If he has gambling debts, he may require money and guess what? For Gibbs, football pays the bills.

Assuming it’s not the “spotlight” or “stress of elite sport” that is Gibbs main issue, playing football and being in and around a supportive environment is probably a good thing.

The issue is if it’s affecting performance and he’s not up to standard, then he may need to be dropped, but doesn’t mean he should step away altogether.

I ****ing hate the assumption that there is any true to these unsubstantiated gossip and innuendo rumours

That is NO evidence or basis to assume that even 1% of it is true

 

[1970crow]

Of course it’s a lie, they clearly don’t want to come out and admit the gambling story.

You have to wonder what switch was flicked that they now reckon it’s a 3-4 week issue. And what’s the difference between training and playing SANFL and training and playing AFL. He would have been more useful than Dougie and probably Greenwood. Should definitely play ahead of Mackay. A spluttering Gibbs is more use to the team than what Mackay brings week in week out.

 

[1970crow]

Who you pick doesn't matter. Picks aren't auto assigned to a player. That's also ignoring someone like a Lachie O'Brien could be looking like a jet in our system.

Always laugh at the, “gotta see how they develop” view. The winner/loser is determined on the day. Just because one club selects Sloane at 44 and the other Watts with 1 doesn’t mean that you won a straight trade giving 1 to get 44. The exception that we’ve just seen is where a club trades live into the draft to get a specific player. Carlton weren’t trading for 19, they were trading for Stocker. Even then, that only relates to them as Stocker may not have appeared for a few spots yet on our order.