Martin Clarke v Bryce Gibbs

[parrot]

Even Grigg v Clarke would have been an extremely unkind comparison for the Irishman.

I wouldn't swap you Stevie Browne for Clarke.

You can't teach what Browne's been born with.

Browne was just brilliant recruiting. The guy has been awesome this year.

 

[parrot]

...Clarke has been improving each time he steps...

Oh, and I guess that's why he was dropped. lol. Clarke cost you at least 2 games this year, when his opponent kicked match-sealing goals late in the game- V North and V Blues (Simmo ran off him). Clarke lacks leg speed, which is a major issue at this level for a player so small. He's a bit of a clanger-king as well. I doubt he'll be playing AFL in 2010.

 

[hellfire]

I suppose the same theory could be applied to Dean Cox & Josh Fraser, although this is probably not a true comparison, because unlike the rookie, Cox, being miles ahead of the #1 draft pick, Fraser, the #1 draft pick, Gibbs, has already demonstrated he is ahead of the rookie Irishman, who has been a handy player in his own right, but does not have the talent or football nous to ever seriously challenge Gibbs in the long term.

But everyone openly acknowledges that Fraser hasn't lived up to the hype. What's your point?

 

[hellfire]

All you Carlton fans need to dry your eyes and harden up.

Barely any Collingwood supporters are saying Clarke>>Gibbs.

What we ARE saying is that MAYBE a Collingwood player isn't 'crap' 'useless' a 'plodder' 'talentless'.

Fact is, Clarke only picked up a football for the first time about 2 years ago, and stepped right into AFL and was actually contributing. At the moment his disposal is one of the best in Collingwood's team, and his football smarts are improving rapidly.

But no, disregard all we're actually saying and just assume we're trying to say Clarke is better.

Sigh.

Well said.

Though you have to forgive them, their masturbation and infatuation blinds them from seeing what anyone is actually saying, all that they can scream is "Gibbs >>>>>>>>> [insert any player here]!!!!" Zzzzzzzzzomggg!

They embarrass themselves with their man-love, and they embarrass themselves with their sheer ignorance. Marty Clarke is an outstanding young player.

 

[hellfire]

Oh, and I guess that's why he was dropped. lol. Clarke cost you at least 2 games this year, when his opponent kicked match-sealing goals late in the game- V North and V Blues (Simmo ran off him). Clarke lacks leg speed, which is a major issue at this level for a player so small. He's a bit of a clanger-king as well. I doubt he'll be playing AFL in 2010.

I was laughing all the way through that post, but I spat out my late night cereal when I read clanger king.

I also needed to run to the toilet when I read that Clarke is a dud but Browne is brilliant recruiting. Comedy gold around here, keep it coming.

Marty Clarke is the paradigm of recruiting brilliance. Browne is a spud, a clanger king, there is no way he'll be playing AFL by 2011. Another recruiting blunder from DA LyGon BoyZ!

 

[mediumsizered]

But everyone openly acknowledges that Fraser hasn't lived up to the hype. What's your point?

The point is you made the statement as follows to justify the fact that Gibbs should be better than Clarke (which of course he clearly is):

"And as I said before: Number 1 draft pick vs. Rookie... you would really hope the former was ahead, or else someone had better sack the recruiting department"

Have those who were anyway involved in recruiting Josh Fraser been banished from the club, never to be allowed back? It doesn't really matter, but it just demonstrates what a ridiculous statement you made.

 

[hellfire]

The point is you made the statement as follows to justify the fact that Gibbs should be better than Clarke (which of course he clearly is):

"And as I said before: Number 1 draft pick vs. Rookie... you would really hope the former was ahead, or else someone had better sack the recruiting department"

Have those who were anyway involved in recruiting Josh Fraser been banished from the club, never to be allowed back? It doesn't really matter, but it just demonstrates what a ridiculous statement you made.

Yes they have. They were responsible for some awful recruiting decisions. Our new team is much better.

And from memory, Fraser and Cox were in different drafts. I think we actually took Guy Richards ahead of Cox! But no, it's a perfectly valid statement. You would expect a number 1 draft pick to be ahead of a rookie from the same draft. Tell me what's wrong with that statement? Oh you can't, but I'm sure you'll say it needs no reasoning or something. Proceed.

 

[Stenchiss]

i prefer martin clarke's accent and i'd bet he'd do a better jig than gibbs too.

 

[Nardz]

truly the worst thread ever to even compare that irish hack to a future great of the game absolutely disgraceful collingwood stupidity

you'd know all about irish hacks. there's 2 of them on your list.

 

[JerryWexler]

I hope to God the thread starter isn't serious.

 

[parrot]

I hope to God the thread starter isn't serious.

You have a lot to learn about Collingwood supporters - they are deadly serious. lol.

 

[Faz 2000]

You have a lot to learn about Collingwood supporters - they are deadly serious. lol.

You have to take into account when it was started. This wasn't started in the last few days, weeks, months.

But it bubbled up to the surface again, and I think many people would be changing their original votes now.

 

[mediumsizered]

Yes they have. They were responsible for some awful recruiting decisions. Our new team is much better.

And from memory, Fraser and Cox were in different drafts. I think we actually took Guy Richards ahead of Cox! But no, it's a perfectly valid statement. You would expect a number 1 draft pick to be ahead of a rookie from the same draft. Tell me what's wrong with that statement? Oh you can't, but I'm sure you'll say it needs no reasoning or something. Proceed.

There is so much more to the draft process than a #1 draft pick should be ahead of a rookie pick from the same draft & Fraser & Cox prove this fact. They were both drafted in the same year (the rookie draft records call it the following year but it actually isn't) & yet Cox is way ahead of Fraser in development & output.

The reason for a particular club choosing a certain player in the draft really varies from club to club & on at what stage in football development, maturity, body size etc a player is at. Would you expect Xav Ellis to have been better than rookies drafted from the same year, at the start of this season? Should Ben Reid or Scott Gumbleton be better than rookie KP players drafted in the same year? Not necessarily. Does the excellent form shown by Ben Rutten over recent years mean that all AFL recruiters 'screwed up' in drafting other KP players ahead of him? Not at all.

It is very superficial to draw the conclusion that an early draft pick should be better than a rookie, particularly in the early stages of their career. Of course Gibbs has already gone past Marty Clarke & Xav Ellis has made up ground & gone past many of the latter draft picks & rookies that were drafted after him, but you cannot assume that all early draft picks should be & will be better than rookie picks. Cox & Rutten are perfect examples of this, but it would be over simplifying things if you were to conclude that the recruiters from all clubs that overlooked these players in the National Draft had got it wrong.

 

[hellfire]

Of course you can't expect them all to be better than the rookies. But when a top draft pick, particularly a number 1 draft pick, is surpassed by a rookie (which isn't applicable with Gibbs obviously, but that's not the argument), I consider it to be a drafting mistake. Perhaps our talent scouts aren't good enough or something? We've made some shocking draft choices, particularly in the first round, and it makes me furious looking back. Fact is, the number 1 draft pick is expected to be either the best player, or in the top few, because they're rated at the top of the talent pool. Anything less than that, and I think it can be deemed a failure. If you disagree, good for you.

 

[Nardz]

Of course you can't expect them all to be better than the rookies. But when a top draft pick, particularly a number 1 draft pick, is surpassed by a rookie (which isn't applicable with Gibbs obviously, but that's not the argument), I consider it to be a drafting mistake. Perhaps our talent scouts aren't good enough or something? We've made some shocking draft choices, particularly in the first round, and it makes me furious looking back. Fact is, the number 1 draft pick is expected to be either the best player, or in the top few, because they're rated at the top of the talent pool. Anything less than that, and I think it can be deemed a failure. If you disagree, good for you.

i wouldnt really call it a mistake. dean cox is better than most number 1 picks.

I think it all just comes down to a measure of success. I think to be successful how many gems you find late in the draft and in rookie picks is just as important, if not more important, than how you use your high draft picks.

Marty Clarke has definitely been a bargain find for us as a rookie pick. He's in our best 22, he's contributing, and he still has plenty of upside. It's unbelievable how well he uses the ball for someone that had never kicked up until 2 years. His courage and attack at the ball is probably second only to Scott Burns on our list

 

[iGNITER]

I would pick Bryce Gibbs if i had the choice for Collingwood - IMO he will be a gun midfielder and within the next 2 years be in the top tier mids in the comp.
I think he will be better than Marc Murphy and he is a gun. (Cant believe im talking up Carlton lol)

Marty Clarke has been playing the game for about 2 years and has picked it up as well as anybody could in that time.
He will be a gun player for Collingwood over the years and will be in our starting 22 for a while hopefully in the midfield.
If all teams could pick up a bargain like we did with Marty in the rookie draft they would be ecstatic.

 

[smiddaz123]

I would pick Bryce Gibbs if i had the choice for Collingwood - IMO he will be a gun midfielder and within the next 2 years be in the top tier mids in the comp.
I think he will be better than Marc Murphy and he is a gun. (Cant believe im talking up Carlton lol)

Marty Clarke has been playing the game for about 2 years and has picked it up as well as anybody could in that time.
He will be a gun player for Collingwood over the years and will be in our starting 22 for a while hopefully in the midfield.
If all teams could pick up a bargain like we did with Marty in the rookie draft they would be ecstatic.

Pretty much the opinion of most pie fans.

But don't bother, most Carlton fans somehow take this as us saying Clarke is better.

 

[murph#3]

I would pick Bryce Gibbs if i had the choice for Collingwood - IMO he will be a gun midfielder and within the next 2 years be in the top tier mids in the comp.
I think he will be better than Marc Murphy and he is a gun. (Cant believe im talking up Carlton lol)

Marty Clarke has been playing the game for about 2 years and has picked it up as well as anybody could in that time.
He will be a gun player for Collingwood over the years and will be in our starting 22 for a while hopefully in the midfield.
If all teams could pick up a bargain like we did with Marty in the rookie draft they would be ecstatic.

pretty good summation.

i'll be honest, i seriously think gibbs will be the best midfielder in the comp for a long time after about 3-4 years and clarke will never even get close to him in terms of output.

but the truth is (and it hurts me to say this) but i'd rather be in collingwood's situation on this one. carlton had to go through the embarrassment of getting a wooden spoon and then had to use a no.1 pick on gibbs. collingwood on the other hand, got clarke for free, didn't have to go through the embarrassment of getting a spoon and still got to use their first round pick on another player.

what clarke has been able to achieve in his time playing the game is nothing short of phenomonal. i really want this kid to make it, not for collingwood's sake but because i admire the risk he has taken and the sacrificises he has made to get to where he is.

 

[Heater39]

pretty good summation.

i'll be honest, i seriously think gibbs will be the best midfielder in the comp for a long time after about 3-4 years and clarke will never even get close to him in terms of output.

but the truth is (and it hurts me to say this) but i'd rather be in collingwood's situation on this one. carlton had to go through the embarrassment of getting a wooden spoon and then had to use a no.1 pick on gibbs. collingwood on the other hand, got clarke for free, didn't have to go through the embarrassment of getting a spoon and still got to use their first round pick on another player.

what clarke has been able to achieve in his time playing the game is nothing short of phenomonal. i really want this kid to make it, not for collingwood's sake but because i admire the risk he has taken and the sacrificises he has made to get to where he is.

Wow, a Carlton supporter who actually gives Clarke some credit for what he's done.

 

[BlueDW]

I would pick Bryce Gibbs if i had the choice for Collingwood - IMO he will be a gun midfielder and within the next 2 years be in the top tier mids in the comp.
I think he will be better than Marc Murphy and he is a gun. (Cant believe im talking up Carlton lol)

Marty Clarke has been playing the game for about 2 years and has picked it up as well as anybody could in that time.
He will be a gun player for Collingwood over the years and will be in our starting 22 for a while hopefully in the midfield.
If all teams could pick up a bargain like we did with Marty in the rookie draft they would be ecstatic.

Right on the money with that post mate. Good stuff.

 

[Zeke]

Gibbs:
366 possessions
49 clangers
One every 7.5 possessions

Clarke:
295 possessions
26 clangers
One every 11.5 possessions

 

[hellfire]

Gibbs:
366 possessions
49 clangers
One every 7.5 possessions

Clarke:
295 possessions
26 clangers
One every 11.5 possessions

Doesn't really mean much. Didak has more clangers than Gibbs, but he's a great user of the ball. Though it is amusing given parrot considers Clarke a "turnover king". I chuckled.

 

[parrot]

Doesn't really mean much. Didak has more clangers than Gibbs, but he's a great user of the ball. Though it is amusing given parrot considers Clarke a "turnover king". I chuckled.

I suggest you watch Marty Clarke V Blues in the first game in the last 1/4. Simmo ran off him easily and kicked the sealer. Marty ain't so fast, and it cost you the game. Did several trademark round-ball floater kicks in that game as well, providing turnover opportunity. Similar efforts V North a few weeks latter when they over-ran you in the last. Again North's small forwards exposed Marty's lack of leg speed, and suspect disposal/decision making. I could give you numerous other examples. He's a battler with weaknesses that the opposition are now targeting big time. You should realise that by now. BTW the title of this poll always makes me laugh. I hope it stays around.

 

[Brent24]

I suggest you watch Marty Clarke V Blues in the first game in the last 1/4. Simmo ran off him easily and kicked the sealer. Marty ain't so fast, and it cost you the game. Did several trademark round-ball floater kicks in that game as well, providing turnover opportunity. Similar efforts V North a few weeks latter when they over-ran you in the last. Again North's small forwards exposed Marty's lack of leg speed, and suspect disposal/decision making. I could give you numerous other examples. He's a battler with weaknesses that the opposition are now targeting big time. You should realise that by now. BTW the title of this poll always makes me laugh. I hope it stays around.

I'd much rather what videos of Gibbs squib out of contests, or possibly trip over himself a metre out from goal.

 

[hellfire]

I suggest you watch Marty Clarke V Blues in the first game in the last 1/4. Simmo ran off him easily and kicked the sealer. Marty ain't so fast, and it cost you the game. Did several trademark round-ball floater kicks in that game as well, providing turnover opportunity. Similar efforts V North a few weeks latter when they over-ran you in the last. Again North's small forwards exposed Marty's lack of leg speed, and suspect disposal/decision making. I could give you numerous other examples. He's a battler with weaknesses that the opposition are now targeting big time. You should realise that by now. BTW the title of this poll always makes me laugh. I hope it stays around.

Feel free to provide those examples parrot. Specific times of a match where his kick resulted in a turnover. Go for it!