GWS doesn’t even need Travis Cloke
By Michael DiFabrizio, 2 May 2012 Michael DiFabrizio is a Roar Expert
Travis Cloke marks in the 2011 AFL Grand Final (Slattery Images)
Related coverage
There’s been a lot of talk about Collingwood star Travis Cloke heading to the GWS Giants at the end of this season.
But after seeing the Giants in action it’s hard not to ask one question: why?
Leaving aside Eddie McGuire’s comical threats against taking his club’s players, there’s some pretty compelling reasons for Magpie fans to feel reassured right now.
On the weekend, 19 year-old Jeremy Cameron was among the Giant standouts against the Western Bulldogs. He booted five goals to back up the four he kicked against North Melbourne.
Given the Giants rank dead last for inside 50s, it’s fair to say that’s a decent effort.
It’s also fair to say his form isn’t going unnoticed. Bookmakers currently have him as the favourite to win this year’s Rising Star award.
Waiting on the sidelines is another big man in Jonathon Patton. He was the No. 1 pick at last year’s draft but is yet to take the field after heading to Sweden for knee surgery.
From all reports Patton is an imposing figure who will be crashing the packs for years to come. He has strength overhead but is also known for his ability below the knees.
Put simply, he wasn’t picked first by accident.
With these two, the makings of a powerful and potent combination of key forwards is there. They’re certainly tracking as though they’ll be a force in the not-too-distant future.
So why would the Giants entertain someone like Cloke?
Cloke is a star player who would pull crowds, no doubt. He is one of the competition’s best key forwards, no doubt. He’s only 25, this is true.
But why would you bring him in when there are two key forwards showing so much promise?
There’s also Israel Folau to take into account. (And no, that wasn’t a joke.)
While Folau has shown promising signs only in very brief patches to date, the fact is we won’t know truly whether he’s up to it until at least his third season of playing the game. That’s when Jim Stynes came good. It’s when Karmichael Hunt is coming good.
Given his position is also that of a key forward, and given the club have invested even more in him than Cameron and Patton, why bring in a guy that would effectively kill any chance of decent playing time in his desired position?
I know Cloke putting off contract talks until the end of the season is meant to be some golden indicator that he’s gone, but I’m not buying it.
Sure, Cloke would take the heat off guys that are still very much developing. However, it won’t be all that long before those young guys will be ready to stand on their own. Don’t for a second think that the Giants wouldn’t have asked themselves, “What happens then?”
It just wouldn’t make sense.
Collingwood fans, and Eddie for that matter, should relax.
Michael DiFabrizio is completing his journalism degree. As an AFL writer, he has been an expert columnist at The Roar since 2009, and appeared in The Age and on ABC television and radio. Follow Michael on twitter @mdifabrizio
- Explore:
- AFL, Collingwood Magpies, GWS Giants, Jeremy Cameron, Jonathon Patton, travis cloke

May 2nd 2012 @ 2:44am
AndyMack said | May 2nd 2012 @ 2:44am | Report comment
Hey Michael,
Think you answered your own question with “He is one of the competition’s best key forwards, no doubt. He’s only 25, this is true”. Doesn’t that sum it up??
Yes there is potential with some of the young guys coming through, but potential doesnt win you matches. I’m sure they would love to have Cloke leading the way for the next few years, allowing the younger guys to develop. Esp if money is not an object.
May 2nd 2012 @ 9:05am
Ian Whitchurch said | May 2nd 2012 @ 9:05am | Report comment
AndyMack,
‘
Money is certainly an object. While the Giants have around $1.5m cap room next year by my best estimate, the opportunity cost of signing up Cloke is signing up, say, Cameron, Bugg, Coniglio, Shiel, Hampton and Giles for long term deals.
May 2nd 2012 @ 6:18am
ManInBlack said | May 2nd 2012 @ 6:18am | Report comment
I took the family down to Hobart for the Rnd 2 game to see my Rooboys clobber the Giants – and driving back to where we were staying from the game the commentators were talking about how they should really work hard to get a Travis Cloke.
And I was thinking that young Cameron with 4 goals that day, and the unseen Josh Bruce and Jon Patton, plus whatever eventuates out of Izzie Folau – and I’m thinking they’re far better off keeping their powder dry to retain the talent they have rather than go all out for a Travis Cloke.
To me – the bigger need will be a quality ruckman. Giles is battling away really, really well – and Brogan is there for probably just the one year?? Perhaps even GWS might need to raid the Swans who with Mumford and Seaby have guys like Pyke and White sitting in the background most of the time.
Perhaps any throwing of the kitchen sink at anyone might be reserved for luring Todd Goldstein away from North?
May 2nd 2012 @ 9:43am
Michael DiFabrizio said | May 2nd 2012 @ 9:43am | Report comment
Like your thinking ManInBlack, a gun ruck would be a much better get. Goldstein is a good one, as North have yet to get him and HMac firing together. Everything I read about Pyke’s development doing my season preview for the Swans was positive (although you won’t even need Cloke-like dollars to woo him). Even just another high-quality midfielder, you can never have enough of them on your books…
May 2nd 2012 @ 1:05pm
Ian Whitchurch said | May 2nd 2012 @ 1:05pm | Report comment
I’d definitely go after either Pyke or Seaby to replace Brogan.
May 2nd 2012 @ 1:52pm
Matt F said | May 2nd 2012 @ 1:52pm | Report comment
Seaby could be a very serious option for GWS. I’m pretty sure that he’s into the final year of his deal and his contract is quite large relative ton how infrequently he plays. When the Swans intitially signed him he was going to be the number one ruckman over Mumford but a season ending injury allowed Mumford to grab the top spot. That, along with the introduction of the sub rule have meant that he can’t get a regular game.
May 2nd 2012 @ 2:19pm
The Cattery said | May 2nd 2012 @ 2:19pm | Report comment
I always thought that Shae McNamara might be a good fit for GWS, that given an opportunity he’d go for it.
May 2nd 2012 @ 7:20pm
AndyMack said | May 2nd 2012 @ 7:20pm | Report comment
So rather than go for one of the best key forwards in the comp, they’ll go for Mark Seaby…!!!!!
May 2nd 2012 @ 7:21pm
Matt F said | May 2nd 2012 @ 7:21pm | Report comment
It’s called recruiting to fill a need
May 2nd 2012 @ 8:32pm
Ian Whitchurch said | May 2nd 2012 @ 8:32pm | Report comment
Andy Mack,
Cloke will cost a million bucks. Seaby will cost around $200k, allowing us to extend Cameron, Shiel, Bugg and probably a couple of others.
Thats the real cost of Cloke – losing good juniors in 2-3 years.
May 3rd 2012 @ 1:51am
AndyMack said | May 3rd 2012 @ 1:51am | Report comment
So the Suns made a real mess of it when they recruited Ablett??
May 2nd 2012 @ 8:46am
brendan said | May 2nd 2012 @ 8:46am | Report comment
Travis Cloke could show these young giant forwards whats required in all aspects of the game to be a gun forward.Similiarly Ablett’s influence at the Suns is there even when he isnt playing as he has shown the young kids how hard they have too run etch to match it with other onballers.Judging young key forwards is a precarious business as they can show promise early in there careers and then hit a form trough ala Tom Hawkins.Anyway Micheal talk up Cloke leaving Eddies reaction would be priceless.
May 2nd 2012 @ 9:19am
Winston said | May 2nd 2012 @ 9:19am | Report comment
Are there any gun midfielders coming off contract at the end of this year? As you’ve said, the problem isn’t the forwards, it’s about getting the ball in the middle of the ground more often than not. If only they had another Ablett…
May 2nd 2012 @ 9:52am
The Cattery said | May 2nd 2012 @ 9:52am | Report comment
Michael diF
really good perspective. It’s definitely a balancing act between paying a lot of money for a bloke who is at the top of his game now, and allowing two of the very best young prospects to develop: Cameron and Patton.
On top of that there’s Setanta and Izzy, and of course Giles has been the find of the year as a a ruck/tall forward.
So maybe, there’s an argument for directing the money in other areas, noting that the four oldies probably won’t play beyond this season: Brogan, Cornes, McDonald and Power – so the money should be directed in covereing them off.
May 2nd 2012 @ 10:00am
Matt F said | May 2nd 2012 @ 10:00am | Report comment
Given their young forward stocks they probably need a ruckman and quality midfielder more, as others have mentioned. It’s probably not a bad idea to find an experienced forward to take the pressure off their kids but I’m thinking of something more along the lines of what Richmond have done with Brad Miller rather than Cloke. A forward who can do a job for a few years and take the pressure off the kids whilst they develop and then step aside.
They’ll probably also need to recruit some more experienced players to replace the likes of Cornes, Brogan, Power and Mcdonald when they move aside in the next year or maybe two. You don’t want them to end like Melbourne and have a bunch of supposedly talented kids with no experienced leaders to guide them. Again though these players don’t nescessarily need to be superstars, just players who are good enough to play in the best 22 for 1-3 years and then step aside.
May 2nd 2012 @ 10:41am
JamesP said | May 2nd 2012 @ 10:41am | Report comment
I would still take Cloke if he wanted it. As others have said he would make an impact straight away. You could also pinch hit him in the ruck (at 196 cm he is similar height to say a Justin Koschitzke), or even put him at centre half back or another key position.
Key position players take more time to develop than mid-fielders, so I would take him – especially as they have the room in the cap, and the fact that they need some big name players in general.
May 2nd 2012 @ 11:21am
ItsCalled AussieRules said | May 2nd 2012 @ 11:21am | Report comment
You’re right Michael, GWS don’t need Travis Cloke.
They need Jesus Christ at Centre Half Forward and Michael Jordan in the rucks.
May 2nd 2012 @ 11:36am
Chop said | May 2nd 2012 @ 11:36am | Report comment
I just hope the Dockers don’t sign him for the amounts being talked about….
May 2nd 2012 @ 11:45am
ren said | May 2nd 2012 @ 11:45am | Report comment
i do
May 2nd 2012 @ 12:00pm
Redb said | May 2nd 2012 @ 12:00pm | Report comment
Heard an interesting theory on SEN this morning from a caller who said that Freo by going after Cloke at $1M are attempting to force Collingwood to match the offer as a restricted free agent so that the Pies then need to offload some other good players. In other words Freo aren’t that serious.
Nice theory but I doubt it.
May 2nd 2012 @ 12:54pm
Matt F said | May 2nd 2012 @ 12:54pm | Report comment
Yeah I can’t see Freo doing this just to make Collingwood pay him more either. It’s a big risk to take if true. Imagine if Collingwood don’t match the offer. Freo would be stuck paying a player $1million when they didn’t really want to give it to him. Either Freo really do want Cloke that badly, or they’re not interested at all and it’s all just one big made up rumour.