Trading Witts
Moderator: bbmods
- Member 7167
- Posts: 5144
- Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2008 3:21 pm
- Location: The Collibran Hideout
This is never going to happen. Having two ruckmen that could potentially be the best ruck combination in the modern game once they mature is a prize and a jewel.
Buckley has stated that the reason he persists playing both is that he wants to retain both and if we drop one to the VFL on an ongoing basis we will loose him to another team and the development will become static.
I certainly back Buckleys approach.
Buckley has stated that the reason he persists playing both is that he wants to retain both and if we drop one to the VFL on an ongoing basis we will loose him to another team and the development will become static.
I certainly back Buckleys approach.
Now Retired - Every Day Is A Saturday
- Darkstranger
- Posts: 1629
- Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2012 9:06 am
- WarrenerraW
- Posts: 5146
- Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2008 12:25 am
- Location: Melbourne
Unless it was guaranteed that we were going to get another ruck in return or an opportunity to recruit one via free agency or the psd then probably not. I would keep him. We can't run the risk of thrashing poor Grundy in the ruck on his own. That would ruin him. He needs back up but someone who is established. I think the problem is that because Witts and Grundy are so young and inexperienced it's not benefiting either of them whereas if either of them had a 10 year ruck by their side, they would most likely flourish. Until that happens, they just have to do it the hard way and learn themselves.
- Dangles
- Posts: 1347
- Joined: Thu May 14, 2015 5:13 am
Totally. J-Rrod has massive upside. I don't know why people would want to use Grundy MC and a third tall forward/relief ruckman type when you can have two A-grade ruckman, who can double team the oppsotition's first ruck and exploit their back up second string ruckman. I also think both J-Rrod and Grundy MC will be better than Leigh Brown or Jesse White up forward.Member 7167 wrote:This is never going to happen. Having two ruckmen that could potentially be the best ruck combination in the modern game once they mature is a prize and a jewel.
Buckley has stated that the reason he persists playing both is that he wants to retain both and if we drop one to the VFL on an ongoing basis we will loose him to another team and the development will become static.
I certainly back Buckleys approach.
- Dave The Man
- Posts: 45001
- Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 2:04 pm
- Location: Someville, Victoria, Australia
- Has liked: 2 times
- Been liked: 21 times
- Contact:
- Dave The Man
- Posts: 45001
- Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 2:04 pm
- Location: Someville, Victoria, Australia
- Has liked: 2 times
- Been liked: 21 times
- Contact:
In There Prime. Would the happy to Share there Ruck Time?Member 7167 wrote:This is never going to happen. Having two ruckmen that could potentially be the best ruck combination in the modern game once they mature is a prize and a jewel.
Buckley has stated that the reason he persists playing both is that he wants to retain both and if we drop one to the VFL on an ongoing basis we will loose him to another team and the development will become static.
I certainly back Buckleys approach.
I am Da Man
- Tannin
- Posts: 18748
- Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2006 7:39 pm
- Location: Huon Valley Tasmania
Re: Trading Witts
Yes. Next question please.Presti35 wrote:Would we be stupid to do this?
�Let's eat Grandma.� Commas save lives!
If we get to that stage, then one of them will want to be traded and we will have a top flight ruckman in his prime on the table. That's when you can get whoever is equivalent to Treloar at that stage (3rd/4th year up and coming mid) and maybe even get a steak knife or two.Dave The Man wrote:In There Prime. Would the happy to Share there Ruck Time?Member 7167 wrote:This is never going to happen. Having two ruckmen that could potentially be the best ruck combination in the modern game once they mature is a prize and a jewel.
Buckley has stated that the reason he persists playing both is that he wants to retain both and if we drop one to the VFL on an ongoing basis we will loose him to another team and the development will become static.
I certainly back Buckleys approach.
At the moment, we would be paying overs to get Treloar and getting unders if we trade Witts. In a few years time, people will hopefully be prepared to pay overs for him to get him away from us.
Meanwhile, we don't do what Carlton did with Judd, selling a big an and picks for another midfielder. We rebuild nice and steady.
And don't get me wrong, Treloar would be kinda awesome
- Dave The Man
- Posts: 45001
- Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 2:04 pm
- Location: Someville, Victoria, Australia
- Has liked: 2 times
- Been liked: 21 times
- Contact:
Trealor would not be Worth the Judd/Beams PriceGeek wrote:If we get to that stage, then one of them will want to be traded and we will have a top flight ruckman in his prime on the table. That's when you can get whoever is equivalent to Treloar at that stage (3rd/4th year up and coming mid) and maybe even get a steak knife or two.Dave The Man wrote:In There Prime. Would the happy to Share there Ruck Time?Member 7167 wrote:This is never going to happen. Having two ruckmen that could potentially be the best ruck combination in the modern game once they mature is a prize and a jewel.
Buckley has stated that the reason he persists playing both is that he wants to retain both and if we drop one to the VFL on an ongoing basis we will loose him to another team and the development will become static.
I certainly back Buckleys approach.
At the moment, we would be paying overs to get Treloar and getting unders if we trade Witts. In a few years time, people will hopefully be prepared to pay overs for him to get him away from us.
Meanwhile, we don't do what Carlton did with Judd, selling a big an and picks for another midfielder. We rebuild nice and steady.
And don't get me wrong, Treloar would be kinda awesome
I am Da Man
- Piesnchess
- Posts: 26202
- Joined: Mon Jun 09, 2008 4:24 pm
- Has liked: 229 times
- Been liked: 94 times
Damn silly thread, Witts is our future version of Sandilands, a giant, big men take a lot longer to develop, as Lou Richards always said, Wittsy will be bloody awesome in 3 seasons time, as Sandilands developed into.
Poverty exists not because we cannot feed the poor, but because we cannot satisfy the rich.
Chess and Vodka are born brothers. - Russian proverb.
Chess and Vodka are born brothers. - Russian proverb.
- Dave The Man
- Posts: 45001
- Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 2:04 pm
- Location: Someville, Victoria, Australia
- Has liked: 2 times
- Been liked: 21 times
- Contact:
Be Great to have a Saindlands and a Goldstein in the RuckPiesnchess wrote:Damn silly thread, Witts is our future version of Sandilands, a giant, big men take a lot longer to develop, as Lou Richards always said, Wittsy will be bloody awesome in 3 seasons time, as Sandilands developed into.
I am Da Man
- The Average Tourist
- Posts: 340
- Joined: Thu Apr 08, 2010 8:46 am
I am a big fan of both Grundy & Witts playing together hopefully for the next 10 years and becoming the dominant ruck paring that we all hope will happen.
The only way I think we would trade them is if Mason Cox becomes a dominant ruckman. If we have 3 dominant ruckman we might have one too many.
But I expect if this was to happen it will be in three or more years time. Lets worry about that in 2018 or 2019
The only way I think we would trade them is if Mason Cox becomes a dominant ruckman. If we have 3 dominant ruckman we might have one too many.
But I expect if this was to happen it will be in three or more years time. Lets worry about that in 2018 or 2019
Bucks you just reckon he can still cut it in the middle