Trading Witts

[John Wren]

I'd like to trade for Carlisle from Essendon. Gun defender who is lost playing up forward. Just what we need to add real steel to our back six. And yep, I'd trade Witts for him.

purely from a trade perspective - rather than what should happen - that's not a bad trade. they are in need of a ruckman who will carry them through the next few years.

[Bucks2014]

Trying to come up with one reason why we should do this, nothing is coming to mind. Let's see, he is 209cms has been playing footy for approx 6 years only played under 16's to keep fit for rugby.

We have put approx 4 years of development into him only to trade away and have another side be rewarded in a couple of years time.

We have already lost one over 200cms, there are a few who post we recruit midgets and when we have one of the tallest players playing AFL we want to get rid of him.

Certainly hope this doesn't happen, he is only 22. Think we expect too much at times.

[Dangles]

Betcha glad we've got two number one ruckmen now.
Otherwise we'd have Gault and White taking on Mumford tomorrow. Or worse still Cox.

[neil]

Betcha glad we've got two number one ruckmen now.
Otherwise we'd have Gault and White taking on Mumford tomorrow. Or worse still Cox.

The exact reason given for keeping him

[RudeBoy]

Witts aint going anywhere.

[swoop42]

Not that I'm advocating it but if we traded Witts then we'd replace him with the best option we could land later in the draft or via a low cost trade.

We aren't that short sighted.

[cressyg]

Geez...Isn't it lucky we have Witts to fill in for Grundy for the next 3 weeks

[Dave The Man]

[Bob Sugar]

If both become elite in the next few years we'll be forced to trade one, you don't want to spend 12% or so of your cap on 2 rucks, the best formula is one elite ruck and a workhorse, then 1 or 2 versatile KP players who can pinch hit.

The only way I'd keep both on big coin is if one (or both) started hitting the scoreboard while resting forward, 30 goals +.

[Dangles]

The only way I'd keep both on big coin is if one (or both) started hitting the scoreboard while resting forward, 30 goals +.

I think either of them could get to that level.

[HAL]

And if one or started hitting the scoreboard while resting 30 goals + is [quoteDefender]

The way he or she'd keep on big coin.

[Dangles]

And if one or started hitting the scoreboard while resting 30 goals + is [quoteDefender]

The way he or she'd keep on big coin.

Yes. If they could kick 30+ while resting in the forward line they'd deserve big coin.

[DT]

[AN_Inkling]

Trading Witts is not at all idiotic - except maybe in the sense of trading him before he's reached his potential - he's one of the most tradeable pieces of value we have.

Witts is potentially elite. However, you only need one first ruck in your best 22. Grundy is certain to be elite and at this stage is our number 1 prospect. Can we move forward with two elite rucks and play them both? Sure, that could work. So far it hasn't very well but both players are still developing. Alternatively, we could decide that moving Witts for a player who better fills a need (tall forward, classy mid) makes more sense. Then we get a low cost backup ruck to have in reserve.

Dealing Witts isn't something that has to happen. It's not idiotic though and could make a lot of sense for the right deal. I wouldn't call dealing Witts for Treloar crazy for instance.

[Johnno75]

I think we can safely put this thread to bed.