Grimes > Waters or A. Johnson

[MatDark]

I won't do a rant like most about underperforming defenders, but Grimes is getting traded this week.

I only have Waters & A.Johnson in mind to swap. Waters is a straight swap which I'm leaning towards more, but Johnson has been playing well, but basing on his scores last year, it's tough to see if he's worth the punt. I have Shaw, Goddard, Scotland, Hargrave, Bugg, Ellis.

Both are performing better than Grimes of course, so should I stick with a proven gun when fit or take a risk on Johnson with his 270k price tag? I'm only after players max 340k. Any thoughts would be appreciated, thanks :)

[Barra17]

How about lake?

Definately waters out of those too.

[MatDark]

Lake I'm a little unsure due to his inconsistency. He had the big week against Adelaide as they were just bombing it in & was taking easy marks. I prefer a consistent player over one that will ton up then go below par.

[Tom_16]

Don't trade grimes mate i've got him and he'll come good, you've gotta think about the long term and not be so short sighted

[henry]

Don't trade grimes mate i've got him and he'll come good, you've gotta think about the long term and not be so short sighted

I agree with this, you must remember that he's come off an injury interupted pre season and will take a while to hit his straps. I have him and will be sticking with him for atleast a couple more weeks. If you are definetly going to trade him though, waters is a better option than johnston imo, but I would also suggest considering dempsey.

[Tom_16]

Don't trade grimes mate i've got him and he'll come good, you've gotta think about the long term and not be so short sighted

I agree with this, you must remember that he's come off an injury interupted pre season and will take a while to hit his straps. I have him and will be sticking with him for atleast a couple more weeks. If you are definetly going to trade him though, waters is a better option than johnston imo, but I would also suggest considering dempsey.

cheers mate, imo grimes and waters will average about the same by the years end if not grimes will acg slightly more and will be more consistant.

[MatDark]

Based on past figures, Grimes will have the better output, it's why last minute I went him over Waters. It's more or less his defensive role plus lack of pre season that is hurting his scores.

It's a real tough one to pull the trigger on early, but with him playing down back & Melbourne getting pummelled down back, his scores should be slightly better. Both weeks he's had junk time just to get to the 60s. The thing working for him is that hes only 329k, so his price will be relatively stable for now.

[lolrocket]

I'd go for Malceski ahead of Johnson.

[Windigo]

Eski & Waters both have their risks....But I'd go Waters, pencil him in for a big one this week.

[MatDark]

Yeah it's Waters now or no trade at all. Wait to see the teams first. Grimes hopefully will actually play in the centre like both weeks he was listed there!

[Adamant]

Eski & Waters both have their risks....But I'd go Waters, pencil him in for a big one this week.

+1

[Mozza3]

Hang on to Grimes, I don't think its the smartest move to replace him with either Waters or Johnson. Johnson looks promising but he's still a bit of an unknown and Waters has just had some loading points activated because of his bump on Grimes and another hit like that will see him on the sidelines for sure.

[TheHanger]

Johnson is set to rise $30,000 this week with a B/E of 3
Waters set to rise $23,000 w/ a B/E of 36
Grimes set to drop $8,000 w/ a B/E of 86