Jarrod Witts

[crowls]

Nank will make money even if he's not a keeper. But in the end I'm happy enough to hold him all year in case Sandi goes down. With Hammer on the LTI list I think Nank is pretty safe in the short term.

Why am I considering this? To basically plug F6 which looks like being a volatile position.

He's just another rookie. One just needs to formulate a get out plan in case he gets dropped.
[/quote] Valid rationale.   I personally dont see Nank as coverage if Sandi goes down long term.  Rather cover in the case he is rested or 1/2 week injury.    If you have Witts you dont need Nank.   However I would rather keep nank, loophole strndica for the F6 at year end.   Within realms for Nank to average 90+ if he is sole ruck.         On the other hand he is only 22 and therefore unlikely to be a keeper.   Next year and the year after will see him grow into a premium ruck.

[Bully]

Nank will make money even if he's not a keeper. But in the end I'm happy enough to hold him all year in case Sandi goes down. With Hammer on the LTI list I think Nank is pretty safe in the short term.

Why am I considering this? To basically plug F6 which looks like being a volatile position.

He's just another rookie. One just needs to formulate a get out plan in case he gets dropped.

Valid rationale.   I personally dont see Nank as coverage if Sandi goes down long term.  Rather cover in the case he is rested or 1/2 week injury.    If you have Witts you dont need Nank.   However I would rather keep nank, loophole strndica for the F6 at year end.   Within realms for Nank to average 90+ if he is sole ruck.         On the other hand he is only 22 and therefore unlikely to be a keeper.   Next year and the year after will see him grow into a premium ruck.
[/quote]

Nank is needed if Witts gets dropped. At the moment it's Taranto vs Witts and if things don't go according to plan then I'm happy to reverse the decision. I think it's safe to assume Witts will average 75-80, it's just up to him to hold his place. If he is on the outer by round 3 then Nank goes to F2 and Taranto comes in (or any other player in the price range).

I've had a look at Witts scores over the years and he has a high score of 135 against Carlton. I'm hoping he can produce at least one monster score to bolster his earnings potential.

[eaglesman]

Nank will make money even if he's not a keeper. But in the end I'm happy enough to hold him all year in case Sandi goes down. With Hammer on the LTI list I think Nank is pretty safe in the short term.

Why am I considering this? To basically plug F6 which looks like being a volatile position.

He's just another rookie. One just needs to formulate a get out plan in case he gets dropped.

Valid rationale.   I personally dont see Nank as coverage if Sandi goes down long term.  Rather cover in the case he is rested or 1/2 week injury.    If you have Witts you dont need Nank.   However I would rather keep nank, loophole strndica for the F6 at year end.   Within realms for Nank to average 90+ if he is sole ruck.         On the other hand he is only 22 and therefore unlikely to be a keeper.   Next year and the year after will see him grow into a premium ruck.

Nank is needed if Witts gets dropped. At the moment it's Taranto vs Witts and if things don't go according to plan then I'm happy to reverse the decision. I think it's safe to assume Witts will average 75-80, it's just up to him to hold his place. If he is on the outer by round 3 then Nank goes to F2 and Taranto comes in (or any other player in the price range).

I've had a look at Witts scores over the years and he has a high score of 135 against Carlton. I'm hoping he can produce at least one monster score to bolster his earnings potential.
[/quote]

Nankwittylands is a go for me too. I like the idea about going to Taranto if it goes all ends up. I think 75-80 is a bit high though.
I presume nank is f6? What are the rest of your forwards? 

[Bully]

Nank will make money even if he's not a keeper. But in the end I'm happy enough to hold him all year in case Sandi goes down. With Hammer on the LTI list I think Nank is pretty safe in the short term.

Why am I considering this? To basically plug F6 which looks like being a volatile position.

He's just another rookie. One just needs to formulate a get out plan in case he gets dropped.

Valid rationale.   I personally dont see Nank as coverage if Sandi goes down long term.  Rather cover in the case he is rested or 1/2 week injury.    If you have Witts you dont need Nank.   However I would rather keep nank, loophole strndica for the F6 at year end.   Within realms for Nank to average 90+ if he is sole ruck.         On the other hand he is only 22 and therefore unlikely to be a keeper.   Next year and the year after will see him grow into a premium ruck.

Nank is needed if Witts gets dropped. At the moment it's Taranto vs Witts and if things don't go according to plan then I'm happy to reverse the decision. I think it's safe to assume Witts will average 75-80, it's just up to him to hold his place. If he is on the outer by round 3 then Nank goes to F2 and Taranto comes in (or any other player in the price range).

I've had a look at Witts scores over the years and he has a high score of 135 against Carlton. I'm hoping he can produce at least one monster score to bolster his earnings potential.

Nankwittylands is a go for me too. I like the idea about going to Taranto if it goes all ends up. I think 75-80 is a bit high though.
I presume nank is f6? What are the rest of your forwards?
[/quote]

Forwards are Dahlhaus, Franklin, Macrae, Greene, Roughie, Nankervis

I can see F6 being the achilles heel  for many people and I want to take advantage of that. I anticipate the difference between Witts & Goldy/Gawn won't be as large as many are predicting. As for Witts scoring potential? His floor is 70-75, but he's the right age to lift that past 80. As sole ruck I reckon he can do that.

[eaglesman]

Nank will make money even if he's not a keeper. But in the end I'm happy enough to hold him all year in case Sandi goes down. With Hammer on the LTI list I think Nank is pretty safe in the short term.

Why am I considering this? To basically plug F6 which looks like being a volatile position.

He's just another rookie. One just needs to formulate a get out plan in case he gets dropped.

Valid rationale.   I personally dont see Nank as coverage if Sandi goes down long term.  Rather cover in the case he is rested or 1/2 week injury.    If you have Witts you dont need Nank.   However I would rather keep nank, loophole strndica for the F6 at year end.   Within realms for Nank to average 90+ if he is sole ruck.         On the other hand he is only 22 and therefore unlikely to be a keeper.   Next year and the year after will see him grow into a premium ruck.

Nank is needed if Witts gets dropped. At the moment it's Taranto vs Witts and if things don't go according to plan then I'm happy to reverse the decision. I think it's safe to assume Witts will average 75-80, it's just up to him to hold his place. If he is on the outer by round 3 then Nank goes to F2 and Taranto comes in (or any other player in the price range).

I've had a look at Witts scores over the years and he has a high score of 135 against Carlton. I'm hoping he can produce at least one monster score to bolster his earnings potential.

Nankwittylands is a go for me too. I like the idea about going to Taranto if it goes all ends up. I think 75-80 is a bit high though.
I presume nank is f6? What are the rest of your forwards?

Forwards are Dahlhaus, Franklin, Macrae, Greene, Roughie, Nankervis

I can see F6 being the achilles heel  for many people and I want to take advantage of that. I anticipate the difference between Witts & Goldy/Gawn won't be as large as many are predicting. As for Witts scoring potential? His floor is 70-75, but he's the right age to lift that past 80. As sole ruck I reckon he can do that.
[/quote]

Couldn't agree more. People pinning their hopes on f6 of turner/schoey wil be very desperate for plan b early in the year. If this set up fails for us then yes we will have to enact plan b as well. But I think I am more confident with our risk than having hacks at f6.

For what it's worth. I already have Taranto in my team at f6 with this set up but I have macrae in the mids. I had a reason for it yesterday but it's escaped my mind now hahahah

[Thewizz71]

I know there is a ruck thread, but what do people really think Witts can/will average this year?

[RaisyDaisy]

70-80, which is just as much as any other expensive rookie and that's why I've got him

[dmac07]

Ok hands up.. who said 100 plus?  ::)

[Samsturmfels]

http://forum.fanfooty.com.au/index.php/topic,108611.75.html

[petefisker]

Haha 100+ voters clearly haven't watched this spud muffin play before.
There was no option for Averaging 40's so had to go 60's

[Mat0369]

I'm thinking something similar to Nicholls-Zac Smith. 70-75 seems about right.

[Spite]

Haha 100+ voters clearly haven't watched this spud muffin play before.
There was no option for Averaging 40's so had to go 60's

When he was a sole ruck at pies, he never even got near 40 so what are you talking about?

I've watched him from the beginning as a Collingwood supporter who was excited that we had a NSW scholarship 15-year old Witts on our list. Sure he has his flaws, but nothing that would suggest he would score THAT badly as you are suggesting.

[Bully]

I've put 80's because I reckon there's some improvement left and think he'll benefit from being solo ruck.

[ants]

I've put 80's because I reckon there's some improvement left and think he'll benefit from being solo ruck.

yea for the first week and then gets replaced by currie or nicholls or shares the duties with either!

[Bully]

I've put 80's because I reckon there's some improvement left and think he'll benefit from being solo ruck.

yea for the first week and then gets replaced by currie or nicholls or shares the duties with either!

Nicholls is the worst tap ruckman in the competition. When a bloke wins 9 tap outs to Gawn's 60 you know there's a serious problem.