Is it worth Heppell for Conca?

[TMurphBROWNLOW]

missed out on this boat unfortunately, and im really disappointed with Conca's output. worth burning a trade for a rookie whose job security is really good and playing in a rising side?

[Chelskiman]

Keep Conca.  He's played three sides that should all make the 8.

[TMurphBROWNLOW]

Hawthorn, St Kilda and Carlton. that means that if they're top 8 contenders and they used the ball well, it would have been in the majority of their attacking halves for the game. Conca plays in defence, meaning the ball is in his vicinity and he's still not getting his hands on it. that's a worrying sign!

how about when they play Gold Coast and destroy them (unlikely) like other teams? Conca will barely get a stint of the ball in defence if the ball is on the other side of the ground!!

Heppell on the other hand is playing half back AND midfield, meaning he's got a better chance at getting the ball and he's proved that in the past 3 weeks!

[Fenno]

I don't know why people always think that when a good team plays a poor team that the poor teams backmen will score well. Its just not the case if you have a look at a game where flogging have occurred the backmen struggle aswell. Same as when a good team plays a poor team that the good teams backmen will struggle to score well.... not true. When a team is good all players backs and forwards are more likely to score well and when a team is bad all players backs and forwards are more likely to score bad.

If it was that backmen in poor teams score well we would all load up on port, bris, GC, Richmond players down back and would stear clear of Collingwood, Geelong, Bulldogs players but we don't do we. Because good teams score more than poor teams regardless.

[thanme]

Concas been named as a back. I'm not expecting any magic from him, and will be trading him for a rookie with a bigger output.