Wells

[Lion El'Johnson]

I'd do that.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Oh, so it was it was a lame attempt at being smart and witty that wasn't funny or witty at all and fell flat on it's face then. Well that clears the confusion up.

No - it was just a Simpsons reference.

If you didn't spot it, that's not a big deal.

If you want to leverage it into one, that just shows you're trying too hard.

Oddly enough trading financial instruments is what i do for a living.

Well, then you'd know that "buy low, sell high" is more a banality than a strategy.

The same way that "kick more goals" isn't much of a strategy.

And i can see be the weird guy who works at the power plant and sits on his own at lunchtime while the other employees breathe a sigh of relief that he didn't try and sit with them is your life.

Are you going to actually express an opinion in this thread or just do your usual trick of critiqueing everyone elses? Probably not, right? But, hey, thats why you come here, not to express an opinion or contribute in a meaningful way but to seek and ego boost and compensate by attempting to ridicule others. We all know that.

This is needlessly ad hominem. And it's utterly mindless.

When it comes to footy and cogent, substantive arguments, you struggle. That's why you go straight to playing the man.

And I've already expressed an opinion on Wells. If the match committee/recruiters decided he was worth a crack, a second-round pick should be the limit.

Once again, you're left with nothing but bitter, fictitious ad hominem. Lift your game.

 

[Swiftkid]

Let's give them a player who's interst is waning. Do we have another D.Mac?

 

[DivideandMultiply]

*Looks in thread and sees Quinz comment. Scrolls up and senses impending td;lr shitstorm...... wonders how a thread on Wells can require such lengthy answers*

 

[The Coast]

Wells has always struck me as a player who would fit in down at Dockerland.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Wells has always struck me as a player who would fit in down at Dockerland.

If Wells magically ended up on our list next week, would he be our second-best on-baller after Kerr?

Not counting Cox, obviously.

 

[ROYAL EAGLE]

As others have said no more than a second round pick.

l sometimes feel he would be one of those players that would benefit going to another club.

Like Matt Clape and Jarrad Schofield did for us.

Dont know if Subi is the best place for him though.

I think a St Kilda or a Carlton would be a good fit for him.

 

[Eagle Ant]

I would not depart with a Draft pick unless we were getting an up grade.

I think Seeing as its North They need another forward for sure so we could give them Mckinley and Nicoski for Wells and their 3rd round pick, that should get the job done.

Others that may work: Hansen, Staker, Seaby, Wilkes and Hunter as packages.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

I think Seeing as its North They need another forward for sure so we could give them Mckinley and Nicoski for Wells and their 3rd round pick, that should get the job done.

You'd be happy to do that deal?

 

[Mop]

My first thought was I don't particularly want someone who doesn't give their all. I'd rather Stevie Armstrong than Wells on that token.
My second thought was trade Staker for him, but then Staker actually tries but can only pull it off once in a blue moon.

Pie and chips for him?
Then again..

He could be in the PSD and I'd still only be marginally interested.

I think I'll keep my pie and chips.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

He could be in the PSD and I'd still only be marginally interested.

Hmmm...

I don't think so.

If Daniel Wells was available in the PSD, we'd take him in an absolute heartbeat.

Consider, if Wells magically landed on our list next week, how many midfielders would we pick ahead of him?

 

[beatlesmith]

I would not depart with a Draft pick unless we were getting an up grade.

I think Seeing as its North They need another forward for sure so we could give them Mckinley and Nicoski for Wells and their 3rd round pick, that should get the job done.

Others that may work: Hansen, Staker, Seaby, Wilkes and Hunter as packages.

No. I'm sorry. No.
Mckinley was our leading goalkicker last year, with almost all agreeing that he was our best forward, let alone forward prospect. Yeah, he has been poor so far, but it is 3 games in to the season, two of which he has played. From watching him, it is clear to see that he is putting in more effort, both in chasing and leading up the ground when the ball is hard to come by. He expressed faith in the future of this club when, against the odds somewhat, he re-signed, and we should be showing the same faith in him and not throwing him on the scrap-heap 3 games in to the season.

 

[beatlesmith]

Hmmm...

I don't think so.

If Daniel Wells was available in the PSD, we'd take him in an absolute heartbeat.

Consider, if Wells magically landed on our list next week, how many midfielders would we pick ahead of him?

That is true. We are lacking in outside options with class, x-factor and game breaking ability, as well as a distinct lack of goalkicking and accurate delivery from our outside mids. Wells fits the description, but then again, so do many draftees.

 

[Mop]

Hmmm...

I don't think so.

If Daniel Wells was available in the PSD, we'd take him in an absolute heartbeat.

Consider, if Wells magically landed on our list next week, how many midfielders would we pick ahead of him?

I'm not necessarily saying that WE as a club wouldn't take him, I'm sure we would just for the 'what if' factor. We're lacking speed and he has speed to burn.

I mean more so from a personal perspective, my interest factor in Wells ranges from low to minimal.

To answer your question I'd probably say Kerr, Selwood (if he counts) and perhaps Stenglein. From our perspective Stenglein may not be setting the world on fire, but he hasn't been dropped and I can't see him being dropped any time soon either.

Wells would be far from an automatic selection.. I'd have him in the same boat as Staker really..

If he's on song then he's a lethal weapon, I'm not disputing that. His lack of consistency is what bothers me. Do we really need another inconsistent player with 'potential'?

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

That is true. We are lacking in outside options with class, x-factor and game breaking ability, as well as a distinct lack of goalkicking and accurate delivery from our outside mids. Wells fits the description, but then again, so do many draftees.

Wells has actually performed at senior level.

Not many draftees have done that.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

I mean more so from a personal perspective, my interest factor in Wells ranges from low to minimal.

What does that mean?

To answer your question I'd probably say Kerr, Selwood (if he counts) and perhaps Stenglein.

That's a real stretch.

Stenglein?

Come on.

Wells would be far from an automatic selection.. I'd have him in the same boat as Staker really.

Bollocks.

We'd pick him all day long.

 

[larrikin]

He'd be in our best 10 players

And depending on his contract situation would cost us probably a mid - late first rounder.

Remember folks, we wanted a second rounder for Seaby a few months ago

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Remember folks, we wanted a second rounder for Seaby a few months ago

Indeed.

 

[shoe]

No Thanks...lazy and over rated..

This.

Do we need this thread every year>

 

[Mop]

What does that mean?

It means I don't particularly want him at our club.
I'd rather that we invest our time elsewhere.

If he were to fall into our lap, then cool. A second rounder would be better spent elsewhere IMO.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

It means I don't particularly want him at our club.
I'd rather that we invest our time elsewhere.

This is crazy.

What is this about "investing our time elsewhere"?

I don't know what that means. Since when is "our time" the big consideration?

If he improves our best 22, then why wouldn't you have him?

He's still young enough and is precisely the kind of player we don't have.

 

[Swiftkid]

This is crazy.

What is this about "investing our time elsewhere"?

I don't know what that means. Since when is "our time" the big consideration?

If he improves our best 22, then why wouldn't you have him?

He's still young enough and is precisely the kind of player we don't have.

He's made his position pretty clear, your arguing for the sake of it.

 

[Mop]

This is crazy.

What is this about "investing our time elsewhere"?

I don't know what that means. Since when is "our time" the big consideration?

If he improves our best 22, then why wouldn't you have him?

He's still young enough and is precisely the kind of player we don't have.

I don't think he'll improve our best 22. Not because he's not good enough, but because he's not consistent enough.
I have my doubts whether he'll ever become a week in week out superstar midfielder.

Feel free to come back and prove me wrong in a few years time should that be the case.

 

[beatlesmith]

Wells has actually performed at senior level.

Not many draftees have done that.

Could the same not be said about every player for pick trade?
It is good to add experience to a young midfield group yes, but wells hardly brings any leadership (like stinger and chick did) and clearly lacks work ethic. Not exactly an example to follow, nor a recipe for a long career which will be needed for his expeience to be worth anything by the time we are againin premiership contention.
If you ask me, short term success in rebuilding years is largely irrelevant. Wells, for mine, will not contribute significantly towads our next permiership push, so we should e investing with youth as an overarching rule, only to be broken if a great deal were to fall in our lap.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

I don't think he'll improve our best 22. Not because he's not good enough, but because he's not consistent enough.
I have my doubts whether he'll ever become a week in week out superstar midfielder.

He doesn't need to be a week-in, week-out superstar to be worth trading for.

Stenglein was worth trading for, wasn't he?

Wells would be our second-best midfielder. He's exactly the kind of player we lack. Hence, I'd say he would improve our 22.

Doesn't mean I want to throw the kitchen sink at the Roos to get him. But to say, "nah, not interested", is a bit silly.