Strategy 2023: Round 11 Trades
- Thread starter Tamuhawk
- Start date
- Joined
- 6 Jul 2012
- Messages
- 2,301
- Likes
- 1,721
- AFL Club
- North Melb.
Team is looking very nice, particularly the midfield! I would probably go Kelly to Sinclair and Oliver to Rozee to get the top liners in each pozzie. Could also go early on Wardlaw and trade Chandler and Wilmot instead of Oliver, but I think that's probably not as good because Wilmot has more money to make.
EDIT: I realised you have d5 (+Ziebell) defenders already, so could be better to get a mid instead of Sincalir - maybe Libba? (would say Neale but better to get him after the bye)
EDIT: I realised you have d5 (+Ziebell) defenders already, so could be better to get a mid instead of Sincalir - maybe Libba? (would say Neale but better to get him after the bye)
- Joined
- 19 Jun 2013
- Messages
- 1,343
- Likes
- 3,771
- AFL Club
- Carlton
Is one M. Johnson actually a possible trade in? Was improving in the couple of games before getting suspended. Probably had him sub last week due to not playing the previous few and wanting to ease him back in again. Hasn't made a heap of cash yet so money to be made. Do we think he continues to play now he is back in the side? Could be valuable for the round 14/15 byes if he is playing.
- Joined
- 3 Jul 2017
- Messages
- 38,967
- Likes
- 126,639
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
Wishing now I took the points loss on McKenna over Chandler and used him to grab Humphrey instead of Sharp last round. Have considered the Simpson to Humphrey option to then possibly trade Davey to Wardlaw via Humphrey next round.
Tough to seperate the likes of Neale, Steele and Macrae. Started Steele so happy to welcome him back but also very interested in Macrae and Neale around the mid 500 range given both were heavily considered as starters and have been mainstays in yesteryears. Potential for fwd status is very enticing for Macrae and a key reason why I opted to go cheap from the start in case we received any good options in RD6 or RD12.
Thank you. Did consider Sinclair briefly but feel it is too many defenders with Dawson to move back eventually or even Sheezel if necessary when Weddle is traded. Have considered Rozee but when comparing to options around his price range on his and other lines, I feel I might be able to get someone with a higher ceiling and potentially higher avg for a similar cost (eg Neale and Macrae). No interest in Liberatore with my cash and trade situation. Wilmot is likely to be traded on his bye for a forward and this could possibly be funded by Chandler to Ford.
A combination of all the above suggestions could lead to something like:
Out: J Kelly and S Simpson
In: L Neale and B Humphrey
With three trades next week, Wilmot, Davey and Chandler could become Ford, Wardlaw and Macrae if price changes and dual position status additions are friendly.
Tough to seperate the likes of Neale, Steele and Macrae. Started Steele so happy to welcome him back but also very interested in Macrae and Neale around the mid 500 range given both were heavily considered as starters and have been mainstays in yesteryears. Potential for fwd status is very enticing for Macrae and a key reason why I opted to go cheap from the start in case we received any good options in RD6 or RD12.
Thank you. Did consider Sinclair briefly but feel it is too many defenders with Dawson to move back eventually or even Sheezel if necessary when Weddle is traded. Have considered Rozee but when comparing to options around his price range on his and other lines, I feel I might be able to get someone with a higher ceiling and potentially higher avg for a similar cost (eg Neale and Macrae). No interest in Liberatore with my cash and trade situation. Wilmot is likely to be traded on his bye for a forward and this could possibly be funded by Chandler to Ford.
A combination of all the above suggestions could lead to something like:
Out: J Kelly and S Simpson
In: L Neale and B Humphrey
With three trades next week, Wilmot, Davey and Chandler could become Ford, Wardlaw and Macrae if price changes and dual position status additions are friendly.
This feels like a fork in the road. Starting this week with 18 trades (2 boosts) left.
The "conservative" move is Cincotta -> Hobbs, looping Ginbey and Mitchell at D6, leaving Johnson at M8 and Hobbs and Humphrey at F5 and F6. Bench coverage from Drury and Angwin (+Esava). Very light on for bench coverage, but 130K in the bank, 17 trades left to burn through in the bye rounds
The "all in" move is to burn a trade and go Oliver, Cincotta and Davey to B. Smith, Wines and Hobbs. Takes me to 15 trades and pretty much zero cash. Still looping Mitchell and Ginbey, Callaghan M8 (Johnson M9), Looping Humphrey and Hobbs at F6 (if that even works)
I think the conservative line is the go for now, but will mull over it
The "conservative" move is Cincotta -> Hobbs, looping Ginbey and Mitchell at D6, leaving Johnson at M8 and Hobbs and Humphrey at F5 and F6. Bench coverage from Drury and Angwin (+Esava). Very light on for bench coverage, but 130K in the bank, 17 trades left to burn through in the bye rounds
The "all in" move is to burn a trade and go Oliver, Cincotta and Davey to B. Smith, Wines and Hobbs. Takes me to 15 trades and pretty much zero cash. Still looping Mitchell and Ginbey, Callaghan M8 (Johnson M9), Looping Humphrey and Hobbs at F6 (if that even works)
I think the conservative line is the go for now, but will mull over it
Is there an option where you use three trades, but get a better premium? That would be my suggestion.
18 is a lot of trades to have at this point, so I think you can afford it. I’m just a bit wary of Smith’s role (Treloar is due back soon) and Wines’ output (one score above 93, but priced at close to that level). Maybe downgrading Wines to upgrade Smith could work.
18 is a lot of trades to have at this point, so I think you can afford it. I’m just a bit wary of Smith’s role (Treloar is due back soon) and Wines’ output (one score above 93, but priced at close to that level). Maybe downgrading Wines to upgrade Smith could work.
