Opinion 2024 AFL SuperCoach Planning Thread
- Thread starter MC's Mix
- Start date
Given the bulldogs have 3 Sunday and then a Saturday night game to start the year, I’m leaning towards Bont as a reliable C option and then a fixture/match up approach to the VC.
Round 1 options: NDaicos, Stewart, LDU
R2: NDaicos, Laird, LDU, Gawn
R3: NDaicos, Laird, LDU, Gawn, Butters
R4: Laird, LDU, Butters
Good mix of options and I’ll refine the final choice closer to each round when I know maximum information.
I’m hoping after 4 rounds I’ll have a clearer idea of C candidates based on in season information.
Round 1 options: NDaicos, Stewart, LDU
R2: NDaicos, Laird, LDU, Gawn
R3: NDaicos, Laird, LDU, Gawn, Butters
R4: Laird, LDU, Butters
Good mix of options and I’ll refine the final choice closer to each round when I know maximum information.
I’m hoping after 4 rounds I’ll have a clearer idea of C candidates based on in season information.
- Joined
- 24 Feb 2015
- Messages
- 6,697
- Likes
- 30,160
- AFL Club
- Sydney
This is something I was thinking a bit about the last couple of days, which players have that 125+ average in them for the season.
English, Bont from last season, Laird, Oliver, Macrae, Steele, Gawn, Grundy and Neale from previous seasons.
Trying to think whether others have the game to go to that level, Petracca yes, Dawson maybe, LDU does I think, Green tick, Gulden I think can at some stage and Butters. Not sure - I like the LDU game and Dawson but there's a few names cheap enough that have already done it that could return - I think Gawn, Grundy, Steele present enormous value if fully fit.
I forgot Touk Miller - he could do it. - oh and Daicos
I'm not sold on Walsh though, happy to be talked into it
English, Bont from last season, Laird, Oliver, Macrae, Steele, Gawn, Grundy and Neale from previous seasons.
Trying to think whether others have the game to go to that level, Petracca yes, Dawson maybe, LDU does I think, Green tick, Gulden I think can at some stage and Butters. Not sure - I like the LDU game and Dawson but there's a few names cheap enough that have already done it that could return - I think Gawn, Grundy, Steele present enormous value if fully fit.
I forgot Touk Miller - he could do it. - oh and Daicos
I'm not sold on Walsh though, happy to be talked into it
I've been doing a bit of research into the early byes and the impact of missing premos.
The screengrab below is the winning round teams for Round 1-3 last year.
I've tried to roughly break it down between Premo (Green), Mid pricer (Orange) and Rookies (Red).
If we drop to best 18 in those early bye rounds then the impact of either one or two premos missing and having to bring in your next best rookie options (highlighted in yellow) is fairly significant.
Looking at an average of between 50-70 points per premo missing per week.
So if like a lot of people, you're rolling with Walsh, then Rd 2 you'll be 50-70 points worse off compared to those without him.
Then roll to round 3. Flanders seems a must have. So drop another 50-70 here.
Where it gets interesting is if you then add in Green or Touk, or both. Increase the points there.
All of a sudden, 3 rounds into the season and you could be anywhere from 100 - 280points behind depending on how the rookies perform in the premo absence.
I'd been against the theory to start Green shift to Walsh option, but I'm starting to see the benefit in it if you're really big on Green for round 1 or think Walsh is too good a value to dismiss. Alternatively I equally see the benefit in deliberately avoiding Green, Touk, Walsh and then to a lesser degree Gulden, Trac, Dusty. I think Round 0 will determine a lot of the decisions.
Bit annoying given the value that I think Green, Touk and Walsh offer. But being behind 100-280 points 5 rounds in is a bit.
Anyway... not sure if any of this makes much sense haha
The screengrab below is the winning round teams for Round 1-3 last year.
I've tried to roughly break it down between Premo (Green), Mid pricer (Orange) and Rookies (Red).
If we drop to best 18 in those early bye rounds then the impact of either one or two premos missing and having to bring in your next best rookie options (highlighted in yellow) is fairly significant.
Looking at an average of between 50-70 points per premo missing per week.
So if like a lot of people, you're rolling with Walsh, then Rd 2 you'll be 50-70 points worse off compared to those without him.
Then roll to round 3. Flanders seems a must have. So drop another 50-70 here.
Where it gets interesting is if you then add in Green or Touk, or both. Increase the points there.
All of a sudden, 3 rounds into the season and you could be anywhere from 100 - 280points behind depending on how the rookies perform in the premo absence.
I'd been against the theory to start Green shift to Walsh option, but I'm starting to see the benefit in it if you're really big on Green for round 1 or think Walsh is too good a value to dismiss. Alternatively I equally see the benefit in deliberately avoiding Green, Touk, Walsh and then to a lesser degree Gulden, Trac, Dusty. I think Round 0 will determine a lot of the decisions.
Bit annoying given the value that I think Green, Touk and Walsh offer. But being behind 100-280 points 5 rounds in is a bit.
Anyway... not sure if any of this makes much sense haha
Here's a little appetite whetter for a thread I will be posting within the next 24-48 hours.
When a player gets his end of season average above 110 for the first time, what happens to his average in the next season?
I'm sure the answer will surprise many of you!
112 players have crossed the 110 barrier for the first time, and then played a subsequent season.
The answer in Round numbers is:
Increased their previous season average by 5 or more: 10%
Scored within +5 or -5 of their previous seasons average: 30%
Dropped their average by more than 5 points: 60%
In fact, 42% of players, having crossed the 110 barrier for the first time, see their next seasons average drop 10+!!!!!
Players that fit this category in 2024:
English (128), Daicos (116), Dawson (116), Butters (114), Stewart (114), LDU (114), Gulden (111), Green (111), Serong (111).
History says, that on average, 5 of these players will see their averages drop by 5 or more. 3 of those 5 players will experience a 10+ drop in average!!!
When a player gets his end of season average above 110 for the first time, what happens to his average in the next season?
I'm sure the answer will surprise many of you!
112 players have crossed the 110 barrier for the first time, and then played a subsequent season.
The answer in Round numbers is:
Increased their previous season average by 5 or more: 10%
Scored within +5 or -5 of their previous seasons average: 30%
Dropped their average by more than 5 points: 60%
In fact, 42% of players, having crossed the 110 barrier for the first time, see their next seasons average drop 10+!!!!!
Players that fit this category in 2024:
English (128), Daicos (116), Dawson (116), Butters (114), Stewart (114), LDU (114), Gulden (111), Green (111), Serong (111).
History says, that on average, 5 of these players will see their averages drop by 5 or more. 3 of those 5 players will experience a 10+ drop in average!!!
https://www.sen.com.au/news/2024/02...ack-as-roos-assistant-reveals-mckercher-plan/
SHEEZEL TO REMAIN DOWN BACK AS ROOS ASSISTANT REVEALS MCKERCHER PLAN
North Melbourne assistant coach Leigh Adams has given Kangaroos fans an idea of what to expect from No.2 draft pick Colby McKercher in his first AFL season.
While the Tasmanian was drafted as a classy and prolific midfielder, Adams says McKercher will be deployed in a half-back role to utilise his speed and kicking much in the mould of teammate Harry Sheezel and Nick Daicos in their Rising Star years.
After the youngster impressed in North Melbourne’s intra-club game on Wednesday, Adams was excited about what the club’s half-back line could look like with four genuine options offering some dash and ball use from defensive 50.
“We've been looking to probably get a little bit more run, carry and ball use off our half-back line,” Adams told SEN Afternoons.
“At this stage, it looks like (Colby) McKercher will come off at half-back and (Harry) Sheezel will probably start there as well.
“It looks like Bailey Scott will probably come off half-back and play wing from there and I'm hoping maybe Zac Fisher – who didn't play today - when he's up and running that he might go through there (half-back) as well.
“So, there's plenty of options for us with speed and ball use off half-back.
“A mixture of those four guys you should see playing through those roles.”
Adams, who is the club’s midfield coach, admits he’d like to have both McKercher and Sheezel in his line group but says the thinking behind leaving the young duo in defence is to provide some balance around the ground.
The assistant also expects McKercher to find a half-back role easier to adapt to at the start of his career even though he’ll eventually become a midfielder, much the same as Sheezel.
“There’s definitely plenty of fighting going on between the assistant coaches trying to get the best players into their line,” Adams said.
“I'd love to have Sheezel and McKercher inside, but we’ve got to balance up the team as best as possible to make sure that we've got all lines covered.
“So, there's a bit of that and I think how successful Sheezel was being able to come off half-back last year and see the game coming at him a little bit instead of getting hit by those bigger bodies all season, probably allowed him to have a really consistent (season).
“It probably let him stay a little bit fresher than if you had to play midfield.
“I think that's a little bit of the thinking behind it with McKercher - allow him to pick up the speed of the game, allow him to probably not get crashed and bashed as much in his first year of footy.
“But no doubt at some stage throughout their career, both of those guys are going to play some midfield time.
“But at the moment when we've got the likes of George Wardlaw, Luke Davies-Uniacke, Jy Simpkin, Will Phillips and Tom Powell that can go through there, there's probably not that need to rush them straight into the middle straight up.”
While a backline including McKercher, Sheezel, Fisher and Scott offers a lot with ball in hand, Adams isn’t certain whether they’ll all be deployed there at once as they look to get the right blend between attack and defence.
“We've got to get that mixture right,” Adams said.
“You've still obviously got to have guys that can defend off half-back as well.
“We feel like the guys that we've got coming off at the moment, they definitely give us some speed and some polish off there and hopefully we can get the balance right of being able to defend the ground if we do turn it over.
“But I think these days defence has just been so strong across the competition that the teams are trying move the ball as quick as they can before that defence is able to get set.”
That's exactly what I wanted to hear re Sheezel
SHEEZEL TO REMAIN DOWN BACK AS ROOS ASSISTANT REVEALS MCKERCHER PLAN
North Melbourne assistant coach Leigh Adams has given Kangaroos fans an idea of what to expect from No.2 draft pick Colby McKercher in his first AFL season.
While the Tasmanian was drafted as a classy and prolific midfielder, Adams says McKercher will be deployed in a half-back role to utilise his speed and kicking much in the mould of teammate Harry Sheezel and Nick Daicos in their Rising Star years.
After the youngster impressed in North Melbourne’s intra-club game on Wednesday, Adams was excited about what the club’s half-back line could look like with four genuine options offering some dash and ball use from defensive 50.
“We've been looking to probably get a little bit more run, carry and ball use off our half-back line,” Adams told SEN Afternoons.
“At this stage, it looks like (Colby) McKercher will come off at half-back and (Harry) Sheezel will probably start there as well.
“It looks like Bailey Scott will probably come off half-back and play wing from there and I'm hoping maybe Zac Fisher – who didn't play today - when he's up and running that he might go through there (half-back) as well.
“So, there's plenty of options for us with speed and ball use off half-back.
“A mixture of those four guys you should see playing through those roles.”
Adams, who is the club’s midfield coach, admits he’d like to have both McKercher and Sheezel in his line group but says the thinking behind leaving the young duo in defence is to provide some balance around the ground.
The assistant also expects McKercher to find a half-back role easier to adapt to at the start of his career even though he’ll eventually become a midfielder, much the same as Sheezel.
“There’s definitely plenty of fighting going on between the assistant coaches trying to get the best players into their line,” Adams said.
“I'd love to have Sheezel and McKercher inside, but we’ve got to balance up the team as best as possible to make sure that we've got all lines covered.
“So, there's a bit of that and I think how successful Sheezel was being able to come off half-back last year and see the game coming at him a little bit instead of getting hit by those bigger bodies all season, probably allowed him to have a really consistent (season).
“It probably let him stay a little bit fresher than if you had to play midfield.
“I think that's a little bit of the thinking behind it with McKercher - allow him to pick up the speed of the game, allow him to probably not get crashed and bashed as much in his first year of footy.
“But no doubt at some stage throughout their career, both of those guys are going to play some midfield time.
“But at the moment when we've got the likes of George Wardlaw, Luke Davies-Uniacke, Jy Simpkin, Will Phillips and Tom Powell that can go through there, there's probably not that need to rush them straight into the middle straight up.”
While a backline including McKercher, Sheezel, Fisher and Scott offers a lot with ball in hand, Adams isn’t certain whether they’ll all be deployed there at once as they look to get the right blend between attack and defence.
“We've got to get that mixture right,” Adams said.
“You've still obviously got to have guys that can defend off half-back as well.
“We feel like the guys that we've got coming off at the moment, they definitely give us some speed and some polish off there and hopefully we can get the balance right of being able to defend the ground if we do turn it over.
“But I think these days defence has just been so strong across the competition that the teams are trying move the ball as quick as they can before that defence is able to get set.”
That's exactly what I wanted to hear re Sheezel
Then i read "Adams isn’t certain whether they’ll all be deployed there at once as they look to get the right blend between attack and defence."
With Tarryn not looking likely this year is any one else concerned Sheezel gets shunted FWD when Fischer Returns.?
I would say most are running with Gawn, Grundy, Daicos and Flanders, so I don't see too much damage being done to overall rankings by going with those 4 and as you rightly point out, it gets expensive (points wise) when you start with more of them.
I'm happy enough to start those players that I think will be 'value' keepers because the points lost should be balanced by using those savings to get either a better keeper, better rookies, upgraded rookies to a stepping stone or combine the savings for an extra keeper. Where I struggle though is justifying the points lost when taking a fairly priced keeper who has an early bye over one that doesn't particularly in those 1st three rounds.
So, how much importance should be placed on those early points losses? How hard is it to make up those points once lost? I've heard the arguments that 50-70 points is only 2-3 PPG over the whole season, I think it's more pertinent to acknowledge that those points are gone in a lump sum early and can't be spread over the season.
I'm happy enough to start those players that I think will be 'value' keepers because the points lost should be balanced by using those savings to get either a better keeper, better rookies, upgraded rookies to a stepping stone or combine the savings for an extra keeper. Where I struggle though is justifying the points lost when taking a fairly priced keeper who has an early bye over one that doesn't particularly in those 1st three rounds.
So, how much importance should be placed on those early points losses? How hard is it to make up those points once lost? I've heard the arguments that 50-70 points is only 2-3 PPG over the whole season, I think it's more pertinent to acknowledge that those points are gone in a lump sum early and can't be spread over the season.