Opinion 2024 AFL SuperCoach Planning Thread

Joined
18 Sep 2012
Messages
3,404
Likes
7,197
AFL Club
Essendon
Steele has done nothing to help me decide to pick him or not. Scored ok without too many disposals/involvement. Similar to last year, was hovering around that 20 possession mark. Just to the naked eye, he doesn't play like he is the best player or he thinks he is the best player.
He still handballs too much as well. Will take an uncontested mark in the centre of the ground and then look to handball it off. Bont in that situation would bomb it 40m+ inside 50. I'll still probably pick him but I doubt he ever gets back to being that 120ppg midfield gun. Can't wait for him to burn me again.
 
Joined
19 Jun 2013
Messages
1,343
Likes
3,771
AFL Club
Carlton
He still handballs too much as well. Will take an uncontested mark in the centre of the ground and then look to handball it off. Bont in that situation would bomb it 40m+ inside 50.
Yes agree. He doesn't stand up and say I'll lead the way, follow me. He defers to everyone else. I took a break from SC for the couple of years he dominated so don't really know if he is playing different to then or the game has changed away from his style. I may still pick him due to price and his ability to tackle, but I'm not confident in his ability to hit 115ave for the whole year.
 
Joined
28 Jun 2012
Messages
5,408
Likes
3,683
AFL Club
Bulldogs
With so much extra value this season I'm happy to take any price hits on the Bont and English. Players in my team like Daicos, Serong and whoever ends up at M2 (600k) are one 70 away from dropping similar dollars. Especially whoever you replace them with. It's not unrealistic for them to start the season with 120s-150s. Especially when champion data just loves to give them Christmas bonus's on a consistent basis.

As I've said if I drop English to Grundy (who looks as lethargic as I do at work) I have no idea which lower priced player to upgrade. I'd just end up with 2-300k in the bank. Happy for the extra C options Especially with round 0 players potentially being my only donuts for loops
 
Joined
24 Feb 2015
Messages
6,697
Likes
30,160
AFL Club
Sydney
He still handballs too much as well. Will take an uncontested mark in the centre of the ground and then look to handball it off. Bont in that situation would bomb it 40m+ inside 50. I'll still probably pick him but I doubt he ever gets back to being that 120ppg midfield gun. Can't wait for him to burn me again.
I was keen on him, wanted to look at him today, tackle numbers are good but probably want someone that has a bit more gut running contest to contest. Guys like Serong, Gulden, Miller, Daicos, Bont, Oliver that are continually involved all the time - I do want to minimise early bye players which makes it difficult
 

Darkie

Leadership Group
Joined
12 Apr 2014
Messages
25,414
Likes
65,517
AFL Club
Collingwood
It’s funny I’d been thinking similar the other day! But I think some of my thoughts may have been lost from being spread across a few different posts.

First up absolutely we are on the same page about those first points. I’ll try and address the “disagreement” ones.. apologies if it rambles along but juggling a sick little one so the brain is fried!

1. Definitely not assuming all mid pricers work, nor that all rookies/premiums do. The reason “correction trades” exists as a term is because no one gets it right with their starting team. But I do subscribe to the theory that you want to get as close as you can while minimising the risks. And that’s where my hesitation around heavy MP teams comes from - statistically they are less likely to succeed as the margin for error is a lot smaller to be successful. They either need to score well enough they comfortably out score a rookie in a point per $ measure, make significant cash as quickly as a rookie, or both. Now that isn’t to say no MP can do that - it’s just a lot harder and any small thing can knock them down to a bad pick.
For arguments sake, let’s apply a similar line of thinking to a premium and a rookie.
If the premium is shaping as a bad pick, then can be sideways traded to a different premium, down to a MP to free up cash, or (unlikely) all the way down to a rookie. Plenty of viable exit strategies and easily fixed with 1 trade.
If a rookie is a bad pick, they can be sideways traded to a rookie or held hoping for a spike score. If they are dropped, they can be a loophole. But even if that doesn’t work, it’s a small amount of cash tied up that can be fixed later.
If a MP fails, they are either needing to be sideways traded to a different midpricer, or down to a rookie.
The problem starting a lot of MP players is that 1. You have reduce the pool of viable MP options to the point you may not have that exit available, or 2. You go to a rookie and are now playing a player likely played by a GnR team but at the cost of a trade (2 if you count the trade to reinvest the capital from the downgrade).
So having too many means you have a higher risk of a bad selection and less viable options to correct it.

2. I don’t think it’s harder to use MP players at the start of the upgrade cadence but I definitely do towards the end. To trade a $400k player to a premium you need another player to have made at least $150k. It’s a lot harder for a MP player to do that, so you’re likely culling a good rookie to get there. Which means the more upgrades you do, the less good rookies you have left to give you that cash. With a GnR team, you have more players generating more money, but also have more chance to a rookie generating significant money. I think this point is a hard one to settle though because SO much depends on variables that can’t be known. But loosely, a team with 12 premiums will likely have more players generating good cash, but the MP team with 10 premiums needs to cull their best rookie and worst MP twice just to get to level pegging at 12 premiums. Meaning they are somewhat behind as they’ve sacrificed strong assets to do so. The argument is that the MP team will have built a points buffer more valuable that the alternative, but again the more MP players the higher the risk that doesn’t happen.

3. This is an excellent point and one I hadn’t fully considered. Absolutely the quality of starting team should be better as we get a free look at players in genuine conditions and not preseason junk. But, that only holds true for the R0 players and most are limiting exposure to those. So while we get the cream from those teams, we are in the dark with the rest and just as much at risk. Ironically, you get the best starting team due to players we are intentionally fading because of the extra bye! The point about trades though is one I find interesting - we can absolutely use 6 trades to fix things in the first few rounds, and while we have more trades and they are less valuable, we still only have 5 boosts and I’d argue they are worth gold in terms of rapid upgrading.

4. Wish I’d listened to you!! That was a huge miss on my season not starting English. But I think it’s an interesting one in that the idea of avoiding injury prone players kind of lumps in with the risk mitigation piece. An injury prone pick is fine if you have a balanced team, but too many MP and I just probe players could lead to a leaky boat. Absolutely I think we shouldn’t be putting a line through these picks, but instead weighing up all the risk vs reward for the combination of picks, not at an individual player level. Would you still pick the 2023 injury risk English if you had the MP heavy team of 2024?

Love the discussion though! I think one mentioned before but u hugely respect your posts and opinions so love this stuff!
Hehe - I hope the little one is on the mend, that is never good for anyone!

I am enjoying our discussion as well. I think there is a bit to work through this preseason, and am hoping we can collectively nut a lot of it out before lockout.

A few thoughts:

- I’m not sure about midpricers needing to score more on a $ per point basis. A 120k rookie that averages 60 is a good pick. That would suggest that the bar for a 360k midpricer was an average of 180. I think the $ cash generation (and the pace of it, as you mention) is a better measure. My preference would be to select everyone that I think will make me 150k, regardless of their initial price.

- The idea about the number of “outs” from a midpricer is interesting and one I may need to think more about. I do think that the hit rate on midpricers has been low historically, although one factor driving this (in my mind) is that we have asked a lot of them because they do chew up scarce trades in a way that GnR doesn’t. Whether midpricers still have a lower success rate than rookies with the extra trades available, I’m less sure.

- A related point that Jackson Davey (the presenter of the YouTube video I posted earlier) made is that a big advantage of a value based approach is that it takes the worst rookies off the field. Often those rookies are quite poor scorers or have JS issues etc. Starting with 12 premos in a GnR setup implies 18 rookies, and often that 18th rookie isn’t great. If we allow ourselves to incorporate midpricers, our 1st midpricer is likely to be a much better pick than our 18th rookie (even after adjusting for the price difference). The 2nd midpricer may be better than the 17th rookie, and so on. Clearly this doesn’t go on forever, but it is an interesting way to think about it.

- I agree that boosts are very valuable, but I reckon there will be a lot of rounds where it’s not obvious what we would use that extra trade for to justify its cost. Ie often 2 trades per round is about the right amount, perhaps because it facilitates a one up, one down. I also agree that boosts should be used early.

- I’m more comfortable taking R0 players than pretty much anyone else, from what I can see. I thought JD made an interesting point on this. We’ll see whether this ends up being the right call or not.

- It’s a good question re whether I would still take English with a MPM team. I think the answer is yes, but it’s probably hard to know for sure. I was pretty convinced that he offered a good risk/reward trade off, which means I would have been inclined to fit him in, and it was the extra trades that made me pretty high conviction on actually taking him … his main downside risk was mitigated by the extra “outs” from increased trades. Interestingly I am unsure who the English of this year is … he’s not jumping out at me at this point!

I think we may have discussed a few weeks ago that I was keen to employ a more value oriented approach - but was struggling to actually identify which of those players I wanted to pick, given that the midpricers looked poor and the rookies looked good. It now seems that the rookies still look good but the midpricers look a lot better. That probably opens up the potential for me to use that value based approach again, but I need to weigh up whether the midpricers look good enough to pick them over the rookies … or perhaps more accurately, whether the merits of those individual selections warrant selecting a team in the structure that I think the rules are most suited to this year.

At a minimum, I’m happy that the midpricers are looking a bit better, so I at least have two viable options to consider!
 
Joined
8 May 2018
Messages
646
Likes
1,785
Boy oh boy, if I pick all the cheap players who a) scored 100s, b) racked up ball or c) have good roles I end up with about 6 premiums and a stack of cash leftover :rolleyes:

Anyone else having the same problem?
You say it like this is a bad thing :). Just embrace the joy of knowing that with all that cash in the bank, like a Cobra, you are poised and ready to strike anytime and at a moments notice.
 

Darkie

Leadership Group
Joined
12 Apr 2014
Messages
25,414
Likes
65,517
AFL Club
Collingwood
Boy oh boy, if I pick all the cheap players who a) scored 100s, b) racked up ball or c) have good roles I end up with about 6 premiums and a stack of cash leftover :rolleyes:

Anyone else having the same problem?
I haven’t tried that approach, but it does seem we may be spoilt for choice!

I would emphasise (c), personally … some teams and players will be taking these games more seriously than others. Maybe that gives you a more palatable structure?
 
Joined
18 Jul 2016
Messages
3,779
Likes
26,307
AFL Club
Sydney
So I watched a game...

North vs Saints - Thanks to Jimmy Webster a game broke out late in the 1st quarter after some tiddlywinks up to that point. Fierce wind to one end made it an interesting game where structures were very different each quarter, both teams dug in. Unfortunately both sides, but especially the Saints, had some very key players missing that makes reading much very hard.

North - Went through the motions in Q1 until the Webster bump and ultimately that was the difference in the game as they completely wasted the wind as a result of engaging in glorified circle work to that point. They were much better from that point on when they dug in and gave some effort and when you lack talent effort is going to be a big thing. Missing Corr, who's back soon, McDonald (no idea), Logue (a while) and then Shiels (not sure should play).

Fisher - Well he just came in to a lot of sides, he just suits that cheap seagull HB role so well and that's the role he played, split the kick-ins pretty equally with McKercher and Sheezel from my count but took enough that there will be a floor there and just worked into space. Was surprisingly good defensively as well with some good efforts. In a bad team the supply should be strong. Really no reason he can't put up mid 90s and be keeper level (barring huge DPP changes) this year.

Sheezel - Big tick, role strong, just casually got 30+ without really getting out of 2nd gear. Just so good.

Scott - Played in defense which was interesting given he played well on a wing last year and they've got much more HB options than they do wing options. He could be a menace to the guys who are actually fantasy relevant if that continues. Gut says he was probably warming McDonald's boots and he'll push Tucker towards the fringe more when he's back.

Lazzaro - Scored surprisingly well in DT, guess the 5 tackles sneak up, his handballing was dreadful, which as his go to disposal type is a problem. He looked like he'd never tried handballing before today he was missing them that badly, albeit as an AFL player you shouldn't expect that to be a consistent pattern. Role was strong, especially before Simpkin went off, he seemed to go more HF after Phillips came on for Simpkin in Q2 but still had some midfield stints. They're not really missing anyone so the role is seemingly there. I've actually liked him in midfield roles in the past and so good to see him actually having one. 50k cheaper and he's a lock, interesting option at his price.

Wardlaw - Strong role, played solidly, definitely was defensively oriented, even borderline tagging Steele at times. I don't personally think he's fantasy relevant outside draft formats.

Stephens - Same old, has found himself stereotyped as a winger which is odd given he's really bad at that position. Had hoped he might find a role that suits him at NM but doesn't look like it.

Goater - Played really solidly. I think there's better options but he should score decently.

Tucker - On a wing, one of those rare left footers who just can't kick, he even had a right foot kick that looked more natural than his left does... Clarko seems to think he's best 22, I don't get it.

Xerri - Ratio stacks up, was poor in DT compared to how it felt (I guess 4 FA hurts) but I thought he soundly beat Marshall in the ruck and perhaps more importantly he abused Owens and Caminiti when he got the chance. He played really well and definitely think he's an option this year, just so awkwardly priced.

Zurhaar - Exclusively forward from what I saw.

Duursma - His role is toxic (in this team) but god he played well. He had two huge contested marks, one that would have ended with a goal, not paid by the umpires because AFL umpiring gonna AFL umpire so probably should have had a ton but honestly this could be the best game he plays all year in that role. Playing HF in a bad team is a hard role to score consistently in. If he was 123k then he'd be a very strong option but at his price, it's a harder sell. He should play though and be an option for us. I think he's probably better left as the bailout to all the other options than the primary option but he looks really good. A lot tougher than his brother by the looks of it so that's a positive.

McKercher - I don't mean this an insult but he reminds me a lot of Tom Scully who was of course an outstanding fantasy rookie back in the day before his heart stopped working and he shirked his way out of the league, McKercher doesn't have the latter issue though which is great. His role was fantastic, took some kick-ins had a mare actually using it today but he's an elite talent in that area and I wouldn't expect that to be an ongoing issue, actually shocked his DE% was 72 and he only had 3 clangers, I'm not sure any of his kicks went to a NM player so it was surprising to see that high. Doesn't really matter, elite talent in that role is a lock, can only hope this game scares away a few people.

BIGGIE Nyuon - I somewhat jokingly put him in my draft team but he might actually end up staying there. This is the hard one, with no Corr, Logue or McDonald it's so hard to work out who their KPD will be. Logue almost certainly out long enough to not be a factor but Corr will push someone out. Nyuon played great and more importantly showed some potential as an intercept player. NM looked absolutely woeful whenever Ziebell wasn't there to play 3rd tall last year as none of their defenders provide any intercept, Fisher and McKercher are not going to help that, so if Biggie can offer that he's great value. Definitely on the watch list, this will be on the higher end of his scoring range but he even took a kick-in or two and was just rock solid and got better as game progressed.

Powell - Role was good, pretty pure centreman, but he just didn't get into the game, dropped several marks and just wasted the chance. Still will watch but like Duursma, feels better left as a potential bailout right now than the primary option in his price range.

Dawson - Was comfortably the worst of the 3 KPD, at 180k he's the worst for fantasy so would be ideal if Corr replaced him rather than the other two cheapies. He wasn't bad, he just wasn't as good as the other two and even at 180k I don't really see a strong option as he doesn't really do anything fantasy wise.

Phillips - Came on for Simpkin which shows his spot in pecking order. Like Powell his role was great but he just can't seem to develop to the AFL level. Has definitely been one of the biggest surprises that he hasn't translated anything to AFL level, he was that good at junior level.

LDU - Motions, going through them completely. Role strong, pushed forward late in 3rd and went even more through the motions if possible. Probably the ideal game for those who want to pick him as you've definitely emptied your bandwagon.

Pink - Really solid game. Didn't make any mistakes, provided a couple of help acts to other defenders. He's as pure a bench only rookie type as you'll get but he's that good solid 6-8 week burner that we all need. Would expect the 70 is also on the higher end of his range. He's probably the most like for like with Corr though so they've got a decision there. I like Reid more and it feels to me there's enough back rookies to probably not need a second pure benchy but he's there and can bailout any other rookie at least if we don't need him at round 1.

Simpkin - KOed towards the end of Q1, was playing pure HF to that point, a high HF role to be fair but pure HF. Definitely seems that's his role moving forward which makes sense with the kids coming through and him having shown his ceiling isn't high enough.
 
Joined
18 Jul 2016
Messages
3,779
Likes
26,307
AFL Club
Sydney
Saints - Solid enough from them. Cashed in on the wind, cashed in on NM not trying in Q1 when they had it. Serious issues stopping the Kangas when they got a run on in the 3rd though and they remain a team that I think is going to have to overachieve significantly again if they're to play finals. To me they're a bottom 6 list so Lyon has a real challenge. Even more so than North, their injuries make all of this a nightmare. Sinclair, Crouch, Windhager, Butler and Clark is probably the 5 names I'd pick to remove if I wanted to make analysing their team impossible, basically all the swingmen and lynchpin types...

Byrnes - Played HB/Wing in first half, went onto the ball in the 2nd half after Phillipou pulled up stumps. He's a tryer, a guy you want in that 20-28 spot on the list.

Bonner - Great role off HB. Example one of the Windhager/Sinclair/Clark (WSM) group making things impossible. He played so well he's there round 1 and Webster further aided (perhaps hinders in role though) the JS. He's at an awfully tempting price for what he could produce, mid only but he's always scored well at Port when playing HB. Plenty of mid options already but he's got 150k in him with a good run.

Owens - Similar role to last year. Sneaky good option after another preseason given how hard he faded last year that can only help. Be a gutsy pick but he's probably in the best few forward options after byes and injuries are factored in. Didn't really do anything special today and yet, 90 is on the board.

Marshall - Smashed in the ruck, couple of blood rules hurt his TOG a bit, still scored solidly. He's a known quantity. Durability is his issue and if it doesn't flare up he's in the top tier of rucks. So good around the ground.

NWM - It felt like he was far more prolific than his actual scores. Another pure WSM question, he's obviously in the best 22 but where are the others playing and how much will they impact his targeting. He's still a really sneaky premium option, especially if Sinclair with the dreaded calf were to miss substantial time, fwiw Sinclair spoke at I think it was 3QT and it sure sounded like r3 was the likely return date.

Wilson - The big takeaway for me in this game. Lock him in if you hadn't already. Elite runner that actually uses it to get to the right places. I dare say he'll have several tackles a game in the real stuff although 10 marks is definitely on the very, very high end of expectations. Played a pure HF role and just works to contests, puts fantastic pressure at ground level, just a whirlwind of a player. Similar physically to Max Holmes only seems to have traded a step of pace (and only a step) for elite endurance to keep doing it over and over. I'm not sold you want to field him as similar to Duursma, his role isn't great in a side that I personally don't think is very good, but he's an excellent bench rookie to potential starter level. This will probably be his top score this season but wouldn't shock me if it wasn't given the workrate that flashed.

Steele - Not as motiony as LDU but pretty motiony also, which makes the score all the more impressive. Most importantly, tape free and moving well. He was already on every radar and don't think he's done that any harm. Lot of value potentially here. I don't love not having Crouch there though as I still think he's lowkey the achilles heel to Steele's scoring, he just snipes enough touches/tackles/etc to lower the floor consistently. His body has been the bigger issue but I don't love that factor.

Schoenmaker - Solid game, playing mostly as a floating defender he did some nice things. The Howard injury definitely opens a door for him albeit in a more lockdown role. I think he's got much better scoring potential than the Reid/Pink types but the JS would be shaky at best, albeit if he can play well enough his kicking is a huge asset over the Howard option who is a liability with the ball. Webster suspension length could also come in to play. Of course the WSM part is also a question.

Henry - Played pure HF. Not fantasy relevant in that role I don't think.

Ross - I don't know who he has pictures of but pure midfield role continues. His AFL career has continued for a solid 4 years longer than it should have. Looks like he will continue to eat a prime fantasy role while not really doing anything at an AFL level. He'd be a really solid VFL depth guy but the fact he's in their starting midfield rotation is just a wow factor.

Wilkie - Such a good player.

Wood - Pure wing. Same as last year.

Stocker - Played HB, feels like he's well behind Bonner and NWM and would be one of the first out for Sinclair.

Phillipou - Love to know why he didn't play the 2nd half, didn't hear anything in the broadcast, but he had an ideal role (pure midfield) and was playing fantastic. Might be a blessing in disguise for the suckers like me that are very strongly considering him as most will exit stage right, now. I thought he was brilliant. The Bont comparison's really are hard to ignore with him the way he combines an extreme left foot with excellent clearance work. Just looked bigger, stronger and more composed and he did that score without really using it all that well, which isn't an area I'm concerned about with him. This is the one where the Crouch, Windhager, Sinclair and Clark questions all come in. He's considerably more talented than all of them except maybe Sinclair but will they get the role ahead of him because he can play elsewhere or do they just go with the best guy and deal with it. I know what I'd do but him only playing a half raises the "we've seen enough, ice him" or "he's not playing there anyway, lets run some others" question. He'd be a really gutsy pick but I reckon he's the highest upside player under 300k in the forwards (except for maybe Sexton who is a total lock anyway). If he got the role, he can go 100+ in it, such is his talent level. God this is a lot for a 42 :LOL:

Garcia - I really liked his game. Nice left boot on him, goes hard at it. Feels like he gets pushed out by all the guys missing first of all, but could be a decent mid season target if he breaks in. There's much safer options even if there round 1, imo. Textbook 7th mid playing as the 5th mid because a couple of guys are missing but showed plenty and looks to have a future.

Howard - Did a hamstring very late, looked the classic 2-4 type.

Webster - Will have a nice holiday for a late bump. Would guess it's a 4+ type. Picking a guy with a bad concussion history just makes it even stupider as the consequences are just elevated.

King - Did some nice things, no where near enough effort level to consider for fantasy purposes. So much talent, I wonder if he's ever going to start to try and extract it.

Collard - Pure forward pocket, terrible role, very punchable head as well. Did very little in a half. Wouldn't expect to see him early on and wouldn't expect him to score well even if we do. Let it go through to the keeper, there's better options.
 
Joined
18 Jul 2016
Messages
3,779
Likes
26,307
AFL Club
Sydney
Gee Zac Fisher feels like a trap. Feels like the type of pre-season game that would suit him well. TBH I feel like it's between him and Fyfe for F1 which nearly makes me vomit in my mouth just saying out loud.
I feel like judging the rebounding half back Zac Fisher via the, admittedly, very flaky forward Zac Fisher is a bad move.

No different to the likes of Ziebell, Baker, Houli (perhaps the best like for like), Lloyd, Coleman and oh so many others who don't score very well in other positions but that one perfectly suits them.

I get it, he was a squib at Carlton but he's had two 95+ games in the role for them last year and goes to a team that will see a LOT of ball down back and has produced in the first hitout.

Also, the forwards are so bloody awful this year.

Also, why not Fyfe and Fisher as F1 and F2 ;) What kind of hamstring related calf injury could possibly go wrong?
 
Joined
12 Jan 2014
Messages
3,765
Likes
11,768
AFL Club
West Coast
Saints - Solid enough from them. Cashed in on the wind, cashed in on NM not trying in Q1 when they had it. Serious issues stopping the Kangas when they got a run on in the 3rd though and they remain a team that I think is going to have to overachieve significantly again if they're to play finals. To me they're a bottom 6 list so Lyon has a real challenge. Even more so than North, their injuries make all of this a nightmare. Sinclair, Crouch, Windhager, Butler and Clark is probably the 5 names I'd pick to remove if I wanted to make analysing their team impossible, basically all the swingmen and lynchpin types...

Byrnes - Played HB/Wing in first half, went onto the ball in the 2nd half after Phillipou pulled up stumps. He's a tryer, a guy you want in that 20-28 spot on the list.

Bonner - Great role off HB. Example one of the Windhager/Sinclair/Clark (WSM) group making things impossible. He played so well he's there round 1 and Webster further aided (perhaps hinders in role though) the JS. He's at an awfully tempting price for what he could produce, mid only but he's always scored well at Port when playing HB. Plenty of mid options already but he's got 150k in him with a good run.

Owens - Similar role to last year. Sneaky good option after another preseason given how hard he faded last year that can only help. Be a gutsy pick but he's probably in the best few forward options after byes and injuries are factored in. Didn't really do anything special today and yet, 90 is on the board.

Marshall - Smashed in the ruck, couple of blood rules hurt his TOG a bit, still scored solidly. He's a known quantity. Durability is his issue and if it doesn't flare up he's in the top tier of rucks. So good around the ground.

NWM - It felt like he was far more prolific than his actual scores. Another pure WSM question, he's obviously in the best 22 but where are the others playing and how much will they impact his targeting. He's still a really sneaky premium option, especially if Sinclair with the dreaded calf were to miss substantial time, fwiw Sinclair spoke at I think it was 3QT and it sure sounded like r3 was the likely return date.

Wilson - The big takeaway for me in this game. Lock him in if you hadn't already. Elite runner that actually uses it to get to the right places. I dare say he'll have several tackles a game in the real stuff although 10 marks is definitely on the very, very high end of expectations. Played a pure HF role and just works to contests, puts fantastic pressure at ground level, just a whirlwind of a player. Similar physically to Max Holmes only seems to have traded a step of pace (and only a step) for elite endurance to keep doing it over and over. I'm not sold you want to field him as similar to Duursma, his role isn't great in a side that I personally don't think is very good, but he's an excellent bench rookie to potential starter level. This will probably be his top score this season but wouldn't shock me if it wasn't given the workrate that flashed.

Steele - Not as motiony as LDU but pretty motiony also, which makes the score all the more impressive. Most importantly, tape free and moving well. He was already on every radar and don't think he's done that any harm. Lot of value potentially here. I don't love not having Crouch there though as I still think he's lowkey the achilles heel to Steele's scoring, he just snipes enough touches/tackles/etc to lower the floor consistently. His body has been the bigger issue but I don't love that factor.

Schoenmaker - Solid game, playing mostly as a floating defender he did some nice things. The Howard injury definitely opens a door for him albeit in a more lockdown role. I think he's got much better scoring potential than the Reid/Pink types but the JS would be shaky at best, albeit if he can play well enough his kicking is a huge asset over the Howard option who is a liability with the ball. Webster suspension length could also come in to play. Of course the WSM part is also a question.

Henry - Played pure HF. Not fantasy relevant in that role I don't think.

Ross - I don't know who he has pictures of but pure midfield role continues. His AFL career has continued for a solid 4 years longer than it should have. Looks like he will continue to eat a prime fantasy role while not really doing anything at an AFL level. He'd be a really solid VFL depth guy but the fact he's in their starting midfield rotation is just a wow factor.

Wilkie - Such a good player.

Wood - Pure wing. Same as last year.

Stocker - Played HB, feels like he's well behind Bonner and NWM and would be one of the first out for Sinclair.

Phillipou - Love to know why he didn't play the 2nd half, didn't hear anything in the broadcast, but he had an ideal role (pure midfield) and was playing fantastic. Might be a blessing in disguise for the suckers like me that are very strongly considering him as most will exit stage right, now. I thought he was brilliant. The Bont comparison's really are hard to ignore with him the way he combines an extreme left foot with excellent clearance work. Just looked bigger, stronger and more composed and he did that score without really using it all that well, which isn't an area I'm concerned about with him. This is the one where the Crouch, Windhager, Sinclair and Clark questions all come in. He's considerably more talented than all of them except maybe Sinclair but will they get the role ahead of him because he can play elsewhere or do they just go with the best guy and deal with it. I know what I'd do but him only playing a half raises the "we've seen enough, ice him" or "he's not playing there anyway, lets run some others" question. He'd be a really gutsy pick but I reckon he's the highest upside player under 300k in the forwards (except for maybe Sexton who is a total lock anyway). If he got the role, he can go 100+ in it, such is his talent level. God this is a lot for a 42 :LOL:

Garcia - I really liked his game. Nice left boot on him, goes hard at it. Feels like he gets pushed out by all the guys missing first of all, but could be a decent mid season target if he breaks in. There's much safer options even if there round 1, imo. Textbook 7th mid playing as the 5th mid because a couple of guys are missing but showed plenty and looks to have a future.

Howard - Did a hamstring very late, looked the classic 2-4 type.

Webster - Will have a nice holiday for a late bump. Would guess it's a 4+ type. Picking a guy with a bad concussion history just makes it even stupider as the consequences are just elevated.

King - Did some nice things, no where near enough effort level to consider for fantasy purposes. So much talent, I wonder if he's ever going to start to try and extract it.

Collard - Pure forward pocket, terrible role, very punchable head as well. Did very little in a half. Wouldn't expect to see him early on and wouldn't expect him to score well even if we do. Let it go through to the keeper, there's better options.

Welcome back. The lure of SC is a like drug. I can stop anytime I like, but......
 
Top