Discussion The Round 0 Knee Jerk

[The Banker]

I agree with you, I'm just wary of Gawn knowing what he's capable of but if he thinks he was worked over around the ground with Grundy, look out next week against English.

I think with Gawn score following on from the Darcy news, selecting Jackson just gives that little bit of breathing space on the R1 position short term.

There's some really good rucks that are low owned, namely English (assume this one is on the rise), Marshall and Briggs. Briggs can wipe off his bye early, but saying that, he does play West Coast so he loses some appeal by waiting.

If Gawn didn't start with a 70 then we aren't even having this conversation. He can still no doubt hurt non-owners with big scores as a highly owned player, but the window opened a little on not selecting him following on from R0 score. I suspect majority still go with him. I think I'll run the gauntlet.

 

[Rowsus]

Out: Fisher, Parish - hamstring concerns reported in injury thread.
In: Green, Jordon

Total changes:
Stewart ---> Howes
Fisher ---> Newcombe
Voss ---> Heeney
Parish ---> Green

Out: Newcombe
In: Flanders

Total changes:
Stewart ---> Howes
Fisher ---> Flanders
Voss ---> Heeney
Parish ---> Green

That puts the Fisher or Jordon problem back on the table.

 

[Chumpion]

He's barely more expensive than the rookies, who all have at least as much sub risk, and he's got proven scoring history of 100+, priced at 45 he only needs a 75 average. He's also proven he's capable of big scores which accelerate cash gains and has a 106 in his rolling average to start with.

As much as we're flooded with trades, can still only make a couple a week and r3 remains a vital round to maximise trades so saving one for him could be very limiting, a couple of injuries and you could miss the best cow there is.

I 100% agree with everything you've said with the sub/job security but I also completely get why people are picking him. I really like McKercher and Reid but they're only priced about 8-10 points cheaper than Lyons and I know if Lyons keeps that role he's going to score 90+.

The biggest problem with Lyons is he plays the very last game next week and you'd be basically locked into keepinig the cash to get Fyfe instead (assuming you don't have) as the only real bailout if he was the sub.

I also think the sub next week is pretty unlikely, I don't like that they play him because he only plays one role and it's at the expense of much better players but he had a really solid game and laying 9 tackles in a game where your team was embarrassingly soft is always a good starting point for another chance next week. Coleman injury also obviously moves them one run down their depth ladder as well.

Yeah totally get what you’re saying and there is a small case there, but $258k for a guy who was either subbed on or subbed off in all but 1 (I think?) game last year is pretty crazy. Reckon he has scapegoat written all over him, but also think he’s on super shaky ground. Won’t take much for him to slip to the sub or out altogether, and only takes 1 vest to destroy his cash gen chances.
Just think the other rookies who have sub risk are cheaper, or who are same price have better JS.
Just think it’s a pick you want to know the maximum information about and that means waiting till post bye.

 

[Santoz]

Touk out.
Flanders in the mids.

Look to shift Flanders forward in due time.

 

[Ben's Beasts]

Flanders and Sexton stay.

OUT: Williams
IN: Gibcus

I can’t go past a guy at 150k who can score 76 from 9 disposals. Nothing wrong with the Williams pick but I feel as though I can go without him with Gibcus and Howes at D5-D6.

 

[NT.Thunder]

So, haven't made too many changes nor taken much notice of the round 0 games but this is where I've settled

 

[Beg2Differ]

So, haven't made too many changes nor taken much notice of the round 0 games but this is where I've settled

View attachment 69001

I dare you.

 

[Rowsus]

So, haven't made too many changes nor taken much notice of the round 0 games but this is where I've settled

View attachment 69001

That team might have won the weekly this week!

 

[wogitalia]

So, haven't made too many changes nor taken much notice of the round 0 games but this is where I've settled

View attachment 69001

Might want to check the byes mate, think you've got a few too many in that r3 bye.

Otherwise looks good.

In seriousness, that team actually does look genuinely decent

 

[TBG]

Super surprised at some of the knee jerking to bring in Lyons. Massive sub risk and has a bye before his price changes anyway. If he scores well in R1 and is not the sub in R3 I could understand the narrative but to take him going into R1 is crazy!

If he scores well in round 1 with similar role to this week and isn't sub in round 3 I'll be thinking of bringing him in and playing on ground. Should make quick money and is a proven scorer. We just need him to stay in best 22 and I think he's good for 85+ every week which is take for a $250k mid.

 

[Chumpion]

If he scores well in round 1 with similar role to this week and isn't sub in round 3 I'll be thinking of bringing him in and playing on ground. Should make quick money and is a proven scorer. We just need him to stay in best 22 and I think he's good for 85+ every week which is take for a $250k mid.

Yeah absolutely.. in that scenario it’s a solid pick. Just a lot of hurdles he needs to overcome so just surprising how many are locking him in before his bye!

 

[Baglimit]

Yeah absolutely.. in that scenario it’s a solid pick. Just a lot of hurdles he needs to overcome so just surprising how many are locking him in before his bye!

Coleman down,Neale not tackling, Lyons wont be sub

 

[Rowsus]

Coleman down,Neale not tackling, Lyons wont be sub

While I agree Neale not tackling might be seen as some selection factor they try and overcome, the bottom line is, Neale had 2 Tackles, and his career average is 3.78. He's never been a big tackler.

 

[Baglimit]

While I agree Neale not tackling might be seen as some selection factor they try and overcome, the bottom line is, Neale had 2 Tackles, and his career average is 3.78. He's never been a big tackler.

Agree with that, but he is still down 50%. Maybe a 3rd Browlow?

 

[quite ironic]

He's barely more expensive than the rookies, who all have at least as much sub risk, and he's got proven scoring history of 100+, priced at 45 he only needs a 75 average. He's also proven he's capable of big scores which accelerate cash gains and has a 106 in his rolling average to start with.

As much as we're flooded with trades, can still only make a couple a week and r3 remains a vital round to maximise trades so saving one for him could be very limiting, a couple of injuries and you could miss the best cow there is.

I 100% agree with everything you've said with the sub/job security but I also completely get why people are picking him. I really like McKercher and Reid but they're only priced about 8-10 points cheaper than Lyons and I know if Lyons keeps that role he's going to score 90+.

The biggest problem with Lyons is he plays the very last game next week and you'd be basically locked into keepinig the cash to get Fyfe instead (assuming you don't have) as the only real bailout if he was the sub.

I also think the sub next week is pretty unlikely, I don't like that they play him because he only plays one role and it's at the expense of much better players but he had a really solid game and laying 9 tackles in a game where your team was embarrassingly soft is always a good starting point for another chance next week. Coleman injury also obviously moves them one run down their depth ladder as well.

Another factor is Lyons is taking Ashcroft’s midfield spot.
Ashcroft isn’t back until round 6 I think?

So Lyons could make 150k and you dump him before Ashcroft even comes back.

 

[Chumpion]

Another factor is Lyons is taking Ashcroft’s midfield spot.
Ashcroft isn’t back until round 6 I think?

So Lyons could make 150k and you dump him before Ashcroft even comes back.

If memory serves Lyons only played a couple of regular season games after Ashcrofts injury and both were sub affected. So not sure it’s as simple to say he’s got Ashcrofts spot as they preferred others last year when Ashcroft went down. He wasn’t obviously injured and was the sub a lot, so something significant would have needed to change for him to suddenly rocket into a consistent best 22 spot.

 

[quite ironic]

If memory serves Lyons only played a couple of regular season games after Ashcrofts injury and both were sub affected. So not sure it’s as simple to say he’s got Ashcrofts spot as they preferred others last year when Ashcroft went down. He wasn’t obviously injured and was the sub a lot, so something significant would have needed to change for him to suddenly rocket into a consistent best 22 spot.

I think you can arguably look at it differently when a player goes down from round 19-23 in a premiership contender where they’ve had a plan and structure all season.

But definitely agree it’s a risk to bring him in.

Just a different story from last year imo with Ashcroft known to be out for quite some time, Coleman out for a long time and very few midfielders due to come in to replace Lyons.

He is a risk to be dropped with a stinker but he also has potential to have a 30-40 point higher ceiling than the rookies priced 180-230k who don’t have locked in job security either.

Just because they were top picks doesn’t mean any of Reid (already mentioned he won’t play the full season), Hustwaite (arguably worse JS), Lazzarro (arguably equal JS and doesn’t have the scoring ceiling imo), Mckerchen (has JS but we don’t know his scoring potential), Sanders (not sold on him having great job security), Fyfe (injury history and sub risk), Mead (shaky JS), Windsor (scoring potential and JS?), Duursma (scoring output?), Watson (scoring output and JS?).

The rookies with far worse tanks at this point in their career have sub potential and shaky job security as we’ve seen many times, even if they were top picks.

He also doesn’t need to be a consistent best 22 all year lock. We literally only need him to play 5-6 games before Ashcroft is back and he’ll probably make more than a lot of rookies would across 8+ games.

Not saying he’s a lock but don’t see him as being a lot worse than any other 180-250k mid or forward priced player, given the scoring potential.

 

[Chumpion]

I think you can arguably look at it differently when a player goes down from round 19-23 in a premiership contender where they’ve had a plan and structure all season.

But definitely agree it’s a risk to bring him in.

Just a different story from last year imo with Ashcroft known to be out for quite some time, Coleman out for a long time and very few midfielders due to come in to replace Lyons.

He is a risk to be dropped with a stinker but he also has potential to have a 30-40 point higher ceiling than the rookies priced 180-230k who don’t have locked in job security either.

Just because they were top picks doesn’t mean any of Reid (already mentioned he won’t play the full season), Hustwaite (arguably worse JS), Lazzarro (arguably equal JS and doesn’t have the scoring ceiling imo), Mckerchen (has JS but we don’t know his scoring potential), Sanders (not sold on him having great job security), Fyfe (injury history and sub risk), Mead (shaky JS), Windsor (scoring potential and JS?), Duursma (scoring output?), Watson (scoring output and JS?).

The rookies with far worse tanks at this point in their career have sub potential and shaky job security as we’ve seen many times, even if they were top picks.

He also doesn’t need to be a consistent best 22 all year lock. We literally only need him to play 5-6 games before Ashcroft is back and he’ll probably make more than a lot of rookies would across 8+ games.

Not saying he’s a lock but don’t see him as being a lot worse than any other 180-250k mid or forward priced player, given the scoring potential.

Definitely not disagreeing he could be the best cash generator of the season, I just don’t understand bringing him in before round 1 given all the obvious risks and question marks. You get 1 game, then a bye, then the price rise. A lot can happen in that time so just doesn’t seem worth the risk. It’s an easy correction trade if he looks a must have but most rookies without a bye should outscore him over rounds 1-2 so it’s taking out some depth for minimal early return.
I’m just captaining team “wait and assess going into round 3”.

 

[quite ironic]

Definitely not disagreeing he could be the best cash generator of the season, I just don’t understand bringing him in before round 1 given all the obvious risks and question marks. You get 1 game, then a bye, then the price rise. A lot can happen in that time so just doesn’t seem worth the risk. It’s an easy correction trade if he looks a must have but most rookies without a bye should outscore him over rounds 1-2 so it’s taking out some depth for minimal early return.
I’m just captaining team “wait and assess going into round 3”.

Yep nothing wrong with that at all in my eyes.

If targeting him I’d just be making sure you have a strategy to have the coin (70-80k spare) to correct a poor scoring, injured or dropped 180k+ player (lazzaro, hustwaite, sanders, Fyfe, Reid).

I can slightly see not want to use a trade if someone does rate Lyons significantly higher than Lazzaro, Hustwaite, Roberts etc and their plan is to trade the failed one of those to Lyons after his bye.

Those keeping James Jordan if dropped, injured or a bad bye have an easy exit strategy if Lyons pops off next week and picked for round 3 though.

 

[quite ironic]

I suppose the other positive is if you were choosing him ahead of those 180-250k players, the round 2 bye means you don’t waste a correction trade if you’re confident in him over someone else 180-250k that you saw as likely to fail and does.

The no price rise hurts but I’d say with Coleman going down, most teams don’t have anyone except really Williams that has the same bye (Brisbane/Carlton) so fielding 18 that week isn’t impacted much either, just the job security and no price rise.