Discussion 2025: AFL SuperCoach Discussion - OPEN
- Thread starter freowho
- Start date
Amazing analysis @freowho, much kudos 
Just on Bont, he is the most reliable VC/Capt option every week & is so durable - rarely misses a game/ can play through niggles.
Average of 126.4 last year & 129.7 the previous year - to me he is the modern day GAJ. Just has the perfect SC game & champion data love him.
No early bye & just 1 bye overall in round 12 - that ticks another box for me when looking at super premiums.
First 4 games are v North, Collingwood, Carlton & Freo
Last 3 v North :- 123,157 + 169
Last 3 v Coll :- 186,123 +125
Last 3 v Carl :- 108, 112 + 105
Last 3 v Freo :- 162, 102 + 114 (scored 182 4th last game v Freo btw)
So his record v the teams he plays to start the season is excellent, Carlton the only one that is slighty unders.
Just on Bont, he is the most reliable VC/Capt option every week & is so durable - rarely misses a game/ can play through niggles.
Average of 126.4 last year & 129.7 the previous year - to me he is the modern day GAJ. Just has the perfect SC game & champion data love him.
No early bye & just 1 bye overall in round 12 - that ticks another box for me when looking at super premiums.
First 4 games are v North, Collingwood, Carlton & Freo
Last 3 v North :- 123,157 + 169
Last 3 v Coll :- 186,123 +125
Last 3 v Carl :- 108, 112 + 105
Last 3 v Freo :- 162, 102 + 114 (scored 182 4th last game v Freo btw)
So his record v the teams he plays to start the season is excellent, Carlton the only one that is slighty unders.
- Joined
- 17 Apr 2013
- Messages
- 1,444
- Likes
- 2,998
Jayden Short is a hot commodity currently in fantasy circles, I'm a more lukewarm on him but think he's definitely in consideration. One big issue for me is he's had repeated soft tissue injuries the last few years.
I will be looking at all of the Richmond defenders in the pre-season, would be negligent not to, even left-field ones like Nick Vlastuin (who will get some kick ins and unlike Short is an intercept marker).
Obviously they also have the rookies and rookie priced players like Josh Gibcus, whose recovery status I'm not that up to date on.
I will be looking at all of the Richmond defenders in the pre-season, would be negligent not to, even left-field ones like Nick Vlastuin (who will get some kick ins and unlike Short is an intercept marker).
Obviously they also have the rookies and rookie priced players like Josh Gibcus, whose recovery status I'm not that up to date on.
- Joined
- 17 Apr 2013
- Messages
- 1,444
- Likes
- 2,998
Obv the issue is you pick him partially on his bye then find out he's basically played 3 byes before his real one because of injury. The enticement is there though as you imply, especially when you look at Yeo's and McGovern's output from last season as starters, albeit in fairly different roles (outside of kick in duties that McGovern and Short had last season).
- Joined
- 19 Jun 2013
- Messages
- 1,357
- Likes
- 3,838
- AFL Club
- Carlton
He will be worth looking at if these numbers hold true or go up a tick. He score consistently higher in the second half of the season once Rioli was taking less kick-ins but that could just be coincidence. I thought there was talk last year that they were going to reduce the points awarded for kick ins this year. Or, did I just dream that in hope (in all the weeks I went without Ryan in my team haha).
Amazing analysis @freowho, much kudos
Just on Bont, he is the most reliable VC/Capt option every week & is so durable - rarely misses a game/ can play through niggles.
Average of 126.4 last year & 129.7 the previous year - to me he is the modern day GAJ. Just has the perfect SC game & champion data love him.
No early bye & just 1 bye overall in round 12 - that ticks another box for me when looking at super premiums.
First 4 games are v North, Collingwood, Carlton & Freo
Last 3 v North :- 123,157 + 169
Last 3 v Coll :- 186,123 +125
Last 3 v Carl :- 108, 112 + 105
Last 3 v Freo :- 162, 102 + 114 (scored 182 4th last game v Freo btw)
So his record v the teams he plays to start the season is excellent, Carlton the only one that is slighty unders.
Just on Bont, he is the most reliable VC/Capt option every week & is so durable - rarely misses a game/ can play through niggles.
Average of 126.4 last year & 129.7 the previous year - to me he is the modern day GAJ. Just has the perfect SC game & champion data love him.
No early bye & just 1 bye overall in round 12 - that ticks another box for me when looking at super premiums.
First 4 games are v North, Collingwood, Carlton & Freo
Last 3 v North :- 123,157 + 169
Last 3 v Coll :- 186,123 +125
Last 3 v Carl :- 108, 112 + 105
Last 3 v Freo :- 162, 102 + 114 (scored 182 4th last game v Freo btw)
So his record v the teams he plays to start the season is excellent, Carlton the only one that is slighty unders.
Flanders is exactly this and its the reason I'm not stashing 140k and converting McKercher to him. I'll be interested to see the ownership %'ages of both Bont & Flanders when it opens.
Flanders went on a 600k+ run of over 10 weeks to finish last season so those thinking they'll just bring him in might be paying up in trades.
Also, Flanders's initial starting fixture is:
Eagles, BYE, Dees, Crows, North, Tigers.
I'm not missing those matchups.
Flanders went on a 600k+ run of over 10 weeks to finish last season so those thinking they'll just bring him in might be paying up in trades.
Also, Flanders's initial starting fixture is:
Eagles, BYE, Dees, Crows, North, Tigers.
I'm not missing those matchups.
Agree entirely on the 400k. You're effectively sacrificing trades to try and catch up on early points sacrificed.
Magic number is 4389 this year. So you're sacrificing 74.2 points per round until you deploy that money, most will use ~3 trades in rounds 2/3, so you probably can only really deploy those trades in round 4 or 5, and have to have done it by round 6 or you're no longer making back ground. If you don't use it until round 4 you'd be basically 300 points down, I just can't see a situation where 4 rounds extra information is going to get you that much better knowledge, the amount of guys you'd target at round 4 that end up reverting to the mean as opposed to sustaining is very high, think a Rowell last year as a classic example.
To me the starting team and maximising points from it is way too important to leave that many points on the board, especially when everyone is effectively getting their worst score wiped out each round on top of loopholes. You've got to be in it to win it and this feels like a strategy that handicaps you significantly with minimal advantage.
To me, a few weeks information isn't enough. Just looking at 4 guys I remember who had cracking starts to last year in Serong, Rowell, Heeney and Tom Green, you'd have got a 111.25, 98.74, 111.53 and 101.5 average from round 4 onwards if you jumped on them, now Heeney probably still a win price wise but given he was a round 0 flyer, you had a pretty good shot at getting him anyway. You'd probably have been dumping a Nic Martin, LDU, Brayshaw, Treloar or Dunkley type that started poorly to grab them and you'd have cost yourself significant points by doing it. It's just a really small sample size to be willingly sacrificing 75 points a week to gamble on.
Just think you're way better gambling on your starting team and using a boost to fix it, especially this year where the flex position makes the correction far easier. This year you can gamble on a 350k MID but you can bail out into any other position through the FLEX, you don't need to have DPP setup to try and create the contingency plan. It's definitely going to make midprice options more juicy.
Absolutely could be a good pick. I worry that more midfield time means more hack kicks. A lot of his better games in 2023 were where he actually played more forward and was kicking goals, for a bad kick he's surprisingly good at goal and at least points are only ineffective rather than clangers.
He can definitely brute force a score though and you're spot on with the midfield, they're paper thin there. Definitely on the watch list to see if he looks fit.
Injury history is more concerning then you're letting on though. Shoulders, concussions and back issues are all potentially recurring problems and when you've had multiple collision injuries, it does become a worrying trend in and of itself. The odd/even year injury pattern sure is something though. Missed 0 games across the last 3 "odd" years and 25 games across the last 3 even years, the DT/SC correlation to "being healthy" is also startling with 110/102 in odd and 88/87.5 in even.
The byes are a genuine nightmare this year.
Round 13 with Freo and Saints is great but they severely overlap in defense where there is genuinely 4 of the best options and then two rucks. Even mids with Steele and the three Freo boys. Saints also loaded in forward bargain bin. Even this bye is dangerous though because there are almost too many great options and it could become a problem, albeit the best round to have the problem.
Round 14 has only Richmond with genuine starting options, I guess also Mills from Sydney. Round 2 and 3 byes do open up the trade options but even then you're left with basically Daicos, Flanders and Heeney as top options across all positions. Maybe some of Anderson, Rowell, Blakey and similar can also put their hands up. Still can see this being a pretty light bye.
Round 15 has some options with Adelaide, WCE and Melbourne but basically there's Gawn, Rankine and Flynn and then you've just got a bunch of midfielders, all of whom have genuine questions on them. Hawthorn are similarly basically a forward and a horde of midfield questions and Sicily down back, who may well be cheap enough to start despite the bye but has a gazillion questions around role and how much a new backline impacts him.
Round 16 has maybe Stewart, Ashcroft and Coleman as starting options. I might be missing someone else but it's incredibly thin. The round 3/4 bye will open them up in upgrade season but it's pretty risky to be planning on getting guys from that bye, the bye issue leads to sub-optimal trade targets being used for bye balance or completely tilting the bye balance out of whack. This bye at least is highly avoidable, so targeting this bye has that bonus.
Then there is round 12... the unavoidable bye is the one with all 4 teams live at round 1, basically the best value and super premium option at every line and even some good rookies. It's the one bye that's dreadful to overload and yet it's by far the bye that makes sense to overload purely on players.
Magic number is 4389 this year. So you're sacrificing 74.2 points per round until you deploy that money, most will use ~3 trades in rounds 2/3, so you probably can only really deploy those trades in round 4 or 5, and have to have done it by round 6 or you're no longer making back ground. If you don't use it until round 4 you'd be basically 300 points down, I just can't see a situation where 4 rounds extra information is going to get you that much better knowledge, the amount of guys you'd target at round 4 that end up reverting to the mean as opposed to sustaining is very high, think a Rowell last year as a classic example.
To me the starting team and maximising points from it is way too important to leave that many points on the board, especially when everyone is effectively getting their worst score wiped out each round on top of loopholes. You've got to be in it to win it and this feels like a strategy that handicaps you significantly with minimal advantage.
To me, a few weeks information isn't enough. Just looking at 4 guys I remember who had cracking starts to last year in Serong, Rowell, Heeney and Tom Green, you'd have got a 111.25, 98.74, 111.53 and 101.5 average from round 4 onwards if you jumped on them, now Heeney probably still a win price wise but given he was a round 0 flyer, you had a pretty good shot at getting him anyway. You'd probably have been dumping a Nic Martin, LDU, Brayshaw, Treloar or Dunkley type that started poorly to grab them and you'd have cost yourself significant points by doing it. It's just a really small sample size to be willingly sacrificing 75 points a week to gamble on.
Just think you're way better gambling on your starting team and using a boost to fix it, especially this year where the flex position makes the correction far easier. This year you can gamble on a 350k MID but you can bail out into any other position through the FLEX, you don't need to have DPP setup to try and create the contingency plan. It's definitely going to make midprice options more juicy.
Absolutely could be a good pick. I worry that more midfield time means more hack kicks. A lot of his better games in 2023 were where he actually played more forward and was kicking goals, for a bad kick he's surprisingly good at goal and at least points are only ineffective rather than clangers.
He can definitely brute force a score though and you're spot on with the midfield, they're paper thin there. Definitely on the watch list to see if he looks fit.
Injury history is more concerning then you're letting on though. Shoulders, concussions and back issues are all potentially recurring problems and when you've had multiple collision injuries, it does become a worrying trend in and of itself. The odd/even year injury pattern sure is something though. Missed 0 games across the last 3 "odd" years and 25 games across the last 3 even years, the DT/SC correlation to "being healthy" is also startling with 110/102 in odd and 88/87.5 in even.
The byes are a genuine nightmare this year.
Round 13 with Freo and Saints is great but they severely overlap in defense where there is genuinely 4 of the best options and then two rucks. Even mids with Steele and the three Freo boys. Saints also loaded in forward bargain bin. Even this bye is dangerous though because there are almost too many great options and it could become a problem, albeit the best round to have the problem.
Round 14 has only Richmond with genuine starting options, I guess also Mills from Sydney. Round 2 and 3 byes do open up the trade options but even then you're left with basically Daicos, Flanders and Heeney as top options across all positions. Maybe some of Anderson, Rowell, Blakey and similar can also put their hands up. Still can see this being a pretty light bye.
Round 15 has some options with Adelaide, WCE and Melbourne but basically there's Gawn, Rankine and Flynn and then you've just got a bunch of midfielders, all of whom have genuine questions on them. Hawthorn are similarly basically a forward and a horde of midfield questions and Sicily down back, who may well be cheap enough to start despite the bye but has a gazillion questions around role and how much a new backline impacts him.
Round 16 has maybe Stewart, Ashcroft and Coleman as starting options. I might be missing someone else but it's incredibly thin. The round 3/4 bye will open them up in upgrade season but it's pretty risky to be planning on getting guys from that bye, the bye issue leads to sub-optimal trade targets being used for bye balance or completely tilting the bye balance out of whack. This bye at least is highly avoidable, so targeting this bye has that bonus.
Then there is round 12... the unavoidable bye is the one with all 4 teams live at round 1, basically the best value and super premium option at every line and even some good rookies. It's the one bye that's dreadful to overload and yet it's by far the bye that makes sense to overload purely on players.
Honestly, have absolutely no idea here. New coach makes it even harder to predict, it's always really hard when a long serving assistant takes over, does he stick a game plan that works in the regular season fairly well but fails in pressure finals consistently, does he do his own thing? Part of Mills' decline the last two years was the tweaks that Horse did make to the game plan in response to the annihilation by Geelong where the ball was moved longer and a more chaotic and stoppage based game was played, couple with injuries and it crushed his scoring.
Trying to work out Sydney's best 22 is very difficult. Our three best midfielders are clearly Mills, Gulden and Heeney when fit but Horse always hated playing any of them there and never played all of them there as he has never valued midfield in his entire time at the club and prefers to put the best players in peripheral roles and go with grunts in the middle. Cox obviously played in a team that went with the complete opposite approach and Sydney absolutely should be designed more on that Eagles team than how Horse has arranged it for the last few years so that's the big question. Does Rowbottom have compromising pictures of Cox like he obviously did Horse to be played as a #1 midfielder over vastly superior players? Will the Taylor Adams disaster continue? Will we insist on wasting our best forward in Papley for short bursts that our midfield can do just as well or better?
Genuinely have no idea, Cox has never spoken much on things he might do differently, was just a good company man of this is how we play and Horse is in charge. The Horse/Cox pair are pretty famous for Cox sitting there copping abuse from Horse, is that because Cox suggested better ideas to Horse and was being told to butt out or was it just because he knew Cox agreed entirely and was happy to be the release valve we all need some times?
Looking at the best 22 for mine it looks something like this:
B: Cunningham Melican Rampe
HB: Blakey McCartin Florent
W: Gulden Heeney McInerney
HF: Papley McDonald Jordon
F: McLean Amartey Hayward
R: Grundy Warner Mills
Int from: Lloyd Roberts Campbell Sheldrick Cleary Rowbottom Fox Adams Paton Wicks (this is more or less in the order that I would pick them)
I don't expect any of the rookies to be relevant but you never know. If we went with that lineup, Mills is a lock pick.
I think that in that side Cunningham is the guy that doesn't really belong but he's a great team man. Mills absolutely could play that spot but I think you should budget a similar drop in output to what Lloyd has had the last couple of years from what Mills put up, those two would chip a lot when they were there together, Blakey, Florent and Gulden/McInerney pushing back do not, nor does Heeney or Warner as midfield play through options. Unless our style becomes substantially slower, I'd be budgeting for high 80s to low 90s if Mills plays defense.
Then of course he could also play forward, which is basically the role he played last year and I think the scoring is more or less in line.
Finally there's the injury problem. Has had just about body part fail him at this point so it's a major issue, not a huge factor if he's playing midfield and averaging close to 110 but if he's playing defense and only a 90 guy, the price rise is going to need him to stay on the field. I'm not sure he's cheap enough to ignore the bye either if he's not playing midfield.
The big problem is Rowbottom seems to be irrationally highly rated internally and while I love his grunt, he's just not got AFL level football skills outside of grunt and Mills can bring all that grunt with sublime ball usage, but that immense quality difference wasn't enough for Heeney, Mills, Warner or Gulden to play midfield ahead of Rowbottom last year under Horse so there needs to be a clear focus on putting our best midfielders in the guts from Cox, such as Rowbottom being #1 for the reserves where he belongs or learning to play forward where his grunt would be great and the lack of class less pronounced, before I'm really interested in Mills. He's not been good on a wing or as a forward. He's far too slow, he can use his brain behind the ball to position and intercept and the ball usage is very valuable and he's a hard nut with class as a mid and with Heeney, Gulden and Warner we can cover the lack of speed comfortably.
But yeah, for mine right now he's a mid tier watchlist option that could elevate to must have if the tealeaves align in the preseason or fall off entirely if they don't. I want to be optimistic but honestly I'd have liked a brand new coach not indoctrinated in Horseball of sacrifice the midfield at all costs.
The range is genuinely from 75-120 on him. Priced at 66, that's a 91 minimum target, with a round 0 bye making that more like 96. If you put a gun to my head right now I'd say that's less likely than likely but as a DEF, keeper threshold at his starting price is ~103 which is certainly possible and that's always a huge positive on a midprice pick.
I'm torn on Short. Bye works really well but would have liked those numbers to be a lot lower honestly. He was better back half of las t year as he got a bit fitter but he's racked up a few soft tissue injuries the past couple of years and he's never hit high enough to be a premium based on starting DEF averages this year even before any position changes that crop up. Would really need a 105 minimum from him.
He's capable for sure, the bad side could help or hinder him on this, maybe the side being decent limited supply but it also means rebound possessions are more likely in scoring chains getting those hidden bonus scaling points rolling in.
Definitely will watch preseason closely. It's genuinely hard to find who the Tigers midfielders are and he's been pretty good in that role in the past, not fantasy wise albeit not impossible he does cash it in if it happened, which also adds to the chances he's used there.
Very much watch list material for me.
Flanders with the r0 is a huge issue. He's a sloot but 130 average is such a huge ask in a midfield that already has a couple of other sloots in Miller and Anderson and a guy who takes all the tackles and contested pill in Rowell. Especially for a coach who has never had players put up great midfield numbers, last year was already easily the best a midfield has scored under Dimma.
Even more so given the r2 bye makes it so avoidable as part of the correction trades and at his price point it only takes a couple of decent 105 type scores for him to be 50k+ cheaper in round 5 and as good as he was last year, he was much more boom or bust as a midfielder with 5 of his 9 games under 115 coming in the last 9 rounds after moving midfield, he cancelled them out with a couple of monster scores to average the same across the two roles but he was much more consistent at HB.
I would expect that most would be not starting him and targeting as one of the first upgrades. Definitely could be wrong but that's my expectation.
Trying to work out Sydney's best 22 is very difficult. Our three best midfielders are clearly Mills, Gulden and Heeney when fit but Horse always hated playing any of them there and never played all of them there as he has never valued midfield in his entire time at the club and prefers to put the best players in peripheral roles and go with grunts in the middle. Cox obviously played in a team that went with the complete opposite approach and Sydney absolutely should be designed more on that Eagles team than how Horse has arranged it for the last few years so that's the big question. Does Rowbottom have compromising pictures of Cox like he obviously did Horse to be played as a #1 midfielder over vastly superior players? Will the Taylor Adams disaster continue? Will we insist on wasting our best forward in Papley for short bursts that our midfield can do just as well or better?
Genuinely have no idea, Cox has never spoken much on things he might do differently, was just a good company man of this is how we play and Horse is in charge. The Horse/Cox pair are pretty famous for Cox sitting there copping abuse from Horse, is that because Cox suggested better ideas to Horse and was being told to butt out or was it just because he knew Cox agreed entirely and was happy to be the release valve we all need some times?
Looking at the best 22 for mine it looks something like this:
B: Cunningham Melican Rampe
HB: Blakey McCartin Florent
W: Gulden Heeney McInerney
HF: Papley McDonald Jordon
F: McLean Amartey Hayward
R: Grundy Warner Mills
Int from: Lloyd Roberts Campbell Sheldrick Cleary Rowbottom Fox Adams Paton Wicks (this is more or less in the order that I would pick them)
I don't expect any of the rookies to be relevant but you never know. If we went with that lineup, Mills is a lock pick.
I think that in that side Cunningham is the guy that doesn't really belong but he's a great team man. Mills absolutely could play that spot but I think you should budget a similar drop in output to what Lloyd has had the last couple of years from what Mills put up, those two would chip a lot when they were there together, Blakey, Florent and Gulden/McInerney pushing back do not, nor does Heeney or Warner as midfield play through options. Unless our style becomes substantially slower, I'd be budgeting for high 80s to low 90s if Mills plays defense.
Then of course he could also play forward, which is basically the role he played last year and I think the scoring is more or less in line.
Finally there's the injury problem. Has had just about body part fail him at this point so it's a major issue, not a huge factor if he's playing midfield and averaging close to 110 but if he's playing defense and only a 90 guy, the price rise is going to need him to stay on the field. I'm not sure he's cheap enough to ignore the bye either if he's not playing midfield.
The big problem is Rowbottom seems to be irrationally highly rated internally and while I love his grunt, he's just not got AFL level football skills outside of grunt and Mills can bring all that grunt with sublime ball usage, but that immense quality difference wasn't enough for Heeney, Mills, Warner or Gulden to play midfield ahead of Rowbottom last year under Horse so there needs to be a clear focus on putting our best midfielders in the guts from Cox, such as Rowbottom being #1 for the reserves where he belongs or learning to play forward where his grunt would be great and the lack of class less pronounced, before I'm really interested in Mills. He's not been good on a wing or as a forward. He's far too slow, he can use his brain behind the ball to position and intercept and the ball usage is very valuable and he's a hard nut with class as a mid and with Heeney, Gulden and Warner we can cover the lack of speed comfortably.
But yeah, for mine right now he's a mid tier watchlist option that could elevate to must have if the tealeaves align in the preseason or fall off entirely if they don't. I want to be optimistic but honestly I'd have liked a brand new coach not indoctrinated in Horseball of sacrifice the midfield at all costs.
The range is genuinely from 75-120 on him. Priced at 66, that's a 91 minimum target, with a round 0 bye making that more like 96. If you put a gun to my head right now I'd say that's less likely than likely but as a DEF, keeper threshold at his starting price is ~103 which is certainly possible and that's always a huge positive on a midprice pick.
I'm torn on Short. Bye works really well but would have liked those numbers to be a lot lower honestly. He was better back half of las t year as he got a bit fitter but he's racked up a few soft tissue injuries the past couple of years and he's never hit high enough to be a premium based on starting DEF averages this year even before any position changes that crop up. Would really need a 105 minimum from him.
He's capable for sure, the bad side could help or hinder him on this, maybe the side being decent limited supply but it also means rebound possessions are more likely in scoring chains getting those hidden bonus scaling points rolling in.
Definitely will watch preseason closely. It's genuinely hard to find who the Tigers midfielders are and he's been pretty good in that role in the past, not fantasy wise albeit not impossible he does cash it in if it happened, which also adds to the chances he's used there.
Very much watch list material for me.
Flanders with the r0 is a huge issue. He's a sloot but 130 average is such a huge ask in a midfield that already has a couple of other sloots in Miller and Anderson and a guy who takes all the tackles and contested pill in Rowell. Especially for a coach who has never had players put up great midfield numbers, last year was already easily the best a midfield has scored under Dimma.
Even more so given the r2 bye makes it so avoidable as part of the correction trades and at his price point it only takes a couple of decent 105 type scores for him to be 50k+ cheaper in round 5 and as good as he was last year, he was much more boom or bust as a midfielder with 5 of his 9 games under 115 coming in the last 9 rounds after moving midfield, he cancelled them out with a couple of monster scores to average the same across the two roles but he was much more consistent at HB.
I would expect that most would be not starting him and targeting as one of the first upgrades. Definitely could be wrong but that's my expectation.
I had Short in my team for a while but the problem is that he has never ave 100 or more and tends to play his season in patches.
In 2023 he had a patch of 9 games mid season ave 104. In 2022 he started with a bang and after Rd 10 was ave 109 inc scores of 136 and 152. But then he faded. In 2021 started solid ave 101 after first 5 games then it becomes a mixed bag.
So I don’t think he is really a keeper and probably is best described as an expensive stepping stone if he starts with one of those runs.
In 2023 he had a patch of 9 games mid season ave 104. In 2022 he started with a bang and after Rd 10 was ave 109 inc scores of 136 and 152. But then he faded. In 2021 started solid ave 101 after first 5 games then it becomes a mixed bag.
So I don’t think he is really a keeper and probably is best described as an expensive stepping stone if he starts with one of those runs.