Opinion 2025: Player X v Player Y

[Chumpion]

The decision im currently struggling with is:

Horne-Francis & Sheldrick/Curtin
V
Parker & Peatling

I’m sure preseason games will ultimately make the decision for me but thought I should get people’s thoughts regardless.

I believe on natural improvement alone Horne-Francis should be able to get his average to a 105 average and dependent on role and if they’re best 22 I’m pretty bullish on Sheldrick 65-70ppg and to a lesser extent Curtain 62-68ppg.

Peatling is someone I’ve always been lukewarm on. He would’ve been recruited with the intent on playing predominately on ball and his numbers last year were good without being “must have” good.

92ppg - excluding his 7 sub affected games.
98ppg - for games where he had over 50% CBA’s

Assuming he goes 95-100 he should make some good coin and be much more consistent than a rookie each week!

Parker’s the one I’m really struggling to predict because I know he’s been training as a mid this preseason but come round one, surely he’s not taking many minutes away from the likes of LDU, Sheezel, Powell and McKercher, especially considering Simpkin will be rotating through as well and Wardlaw will come straight back in as well!

The question for me is, if Parker only gets 25-33% CBA’s would he still score enough to be a viable pick and with a weaker forward line and his price point, what is an “acceptable average”.

Thanks!

As someone who currently has the Peatling/Parker combo, here are my thoughts:

JHF - Very likely to be the number 1 forward and should average over 100. But reason I’m not starting him is I don’t think his price ever gets away from you. He’s prone to a bad score, and when he does his price will drop to either his current price or a little lower. I don’t think he hurts you too much not starting him and allows him to be grabbed at the best time.

Parker - I don’t see him as a keeper, but he’s a guy that can hit keeper levels and push a rookie off field, and forward rookies are traditionally the worst so not having many on field is always good. I see it as worst case, he plods along just above a mid rookie score level and I trade him for around his current price for a middling points return, best case he holds a good role and fills a F5/F6 role for the season at a bargain.

Peatling - I don’t think a guy leaves a potentially premiership contender for a mid pack team unless he’s pushed (he wasn’t) or he can get the role he needs to get paid. I definitely think it’s the latter, so now the question is, is he good enough to make the most of it? From what I saw last season I think yes.

 

[GrainFedBeef]

As someone who currently has the Peatling/Parker combo, here are my thoughts:

JHF - Very likely to be the number 1 forward and should average over 100. But reason I’m not starting him is I don’t think his price ever gets away from you. He’s prone to a bad score, and when he does his price will drop to either his current price or a little lower. I don’t think he hurts you too much not starting him and allows him to be grabbed at the best time.

Parker - I don’t see him as a keeper, but he’s a guy that can hit keeper levels and push a rookie off field, and forward rookies are traditionally the worst so not having many on field is always good. I see it as worst case, he plods along just above a mid rookie score level and I trade him for around his current price for a middling points return, best case he holds a good role and fills a F5/F6 role for the season at a bargain.

Peatling - I don’t think a guy leaves a potentially premiership contender for a mid pack team unless he’s pushed (he wasn’t) or he can get the role he needs to get paid. I definitely think it’s the latter, so now the question is, is he good enough to make the most of it? From what I saw last season I think yes.

Challenge is JHF is a likely premium, top 6 at end ofl season and getting more mid minutes giving upside as well, would be pure mid if he has the fitness.

Peatling will be excellent but at 100 he goes up $150k which is good but needs to be upgraded.

Parker could be a top 6, but likely not given age and may not make as much money as a sheldrick. Parker was 75% and 72% in 23 and 22 years pushing 103 and 96, then his scores were mixed when even at 40-50% CBA's in 2024.

 

[freowho]

Challenge is JHF is a likely premium, top 6 at end ofl season and getting more mid minutes giving upside as well, would be pure mid if he has the fitness.

Peatling will be excellent but at 100 he goes up $150k which is good but needs to be upgraded.

Parker could be a top 6, but likely not given age and may not make as much money as a sheldrick. Parker was 75% and 72% in 23 and 22 years pushing 103 and 96, then his scores were mixed when even at 40-50% CBA's in 2024.

I agree with you on Parker. Needs to be a first choice mid which you would think is unlikely. 33 this year. I don't think he is a bad pick, but probably just falls short of being a good pick.

 

[Chumpion]

Challenge is JHF is a likely premium, top 6 at end ofl season and getting more mid minutes giving upside as well, would be pure mid if he has the fitness.

Peatling will be excellent but at 100 he goes up $150k which is good but needs to be upgraded.

Parker could be a top 6, but likely not given age and may not make as much money as a sheldrick. Parker was 75% and 72% in 23 and 22 years pushing 103 and 96, then his scores were mixed when even at 40-50% CBA's in 2024.

Don’t disagree re: JHF which is why I said he’s very like the #1 forward, but having him from round 1 or round say, 8, is not likely to have a huge impact on your overall success. I don’t think he’s gets away in terms of price, and I think having 2 less forward rookies is pretty important. Add the value and the potential keeper aspects, and overall net points, and I think JHF is one you can take on early. $537k isn’t cheap after all!

 

[OnTopBar]

not sure how to write a comment ,anyone ? in reply to ONTOPBAR I went with Flanders as well but 30 pts seems way short / in my case I am comparing ZERRETT ( my flanders replacement ) with my 4th rookie 120 to 60 therefore double your 30 .Am I correct and if so is a trade worth 60 points ?

I can't find the question you're referring to? Im assuming you're thinking of sidewaysing Merrett > Flanders after Flander's bye. I think most here would say that a trade is worth (or was worth) $150k or 300pts. A 60pt saving doesn't fit that criteria, especially if it's not a projected 60pt saving, by that I mean that saving could be just 30-40pts, even less if Flander's outscores Merrett in rounds one and three, or even just in round 1. Flander's has WCE who were one of the easiest to score against last year, so let's say a 15pt boost, Merrett has the Hawks who were one of the hardest to score against, so possibly a 15pt hit. That could well see some, or most of your 'gain' wiped out.

I've had a look at the top 8 rookie scores in each of the first 4 rounds over the last 2 years and whilst past performances are no guarantee of future returns, I found that the fourth best score was 80+ on average. That average relies on the assumption that you have the best scoring rookies as well as being skewed by the likes of Sheezel, McKercher etc. If I go down to the 8th best then I'm starting to hit those high 60's low 70's.

I think that 60 could be too low and 80+ could be too high, somewhere in the middle would be about right.

 

[Singapore Flyers]

The decision im currently struggling with is:

Horne-Francis & Sheldrick/Curtin
V
Parker & Peatling

I’m sure preseason games will ultimately make the decision for me but thought I should get people’s thoughts regardless.

I believe on natural improvement alone Horne-Francis should be able to get his average to a 105 average and dependent on role and if they’re best 22 I’m pretty bullish on Sheldrick 65-70ppg and to a lesser extent Curtain 62-68ppg.

Peatling is someone I’ve always been lukewarm on. He would’ve been recruited with the intent on playing predominately on ball and his numbers last year were good without being “must have” good.

92ppg - excluding his 7 sub affected games.
98ppg - for games where he had over 50% CBA’s

Assuming he goes 95-100 he should make some good coin and be much more consistent than a rookie each week!

Parker’s the one I’m really struggling to predict because I know he’s been training as a mid this preseason but come round one, surely he’s not taking many minutes away from the likes of LDU, Sheezel, Powell and McKercher, especially considering Simpkin will be rotating through as well and Wardlaw will come straight back in as well!

The question for me is, if Parker only gets 25-33% CBA’s would he still score enough to be a viable pick and with a weaker forward line and his price point, what is an “acceptable average”.

Thanks!

Lots of strong answers on this already. With JHF, you also have the R12 bye issue. If you run more than 4 players with the R12 bye, you are almost certainly looking at a rookie score. So, if you told yourself you could only pick 3 or 4 from R12, would JHF be one of those?
For Parker, with Wardlaw out early, plus the “I got something to prove “ factor, I am expecting that early bump in his scoring. This is also with the hope that R6 will throw up new forward options for us to trade him to. At worst, I will be trading him on his bye.
For Peatling, his bye is excellent. Feel like he can hold that M8 or flex role through upgrade season and be the perfect candidate to upgrade to a R12 player on his bye. If he delivers 90-95 for that time, I will be pleased.

 

[OnTopBar]

Don’t disagree re: JHF which is why I said he’s very like the #1 forward, but having him from round 1 or round say, 8, is not likely to have a huge impact on your overall success. I don’t think he’s gets away in terms of price, and I think having 2 less forward rookies is pretty important. Add the value and the potential keeper aspects, and overall net points, and I think JHF is one you can take on early. $537k isn’t cheap after all!

I actually think that $537k isn't too much to pay for a likely F1, locks it away and saves a couple of trades. Those trades are more important this year given we'll aim for 23 premo's (some already did this) meaning less trades overall.

 

[Chumpion]

I actually think that $537k isn't too much to pay for a likely F1, locks it away and saves a couple of trades. Those trades are more important this year given we'll aim for 23 premo's (some already did this) meaning less trades overall.

Fair, to me it comes down to how much importance you place on the starting picks on each line. To me, I’d rather have an extra crack at getting my D1-2 right by taking 3 premiums down back, or go a little deeper in the mids, than prioritize an F1 premium.
Also worth noting there is a good likelihood that with minimal extra spend you get more points on a different line anyway.
Add to all that the fact he has the problematic round 12 bye, and I think he’s one you can fade without getting punished.

 

[OnTopBar]

Fair, to me it comes down to how much importance you place on the starting picks on each line. To me, I’d rather have an extra crack at getting my D1-2 right by taking 3 premiums down back, or go a little deeper in the mids, than prioritize an F1 premium.
Also worth noting there is a good likelihood that with minimal extra spend you get more points on a different line anyway.
Add to all that the fact he has the problematic round 12 bye, and I think he’s one you can fade without getting punished.

That's good logic, but removing F1 to D2 or M4 knocks a rookie off those lines and adds a rookie to F6.

I guess it comes down to structure and team balance, I don't mind starting JHF even with the round 12 bye as I can structure around that with currently 3 premos missing and that's as far as I want to be exposed in that round, if I don't start him then he'll have to come in after round 12, for me anyway.

I agree that he shouldn't get away from a price perspective, but at what point is he an ideal trade in trade? Possibly round 13 at $480k, or during upgrade season? Maybe his availability coincides with a fallen Mid/Def premo becoming available, maybe a must have rookie shows up along with an injury to someone else, all of those things can combine over a number of weeks, delaying a 'want to' trade behind a 'need to' trade. The other thing, which can work both ways, is how much of a priority do you associate with a forward upgrade as against a Mid/Def upgrade?

 

[Chumpion]

That's good logic, but removing F1 to D2 or M4 knocks a rookie off those lines and adds a rookie to F6.

I guess it comes down to structure and team balance, I don't mind starting JHF even with the round 12 bye as I can structure around that with currently 3 premos missing and that's as far as I want to be exposed in that round, if I don't start him then he'll have to come in after round 12, for me anyway.

I agree that he shouldn't get away from a price perspective, but at what point is he an ideal trade in trade? Possibly round 13 at $480k, or during upgrade season? Maybe his availability coincides with a fallen Mid/Def premo becoming available, maybe a must have rookie shows up along with an injury to someone else, all of those things can combine over a number of weeks, delaying a 'want to' trade behind a 'need to' trade. The other thing, which can work both ways, is how much of a priority do you associate with a forward upgrade as against a Mid/Def upgrade?

I think that’s where the two value picks over him comes into play, get the 8-9 premiums as per everyone else but prioritize better lines, and then sue the 2 mid pricers to avoid the forward rookie risks.
The last point about timing is impossible to answer because anything could happen any given round, but I think my overall point stands in that he won’t massively hurt you and so can be prioritized when best suits the team. If there is a clear win in a value M/D pick I would go that, and just get him when best works.
But everyone has different perspectives so fair play if you (or anyone) starts him. I don’t think he’ll be a bad pick, just not a priority for me with how my team is shaping up!

 

[OnTopBar]

I think that’s where the two value picks over him comes into play, get the 8-9 premiums as per everyone else but prioritize better lines, and then sue the 2 mid pricers to avoid the forward rookie risks.
The last point about timing is impossible to answer because anything could happen any given round, but I think my overall point stands in that he won’t massively hurt you and so can be prioritized when best suits the team. If there is a clear win in a value M/D pick I would go that, and just get him when best works.
But everyone has different perspectives so fair play if you (or anyone) starts him. I don’t think he’ll be a bad pick, just not a priority for me with how my team is shaping up!

Fair enough, I've reached critical mass with MP's, currently 11 in the team with 4 rookie priced players, with luck requiring 10 upgrades.

There's certainly value in the forwards and I have one MP forward in the mids already, time will tell if I need to adjust.

 

[Connoisseur]

Parker was 75% and 72% in 23 and 22 years pushing 103 and 96, then his scores were mixed when even at 40-50% CBA's in 2024.

A good overheard mark and can hit the scoreboard as well, so forward stints here and there in lieu of the bench may not be all that bad given it will likely fall under the radar due to the inflated importance of CBA‘s.

 

[GrainFedBeef]

A good overheard mark and can hit the scoreboard as well, so forward stints here and there in lieu of the bench may not be all that bad given it will likely fall under the radar due to the inflated importance of CBA‘s.

Correlation looks to suggest CBAs are not overinflated. Forward line of Swans likely to see more ball, quicker entry and less rebound than Norths, so could be a difference in fwd line too. Upside may be he is a tier or two higher importance in fwd line vs swans fwd line.

 

[TopBillings]

Sinclair & Sicily
V
Clark & NWM

 

[freowho]

Sinclair & Sicily
V
Clark & NWM

Clark and NWM.
Sinclair to the mids and Sicily forward because of injuries.

 

[mwross91]

who has the more upside in 2025: Will Ashcroft or Matt Roberts?

 

[freowho]

who has the more upside in 2025: Will Ashcroft or Matt Roberts?

Hard to answer but Ashcroft the safer bet.

 

[mwross91]

Hard to answer but Ashcroft the safer bet.

Yeh I'm leaning that way too.
Basically looking at either of them as a my flex at the moment.

 

[freowho]

Yeh I'm leaning that way too.
Basically looking at either of them as a my flex at the moment.

If Roberts and McKercher have kick ins they're probably in my starting side. We get a proper look at Roberts in rnd 0.

 

[Russty_]

Sinclair & Sicily
V
Clark & NWM

Think Clark came into his own last season with an impressive 16 tons, NWM definitely can still get better too. Both young and on the way up.