Position 2025: DEFENDER DISCUSSION
- Thread starter KLo30
- Start date
- Joined
- 14 Jan 2023
- Messages
- 254
- Likes
- 1,080
- AFL Club
- Carlton
Although it’s tempting, I think I’m going to hold off and bringing in SDK even if he’s looking like being the number one ruck.
I can only assume Conway is who they see as the person who can hold down the ruck position long term.
Even if Stanley doesn’t start the year in the ones, it’d only take one poor game for him to be brought in, resulting in SDK moving down back to produce some lack luster scores…
I’m warming on Holmes as well and would much prefer him than SDK at the moment!
I can only assume Conway is who they see as the person who can hold down the ruck position long term.
Even if Stanley doesn’t start the year in the ones, it’d only take one poor game for him to be brought in, resulting in SDK moving down back to produce some lack luster scores…
I’m warming on Holmes as well and would much prefer him than SDK at the moment!
- Joined
- 6 Dec 2022
- Messages
- 482
- Likes
- 2,457
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
Conway is injured currently which is why SDK has been training in the ruck.
The role is going to be there to start with but I just don’t trust Scott to stick with it. Particularly with their run I can see Stanley come in or Blicavs take a large amount of ruck time.
SDK looks like he gets a lot of his points around the ground rather than from stoppage so might not be the end of the world if he’s getting under 60%+ ruck contests.
The role is going to be there to start with but I just don’t trust Scott to stick with it. Particularly with their run I can see Stanley come in or Blicavs take a large amount of ruck time.
SDK looks like he gets a lot of his points around the ground rather than from stoppage so might not be the end of the world if he’s getting under 60%+ ruck contests.
- Joined
- 7 Sep 2020
- Messages
- 13,240
- Likes
- 46,581
Early talk was just speculation on replacing Houston like for like. He had hamstring surgery and has been in training roughly since January
. It could be a committee from the distribution point with Burton, Bergman, Evans, Burgoyne at times, Farrell and Sinn/Williams if selected.
Houston also a different player with what he could produce from his 23 disposal average.
. It could be a committee from the distribution point with Burton, Bergman, Evans, Burgoyne at times, Farrell and Sinn/Williams if selected.
Houston also a different player with what he could produce from his 23 disposal average.
Last edited:
Was just throwing the draft together and struggled even more with DEF than I expected...
My problem is that I think the 110 threshold is pretty reasonable for D6 but I strongly dislike just about all the guys that I have in that range as starting picks!!!
Sheezel - For mine a lock, the only guy starting in the 110 group that doesn't have round 0 or obvious downside. He might drop a little if he gets tags and the like but should be 110+, just can't see them really letting him not be a primary player.
Flanders/Whitfield/Zorko/Houston - All more or less full priced with the round 0 issue. I just struggle to find the 10+ points upside they need as starting picks.
Ryan - I think his 2nd half of the season was a genuine strategic change as the side tried to be more attacking and not just waxing at HB. If that's the case he's very overpriced on how he performed post bye. That being said, you could totally draw up the opposite conclusion, especially given it's the 2nd straight year he started on fire and then fell to "pieces".
McGovern - Career best year, by a lot, at his age. Loses Barrass as support. Oh yeah, and his durability. If he can stay on park he could actually be a good pick but I don't trust him.
Sinclair - Hamstring issues. Started very slowly last year after calf issues. At the age where you need to take note of constant soft tissue problems. Also no idea on his role yet, much better at HB for fantasy but feels like needed more in midfield early. If he's fit, he's underpriced on his best and finish to last year but that's a question.
Martin - Round 0 but also going forward again where didn't score at this level.
Clark - Kind of reverse Ryan, he was the benefactor of their get and go strategy and he finished the season with a solid 105. The problem is 105 is probably not enough if 110 holds up, so he needs to improve and at fair price, it's hard to not conclude there's better options. Awkward pick in other words.
Ridley - Round 0 and injured.
NWM - I think can push higher but like Clark, he needs to and basically relying on natural improvement to do it. Capable of it. Sinclair role a big question as well as definitely impacts NWM. Think he's better than Clark simply for being a bit cheaper with a very similar profile otherwise.
Holmes/Sicily/Stewart/Blakey - I could actually see all 4 of these guys in the 110+ group but they've all got big questions to go with their round 0 byes. Holmes has his hamstrings and whether the midfield role actually helps his scoring. Stewart has tags and age. Sicily has role concerns. Blakey hasn't been there before, I think being the only real intercept option down back helps him but he's also playing taller so might have to lock down at times.
Dale - The sneaky good option with the awful bye, hurts that Sheezel is the lock, imo, and he shares it. On a positive, no other real r12 options right now so that helps as would be just these two, but obviously a very heavy bye on other lines. Started last year terribly and copped some heavy tags late in the season which remain a threat but has upside with Daniel and Richards out of the way now. Think he's more of a 105 target though.
McGrath - Bye and upside questions.
Hinge - Laird going back, never done it before, durability.
Rioli - Bye and upside issues. Also some injuries right now.
Wilkie/Vlastuin/May - All with upside issues, I think all are actually capable but I definitely wouldn't bet for 110 region.
That's everyone that was 90+
I think Laird pushes somewhere towards 110 and should be 105+ based on history and increases in HB scoring. Duggan and Rivers going midfield are interesting but very unknown. Short is underpriced but has never hit the 110 threshold.
Mills has 110 potential if he can stay fit but that's an enormous if that I'd firmly bet against at this point, especially now that he's added feet to the list that includes achilles, shoulder, calf, quad, knee, hamstring, concussion and whatever else (to be fair, has had foot before).
Tough group made tougher by the rookies also looking weak. I only see 3 or maybe 4 that are fringe starters, while the premiums scream to overload rookies, the rookies scream to overload premiums and the rookies elsewhere seem much stronger field options so would be fielding sub-par rookies most likely.
My problem is that I think the 110 threshold is pretty reasonable for D6 but I strongly dislike just about all the guys that I have in that range as starting picks!!!
Sheezel - For mine a lock, the only guy starting in the 110 group that doesn't have round 0 or obvious downside. He might drop a little if he gets tags and the like but should be 110+, just can't see them really letting him not be a primary player.
Flanders/Whitfield/Zorko/Houston - All more or less full priced with the round 0 issue. I just struggle to find the 10+ points upside they need as starting picks.
Ryan - I think his 2nd half of the season was a genuine strategic change as the side tried to be more attacking and not just waxing at HB. If that's the case he's very overpriced on how he performed post bye. That being said, you could totally draw up the opposite conclusion, especially given it's the 2nd straight year he started on fire and then fell to "pieces".
McGovern - Career best year, by a lot, at his age. Loses Barrass as support. Oh yeah, and his durability. If he can stay on park he could actually be a good pick but I don't trust him.
Sinclair - Hamstring issues. Started very slowly last year after calf issues. At the age where you need to take note of constant soft tissue problems. Also no idea on his role yet, much better at HB for fantasy but feels like needed more in midfield early. If he's fit, he's underpriced on his best and finish to last year but that's a question.
Martin - Round 0 but also going forward again where didn't score at this level.
Clark - Kind of reverse Ryan, he was the benefactor of their get and go strategy and he finished the season with a solid 105. The problem is 105 is probably not enough if 110 holds up, so he needs to improve and at fair price, it's hard to not conclude there's better options. Awkward pick in other words.
Ridley - Round 0 and injured.
NWM - I think can push higher but like Clark, he needs to and basically relying on natural improvement to do it. Capable of it. Sinclair role a big question as well as definitely impacts NWM. Think he's better than Clark simply for being a bit cheaper with a very similar profile otherwise.
Holmes/Sicily/Stewart/Blakey - I could actually see all 4 of these guys in the 110+ group but they've all got big questions to go with their round 0 byes. Holmes has his hamstrings and whether the midfield role actually helps his scoring. Stewart has tags and age. Sicily has role concerns. Blakey hasn't been there before, I think being the only real intercept option down back helps him but he's also playing taller so might have to lock down at times.
Dale - The sneaky good option with the awful bye, hurts that Sheezel is the lock, imo, and he shares it. On a positive, no other real r12 options right now so that helps as would be just these two, but obviously a very heavy bye on other lines. Started last year terribly and copped some heavy tags late in the season which remain a threat but has upside with Daniel and Richards out of the way now. Think he's more of a 105 target though.
McGrath - Bye and upside questions.
Hinge - Laird going back, never done it before, durability.
Rioli - Bye and upside issues. Also some injuries right now.
Wilkie/Vlastuin/May - All with upside issues, I think all are actually capable but I definitely wouldn't bet for 110 region.
That's everyone that was 90+
I think Laird pushes somewhere towards 110 and should be 105+ based on history and increases in HB scoring. Duggan and Rivers going midfield are interesting but very unknown. Short is underpriced but has never hit the 110 threshold.
Mills has 110 potential if he can stay fit but that's an enormous if that I'd firmly bet against at this point, especially now that he's added feet to the list that includes achilles, shoulder, calf, quad, knee, hamstring, concussion and whatever else (to be fair, has had foot before).
Tough group made tougher by the rookies also looking weak. I only see 3 or maybe 4 that are fringe starters, while the premiums scream to overload rookies, the rookies scream to overload premiums and the rookies elsewhere seem much stronger field options so would be fielding sub-par rookies most likely.
Interesting write up across the options. Given what you’ve said around the challenges with options, does it change your view on needing 10+ points to o***et the R0/early bye issues? I can see it being a factor on other lines but if the other options that seem viable all have the same bye issue, it sort of cancels out a little?
Other thought is, does early fixture work as a bit of a tie breaker? I’ve done no real fixture analysis, but there could be upside in the draw that o***ets some of the other issues, especially if they don’t have a round 12 bye and can be slingshotted out if needed at the byes. Granted don’t love that strategy..
FWIW I current have Sheezel (agree he’s the most lockable), NWM and Clark, but I’m open to the round 0 guys as I think the best 18 factor will make the byes survivable if I’m not batting too deep across the team.
Other thought is, does early fixture work as a bit of a tie breaker? I’ve done no real fixture analysis, but there could be upside in the draw that o***ets some of the other issues, especially if they don’t have a round 12 bye and can be slingshotted out if needed at the byes. Granted don’t love that strategy..
FWIW I current have Sheezel (agree he’s the most lockable), NWM and Clark, but I’m open to the round 0 guys as I think the best 18 factor will make the byes survivable if I’m not batting too deep across the team.
I don't consider fixtures beyond teams with taggers for players that get tagged and even then it's not something I really look at preseason generally. It feels like every year the tagger makes a comeback somewhere around the byes but teams don't really do it before there's established form lines in place.
Definitely is some room to run the numbers on whether those early points or the trade has more value. General rule of thumb I've always used is 150-200 points for a trade, no idea if someone has done better calculations on it but that's roughly what I work on, earlier trades are considerably more value.
Round 0 might give me answers on some of those guys. The main group for me is Sicily, Stewart and Holmes as I think all 3 are 110+ capable but would definitely want the confirmation. If the 110 looks likely then they're all cheap enough to take despite the bye.
The positive for me is that the only other round 0 guy I'm really even looking at right now is Bailey Smith, so not really looking at any of the MID, RUCK or FWD options strongly, basically I think they're all more or less fairly priced or too many questions to punt. Round 0 could change this but not very likely.
What I'm hoping is obviously that 2 of Ryan, Clark, Sinclair and NWM firm up as genuinely good options. Or even better would be Rivers. Short probably the other name still firmly on my list to cross off.
Definitely want to avoid those byes if I can but I'm not going to force premiums I don't believe in just because of it. The conundrum right now is that I'm not remotely confident in the rookies either. I'd ideally have probably 4 rookies on field but feels like that's a stretch. I must say though that the best 18 factor definitely helps that unbalanced structure where having say a Reid on field isn't actually going to matter because he wouldn't count but it's likely that Reid is the D8 so you're not that far from fielding him if rookie heavy! Worth noting that the flex also helps immensely in this area.
Round 0 could also change things rapidly if say a Whitfield has a shocker and becomes a clear early trade target where might structure towards that as well.
Will be watching this weeks games and then obviously round 0 and then make the call. Still feel very unlikely I'd pick a Whitfield or Flanders type, guys I think are within a few points of fully priced. The Stewart/Holmes types are a lot more interesting to me where they're underpriced by enough to cancel out round 0. If Stewart scores 110 and Clark scores 105, Stewart still comes out ahead overall if the extra money is spent at fair value.
Definitely is some room to run the numbers on whether those early points or the trade has more value. General rule of thumb I've always used is 150-200 points for a trade, no idea if someone has done better calculations on it but that's roughly what I work on, earlier trades are considerably more value.
Round 0 might give me answers on some of those guys. The main group for me is Sicily, Stewart and Holmes as I think all 3 are 110+ capable but would definitely want the confirmation. If the 110 looks likely then they're all cheap enough to take despite the bye.
The positive for me is that the only other round 0 guy I'm really even looking at right now is Bailey Smith, so not really looking at any of the MID, RUCK or FWD options strongly, basically I think they're all more or less fairly priced or too many questions to punt. Round 0 could change this but not very likely.
What I'm hoping is obviously that 2 of Ryan, Clark, Sinclair and NWM firm up as genuinely good options. Or even better would be Rivers. Short probably the other name still firmly on my list to cross off.
Definitely want to avoid those byes if I can but I'm not going to force premiums I don't believe in just because of it. The conundrum right now is that I'm not remotely confident in the rookies either. I'd ideally have probably 4 rookies on field but feels like that's a stretch. I must say though that the best 18 factor definitely helps that unbalanced structure where having say a Reid on field isn't actually going to matter because he wouldn't count but it's likely that Reid is the D8 so you're not that far from fielding him if rookie heavy! Worth noting that the flex also helps immensely in this area.
Round 0 could also change things rapidly if say a Whitfield has a shocker and becomes a clear early trade target where might structure towards that as well.
Will be watching this weeks games and then obviously round 0 and then make the call. Still feel very unlikely I'd pick a Whitfield or Flanders type, guys I think are within a few points of fully priced. The Stewart/Holmes types are a lot more interesting to me where they're underpriced by enough to cancel out round 0. If Stewart scores 110 and Clark scores 105, Stewart still comes out ahead overall if the extra money is spent at fair value.
Yep that all makes a lot of sense! One of my big takeaways from last season was that early on, ceiling was everything as the best 18 rounds were so compressed if you didn’t have the high ceiling guys/captains to seperate out from the pack a little. Obvious sounds great in hindsight and finding them is the battle, but someone like Tom Green really helped my start the season well even though conventional wisdom said with a round 3 bye he was a risky selection. So I guess it’s a round about way of saying don’t let the round 0 factor lose you the best pick (which you’ve basically said anyway so probably a good point to stop typing!)
Love the write up, but I think the 110 goal is a bit ambitious.
Looking back to last season, only 6 DEF players hit that mark.
Obviously being able to divine those 6 that hit the mark is great, but I'd say it would involve a large slice of luck.
All up there were 14 who had a 100+ avg, so getting 6 in that range, with 2-3 of the 110 guys would be going well.
Looking back to last season, only 6 DEF players hit that mark.
Obviously being able to divine those 6 that hit the mark is great, but I'd say it would involve a large slice of luck.
All up there were 14 who had a 100+ avg, so getting 6 in that range, with 2-3 of the 110 guys would be going well.
There's 7 guys at 110 to start the season. There were 6 guys last year. 2023 had 5 and 2022 had 6.
So it's very likely that there will be 6 guys at 110 again this year, that's the standard line. In most of those seasons it's a 107 type that is the next up and then a bunch of 105 guys.
With all the extra trades, you really do need something close to the creme de la creme on each line and it's very likely D6 will be stronger than F6, so F6 is the spot to sacrifice for the Flex.
It's more of a target though, if I assume the ideal D6 is 110, the targeting guys that can do that gives a lot more margin for error. Like last year I thought Nick Martin could do it which means he can miss the goal and still work. This is especially relevant for guys priced just outside of that D6 range. If you don't think a guy that's priced at 105 can score 115, he's probably a pick you should reconsider unless you're extremely bearish on everyone else! So yeah, it's more of I like to target high, so I can miss and still have a good pick outcome.
There might be an adjustment, which last year's winner made, to shift from the idea that we need to actually pick keepers in the starting side, there's so many trades and with the boosts more flexibility on timing, all the bye rounds mean you're effectively able to boost for half the rounds in the season, so with 40 trades it's possible to basically cash out 17 rookies and then turnover/improve every on field position.
It's been very interesting taking the NBA RDT serious this year where you literally don't have keepers because of the weekly game counts so you're just constantly shuffling value in and out of the side, I think there could be a huge scope for that this year as well. Probably the hardest thing I've found with my drafts so far is actually spending all the cash
So it's very likely that there will be 6 guys at 110 again this year, that's the standard line. In most of those seasons it's a 107 type that is the next up and then a bunch of 105 guys.
With all the extra trades, you really do need something close to the creme de la creme on each line and it's very likely D6 will be stronger than F6, so F6 is the spot to sacrifice for the Flex.
It's more of a target though, if I assume the ideal D6 is 110, the targeting guys that can do that gives a lot more margin for error. Like last year I thought Nick Martin could do it which means he can miss the goal and still work. This is especially relevant for guys priced just outside of that D6 range. If you don't think a guy that's priced at 105 can score 115, he's probably a pick you should reconsider unless you're extremely bearish on everyone else! So yeah, it's more of I like to target high, so I can miss and still have a good pick outcome.
There might be an adjustment, which last year's winner made, to shift from the idea that we need to actually pick keepers in the starting side, there's so many trades and with the boosts more flexibility on timing, all the bye rounds mean you're effectively able to boost for half the rounds in the season, so with 40 trades it's possible to basically cash out 17 rookies and then turnover/improve every on field position.
It's been very interesting taking the NBA RDT serious this year where you literally don't have keepers because of the weekly game counts so you're just constantly shuffling value in and out of the side, I think there could be a huge scope for that this year as well. Probably the hardest thing I've found with my drafts so far is actually spending all the cash