Opinion Questions For Rowsus

[Blue Dragons]

Happy to help!
I saw most of the Bull v Ade game, and Webb did look ok. Beveridge seems keen to play a young team, too which helps Webb. I'm just worried that his efforts looked a bit flattering due to Adelaide having a really bad day. It would also be different to take him, in front of Krak and Tarrant, but it may not pay off in the long run.
Tarrant's TOG was always going to be high, it's the nature of KPP Defs to have high game time.

Boy, you are right about smashing through these! There has been 17 pages in the last 2 weeks!

Yeah thats true..he probably wont get to play in too many wins so it might be harder for him to score.

Sorry one more quick one..how many more ppg would I need Whitecross to score over Kelly to justify selecting him?

Thanks!

 

[Rowsus]

Rowsus you seem to be really doubting Tarrants ability to maintain a decent scoring level. At the risk of questioning you on your own thread....... doesn't his change of role and age (compared to other rookies) give him a greater chance of scoring at a reasonable level? I am not expecting him to score 100 every week but I cant see why he cant average 80 for the rest of the season (provided he doesn't snap in half at some stage).

His job security is not in doubt at all. As long as he is fit he will be picked every week.

Hi Mudflap,
I'm certainly not so precious, that I can't be questioned on the things I say/write/think
There is no doubt I will get a fair few things wrong over a season, especially as I answer around 700 questions a season, I'm bound to fluff a fair few!
I have a number of reasons for thinking this about Tarrant.
The first reason is the general bad scoring of tall non-Rucks, non 3 goal/game players.
Quoting from the summary of: The Dreaded 192cm + Cut Off Point
Here is an excerpt from that thread.

Summary:
Of the 200 players 192cm+, 4 were Rucks that averaged 32 Hitouts/game or higher, and returned 107 or higher (Jacobs, Mumford, Sandilands, Goldstein).
Two were two of the best 2 Forwards in recent years, and averaged 3.1 Goals/game or better, and returned averages of 100 (Franklin) and 96 (Roughead).
That leaves us 194 players that at best, returned borderline returns in SC. The top 10 non-Rucks, that didn't kick 3.1+ goals/game, and were 192cm+ in 2014 were:
Player - Games Played/Average
Martin S - 12/111.7
Mundy - 22/102.2
Smith B - 22/93.5
Riewoldt N - 22/91.7
Waite - 16/91.5
Westhoff - 22/91.1
Gunston - 20/90.4
Birchall - 22/88.9
Johnson M - 18/87.2
Hawkins - 22/87.1


Keeping in mind there were 104 players that averaged 90+ in 2014, and that list of the 10 scorers is drawn from 158 players, you would have to admit, it is mostly a disappointing bunch.

Unless you are picking Rucks (or Rucks that have R/F status), or players you are confident will average better than 3 goals/game, you are best served by avoiding players that are 192cm+.

Keep in mind, that's 192+cm, and Tarrant is 196cm. When you look at last years players that were 196+cm, weren't Rucks, and didn't kick 3+goals/game, there were 51 players that met that description last season. Here is the full list of those 51 players that averaged 80+ SC/game for the season.
Westhoff 199cm 91 SC
Hawkins 197cm 87 SC
Lynch (GC) 199cm 83 SC
Fletcher 198cm 81 SC
That's it, no more. So if you are expecting Tarrant to average 80 from here, that would make him in the top 3 players of his description, according to last years figures. Of the 47 players left on that list, only 11 of them averaged 70+/game. So a touch over 70% of the players matching Tarrant's description averaged less than 70/game last season.

The next reason is Tarrant's scoring history in 41 games:
97+ scores - 7
80 - 96 scores - 0
70 - 79 scores - 4
60 - 69 scores - 6
50 - 59 scores - 6
0 - 49 scores - 18

Tall defenders have been scoring well so far this season. I don't think it is a CD scoring shift (or at least, I hope it isn't!), but the history of tall Defenders is poor. Maybe the Coaches have shifted tactics, and are telling their tall Defs to mark more and spoil less. I don't have access to the stats that might support this though.

All in all, I think it is off the mark to expect Tarrant to average 80 from Round 5 on, unless he only plays a few games. I am fairly confident, the more he plays, the less he'll average. He doesn't have to average 80 from here to be considered a good Rookie choice. 70/game will see him hit a $200k increase by the time he tops out. The thing that worries me is, only 30% of players like Tarrant managed that last season, and Tarrant has only scored 70+ in 11 of 41 games!

 

[Rowsus]

Hi Rowsus

Since the backs are still so random in terms of being keepers, do you think that is it a better decision to concentrate on upgrading the mids and forwards first before the backs and leave them to later in the season? I can clearly still see that the mids and forwards still have their usual keepers like Selwood, Sloane, Dangerfield, Ward, Franklin etc. so would it be a smarter move to concentrate on them and not the backline first? Because I was thinking of bringing in Simpson and Smith soon, but unsure if I should be concentrating on Franklin, Rough or Harvey? I presume that mids should be upgraded after the rookies have peaked, so they can wait.

I always look to upgrade either (a) Wherever the most points are being leaked or (b) Where the best value presents itself. Quite often they are the same upgrade.

Hold one more week of it's possible, were about 1/4 way through and barring big movers, especially in defence, we should know loosely where we sit on terms of top 10 in each position.

Hi w2Tk,
I don't think there is a specific order for upgrading, but certainly this season it is looking like there are some tough decisions to be made, in both Fwd and Def.
Generally, I think it is best to try and build your team like a brickwall. Don't complete one line, while another still needs 3 to complete it. Things change, and it is rare to complete a line early, and not regret one or two choices later on. This can happen both ways. Your picks underperforming, and other possibly better picks appearing after you have completed a line.
While we have doubts, it is best to stick to choosing "safe" picks. If that means you make a couple of Mid upgrades, while waiting for a lead on other lines, that's ok too. It really is a fine balancing act. You need to fill your team as quickly as you can. To do that, you need to buy well, or you will finish 4 to 5 weeks and trades behind other teams, if you are buying in your Prems at peak prices. The problem becomes magnified, particularly down back this season, as not only do we want to buy as cheap as we can, we really have no idea who to buy!
In a season where so many of the top teams are looking so similar at the moment, I think we are heading to a bit of topsy-turvy chain of events. In past seasons, teams have started differently, and traded towards similarity. This season they have started similarly, but will trade towards difference, as we are all guessing on who the D2-6, F3-6, M7-8 will be. Most seasons we are only guessing on the last 5 or 6 spots, this season it is as many as 11.
You probably have to take a risk or 4 at some stage, but you also still have some safe-ish picks you can make in the meantime. If you're not sure, stick to the safe-ish picks for the next few weeks.

 

[Aneil915]

Hi Sir,

Would love your opinion on my trades this week.

Locked is McGrath to Krak

Next trade I'm thinking is Salem or Heeney to Tarrant? Or just do 1 trade this week...

What are your thoughts? My team is linked.

 

[GrainFedBeef]

Hi Mudflap,
all defenders have been scoring well so far this season. I don't think it is a CD scoring shift (or at least, I hope it isn't!), but the history of tall Defenders is poor. Maybe the Coaches have shifted tactics, and are telling their tall Defs to mark more and spoil less. I don't have access to the stats that might support this though.

All in all, I think it is off the mark to expect Tarrant to average 80 from Round 5 on, unless he only plays a few games. I am fairly confident, the more he plays, the less he'll average. He doesn't have to average 80 from here to be considered a good Rookie choice. 70/game will see him hit a $200k increase by the time he tops out. The thing that worries me is, only 30% of players like Tarrant managed that last season, and Tarrant has only scored 70+ in 11 of 41 games!

Good point Rowsus. Also wonder if due to teams trying to boost their scoring levels, the fast transition is leading to a greater opportunity for defenders to take intercept marks in I50. If a team is on a fast break then spoiling is only going to send the ball back into the direction of oncoming midfielders, hence the need to mark.

All current defenders are leading intercept markers. re CD scoring, I thought there may have been some comments around greater weight for marks in I50 - not sure if this was a change or emphasis on their scoring system.

Either way, coaches may start to adjust at some stage if the stats support that the I50 intercept mark was hurting them on the rebound, if its not, then they will maintain status quo. Only round 4, it was only few years back that coaches started locking down rebounding defenders from round 5 with many defenders impacted by round 8 (thinking Birchall).

 

[Mudflap]

Hi Mudflap,
I'm certainly not so precious, that I can't be questioned on the things I say/write/think
There is no doubt I will get a fair few things wrong over a season, especially as I answer around 700 questions a season, I'm bound to fluff a fair few!
I have a number of reasons for thinking this about Tarrant.
The first reason is the general bad scoring of tall non-Rucks, non 3 goal/game players.
Quoting from the summary of: The Dreaded 192cm + Cut Off Point
Here is an excerpt from that thread.



Keep in mind, that's 192+cm, and Tarrant is 196cm. When you look at last years players that were 196+cm, weren't Rucks, and didn't kick 3+goals/game, there were 51 players that met that description last season. Here is the full list of those 51 players that averaged 80+ SC/game for the season.
Westhoff 199cm 91 SC
Hawkins 197cm 87 SC
Lynch (GC) 199cm 83 SC
Fletcher 198cm 81 SC
That's it, no more. So if you are expecting Tarrant to average 80 from here, that would make him in the top 3 players of his description, according to last years figures. Of the 47 players left on that list, only 11 of them averaged 70+/game. So a touch over 70% of the players matching Tarrant's description averaged less than 70/game last season.

The next reason is Tarrant's scoring history in 41 games:
97+ scores - 7
80 - 96 scores - 0
70 - 79 scores - 4
60 - 69 scores - 6
50 - 59 scores - 6
0 - 49 scores - 18

Tall defenders have been scoring well so far this season. I don't think it is a CD scoring shift (or at least, I hope it isn't!), but the history of tall Defenders is poor. Maybe the Coaches have shifted tactics, and are telling their tall Defs to mark more and spoil less. I don't have access to the stats that might support this though.

All in all, I think it is off the mark to expect Tarrant to average 80 from Round 5 on, unless he only plays a few games. I am fairly confident, the more he plays, the less he'll average. He doesn't have to average 80 from here to be considered a good Rookie choice. 70/game will see him hit a $200k increase by the time he tops out. The thing that worries me is, only 30% of players like Tarrant managed that last season, and Tarrant has only scored 70+ in 11 of 41 games!

Very hard to argue with stats in general...... but virtually impossible to argue with the numbers you have just put up!! If you had have told me an hour ago that there was a chance I would not be trading Tarrant in this week I would have thought that you were mad. Somehow I am now going to have a harder think about this trade.

The fact that I had Tarrant in my team all pre season will probably make me lean towards pulling the trigger but thanks for the info.

 

[jaca]

The fact with Tarrant is I'm not bringing him in to score me points, he'll likely sit on my bench most weeks. I'm bringing him in to make me a few hundred grand, allowing me to upgrade to another premo.

 

[Rowsus]

Yeah thats true..he probably wont get to play in too many wins so it might be harder for him to score.

Sorry one more quick one..how many more ppg would I need Whitecross to score over Kelly to justify selecting him?

Thanks!

In simplistic terms, they are roughly $76k apart in price, so that equates to about a 15/game difference.
They both have JS and vest worries, so I would be surprised if it turned out not to be that simple though.

 

[Rowsus]

Hi Sir,

Would love your opinion on my trades this week.

Locked is McGrath to Krak

Next trade I'm thinking is Salem or Heeney to Tarrant? Or just do 1 trade this week...

What are your thoughts? My team is linked.

Hi Aneil915,
I think the 2nd trade is probably warranted. If you think Heeney is bottomed out, physically, as can happen with first year players, or if he is green vested, then use Heeney. Otherwise, I think Salem is in for a bit of tough spell anyway, use him.

 

[Rowsus]

Very hard to argue with stats in general...... but virtually impossible to argue with the numbers you have just put up!! If you had have told me an hour ago that there was a chance I would not be trading Tarrant in this week I would have thought that you were mad. Somehow I am now going to have a harder think about this trade.

The fact that I had Tarrant in my team all pre season will probably make me lean towards pulling the trigger but thanks for the info.

I'm certainly not saying people shouldn't trade him in, just that his history, and the recent history of players of his description, suggest he is more likely to score 60's than 80+'s from here.
One of the barrows I am constantly pushing, is for people to have reasonable expectations. We can hope for 70's from here, and a $200+k price increase, but more realistically, we should expect something more in the $150-$180k area, which is ok, too. There is still some chance he won't even achieve that of course.

The fact with Tarrant is I'm not bringing him in to score me points, he'll likely sit on my bench most weeks. I'm bringing him in to make me a few hundred grand, allowing me to upgrade to another premo.

Absolutely, and anyone bringing him in for anything else is on a hunt for fools gold. I still think a $200k increase is about his upper limit.

 

[anfa18]

I've read your thoughts on Tarrant and it has confirmed my thoughts on him. As a North supporter i have never really rated him and the fact he's only managed to play 41 games since being recruited in 2007, shows North haven't really rated him either. In my eyes, the only reason he is getting games is the fact North have had so many defensive injuries this year.

Anyway, onto my question. I'm highly considering skipping on Tarrant and trying to sure up my backline.

My backline looks like this at the moment (sorted by average).

Simpson, Johnson, Lumumba, Saad, McIntosh, Oxely (Newnes, Brown).... Newnes is currently averaging less than the 3 main defensive rookies. So, instead of bringing in both Krakouer and Tarrant, i'm thinking, McGrath > Krakouer and Newnes > Hibberd.

I think Hibberd had a very poor first game (like most Essendon players) where he scored 59, but has since started to get his form back with 84, 84 and 100. He's priced at 460k with a B/E of 90, so this could potentially be the best time to grab him for a while. Alternatively, if there is another defender you would recommend i do research on, that would also be very helpful.

Cheers.

 

[Rowsus]

I've read your thoughts on Tarrant and it has confirmed my thoughts on him. As a North supporter i have never really rated him and the fact he's only managed to play 41 games since being recruited in 2007, shows North haven't really rated him either. In my eyes, the only reason he is getting games is the fact North have had so many defensive injuries this year.

Anyway, onto my question. I'm highly considering skipping on Tarrant and trying to sure up my backline.

My backline looks like this at the moment (sorted by average).

Simpson, Johnson, Lumumba, Saad, McIntosh, Oxely (Newnes, Brown).... Newnes is currently averaging less than the 3 main defensive rookies. So, instead of bringing in both Krakouer and Tarrant, i'm thinking, McGrath > Krakouer and Newnes > Hibberd.

I think Hibberd had a very poor first game (like most Essendon players) where he scored 59, but has since started to get his form back with 84, 84 and 100. He's priced at 460k with a B/E of 90, so this could potentially be the best time to grab him for a while. Alternatively, if there is another defender you would recommend i do research on, that would also be very helpful.

Cheers.

Tarrant is a tougher decision than he looks at first glance. Yes, he's guaranteed to go up $62k just by running on the park, but I'd hate to get him, only to have him make just over $100k, and be of absolutely no loopholing his score onto the ground value.
As to your Defs, Hibberd does look like he is priced well, and the only one outside of the obvious picks I can recommend you look at is R Murphy. The problem is, he is more expensive than Hibberd. Murphy is in less 3% of teams, and being an experienced/older Captain in a young team helps him "demand" the ball. I started with him, and I've been pleased so far.

 

[Slammer]

G'day Rowsus,

Just wondering what your thoughts are on Hurley instead of Hibberd?
He is in on 1.3% of teams and now looks to be a lock down back playing a Hibberd like role.
Do you think he could keep it up or is the fact his marking ability is why he is scoring well?
Just looking outside the square for my Newnes and/or Lumumba upgrades.

 

[Bob Loblaw]

G'day Rowsus,

Just wondering what your thoughts are on Hurley instead of Hibberd?
He is in on 1.3% of teams and now looks to be a lock down back playing a Hibberd like role.
Do you think he could keep it up or is the fact his marking ability is why he is scoring well?
Just looking outside the square for my Newnes and/or Lumumba upgrades.

I'm going to jump in and say do it. Was relatively keen on Hurley at the start of the year but decided against any serious consideration because I avoid breakouts sort of players from essendon to avoid bias. The second half of last year he got into the groove of playing down back and did really well and probably averaged about 90-95 in that period, mainly due to a massive 170. Expect him to average 90-95 as long as they don't become fustrated with Carlisle and switch them around. Good thing with Hurley (& Hooker) is he is able to play a good defensive game Eg.) against Franklin and still run of and get touches. He's a good kick and a quality player.
Still a risky pick because you are paying a premium for him at 476k but I like it.

Edit: Hibbered is a much safer pick and 20k cheaper.

 

[aleceee]

Hi Rowsus,
Please see my team linked. I'm having trouble deciding on my trades this week. I'm thinking I might go Heeney or Van Berlo to Tarrant but I don't know where or how I should use my other trade. Should I fix up underperformaning premiums/mid pricers (newnes) or should I look at upgrading. I can't find a good upgrade to do though. Thanks

 

[The Saltshaker]

For those of you like me not 100% keen on offloading Lonie + $28k rise or Clarke + $33k rise, a potential option this week may arrive through Swan if he is rested.

Heeney > Tarrant and Swan to mids.

Next week Lonie/Clarke > Boek and Swan fwd

Gives you another week to look at Boekhurst, whilst using Heeneys 7sc this week to use a mid to grab Tarrant instead of a fwd cow $$ with some milk. One thing i heard about Lonie is his work rate is immense, another week to see how he follows up after last weeks 2goal confident boost would be of benefit.

 

[Rowsus]

G'day Rowsus,

Just wondering what your thoughts are on Hurley instead of Hibberd?
He is in on 1.3% of teams and now looks to be a lock down back playing a Hibberd like role.
Do you think he could keep it up or is the fact his marking ability is why he is scoring well?
Just looking outside the square for my Newnes and/or Lumumba upgrades.

I'm going to jump in and say do it. Was relatively keen on Hurley at the start of the year but decided against any serious consideration because I avoid breakouts sort of players from essendon to avoid bias. The second half of last year he got into the groove of playing down back and did really well and probably averaged about 90-95 in that period, mainly due to a massive 170. Expect him to average 90-95 as long as they don't become fustrated with Carlisle and switch them around. Good thing with Hurley (& Hooker) is he is able to play a good defensive game Eg.) against Franklin and still run of and get touches. He's a good kick and a quality player.
Still a risky pick because you are paying a premium for him at 476k but I like it.

Edit: Hibbered is a much safer pick and 20k cheaper.

Hi Slammer,
I'm sure when we get to the end of the season, there will be 2 or 3 Defs in the top 6 to 8 that we couldn't easily spot in the pre-season, or now. Hurley could just as easily be one, and for each of those 2 or 3 players there will be reasons why we thought they couldn't do it.
My reasons for Hurley are:
His Fifth best score last season was 92, and that's not many scores at, or above the level you are hoping for. His average from last season is also a little "artificially" boosted by that 170. You'd expect his usual ceiling to be about 130 to 140, so that 170 boosts his average by about 2 more per game than it should.
He has played over 100 games and is in his 7th season, that generally means any peak season he hits now is a spike season, and not a break out season. He could have a spike season, but it always risky to try and predict one of those.
All of that doesn't mean he won't be one of those 2 or 3 though.

 

[Rowsus]

Hi Rowsus,
Please see my team linked. I'm having trouble deciding on my trades this week. I'm thinking I might go Heeney or Van Berlo to Tarrant but I don't know where or how I should use my other trade. Should I fix up underperformaning premiums/mid pricers (newnes) or should I look at upgrading. I can't find a good upgrade to do though. Thanks

Hi aleceee,
the 2nd trade largely depends on how much cash you have. Generally upgrading is preferable to fixing, though if Weller doesn't play this week, you could look at fixing Newnes. The tough question becomes, who do you bring in? We're all asking that question.

 

[Rowsus]

For those of you like me not 100% keen on offloading Lonie + $28k rise or Clarke + $33k rise, a potential option this week may arrive through Swan if he is rested.

Heeney > Tarrant and Swan to mids.

Next week Lonie/Clarke > Boek and Swan fwd

Gives you another week to look at Boekhurst, whilst using Heeneys 7sc this week to use a mid to grab Tarrant instead of a fwd cow $$ with some milk. One thing i heard about Lonie is his work rate is immense, another week to see how he follows up after last weeks 2goal confident boost would be of benefit.

I haven't heard of too many wanting to trade Lonie or Clark out yet, but your plan has some merit, for those that don't have, or don't want to break a M/F link, and they want to bring Tarrant in.
As to Boekhorst, I would want to see something pretty positive this week for him to make my wish list.

 

[Slammer]

Hey Rowsus,

Just a quick one.
I still have Lambert on mid bench. Every other bench spot atm is a rookie that is getting a game.
With the extended bench, do I just keep Lambert or trade him to Tarrant.
With the extra mid bench spot this year I am thinking of bypassing Tarrant and just using Lambert as a loophole
Any thoughts?