Analysis Premium Point of Difference

[Nk29]

LOL Yes, but No.

Don't forget Mundy and Jack are popular for this site, ie a small sample size. The actual Herald Sun stats at the time of the poll was 3.1% (Mundy) and 2.1% (Jack). Don't forget a high percentage of the entries play for fun unlike us who live, sleep and breathe SuperCoach

But still have fun

 

[Courtesans]

LOL Yes, but No.

Don't forget Mundy and Jack are popular for this site, ie a small sample size. The actual Herald Sun stats at the time of the poll was 3.1% (Mundy) and 2.1% (Jack). Don't forget a high percentage of the entries play for fun unlike us who live, sleep and breathe SuperCoach

Mundy, Jack, Dal Santo, S. Selwood, etc are spoken of here, I suppose they have not the "brand name" as Jay has written of. The example I like to use, is Martin/Wright..both at this time are equal, more or less in projections. Wright is my choice,..think about why

 

[Prochard]

LOL Yes, but No.

Don't forget Mundy and Jack are popular for this site, ie a small sample size. The actual Herald Sun stats at the time of the poll was 3.1% (Mundy) and 2.1% (Jack). Don't forget a high percentage of the entries play for fun unlike us who live, sleep and breathe SuperCoach

Haha true

 

[Prochard]

does Harley Bennell fall under this category and is worth consideration?

 

[Philzsay]

does Harley Bennell fall under this category and is worth consideration?

I am not sure on his percentage but I would say yes it fits in the category and yes he is worth giving proper consideration to.

 

[Goodie's Guns]

does Harley Bennell fall under this category and is worth consideration?

Yep definitely agree on both accounts.

 

[Prochard]

So atm I have bennell and mundy, other candidates feature fyfe gaff and shuey

 

[Percination]

G'day guys, only been reading these threads for the past week and thought I've gotta get in on these discussions! First time posting, long time supercoaching. What do you guys think of GAJ? He's in 41% of teams currently but with a BE of 139 surely you would think he would drop in price and use the extra cash elsewhere (also there was talk he'll be spending more time up forward).

The flipside to that is even if he averages 120 he's still likely to be in the top 6 mids. I for one know how hard it was trying to get him back in last year when I traded him out while injured. I guess what I'm saying is, do you take the risk by leaving him out and hope to pick him up cheaper or pay the extra and lock him in as captain each week? I've seen a lot of teams without him

 

[Prochard]

So atm I have bennell and mundy, other candidates feature fyfe gaff and shuey

For me, I dont select someone who won't rise in price unless they can take advantage of the Captaincy or the Captain loophole(Ablet Pendlebury,Cox).

 

[Prochard]

Ooops wrong quote

 

[Grant]

I'm thinking of going for Beams. He'll be the least popular top 5 contender.

Most people will go for Pendlebury and Swan but I don't see why he can't match them. I don't think Ball will have an impact on his numbers.

 

[AngryAnt]

Jack averaged ~128 ppg from rounds 8 to 21 last season, imagine if he could replicate that across a whole season, look out Gaz!

 

[Prochard]

Ooops wrong quote

According to the statistics from last year.
Beams average 114.4 when pendlbury and swan are both playing, 136.75 with one of pendlebury and swan playing
Swan averages 126.5 when both beams and pendlebury are playing, 125.6 with one of them missing
Pendlebury averages 127.9 if he is playing alongside beams and swan, and 116.4 with either of swan and beams missing.

As you can see, even without Ball last yearm Beams's scores are affected significantly by the addition of midfielders.
But the whole point of PODs is to think differently and unorthodox, so things could work your way

 

[Prochard]

OMG, why do I keep quoting the wrong thing

 

[Grant]

According to the statistics from last year.
Beams average 114.4 when pendlbury and swan are both playing, 136.75 with one of pendlebury and swan playing
Swan averages 126.5 when both beams and pendlebury are playing, 125.6 with one of them missing
Pendlebury averages 127.9 if he is playing alongside beams and swan, and 116.4 with either of swan and beams missing.

As you can see, even without Ball last yearm Beams's scores are affected significantly by the addition of midfielders.
But the whole point of PODs is to think differently and unorthodox, so things could work your way

I think the numbers are misleading for Beams.

 

[Prochard]

I think the numbers are misleading for Beams.

How so? (Yes quoted the right thing this time)

 

[Grant]

How so? (Yes quoted the right thing this time)

His bad scores came early in the season other than his 80 v Carlton when he was tagged by Carrazzo because Pendlebury wasn't playing.

 

[Prochard]

His bad scores came early in the season other than his 80 v Carlton when he was tagged by Carrazzo because Pendlebury wasn't playing.

Ok well Beams did average 136+ from round 9 onwards, but just keep in mind that he was initially brought in for Ball's injury, ball's return will be fairly significant for Beam's scores.

 

[Termin8er789]

Seeming as though Mundy averaged 116 in 2011 excluding his score of 6 when he went down, do you think he will be able to reproduce that kind of scoring this year. His last 8 games of 2012 (including Freo's two finals) he averaged 114, so is this maybe a glimpse of what is 2013 season will be like?

 

[Damoz]

I haven't got any of those Players in my Team. =/

Mundy the most selected option in the Poll.....interesting....