Opinion Player X vs Player Y

[teatai]

Pick 2
Simpson v Macmillan v Yeo v b smith

I'd go Simpson for sure > Yeo and Smith pretty even but would go Yeo just... > Macmillan dont know much about him, could be a make or break POD

 

[Ben's Beasts]

Option one for mine except I am not sold on Yeo personally. That said, not sold that Simpson is a great pick either. I reckon don't get too stuck on premium defenders like Simpson because there are cheaper options like Smith who are more than capable of matching him. Plus Simpson is one who always drops to $400Kish from memory. Nice, easy upgrade target.

Is there some other way of scrounging the money other than Laird-->Yeo? I think Simpson-->Smith is a bit of a no-brainer really. I wouldn't go out of my way to avoid Smith BTW. I expect him to be a popular pick and so the risk is lowered.

Dahlhaus to Buddy instead of Laird to Yeo could get it done but I just don't trust Lance!

 

[Bomber18]

I'm not sure if it has been answered but
Libba (M6) v Malceski (D4)
What do you think each can average?

 

[Eagling]

I'm not sure if it has been answered but
Libba (M6) v Malceski (D4)
What do you think each can average?

Libba 112, Malceski 82.

 

[Bomber18]

Libba 112, Malceski 82.

Thanks for the response
Gee Libba 112! If only I had your goggles on it'd be Libba no contest and I could tinker other parts of my team !
I rate them a little closer though so it's a bit more of a toss up

 

[_Slip_]

I'm not sure if it has been answered but
Libba (M6) v Malceski (D4)
What do you think each can average?

Libba 104 Malceski 86

 

[happydays]

Fyfe + Weitering vs Barlow + Zac Williams/Malceski

Confused ��

 

[Rowsus]

I'm not sure if it has been answered but
Libba (M6) v Malceski (D4)
What do you think each can average?

Libba 101, Malceski 81

 

[GoldenBoys]

I'm not sure if it has been answered but
Libba (M6) v Malceski (D4)
What do you think each can average?

Libba 104 Malceski 83

 

[Jurn Stern]

Dahlhaus to Buddy instead of Laird to Yeo could get it done but I just don't trust Lance!

Buddy misses games, but is priced below what we expect him to deliver. Dahlhaus is at his highest starting price coming off a career best season where the dogs far exceed expectations placed upon them and he has the dogs best midfielder coming back into the side. If you can tell, I rate Dahlhaus a poor chance to keep his scoring up.

 

[Ben's Beasts]

Pick 2
Simpson v Macmillan v Yeo v b smith

Simpson & B Smith

I'm not sure if it has been answered but
Libba (M6) v Malceski (D4)
What do you think each can average?

Libba 107, Malceski 85

 

[Ricky Bobby]

K.Kolo v Smith? (and what can they average?)

 

[Ben's Beasts]

K.Kolo v Smith? (and what can they average?)

I prefer KK. I think he will average 95 - 100 and I'm not buying into the argument that the returning GC mids will affect his output as I believe he will play mostly off half-back in an SC friendly role.

Smith is so hard to estimate. He could average as much as 100 or as little as 85.

I think KK is the safer pick.

 

[Hondo]

Dahlhaus to Buddy instead of Laird to Yeo could get it done but I just don't trust Lance!

If you feel you have to persist with the more exy guys in their positions like Dalhaus & Kade then maybe Danger just has to slide.

I briefly had Dalhaus but found it hard to justify with other guys I wanted one being Danger over Wines.

It's a matter of which premium in their position is the priority to start and who are you prepared to upgrade in. My feeling is get your engine room right and compromise up forward or defence where as I have suggested with Simpson v Smith, it is not a sure bet that going expensive will generate the extra benefit / the list clogging risk is lower.

Then again, Wines could be ready to step it up and be a smart value choice over Danger.

My take on Simpson/Wines/Dalhaus v Smith/Danger/Buddy is the second one as you would have guessed

Others will look at it and straight away pick the first option.

 

[Ben's Beasts]

If you feel you have to persist with the more exy guys in their positions like Dalhaus & Kade then maybe Danger just has to slide.

I briefly had Dalhaus but found it hard to justify with other guys I wanted one being Danger over Wines.

It's a matter of which premium in their position is the priority to start and who are you prepared to upgrade in. My feeling is get your engine room right and compromise up forward or defence where as I have suggested with Simpson v Smith, it is not a sure bet that going expensive will generate the extra benefit / the list clogging risk is lower.

Then again, Wines could be ready to step it up and be a smart value choice over Danger.

My take on Simpson/Wines/Dalhaus v Smith/Danger/Buddy is the second one as you would have guessed

Others will look at it and straight away pick the first option.

Have figured out a way to get Danger and keep Wines but it means I'm changing my structure which you knew would happen!

OUT: Simpson, Dahlhaus, mid rookie
IN: Smith, Danger, fwd rookie

Just means I'm needing an extra rookie up forward instead of the mids but one of my fwd rookies will be a floating donut if I go with this structure anyway.

 

[Squiz]

Is it just my doggies bias, or do others think that the bont could average 110+ for the year. Currently have him in my team as a bit of a POD. Averaged 115.8 from round 15-23 last year. There has been reports of him starting on light duties this preseason but he can continue that late season form he could be anything this year.

 

[IDIG]

I'm quite bullish on Wells. He's clearly risky in an injury sense, but he's very cheap, and essentially I see him as a dear rookie with excellent JS, high scoring history, and a great early draw. I will almost certainly start him unless he's unfit. After that I think it's daylight. I currently have Simpkin, but that's largely based on other people's views, and I don't like those picks as a general rule. He is a strong chance to be cut if I need cash or if he shows any signs of injury, role uncertainty, etc. No interest in anyone else at around this price. As Ben said, most players in this price range are there for a reason, although I am not averse to sifting a fair bit to find the potential gold nuggets.

Libba is a lock for me. I think he's a viable M8, and even if he underperforms that, he should help make a fast start and facilitate an upgrade. Ridiculous value in my view. A bit like Sandi a few years ago - to me he's a premium with a huge discount, not a speculative mid-pricer. The other two are not premiums, although obviously both have a lot of potential. I think both are clearly stepping stones, at least for the purposes of my planning. I favour JOM largely because he is more durable and he has outperformed Crouch in both years they have played. To me the ordering of those two is clear if they are similarly fit, so I've been watching the ups and downs of that to determine my final call. I wouldn't mind having JOM as a POD vs Crouch assuming they both start fit, albeit that I'll happily replace JOM with Crouch if the former doesn't get up. The only other one around this price that has had serious consideration from me is Leuey, and a bit has changed there recently for the worse.

The other one on my watchlist who isn't getting alot of attention is Lyons. Subbed something like 6 or 8 times last year, if he gets his chance to cement his spot in the side he could be a decent option.

I get the feeling JOM will be more popular but from what i've read he's no certainty to start round 1 so Crouch (who's flying ) will play throughout the preseason. No issues with role for Crouch either so it will just be a matter of if his body holds up.

Berger, is looking less and less likely for round 1 as it nears. Jamar was on SEN last night and i interpreted alot of his comments that he was expecting to play this year..maybe not in round 1 but definitely throughout the year. For me, that makes Berger far less appealing.

 

[Courtesans]

Tippett v Harvey?

 

[Bontempele]

Tippett v Harvey?

Boomer has much more chance of playing 20+ games despite his age. He's also slightly discounted given his sub games.

Tippett, on the other hand, was boosted by some strong hitout figures in 2015 (Sinclair will most likely take 75 % of the ruck time in 2016, meaning Tippett's scores could drop).

 

[jaca]

I have Harvey.

Sinclair will be in Sydney's 22, though who knows who will do what. Having said that, Tippett hasn't got over 90 since he's started.

Yes, Boomer was down on average last year, but was started a sub twice. First time was clearly kick up the backside, 2nd time to rest him ahead of finals. He also averaged 104 over the 7 weeks after being subbed, and 95 across all unsubbed regular season games.

One thing i'm somewhat unsure is - if the sub rule is gone and the sub isn't just a 4th quarter guy - do they give him a full week off every now and then?