Opinion Rate My Team
- Thread starter Impromptu
- Start date
- Joined
- 28 Feb 2013
- Messages
- 1,292
- Likes
- 268
Hi guys, my first reveal of the preseason.
Hoping to get some feedback. Obviously rookies are not locked in, need to see some NAB Challenge form etc.
Thanks.
Hoping to get some feedback. Obviously rookies are not locked in, need to see some NAB Challenge form etc.
Thanks.
I am basically using the same structure and i think we might have around 5 players that are different excluding rookies. i dont have any issues with the structure however i agree with thanh point that you need some money in case we have another pat cripps type player. i would also keep my eye on dahlhaus. his role might change with libba in the squad. good luck
I love this thread.
starting to see more and more 3/0/5 in Def, with a few (like myself) opting for 4/0/4
Mids are nearly all 5/0/6 or plus Libba,
Rucks 2/0/1 (Though I am starting Lobbe)
and 4/0/4 or 3/0/5 in the FWD line
The next part becomes Ford vs Holden, then splits to Bottleo v Triple 8, DJR v HRT then splits further to Chaz or Frosty, J-Dub or Lowndesy. Lowndes had a great year in 2015, but we all expect that Whincup will be the lead driver don't we?
Nissan motorsport may be competitive, but if you think Todd or Rick will be serious contenders, you need to take a long hard look at yourself. Everyone wants Team BOC to succeed, but do you really think they will place 1 or 2 in the championship? No, me either, and that's why my line-up is more settled, with some minor tinkering of personnel.
All of this in Feb, 44 days before the season starts!
Gentlemen, start your engines!
starting to see more and more 3/0/5 in Def, with a few (like myself) opting for 4/0/4
Mids are nearly all 5/0/6 or plus Libba,
Rucks 2/0/1 (Though I am starting Lobbe)
and 4/0/4 or 3/0/5 in the FWD line
The next part becomes Ford vs Holden, then splits to Bottleo v Triple 8, DJR v HRT then splits further to Chaz or Frosty, J-Dub or Lowndesy. Lowndes had a great year in 2015, but we all expect that Whincup will be the lead driver don't we?
Nissan motorsport may be competitive, but if you think Todd or Rick will be serious contenders, you need to take a long hard look at yourself. Everyone wants Team BOC to succeed, but do you really think they will place 1 or 2 in the championship? No, me either, and that's why my line-up is more settled, with some minor tinkering of personnel.
All of this in Feb, 44 days before the season starts!
Gentlemen, start your engines!
My wife (following in my footsteps) would like some objective opinions on her SC team, first time playing SC or any fantasy sport for that matter. She did this all by herself, I just helped her to fill in the Rookie spots.
D: Shaw, Laird, KK, Macmillan, Brown, Hartley (Broad, Collins)
M: Fyfe, Ablett, Priddis, Selwood, Rockliff, Libba, Cuningham, Gresham (Menegola, Polkinghorne, Gore)
R: Jacobs, Naitanui (Loersch)
F: Dusty, Wingard, Franklin, Wells, Petracca, Kerridge (Kommer, Adams)
Any suggestion/comment would be appreciated and am deliberating on whether I should sign her up for an SCS league.
D: Shaw, Laird, KK, Macmillan, Brown, Hartley (Broad, Collins)
M: Fyfe, Ablett, Priddis, Selwood, Rockliff, Libba, Cuningham, Gresham (Menegola, Polkinghorne, Gore)
R: Jacobs, Naitanui (Loersch)
F: Dusty, Wingard, Franklin, Wells, Petracca, Kerridge (Kommer, Adams)
Any suggestion/comment would be appreciated and am deliberating on whether I should sign her up for an SCS league.
Hi Shaahorn, my main question when I see teams like yours is: will your "full premo" team have enough premos in it? An example, take your midfield: Is JOM a keeper or a stepping stone? Even if he's a keeper, it means your final team is without one of Pendles, Danger or Fyfe. In your defence, you "rule out" (at least) 2 of Shaw, McVeigh, Boyd... and so on.
I'm not saying it's wrong, it's more how I think about my starting team structure.
Will post my team in a few minutes, would also appreciate feedback.
I'm not saying it's wrong, it's more how I think about my starting team structure.
Will post my team in a few minutes, would also appreciate feedback.
- Joined
- 31 Mar 2014
- Messages
- 2,909
- Likes
- 2,122
- AFL Club
- Brisbane
here we go, ready for feedback good and bad!
D - Shaw, Laird, Bartel, Eski, RRRR
M - Danger, Pendles, Ablett, Rocky, Libba, RRRRR
R - Goldy, Blicavs, R
F - Joey, Chopsticks (i heard that on hear and lol'd), Dollhaus, Barlow, RRRR
Exactly $0 left in bank, pending rookie changes.
Thoughts:
1. Eski - heard Rocket Eade interviewed a couple of times and said Eski was in terrible shape last year (injuries and fitness) and looks the goods. I trusted the same info on Swannie last year and he produced so i'm going with the same premise.
2. Laird - can improve so he beats out McVeigh and Simpson. Slight risk but sentiment seems to be that he gets better.
3. Gaz - are you kidding? it's Gaz, avoid him at your peril. saw him the other day and looked fit and ready to roll!!!
4. Shaw - killed me last year and just dominates in the backs. willing to take the risk!
5. Blicavs - interchanges reduced, he's a cardio beast and i think will improve again. Beats out Stef who's said a few times he'll suffer from the changes (although i'm hopeful not and he has good endurance but Blic is cheaper and i think has more potential to improve).
The rest seems pretty cookie cutter. Look forward to comments! Thank you!!
D - Shaw, Laird, Bartel, Eski, RRRR
M - Danger, Pendles, Ablett, Rocky, Libba, RRRRR
R - Goldy, Blicavs, R
F - Joey, Chopsticks (i heard that on hear and lol'd), Dollhaus, Barlow, RRRR
Exactly $0 left in bank, pending rookie changes.
Thoughts:
1. Eski - heard Rocket Eade interviewed a couple of times and said Eski was in terrible shape last year (injuries and fitness) and looks the goods. I trusted the same info on Swannie last year and he produced so i'm going with the same premise.
2. Laird - can improve so he beats out McVeigh and Simpson. Slight risk but sentiment seems to be that he gets better.
3. Gaz - are you kidding? it's Gaz, avoid him at your peril. saw him the other day and looked fit and ready to roll!!!
4. Shaw - killed me last year and just dominates in the backs. willing to take the risk!
5. Blicavs - interchanges reduced, he's a cardio beast and i think will improve again. Beats out Stef who's said a few times he'll suffer from the changes (although i'm hopeful not and he has good endurance but Blic is cheaper and i think has more potential to improve).
The rest seems pretty cookie cutter. Look forward to comments! Thank you!!
The one word I got out of this RMT was POSSIBLY.
Now this is more of some friendly advice rather than a shut down, but think of it this way: every time you bring in a possibly player, it adds risk to your team. The more risk you introduce increases the likelihood of a greater hazard (in this case, POSSIBLY using more trades to fix said hazards).
Think of it in terms of probability: what is the probability of (conservatively) half of your possibles doing at least what you want them to? My guess would be pretty low (hence the high risk)
Unfortunately, for me, this team just screams HAZARD
A few POSSIBLY picks are fine, as long as you have a plan or a "what if" get-out strategy/plan.
Now this is more of some friendly advice rather than a shut down, but think of it this way: every time you bring in a possibly player, it adds risk to your team. The more risk you introduce increases the likelihood of a greater hazard (in this case, POSSIBLY using more trades to fix said hazards).
Think of it in terms of probability: what is the probability of (conservatively) half of your possibles doing at least what you want them to? My guess would be pretty low (hence the high risk)
Unfortunately, for me, this team just screams HAZARD
A few POSSIBLY picks are fine, as long as you have a plan or a "what if" get-out strategy/plan.
- Joined
- 31 Mar 2014
- Messages
- 2,909
- Likes
- 2,122
- AFL Club
- Brisbane
The one word I got out of this RMT was POSSIBLY.
Now this is more of some friendly advice rather than a shut down, but think of it this way: every time you bring in a possibly player, it adds risk to your team. The more risk you introduce increases the likelihood of a greater hazard (in this case, POSSIBLY using more trades to fix said hazards).
Think of it in terms of probability: what is the probability of (conservatively) half of your possibles doing at least what you want them to? My guess would be pretty low (hence the high risk)
Unfortunately, for me, this team just screams HAZARD
A few POSSIBLY picks are fine, as long as you have a plan or a "what if" get-out strategy/plan.
Now this is more of some friendly advice rather than a shut down, but think of it this way: every time you bring in a possibly player, it adds risk to your team. The more risk you introduce increases the likelihood of a greater hazard (in this case, POSSIBLY using more trades to fix said hazards).
Think of it in terms of probability: what is the probability of (conservatively) half of your possibles doing at least what you want them to? My guess would be pretty low (hence the high risk)
Unfortunately, for me, this team just screams HAZARD
A few POSSIBLY picks are fine, as long as you have a plan or a "what if" get-out strategy/plan.
My current set-up below:
Defs: Obviously it's rookie dependent, so let's see how we go
Mids: A little deep, but plenty of value there
Rucks: To Goldy or not to Goldy isn't my question, but who is his partner. I'm almost certain I'll go for a non-Lobbe/Tippet answer
Fwds: Have been set this way for a while.
Defs: Obviously it's rookie dependent, so let's see how we go
Mids: A little deep, but plenty of value there
Rucks: To Goldy or not to Goldy isn't my question, but who is his partner. I'm almost certain I'll go for a non-Lobbe/Tippet answer
Fwds: Have been set this way for a while.
The one word I got out of this RMT was POSSIBLY.
Now this is more of some friendly advice rather than a shut down, but think of it this way: every time you bring in a possibly player, it adds risk to your team. The more risk you introduce increases the likelihood of a greater hazard (in this case, POSSIBLY using more trades to fix said hazards).
Think of it in terms of probability: what is the probability of (conservatively) half of your possibles doing at least what you want them to? My guess would be pretty low (hence the high risk)
Unfortunately, for me, this team just screams HAZARD
A few POSSIBLY picks are fine, as long as you have a plan or a "what if" get-out strategy/plan.
Now this is more of some friendly advice rather than a shut down, but think of it this way: every time you bring in a possibly player, it adds risk to your team. The more risk you introduce increases the likelihood of a greater hazard (in this case, POSSIBLY using more trades to fix said hazards).
Think of it in terms of probability: what is the probability of (conservatively) half of your possibles doing at least what you want them to? My guess would be pretty low (hence the high risk)
Unfortunately, for me, this team just screams HAZARD
A few POSSIBLY picks are fine, as long as you have a plan or a "what if" get-out strategy/plan.