Opinion Player X vs Player Y

[Darkie]

Option 1: Malceski & Dangerfield
Option 2: Houli/Laird/Simpson/KK & Z Merrett
Option 3: Birchall & Dahlhaus

On the basis that I know you think Merrett will be a forward keeper (I'm not as confident), option two, as it gives you two keepers if you are correct. I don't think anyone has any blinding insights (although I am happy to be corrected!) into Malceski or Birchall, and to me they're perhaps 50-50 picks. I haven't seen a good argument for why Danger or Dahlhaus would outperform their price either - I think both are at risk of underperforming somewhat, whereas Simpson should be a safe bet, and he's reportedly having his best preseason in many years.

 

[Spud]

Luke Bruest v Brent Harvey?

 

[Ben's Beasts]

Luke Bruest v Brent Harvey?

Boomer. Has shown many times in the past that he can score enough to be a forward premium. Breust has never done so and doesn't look like he ever will. Great player though.

 

[Ben's Beasts]

Danger & Nic Nat v JPK & Stef Martin?

 

[Aneil915]

Luke Bruest v Brent Harvey?

Harvey for mine. Has the scoring history behind him but age might be a factor. Bruest will be up and down as most FWDs are during the season. Although I wont be going near either...

 

[Jurn Stern]

Danger & Nic Nat v JPK & Stef Martin?

Good one. Risk v Reward. Option 2 is the biggest chance of getting 235+ out of the two, but they are also more likely to average sub 210. I would think the option with the better ruck is better, as you have more scope to upgrade in the middle.

 

[Monya Meow Meow]

Danger & Nic Nat v JPK & Stef Martin?

All 4 are keepers so it's a really tough one
On the basis that Danger is at a new club and historically starts slow plus keep a look-out for Nic Nat's back, I'd say option 2 has the slightest of edges at the moment.

 

[THCLT]

Lewis or Hannebery...for RDT...LOL.

 

[Ben's Beasts]

Good one. Risk v Reward. Option 2 is the biggest chance of getting 235+ out of the two, but they are also more likely to average sub 210. I would think the option with the better ruck is better, as you have more scope to upgrade in the middle.

Do you prefer Stef over Nic Nat?

 

[WindyHillWizard]

One that I have been considering for the past few days:

Goldy + Anderson/Duggan / Parish (~$200K Mid) vs Lobbe + Wines

 

[WindyHillWizard]

Danger & Nic Nat v JPK & Stef Martin?

Option 1 for me. Danger will average +10 pts per game over JPK (in my opinion), whilst the difference between Nic Nat and Stef Martin will be less than 10pts (again in my opinion).

 

[Hondo]

One that I have been considering for the past few days:

Goldy + Anderson/Duggan / Parish (~$200K Mid) vs Lobbe + Wines

Option 1 at this stage

 

[Jurn Stern]

Do you prefer Stef over Nic Nat?

Stef is in my team currently. I like him more because he is involved more in general play, so there 'should' be less swings and roundabouts than with NN. NN is a jet though, and when I consider my R2 ruck upgrade, it'll be to either he, Goldy or Sauce.

 

[Courtesans]

Lewis or Hannebery...for RDT...LOL.

Lewis.

 

[30BucketsofRo]

Nic Nat hasn't won enough uncontested ball so far in his career. If he gets that facet of his game up, he will be right up there with Goldstein. And for someone of his athletic ability, he is expected to make more of an impact up forward.

 

[t.thomas6]

Nic Nat hasn't won enough uncontested ball so far in his career. If he gets that facet of his game up, he will be right up there with Goldstein. And for someone of his athletic ability, he is expected to make more of an impact up forward.

The difference between those two scoring similarly on a more consistent basis is Goldy's tank. He gets that base from being a junior runner.
If NicNat can improve that facet of his game, work hard to get to the right spots and pick up some 'cheaper' possessions (he also has to use it like Goldy does when he gets it)...he'll be top 2 in the comp easily.

...may even take a few more marks then too

 

[t.thomas6]

Ok here it is (probably already done before, but I'm restarting the conversation):

Fyfe vs Danger?

#discuss

 

[Hawk]

Ok here it is (probably already done before, but I'm restarting the conversation):

Fyfe vs Danger?

#discuss

If I was going to pay 600k for anything, it'd want to be durable. Fyfe has never played 22 games. If Fremantle are serious about chasing a flag, they need some scoring potency. I think he's the answer.
Danger rarely misses a match, and Geelong have a soft opening draw. Personally I think there is too much value in the 500-600k range this year, and I'm already taking Pendlebury and GAJ so I'm avoiding both Fyfe/Danger. In summary I'd pick Dangerfield as I feel he'll play more games, and average around the same as Fyfe.

 

[jaca]

I hear your points on there being value in the mids, but i'm also conscious of the fact I want a team of top end premo's by the end too. What concerns me about taking too many value players is not being left with any space for a) superstars and b) this year's heroes.

 

[Ricky Bobby]

I hear your points on there being value in the mids, but i'm also conscious of the fact I want a team of top end premo's by the end too. What concerns me about taking too many value players is not being left with any space for a) superstars and b) this year's heroes.

I think the best case scenario is where you are getting a top end premium player at a value/discounted price. If you are just getting value for a lower end player, then I think that's were we been to be careful