Opinion Injury/Suspension Updates

[Lost In The Sky]

In order: 93, 91, 87, 86, 84, 82

Sure, you can explain away last seasons 75 with all of their backline woes, but 88 would be his third best season ever and 95 would be a career best. He is entering his 11th season, so I would argue he is a known quantity. Also, he played 18 games in 2014, 12 games in 2013 and 15 games in 2010 so I would have mild concerns about his durability.

For mine, at $400k he is awkwardly priced. If he scores his 88 average, you would be mildly disappointed with him as a keeper, but he wouldn't generate any cash in order to upgrade.

I think the important thing to remember is that there is a difference between "underpriced" and "value". It all boils down to what you want to get out of a player. If you are picking him as a keeper believing he can average 90+, power to you. I'm not sold.

He's not for everyone but if you are selecting him, you are doing so thinking he will be a D4-6. Your not picking him to be making a ton of money. But if you can grab a good D4-6 at only $400k you have done well.

He was very heavily impacted by the loss of Mackenzie and Brown last year. It didn't allow him to play his usual role and didn't allow him to fully use his elite kicking skills.

Yes he is entering his 11th season but he is only 28 so he should be playing his best football, and with a move back to his usual role, a career year would not surprise in the slightest.

He has significant upside from last season.

I have no fears whatsoever about his durability. He's only had 2 injuries in his last 5 years... An Achilles in 2013 forcing him to miss the rest of the season. And a Medial Strain in 2014 causing him to miss 4 games. That's hardly a worry.

Say at worst Hurn averages 88 this year, If you can use that extra $110k+ wisely you save by picking Hurn (and most likely in the midfield), you could easliy make up those 7 points between an 88 avg and what was a D5-D6 avg of 95 last year.

 

[I am Cursed :(]

He's not for everyone but if you are selecting him, you are doing so thinking he will be a D4-6. Your not picking him to be making a ton of money. But if you can grab a good D4-6 at only $400k you have done well.

He was very heavily impacted by the loss of Mackenzie and Brown last year. It didn't allow him to play his usual role and didn't allow him to fully use his elite kicking skills.

Yes he is entering his 11th season but he is only 28 so he should be playing his best football, and with a move back to his usual role, a career year would not surprise in the slightest.

He has significant upside from last season.

I have no fears whatsoever about his durability. He's only had 2 injuries in his last 5 years... An Achilles in 2013 forcing him to miss the rest of the season. And a Medial Strain in 2014 causing him to miss 4 games. That's hardly a worry.

Say at worst Hurn averages 88 this year, If you can use that extra $110k+ wisely you save by picking Hurn (and most likely in the midfield), you could easliy make up those 7 points between an 88 avg and what was a D5-D6 avg of 95 last year.

Like I said, so long as you know why you are picking him and have a realistic expectation then power to you. I love the people who back their POD's and don't just select the top 10 hyped players.

Having said that, to me your logic doesn't make sense. If you are picking someone as a keeper you are hoping they are top 6 in their position by seasons end. He looks more like a trap selection than a keeper. At the start of the year you would be satisfied with a score of 88, but by seasons end you will be frustrated that he isn't scoring at premium levels. By then you will have too many other holes to plug.

I agree re: him improving on last years average for the reasons you mentioned. I don't see why he will improve on his career average though, which is where he becomes a bit of a trap. 88 points "at worst" would be his third best return, so I'm not sure how that is the worst case scenario! 5 out of his last 7 seasons have been below what you are hoping for, and only last year can be explained away by an injury depleted backline.

If you draw a line through last year you would want to have reasons why he is going to improve on his career average, not just reasons why he will be better than last year.

Just my unwanted $0.02.

 

[Bomber18]

Some good discussion on here on Hurn!
At 408k I think I'd want closer to 90+ from Hurn, especially with Lonergen at $345k who should go 85-90 himself. Hurn'd be a failure for me at 88 for me. In his better seasons he was very heavily tagged from memory. Just looking at how Shaw was left untagged last season, it seems forward tags aren't as trendy as they were 3-4 years ago. Potentially bodes well for Hurn.
He makes full advantage of SCs rewards for long kickouts. If he can get back to his more favourable role, he could push 95 but then again if there are few injuries his role could change again. That's what worries me most.

 

[Lost In The Sky]

Like I said, so long as you know why you are picking him and have a realistic expectation then power to you. I love the people who back their POD's and don't just select the top 10 hyped players.

Having said that, to me your logic doesn't make sense. If you are picking someone as a keeper you are hoping they are top 6 in their position by seasons end. He looks more like a trap selection than a keeper. At the start of the year you would be satisfied with a score of 88, but by seasons end you will be frustrated that he isn't scoring at premium levels. By then you will have too many other holes to plug.

I agree re: him improving on last years average for the reasons you mentioned. I don't see why he will improve on his career average though, which is where he becomes a bit of a trap. 88 points "at worst" would be his third best return, so I'm not sure how that is the worst case scenario! 5 out of his last 7 seasons have been below what you are hoping for, and only last year can be explained away by an injury depleted backline.

If you draw a line through last year you would want to have reasons why he is going to improve on his career average, not just reasons why he will be better than last year.

Just my unwanted $0.02.

Definitely not unwanted $0.02... All points of view are valid and definitely welcome.

I think he will avg around 95. And at that point he would be a keeper and one of the best scoring backs. You have to remember that apart from Heath Shaw, the defenders have a lower bar for being in the top 6 averaging players than any other position.

West Coast will win a lot of games this year, and along with that a fair chunk of the SC points on offer. Hurn stands to benefit from that due to his SC friendly style of game. He had 101 on the weekend in a game where he didn't even stand out, He just played his usual pre-2015 role.

Some good discussion on here on Hurn!
At 408k I think I'd want closer to 90+ from Hurn, especially with Lonergen at $345k who should go 85-90 himself. Hurn'd be a failure for me at 88 for me. In his better seasons he was very heavily tagged from memory. Just looking at how Shaw was left untagged last season, it seems forward tags aren't as trendy as they were 3-4 years ago. Potentially bodes well for Hurn.
He makes full advantage of SCs rewards for long kickouts. If he can get back to his more favourable role, he could push 95 but then again if there are few injuries his role could change again. That's what worries me most.

Hurn has always been heavily tagged due to the damage he can and does cause. The relaxing of the hard tag in recent years as well as the emergence of a gun player in McGovern will both benefit Hurn.

His role shouldn't change back to what it was last year as it is very rare you cop 2 season ending injuries to your two key tall backman. You wouldn't think that would happen to the same team 2 seasons in a row!!

Where you referring to having Tom Lonergan at $364K instead of Hurn?

Lonergan has only avg'd 56 over the last 5 years.

 

[Deeman1]

Hurn has always been heavily tagged due to the damage he can and does cause. The relaxing of the hard tag in recent years as well as the emergence of a gun player in McGovern will both benefit Hurn.

His role shouldn't change back to what it was last year as it is very rare you cop 2 season ending injuries to your two key tall backman. You wouldn't think that would happen to the same team 2 seasons in a row!!

Where you referring to having Tom Lonergan at $364K instead of Hurn?

Lonergan has only avg'd 56 over the last 5 years.

I believe he was referring to Jesse not Tom

 

[Lost In The Sky]

I believe he was referring to Jesse not Tom

Sorry my bad, I actually forgot that Jesse is a DEF as well this year, lol

 

[jaca]

Thanks for the insights on Hurn, have had him and McGovern in my team at various stages. I hear the comments of others saying Simpson is a "guaranteed" 95... but I'm not sure the 100k is worth the guarantee.

I'm also sure we get a bit unrealistic with our expectations of averages. If my final Defs end up: 105, 100, 95, 95, 90, 85 - whilst you may not be ecstatic, it's the base for a pretty reasonable weekly score.

 

[stephen]

Completely agree Jaca. 90 as keeper score has become kinda gospel round these parts but is essentially arbitrary. Last year's winner had malceski from the get go. Personally I think a cheap 85 average in defence gets the job done fine if it means a significantly better team elsewhere.

 

[Bomber18]

Thanks for the insights on Hurn, have had him and McGovern in my team at various stages. I hear the comments of others saying Simpson is a "guaranteed" 95... but I'm not sure the 100k is worth the guarantee.

I'm also sure we get a bit unrealistic with our expectations of averages. If my final Defs end up: 105, 100, 95, 95, 90, 85 - whilst you may not be ecstatic, it's the base for a pretty reasonable weekly score.

Completely agree Jaca. 90 as keeper score has become kinda gospel round these parts but is essentially arbitrary. Last year's winner had malceski from the get go. Personally I think a cheap 85 average in defence gets the job done fine if it means a significantly better team elsewhere.

Great points here. I agree too. I think another consideration is that your 85 average defender needs to play 22 games. I see more value in 22 game 85 average player than a 19-20 game 90+ average (ie: Simpson).
Some of these older blokes might average 90+ but their value diminishes with every missed game.

 

[Brettthejett]

Great points here. I agree too. I think another consideration is that your 85 average defender needs to play 22 games. I see more value in 22 game 85 average player than a 19-20 game 90+ average (ie: Simpson).
Some of these older blokes might average 90+ but their value diminishes with every missed game.

An 85 AV def will leave you points down if you had Simpson and your cover for him being out can score a 60. You would be 50 points down over the season. I'd go the higher AV player each time. Injury would affect my decision to though.

 

[anfa18]

Simpson has missed 5 H&A games in the last 10 seasons and averaged 90+ for the last 7.

PIT70:

22 @ 85 = 1870

20 @ 90 = 1940
19 @ 90 = 1920

17 @ 90 = 1880 - Premium misses 5 games with rookie scoring 70.


PIT65:

22 @ 85 = 1870

20 @ 90 = 1930
19 @ 90 = 1905

18 @ 90 = 1880 - Premium misses 4 games with rookie scoring 65.


PIT60:

22 @ 85 = 1870

20 @ 90 = 1920
19 @ 90 = 1890 - Premium misses 3 games with rookie scoring 60.



In most cases, going by total points (with rookie cover) the premium who averages 90 but misses 3-4 games still scores more than a player who averages 85 from 22 games.

*This doesn't take into account price differences and where the extra money can be spent.

 

[Zimmer]

Yeah, didn't think Simpson had missed many games. Thanks for that info anfa.

 

[Bomber18]

An 85 AV def will leave you points down if you had Simpson and your cover for him being out can score a 60. You would be 50 points down over the season. I'd go the higher AV player each time. Injury would affect my decision to though.

There's always the uncertainty of a 55-60 averaging rookie though, you might be getting his 30-40 score that week. You might not even have cover due to other injuries. I'd prefer the 22 game player in the defence instead of running the gauntlet with a D7, D8 rookie.
You would also save around $150k starting Sheridan over Simpson which could be used to make much more than 50 points.

It's all about maximising value in the end imo, I think we can do that best in the defence with some of these promising midpriced options. Things turn pear shaped through when instead of a 85-90 average, they just average 70-75.

EDIT: Thanks for those charts anfa. Great help. On points overall, providing you have at least a 60 averaging bench option, the higher averaging player gets you from 20-50 points more. You still run the gauntlet on your D7 & D8.

 

[Beg2Differ]

The debate about Hurn reminds me a lot of my thought process last year when reliable defenders were few and far between. I started him assuming he'd do no worse that his history (90ish) and at worst fill D4-D6. I ended breaking one of my golden SC rules and trading him out after the byes (in desperation). Seemed to run away from the ball at times avoiding points at all costs. Won't risk putting myself through that again.

 

[Beg2Differ]

Hard to take anything the Gold Cast hierarchy say about Ablett seriously after the pup they sold us last year at about this time.

 

[Goodie's Guns]

MELBOURNE INJURY UPDATE

Chris Dawes is resigned to missing the first month of the AFL season as the Melbourne key forward recovers from his latest calf muscle injury.

 

[Philzsay]

Been briefly mentioned elsewhere but thought I'd add a link here re Tom Rockliff:
http://m.afl.com.au/news/2016-03-09...inal-nab-challenge-clash-with-hamstring-issue

BRISBANE Lions captain Tom Rockliff is likely to miss Sunday's final NAB Challenge match against GWS after leaving training on Wednesday with a hamstring niggle.

Although the club has not totally ruled him out, it would be a shock if Rockliff was named to play.

He is in no doubt for round one against West Coast, however.

Rockliff had a back-related hamstring niggle earlier in the pre-season and the club is hopeful it's just a repeat of that.

After last season's disastrous run of injuries, the Lions are being ultra cautious this pre-season.

Rockliff has done a full pre-season of training but will go into the season without a match under his belt after Sunday's contest against St Kilda in Mackay was washed out.

Dayne Beams, Josh Green and Allen Christensen will also miss against the Giants.

 

[I am Cursed :(]

I don't like that!

 

[Monya Meow Meow]

So Fyfe, Gaz and Rocky are all under injury clouds.
Brilliant

 

[Matt]

Adelaide Midfielders Brad Crouch and Rory Atkins have been dropped to the SANFL for disciplinary reasons. (Drinking at the Clipsal 500)

The club say the players "failed to meet the elite standards required in regards to their preparation."

Crows Senior Coach Don Pyke said the decision followed a recommendation from the Senior Leadership Group.

"Our players have established a trademark and standards which govern their behaviour both on and off the field,” Pyke said.

“In this instance, Brad and Rory did not meet those standards when the playing group had a break from training over the weekend.”

The Crows play Gold Coast in their final NAB Challenge match on Friday night.