Opinion Forward Discussions
- Thread starter IDIG
- Start date
I don't trust him. His body has let him down so many times and now he's 31. His history of foot/calf/achilles problems should be a huge neon warning sign. Last year i remember him being somewhat talked up pre-season, saying he was fit and ready, 2 games in and he was done. His age and the specific injuries are enough to convince me to stay away. He will need to play 8-10 games (in a row) at about 85ppg to make 150k and i'm doubtful that he will manage it.
Being a North man myself, I think you're being a tad tough on your summation of the guy. You present a very valid case why not to select him and I'm not about to offer a counter argument to that.
Injury aside, he's one of the many players in our side of late who've for one reason or another have never really reached their full potential. We really lack his class, poise and finish in the forward half and for our sake I hope he has a good run at it this year.
Back to SC, two things I take into consideration when I select my non-premiums, job security and potential to play an SC friendly role. Wells ticks both those boxes and some. If there were an abundant of 'cheaper' rookies to choose from, then I'd absolutely agree with you that he's a risk not worth taking. However, at it stands, there aren't a lot of those 'cheap' rookies really putting their hands up and screaming 'pick me'!
For that reason alone, he's definitely a worthwhile candidate to occupy one of the higher priced rookie spots until the waters becomes clearer leading up to round 1. Injury aside, he's far and above most players in the same price bracket.
Injury aside, he's one of the many players in our side of late who've for one reason or another have never really reached their full potential. We really lack his class, poise and finish in the forward half and for our sake I hope he has a good run at it this year.
Back to SC, two things I take into consideration when I select my non-premiums, job security and potential to play an SC friendly role. Wells ticks both those boxes and some. If there were an abundant of 'cheaper' rookies to choose from, then I'd absolutely agree with you that he's a risk not worth taking. However, at it stands, there aren't a lot of those 'cheap' rookies really putting their hands up and screaming 'pick me'!
For that reason alone, he's definitely a worthwhile candidate to occupy one of the higher priced rookie spots until the waters becomes clearer leading up to round 1. Injury aside, he's far and above most players in the same price bracket.
- Joined
- 22 Jan 2013
- Messages
- 3,858
- Likes
- 1,652
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
The Wells dilemma reminds me of the Higgins ($254,600) debate during the 2014 preseason, I did not start with Higgins that year.
For those that did, he played all 8 games leading up to the bye averaging a very respectable 82.5 and you could've made a handy profit of $152,600 had you chose to trade him out during the bye.
If Wells can emulate Higgins feat of 2014, then I would call that a definite win.
For those that did, he played all 8 games leading up to the bye averaging a very respectable 82.5 and you could've made a handy profit of $152,600 had you chose to trade him out during the bye.
If Wells can emulate Higgins feat of 2014, then I would call that a definite win.
That's probably the most important consideration for me, especially in the past week when I'm trying to firm up players within my team. I read a lot of comment to the effect, 'Rookies are only placeholders at the moment'...whilst that may be true (and there's nothing wrong with that), I believe people should have a plan B just in case those 'placeholder' doesn't have a 'place' in the round 1 teams!
I'm very quickly going away from players and structure which I want to something that is more representative of the current situation with regards to rookies. To be honest, even if we somehow get a whole heaps of 'cheap' rookies named for round 1, I would be cautious in slotting them into my starting team just because they are named. I have a list of rookies that I rate and if they are named I would have no hesitation in putting them in my starting team.
I'm very quickly going away from players and structure which I want to something that is more representative of the current situation with regards to rookies. To be honest, even if we somehow get a whole heaps of 'cheap' rookies named for round 1, I would be cautious in slotting them into my starting team just because they are named. I have a list of rookies that I rate and if they are named I would have no hesitation in putting them in my starting team.
I'm on board with both of these comments.
I was using rookies as placeholders for a long time as well, but given we are now halfway through NAB, I think we should be looking to firm these up. This year's crop seems to be less promising, so it's now a matter of adjusting to reflect that, as I see it ... as they say, rookies determine structure.
In the event a bunch of cheap and reliable rookies turn up, I am confident that I can and will revert to my earlier structure and picks. I don't want to completely destroy my side in the meantime and/or fill it with mid-priced options I will come to regret, but I do think it's time for some contingency planning
I was using rookies as placeholders for a long time as well, but given we are now halfway through NAB, I think we should be looking to firm these up. This year's crop seems to be less promising, so it's now a matter of adjusting to reflect that, as I see it ... as they say, rookies determine structure.
In the event a bunch of cheap and reliable rookies turn up, I am confident that I can and will revert to my earlier structure and picks. I don't want to completely destroy my side in the meantime and/or fill it with mid-priced options I will come to regret, but I do think it's time for some contingency planning
From what I've seen in the intraclub and NAB 3, he could average anywhere between 85 and 105 to be quite honest. When he's on, he's easily one of the best players in the comp (in the sense of how he can influence/turn a match by himself) and probably the most pleasing to the eye to watch. Aside from SC, I just hope to see him play close to if not 22 games because the game is better off when players like him are out on the park making us enjoy the game of AFL
I couldn't agree more THCLT.
My team was pretty settled about a week ago with the big 4 midfielders included, however due to potential rookie availabilty it has somewhat been watered down in the past week or so the point that only 2 of the big 4 mids are still there.
The problem I found is that having players like Shaw, Fyfe, Danger, GAJ, Goldy really meant that I could afford to have several 123 rookies and a couple of 117k and 102k rookies with no cash.
I think we are going to be in the situation that we may have to pay a little more for our rookies, so comprimises have have to be made on the premiums/keepers in our starting team to facilitate this.
As a result, I think my team will be short of the players that I really want in order to maximise quality and cash generation of the rookies selected.
ATM i have a mixture of mostly mid range and more expensive rookies, Mills, Menadue, Kennedy, as place holders, but if cheaper rookies are available with decent J/S and scoring ability then it is easier to downgrade a starting rookie than it is to find cash at the last minute to uprgade one to one that is playing.
I think it also may mean that the normally off-limits mid-pricer mids may have to be considered. For example instead of a mid struture of 5-1-5 may have to become a 4-2-5 struture with players like Crouch, Crouch and Liberatore under further consideration.
My team was pretty settled about a week ago with the big 4 midfielders included, however due to potential rookie availabilty it has somewhat been watered down in the past week or so the point that only 2 of the big 4 mids are still there.
The problem I found is that having players like Shaw, Fyfe, Danger, GAJ, Goldy really meant that I could afford to have several 123 rookies and a couple of 117k and 102k rookies with no cash.
I think we are going to be in the situation that we may have to pay a little more for our rookies, so comprimises have have to be made on the premiums/keepers in our starting team to facilitate this.
As a result, I think my team will be short of the players that I really want in order to maximise quality and cash generation of the rookies selected.
ATM i have a mixture of mostly mid range and more expensive rookies, Mills, Menadue, Kennedy, as place holders, but if cheaper rookies are available with decent J/S and scoring ability then it is easier to downgrade a starting rookie than it is to find cash at the last minute to uprgade one to one that is playing.
I think it also may mean that the normally off-limits mid-pricer mids may have to be considered. For example instead of a mid struture of 5-1-5 may have to become a 4-2-5 struture with players like Crouch, Crouch and Liberatore under further consideration.
