Opinion Questions For Rowsus
- Thread starter Rowsus
- Start date
- Status
Hey Deeman1, I'm well, and I hope you are too.
No, I don't think Midprice compromise is good for M5. Each position needs to serve a purpose. If you need to go cheap with your M5, in order to make better selections elsewhere on the field, then you may as well take your M5 all the way down to a Rookie. I'm no big wrap for Parker, in SC-terms. Tremendous player, but needs things to go his way to post consistently good SC scores. Wines I rate a decent chance to become a Keeper, even if it is a weak M7/8. I'd prefer him to M Crouch, but if that stops you getting two ultra Prems, and you have to settle for two "normal" Prems, then I'd forego Wines too.
No, I don't think Midprice compromise is good for M5. Each position needs to serve a purpose. If you need to go cheap with your M5, in order to make better selections elsewhere on the field, then you may as well take your M5 all the way down to a Rookie. I'm no big wrap for Parker, in SC-terms. Tremendous player, but needs things to go his way to post consistently good SC scores. Wines I rate a decent chance to become a Keeper, even if it is a weak M7/8. I'd prefer him to M Crouch, but if that stops you getting two ultra Prems, and you have to settle for two "normal" Prems, then I'd forego Wines too.
Last edited:
I agree with anfa18, I'm not aware of any hamstring history. He does however seem to accumulate niggles and problems. I can understand some Coaches looking for a POD by not starting him. We all know what he is capable of, and that if he even goes close to those levels, that he represents a very cheap M3/5. I will be starting him, as I believe his upside outweighs his downside.
Hey Row,
Quick question: in your professional opinion
where (i.e. what line) would you take a gamble on a potential breakout player (e.g. a Lonergan, Z. Merrett, Sheridan, Williams etc type) and who would that player currently be?
Quick question: in your professional opinion
where (i.e. what line) would you take a gamble on a potential breakout player (e.g. a Lonergan, Z. Merrett, Sheridan, Williams etc type) and who would that player currently be?
there is absolutely no doubt, the Def line is the best place to speculate. The difference between what you might want from your D5/6 and what a failed speculative pick might score, is likely to be less than a failed speculative pick on any other line.
At the moment, I'm thinking the best speculative picks are: Lonergan, Sheridan, S Gray and A Hall
Hey Row,
Second question for the day
What would your thoughts be on Harwood? Say as another option to Sheridan and Lonergan.
Second question for the day
What would your thoughts be on Harwood? Say as another option to Sheridan and Lonergan.
I think people are breaking one of the basic rules in selecting their SC team. They are getting carried away by one half of football in the first week of the NAB series! Surely that's an over reaction?! He's managed 59 games in six seasons, and has a best return of 83, and a next best of 67! We're not talking about a 3rd or 4th season young gun on the rise here. He might turn out to be a good pick, but I won't be touching him.
Hi anfa18,
nothing has changed for me, since I wrote this on 27/1/2016.
nothing has changed for me, since I wrote this on 27/1/2016.
Tom Langdon
Season - 22 games at 85.5 (2014 19 games at 71.0)
MCG - 14 games at 82.2 (MCG wins 8 at 87.6, MCG losses 6 at 75.0)
Etihad - 3 games at 91.3 (Etihad wins 0 at 0.0, Etihad losses 3 at 91.3)
Away - 5 games at 91.0 (Away wins 2 at 85.0, Away 3 losses at 95.0)
Wins - 10 games at 87.1
Losses - 12 games at 84.1
Of note...
It's hard to draw patterns from only 2 seasons of playing. He probably performed too well in 2015, pushing his price up, and increasing the risk of taking him in 2016. Just to add to the he's too risky argument, and trying to find something in his stats, his best scoring area is losses on Small grounds. It's clutching at straws, when dealing with small sample sizes, but here is a break up of Langdons career:
Losses on Small grounds: 8 games at 98.5
Wins on Small grounds: 2 games at 72.0
Losses on Med/Lge grounds: 13 games at 64.1
Wins on Med/Lge grounds: 18 games at 81.3
Given Collingwood only play 5 games on Small grounds in 2016 (Rnds 1, 17, 18, 21, 22), that would seem to add to the risk, if you were thinking of starting with Langdon.
Season - 22 games at 85.5 (2014 19 games at 71.0)
MCG - 14 games at 82.2 (MCG wins 8 at 87.6, MCG losses 6 at 75.0)
Etihad - 3 games at 91.3 (Etihad wins 0 at 0.0, Etihad losses 3 at 91.3)
Away - 5 games at 91.0 (Away wins 2 at 85.0, Away 3 losses at 95.0)
Wins - 10 games at 87.1
Losses - 12 games at 84.1
Of note...
It's hard to draw patterns from only 2 seasons of playing. He probably performed too well in 2015, pushing his price up, and increasing the risk of taking him in 2016. Just to add to the he's too risky argument, and trying to find something in his stats, his best scoring area is losses on Small grounds. It's clutching at straws, when dealing with small sample sizes, but here is a break up of Langdons career:
Losses on Small grounds: 8 games at 98.5
Wins on Small grounds: 2 games at 72.0
Losses on Med/Lge grounds: 13 games at 64.1
Wins on Med/Lge grounds: 18 games at 81.3
Given Collingwood only play 5 games on Small grounds in 2016 (Rnds 1, 17, 18, 21, 22), that would seem to add to the risk, if you were thinking of starting with Langdon.
has your opinion changed on blicavs now that he will tag the fyfe,jpk types?
i think it makes him alot more attractive now that all those types are going to lead him to the ball and the fact that he can hurt them the other way with his speed
apparantly did a good job on pendles last season and scored quite well
i think it makes him alot more attractive now that all those types are going to lead him to the ball and the fact that he can hurt them the other way with his speed
apparantly did a good job on pendles last season and scored quite well
Absolutely not!!!
I think you might be mixing your terms. Tagging implies you forego your own game, with the idea of doing nothing else but shut that player down. Outside of a permanent, stay at home, small Forward Pocket, I can't think of a worse role, in SC terms. I think what you are referring to is a "run with" role, and no, that won't change my mind, as, if Fyfe/Pendles/Ward, whoever, are taking Blicavs to the ball/contest, I will back them to beat him more times than not! It might possibly reduce their output, but I can't see it increasing his.
I think you might be mixing your terms. Tagging implies you forego your own game, with the idea of doing nothing else but shut that player down. Outside of a permanent, stay at home, small Forward Pocket, I can't think of a worse role, in SC terms. I think what you are referring to is a "run with" role, and no, that won't change my mind, as, if Fyfe/Pendles/Ward, whoever, are taking Blicavs to the ball/contest, I will back them to beat him more times than not! It might possibly reduce their output, but I can't see it increasing his.
Rowsus
Based on comments made by both of us in the Rucks thread I think we are (or were) on a similar path with our rucks. Now that the NAB is over (well it will be in a few hours) are there any cheaper options that you think may be worth selecting?
I am still considering Sinclair, Minson and Z Smith (and would want at least 95 per week from them) and at a lower price level I am looking at Currie, Vardy and Campbell (would be happy with 80 a week from any of these)
Based on comments made by both of us in the Rucks thread I think we are (or were) on a similar path with our rucks. Now that the NAB is over (well it will be in a few hours) are there any cheaper options that you think may be worth selecting?
I am still considering Sinclair, Minson and Z Smith (and would want at least 95 per week from them) and at a lower price level I am looking at Currie, Vardy and Campbell (would be happy with 80 a week from any of these)
Hi Rowsus
Interested on your thoughts re the following.
It would appear at the moment that there is a shortage of 102-123k rookies in a number of positions or at least serious question marks against many of them. I suspect for many coaches this will drive them to bring in higher priced 137 to 211k rookies eg Kerridge, Kennedy, Mills etc. Apart from coaches now probably tweaking their teams to get that many higher priced rookies in, how do you think this will affect upgrades later on? Will the strategy change? What complications could this bring?
Take say Menadue @ 155k as a forward. He ave 70 and after 8 rds is around 297k. Along side him is a 117k rookie who ave say 65 which will bring him up to around 270 after rd 8. If the 117k rookie is traded out for another 117k replacement you could upgrade Menadue to a $450 fallen premium or something better if you have some spare cash. But that would not cut it in the midfield. So are we now looking at sitting on rookies longer (and later byes helps) or two step upgrades in the midfield? After all isn’t the midfield where we should be trying to upgrade first?
I guess most coaches will be in the same boat but being prepared could be an important factor in knowing what decisions to make. Any thoughts?
Interested on your thoughts re the following.
It would appear at the moment that there is a shortage of 102-123k rookies in a number of positions or at least serious question marks against many of them. I suspect for many coaches this will drive them to bring in higher priced 137 to 211k rookies eg Kerridge, Kennedy, Mills etc. Apart from coaches now probably tweaking their teams to get that many higher priced rookies in, how do you think this will affect upgrades later on? Will the strategy change? What complications could this bring?
Take say Menadue @ 155k as a forward. He ave 70 and after 8 rds is around 297k. Along side him is a 117k rookie who ave say 65 which will bring him up to around 270 after rd 8. If the 117k rookie is traded out for another 117k replacement you could upgrade Menadue to a $450 fallen premium or something better if you have some spare cash. But that would not cut it in the midfield. So are we now looking at sitting on rookies longer (and later byes helps) or two step upgrades in the midfield? After all isn’t the midfield where we should be trying to upgrade first?
I guess most coaches will be in the same boat but being prepared could be an important factor in knowing what decisions to make. Any thoughts?
Hey Rowsus,
Just curious to know your thoughts on Cripps and Gaff.
Can Cripps take it to another level this year in a side that will get beaten most games.
His contested ball work is impressive but can he do against the best teams to become a premo.
Also with Gaff although slightly different as he is in a much better side.
For some reason I am worried about the ageing players like Gaz and the competitive midfields like Collingwood where possessions etc. could be shared. Not too mention injury concerns with Fyfe, Rocky aswell.
Cheers
Just curious to know your thoughts on Cripps and Gaff.
Can Cripps take it to another level this year in a side that will get beaten most games.
His contested ball work is impressive but can he do against the best teams to become a premo.
Also with Gaff although slightly different as he is in a much better side.
For some reason I am worried about the ageing players like Gaz and the competitive midfields like Collingwood where possessions etc. could be shared. Not too mention injury concerns with Fyfe, Rocky aswell.
Cheers
- Status