Opinion Rate My AFL SuperCoach Team
- Thread starter Ironhawk
- Start date
- Joined
- 3 Jul 2017
- Messages
- 38,963
- Likes
- 126,636
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
Indicative of the current climate and the need to be continually praised. Unsurprising when the game is marketed towards slack jawed yokels who don’t have the capacity or the effort to question or concern themselves about the aforementioned thus why they continually pander to the demographic and avoid the legitimate questions or queries around certain specifics to be addressed and inconsistencies.
- Joined
- 16 Dec 2018
- Messages
- 842
- Likes
- 2,447
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
- Joined
- 3 Jul 2017
- Messages
- 38,963
- Likes
- 126,636
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
Haha - thanks for your thoughts. It's usually a better sign when someone asks "I thought you'd gone over the budget", but you are correct ... I have $187.6k to spare for now.
On the players you mentioned:
- That's interesting re Lloyd/Dawson, thanks. I noted that Lloyd's scores had come off a little, and he is probably my least certain def starter, but he's very durable and highly likely to be a top scorer, so I've kept him in at this point. I don't disagree that he might be a little overpriced - I'm likely to be a bit more tolerant of that this year for otherwise very "safe" picks.
- I'm a bit concerned that Neale is similar, although I can't see another top mid who is also durable, other than maybe Danger (who I'm not overly averse to, but he is starting to get on). I saw Thanh's post indicating that Neale averaged low 120s/amongst the very top mids after the byes, and it looks like he averaged around 119 after his own bye. His scoring did seem more volatile, with 2 of his 3 lowest scores, as well as his 2 best, coming after the bye. He is also the least certain of being in my side amongst the mids ... he was actually my Mitchell replacement given (1) I expected a 20% discount but he only received 10%, and (2) apparently Mitchell is recovering somewhat slowly.
- Whitfield was in an early cut when I replaced Danger (who I had in my notes from August as a forward selection - I note that your positional changes were all bang on), but I removed him given cash constraints and the fact that he's not proven at his price, and seems quite injury prone. Essentially the plan would be to bring him in after 1 or 2 down games, which he seems to have regardless of fitness. He's the type of player I'm most inclined to bet against next year, albeit one I'd probably own fairly happily if cash easily permitted.
Interestingly these three names were the three most marginal premiums in/out of my side. That probably means we are thinking about it quite similarly.
On the players you mentioned:
- That's interesting re Lloyd/Dawson, thanks. I noted that Lloyd's scores had come off a little, and he is probably my least certain def starter, but he's very durable and highly likely to be a top scorer, so I've kept him in at this point. I don't disagree that he might be a little overpriced - I'm likely to be a bit more tolerant of that this year for otherwise very "safe" picks.
- I'm a bit concerned that Neale is similar, although I can't see another top mid who is also durable, other than maybe Danger (who I'm not overly averse to, but he is starting to get on). I saw Thanh's post indicating that Neale averaged low 120s/amongst the very top mids after the byes, and it looks like he averaged around 119 after his own bye. His scoring did seem more volatile, with 2 of his 3 lowest scores, as well as his 2 best, coming after the bye. He is also the least certain of being in my side amongst the mids ... he was actually my Mitchell replacement given (1) I expected a 20% discount but he only received 10%, and (2) apparently Mitchell is recovering somewhat slowly.
- Whitfield was in an early cut when I replaced Danger (who I had in my notes from August as a forward selection - I note that your positional changes were all bang on), but I removed him given cash constraints and the fact that he's not proven at his price, and seems quite injury prone. Essentially the plan would be to bring him in after 1 or 2 down games, which he seems to have regardless of fitness. He's the type of player I'm most inclined to bet against next year, albeit one I'd probably own fairly happily if cash easily permitted.
Interestingly these three names were the three most marginal premiums in/out of my side. That probably means we are thinking about it quite similarly.
Last edited:
One option you may want to consider is opening up a rookie spot down back, given that def rookies are usually pretty good. This can be done by pushing Hill forward and moving Smith or Steven to the midfield.
I'm not using that approach at this stage, but will keep it in mind as an option as the rookies, and my non-rookie picks, firm up.
I'm not using that approach at this stage, but will keep it in mind as an option as the rookies, and my non-rookie picks, firm up.
Just put something together while watching the cricket.
All conjecture and speculation at the moment but if all 3 of Doedee , Roberton & Hill look viable :-
Dawson * , Docherty , Doedee , Roberton , Hill * , Young + 2
Macrae , Fyfe , Cripps , Oliver , Rowell , Anderson , Flanders * , Pickett + 3
Grundy , Gawn + 1
Martin * , Heeney * , Steven * , Smith * , Cavarra , Cameron * /King , Rankine
enough $$$ to upgrade Flanders to a premium mid
All conjecture and speculation at the moment but if all 3 of Doedee , Roberton & Hill look viable :-
Dawson * , Docherty , Doedee , Roberton , Hill * , Young + 2
Macrae , Fyfe , Cripps , Oliver , Rowell , Anderson , Flanders * , Pickett + 3
Grundy , Gawn + 1
Martin * , Heeney * , Steven * , Smith * , Cavarra , Cameron * /King , Rankine
enough $$$ to upgrade Flanders to a premium mid
- Joined
- 16 Dec 2018
- Messages
- 842
- Likes
- 2,447
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
Very similar to my side across def, mid and ruck lines ... Neale vs Bont really the only difference.
Our forward lines are much more different, with Dusty, Heeney, Smith and Hill for me. I can see the rationale for all you're picis though, and yours likely has more upside if it clicks. My main concern would probably be injury risk, but at least with your structure it's not hard to address via a downgrade if someone does go down.
Looks good to me.
Our forward lines are much more different, with Dusty, Heeney, Smith and Hill for me. I can see the rationale for all you're picis though, and yours likely has more upside if it clicks. My main concern would probably be injury risk, but at least with your structure it's not hard to address via a downgrade if someone does go down.
Looks good to me.
