Position Midfielder Discussion
- Thread starter IDIG
- Start date
- Joined
- 13 Dec 2018
- Messages
- 785
- Likes
- 1,660
- AFL Club
- Geelong
Don't know if it's Ross, but with a new coach their may be some value at the Saints. Whether it's him or Steele or Gresham who knows, but it wouldn't knock me off of my seat if they have a midfielder become SC relevant this year.
I looked into him a few years back as an option, Ross plays a bit to uncontested from memory and also seems to get stuck on 3-5 clearances per game, so he doesn't score as consistently high as the clearance/contested beats do.
Last edited:
- Joined
- 13 Dec 2018
- Messages
- 785
- Likes
- 1,660
- AFL Club
- Geelong
I would like to rise two queries with the masses.
Firstly, is there any reason not to start all three of Macrae, Bont & Dunkley with the Bulldogs having what I think is a very good draw?
Secondly (and I would credit the person I read this information from but I can't remember his name) Carlton seemed to play Murphy and Curnow in dominate roles towards the end of the season. The poster mentioned that Teague wanted his strongest mature guys leading the midfield rather than having Cripps doing it all while trying to fast track the up and comers. Both Curnow and Murph scored very well over the last 2 months showing they still have it. I have Curnow at M5 at the moment as the bloke can score as he averaged 113 for half a season a couple of years back when given a main gig, 50-60k cheaper than Cogs, more durable, only 30 in season 2020.
Thoughts?
Firstly, is there any reason not to start all three of Macrae, Bont & Dunkley with the Bulldogs having what I think is a very good draw?
Secondly (and I would credit the person I read this information from but I can't remember his name) Carlton seemed to play Murphy and Curnow in dominate roles towards the end of the season. The poster mentioned that Teague wanted his strongest mature guys leading the midfield rather than having Cripps doing it all while trying to fast track the up and comers. Both Curnow and Murph scored very well over the last 2 months showing they still have it. I have Curnow at M5 at the moment as the bloke can score as he averaged 113 for half a season a couple of years back when given a main gig, 50-60k cheaper than Cogs, more durable, only 30 in season 2020.
Thoughts?
Last edited:
Hopefully all 3 get kept in the mid field and not shifted around. I would probably look into it further to see how many times all 3 had 100+ games at once last season - looks like 8 or 9 times which would be about the minimum you would want.
Curnow could be a good POD pick. I think Carlton will improve this season, should be some value in their team.
Curnow could be a good POD pick. I think Carlton will improve this season, should be some value in their team.
- Joined
- 19 Jan 2016
- Messages
- 722
- Likes
- 2,250
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
- Joined
- 3 Jul 2017
- Messages
- 38,960
- Likes
- 126,628
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
S Ross:
Wins: 106.13 from 23 (3/23 below 80, 9/23 below 100, 7/23 120+)
2017: 110.27 from 11
2018: 102.67 from 3
2019: 102.22 from 9
Losses: 95.90 from 41 (14/41 below 80, 28/41 below 100, 7/41 120+)
2017: 91.73 from 11
2018: 99.53 from 17
2019: 94.69 from 13
Pre Bye: 96.53 from 34 (9/34 below 100, 18/34 below 100, 5/34 120+)
2017: 101.8 from 10
2018: 97.85 from 13
2019: 90.18 from 11
Post Bye: 104.87 from 31 (8/31 below 80, 13/31 below 100, 10/31 120+)
2017: 100.33 from 12
2018: 111 from 8
2019: 105.36 from 11
Prefer Hannebery for approximately $110,000 less.
Wins: 106.13 from 23 (3/23 below 80, 9/23 below 100, 7/23 120+)
2017: 110.27 from 11
2018: 102.67 from 3
2019: 102.22 from 9
Losses: 95.90 from 41 (14/41 below 80, 28/41 below 100, 7/41 120+)
2017: 91.73 from 11
2018: 99.53 from 17
2019: 94.69 from 13
Pre Bye: 96.53 from 34 (9/34 below 100, 18/34 below 100, 5/34 120+)
2017: 101.8 from 10
2018: 97.85 from 13
2019: 90.18 from 11
Post Bye: 104.87 from 31 (8/31 below 80, 13/31 below 100, 10/31 120+)
2017: 100.33 from 12
2018: 111 from 8
2019: 105.36 from 11
Prefer Hannebery for approximately $110,000 less.
- Joined
- 15 Oct 2018
- Messages
- 3,912
- Likes
- 12,177
- AFL Club
- Essendon
That injury happened late in the 4th quarter (he played 103 minutes which is more minutes than he played the 3 weeks prior). Including that game he averaged 108.
He definitely improved following Teague's arrival and being moved to the midfield where he belongs and Carlton need him but I don't think you can look at a 30 year old and use seasonal splits to suggest that they will average their highest ever score the following season. Statistically to me it looks like a change in form, whereas with a younger guy it shows me legitimate improvement, with an older guy I don't think it can be used as evidence of that. Wouldn't be surprised if Ed Curnow averages about 100 odd but I think he's a bit risky, personally.
He definitely improved following Teague's arrival and being moved to the midfield where he belongs and Carlton need him but I don't think you can look at a 30 year old and use seasonal splits to suggest that they will average their highest ever score the following season. Statistically to me it looks like a change in form, whereas with a younger guy it shows me legitimate improvement, with an older guy I don't think it can be used as evidence of that. Wouldn't be surprised if Ed Curnow averages about 100 odd but I think he's a bit risky, personally.
I am pondering the GWS midfield for 2020. Currently I have no GWS mids as I think there are too many variables. If everyone is fit they have Jelly, Whitfield, Taranto, Cogs, Hopper and Ward. If they rotated all of them through the midfield they cannot all score big consistently. They might take turns going big but that is not what you want. Plus if you have Jelly and Cogs you risk injury. That might be good if you have Taranto or Ward but then what you are doing is making a risk decision of going better scoring/high injury risk player versus a not as good player who probably gets more points only when some else is injured. Thinking at the moment to avoid making one of those calls and getting it wrong so going with other players in teams where the issues are much clearer.
- Joined
- 13 Dec 2018
- Messages
- 785
- Likes
- 1,660
- AFL Club
- Geelong
Kelly is a 115-120 mid, I don't think Cogs is that.
But Kelly has only played 19 games in two years. If you held him for 2 - 3 games in each season and played a rookie instead the real cost of having him pushes his ave down to a lot less than that. That is the frustration of a great player with a fragile body.
But Kelly has only played 19 games in two years. If you held him for 2 - 3 games in each season and played a rookie instead the real cost of having him pushes his ave down to a lot less than that. That is the frustration of a great player with a fragile body.
- Joined
- 21 Mar 2019
- Messages
- 2,295
- Likes
- 6,291
I'm not so sure that will be the case if all of the GWS mouths are at the table waiting to be fed, so to speak.
If their fab 5 (plus the two or three others who regularly get midfield time) are all fit and firing then the midfield situation could very well pan out in manner that you would be quite familiar with as a Geelong supporter - ie. any of them could average 110+ given the chance, but if all of them are on the field then they might all drag each other's numbers down into 95-105 range with the midfield time and CBA's / stoppages being split amongst them more evenly.
This would likely be a better outcome for GWS's flag prospects overall, but probably not so great for fantasy.
I was keen on Cogs initially myself, but I think I'll be looking at GWS midfielders as more of an upgrade target situation to give their midfield mix time to shake itself out.
If their fab 5 (plus the two or three others who regularly get midfield time) are all fit and firing then the midfield situation could very well pan out in manner that you would be quite familiar with as a Geelong supporter - ie. any of them could average 110+ given the chance, but if all of them are on the field then they might all drag each other's numbers down into 95-105 range with the midfield time and CBA's / stoppages being split amongst them more evenly.
This would likely be a better outcome for GWS's flag prospects overall, but probably not so great for fantasy.
I was keen on Cogs initially myself, but I think I'll be looking at GWS midfielders as more of an upgrade target situation to give their midfield mix time to shake itself out.
Last edited:
- Joined
- 7 Feb 2013
- Messages
- 270
- Likes
- 190
ive looked into Dunkley a little more. tossing up between him and Neale/JKelly/Treloar
ave for the year 116.45
ave post bye 130.9
ave post bye when libba didnt play 135 (7 games)
ave post bye when libba did play 123.75 (4 games) but if you remove the rd 13 game where libba gets injured and then misses the next 4 games dunkley average drops to 107...
*** note i cant remember when dunkley moved to an increase midfield time but when they did play together pre bye dunkley averaged 102 and libba averaged 93 (both from 11 games each)
attached are my calculations as i have done these only very quickly.
ave for the year 116.45
ave post bye 130.9
ave post bye when libba didnt play 135 (7 games)
ave post bye when libba did play 123.75 (4 games) but if you remove the rd 13 game where libba gets injured and then misses the next 4 games dunkley average drops to 107...
*** note i cant remember when dunkley moved to an increase midfield time but when they did play together pre bye dunkley averaged 102 and libba averaged 93 (both from 11 games each)
attached are my calculations as i have done these only very quickly.