So if you consciously cap yourself at no more than 7 starters from that bye, will you then also go out of your way not to trade the likes of Lloyd into your team before his bye?
Good question. I think the answer would have to be yes unless you are replacing another premium with that bye round. Ideally you want minimum 18 playing each bye round. Say you have 8 premiums already out round 13 + Comben. Add in any must have rookies that have that bye round and others who end up dropped without adding enough cash to trade out. Gets too tight with any more than 7 premiums is my gut feel.
For me it will probably come down to Lloyd vs Heeney.
Another option. Structure wise I don't mind this at all but is relying on some solid preseasons from guys like Steven, Hill, Cockatoo, Sicily, Houston and Doc. Sicily more confidence in his role obviously.
Wasn't keen on Steven but that Dangerfield comment makes me sit up and take notice.
Thanks for your thoughts.
I personally reckon Heeney is fairly low risk as a starter. Floor of 90-95 avg but still has breakout potential if he gets that more significant mid time. I think he will breakout to 105+ at some stage, only a matter of when. Buddy will still play early (if not R1) and Sydney kept Papley, so both should help keep Heeney away from a heavy fwd role.
No real preference on the mids after Cripps and Oliver. There will no doubt be a few $600k+ guys who end up being huge bullets as starting picks. Will just need to figure out who those ones are vs the ones that start the year well. Hard to see any of the guys in the $600k range averaging under 105, but there always seems to be a few elites who drop for whatever reason.
Re Danger and Neale, Neale I think his price may fall at some point with a tagged score, I’m pretty unlikely to start him after a career best year. Danger, just feel a bit hesitant to start given price, age and role concerns but I’m not against the pick. Like Bont a bit more due to age and I doubt he’ll play fwd anymore with Bruce’s arrival.
Great post Bomber18.
I agree with you about Heeney. Seems to be priced at his floor.
I agree with your thoughts on Danger and posted similarly but I'm shifting on him with Kelly leaving, Josh Jenkins playing forward, Danger having a good second half of 2019 and still being fit. Ablett was flying as a 30 year old until he got dumped into the ground and wrecked his shoulder. He was still a good staring pick that year. Danger might be one who bucks the aging trend. From what I can gather he's not a party animal, family man who eats well and gets plenty of rest. Grundy seems like a similar character. Trekking to Mt Everest Base Camp during the off season rather than sitting in a limo on the Vegas Strip. (Clubs could save a lot of money if they just recruited players willing to do their own high altitude training!)
I'm also not sure if Bruce changes the Bulldogs setup. Do the Bulldogs play Naughton, Bruce and Schache? Or does Bruce just replace Schache keeping Bont in the forward line for periods. Although if the bulldogs get better does resting forward now maintain a midfielders scoring? If they had recruited a specialist mid sized forward rather than a key position player the picture might be clearer.
Another option. Structure wise I don't mind this at all but is relying on some solid preseasons from guys like Steven, Hill, Cockatoo, Sicily, Houston and Doc. Sicily more confidence in his role obviously.
Wasn't keen on Steven but that Dangerfield comment makes me sit up and take notice.
Another option. Structure wise I don't mind this at all but is relying on some solid preseasons from guys like Steven, Hill, Cockatoo, Sicily, Houston and Doc. Sicily more confidence in his role obviously.
Wasn't keen on Steven but that Dangerfield comment makes me sit up and take notice.
I think Danger's comment is a fairly generic one. Steven hasn't been the same player for a few years even before the announcement of mental health issues. Geelong will try and get him up and going and he will probably play some games but I can't see him being a replacement for Tim Kelly. There was another article saying Menegola would move to an inside role. Pity he is now mid only.
I think Danger's comment is a fairly generic one. Steven hasn't been the same player for a few years even before the announcement of mental health issues. Geelong will try and get him up and going and he will probably play some games but I can't see him being a replacement for Tim Kelly. There was another article saying Menegola would move to an inside role. Pity he is now mid only.
I'm trying very hard to avoid ALL of the Docherty/Steven/Smith/Houston/Dawson types, I've rarely been successful with those type of picks and don't see that trend bucking, for me anyways. With that says, I somehow always end up with 1 or 2 speculative picks of my own which has been anything but spectacular, so will also need to control that urge as we head towards R1.
Very out of character of me to start with a solid straight bat, but I feel that it has worked more often than not for others so it's probably time for me to adopt that approach in my 8th season.
I'm trying very hard to avoid ALL of the Docherty/Steven/Smith/Houston/Dawson types, I've rarely been successful with those type of picks and don't see that trend bucking, for me anyways. With that says, I somehow always end up with 1 or 2 speculative picks of my own which has been anything but spectacular, so will also need to control that urge as we head towards R1.
Very out of character of me to start with a solid straight bat, but I feel that it has worked more often than not for others so it's probably time for me to adopt that approach in my 8th season.
yet at the end of the year when Stephen brings out his his Perfect Supercoach article , hindsight will show starting 6-10 midpricers was the right thing to do ?
yet at the end of the year when Stephen brings out his his Perfect Supercoach article , hindsight will show starting 6-10 midpricers was the right thing to do ?
Houston
Dawson
Docherty
Doedee
Roberton
Lynch
Steven
Smith
all in isolation though they all have enough pros to suggest they could all be good starting picks and 6 of the 8 could even be season long keepers
they all have against as well.
I personally can't see (especially if you start Grundy , Gawn & 5 premium mids) with the salary cap how you can't start at least 2-3 of them unless people go something like :-
Laird , Sicily
4 + Oliver
Grundy , Gawn
Martin , Heeney
and 19 rookies (with 11 onfield)
anyway it all makes interesting reading and discussion in trying to get the right balance to start with.
Whitfield is one I like (obviously) but can't see the value. If he performs per last year, he'll be a must own... but 100k over Heeney can really make a difference.
all in isolation though they all have enough pros to suggest they could all be good starting picks and 6 of the 8 could even be season long keepers
they all have against as well.
I personally can't see (especially if you start Grundy , Gawn & 5 premium mids) with the salary cap how you can't start at least 2-3 of them unless people go something like :-
Laird , Sicily
4 + Oliver
Grundy , Gawn
Martin , Heeney
So if you consciously cap yourself at no more than 7 starters from that bye, will you then also go out of your way not to trade the likes of Lloyd into your team before his bye?
Lloyd could potentially be underpriced. Had a delayed preseason last year (can't remember what the surgery was), yet came out firing. Perhaps it was Dawson that affected his scores at the end of the year. Or perhaps he ran out of gas with his lack of preseason. Either way I think he is the safest defender to be top 6 this year.
Only thing stopping me from locking him in is his bye. Seriously could easily choose 9 keepers from that bye round. Trying to limit it to 7.
Hip surgury, but was up and going by Feb. Which is my cutoff for injury returning players. Hence he started last year for me. https://outline.com/Udvdq6