Position Forward Discussion

[NT.Thunder]

Yeah one or two, but if you go in to the season with too many of Petracca, Smith, Lynch, Dawson, Brayshaw, Rozee, McDonald, Wingard you could be burning multiple trades to get where you need and it's always harder to get from one of these guys to a premium scoring well then from a poor premium to a firing midfielder. For me I like to see which mids are showing that jump to the next level and then make the trade, if your premiums are all firing then there's no need to really trade so you save trades early.

 

[Pieman17]

Why spend your $$$ and a trade when I can just invest that $260k into a Dangerfield?

It can give you flexibility to change structure or jump on another midpricer (Marshall or Daniel from last year).

 

[Pieman17]

Yeah one or two, but if you go in to the season with too many of Petracca, Smith, Lynch, Dawson, Brayshaw, Rozee, McDonald, Wingard you could be burning multiple trades to get where you need and it's always harder to get from one of these guys to a premium scoring well then from a poor premium to a firing midfielder. For me I like to see which mids are showing that jump to the next level and then make the trade, if your premiums are all firing then there's no need to really trade so you save trades early.

I think 2 is a decent number. Devon Smith and Petracca are currently the two I have.

 

[NT.Thunder]

It's easy to forget about issues also around the other lines in our teams during the pre-season where we usually discuss based around position. But if you've got these midprice problems accross forward, mids, defenders and it looks a few will test the rucks heaven forbid, then you could have 4 problems that need to be sorted out each week.

 

[OnTopBar]

A 260k investment to get to Dangerfield would be upgrading a midpricer. You're doing it before the season starts and taking a punt on the rookie. If that rookie doesn't work out, for whatever reason, then you're stuck with him or have to trade.
The MP team is taking a punt on 2 x MP's, the fallback position is to trade down to a rookie that has identified themselves as being a good pick and then using the other trade to upgrade another failed MP to a premo that has identified themselves.
At a guess there would be 6 trades budgeted for these moves, not much different to correctional and rookie chasing trades.

 

[Rockydunlop]

A 260k investment to get to Dangerfield would be upgrading a midpricer. You're doing it before the season starts and taking a punt on the rookie. If that rookie doesn't work out, for whatever reason, then you're stuck with him or have to trade.
The MP team is taking a punt on 2 x MP's, the fallback position is to trade down to a rookie that has identified themselves as being a good pick and then using the other trade to upgrade another failed MP to a premo that has identified themselves.
At a guess there would be 6 trades budgeted for these moves, not much different to correctional and rookie chasing trades.

You make it sound so easy! Definitely this needs to be considered. 2 MPs is enough to play around with.

 

[NT.Thunder]

A 260k investment to get to Dangerfield would be upgrading a midpricer. You're doing it before the season starts and taking a punt on the rookie. If that rookie doesn't work out, for whatever reason, then you're stuck with him or have to trade.
The MP team is taking a punt on 2 x MP's, the fallback position is to trade down to a rookie that has identified themselves as being a good pick and then using the other trade to upgrade another failed MP to a premo that has identified themselves.
At a guess there would be 6 trades budgeted for these moves, not much different to correctional and rookie chasing trades.

That's fine, but sometimes it's hard to define 'failed' for a midprice pick and you can get caught in limbo where other problems on other lines take priority. If you've got a mid-price or two thaty has a marginal improvement in scoring it's sometimes difficult to cut them lose and these types bleed points as the year goes by.
It's all based around perfect scenarios, for me I'm a bit of a pessimist and base my thoughts around 'what if' and worse case situations. There's a saying I love when buying beer for a camping trip which is i'd rather be looking at it than looking for it, which for me is looking at the case tied up in a premium early.

But yeah I get your point and that could work just as well. Mid-price makes me nervous but I'll take a couple.

 

[stephen]

I think you have until RD5 to 'fix' your team. Carrying a failed midpricer doesn't do you any harm before then, as long as they're at least scoring to their price, unless it has caused you to miss a successful rookie that others are getting fat on. After that they start to drag and you don't get another easy chance to fix things until byes.

Usually things are clear enough by then to make your moves. Obviously if you have too many duds, or the ones you jump onto go sour too, life is bad. But I think people underestimate their capacity to pick them. It's not shooting fish in a barrel but it's not blindfolded darts either. Or are my metaphors getting stretched?

 

[Hondo]

To be honest, a big factor in not liking midprice breakout options is me - I have no talent or knowledge of the game that helps me identify them.

You don't need to try too hard to find them. If Trac goes big again in the next game then he will be at 30+% ownership and that's as much research as you need to do isn't it? Switch the brain off and look to other areas of your team.

If you ignore value in the forwards I feel you will be behind from the get go. Others will have equal points because their value picks will match or better your gun/rookie but meanwhile they will might have avoided a couple of terrible FWD rookie cash cows that you have.

I think Whitfield and Dusty can be picked up as upgrades at cheaper than their starting prices, if that is how someone has to go.

 

[THCLT]

Yeah one or two, but if you go in to the season with too many of Petracca, Smith, Lynch, Dawson, Brayshaw, Rozee, McDonald, Wingard you could be burning multiple trades to get where you need and it's always harder to get from one of these guys to a premium scoring well then from a poor premium to a firing midfielder. For me I like to see which mids are showing that jump to the next level and then make the trade, if your premiums are all firing then there's no need to really trade so you save trades early.

It's easy to forget about issues also around the other lines in our teams during the pre-season where we usually discuss based around position. But if you've got these midprice problems accross forward, mids, defenders and it looks a few will test the rucks heaven forbid, then you could have 4 problems that need to be sorted out each week.

As with the majority of good coaches here (which I'm not a part of), mitigating the risks is one of the key consideration. We all have a core group of players who we've identify/bookmark to watch during the preseason. Whether it be for a positive positional change, recovering from injury, increase opportunity due to personnel or natural progression, etc. These are the key indicators which we should be looking to identify and solidify our decision on those preseason players of interest. A few example below after Marsh 1...

Houston - advertised midfield role looks to be genuine so should have every chance of making the progression.
Weller - played that lucrative inside role but only for a half, another watch for Marsh 2.
Doedee - another setback so we can cross him off our list.
McCluggage - mix of inside and wing, dynamic when in that inside role but lots of competition
Wingard - only played a half so hard to deduce anything concrete for now.
Petracca - surprised by his role and fitness, something we didn't have preview to, certainly a big watch for Marsh 2.
TMac - looks fit and proven at role, but still carries the KPF stigma.
Rozee - surprised at his midfield minutes, again low TOG so will watch again in Marsh 2 but ticked a lot of boxes if you were keen.
Greenwood - role as expected, first full preseason since joining the AFL system is noteworthy.

There will be a few more to come for Marsh 2 and the real acid test will come in Marsh 3.

I'll admit that there's a few on the above list who are high on my preseason watch list, and none have given me any reason to cross them off that list yet.

 

[OnTopBar]

That's fine, but sometimes it's hard to define 'failed' for a midprice pick and you can get caught in limbo where other problems on other lines take priority. If you've got a mid-price or two thaty has a marginal improvement in scoring it's sometimes difficult to cut them lose and these types bleed points as the year goes by.
It's all based around perfect scenarios, for me I'm a bit of a pessimist and base my thoughts around 'what if' and worse case situations. There's a saying I love when buying beer for a camping trip which is i'd rather be looking at it than looking for it, which for me is looking at the case tied up in a premium early.

But yeah I get your point and that could work just as well. Mid-price makes me nervous but I'll take a couple.

I guess that's the key, 'Marginal improvement'. For me that's a failed MP, if I'm choosing a MP then it's because I see the potential as being much better than marginal. That might be an initial scoring spike or two, or a defined role change and a marked increase in scoring, because what was the point in choosing them in the first place?

I'm not trying to pick those breakout players like McLuggage/Brayshaw/Gresham types, it's just too hard and the likelihood of nailing one is quite slim. The players I'm targeting are more the 'value' types, players that are exhibiting defined role changes, fallen premos etc. I think my chances of succeeding with 4/5 of those types is quite high.

 

[Herbie66]

Managed to get my Whitfield , Martin , Heeney , Lynch , Smith + King , Rankine & Xerri ✓ ?

Still keeps GG & Co ✓?

Have the 3 Bulldogketeers + Cripps ✓

but leaves Birchall as my D1 ???

Disclaimer

Not starting Martin so he either becomes :-

Oliver via Bonar
Sicily/Houston/Docherty via Hill
or another Forward rookie if viable

 

[Ironhawk]

Managed to get my Whitfield , Martin , Heeney , Lynch , Smith + King , Rankine & Xerri ✓ ?

Still keeps GG & Co ✓?

Have the 3 Bulldogketeers + Oliver ✓

but leaves Birchall as my D1 ???

I'm a bit surprised you can squeeze all them in still.

 

[Herbie66]

I'm a bit surprised you can squeeze all them in still.

my defence is Birchall , Doedee , Lukosious , Roberton , Ash , Hill , Guthrie , Zerk-Thatcher

and used all of Rowell , Anderson , Bonar , Stephens , Serong & Green + Pickett

 

[Rockydunlop]

my defence is Birchall , Doedee , Lukosious , Roberton , Ash , Hill , Guthrie , Zerk-Thatcher

and used all of Rowell , Anderson , Bonar , Stephens , Serong & Green + Pickett

Might have to assess Doedee as he has suffered a setback

 

[Herbie66]

Might have to assess Doedee as he has suffered a setback

yes he will be adjusted once everything becomes clearer

bone bruising they were reporting on the News.

 

[Hondo]

my defence is Birchall , Doedee , Lukosious , Roberton , Ash , Hill , Guthrie , Zerk-Thatcher

and used all of Rowell , Anderson , Bonar , Stephens , Serong & Green + Pickett

Is that a “for fun” setup or you genuinely want the heavier forward line? It’s an interesting alternate approach but I think Houston at least is worth considering down back. I think he wins in a price for points comparison with Heeney unless we see Heeney will run midfield more. Have we heard that?

 

[Herbie66]

Is that a “for fun” setup or you genuinely want the heavier forward line? It’s an interesting alternate approach but I think Houston at least is worth considering down back.

My disclaimer showed that Martin would be swapped out , definitely starting Whitfield , Lynch & Smith.

Think it may now be easier to start Heeney rather than take a gamble on another of the 20 breakout contenders.

At this stage hoping King , Rankine , Xerri can be F6-8.

Georgiades & Budarick could be options.

Leaves me 1 premium short in the mids though.

Aside from Rowell & Pickett , who knows what others are viable.

Just need to wait on the rookies and follow those from the start.

Still not 100% convinced on Houston , still think they will rotate heavily through the mids.

At his starting price , I don't think he will hurt too much.

All going well Heeney should be a Top 6 Forward , not sure we can make the assumption that Houston will be a Top 6 Defender.

Heeney has gone 94+ the last 3 seasons without necessarily getting all this "extra" mid time people assume he will get , couple of other developing Swans mids might actually get it ahead of him.

 

[freowho]

TMac - looks fit and proven at role, but still carries the KPF stigma.

I assume the stigma is lack of consistency? If he was fully priced I would agree but he is priced nearer the bottom of the KPF price cycle so even if he doesn't become a keeper he should have a serious bump up at some point.

 

[THCLT]

I assume the stigma is lack of consistency? If he was fully priced I would agree but he is priced nearer the bottom of the KPF price cycle so even if he doesn't become a keeper he should have a serious bump up at some point.

Yeah...pretty much the reason behind my comment.

I was thinking more along the line of 'possible' starting Keepers when I was composing those comments, so your point is definitely a valid one.