Position SC 2021: Midfielder Discussion
- Thread starter THCLT
- Start date
For myself, I'm both in the situation where I think that a lot of players are overpriced due to scoring in shorter quarters and a shorter season, but I'm also willing to overpay for perceived scoring power (for instance, my current team iteration has all of Lloyd, Neale, Oliver, Steele, Macrae, Gawn and Grundy).
I look at each player and it's the most expensive ones that seem to have the most secure upside, even if statistically there's potential value elsewhere.
Neale - obvious risk to drop back to 120 BUT basically plays every game and is a consistent captaincy option.
Steele - the riskiest pick in the expensive $650k+ category - but changed his gamestyle in 2020 and will definitely be the main man at St Kilda (I personally like to spread my premiums around different clubs, especially on the same line for looping and being more likely to hit different massive scores over different matches).
Oliver - Potentially boosted his average in 2020 too, but he's been a 110 or close to 110+ player basically since his second season. Probably the safest $600k+ pick
Macrae - Definitely a gamble, and it's 50/50 whether I think he's a good option to start but I'm leaning towards starting him even with Treloar, trusting that over the course of the season he'll find a way to average close to 120
Petracca - Could be anything - he's built up his tank, but is it enough to last 4 quarters and will he play full time mid or does he spend enough time forward? Has the potential to hit 130 but with Gawn and Oliver, I'm inclined to wait and see.
Bontempelli - Not someone who has really interested me. Could be a good POD but I personally prefer Macrae in general as a SC option.
Merrett - I honestly cannot get a read on Merrett. He's penciled in as an upgrade target but his previous seasonal averages have wildly fluctuated
Hunter - Absolutely irrelevant.
Kelly and Fyfe - Too much injury risk and both play outside/forward as well as in the guts so I'm not picking them. I can understand the temptation though
Mitchell - Was in my side before pre-season reports said he was racing to be fit for Round 1. Definite upgrade target.
Lyons - not interested. Reckon 2019-20 was a spike run.
MCrouch - not interested. Doesn't play enough TOG.
----
Under $600k, the only players I'm really interested in (that are also keeper level priced are)
Walsh - I reckon he's my favoured pick to break out in 2021. I don't currently have him, but he's definitely one I've considered if he can get that inside mid time.
Cripps - absolute lock for me. Too much potential value even if there's a season and a half of 100ish scoring.
Rowell - I'm not bullish on starting him but it's Rowell so I have to keep an eye on him anyway.
----
Many times in my starting teams I've avoided expensive players due to perception that they were overpriced, but my track record of nailing breakout picks is abysmal. I think I'm inclined to overpay and have a decent base to start from instead of worrying from week to week whether my picks are genuine premiums or not.
I look at each player and it's the most expensive ones that seem to have the most secure upside, even if statistically there's potential value elsewhere.
Neale - obvious risk to drop back to 120 BUT basically plays every game and is a consistent captaincy option.
Steele - the riskiest pick in the expensive $650k+ category - but changed his gamestyle in 2020 and will definitely be the main man at St Kilda (I personally like to spread my premiums around different clubs, especially on the same line for looping and being more likely to hit different massive scores over different matches).
Oliver - Potentially boosted his average in 2020 too, but he's been a 110 or close to 110+ player basically since his second season. Probably the safest $600k+ pick
Macrae - Definitely a gamble, and it's 50/50 whether I think he's a good option to start but I'm leaning towards starting him even with Treloar, trusting that over the course of the season he'll find a way to average close to 120
Petracca - Could be anything - he's built up his tank, but is it enough to last 4 quarters and will he play full time mid or does he spend enough time forward? Has the potential to hit 130 but with Gawn and Oliver, I'm inclined to wait and see.
Bontempelli - Not someone who has really interested me. Could be a good POD but I personally prefer Macrae in general as a SC option.
Merrett - I honestly cannot get a read on Merrett. He's penciled in as an upgrade target but his previous seasonal averages have wildly fluctuated
Hunter - Absolutely irrelevant.
Kelly and Fyfe - Too much injury risk and both play outside/forward as well as in the guts so I'm not picking them. I can understand the temptation though
Mitchell - Was in my side before pre-season reports said he was racing to be fit for Round 1. Definite upgrade target.
Lyons - not interested. Reckon 2019-20 was a spike run.
MCrouch - not interested. Doesn't play enough TOG.
----
Under $600k, the only players I'm really interested in (that are also keeper level priced are)
Walsh - I reckon he's my favoured pick to break out in 2021. I don't currently have him, but he's definitely one I've considered if he can get that inside mid time.
Cripps - absolute lock for me. Too much potential value even if there's a season and a half of 100ish scoring.
Rowell - I'm not bullish on starting him but it's Rowell so I have to keep an eye on him anyway.
----
Many times in my starting teams I've avoided expensive players due to perception that they were overpriced, but my track record of nailing breakout picks is abysmal. I think I'm inclined to overpay and have a decent base to start from instead of worrying from week to week whether my picks are genuine premiums or not.
MN is always a mystery, many are better with it than I am! Just basing it on DT last year where you essentially had the same phenomenon where all the premiums are overpriced and all the rookies are priced as normal. The outcome was that because it's based on a total pool, the top end stabilises despite everyone falling in average and only those who fall in average beyond the mean will actually have a dip.
Basic theory is everyone is overpriced by, let's call it 5 points, then Steele dropping to 117 would only decline by the normal inflation of scoring the "same" as their starting point. Steele dropping to 112 would result in a 5 point loss in value. What that actual overpricing point is is debatable and whether it will operate that way with the midprice guys probably more fairly priced (as opposed to also overpriced in DT) is another question I just don't know the answer to!
No matter what, those guys underpriced are going to see appreciation. I do always find it interesting just how much it actually takes for the midprice guys to move strongly though, again, magic number wizardry stuff, but they seem to have to sustain it for about twice as long as rookies who appreciate much faster generally. Think I posted it elsewhere but Setterfield had to average 98 for 13 weeks to make 180k from his 310 base point. In comparison Tom Green made 155k in 6 games averaging 73 from 165k, that's roughly the same gap in scoring to starting point.
I'd love any of the MN wizards to completely debunk this though, would be very valuable
I still remember the two 50/50 trades that I got wrong that cost me the overall in 2016, the last two trades! Luck is a massive factor, you can do all the analysis but sometimes Nick Riewoldt is just going to score 200 in the last round when you went the other path I think avoiding injuries as best you can is the most important thing you can do neatly followed by not needing trades that are inherently too sideways.
Taking the risks is a part of the game, I think knowing where to take the risks is the underrated skill. You can take risks in the rucks but the opportunity cost is greatest there because of only two spots. You can take risks in the mids but the payout threshold is so high that you need to hit bigger wins. I much prefer the forwards and to a lesser extent the backs for that risk. The number of players scoring 90+ is exponentially higher than the number scoring 110+. Caldwell and lets say Heppell could both average 95, Caldwell is a keeper and Heppell is more in line with a solid rookie on what they've really done for the team.
Great discussion
Basic theory is everyone is overpriced by, let's call it 5 points, then Steele dropping to 117 would only decline by the normal inflation of scoring the "same" as their starting point. Steele dropping to 112 would result in a 5 point loss in value. What that actual overpricing point is is debatable and whether it will operate that way with the midprice guys probably more fairly priced (as opposed to also overpriced in DT) is another question I just don't know the answer to!
No matter what, those guys underpriced are going to see appreciation. I do always find it interesting just how much it actually takes for the midprice guys to move strongly though, again, magic number wizardry stuff, but they seem to have to sustain it for about twice as long as rookies who appreciate much faster generally. Think I posted it elsewhere but Setterfield had to average 98 for 13 weeks to make 180k from his 310 base point. In comparison Tom Green made 155k in 6 games averaging 73 from 165k, that's roughly the same gap in scoring to starting point.
I'd love any of the MN wizards to completely debunk this though, would be very valuable
I still remember the two 50/50 trades that I got wrong that cost me the overall in 2016, the last two trades! Luck is a massive factor, you can do all the analysis but sometimes Nick Riewoldt is just going to score 200 in the last round when you went the other path
I think avoiding injuries as best you can is the most important thing you can do neatly followed by not needing trades that are inherently too sideways.Taking the risks is a part of the game, I think knowing where to take the risks is the underrated skill. You can take risks in the rucks but the opportunity cost is greatest there because of only two spots. You can take risks in the mids but the payout threshold is so high that you need to hit bigger wins. I much prefer the forwards and to a lesser extent the backs for that risk. The number of players scoring 90+ is exponentially higher than the number scoring 110+. Caldwell and lets say Heppell could both average 95, Caldwell is a keeper and Heppell is more in line with a solid rookie on what they've really done for the team.
Great discussion
- Joined
- 31 Jul 2013
- Messages
- 491
- Likes
- 1,397
- AFL Club
- Richmond
MN is always a mystery, many are better with it than I am! Just basing it on DT last year where you essentially had the same phenomenon where all the premiums are overpriced and all the rookies are priced as normal. The outcome was that because it's based on a total pool, the top end stabilises despite everyone falling in average and only those who fall in average beyond the mean will actually have a dip.
Basic theory is everyone is overpriced by, let's call it 5 points, then Steele dropping to 117 would only decline by the normal inflation of scoring the "same" as their starting point. Steele dropping to 112 would result in a 5 point loss in value. What that actual overpricing point is is debatable and whether it will operate that way with the midprice guys probably more fairly priced (as opposed to also overpriced in DT) is another question I just don't know the answer to!
No matter what, those guys underpriced are going to see appreciation. I do always find it interesting just how much it actually takes for the midprice guys to move strongly though, again, magic number wizardry stuff, but they seem to have to sustain it for about twice as long as rookies who appreciate much faster generally. Think I posted it elsewhere but Setterfield had to average 98 for 13 weeks to make 180k from his 310 base point. In comparison Tom Green made 155k in 6 games averaging 73 from 165k, that's roughly the same gap in scoring to starting point.
I'd love any of the MN wizards to completely debunk this though, would be very valuable
I still remember the two 50/50 trades that I got wrong that cost me the overall in 2016, the last two trades! Luck is a massive factor, you can do all the analysis but sometimes Nick Riewoldt is just going to score 200 in the last round when you went the other path I think avoiding injuries as best you can is the most important thing you can do neatly followed by not needing trades that are inherently too sideways.
Taking the risks is a part of the game, I think knowing where to take the risks is the underrated skill. You can take risks in the rucks but the opportunity cost is greatest there because of only two spots. You can take risks in the mids but the payout threshold is so high that you need to hit bigger wins. I much prefer the forwards and to a lesser extent the backs for that risk. The number of players scoring 90+ is exponentially higher than the number scoring 110+. Caldwell and lets say Heppell could both average 95, Caldwell is a keeper and Heppell is more in line with a solid rookie on what they've really done for the team.
Great discussion
Basic theory is everyone is overpriced by, let's call it 5 points, then Steele dropping to 117 would only decline by the normal inflation of scoring the "same" as their starting point. Steele dropping to 112 would result in a 5 point loss in value. What that actual overpricing point is is debatable and whether it will operate that way with the midprice guys probably more fairly priced (as opposed to also overpriced in DT) is another question I just don't know the answer to!
No matter what, those guys underpriced are going to see appreciation. I do always find it interesting just how much it actually takes for the midprice guys to move strongly though, again, magic number wizardry stuff, but they seem to have to sustain it for about twice as long as rookies who appreciate much faster generally. Think I posted it elsewhere but Setterfield had to average 98 for 13 weeks to make 180k from his 310 base point. In comparison Tom Green made 155k in 6 games averaging 73 from 165k, that's roughly the same gap in scoring to starting point.
I'd love any of the MN wizards to completely debunk this though, would be very valuable
I still remember the two 50/50 trades that I got wrong that cost me the overall in 2016, the last two trades! Luck is a massive factor, you can do all the analysis but sometimes Nick Riewoldt is just going to score 200 in the last round when you went the other path
I think avoiding injuries as best you can is the most important thing you can do neatly followed by not needing trades that are inherently too sideways.Taking the risks is a part of the game, I think knowing where to take the risks is the underrated skill. You can take risks in the rucks but the opportunity cost is greatest there because of only two spots. You can take risks in the mids but the payout threshold is so high that you need to hit bigger wins. I much prefer the forwards and to a lesser extent the backs for that risk. The number of players scoring 90+ is exponentially higher than the number scoring 110+. Caldwell and lets say Heppell could both average 95, Caldwell is a keeper and Heppell is more in line with a solid rookie on what they've really done for the team.
Great discussion
I think the only place we are differing on is the notion that everyone is overvalued and that the MN will force everyone down at proportionally the same rate. If the total $ pool is fixed (I suppose this could be confirmed but my understanding is that it is @Rowsus ?) then the MN's adjusts to account for all player's movements.
The MN shifts proportionally - I don't think it is a black box - but it is difficult to calculate unless you have a database with everyone's scores week to week. I think it's correct to say the top-end guys will fall harder and faster than the rookie and low end guys because as the season starts their salary contributions as a % of the total pool is proportionally higher than their scoring (even if you are Neale).
Even putting the MN aside though A) we know the MN declines (and is why a player falls in value even when they hold their average) and B) (my view is) that we will not see the same number of player finish in the 110+ range. So many will get hit twice -> happens every year though just to more players this year.
None of this isn't anything you (and everyone probs already knows though right).
So to try sum up, there are way more players this year that we all want to start that we can mostly agree are overvalued and so more than ever it's important to find value. Salary cap demands (and the fact it is going to be necessary to select year-long keepers - that we know are overvalued more than usual) aaaand the need for captains (ie ignoring this and going Gawn) mean players like Taranto in my view, or even all the way down to a Rory Atkins, are more valid picks than usual.......but hey like you said it all comes down to the rookies!!!
Agree - good discussion mate.
I think the only place we are differing on is the notion that everyone is overvalued and that the MN will force everyone down at proportionally the same rate. If the total $ pool is fixed (I suppose this could be confirmed but my understanding is that it is @Rowsus ?) then the MN's adjusts to account for all player's movements.
The MN shifts proportionally - I don't think it is a black box - but it is difficult to calculate unless you have a database with everyone's scores week to week. I think it's correct to say the top-end guys will fall harder and faster than the rookie and low end guys because as the season starts their salary contributions as a % of the total pool is proportionally higher than their scoring (even if you are Neale).
Even putting the MN aside though A) we know the MN declines (and is why a player falls in value even when they hold their average) and B) (my view is) that we will not see the same number of player finish in the 110+ range. So many will get hit twice -> happens every year though just to more players this year.
None of this isn't anything you (and everyone probs already knows though right).
So to try sum up, there are way more players this year that we all want to start that we can mostly agree are overvalued and so more than ever it's important to find value. Salary cap demands (and the fact it is going to be necessary to select year-long keepers - that we know are overvalued more than usual) aaaand the need for captains (ie ignoring this and going Gawn) mean players like Taranto in my view, or even all the way down to a Rory Atkins, are more valid picks than usual.......but hey like you said it all comes down to the rookies!!!
I think the only place we are differing on is the notion that everyone is overvalued and that the MN will force everyone down at proportionally the same rate. If the total $ pool is fixed (I suppose this could be confirmed but my understanding is that it is @Rowsus ?) then the MN's adjusts to account for all player's movements.
The MN shifts proportionally - I don't think it is a black box - but it is difficult to calculate unless you have a database with everyone's scores week to week. I think it's correct to say the top-end guys will fall harder and faster than the rookie and low end guys because as the season starts their salary contributions as a % of the total pool is proportionally higher than their scoring (even if you are Neale).
Even putting the MN aside though A) we know the MN declines (and is why a player falls in value even when they hold their average) and B) (my view is) that we will not see the same number of player finish in the 110+ range. So many will get hit twice -> happens every year though just to more players this year.
None of this isn't anything you (and everyone probs already knows though right).
So to try sum up, there are way more players this year that we all want to start that we can mostly agree are overvalued and so more than ever it's important to find value. Salary cap demands (and the fact it is going to be necessary to select year-long keepers - that we know are overvalued more than usual) aaaand the need for captains (ie ignoring this and going Gawn) mean players like Taranto in my view, or even all the way down to a Rory Atkins, are more valid picks than usual.......but hey like you said it all comes down to the rookies!!!
Over the course of the season (assuming no players are added), the total is allocated across every player based on performance and, effectively for every increase in price there is a corresponding decrease somewhere else (notionally). Basically it's dollars doing physics. The magic number is just a product of the process. It's not really "magic".
As rookies generally score well in excess if the average they're priced at (22), their prices go up quicker. On the flipside, every premo comes down in price even if they're hitting their average. That's just the nature of SC.
EMERGING midfielder Luke Davies-Uniacke sparkled as North Melbourne hit the track on Friday for an intraclub clash, with a calf issue keeping important recruit Aidan Corr on the sidelines.
Davies-Uniacke, who has noticeably added extra strength to his frame, caught the eye throughout North's hour-long contest of four shortened quarters with some explosive runs and damaging bursts playing in the Roos' midfield.
The 21-year-old shapes as one of the Kangaroos' biggest improvers ahead of his fourth season at AFL level, with his speed and power adding a different edge to North's onball group.
Davies-Uniacke, who has noticeably added extra strength to his frame, caught the eye throughout North's hour-long contest of four shortened quarters with some explosive runs and damaging bursts playing in the Roos' midfield.
The 21-year-old shapes as one of the Kangaroos' biggest improvers ahead of his fourth season at AFL level, with his speed and power adding a different edge to North's onball group.
- Joined
- 3 Jul 2017
- Messages
- 38,961
- Likes
- 126,629
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
- Joined
- 23 Jan 2014
- Messages
- 675
- Likes
- 2,480
Yeah, understand that and you make good points, however, I think the emergence of LDU and Simpkin actually helps his game, he becomes the extractor, feeding it out to those guys. He really is only an inside mid, so not really going to play forward often if he is fit. Think he can get 100+ avg and he is priced at 80..
I think he will play more time forward. It just makes sense (less workload for him and more opportunities for younger players). I also think that he could score well as a forward. Strong contested mark and would not be surprised to see him average a goal a game this year.
** I am still passing on him and going with LDU
- Joined
- 30 Dec 2019
- Messages
- 1,540
- Likes
- 5,910
- AFL Club
- Richmond
Gold Coast Suns young gun Matthew Rowell says he will “definitely” be ready for Round 1, despite still not being in full contact training after shoulder surgery last year.
The Suns have held back Rowell over the summer following surgery on his right shoulder last July, but are planning to ease the 19-year-old back into full training in coming weeks.
“I’m really happy with it, personally. It’s feeling back to normal,” Rowell told the Herald Sun when asked about his shoulder.
“They (the club physios) just want to be really cautious with it and make sure it’s 100 per cent before I get into full contact. I’m just still doing a few contact progressions. Not full contact yet, but I’m slowly building into it.
“I’ll definitely be available for Round 1 if it stays the way it’s going at the moment. I’m really looking forward to the season starting and I can’t wait to get back on the park.”
Rowell — a midfielder in KFC SuperCoach this year with a price tag of $495,100 — logged nine Brownlow Medal votes and helped lead the Suns to three wins from just five games last season before going down with the injury.
The remarkable start to his career has seen sponsors circle, with official AFL ball supplier Sherrin the latest to sign up Rowell as an ambassador for the brand and their new local footy apparel range, which is available to local football clubs around the country.
The No.1 draft pick in 2019, Rowell said he was ready for any closer attention opposition sides throw at him this season, including potential tags.
Already a midfield bull last season, Rowell said he had only “got stronger in the gym” since his surgery.
“I might get a bit more attention,” the 2021 Rising Star favourite said.
“But I can’t worry about it too much. I’ve just got to go out there and play my footy how I do.
“I had a few tags going through my junior days so I have dealt with it a little bit. It’s just something that you have to deal with as a footy player.”
Rowell has a personal collection of more than 50 Sherrin footballs which have been gathered throughout his childhood and are among his most prized possessions.
“The collection’s grown over the years since I was a kid when I got my first footy,” Rowell said.
“I’ve never thought I could have enough.”
https://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/...1/news-story/4b3ed2a083320647d80f196f7a7901a6
First let me say, a big welcome to the guys from FFC!
From the little I have seen, you guys are really bringing some quality content to the table, which is absolutely fantastic!!!
Great to have you here, guys!
In answer to @Dimmawit 's question:
This is something I used to keep track of, but haven't the past 2 or 3 seasons. It certainly used to be a "zero sum game", where the rises and the drops cancelled each other out in the total player value, as @Wheedus has indicated.
From the little I have seen, you guys are really bringing some quality content to the table, which is absolutely fantastic!!!
Great to have you here, guys!
In answer to @Dimmawit 's question:
This is something I used to keep track of, but haven't the past 2 or 3 seasons. It certainly used to be a "zero sum game", where the rises and the drops cancelled each other out in the total player value, as @Wheedus has indicated.