Position SC 2021: Midfielder Discussion

[Gruffles]

What's the deal with Tom Mitchell? Is he expected for round 1?

 

[freowho]

What's the deal with Tom Mitchell? Is he expected for round 1?

Touch and go. Seems unlikely.

 

[Hasnoshoes]

125k rookie makes $ 150 k = 275 k

1 down to new rookie , leaves $ 425k

1 down to new rookie , leaves $ 575

now I understand if ALL our rookies make $ 150 k we need 2 and a bit downgrades to get a $ 600k player

too easy (just hope we get 15-17 rookies each week playing and we won't have any issues at all)

think from a previous post it gennerally takes 10 rounds for a rookie to make the $ 150 k mark

can you post my side that has 11 midpricers in it, would be keen to see it

dont all those sides at the end of the season that use no trades at all and outscore the winner have about 6-8 mid pricers in them normally

2 x $ 700 k = $ 1.4 million
7 x $ 200k = $ 1.4 million
Bench = $ 1 million

$ 6.2 million left for 13 players, not buying too many (any) guaranteed premiums for approx $ 500k

Love these 13/14 premium sides with rookies that probably have little chance of playing Round 1 , I guess people are happy wiith donuts from the start

Hope you didn't take it the wrong way bud, wasn't having a go or anything. In my head you are just someone that loves a mid pricer so was just trying to be funny.

 

[randomcliche]

Is anyone thinking not to start Neale purely because his injury and price tag? Should drop 100k then pick him up then, his fitness should be better then to..,

I'm not starting him because his average might fall, it's is expected PIT that I have lowered with his injury risk. I have a rule, If you're not in full training 1 Feb, you can Feb off to someone else's team.

If you're not starting Neale, you're doing so because you expect his average to drop back to the pack. If that's the case, then you don't need him at all because there'll be others who are in that pack that you have started with or will trade up to. If he stays head and shoulders above the pack then you've lost but you were never going to get him anyway and hopefully you've spent your money wisely elsewhere.

If he proves he is fit by scoring, and I expect improved scoring as his fitness builds I'll have no hesitation informing out the $ (only to watch it go pair shaped).

What's the deal with Tom Mitchell? Is he expected for round 1?

No. And do not select based on above. Wait for sig tackle numbers.

Wonder how Mitchells season pans out from here, Worpel could be a could pick if Titch's season doesn't come together.

Would take more guts than I have to head down that path at the moment with Mitchell expected to only miss a week or two at most though.

The bloke can play and can improve his scoring. I sure hope he does. Injury risk to Titch bodes well for scoring but not enough to build a selection case for mine, as base case is delayed start (for titch) then progressively takes more central mid role from worpel following return. Tough because titch could start very strong.

 

[GrainFedBeef]

Those players are very hard to obtain though.

If we generate 2.5m, using 500k of that to get one player leaves you 2m or just 285k per upgrade for the other 7, assuming you managed 14 keepers. That drops to 250k if you've only managed 13. That's an average upgrade at 410k for your other 7 upgrades, you're going to struggle to find good picks in that range with any consistency.

Realistically you're looking at a perfect 2 weeks worth of trading to get that jump done as well, which is also always difficult to manage.

And if they don't drop, you're cactus, believe me after I started Cripps over Neale last year

All good and agree, you don't want to be chasing many. I have Gawn, Grundy, Lloyd, Danger etc 12 premiums and no Williams currently, with the worst Rowell re pricing.

Neale the only one not in the side, will see how he goes re post injury. Currently have Merrett instead.

 

[Locus Levy Lunacy]

Again, this is a fallacy. If you've spent the 330k reasonably you're not banking any points, you're losing points and then you're burning a trade on top of it.

Think of two teams, they're identical but for 3 players and we're assuming players produce what they're priced at (otherwise you're just playing the guessing game) except for our rookie and Taranto.

Team Taranto - Taranto at 100, Bolton and ZWilliams
Team Rookie - Rookie at 60, Dangerfield and Petracca.

Team Taranto produces you 271.5 points for your $1374700, Team Rookie produces you 291.4 points for 7.5k less (Petracca was slightly cheaper than what I had left 5 players in!).

Now obviously this is very simple but it illustrates the on-field value of Taranto at 100 vs what is a very ordinary on-field rookie.

To be clear, this isn't based on Taranto so don't get caught up on names here, I could just have called them all Player A, B, C etc and shown the same outcome. The rookie, if you get fair value on the money, will result in more points for your team and more cash generation.

Hence why I say Taranto needs to be a keeper, at his starting price he is either a keeper (great result) or a bad outcome compared to a rookie.

There are also cases for the Taranto pick, if he's capable of enormous scores that would price spike and actually turn him into an excellent cash cow, say a 125+ type month and his scoring history in 2019 probably supports that he is (though good luck pulling the trigger!), his job security and, hopefully, lower variability in scoring are among the strongest reasons I can think of but really at the end of the day the main reason to take him is you believe he's likely to be a keeper and, imo, that alone is a good enough reason to start him and all the other things I've said would just be supporting evidence for the chance you're wrong about him being a keeper that he could still work. Basically the case for a Taranto priced pick that you're picking to upgrade is generally going to be a poor case, especially compared to a rookie with some job security as the comparison.

Hi people. First post but long time observer and admirer. I did register some years ago under a different name, but never posted and account was disabled.

Lots of good reading, and you have added greatly to discussions.

In the above example, you are not buying Taranto, Bolton and Williams to average their price though. Whereas with Petracca and Dangerfield you pretty much are. You would hope that Taranto goes 105-108 and becomes keepable, and that the other 2 increase their average by 10-15 points and also become keepers. This would see you win on points and trades.

You don't win the $50,000 with the Neale, Gawn, Lloyd picks, because anyone can do that (and a large percentage do). Last year, the key picks were the likes of Petracca, Brayshaw, Ridley and Simpkin (early).

There are an abnormally high number of young guns in that mid-price range that will be the key to this years success IMO. We are talking midfield in this thread, so to me Taranto, Walsh, Rowell, Simpkin, Daicos, Green are massively relevant - if you can nail the right ones. To avoid them at the expense of a weak batch of rookies (some with no footy for 18 months) is what I want to see everyone else doing.

 

[Connoisseur]

J Simpkin:




2020:
SC avg when disposals equal/exceed 21: 121.63 from 8 (low of 103 and a high of 144, 4/8 120+)
SC avg when disposals below 21: 67.56 from 9 (low of 35 and a high of 100, 7/9 below 80, 8/9 below 100)

 

[Professor]

J Simpkin:
View attachment 26514
View attachment 26515
View attachment 26516

2020:
SC avg when disposals equal/exceed 21: 121.63 from 8 (low of 103 and a high of 144, 4/8 120+)
SC avg when disposals below 21: 67.56 from 9 (low of 35 and a high of 100, 7/9 below 80, 8/9 below 100)

Question is, can he maintain that spike in average or regress a bit. Had him in my team early, but not atm.

 

[McLovin]

Hi people. First post but long time observer and admirer. I did register some years ago under a different name, but never posted and account was disabled.

Lots of good reading, and you have added greatly to discussions.

In the above example, you are not buying Taranto, Bolton and Williams to average their price though. Whereas with Petracca and Dangerfield you pretty much are. You would hope that Taranto goes 105-108 and becomes keepable, and that the other 2 increase their average by 10-15 points and also become keepers. This would see you win on points and trades.

You don't win the $50,000 with the Neale, Gawn, Lloyd picks, because anyone can do that (and a large percentage do). Last year, the key picks were the likes of Petracca, Brayshaw, Ridley and Simpkin (early).

There are an abnormally high number of young guns in that mid-price range that will be the key to this years success IMO. We are talking midfield in this thread, so to me Taranto, Walsh, Rowell, Simpkin, Daicos, Green are massively relevant - if you can nail the right ones. To avoid them at the expense of a weak batch of rookies (some with no footy for 18 months) is what I want to see everyone else doing.

I'm not sure about those key picks. I somehow managed to finish 26th last season despite the fact that I never owned Brayshaw or Simpkin, traded Ridley in fairly late, didn't start Bailey Smith, didn't own Lloyd until later in the season and a few other things. There's always more than one way to succeed.

 

[wogitalia]

Hi people. First post but long time observer and admirer. I did register some years ago under a different name, but never posted and account was disabled.

Lots of good reading, and you have added greatly to discussions.

In the above example, you are not buying Taranto, Bolton and Williams to average their price though. Whereas with Petracca and Dangerfield you pretty much are. You would hope that Taranto goes 105-108 and becomes keepable, and that the other 2 increase their average by 10-15 points and also become keepers. This would see you win on points and trades.

You don't win the $50,000 with the Neale, Gawn, Lloyd picks, because anyone can do that (and a large percentage do). Last year, the key picks were the likes of Petracca, Brayshaw, Ridley and Simpkin (early).

There are an abnormally high number of young guns in that mid-price range that will be the key to this years success IMO. We are talking midfield in this thread, so to me Taranto, Walsh, Rowell, Simpkin, Daicos, Green are massively relevant - if you can nail the right ones. To avoid them at the expense of a weak batch of rookies (some with no footy for 18 months) is what I want to see everyone else doing.

No doubt you're hoping they improve when you pick them but there is genuine risk that they don't and they were simply control variables to show the difference and I don't think anyone picks their premiums without at least hoping for upside in the pick. I think a guy like Merrett could improve just as much as say Taranto, I wouldn't say it's likely, but I think he could be a 130 guy if things all go to plan, just as an example. I think you could make a strong case that Dangerfield in a pure midfield role has as much upside as Bolton with a debatable role, I'd quite possibly even say I think Dangerfield is more likely to increase his average by 5+ points than Bolton.

I mean last year for example I took Hurley, Wingard, Lynch and Ceglar in that price range and none of them delivered and there were plenty of players in that range that worked very well but 4 of the 6 I took in that range failed and Dev Smith is very debatable as well and even Howe ultimately failed by getting injured. Meanwhile Neale added 13, Gawn added 11 and Lloyd added 14.

I always sound down on Taranto with this because he keeps being the guy who gets named, I actually don't mind the Taranto pick, if he looks super fit, with a great role and is basically kicking to contests instead of the opposition in the preseason I think he actually is a very solid option to be looking at BUT that is because I think that scenario has keeper potential because the reality is he only needs to get a mediocre ratio and return to his 2019 DT form and he's a keeper. If even with all that I thought he was a 100 scorer I wouldn't even look at him again.

 

[Locus Levy Lunacy]

I'm not sure about those key picks. I somehow managed to finish 26th last season despite the fact that I never owned Brayshaw or Simpkin, traded Ridley in fairly late, didn't start Bailey Smith, didn't own Lloyd until later in the season and a few other things. There's always more than one way to succeed.

Absolutely, but you might have won had you had them .

I take more risks in the other formats, and had all of them early on in RDT. Finished 5th after being 2nd going in to the last round.

This year is set up a bit differently IMO. We almost certainly have over-priced premos and it appears we have a weaker rookie field - both in numbers that will play and exposed talent. The mid-pricers contain a large number of high draft picks (from strong drafts) who could potentially explode.

The recipe for GnR seems weaker than normal, but it's great that there will hopefully be more diversity.

 

[GrainFedBeef]

Absolutely, but you might have won had you had them .

I take more risks in the other formats, and had all of them early on in RDT. Finished 5th after being 2nd going in to the last round.

This year is set up a bit differently IMO. We almost certainly have over-priced premos and it appears we have a weaker rookie field - both in numbers that will play and exposed talent. The mid-pricers contain a large number of high draft picks (from strong drafts) who could potentially explode.

The recipe for GnR seems weaker than normal, but it's great that there will hopefully be more diversity.

I think GnR can work fine this year, as long as you are not planning on 123k rookies.

Dial back a premium and you can fit many players that are either side of the 200k. Sure if you can nail a 400k player it will help and there will be someone who gets it right with the 350k player, just lots of players trying for that different combination.

I think the structure and mid pricers comes down to each users talent. if you are watching every game and good at identifying the breakout players, I think you can go that way. It is not just identifying role, it is also scoring ability in that role.

Williams, Duggan, Mills, Butters, Rozee will all get more midfield time, which is the pick of the bunch though? Taranto, Caldwell, Hately, Cerra, Serong similar, all playing mids, which can be a keeper or do none of them get there. Maybe the trick is the sideways trade in round 3.

 

[Locus Levy Lunacy]

No doubt you're hoping they improve when you pick them but there is genuine risk that they don't and they were simply control variables to show the difference and I don't think anyone picks their premiums without at least hoping for upside in the pick. I think a guy like Merrett could improve just as much as say Taranto, I wouldn't say it's likely, but I think he could be a 130 guy if things all go to plan, just as an example. I think you could make a strong case that Dangerfield in a pure midfield role has as much upside as Bolton with a debatable role, I'd quite possibly even say I think Dangerfield is more likely to increase his average by 5+ points than Bolton.

I mean last year for example I took Hurley, Wingard, Lynch and Ceglar in that price range and none of them delivered and there were plenty of players in that range that worked very well but 4 of the 6 I took in that range failed and Dev Smith is very debatable as well and even Howe ultimately failed by getting injured. Meanwhile Neale added 13, Gawn added 11 and Lloyd added 14.

I always sound down on Taranto with this because he keeps being the guy who gets named, I actually don't mind the Taranto pick, if he looks super fit, with a great role and is basically kicking to contests instead of the opposition in the preseason I think he actually is a very solid option to be looking at BUT that is because I think that scenario has keeper potential because the reality is he only needs to get a mediocre ratio and return to his 2019 DT form and he's a keeper. If even with all that I thought he was a 100 scorer I wouldn't even look at him again.

I'm certainly not going in to bat specifically for Taranto and Bolton - I think there are better options.

As I just said above, there is a lot of young talent from recent drafts that threaten to increase their averages significantly. They are in a very different category to the four you took last year - no criticism intended as it is very easy in hindsight.

This year just reeks of elite talent on every line (except ruck) just needing that slight change in role to excel. I would be surprised if guys like Hunter Clark (more mid), Lukosius (great kick, more space with rule changes), Daicos (more inside), Walsh (more inside), Green (fitter, just needs opportunity), Rozee (foot pending), Z. Bailey and Rayner (more mid) amongst others, don't improve their averages towards keeper status. Rowell has me conflicted due to excelling in such a small sample.

The fact that Gawn, Neale and Lloyd did what they did last year (in an abnormal year) should make them less appealing this year (it never works like that though), and like you said, it makes the Dangerfield and Merrett-type picks better value options.

 

[wogitalia]

I'm certainly not going in to bat specifically for Taranto and Bolton - I think there are better options.

As I just said above, there is a lot of young talent from recent drafts that threaten to increase their averages significantly. They are in a very different category to the four you took last year - no criticism intended as it is very easy in hindsight.

This year just reeks of elite talent on every line (except ruck) just needing that slight change in role to excel. I would be surprised if guys like Hunter Clark (more mid), Lukosius (great kick, more space with rule changes), Daicos (more inside), Walsh (more inside), Green (fitter, just needs opportunity), Rozee (foot pending), Z. Bailey and Rayner (more mid) amongst others, don't improve their averages towards keeper status. Rowell has me conflicted due to excelling in such a small sample.

The fact that Gawn, Neale and Lloyd did what they did last year (in an abnormal year) should make them less appealing this year (it never works like that though), and like you said, it makes the Dangerfield and Merrett-type picks better value options.

Oh I'm just an example of how easy it is for those picks to not work. My DT I nailed Brayshaw, Petracca, Simpkin, Ridley and Bailey Smith (Wingard still got me!).

I can make a case for all those guys you named but I can just as easily make the counter-case and the odds are that more of those guys fail than succeed, the real game is managing the risk of those failures, do you have bailouts? If they fail, will they still make cash? Those sorts of questions.

I actually think last year was an incredible group for picking midprice guys and that's why there is such a desire to do it this year.

Depending where you draw the line but...

Ridley, Maynard, Mills, Crisp, Howe, Blicavs, Haynes, Saad, Short, McDonald, May, Steele, Petracca, Lyons, Menegola, Rockliff, Hawkins, Smith, Brayshaw, Simpkin, Dixon, Smith, Greenwood, Perryman and a couple of others were all very good picks as midprice options.

I reckon I made a case for all but about 5 of those names last o***eason, heck I've picked about 3/4 of that list in the wrong season as breakouts previously!

I personally don't really like the group this year, not because they're not good but because they're so heavily in the midfield group where the requirements are just so much higher. Taranto would be one of my first picked as a forward. Walsh would be a no brainer in D/F. Ditto Rowell. Daicos as a forward also would be very high on my list.

There will be a handful of guys in the forwards or backs most likely that make the jump, what I find hard this year is picking them. I'm personally finding it one of those weird years where I like the upside on several premium picks more than I like the vast majority of the mid-price guys. I like Laird and Mills chances of improving 10 points as much as just about anyone in the 85-95 group for example. I don't like any of the forwards but I think it's a unique year there with Ziebell, Daniher, Impey, Dow and a few others putting their hands up, reckon you're better rolling a 400k+ player into those names than picking a Bolton/Bailey type.

For me the other major factor is the lack of preseason games on which to make a read, so I'm more happy taking guys I know and trust and using the correction trades to get those breakout guys. From experience, being stuck with Wingard or Ceglar types not generating any cash or producing any points value is crippling. You not only are losing that but you also get stuck making non-progress trades trying to fix it and before you know it, even with all the free trades, you're running out of trades and stuck with half of them for the season!

 

[Locus Levy Lunacy]

Oh I'm just an example of how easy it is for those picks to not work. My DT I nailed Brayshaw, Petracca, Simpkin, Ridley and Bailey Smith (Wingard still got me!).

I can make a case for all those guys you named but I can just as easily make the counter-case and the odds are that more of those guys fail than succeed, the real game is managing the risk of those failures, do you have bailouts? If they fail, will they still make cash? Those sorts of questions.

I actually think last year was an incredible group for picking midprice guys and that's why there is such a desire to do it this year.

Depending where you draw the line but...

Ridley, Maynard, Mills, Crisp, Howe, Blicavs, Haynes, Saad, Short, McDonald, May, Steele, Petracca, Lyons, Menegola, Rockliff, Hawkins, Smith, Brayshaw, Simpkin, Dixon, Smith, Greenwood, Perryman and a couple of others were all very good picks as midprice options.

I reckon I made a case for all but about 5 of those names last o***eason, heck I've picked about 3/4 of that list in the wrong season as breakouts previously!

I personally don't really like the group this year, not because they're not good but because they're so heavily in the midfield group where the requirements are just so much higher. Taranto would be one of my first picked as a forward. Walsh would be a no brainer in D/F. Ditto Rowell. Daicos as a forward also would be very high on my list.

There will be a handful of guys in the forwards or backs most likely that make the jump, what I find hard this year is picking them. I'm personally finding it one of those weird years where I like the upside on several premium picks more than I like the vast majority of the mid-price guys. I like Laird and Mills chances of improving 10 points as much as just about anyone in the 85-95 group for example. I don't like any of the forwards but I think it's a unique year there with Ziebell, Daniher, Impey, Dow and a few others putting their hands up, reckon you're better rolling a 400k+ player into those names than picking a Bolton/Bailey type.

For me the other major factor is the lack of preseason games on which to make a read, so I'm more happy taking guys I know and trust and using the correction trades to get those breakout guys. From experience, being stuck with Wingard or Ceglar types not generating any cash or producing any points value is crippling. You not only are losing that but you also get stuck making non-progress trades trying to fix it and before you know it, even with all the free trades, you're running out of trades and stuck with half of them for the season!

When SC opened I had in my head a bunch of young blokes who my eyes had told me were too good not to improve. I said this is the year that you just pick them. Don't be influenced by the masses on SCS and various other places, stick to your guns!

Here I am not just reading, but posting. And being influenced.

 

[McLovin]

Absolutely, but you might have won had you had them .

I take more risks in the other formats, and had all of them early on in RDT. Finished 5th after being 2nd going in to the last round.

This year is set up a bit differently IMO. We almost certainly have over-priced premos and it appears we have a weaker rookie field - both in numbers that will play and exposed talent. The mid-pricers contain a large number of high draft picks (from strong drafts) who could potentially explode.

The recipe for GnR seems weaker than normal, but it's great that there will hopefully be more diversity.

Quite possibly. I prefer to think my ranking stalled in the 20s about half way through the season because I started and held onto the likes of Congilio and Dev Smith I think I made up for it by starting Lukosius and picking up Doedee post restart.

My problem with a lot of these potential midprice breakout candidates is often that the more they get talked up and the higher their ownership gets, the more convinced I become that they're not going to live up to the hype. The results are often mixed. I tend to prefer players in the 200-ish price range, there's a lot less risk and a much lower bar for success there.

I'm not too concerned by fwd and mid rookies just yet, but the lack of def rookies could cause problems and pigeonhole us into picking fairly speculative types like Cumming or Young just to have solid options on field.

 

[Bomber18]

Taranto is growing close to a lock for me personally. I'm not intending to engage in too much of a debate for him to "persuade" others but just a few brief points setting out my own thinking:

• In 2019, he was the 4th highest DT scorer overall with a 112.5 avg (in only his third season). This is not an easy feat and right up there with the elite DT scorers.
• Only 23 entering his 5th season so not an established SC scorer yet. Very much has scope to improve his DT/SC conversion and establish his SC scoring potential.
• Only at 450k, at which price a 105 avg is a win (some might disagree). Saves $150-200k on a $600k-650k ish player for say maybe a loss of 5-10ppg. I'd back myself to make up more than 10ppg with the 200k.

 

[SuchIsLife]

Taranto is growing close to a lock for me personally. I'm not intending to engage in too much of a debate for him to "persuade" others but just a few brief points setting out my own thinking:

• In 2019, he was the 4th highest DT scorer overall with a 112.5 avg (in only his third season). This is not an easy feat and right up there with the elite DT scorers.
• Only 23 entering his 5th season so not an established SC scorer yet. Very much has scope to improve his DT/SC conversion and establish his SC scoring potential.
• Only at 450k, at which price a 105 avg is a win (some might disagree). Saves $150-200k on a $600k-650k ish player for say maybe a loss of 5-10ppg. I'd back myself to make up more than 10ppg with the 200k.

I'm in a similar boat. I see Taranto as the perfect excuse NOT to pick Neale. I think most would agree Neale is likely to drop 50-100k throughout the season, and him being out of reach is a reason why you should pick him. But that argument gets destroyed if you start with a Taranto, if he averages 105, he will rise 65k to 520k ish, which is easily 1 trade away from Neale.

These numbers only get friendlier if you can time a spike in Taranto's prices well. What I'm debating atm is whether someone like a Cunnington/Green/Heppell can do the same job at much cheaper prices.

 

[wogitalia]

Taranto is growing close to a lock for me personally. I'm not intending to engage in too much of a debate for him to "persuade" others but just a few brief points setting out my own thinking:

• In 2019, he was the 4th highest DT scorer overall with a 112.5 avg (in only his third season). This is not an easy feat and right up there with the elite DT scorers.
• Only 23 entering his 5th season so not an established SC scorer yet. Very much has scope to improve his DT/SC conversion and establish his SC scoring potential.
• Only at 450k, at which price a 105 avg is a win (some might disagree). Saves $150-200k on a $600k-650k ish player for say maybe a loss of 5-10ppg. I'd back myself to make up more than 10ppg with the 200k.

Only real counterpoints I'd offer up on him is the following:

That 112.5 is sensational but yielded only 102 SC, and his disposal has gotten worse since that season, can he actually reach those heights again?

Durability is definitely something to mention, missed 6 last year, ~10 his first year and another game in 2018. If 105 is required, which is where I think you're in the winning lane, missing a couple of games makes that really difficult.

Tom Green, who looks a much better player on the limited sample, especially for the role that helped produce that 112 season. I don't think being more outside is good for Taranto who relies a lot on tackling and is hurt significantly whenever he is kicking it. Throw in Hopper with a couple of years development and it's two guys who certainly are at least possibly in his way and, more likely, probably in his way.

Taranto's situation actually reminds me a lot of Jack Viney heading into 2017, it wasn't that he got worse or even that his role was hugely different but when a talent like Oliver storms past you it just leaves you picking up the crumbs and, imo, Tom Green is one of those talents and that fact scares me with Taranto given his scoring history and what he needs to produce. Having watched them both it's not a matter of if but when Green takes over their main inside role (and that goes for Jelly as well).

I'm really hoping one of the teams put that game up though as I really want to watch it given how many fantasy relevant players are in it and I'd love to watch Taranto and see how he looks because, fundamentally, I agree with what you've written on the value and his basic scenario, would be great to get a few more pieces of the puzzle as he's got the potential to be a massive headstart pick if he does work.

Said it before but anyone with the balls to take that pick deserves the rewards when it works.

 

[Shaunpro1]

Hi people. First post but long time observer and admirer. I did register some years ago under a different name, but never posted and account was disabled.

Lots of good reading, and you have added greatly to discussions.

In the above example, you are not buying Taranto, Bolton and Williams to average their price though. Whereas with Petracca and Dangerfield you pretty much are. You would hope that Taranto goes 105-108 and becomes keepable, and that the other 2 increase their average by 10-15 points and also become keepers. This would see you win on points and trades.

You don't win the $50,000 with the Neale, Gawn, Lloyd picks, because anyone can do that (and a large percentage do). Last year, the key picks were the likes of Petracca, Brayshaw, Ridley and Simpkin (early).

There are an abnormally high number of young guns in that mid-price range that will be the key to this years success IMO. We are talking midfield in this thread, so to me Taranto, Walsh, Rowell, Simpkin, Daicos, Green are massively relevant - if you can nail the right ones. To avoid them at the expense of a weak batch of rookies (some with no footy for 18 months) is what I want to see everyone else doing.

Midfield is a pretty risky place to be hoping guys break out for mine, its also consistently the best area for scoring rookies wouldn't want any more than one mid pricer personally.