Position 2022: Midfield Discussion
- Thread starter KLo30
- Start date
Always good to be contrary, if we all agreed on everything this whole forum would be pointless 
I don't think 95 is impossible if he stays fit and has the right role. Stringer injury doesn't hurt his cause. Nor does Rutten seemingly wanting to go down the "let's get cute" path after so artfully avoiding it last year with the whole Merrett at HB thing.
Hardest part for Caldwell will definitely be that his kicking is going to make it hard for him, it's not impossible and Hopper/Taranto, two similar types, both averaged 97 last year.
I guess the hard part for the Caldwell pick is that ideally I think you want a higher ceiling than 95+, realistically you'd want him to look like a 110+ capable guy, which leaves you a lot of room for failure on your outcome before you've got a failure on the selection. If it's 95-100 that's your realistic aim point you're basically not leaving any scope for error before the pick starts to go bad.
I really like Caldwell though, hope he can stay fit and have a run at it and would be happy to be wrong, if for no other reason than I've got him in a couple of my keeper leagues, but I think he's a very high risk starting pick in classic. FWIW, if he was a forward I'd almost certainly be picking him so it's not that I think he's bad as much as the midfield requirements make the successful ending a lot harder to obtain.
Having said that, the winner last year had Taranto and I'd argue Caldwell has the same upside scenario as him, possibly better because he's not that bad a kick, and he's cheaper, so logically there's zero reason he can't be part of the winning side! As much as I think we can overrate how hard 95+ actually is, we also tend to overrate how bad the M8 is in most winning sides
I don't think 95 is impossible if he stays fit and has the right role. Stringer injury doesn't hurt his cause. Nor does Rutten seemingly wanting to go down the "let's get cute" path after so artfully avoiding it last year with the whole Merrett at HB thing.
Hardest part for Caldwell will definitely be that his kicking is going to make it hard for him, it's not impossible and Hopper/Taranto, two similar types, both averaged 97 last year.
I guess the hard part for the Caldwell pick is that ideally I think you want a higher ceiling than 95+, realistically you'd want him to look like a 110+ capable guy, which leaves you a lot of room for failure on your outcome before you've got a failure on the selection. If it's 95-100 that's your realistic aim point you're basically not leaving any scope for error before the pick starts to go bad.
I really like Caldwell though, hope he can stay fit and have a run at it and would be happy to be wrong, if for no other reason than I've got him in a couple of my keeper leagues, but I think he's a very high risk starting pick in classic. FWIW, if he was a forward I'd almost certainly be picking him so it's not that I think he's bad as much as the midfield requirements make the successful ending a lot harder to obtain.
Having said that, the winner last year had Taranto and I'd argue Caldwell has the same upside scenario as him, possibly better because he's not that bad a kick, and he's cheaper, so logically there's zero reason he can't be part of the winning side! As much as I think we can overrate how hard 95+ actually is, we also tend to overrate how bad the M8 is in most winning sides
Always good to be contrary, if we all agreed on everything this whole forum would be pointless
I don't think 95 is impossible if he stays fit and has the right role. Stringer injury doesn't hurt his cause. Nor does Rutten seemingly wanting to go down the "let's get cute" path after so artfully avoiding it last year with the whole Merrett at HB thing.
Hardest part for Caldwell will definitely be that his kicking is going to make it hard for him, it's not impossible and Hopper/Taranto, two similar types, both averaged 97 last year.
I guess the hard part for the Caldwell pick is that ideally I think you want a higher ceiling than 95+, realistically you'd want him to look like a 110+ capable guy, which leaves you a lot of room for failure on your outcome before you've got a failure on the selection. If it's 95-100 that's your realistic aim point you're basically not leaving any scope for error before the pick starts to go bad.
I really like Caldwell though, hope he can stay fit and have a run at it and would be happy to be wrong, if for no other reason than I've got him in a couple of my keeper leagues, but I think he's a very high risk starting pick in classic. FWIW, if he was a forward I'd almost certainly be picking him so it's not that I think he's bad as much as the midfield requirements make the successful ending a lot harder to obtain.
Having said that, the winner last year had Taranto and I'd argue Caldwell has the same upside scenario as him, possibly better because he's not that bad a kick, and he's cheaper, so logically there's zero reason he can't be part of the winning side! As much as I think we can overrate how hard 95+ actually is, we also tend to overrate how bad the M8 is in most winning sides
I don't think 95 is impossible if he stays fit and has the right role. Stringer injury doesn't hurt his cause. Nor does Rutten seemingly wanting to go down the "let's get cute" path after so artfully avoiding it last year with the whole Merrett at HB thing.
Hardest part for Caldwell will definitely be that his kicking is going to make it hard for him, it's not impossible and Hopper/Taranto, two similar types, both averaged 97 last year.
I guess the hard part for the Caldwell pick is that ideally I think you want a higher ceiling than 95+, realistically you'd want him to look like a 110+ capable guy, which leaves you a lot of room for failure on your outcome before you've got a failure on the selection. If it's 95-100 that's your realistic aim point you're basically not leaving any scope for error before the pick starts to go bad.
I really like Caldwell though, hope he can stay fit and have a run at it and would be happy to be wrong, if for no other reason than I've got him in a couple of my keeper leagues, but I think he's a very high risk starting pick in classic. FWIW, if he was a forward I'd almost certainly be picking him so it's not that I think he's bad as much as the midfield requirements make the successful ending a lot harder to obtain.
Having said that, the winner last year had Taranto and I'd argue Caldwell has the same upside scenario as him, possibly better because he's not that bad a kick, and he's cheaper, so logically there's zero reason he can't be part of the winning side! As much as I think we can overrate how hard 95+ actually is, we also tend to overrate how bad the M8 is in most winning sides
- Joined
- 8 Aug 2012
- Messages
- 418
- Likes
- 2,699
- AFL Club
- Bulldogs
Bailey Smith (Mid - $473K)
I realise that this is the price range that most on this site don't like, but he's in my team at the moment.
To be a bit more controversial, my thinking goes along the lines that he is not that different to Sam Walsh - he just hasn't had the opportunities that Walsh has enjoyed at the Blues because of our massive mid-field depth.
Smith went at #7 in the 2018 draft where Walsh was pick 1 - as far as I know neither have missed a game thereafter.
In his 3 seasons he has averaged 77-92-87
That dip last year can be explained by his role as a winger which doesn't play too his real strength which is a gut-running machine - much like Walsh.
IMO it took Bevo a bit too long to switch him into a prime mid-fielder role, but we all saw what he could do when that opportunity came along in the back half of last season. From round 15 he averaged more like 100 (7 tons including scores of 129 & 146 in the finals).
He is an exceptionally good kick, he kicks goals and is coming into his prime.
Obviously it wont work if he doesn't crack a prime mid-role, but as good as our other mid-stars are, none of them can match his speed or run & carry.
There you are Sam Walsh for $473K instead of $637K
I realise that this is the price range that most on this site don't like, but he's in my team at the moment.
To be a bit more controversial, my thinking goes along the lines that he is not that different to Sam Walsh - he just hasn't had the opportunities that Walsh has enjoyed at the Blues because of our massive mid-field depth.
Smith went at #7 in the 2018 draft where Walsh was pick 1 - as far as I know neither have missed a game thereafter.
In his 3 seasons he has averaged 77-92-87
That dip last year can be explained by his role as a winger which doesn't play too his real strength which is a gut-running machine - much like Walsh.
IMO it took Bevo a bit too long to switch him into a prime mid-fielder role, but we all saw what he could do when that opportunity came along in the back half of last season. From round 15 he averaged more like 100 (7 tons including scores of 129 & 146 in the finals).
He is an exceptionally good kick, he kicks goals and is coming into his prime.
Obviously it wont work if he doesn't crack a prime mid-role, but as good as our other mid-stars are, none of them can match his speed or run & carry.
There you are Sam Walsh for $473K instead of $637K
Rayner is an interesting one for me .. purely a JS place holder for now over a Curnow / Rachelle on field pick ... which I don't want ...
- Not a big possession player but generally uses it well ... not enough depth in my back line to swing Kiddy forward ... working on it though ..
- Maginness also interests me but is my back up E for now ..
- Not a big possession player but generally uses it well ... not enough depth in my back line to swing Kiddy forward ... working on it though ..
- Maginness also interests me but is my back up E for now ..
Not every community thinks that. Certainly not every member of every community. I don't think that. In fact I think it's a pervasive myth that works as an obstacle to many people playing the game successfully.
We're all playing the same hand so maximising value is and always will be the key to going well.
And I think the statement that the guns go up every year needs some scrutiny. The top echelon of mids went up this year because so many did so well last season, but there's no particular reason to think that's part of a trend that will sustain.
We're all playing the same hand so maximising value is and always will be the key to going well.
And I think the statement that the guns go up every year needs some scrutiny. The top echelon of mids went up this year because so many did so well last season, but there's no particular reason to think that's part of a trend that will sustain.
Very interesting comparison of the top mids!
View: https://twitter.com/empr_x/status/1495193810325753862?s=21
View: https://twitter.com/empr_x/status/1495193815312789505?s=21
View: https://twitter.com/empr_x/status/1495193819297423360?s=21
View: https://twitter.com/empr_x/status/1495193823248453640?s=21
View: https://twitter.com/empr_x/status/1495193810325753862?s=21
View: https://twitter.com/empr_x/status/1495193815312789505?s=21
View: https://twitter.com/empr_x/status/1495193819297423360?s=21
View: https://twitter.com/empr_x/status/1495193823248453640?s=21
