Position 2022: Forward Discussion
- Thread starter KLo30
- Start date
Think most had Dunkley as a lock , then half a dozen of the $ 480k guys then try and fit in Brodie , Cogs , Curnow , Gresham (maybe overlooked) , McGovern , Xerri etc etc
Then Dixon , Hayes , Martin all were named.
Thought many overlooked Taranto as they expected him to play forward more without Greene.
Then Dixon , Hayes , Martin all were named.
Thought many overlooked Taranto as they expected him to play forward more without Greene.
- Joined
- 4 Mar 2013
- Messages
- 1,928
- Likes
- 5,871
Also he has the Rd 12 bye so was earmarked as a midseason upgrade.
In terms of return on investment, Heeney English and Butters have him covered so far. So really he was only viable as a starting forward pick:
1. at F1 to fade Dunkley (low percentage play); or
2. at F2 behind Dunkley if English had started in the rucks (low percentage play).
In terms of return on investment, Heeney English and Butters have him covered so far. So really he was only viable as a starting forward pick:
1. at F1 to fade Dunkley (low percentage play); or
2. at F2 behind Dunkley if English had started in the rucks (low percentage play).
Last edited:
Was definitely the opposite, huge concerns on his role to start the season with no Greene, especially after how badly he finished last season when playing a similar role (the reason he got FWD in the first place).
In the end the Hopper injury has basically cancelled out Greene and his role has remained steady.
In the end the Hopper injury has basically cancelled out Greene and his role has remained steady.
- Joined
- 3 Jul 2017
- Messages
- 38,958
- Likes
- 126,622
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
He highlights the durability isn't just missing games factor, durability was his single biggest issue coming into the season and now has basically 3 games that are injury impacted and seriously crushing his average.
Role was really good on the weekend, he played well for 2.5 quarters and then just went home when all the points were on the line in Q4 unfortunately.
Moore interestingly on the weekend had a role improvement after a very quiet start, then released to a wing/HB pickup type role and just waxed hard. Great runner and just a really good little player. Sadly one of those guys you consider and just can't get past that point to even serious consideration, even his start to the season where it was goal dependent just makes jumping there so hard!
Hardest thing I've found with the forwards is I've ended up with the dreaded "6 keepers" scenario where I've got an F1, F2 and then 4 F6s... If Bont gets FWD, and he should, then those 4 F6s probably get pushed out of keeper range as well so you have that awkward decision of target the Heeney/Parker types and write off a couple of the F6 as last upgrades or loophole keepers or you just hope your guys improve...
With this being such an "easy" upgrade season where most should finish their sides with somewhere in the 10-15 trades range I think I'm definitely leaning towards the upgrade and hold as loops pathway.
It definitely feels like the forward group perhaps has the most scope to go "top 6" and genuinely put ground away on those who scrape it.
Role was really good on the weekend, he played well for 2.5 quarters and then just went home when all the points were on the line in Q4 unfortunately.
Moore interestingly on the weekend had a role improvement after a very quiet start, then released to a wing/HB pickup type role and just waxed hard. Great runner and just a really good little player. Sadly one of those guys you consider and just can't get past that point to even serious consideration, even his start to the season where it was goal dependent just makes jumping there so hard!
Hardest thing I've found with the forwards is I've ended up with the dreaded "6 keepers" scenario where I've got an F1, F2 and then 4 F6s... If Bont gets FWD, and he should, then those 4 F6s probably get pushed out of keeper range as well so you have that awkward decision of target the Heeney/Parker types and write off a couple of the F6 as last upgrades or loophole keepers or you just hope your guys improve...
With this being such an "easy" upgrade season where most should finish their sides with somewhere in the 10-15 trades range I think I'm definitely leaning towards the upgrade and hold as loops pathway.
It definitely feels like the forward group perhaps has the most scope to go "top 6" and genuinely put ground away on those who scrape it.
- Joined
- 7 Sep 2020
- Messages
- 12,069
- Likes
- 42,465
I agree with this. I own him in a keeper league, so I may be a bit biased, but:
- He seems to be able to score very quickly during games at times. Takes contested marks, kicks goals, puts on pressure etc. The o***et is that he sometimes has long periods away from the play … but that shouldn’t be the case with Grundy out.
- It looks like Grundy has only missed two home and away games since Cameron arrived, and Cameron scored 53 and 113. The 53 was seemingly with Lynch as #1 ruck though (18 hitouts vs 8 for Cameron). The 113 was similar, with Cameron kicking 4 goals. The 115 last round is obviously encouraging, especially against a good ruck like Witts.
- Averaged 77 last year playing behind Grundy
- Ruck eligibility would be handy, and may be viable if you still held him at R12 (or whenever the next batch gets implemented)
- Collingwood’s ruck draw doesn’t look bad to me - Rich, Dogs, Freo, Carl, Haw (then Mel). It’s possible that the only really good ruck opponents in that time are Sean Darcy and Tom de Koning*.
I haven’t given strong consideration to bringing in Cameron for my Classic side, but I agree that you could do worse as a pinch hitter.
*Possible keeper league teammate of D Cameron.
- He seems to be able to score very quickly during games at times. Takes contested marks, kicks goals, puts on pressure etc. The o***et is that he sometimes has long periods away from the play … but that shouldn’t be the case with Grundy out.
- It looks like Grundy has only missed two home and away games since Cameron arrived, and Cameron scored 53 and 113. The 53 was seemingly with Lynch as #1 ruck though (18 hitouts vs 8 for Cameron). The 113 was similar, with Cameron kicking 4 goals. The 115 last round is obviously encouraging, especially against a good ruck like Witts.
- Averaged 77 last year playing behind Grundy
- Ruck eligibility would be handy, and may be viable if you still held him at R12 (or whenever the next batch gets implemented)
- Collingwood’s ruck draw doesn’t look bad to me - Rich, Dogs, Freo, Carl, Haw (then Mel). It’s possible that the only really good ruck opponents in that time are Sean Darcy and Tom de Koning*.
I haven’t given strong consideration to bringing in Cameron for my Classic side, but I agree that you could do worse as a pinch hitter.
*Possible keeper league teammate of D Cameron.
At the moment, I envision my forward line to be my last line upgraded due to the quality of the rookies/midpricers I currently have on field.
I already have Dunkley, Parker, Butters and Coniglio who I would consider keepers. I plan on adding English as an obvious top 6, and JDG who should present outstanding value two weeks from now.
That would round out my 6 with the most notable omissions being Taranto and Heeney. If luxury trades allow, one or both of Cogs and Butters could become one or both of those guys.
I already have Dunkley, Parker, Butters and Coniglio who I would consider keepers. I plan on adding English as an obvious top 6, and JDG who should present outstanding value two weeks from now.
That would round out my 6 with the most notable omissions being Taranto and Heeney. If luxury trades allow, one or both of Cogs and Butters could become one or both of those guys.