Discussion 2023: Rate My Team
- Thread starter KLo30
- Start date
- Joined
- 3 May 2017
- Messages
- 2,684
- Likes
- 8,886
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Joined
- 24 Jan 2016
- Messages
- 4,380
- Likes
- 18,390
The snippet below will maybe offer up an opening. Really don't think 2 trades matters. We have more than ever. Many started a rookie R2 in 2021. I was the same. It didn't work, but it landed me on Darcy very early in the season which turned out to be a great move.
Is the security there for 6-7 weeks is the question? Because the role should be good enough for a floor of 60 (McCartin went at 70). Word is there was back end VFL 2022 form to suggest Sav was starting to get comfortable in the role.
Could take all the guess work out of the rucks, and I much prefer spending cash on other lines compared to the preseason ruck flip-flop that has taken place for the past month and really...what are we going to see in practice matches that is going to clear it up?
Is the security there for 6-7 weeks is the question? Because the role should be good enough for a floor of 60 (McCartin went at 70). Word is there was back end VFL 2022 form to suggest Sav was starting to get comfortable in the role.
Could take all the guess work out of the rucks, and I much prefer spending cash on other lines compared to the preseason ruck flip-flop that has taken place for the past month and really...what are we going to see in practice matches that is going to clear it up?
Structure isn't too bad.
Overspent in the rucks compared to most going Marshall as one ruck.
2 starting $ 600k+ defenders is probably different.
Bonar - > McLean via Ginbey
Miller - > Hopper
or given your user name , one of Docherty/Stewart to Bowes
would give you enough $ to fix up your bench (doubt any of those $ 102k players play)
Baker , Comben , Constable , Greene etc appear the popular $ 123,900.00 guys at this stage to play Round 1.
Bruce might not be Best 22.
Overspent in the rucks compared to most going Marshall as one ruck.
2 starting $ 600k+ defenders is probably different.
Bonar - > McLean via Ginbey
Miller - > Hopper
or given your user name , one of Docherty/Stewart to Bowes
would give you enough $ to fix up your bench (doubt any of those $ 102k players play)
Baker , Comben , Constable , Greene etc appear the popular $ 123,900.00 guys at this stage to play Round 1.
Bruce might not be Best 22.
- Joined
- 9 Mar 2014
- Messages
- 4,259
- Likes
- 7,602
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
- Joined
- 3 Jul 2017
- Messages
- 38,963
- Likes
- 126,630
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
As mentioned earlier, redistribute cash from one (or more) of your premiums into a midpricer to upgrade all of the $102,400 rookies to higher priced rookies for a more realistic setup and to ensure you have a solid base leading into Round 1 team announcements that you can easily manage any unexpected inclusions or outs without having to chop many of your preferred premiums to squeeze the key rookies in.
Cash generation is vital to building a strong team and paying up for starting premiums does not always guarantee the same or greater points from last season or provide a solid return on investment. Rookies should help to dictate structure and not vice versa.
Cash generation is vital to building a strong team and paying up for starting premiums does not always guarantee the same or greater points from last season or provide a solid return on investment. Rookies should help to dictate structure and not vice versa.
I like it, it’s very easy on the eyes. One of those teams where at first you question how they have the cash to make it work, yet on closer inspection it still seems to hold up.
I like the stability across all lines, if I were to suggest one change it would be to downgrade Stewart/Dawson to Young/Daicos and upgrade Rowell to a top 10 mid.
Reason being avoiding paying 600k+ on defenders has seemed to be a pretty reliable rule of thumb in the past and if you think Young/Daicos will end up in the top 8 defenders at the end of the year then you’re effectively saving a trade needed to upgrade Rowell later on. That and it mitigates the risk of going all 3 Cripps, Rowell and Hopper which all hold an element of risk to them and picking 2/3 of them might be the safer play, although I suppose you have to take a risk somewhere if you want to stand out and all your other selections look pretty sound. I also don’t rate Rowell that highly, I just don’t think there’s much room for improvement in him, but if you think he’s got some cash flow in him or that he’ll end up a keeper then the risk is probably worth it.
I like the stability across all lines, if I were to suggest one change it would be to downgrade Stewart/Dawson to Young/Daicos and upgrade Rowell to a top 10 mid.
Reason being avoiding paying 600k+ on defenders has seemed to be a pretty reliable rule of thumb in the past and if you think Young/Daicos will end up in the top 8 defenders at the end of the year then you’re effectively saving a trade needed to upgrade Rowell later on. That and it mitigates the risk of going all 3 Cripps, Rowell and Hopper which all hold an element of risk to them and picking 2/3 of them might be the safer play, although I suppose you have to take a risk somewhere if you want to stand out and all your other selections look pretty sound. I also don’t rate Rowell that highly, I just don’t think there’s much room for improvement in him, but if you think he’s got some cash flow in him or that he’ll end up a keeper then the risk is probably worth it.
Also forgot to mention some anecdotal experience, I’ve had a fall in rankings over the past couple of seasons and I think I can attribute it to going too light on in the mids. Also got smashed in some draft leagues last year by trying to be savvy and selecting the top FWDS/BACKS in each line before prioritising the Mids, rationalising it due to the supposed depth in value through the mids. However a full premo midfield is worth a whole lot more than any other line and so this is also why I suggested downgrading one of your premium backs to upgrade Rowell in order not to fall to far behind some of the Mid heavy teams. However again, if you think LDU, Rowell and Hopper can keep up sufficiently enough so that your other lines can prosper earlier than others then it’s as good a game plan as any. There’s just a bit of risk there and I’d be hesitant that those three can pull enough weight. In saying that, this is still one of the better teams I’ve seen so far.
Thanks for the feedback, appreciated.
Dunkley possibly over priced, he’s an upgrade target in my opinion, he’s at the higher end of his historical SC output. Taranto and Cogs better value options I reckon.
Hopper never averaged over 100 and has always missed games, too much risk for a starting mid position I feel. Yeo you’re probably right, may well end up in my side round one.
I like Jones in there, I’ve got a solid three premo defence behind him so I feel it’s low risk to start him a D4, defence always has a lower average for him to end up as a keeper. Daicos wait and see for his price given he’s a second year player.
Dunkley possibly over priced, he’s an upgrade target in my opinion, he’s at the higher end of his historical SC output. Taranto and Cogs better value options I reckon.
Hopper never averaged over 100 and has always missed games, too much risk for a starting mid position I feel. Yeo you’re probably right, may well end up in my side round one.
I like Jones in there, I’ve got a solid three premo defence behind him so I feel it’s low risk to start him a D4, defence always has a lower average for him to end up as a keeper. Daicos wait and see for his price given he’s a second year player.