Position 2023: Defenders Discussion

Joined
31 Jan 2016
Messages
393
Likes
1,675
Yeah, Yeo could quite easily end up a D keeper. Last year just felt easy to pick our starters. I'm feeling more challenged this year putting together a squad I'm happy with overall. Feels like I have to have a weak F6 or compromise somewhere else to fit in a Flanders/Bruhn type F6.
I think it's great though for the comp overall. I reckon there'll be a lot of trades burnt early on the mid price merry go round.
I hear you. If my forwards look good, then my defence looks weak, and when my defence looks good, my forwards look weak. I've currently got 6 mid pricers to try balance both lines, which means they'll likely both end in disaster.
 
Joined
13 Mar 2012
Messages
2,790
Likes
2,985
AFL Club
Adelaide
Perhaps the point of the tweet was to show how overrated intercept marking is in SC? McGovern has averaged about 87 over that period and Jones 70
Maybe the point is that these guys can have a decent SC floor when they don’t actually get many possessions
That’s what we want for Jones
 
Joined
12 Jan 2014
Messages
3,760
Likes
11,752
AFL Club
West Coast

Not sure if the McGovern example is to show that is not always the case? McG has not started below $462k in the past 3 years so his scoring does not justify starting him at that price. The McCartin case (Paddy I assume) is only relevant because of his price. His ave was 71 so nothing outstanding but it was very good considering he started at $157k.
 
Joined
13 Apr 2012
Messages
6,024
Likes
15,759
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
I would imagine Jones knocking out 70s would make him a pretty successful pick. Can someone smarter than me tell me what Jones would be priced at after 6 of weeks scoring 70s?
 
Joined
9 Feb 2015
Messages
9,440
Likes
57,906
AFL Club
West Coast
I would imagine Jones knocking out 70s would make him a pretty successful pick. Can someone smarter than me tell me what Jones would be priced at after 6 of weeks scoring 70s?
Ideally you want told him for 10 weeks to make the magic 150K mark which would require him averaging about 78 which I think is possible:-
$150k CASH COW
Average needed to make $150k by R10
$200k player => 72 $250k player => 82
 
Joined
17 Feb 2013
Messages
1,474
Likes
3,407
AFL Club
Collingwood
Ok, so the next question: do we really want 150k from our rookies?

I recall about 12 years ago when a trade was worth 200k. We had 20 trades then. Somewhere down the track, we got up to 30 trades and they were valued around 150k. I've just assumed that more trades made each one less valuable but if I'm wrong I'd be happy to know.

But assuming the link is there, then us getting 20% more trades in the last year or so should further dilute the value of the trades. 20% from 150k leaves 120k as a back of the napkin number.

Or does the expectation of now having a supersub by round 18 these days distort the value of each trade more?
 
Joined
13 Apr 2012
Messages
6,024
Likes
15,759
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Ok, so the next question: do we really want 150k from our rookies?

I recall about 12 years ago when a trade was worth 200k. We had 20 trades then. Somewhere down the track, we got up to 30 trades and they were valued around 150k. I've just assumed that more trades made each one less valuable but if I'm wrong I'd be happy to know.

But assuming the link is there, then us getting 20% more trades in the last year or so should further dilute the value of the trades. 20% from 150k leaves 120k as a back of the napkin number.

Or does the expectation of now having a supersub by round 18 these days distort the value of each trade more?
Pointless discussion talking about the “value” of a trade. Once the season gets rolling and all those moving parts start to shift the value is dependant on the team and the landscape.

Gotta grab the value when it presents. Sometimes grabbing value means selling 2 rookies that haven’t peaked to grab a premium before they become unattainable. Certainly not getting your 150k each but the value to your team is substantial.
 
Joined
24 Feb 2015
Messages
6,697
Likes
30,160
AFL Club
Sydney
Ok, so the next question: do we really want 150k from our rookies?

I recall about 12 years ago when a trade was worth 200k. We had 20 trades then. Somewhere down the track, we got up to 30 trades and they were valued around 150k. I've just assumed that more trades made each one less valuable but if I'm wrong I'd be happy to know.

But assuming the link is there, then us getting 20% more trades in the last year or so should further dilute the value of the trades. 20% from 150k leaves 120k as a back of the napkin number.

Or does the expectation of now having a supersub by round 18 these days distort the value of each trade more?
It really is a week by week proposition. Depends where individuals teams are at and when rookies are on the bubble. When rookies are on the bubble it usually doesn't align with the magic $150k price increase for the player being traded out. Situational Awareness of the bigger picture around you is critical when trading, you need to know when other rookies may be available otherwise sometimes you're just forced to go early or you sit in dead mans land watching that $150k you just made on the rookie drop like a stone.

Like what @BigRuss above says
 
Joined
19 Jan 2016
Messages
1,929
Likes
6,564
A moving puzzle as alluded to, but I wouldn't say the extra trades have decreased the value of a trade. It simply means top coaches use trades more aggressively. Eg back with 20 trades, there's no way you'd slingshot 3 or 4 players through the byes.
 
Top