Strategy 2023: Round 3 Trades

[BlufBlufShuv]

Am I alone in potentially holding Darcy?? If he's not injured it's just one bad week.









I've gone Rat to Chandler, Callaghan to Sheezel

I'm out on him, have to make a decision on him this week due to his $ loss and $ gain of alternatives.

If you have the wrong rucks it can put your season into terminal decline. Jackson is clearly having an impact on him and the fact Jackson started first ruck with Darcy in the forward line rd 2 is really game over for me with him.

English has the potential to put a big gap quickly in points between he and the next best, even over Witts, Cameron could well match Darcy at $100k cheaper, given his around the ground prowess and the fact he's in the ruck basically the entire time he's on the ground.

 

[aj74]

You can’t be trading out Docherty when you’ve got Hayden Young and Ed Richards in your team. Let’s be serious for a second.

Grrrrr... sounds like a challenge.

Damn and I'd just gotten used to the idea of keeping Doc and foregoing Setterfield

 

[Zimmer]

Chesser > Chandler
Darcy > Cameron (English?)
Flanders > Ziebell (Setterfeild?)

 

[aj74]

I'm finding this difficult, despite having no injuries other than Hopper.
Possible trade outs: Cumming, Chesser, Neale, Darcy, Bruhn (definitely going).
Possible trade ins: Naicos, Setters, LDU, Ruck?, Ziebell.
Limited funds: $1,700. 36 trades.
Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Other than Pou, i have desired rookies ( i think)

View attachment 54761

You really need to do something about your backline. You've got a bit of a dud rookie in Greene by the looks but that isn't terminal. Keep it in mind though. Bruhn to ZB seems like a good trade but you don't have the cash

Baker will get off field when Hopper gets back. Could probably already go out for Hollands on exposed form. Your mids could be thought of a full for this time of year with 3 premiums, decent MPs and a breakout doing what he needs to do. Callaghan has a soft draw and can hit 100s.

But you have to field 2 of Wilmot, Cowan and Constable. That can't be good. Busting Cumming down to one of the 500K defs doesn't solve your depth issue back there and it doesn't get you the money you want for Bruhn > ZB. You can't afford ZB/Setterfield/Worpel at all without splitting 1 of Cumming (stu*** your backline further and you don't have the MPP back to make it work), Darcy, or one of your mid premiums. At the moment, that would be Neale. Of the two, I'd lean towards Darcy to DC. It seems popular but I'm not sure if there will be more points in it yet. Still, Neale could just be starting slow and he doesnt have the round 15 bye. This will save you another trade down the track

I suppose you could pull the pin on Callaghan down to Pou. That would give you the dollars to upgrade Bruhn into whoever you prefer out of Setterfield or ZB. Doesn't fix your backs at all though. Not for another month when ZB gets his back status

If you wanted to take a big risk and forego ZB/Setterfield, you could go a week early on Bowes. I think you can just afford Cumming > 500K back, Bruhn > Pou and Chesser > Bowes. Pretty risky relying on Bowes right now, yeah? But it does get Bruhn out of your squad and gets Cowan back on the bench with Constable and Wilmot battling it out for D6. Take a look at it anyway and see if you like it. Trusting Scott to keep Bowes playing a good role with Stewart back soon is risky. But then so is Wilmot at D5.

Pity you didn't leave yourself 50k for corrections. Bruhn > ZB straight up would be a no brainer

 

[aj74]

Am I alone in potentially holding Darcy?? If he's not injured it's just one bad week.

Yeah Darcy isn't a problem for me. He doesn't look to be the ruck force he has been in the past but the risk is lower this week and he's an easy straight swap to DC next week if I have to

 

[Zimmer]

Am I alone in potentially holding Darcy?? If he's not injured it's just one bad week.

He's just going to lose too much $$ and his role isn't clear.

 

[inwhiterooms]

Bruhn > Ziebell locked and loaded. for my first trade. Cox injury has me really on the fence as to whether English or DC is the go for my Darcy replacement.

A) Darcy + Callaghan > English + Setterfield (66k bank)



B) Darcy + Chesser > Cameron + Setterfield (61k bank)

 

[Shannon]

Bruhn > Ziebell locked and loaded. for my first trade. Cox injury has me really on the fence as to whether English or DC is the go for my Darcy replacement.

A) Darcy + Callaghan > English + Setterfield (66k bank)

View attachment 54777

B) Darcy + Chesser > Cameron + Setterfield (61k bank)

View attachment 54778

I like Option B :- Callaghan BE -8, kid copped a stinger to the shoulder last week but still played out the game.

He played the majority of the last 1/4, watched him closely as was at the game - didn't appear in any real discomfort. He missed a goal on the run he would normally kick, ran hard & presented an option but was ignored. Impressed with his endurance, kid ran out the game well so I would be holding him.

 

[Bones]

Darcy is a difficult call - if no other issues I would definitely swap him out but its the opportunity cost of not getting one of Setterfield or Ziebel that makes the decision difficult. He's not playing well, is in a team that is playing badly, Jackson seems to be number 1 and his replacements are going to go up in price. He 'could' make his breakeven this week given the opposition.

 

[Shannon]

I was going to go Option A :-

Bruhn > Chandler
Darcy > Cameron
Jones > Daicos

But now thinking Option B might be better:-

Ridley > Daicos (worried now with BZT out he plays more as a key back)
Darcy > Cameron
Bruhn > Setterfield (Cogs to fwd line)

Leaves me like this:-



It means I miss out on Chandler unfortunately but with Hopper missing this week I can swing Mackenzie on (v North this week) pending hawks team announcement (hoping no Nash who took serious mid mins from him on the weekend) to cover.

I do like Ziebell but he doesn't really suit my structure.

Thoughts appreciated

 

[gunslinga]

Hi, can I get thoughts on below options please? Both feel like am trying a bit too hard to fit in these players but I also need to do something...

1) Rozee/Jones & Chesser - JZ/Daicos (to D4) & Chandler
2) Darcy/Chesser & other rookie - Cameron/Chandler/Setterfield?

Haven't had the best start and am now playing catchup to some extent.

As always, thanks in advance!

 

[neeld]

I was going to go Option A :-

Bruhn > Chandler
Darcy > Cameron
Jones > Daicos

But now thinking Option B might be better:-

Ridley > Daicos (worried now with BZT out he plays more as a key back)
Darcy > Cameron
Bruhn > Setterfield (Cogs to fwd line)

Leaves me like this:-

View attachment 54779

It means I miss out on Chandler unfortunately but with Hopper missing this week I can swing Mackenzie on (v North this week) pending hawks team announcement (hoping no Nash who took serious mid mins from him on the weekend) to cover.

I do like Ziebell but he doesn't really suit my structure.

Thoughts appreciated

Same ins as me, other option you could consider is keep Ridley and trade out Chesser for Chandler

 

[Goodie's Guns]

Officially just made my trades for the round:

OUT: Dusty, Ugle-Hagan
IN: Jeremy Cameron, Kade Chandler

Buyer beware, Jeremy Cameron has some doubt surrounding him playing this week.

 

[Socrates2]

Looks like Darcy Cameron in for me especially with Cox a chance to miss multiple weeks. I think I'll keep Darcy, bypass Setterfield and get Daicos next week.

Out: Neale, Flanders, Green (Haw)
In: LDU, D.Cameron(for), Sheezle

 

[Goodie's Guns]

Looks like Darcy Cameron in for me especially with Cox a chance to miss multiple weeks. I think I'll keep Darcy, bypass Setterfield and get Daicos next week.

Out: Neale, Flanders, Green (Haw)
In: LDU, D.Cameron(for), Sheezle

Can’t work things to hold Neale and move out Darcy instead? I assume it comes down to budget for the ins?

 

[Harmonic Nine]

Out : Gawn, Pedlar, Dangerfield

In : NDaicos, Chandler, Touk Miller

Gawn to N.Daicos via a bunch of DPP movements. Gawn - FWD (via Dcam), FWD to MID (via JHF in mids), MID to NDaicos (via Constable) = 1 Nett trade

 

[Socrates2]

Can’t work things to hold Neale and move out Darcy instead? I assume it comes down to budget for the ins?

I can hold Neale and lose Darcy but I'm backing Darcy to bounce back and be a good pod.
Neale has been uninspiring this year and possibly affected by Duckley.
Darcy can spike big scores at times and could do this week.

 

[Socrates2]

Out : Gawn, Pedlar, Dangerfield

In : NDaicos, Chandler, Touk Miller

Gawn to N.Daicos via a bunch of DPP movements. Gawn - FWD (via Dcam), FWD to MID (via JHF in mids), MID to NDaicos (via Constable) = 1 Nett trade

I'd bring in LDU instead of Touk if you don't have him.

 

[jobeywatto]

Is Chandler really must-have? I don't really have a reasonable way to get him.

If I trade Chesser > Chandler then I'll have to play Chandler on field instead of Mackenzie, which doesn't seem wise. Could trade Greene/Caminiti > Chandler instead and have him on the bench, but neither are scoring bad enough to justify getting rid of just yet. If I trade Flangers > Chandler then that means missing out on Setterfield, who seems a much more important trade-in.

May end up having to just ignore Chanlder and hope his scoring so far is unsustainable.

 

[Goodie's Guns]

I can hold Neale and lose Darcy but I'm backing Darcy to bounce back and be a good pod.
Neale has been uninspiring this year and possibly affected by Duckley.
Darcy can spike big scores at times and could do this week.

Fair. I’m personally jumping the other way. Have no doubt Darcy will bounce back against a NN-less WCE, but going forward the ruck split with Jackson is a real worry. Neale on the other hand, has been on 60+ at HT in both games so far, then had two horrid third terms by his standards, and then had reasonable final terms. Both could’ve comfortably been 120+ scores if he had usual third terms, and he was at 108 late in the last term against the Demons, which scaled back after a rough FKA. And more importantly, the role doesn’t appear to have changed even with the addition of Dunkley.