Discussion 2021: Detailed Pre-Season Player/Role Observations by Wogitalia & Others
- Thread starter wogitalia
- Start date
He is certainly overpriced (dont think he will be going near 134 ppg again) but still he's one of these blokes that just kills you when you dont have him and he's pumping out 140s early on, especially with those that have the C on him every week. Would prefer not to spend so much on him and Lloyd, don't think I can fit all three of Lloyd, Gawn and Neale in without the rest of the side looking pretty thin.
Correct however he plays some of his worst team historically to start the season this year :-
Round 1 v Sydney - average of 80 overall ( scores of : 55, 108,110, 44, 112, 45 & 86)
Round 2 v Cats - average of 95 overall (play at GMHBA Stadium, many players struggle at that unique ground)
Round 3 v Pies - average of 88.3 overall
So with that data & the fact he actually had an injury interrupted preseason makes me think he is an upgrade target. Didn't look quite himself last night, think he is still building fitness.
Round 1 v Sydney - average of 80 overall ( scores of : 55, 108,110, 44, 112, 45 & 86)
Round 2 v Cats - average of 95 overall (play at GMHBA Stadium, many players struggle at that unique ground)
Round 3 v Pies - average of 88.3 overall
So with that data & the fact he actually had an injury interrupted preseason makes me think he is an upgrade target. Didn't look quite himself last night, think he is still building fitness.
Can understand that as I finally started Lloyd last year after years of being burnt and not being able to bring him in. Reasons for not starting Lloyd are Dawson likely to take kick ins, more direct and faster play and less 1-2 opportunities at the back for the pidgeon. Not sure of this but early days it seems a valid assumption. last year scores were inflated, Finally if Campbell plays swans will want the ball coming from him not from Lloyd into the forward line. We have a bunch of def premiums likely to score 95-105 assuming scores revert to mean. Laird, Daniel, Stewart, Ridley, Ryan are 5, then Lloyd, Williams, Docherty, Rich, Day, are also options. I am reasonably confident I will not lose 250-400 pts not starting Lloyd.
Neale - less certain of this one, do not see a 140 avg but mid high 120's is likely and therefore expect him to be top 3 mid at years end. So probably worth paying up for him. Did not like the way he was prepping for the season, though when you see him knock out a 60pt quarter as he did last night after not being in the game it is likely he may not drop off or have a bad patch. Keep in mind, less interchange, longer quarters and not quite pre season so Neale has the risk of having a bad game or two early in the year.
Neale - less certain of this one, do not see a 140 avg but mid high 120's is likely and therefore expect him to be top 3 mid at years end. So probably worth paying up for him. Did not like the way he was prepping for the season, though when you see him knock out a 60pt quarter as he did last night after not being in the game it is likely he may not drop off or have a bad patch. Keep in mind, less interchange, longer quarters and not quite pre season so Neale has the risk of having a bad game or two early in the year.
Finding Dunkley to be one of the toughest ones to make my mind up on.
The sucker in me goes just look at his potential vs price. This is a guy who has put up scores of 202, 173, 169, 153 in 2019, the scoring potential is huge. Take a step back, since mid 2018 (when he got a move into the midfield) he's had 12 scores of 130+ from from 43 games which is pretty good imo. Last year was underdone due to him starting the trend with the syndesmosis injuries (or one of the earlier ones to jump on the hot injury of 2020) which saw him miss the next 7 weeks where he'd have lost a lot of his fitness base so he's still undervalued as he would have had a bigger role otherwise.
The other half of me goes he's struggled to get proper midfield time the past couple of years with him fighting the likes of Wallis for those minutes who they've finally realised is a better forward. As Divvy posted on FFC discord, he ranked 4th on the weekend at CBA (Macrae 26, Libba & Bont 22, Dunkley 16) so he's already the 4th option and Treloar has to come in. We've seen Bev rate him as a forward (even though he's not a great kick) so it's hard to see him going against that, even if they decide to play Bont as a forward more too. The addition of Martin also hurts as it means Bev can no longer take his frustrations out of Jong/Dunkley by throwing them in the ruck anymore either which will hurt his midfield time further.
But he scored 202 in a game. Basically, to sum up what's going on in my head with a Simpsons clip, it would be this -
One thing I will say is Daniher has reached a higher high than Impey with his 86 SC average back in 2017 compared to Impey who has peaked at 74 which was the year he did his knee (which rises to 77 if you remove that game). Even then though, he only had a single 100+ score (and 3 in the 90s) in 2019 and just about the same in 2018 with one less score in the 90s.
Compare that to Daniher's 2017 season, he had 7 100+ scores to go with 3 scores in the 90s, if you're viewing them as an upgrade choice, I feel like you're going to get a better chance of owning Daniher at an overvalued price compared to Impey *if his body holds up*
The sucker in me goes just look at his potential vs price. This is a guy who has put up scores of 202, 173, 169, 153 in 2019, the scoring potential is huge. Take a step back, since mid 2018 (when he got a move into the midfield) he's had 12 scores of 130+ from from 43 games which is pretty good imo. Last year was underdone due to him starting the trend with the syndesmosis injuries (or one of the earlier ones to jump on the hot injury of 2020) which saw him miss the next 7 weeks where he'd have lost a lot of his fitness base so he's still undervalued as he would have had a bigger role otherwise.
The other half of me goes he's struggled to get proper midfield time the past couple of years with him fighting the likes of Wallis for those minutes who they've finally realised is a better forward. As Divvy posted on FFC discord, he ranked 4th on the weekend at CBA (Macrae 26, Libba & Bont 22, Dunkley 16) so he's already the 4th option and Treloar has to come in. We've seen Bev rate him as a forward (even though he's not a great kick) so it's hard to see him going against that, even if they decide to play Bont as a forward more too. The addition of Martin also hurts as it means Bev can no longer take his frustrations out of Jong/Dunkley by throwing them in the ruck anymore either which will hurt his midfield time further.
But he scored 202 in a game. Basically, to sum up what's going on in my head with a Simpsons clip, it would be this -
One thing I will say is Daniher has reached a higher high than Impey with his 86 SC average back in 2017 compared to Impey who has peaked at 74 which was the year he did his knee (which rises to 77 if you remove that game). Even then though, he only had a single 100+ score (and 3 in the 90s) in 2019 and just about the same in 2018 with one less score in the 90s.
Compare that to Daniher's 2017 season, he had 7 100+ scores to go with 3 scores in the 90s, if you're viewing them as an upgrade choice, I feel like you're going to get a better chance of owning Daniher at an overvalued price compared to Impey *if his body holds up*
I wouldn’t say they’re trying to slow the game. More, trying to reduce congestion by making it harder for players to cover the whole field. I think the combination of the reduced interchanges and the new rule will mean better ball movement, more marks and less stoppages / contested footy. There’ll be an impact but not a huge one and certainly not to the extent Grundy and Gawn were impacted on the weekend.
And I agree Gawn and Grundy will find points elsewhere as quasi mids / marking targets. The pure tap rucks will be impacted more.
And I agree Gawn and Grundy will find points elsewhere as quasi mids / marking targets. The pure tap rucks will be impacted more.
What do you mean?
Maybe
Neale is going to benefit if there is a move to spread guys but also be hurt by less clearances but he's one who should be pretty neutral. Worry is obviously that 134 is a huge average to sustain and a couple of down games would almost make him affordable.
Honestly think Neale is probably an either pick though, reckon even down on last year he's going to be 115+ and a top midfielder but I also think he might start slow enough that not starting him can work.
He torched me last year though when I felt like he didn't have a lot of room for improvement and I still remember chasing Ablett back in the day when his 130+ starting price seemed unsustainable
I like Daniher for two key reasons.
Job security, which for me cancels out the FOGI as you put it, Impey being subbed out can be read two ways and one of them has to at least be considered, especially given how well his competitors played.
Scoring potential, this is the bigger factor. Daniher can score massive scores, could easily score 130 in a game or two, if he does that in a couple of games in a month, he's going to make you 200k+ pretty easily. Impey has not shown any real high scoring capacity, he's more of a slow grind but to me the vast majority of the rookies this year are going to be grinders not price spikes so if Daniher can get a hot start and be out of the team by round 6 that's the dream.
You make some good points.
Regarding Rucks scoring less in the preseason games, I wonder if it is because the game's intensity is less, meaning there are less stoppages and less ball ups
Regarding Rucks scoring less in the preseason games, I wonder if it is because the game's intensity is less, meaning there are less stoppages and less ball ups
Cripps makes more sense on paper and is a very strong pick but his past 18 months haven't actually been very good and there are concerns, the ankle thing especially. It may be a coincidence but he's averaged "just" 104 since Teague took over in 26 games. Half of those 26 games have been below 100. Was he just injured or is Teague using him more as a forward and improvement from other players eating in to his scoring. Finally the stoppage factor is a worry for him (though against Rowell this is a moot point).
Rowell makes little sense in any way but the eye test, unlike Cripps his disposal appears elite. Durability a massive question, tags a massive question, ability to handle a whole season a massive question but he looks to be a Fyfe level type of animal to me, hopefully minus the durability woes!
Ultimately both are strong options, especially if you think premiums are overpriced or that stoppage numbers may be doing some funky things and that it will impact a lot of the existing premiums. It could be a genuine case where that 110 midfield premium level becomes 105 and you could make a case that 105 from either of them at their price might suffice as a M8. If you take both then one of them needs to push 110 though barring big changes which is something I think both can do. I do find it hard spending the value this year though so when I drop to these guys I'm kind of just ending up with extra cash that most logically goes to upgrading those guys
If you grade them fairly equally then ultimately Rowell is cheaper and thus has a lower keeper requirement.
I can't say I noticed his absence, he was there to my eye just not getting to repeat contests like last year, didn't help that they got smashed out of the middle and were playing in their back half when he does a lot of his work as a traditional centreman providing linkup and repeat possessions.
Neale is a hard one, I love him as a player but to me he looked a bit off in both games and at his level 5-10% off is significant.
Still fully expect him to be in the top group of mids this year, quite probably the top dog still, just wouldn't shock me if it's more in the 125 range which I think would still absolutely justify starting him.
Daniher/Impey stuff I agree entirely.
Dunkley I actually think is pretty low risk. I only really have one strong negative on him and it's the one very few mention, durability. Otherwise he's a guy who has averaged 95, 116 and 104 the last 3 years. The 95 will be a premium unless I've completely misread the forwards so really he might not be an ideal starting pick in that the value wouldn't be great but you're still getting a premium pick and ultimately that's the main thing. His upside though is huge. Libba and Treloar both have very ordinary injury histories and while Bont and Macrae have been ironmen he's only an injury to either of them from being their #1 extractor most likely.
For me Dunkley's real risk is his durability and with a flawless preseason, as far as I'm aware, you can't do anything more to avoid that risk than he has. Realistically his durability issue is probably the least concerning issue of any of the forward premiums this year. Danger has a bigger health question, despite looking fine. Sidey, Walters and Marshall all genuinely injured. Zorko with significant role questions and his own preseason health issues and Martin, who is the safest but doesn't have much in the way of upside most likely and has lost 75k+ over the first 10 rounds for the last 5 seasons.
I actually feel like Dunkley's durability is a relatively low risk. Outside of the ankle injury he didn't miss a game in 2019, he was dropped in 2018 (missed 3 games in a row) and prior to that I'm not sure if he was best 22 so unless he was plagued with injuries as a junior, he's had a pretty reasonable run in the AFL really.
Yeah I guess the concern is a low 90s average as primarily a forward player however his tackling will still prop up his scores enough so I'm inclined to agree that he probably won't drop too low compared to what will be considered a premium and the upside is probably too hard to ignore.
Yeah I guess the concern is a low 90s average as primarily a forward player however his tackling will still prop up his scores enough so I'm inclined to agree that he probably won't drop too low compared to what will be considered a premium and the upside is probably too hard to ignore.
