Position 2023: Midfield Discussion

[NT.Thunder]

In short, almost certainly no.

The only time it actually means anything is if all your forward rookies, especially the on field ones, don't have DPP and thus you're using Dunkley in the mids to field those FWD only rookies over the mid rookies.

If you've got a DPP rookie then all you're doing playing Dunkley in the mids is starting a forward rookie over a mid rookie and could obtain the exact same result starting a rookie DPP in the mids.

I'm ignoring the absurd scenario where there are 6 forwards, not including Dunkley, who are outscoring the top mids and that Dunkley is only viable as a midfielder because it's never been even remotely close to happening.

It quite simply doesn't change the amount of FWD premiums you're starting, where you hide them doesn't change that.

DPP in starting sides is literally just about what rookies you choose to start where, outside the rucks where a DPP guy can be taken as a stopgap to work out *** is happening there

I don’t agree with this entirely - there’s so many variables where playing a forward premium in the mids doesn’t mean you’re playing a forward rookie over a mid rookie. And a forward rookie doesn’t always mean they’ll score less or perform less in pts or JS as a mid rookie. He may want to start Dunkley, Cogs, Rozee, Taranto which IMO is a pretty common scenario and may also want to fit in 3 of Fyfe, Cunnington, McLean, Ziebell, Allen etc. Starting a Cogs in the midfield he can fit the 4 keeper forwards in his squad without having to take a risk on a mid priced around that value that may not be a keeper in that position. All 4 of those forward premiums are solid scorers when compared to value of the same players who are mid only who you’re looking for significant improvement from.

Plenty of coaches have done it in the past and done it well.

 

[Eagling]

I don’t agree with this entirely - there’s so many variables where playing a forward premium in the mids doesn’t mean you’re playing a forward rookie over a mid rookie. And a forward rookie doesn’t always mean they’ll score less or perform less in pts or JS as a mid rookie. He may want to start Dunkley, Cogs, Rozee, Taranto which IMO is a pretty common scenario and may also want to fit in 3 of Fyfe, Cunnington, McLean, Ziebell, Allen etc. Starting a Cogs in the midfield he can fit the 4 keeper forwards in his squad without having to take a risk on a mid priced around that value that may not be a keeper in that position. All 4 of those forward premiums are solid scorers when compared to value of the same players who are mid only who you’re looking for significant improvement from.

Plenty of coaches have done it in the past and done it well.

Maybe so, but did that happen when we got DPP changes midseason?

 

[wogitalia]

I don’t agree with this entirely - there’s so many variables where playing a forward premium in the mids doesn’t mean you’re playing a forward rookie over a mid rookie. And a forward rookie doesn’t always mean they’ll score less or perform less in pts or us as a mid rookie. He may want to start Dunkley, Cogs, Rozee, Taranto which IMO is a pretty common scenario and may also want to fit in 3 of Fyfe, Cunnington, McLean, Ziebell, Allen etc. Starting a Cogs in the midfield he can fit the 4 keeper forwards in his squad without having to take a risk on a mid priced around that value that may not be a keeper in that position. All 4 of those forward premiums are solid scorers when compared to value of the same players who are mid only who you’re looking for significant improvement from.

Plenty of coaches have done it in the past and done it well.

Even in that scenario you're limited to 6 total keepers from that group so you're either picking Fyfe/Ziebell types as pure cash cows or they factor into the 6 count anyway and the only reason to have Dunkley in the mids would be again having a FWD only rookie type that you want on field over the mid only ones.

I can see it happening this year if someone were to go Milera, Ziebell and Allen and McLean doesn't make it to round one but honestly, I can't see there being anyone who isn't starting McLean if he does in which case you would just use him as the DPP guy if you really do want an extra forward rookie playing over the mid options.

Ziebell and Milera are probably the strongest argument for doing it in that you're using forward spots to pick DEF for a month, in which case you might want to use a mid spot for an extra forward. Making it Dunkley instead of McLean is just semantics though and I'd definitely argue that the rookie scoring is more volatile and the area you're more likely to utilise DPP on if you have it, you're not looping a Dunkley in early rounds so realistically you'd lock him in the forwards.

To be fair, the forward rookies do look good this year and the mids look thin, my drafts look likely to have 2 DPP guys in the midfield right now.

Basically Dunkley still counts in how many forwards you're starting and the semantics of which DPP forward you put in the middle doesn't change that or enable you to pick more premium forwards than anyone else, if you've got him and 4 others you're starting 5 whether he lines up in the mids or fwds because there's no scenario that he ends up as a midfielder at season end that's based on reality.

 

[NT.Thunder]

Maybe so, but did that happen when we got DPP changes midseason?

I’m not quite sure I follow, I would say any fwd premium starting in the mids would only be temporary, early in the season and likely for a starting side. I agree there’s no long term value for a premium forward stuck in the mids if that’s what you mean.

 

[NT.Thunder]

I think we may have mixed views around how we class rookies/cash cows. I just call anyone in the basement price range, like Allen and McLean as rookies. Like it or not they’re just rookies to me, I don’t over think it, they’re just rookies, in the system for longer, with good JS and scoring potential. And this was a scenario that I looked at and do have a team somewhere saved that started Cogs in the middle to get some of these ‘rookies’ in, as at the time that’s where I saw better value. In fact at this stage outside of Callaghan down to Phillips and Ashcroft - there’s not a huge number of Mid rookies jumping out at me saying start me. I do struggle to follow some of your explanations, and it’s not you it’s me, but to pretty much have a cut and dry view of no, i still don’t agree with it.

 

[NT.Thunder]

And this is the team I was looking at a week or so ago - starting Cogs in the mids gives you 4 almost guaranteed FWD keepers with the option to start a Ziebell, Fyfe and McLean - you're right, it doesn't matter if it's Cogs, Fyfe or McLean starting in the mids - the conversation here is around seeing better value with a M/F DPP regardless of price then a pure Mid within that price-range.

Would change every season depending on where the value picks and rookies are. I think I even started a DEF/MID in the mids last season

 

[Feerits Elf]

I just call anyone in the basement price range, like Allen and McLean as rookies. Like it or not they’re just rookies to me, I don’t over think it, they’re just rookies, in the system for longer, with good JS and scoring potential.

They are rookies.

Rookie status is no more than a function of price.

 

[wogitalia]

And this is the team I was looking at a week or so ago - starting Cogs in the mids gives you 4 almost guaranteed FWD keepers with the option to start a Ziebell, Fyfe and McLean - you're right, it doesn't matter if it's Cogs, Fyfe or McLean starting in the mids - the conversation here is around seeing better value with a M/F DPP regardless of price then a pure Mid within that price-range.

Would change every season depending on where the value picks and rookies are. I think I even started a DEF/MID in the mids last season

View attachment 52860

You're actually agreeing with me based on your screenshot.

The only reason to pick Coniglio in the mids is because you've valued JVR in particular (and Richards, Davey and Drury to a lesser extent) over a mid only rookie and even then, it's a semantics choice given you've got a DPP rookie and midpricer starting in the forwards who you've left there instead of the premium forward.

Also you've picked your 6 starting premiums already (assuming forwards stays weaker than backs with Ziebell), having Cogs in this scenario in the mids doesn't change that.

You've literally picked 3 forward rookies over mid rookies and you're still not fielding them over the mid rookies by putting Cogs in the mids, all that Cogs in the mids achieves is that you can loop the F6 spot and the M8 spot assuming you've got the donuts to do it, definitely an advantage in that situation but very limited value in early rounds when, hopefully, you wont have the donuts given you're putting Cogs there in order to pick hypothetically stronger rookies!

The only reason to do it is to load up on forward only rookies that you want on field over mid and/or DPP rookies. If you like a DPP rookie over a mid rookie you'll just pick them in the mids (once forwards are full) as you have here. If JVR was the clear top rookie, then Coniglio to the mids would make sense to get him on field (assuming that Phillips/Ashcroft are still better than your resulting F7).

 

[Vicwood]

I'm not a number cruncher like many others on here and I know they've already helped you out with some good data but my two cents is if he's one of your favourite players and plays for your team it's always enjoyable to have them in your SC side. I've had Jack Steele in my side ever since Ratts released him from the run with role he got stuck in under Richo.
This year I'll hopefully enjoy having Steele, Marshall, Coffield and Phillipou in my side

Windhager, i definately see upside if he gets a positive role through the midfield and loses the tagging role.?

 

[Vicwood]

Even in that scenario you're limited to 6 total keepers from that group so you're either picking Fyfe/Ziebell types as pure cash cows or they factor into the 6 count anyway and the only reason to have Dunkley in the mids would be again having a FWD only rookie type that you want on field over the mid only ones.

I can see it happening this year if someone were to go Milera, Ziebell and Allen and McLean doesn't make it to round one but honestly, I can't see there being anyone who isn't starting McLean if he does in which case you would just use him as the DPP guy if you really do want an extra forward rookie playing over the mid options.

Ziebell and Milera are probably the strongest argument for doing it in that you're using forward spots to pick DEF for a month, in which case you might want to use a mid spot for an extra forward. Making it Dunkley instead of McLean is just semantics though and I'd definitely argue that the rookie scoring is more volatile and the area you're more likely to utilise DPP on if you have it, you're not looping a Dunkley in early rounds so realistically you'd lock him in the forwards.

To be fair, the forward rookies do look good this year and the mids look thin, my drafts look likely to have 2 DPP guys in the midfield right now.

Basically Dunkley still counts in how many forwards you're starting and the semantics of which DPP forward you put in the middle doesn't change that or enable you to pick more premium forwards than anyone else, if you've got him and 4 others you're starting 5 whether he lines up in the mids or fwds because there's no scenario that he ends up as a midfielder at season end that's based on reality.

If Zieball can Average 95+ why would you move him to DEF Line.

FWD line he is close to keeper value in DEF he is not.?

 

[Wheedus]

Windhager, i definately see upside if he gets a positive role through the midfield and loses the tagging role.?

His coach is now Ross Lyon

Having said that, the kid has the chops so there is still upside. One for draft leagues.

 

[dlanod]

Forward premiums are easier to chase during the season. Start with high priced mid premo instead, and aim to bring in whichever of Rozee/Taranto/Coniglio you aren't starting.

Yep - it's a lot slower process to change price after the first few weeks, so if your targeted player started off midpriced and goes well he's probably still going to be priced less than another player that started off fully priced and has gone the same or worse so is easier to pick up.

 

[Johnsy44]

Haven’t really seen him mentioned much at all in here, but I’m very much considering Wines. Currently In only 1% of teams.

 

[Darkie]

Haven’t really seen him mentioned much at all in here, but I’m very much considering Wines. Currently In only 1% of teams.

Has had an interrupted pre season, could start slow.

 

[Russty_]

Haven’t really seen him mentioned much at all in here, but I’m very much considering Wines. Currently In only 1% of teams.

Think he's only just returned to full training recently, has been recovering from knee surgery.

 

[wogitalia]

If Zieball can Average 95+ why would you move him to DEF Line.

FWD line he is close to keeper value in DEF he is not.?

More temporary, most teams I've seen are much lighter down back with heavy forward premiums, so would swing him there to get rookies off field, can move him back to forwards later.

At 95 he'd be very borderline as a keeper based on last year, purely on value would he be a keeper as the scoring would be off the pace. Would expect that the threshold remains similar this year to last years 102+ for F6.

 

[Connoisseur]

Haven’t really seen him mentioned much at all in here, but I’m very much considering Wines. Currently In only 1% of teams.

Poor kicking efficiency limits his ceiling and thus reliant on accumulating 30+ disposals to score around the 110+ range on a regular basis. In 2022, he recorded his career high in kicking efficiency (54.5%). TOG is another limitation, as he also recorded a career high (77.4%) in 2022. Averaged 32.4 disposals in his Brownlow year (2021) but could only manage a 112.5 average. A low upside pick comparative to those available within $50,000 or $100,000 either side of his price.

 

[Connoisseur]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1627274059376627712

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1627285395745693697

 

[wogitalia]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1627274059376627712

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1627285395745693697

Would love to see this broken down for teams playing by stadium.

It may be coincidence but the 5 Marvel Stadium sides were in the bottom 7 sides tackling last season. West Coast were another of the 7. Richmond the other.

On a flipside the top tackling sides were Sydney, Collingwood, Geelong, Adelaide and Brisbane. Brisbane play in the humid, approaching wet conditions. Sydney in Sydney, Pies almost exclusively in open stadiums and then Geelong and Adelaide.

The year before the WA sides, Richmond and the Marvel teams outside the WB again made up the bottom half of the league. No idea if my perception that wet games have more tackles actually stacks up either, fwiw

 

[Connoisseur]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1628157316657807360