Position Forward Discussion
- Thread starter IDIG
- Start date
I wouldn’t necessarily pick someone in that price range with the mindset of having to trade them out. Of course if they reach a price where you no longer think they can score to match the price tag, then yes trade them out.
Don’t have the exact numbers by a run anything close to Cloke’s would have to be incredibly rare and I imagine picking a midpricer to average 95-100 would be just as if not more likely.
Don’t have the exact numbers by a run anything close to Cloke’s would have to be incredibly rare and I imagine picking a midpricer to average 95-100 would be just as if not more likely.
That's a very hard thing to do. If I had Cloke running with a 133 average after 6 rounds then it would be difficult to trade him out. That decision would be easier after he pulled a 36 and his BE skyrocketted. Same with Boak, after 7 rounds he was averaging 120, what then is the key to trading him out? Dunkley was averaging 85 after the first 6 rounds.
Ok, maybe I'm answering my own questions here, but Dunkley had a 134 in round 7 and an obvious change in role plus his BE would have gone quite a bit into the negative. Boaks BE would have been quite high and would have become very high after a 79 in round 8. So , the time that was most obvious to do that trade was after round 8, particularly when Dunkley pulled out a 133.
I guess that's what separates the top coaches from imbeciles like me, that ability to identify role changes throughout the year combined with chasing those BE's (not just with rookies) and not being scared to use trades.
Ok, maybe I'm answering my own questions here, but Dunkley had a 134 in round 7 and an obvious change in role plus his BE would have gone quite a bit into the negative. Boaks BE would have been quite high and would have become very high after a 79 in round 8. So , the time that was most obvious to do that trade was after round 8, particularly when Dunkley pulled out a 133.
I guess that's what separates the top coaches from imbeciles like me, that ability to identify role changes throughout the year combined with chasing those BE's (not just with rookies) and not being scared to use trades.
I like both Fwd/Ruc Ladhams and Ceglar.
Ladhams worries me because of Lycett, as I'm not sure how Lycett and Ladhams will both fit in the team? If Ladhams does become the solo ruckman, can a 22yo 5 gamer ruckman score consistently well each week?
Ceglar is a 29yo 76 gamer, who is more likely to be the main ruckman at HAW, and has scored well (comparing to a forward) as a ruckman.
I'm leaning to Ceglar.
Tuesday, 10 September 2019
Jonathon Ceglar signs a new three-year deal with Hawthorn in a move that hints he is primed to become the Hawks' No.1 big man.
The Lions were keen to add Ceglar to their ruck division, but he instead elected to remain at Waverley Park, where he's played 15 and 11 games respectively in the past two seasons.
"He's a valuable player for us who adds a wealth of versatility to our line-up," Hawthorn football boss Graham Wright said.
"He's also a member of our emerging leaders group and sets a great example for his teammates both on and off the field."
Ladhams worries me because of Lycett, as I'm not sure how Lycett and Ladhams will both fit in the team? If Ladhams does become the solo ruckman, can a 22yo 5 gamer ruckman score consistently well each week?
Ceglar is a 29yo 76 gamer, who is more likely to be the main ruckman at HAW, and has scored well (comparing to a forward) as a ruckman.
I'm leaning to Ceglar.
Tuesday, 10 September 2019
Jonathon Ceglar signs a new three-year deal with Hawthorn in a move that hints he is primed to become the Hawks' No.1 big man.
The Lions were keen to add Ceglar to their ruck division, but he instead elected to remain at Waverley Park, where he's played 15 and 11 games respectively in the past two seasons.
"He's a valuable player for us who adds a wealth of versatility to our line-up," Hawthorn football boss Graham Wright said.
"He's also a member of our emerging leaders group and sets a great example for his teammates both on and off the field."
- Joined
- 6 Jul 2012
- Messages
- 4,890
- Likes
- 11,150
- AFL Club
- West Coast
I am with you, rnd 8 makes sense. Boak kicked on scoring so not sure that was a perfect manoeuvre. I had dunkley and picked Kelly up after his tag and when he bottomed, still happy with that methodology!
dont be hard on your self, 250k coaches and a large number doing trades, 1 is going to get some luck.
I dont think I could have pulled off dimmawits cloke trade and would assume same role he may keep going. Then again, I dont have key fwd pre winter so maybe easier to see it coming.
dont be hard on your self, 250k coaches and a large number doing trades, 1 is going to get some luck.
I dont think I could have pulled off dimmawits cloke trade and would assume same role he may keep going. Then again, I dont have key fwd pre winter so maybe easier to see it coming.
I'm new at this game and followed the mantra of 'never sideways trade a premo'. Started with Dunkley and was oh so close to trading him out after round 6, but by that stage he had lost all the cash he was going to lose and I would have then locked in his losses, glad I held.
I'm not scared to use trades and cash rookies out early (maybe hold some that have good JS for the byes) and chase their BE's but I haven't, or didn't, use that same strategy with the premos. So the lesson for me, is to identify players that exhibit definite role changes and those that fall in value for reason's other than role changes, jump on and off using BE's as a guide. Probably once or twice during a season would be the limit I imagine.
I'm not scared to use trades and cash rookies out early (maybe hold some that have good JS for the byes) and chase their BE's but I haven't, or didn't, use that same strategy with the premos. So the lesson for me, is to identify players that exhibit definite role changes and those that fall in value for reason's other than role changes, jump on and off using BE's as a guide. Probably once or twice during a season would be the limit I imagine.
It's nearly always the right thing to do. 99.9% of the time. Occasionally an opportunity presents itself to leverage an unusual situation. Even though Boak got off to a hot start and his price went up it wasn't enough to trade him out and his role didn't change.
Heath Shaw in 2016 was a good example. He had a 200 point game and his priced spiked to $664K! A massive outlier and no way he was going to stay there. Too much money to ignore.
The famous Bruyn manouvre of 2013 was another one. One of our SCS members Dimmawitts started Travis Cloke at $436K and he had a 133 followed by a 195 in rnds 3 and 4 and he got to $575K by round 6. Again a massive outlier and way too much money to ignore. Dimmawitts traded him out and won supercoach that year.
Heath Shaw in 2016 was a good example. He had a 200 point game and his priced spiked to $664K! A massive outlier and no way he was going to stay there. Too much money to ignore.
The famous Bruyn manouvre of 2013 was another one. One of our SCS members Dimmawitts started Travis Cloke at $436K and he had a 133 followed by a 195 in rnds 3 and 4 and he got to $575K by round 6. Again a massive outlier and way too much money to ignore. Dimmawitts traded him out and won supercoach that year.
I'd say only if the expected emergence of playing rookies fails to develop.... but probably not even then... btw he was compared to Dangerfield last week on the radio!!!
https://www.fiveaa.com.au/shows/rowey-bicks/Graham-Cornes-Warning-About-A-Young-Gun-Adelaide-Crow
https://www.fiveaa.com.au/shows/rowey-bicks/Graham-Cornes-Warning-About-A-Young-Gun-Adelaide-Crow
3rd time lucky 
Started at $400k, peaked at $580k in 10 rounds with an average of 108. To save Diabolical the pain i won't revisit what happened last year but what i will say is, it ain't pretty
I think generally speaking, a clear role change is a pretty good indicator of when it might be time to jump aboard/ship. As you have mentioned, Dunkley is the poster child for this.
Another that comes to mind is Mundy last year. Started the year with a 73 and 35 and i'm pretty sure zero CBA's. To me, that is a good enough reason to move someone on (which i did with a clear conscience). He then started attending CBA's and went bonkers, raising his ave of 54 after 2 games to 106 7 rounds later. His CBA's presumably came down again as did his average for the rest of the year.
To me, what that shows is spikes can occur throughout the year as opportunities come and go and if you're brave enough, it's a handy manoevre to have up your sleeve if you can identify the change. It certainly isn't for the faint hearted though..
Another that comes to mind is Mundy last year. Started the year with a 73 and 35 and i'm pretty sure zero CBA's. To me, that is a good enough reason to move someone on (which i did with a clear conscience). He then started attending CBA's and went bonkers, raising his ave of 54 after 2 games to 106 7 rounds later. His CBA's presumably came down again as did his average for the rest of the year.
To me, what that shows is spikes can occur throughout the year as opportunities come and go and if you're brave enough, it's a handy manoevre to have up your sleeve if you can identify the change. It certainly isn't for the faint hearted though..
- Joined
- 6 Jul 2012
- Messages
- 4,890
- Likes
- 11,150
- AFL Club
- West Coast
Probably a little more options in the fwd line, including some 200k players and Devon Smith. Whilst his numbers last year beside the last game were 40-60, all the talk is he is training well and getting mid time. Will be an option like Doedee or a Roberton in backs, just doesn't have the history at the same price.
if I lose another another expensive rookie ( Cockatoo already injured), then I think he is a real option.
if I lose another another expensive rookie ( Cockatoo already injured), then I think he is a real option.