Opinion Questions For Rowsus
- Thread starter Rowsus
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- 5 Jun 2012
- Messages
- 220
- Likes
- 490
- AFL Club
- Geelong
Hey Rowsus
Hope you are well. Please see my attached team link
I have $28K in the bank. I already have N Krak and wish to get Tarrant this week.
I have deadwood in Lamb on my forward bench. If I just trade Lamb for Tarrant, I will only have a measly $1,200 in the bank.
I also have B Goodes in my backline. I could trade Salem (has a tough 3 match run and a B/E of 17) to Tarrant, then trade B Goodes to either J Kelly (Adelaide but questionable JS??) or N Brown leaving around $215,600 but still have Lamb on my forward bench. Not sure if I should be carrying a rookie with a LTI.
If I did B Goodes to say N Brown and Lamb to Tarrant would leave me with round $61,400.
Please advise which scenario sounds the best. Or if there is something I am missing.
Always welcome your comments.
Lobo
Hope you are well. Please see my attached team link
I have $28K in the bank. I already have N Krak and wish to get Tarrant this week.
I have deadwood in Lamb on my forward bench. If I just trade Lamb for Tarrant, I will only have a measly $1,200 in the bank.
I also have B Goodes in my backline. I could trade Salem (has a tough 3 match run and a B/E of 17) to Tarrant, then trade B Goodes to either J Kelly (Adelaide but questionable JS??) or N Brown leaving around $215,600 but still have Lamb on my forward bench. Not sure if I should be carrying a rookie with a LTI.
If I did B Goodes to say N Brown and Lamb to Tarrant would leave me with round $61,400.
Please advise which scenario sounds the best. Or if there is something I am missing.
Always welcome your comments.
Lobo
G'Day Rowsus
Hope you are keeping well. I'm looking forward to when you make the trip back home so I can meet you like the rest of the guys here.
I'm interested in your assessment of Kade Simpson to date. I have watched a lot of football (probably too much.. according to my Mrs).
It appears to me that he has been impacted by Carlton's style down the guts. Historically we have seen him go up the wing and collect a lot of points between HB and HF but this year he appears to be playing a Salem style (Yes better player), but he doesn't appear to have the luxury to run through the guts/wing and collect possessions and deliver to the forwards like years previously.
I have been considering him as an upgrade target and his price is getting juicy but at this rate I can't see him being a top 8 defender.
What is your thoughts?
Hope you are keeping well. I'm looking forward to when you make the trip back home so I can meet you like the rest of the guys here.
I'm interested in your assessment of Kade Simpson to date. I have watched a lot of football (probably too much.. according to my Mrs).
It appears to me that he has been impacted by Carlton's style down the guts. Historically we have seen him go up the wing and collect a lot of points between HB and HF but this year he appears to be playing a Salem style (Yes better player), but he doesn't appear to have the luxury to run through the guts/wing and collect possessions and deliver to the forwards like years previously.
I have been considering him as an upgrade target and his price is getting juicy but at this rate I can't see him being a top 8 defender.
What is your thoughts?
Hey Loboda
I know this question was not directed at me. But looking at your team it is a simple decision for me (if it was my team). Lamb is out for 8-12 weeks so swap Lamb for Tarrant. Goodes isn't going to get a game again this year IMO, and his BE is less than desirable. I would trade Goodes to either WhiteX or J.Kelly. Both are a risk but atleast you can bank the cash difference on Goodes to Kelly and Jake will go up in value this week. There are no options that are locks for a def rookie.
Cheers
Slip
I know this question was not directed at me. But looking at your team it is a simple decision for me (if it was my team). Lamb is out for 8-12 weeks so swap Lamb for Tarrant. Goodes isn't going to get a game again this year IMO, and his BE is less than desirable. I would trade Goodes to either WhiteX or J.Kelly. Both are a risk but atleast you can bank the cash difference on Goodes to Kelly and Jake will go up in value this week. There are no options that are locks for a def rookie.
Cheers
Slip
Hi Imjcb,
I must apologise. I wrote a 70-80 line reply to your question, and it just disappeared when I went to post it!
I don't have the patience to reproduce it all, so let me try summarising in points.
B/E's are largely meaningless in regards to a players earning potential. They are more of a safety net. In Tarrants case, he only has to run on the ground, and he goes up $62k. That fact has no bearing on his actual earning potential.
We generally talk of a players average being an indicator of their final price. But it's actually their more recent scores that indicate where they are heading. Usually it is around 4950 times their average. If Tarrant scores at 60 from here, he will top out at around $296k in Round 12, but his average will be around 71. The more recent average of 60 is more telling than his overall average of 71. - - 60 x 4950 = $297k, 71 x 4950 = $351k.
If McGrath wasn't injured, then unless you have a very high opinion of Tarrant's average from here on in, it would only be a justified trade if there were no other money making options on the horizon. It wouldn't surprise me if Tarrant averaged around 65-70 from here on in, got injured before he was fat, or lost his JS in the team before he was fat. A 70 average still makes him a good acquisition, and it is ok to cull another Rookie early to get a potential good Cash cow, but I would only do it in the circumstances described above. A high opinion of the in coming Cash cow, or no others on the Horizon, or if the Rookie you were culling had limited room for growth left.
Rookies are in our team to first make money, then score points, then provide cover, then be loophole agents. It is dangerous to keep McGrath as a loophole agent, as he doesn't float (doesn't have DPP). One of the safeties of a FD, is the floating part. You get 2 benches to provide cover, with McGrath as a loophole agent there's only 1 player left giving you cover on the Fwd bench. That can quickly lead to problems. I would recommend against it as a medium to long term plan.
The fact that you make virtually no money on the Mcgrath to Tarrant trade is irrelevent. McGrath is no longer able to complete the job you acquired him for. He needs another 5 or 6 games to get close to his top out price, and is out for another 8 to 12 weeks. That means he is pretty much useless to you, as he won't be fat for milking before at least Round 17!
Salem is an option for your Tarrant trade, but only if you have good plans for the cash this week, or next week. While he might only score 50 this week (playing Freo), and rise $13k, and he might only have $40-50k of growth left in him, you'd still be crazy to axe him if there is no direct plan for the money, and Mcgrath still sits as a potential problem on your bench. His use is still there, if you are just grabbing blindly cash, I would leave him in your team.
Opinion is everything in this game. Blindly following the pack turns it into a pretty boring game in the end. Having an opinion, and following it is the most entertaining part of the game. sometimes it means you are part of the majority, following the same path, and sometimes it seperates you from the pack, in a good way, or in a bad way. The main thing is to have an opinion, and follow it, don't do something because the masses are doing it, and conversely, don't NOT do something because the masses are doing it, if it really looks like the right thing to do!
I'm sorry, there was some other good stuff in there got lost, that was also going to be used to answer/reference some of the questions up ahead.
I hope this helped.
I must apologise. I wrote a 70-80 line reply to your question, and it just disappeared when I went to post it!
I don't have the patience to reproduce it all, so let me try summarising in points.
B/E's are largely meaningless in regards to a players earning potential. They are more of a safety net. In Tarrants case, he only has to run on the ground, and he goes up $62k. That fact has no bearing on his actual earning potential.
We generally talk of a players average being an indicator of their final price. But it's actually their more recent scores that indicate where they are heading. Usually it is around 4950 times their average. If Tarrant scores at 60 from here, he will top out at around $296k in Round 12, but his average will be around 71. The more recent average of 60 is more telling than his overall average of 71. - - 60 x 4950 = $297k, 71 x 4950 = $351k.
If McGrath wasn't injured, then unless you have a very high opinion of Tarrant's average from here on in, it would only be a justified trade if there were no other money making options on the horizon. It wouldn't surprise me if Tarrant averaged around 65-70 from here on in, got injured before he was fat, or lost his JS in the team before he was fat. A 70 average still makes him a good acquisition, and it is ok to cull another Rookie early to get a potential good Cash cow, but I would only do it in the circumstances described above. A high opinion of the in coming Cash cow, or no others on the Horizon, or if the Rookie you were culling had limited room for growth left.
Rookies are in our team to first make money, then score points, then provide cover, then be loophole agents. It is dangerous to keep McGrath as a loophole agent, as he doesn't float (doesn't have DPP). One of the safeties of a FD, is the floating part. You get 2 benches to provide cover, with McGrath as a loophole agent there's only 1 player left giving you cover on the Fwd bench. That can quickly lead to problems. I would recommend against it as a medium to long term plan.
The fact that you make virtually no money on the Mcgrath to Tarrant trade is irrelevent. McGrath is no longer able to complete the job you acquired him for. He needs another 5 or 6 games to get close to his top out price, and is out for another 8 to 12 weeks. That means he is pretty much useless to you, as he won't be fat for milking before at least Round 17!
Salem is an option for your Tarrant trade, but only if you have good plans for the cash this week, or next week. While he might only score 50 this week (playing Freo), and rise $13k, and he might only have $40-50k of growth left in him, you'd still be crazy to axe him if there is no direct plan for the money, and Mcgrath still sits as a potential problem on your bench. His use is still there, if you are just grabbing blindly cash, I would leave him in your team.
Opinion is everything in this game. Blindly following the pack turns it into a pretty boring game in the end. Having an opinion, and following it is the most entertaining part of the game. sometimes it means you are part of the majority, following the same path, and sometimes it seperates you from the pack, in a good way, or in a bad way. The main thing is to have an opinion, and follow it, don't do something because the masses are doing it, and conversely, don't NOT do something because the masses are doing it, if it really looks like the right thing to do!
I'm sorry, there was some other good stuff in there got lost, that was also going to be used to answer/reference some of the questions up ahead.
I hope this helped.
Last edited:
Hi Rowsus
Thanks for the advice this week, worked a treat. Who knew being optimistic works!
I'm thinking about bringing in Harvey or Ryder? I've got 3 fwd keepers to get and 1 spot will hopefully be for Robbie Gray in a few weeks. With Deledio and Bartel off the list it looks like a more open race for F5 and F6. I think I can still get Harvey at the same price next week as the Roos play Hawthorn. Do you think Ryder will be a decent F6 or possibly R2, or do I bring in Harvey this week?
Cheers
Thanks for the advice this week, worked a treat.
Who knew being optimistic works!I'm thinking about bringing in Harvey or Ryder? I've got 3 fwd keepers to get and 1 spot will hopefully be for Robbie Gray in a few weeks. With Deledio and Bartel off the list it looks like a more open race for F5 and F6. I think I can still get Harvey at the same price next week as the Roos play Hawthorn. Do you think Ryder will be a decent F6 or possibly R2, or do I bring in Harvey this week?
Cheers
we'd ideally like to see another game or two with Ryder and Lobbe operating together before we really decided where Ryder is sitting. On the information we have at hand, and taking into account how disappointing some of the expected big forwards have been, I have no doubt that Ryder could be an F6. I would pick him there, and not at R2. Why not make cover where and when you can? He might outscore your R2, but I think the cover will be invaluable later in the season.
Harvey will no doubt have a hot streak at some stage, but I think (without being certain!) he will be available at a similar price in the near future, so he can wait.
- Joined
- 18 Sep 2014
- Messages
- 848
- Likes
- 493
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
I have a similar question. I currently have an underperformaning TBC at R2. Should I consider upgrading him to Ryder, with the eventual aim of him becoming F6.
I could see it netting me a 25 point per round increase in score. I guess I'm answering my own question for the time being. No. TBC should put out a few better scores, and Ryder averaging 90 should drop a little lower than where he is. Plus no rucks have been injured like last year yet, so I am judging the benefit of TBC without actually having used it yet.
I could see it netting me a 25 point per round increase in score. I guess I'm answering my own question for the time being. No. TBC should put out a few better scores, and Ryder averaging 90 should drop a little lower than where he is. Plus no rucks have been injured like last year yet, so I am judging the benefit of TBC without actually having used it yet.
Hi Bobbie, happy to help, and I'm glad it's working out so far!
I think it's a bit dangerous keeping Lamb too long, and relying on Lonie/Clarke as your only cover. As we know, Things can fall aprt quickly, and suddenly you are facing a donut. I'd be taking Lamb out. I know you can use him to loophole, and that Salem is only likely to rise around $13-$15k this week, and another $50k overall anyway, but that's better than nothing. The potential short term point gain in loopholing Tarrant/Lonie/Clark is o***et by the potential donut if things fall apart quickly.
The Anderson/Heeney situation is slightly different. Firstly, there is more bench cover in the Mids.
Secondly, as I said to Imcjb, B/E's aren't the be all and end all, they are more of a risk indicator. Heeney (B/E 36) and Anderson (B/E 25) have terrible B/E's as far as their immediate cash making potential is concerned, and each have a low score up front in their pricing cycle. Being Rookies playing for better teams, their JS, particularly Anderson's, is a bit questionable. Having said all that, it in no way means they are nearly cooked as money making options! Anderson has an age/years in the system advantage over Heeney, and Heeney has a perceived JS/better scoring advantage over Anderson. Heeney also has the advantage of being more convenient to trade out during the byes, being Round 12, over Anderson round 11. If Heeney scores at 65/game from here, assuming he plays every game, his price actually drops a Little after Round 6, due to the 7 in his cycle, but then starts going up again. It would reach $306k after Round 11, up $74k from his current price. Anderson only needs to play 5 games at 52/game to match that $74k growth by after Round 9, or 4 games at 56/game to match it after Round 8.
The magic word that keeps popping up is, opinion. If you're of the opinion Anderson can come back into the side, and avoid too many vests, he should kill Heeney on growth from here. I can see Anderson becoming one of those "second spurt" rookies, that look cooked, and then rise again. The question becomes, will it be in a timely manner, where we get use out of it? I can also see Heeney succumbing to his first season, and getting tired and his game time and scoring suffering. The 65/game might be optimistic in this scenario. So it possibly becomes a question of earning potential versus convenience. Anderson, if he can find some game time, should earn more than Heeney from here, but is a very inconvenient Rookie for trading. his stalled growth due to low scoring and being dropped means, unless you believe he can grab some games, and score in the 55-60 area, he won't be ripe for trading until it is nearly the worst time to trade him out. when you need him possibly for bye coverage. It would be nice if Sydney played after the Haw v Nth game, then it might make the decision easier if we saw Anderson in a green vest. We don't have that luxury. Given everything we know, and even though we expect some decline in Heeney's output, as well as him having less growth potential than Anderson, it's the unknown and inconvenience that makes me think Anderson goes, and Heeney stays.
As to whether you work on upgrades, and only grab one of Tarrant/Krakouer, my opinion is grab both now. I really think Tarrant is fooling a lot of people, and could very quickly become a 55-60/game player, meaning he only has $130-150k to make before he tops out. There's even precedence in his own history, where in 2011 he scored 119 in Round 1, and then only managed to average 41 in the next 6 games. He only played 7 games that season. Then in 2013 he went 105, 9, 108 from round 13 (his 4th to 6th games of the season), and then averaged 61 in the last 8 games. Having told you why you mightn't take Tarrant, I really think you should grab him, unless you can see something much better on the horizon. I can't at the moment. It will also give you another weeks info on your upgrade targets, most of who probably have decent B/E's this week anyway!
I think it's a bit dangerous keeping Lamb too long, and relying on Lonie/Clarke as your only cover. As we know, Things can fall aprt quickly, and suddenly you are facing a donut. I'd be taking Lamb out. I know you can use him to loophole, and that Salem is only likely to rise around $13-$15k this week, and another $50k overall anyway, but that's better than nothing. The potential short term point gain in loopholing Tarrant/Lonie/Clark is o***et by the potential donut if things fall apart quickly.
The Anderson/Heeney situation is slightly different. Firstly, there is more bench cover in the Mids.
Secondly, as I said to Imcjb, B/E's aren't the be all and end all, they are more of a risk indicator. Heeney (B/E 36) and Anderson (B/E 25) have terrible B/E's as far as their immediate cash making potential is concerned, and each have a low score up front in their pricing cycle. Being Rookies playing for better teams, their JS, particularly Anderson's, is a bit questionable. Having said all that, it in no way means they are nearly cooked as money making options! Anderson has an age/years in the system advantage over Heeney, and Heeney has a perceived JS/better scoring advantage over Anderson. Heeney also has the advantage of being more convenient to trade out during the byes, being Round 12, over Anderson round 11. If Heeney scores at 65/game from here, assuming he plays every game, his price actually drops a Little after Round 6, due to the 7 in his cycle, but then starts going up again. It would reach $306k after Round 11, up $74k from his current price. Anderson only needs to play 5 games at 52/game to match that $74k growth by after Round 9, or 4 games at 56/game to match it after Round 8.
The magic word that keeps popping up is, opinion. If you're of the opinion Anderson can come back into the side, and avoid too many vests, he should kill Heeney on growth from here. I can see Anderson becoming one of those "second spurt" rookies, that look cooked, and then rise again. The question becomes, will it be in a timely manner, where we get use out of it? I can also see Heeney succumbing to his first season, and getting tired and his game time and scoring suffering. The 65/game might be optimistic in this scenario. So it possibly becomes a question of earning potential versus convenience. Anderson, if he can find some game time, should earn more than Heeney from here, but is a very inconvenient Rookie for trading. his stalled growth due to low scoring and being dropped means, unless you believe he can grab some games, and score in the 55-60 area, he won't be ripe for trading until it is nearly the worst time to trade him out. when you need him possibly for bye coverage. It would be nice if Sydney played after the Haw v Nth game, then it might make the decision easier if we saw Anderson in a green vest. We don't have that luxury. Given everything we know, and even though we expect some decline in Heeney's output, as well as him having less growth potential than Anderson, it's the unknown and inconvenience that makes me think Anderson goes, and Heeney stays.
As to whether you work on upgrades, and only grab one of Tarrant/Krakouer, my opinion is grab both now. I really think Tarrant is fooling a lot of people, and could very quickly become a 55-60/game player, meaning he only has $130-150k to make before he tops out. There's even precedence in his own history, where in 2011 he scored 119 in Round 1, and then only managed to average 41 in the next 6 games. He only played 7 games that season. Then in 2013 he went 105, 9, 108 from round 13 (his 4th to 6th games of the season), and then averaged 61 in the last 8 games. Having told you why you mightn't take Tarrant, I really think you should grab him, unless you can see something much better on the horizon. I can't at the moment. It will also give you another weeks info on your upgrade targets, most of who probably have decent B/E's this week anyway!
Hi Rowsus, another question on the Krak / Tarrant theme. Having read your previous posts I've eliminated some options and am left with the following:
a) Newnes to Krak (via Adamson but it messes up my D/M link with both Saad and Adamson in my defence). I'm not too keen on this option but interested in your view.
b) Anderson or Heeney to Krak (Anderson based on your feedback to Bobbie)
c) Anderson and Heeney to Krak/Tarrant (via moving a m/f premium to mids)
d) TBC to Tarrant is another 'option' but I'd be left with no ruck cover to Goldy/NN but gee I hope he gets his finger out soon.
I have no immediate plans for the cash so, based on your advice to Imcjb I'm not considering d/g Salem.
What do you reckon Rowsus? Cheers
a) Newnes to Krak (via Adamson but it messes up my D/M link with both Saad and Adamson in my defence). I'm not too keen on this option but interested in your view.
b) Anderson or Heeney to Krak (Anderson based on your feedback to Bobbie)
c) Anderson and Heeney to Krak/Tarrant (via moving a m/f premium to mids)
d) TBC to Tarrant is another 'option' but I'd be left with no ruck cover to Goldy/NN but gee I hope he gets his finger out soon.
I have no immediate plans for the cash so, based on your advice to Imcjb I'm not considering d/g Salem.
What do you reckon Rowsus? Cheers
Thanks Rowsus.
Since I posted my question I have seen Brad Scott on the telly talking about Boomer playing with the back 6 this year which I hadn't noticed while watching North play. He has only had 3 shots at goal this year and his AFL Fantasy scores are well down on previous years. He might not even be an F6!
Since I posted my question I have seen Brad Scott on the telly talking about Boomer playing with the back 6 this year which I hadn't noticed while watching North play. He has only had 3 shots at goal this year and his AFL Fantasy scores are well down on previous years. He might not even be an F6!
TBO, I must admit, I'm not sure why people would keep Lamb/McGrath for loopholing, unless they have a playing M/F link on their Mid bench, and their other Fwd bench is also a playing M/F. To me, that is too risky. They are one bad selection week away from a real problem. With extra bench in the Mids, I can understand it, but I think McGrath/Lamb owners need to move them on, unless they have that solid, linked cover. Some seem to have the attitude, that if they make no money by going McGrath to Tarrant, then why do it? The answer is simple. McGrath is listed as being out for 8 - 12 weeks. He needs another 5 games to get close to topping out in price. Are they really going to sit a non-Floating Donut on their bench for up to 17 weeks? Especially as, if it means you mightn't get to milk him until it's basically all over. Nearly the definition of crazy, unless you believe he will be back way earlier than predicted. It's too early to be carrying deadwood on the bench, especially when there is opportunities to fix it!
I can see one or both of Heeney/Anderson getting one of those "second spurts" that happens with some Rookies each season. Of course, we are waiting for Andersons first spurt! To me, that means there might value in holding one of them. As I detailed to Bobbie, given Anderson's lack of JS (he might reappear with Puopolo out for 2 weeks), and his awkward Round 11 bye, I'd be more inclined to keep Heeney, and trade Anderson. I am a Little worried about Heeney bottoming out, physically, but Andersons risks and awkwardness make him a tougher hold.
Bottomline - Anderson/McGrath to Krak/Tarrant looks right to me.
I can see one or both of Heeney/Anderson getting one of those "second spurts" that happens with some Rookies each season. Of course, we are waiting for Andersons first spurt!
To me, that means there might value in holding one of them. As I detailed to Bobbie, given Anderson's lack of JS (he might reappear with Puopolo out for 2 weeks), and his awkward Round 11 bye, I'd be more inclined to keep Heeney, and trade Anderson. I am a Little worried about Heeney bottoming out, physically, but Andersons risks and awkwardness make him a tougher hold. Bottomline - Anderson/McGrath to Krak/Tarrant looks right to me.
Anderson I can understand. McGrath is deadwood, and it is too early to be carrying deadwood, when there is a perfect opportunity to fix it. Unless you have a lot of selection luck, I think you will come to regret holding McGrath in the coming weeks.
If you went out, and bought a lawnmower at a garage sale, and it broke down 2 weeks later, and was going to cost more to fix than it was worth, would you keep it just because you can't get your money back? If you do, it's just taking up room in your shed.
McGrath is that broken lawnmower. The guy that sold it to you is offering to sell you another, but this one comes with a guarantee it will do the job, and appreciate in value. Are you going to take his offer, or let your kids bikes rust in the rain, because the old broken mower is keeping their bikes out?
Cut your losses and run. Under your logic, if the same scenario happens again, you run through the season with no Fwd cover on your bench. Remember, Rookies have a job to do, and McGrath is not capable of doing any of the first 3 jobs he was bought to do! Earn, Score, Cover, Loophole in that order. He's only getting the last priority job done, and only getting it done properly every 2nd week!
If you went out, and bought a lawnmower at a garage sale, and it broke down 2 weeks later, and was going to cost more to fix than it was worth, would you keep it just because you can't get your money back? If you do, it's just taking up room in your shed.
McGrath is that broken lawnmower. The guy that sold it to you is offering to sell you another, but this one comes with a guarantee it will do the job, and appreciate in value. Are you going to take his offer, or let your kids bikes rust in the rain, because the old broken mower is keeping their bikes out?
Cut your losses and run. Under your logic, if the same scenario happens again, you run through the season with no Fwd cover on your bench. Remember, Rookies have a job to do, and McGrath is not capable of doing any of the first 3 jobs he was bought to do! Earn, Score, Cover, Loophole in that order. He's only getting the last priority job done, and only getting it done properly every 2nd week!
Must say I do love the Lawnmover analogy Rowsus, as much as it would never happen in real life I totally agree with you though, McGrath is deadwood and with a lack of ability to 'float' / DPP, there isn't much incentive to keep him as a loophole agent especially when we have two rookies (krak/tarrant) on the bubble
I totally agree with you though, McGrath is deadwood and with a lack of ability to 'float' / DPP, there isn't much incentive to keep him as a loophole agent especially when we have two rookies (krak/tarrant) on the bubble
TBO, I must admit, I'm not sure why people would keep Lamb/McGrath for loopholing, unless they have a playing M/F link on their Mid bench, and their other Fwd bench is also a playing M/F. To me, that is too risky. They are one bad selection week away from a real problem. With extra bench in the Mids, I can understand it, but I think McGrath/Lamb owners need to move them on, unless they have that solid, linked cover. Some seem to have the attitude, that if they make no money by going McGrath to Tarrant, then why do it? The answer is simple. McGrath is listed as being out for 8 - 12 weeks. He needs another 5 games to get close to topping out in price. Are they really going to sit a non-Floating Donut on their bench for up to 17 weeks? Especially as, if it means you mightn't get to milk him until it's basically all over. Nearly the definition of crazy, unless you believe he will be back way earlier than predicted. It's too early to be carrying deadwood on the bench, especially when there is opportunities to fix it!
I can see one or both of Heeney/Anderson getting one of those "second spurts" that happens with some Rookies each season. Of course, we are waiting for Andersons first spurt! To me, that means there might value in holding one of them. As I detailed to Bobbie, given Anderson's lack of JS (he might reappear with Puopolo out for 2 weeks), and his awkward Round 11 bye, I'd be more inclined to keep Heeney, and trade Anderson. I am a Little worried about Heeney bottoming out, physically, but Andersons risks and awkwardness make him a tougher hold.
Bottomline - Anderson/McGrath to Krak/Tarrant looks right to me.
I can see one or both of Heeney/Anderson getting one of those "second spurts" that happens with some Rookies each season. Of course, we are waiting for Andersons first spurt!
To me, that means there might value in holding one of them. As I detailed to Bobbie, given Anderson's lack of JS (he might reappear with Puopolo out for 2 weeks), and his awkward Round 11 bye, I'd be more inclined to keep Heeney, and trade Anderson. I am a Little worried about Heeney bottoming out, physically, but Andersons risks and awkwardness make him a tougher hold. Bottomline - Anderson/McGrath to Krak/Tarrant looks right to me.
- Status