I'm curious as to why the vast majority of people are intending on buying Goddard, Gibbs and Deledio all as backs. I understand that they will likely be the three highest scoring defenders whereas there are other options in the middle. However, taking byes into consideration wouldn't it be nice to start one in the middle and swap him into defence to cover for the other two when they miss? Assuming you start with Heppell or trade down to Jacobs you could then move the mid into defence permanently later on to free up a spot for one more rampaging midfielder.
Because think of it this way. They will probably be the three highest scoring backs. But apart from Goddard, they might not even be in the top ten of midfielders. So you want to stick them in your back line, and save your midfield for the very very best. Also, since regardless of where those three are, you will still have a bench player come on. If all three are in the back line, you get a midfield rookie come on, and they seem much more tasty as scorers then the backs do.
Starting Goddard in the middle, then moving him out to defence later in the year is a legitimate tactic. Just as legitimate as starting with no DP links then trading into them later in the year. Considering every team will have at least 8 non premiums in the starting 22, in some ways it doesn't matter where they are. It only really matters when you need to upgrade, which of course you want to plan, so if you need Goddard in the central division to give you more options in defence then go for it. The tactic at the moment isn't really for me but I can see a justification. Also I've been surprised with the lack of nuance from people regarding DP. If you have Goddard in DEF and Gibbs in MID and St Kilda has a bye you can replace Goddard with either a DEF or a MID rookie. So you don't need the DP player on the bench to be able to get them into your 22, you literally cross Goddard with Gibbs, then bring in your mid rookie. Hope that made sense
Just on Deledio, I know most coaches are looking at him as D3 with Goddard and Gibbs, but has anybody considered Daniel Connors? Played 14 games at an average of neary 86. Just put it out there as a possible POD.
<blockquote>Quote from Morko78 on February 3, 2011, 16:14 Just on Deledio, I know most coaches are looking at him as D3 with Goddard and Gibbs, but has anybody considered Daniel Connors? Played 14 games at an average of neary 86. Just put it out there as a possible POD.</blockquote> way too expensive for mine. and definitely not in place of lids. if you want points of difference look for them in D4,5,6&7 I still don't understand why people are hesitant on Lids.
<blockquote>Quote from Lucas on February 3, 2011, 16:07 If you have Goddard in DEF and Gibbs in MID and St Kilda has a bye you can replace Goddard with either a DEF or a MID rookie. So you don't need the DP player on the bench to be able to get them into your 22, you literally cross Goddard with Gibbs, then bring in your mid rookie. </blockquote> This is fine for when Goddard or Gibbs have the bye, you can cover them with a MID or DEF rookie. The idea with having say Goddard in MID and say Hibberd as DEF on the bench, is when any defender has the bye, you can cross Goddard with Hibberd and bring in a mid rookie, so you can cover any defender with a MID or DEF rookie.
<blockquote>Quote from WillS on January 31, 2011, 11:49 <blockquote>Quote from wal on January 30, 2011, 11:06 <blockquote>Quote from bonesy on January 28, 2011, 17:59 Agree with this completely. The point is their role in their teams won't change, but their scores should now be compared against the other defenders, not the midfielders anymore.</blockquote> Gibbs' role will change. Ratts said after the practice match yesterday that we picked up Nick Duigan and Jeremy Laidler in order to move Gibbs into the midfield. In all likelihood his back eligibility will be a one-off. Remains to be seen how things pan out but going back into the guts could make him a 115ppg player. I'm excited!</blockquote> Pretty confident Duigan will get a start then?</blockquote> Duigan looks likely to get games but there will be competition for his position. Laidler may take a more defensive role but could still replace Duigan if structures change for different opponents. Yarran might be playing back. Younger guys like Lucas or O'Keeffe (if fit) could also press for a run. I'll be waiting until I've seen the NAB matches to make a call on starting Duigan.
You could not help yourself Lucas with the cheap shot at Port, lol I am quietly confident that we will make the 8 this year. Shame about Jacobs. Have been to a few training sessions this summer and he does look the goods. Has a booming left foot kick on him and reminds me a bit of Stewie Dew but about 30 kilos lighter!
Daniel Connors...arrgh.. He was (without doubt) my best POD pick last year at season start (til the club suspension of course). I'd be keen on him again, though have earmarked a couple other tigers for now...which given the bye's forces him out.
Has anyone considered Graham Johncock as a POD? I don't think I have seen his name appear on this forum yet. Feast or famine with him though. And a bit of an injury risk. Averaged 101 through 15 games last year. In his 7 games over 100, he averaged 135. In his 8 games under 100, he only averaged 72.
I think you have hit it on the head, Jasmine; feast or famine. He is tempting and certainly would be a POD but I'm steering clear of him. I like consistency with my team and his inconsistency does nothing for me.
Who do people think will be the bargain as Malceski was last year? Every man and his dog will have A.Otten but what others represent value in that D5/6 spot? Adcock, Rhys Shaw is dirt cheap.
Yeah Stiffy an option if you are not sold on Otten. And to be honest Otten is a real risk if not running into the early rounds battle hardened.
Hey guys whats your thoughts on Levi Greenwood as a D5/6. B/C, had a couple of big scores of 140 last year, but was pretty inconsistant. but assuming hes had injury free preseason to build his tank could he spend more time in the middle thus being more consistant scoring wise? cheers
Greenwood's disposals and tackles are good. His frees against are pretty bad. He played 17 games last year. If you take his 3 top scores out (125, 139, 111), his next highest score is only 76. His average in these games was only 51. Too risky I think.
Greenwood played a run with role at the start of last season, however towards the end of the season he was kinda a head to head player. So his stats increased. Considering but still better defenders IMO.