Im definately going to choose 1 of these 2 defenders. Grimes will be back in 2 weeks and although he got injured (again) it was somewhat of a freak collision and gets alot of the ball and uses it well. Where as lake was from what i remember in the top 3 defenders over a year ago. Who is most likely to be in the top 7 defenders come end of the year?
You must love far king pain !!. Just grab a pen and stick it in your eye. You wont have to wait for the season to start then lol. Grimes avoids injuries like Brad Hardie avoids TAB's. I hope Lake can go through uninjured but if a bookie will lay odds on it my hard earned will be on NO quicker than Big Bad Bazza's left landed on Staker.
<blockquote>Quote from crew on March 5, 2012, 20:56 You must love far king pain !!. Just grab a pen and stick it in your eye. You wont have to wait for the season to start then lol. Grimes avoids injuries like Brad Hardie avoids TAB's. I hope Lake can go through uninjured but if a bookie will lay odds on it my hard earned will be on NO quicker than Big Bad Bazza's left landed on Staker.</blockquote> Absolutely love it Crew.......
I'm leaning towards Lake at this stage just because the bulldogs game plan looks to be a mirrow of the Hawks with short chipping and lots of switching play. I reckon Waters is another injury ridled mid pricer we know can score high too. Maybe he is a better choice than both of them.
Lake had an absolute shocker last year, but before that, he'd only missed 2 games since 2005. clear case of a fallen prem who should return to a 90+ average if he's fit. He looked to be moving ok on the weekend imo. fwiw though, he's not in my team yet.
Id be willing to go Lake over Grimes just because of the price diff. If the likely happens and both fail (whether its injury or just play poorly) I would rather that $100K elsewhere.
Hargreaves over both of them. Injured last year too and looks good so far, was previously a good scorer and WB have different chip around style in the backs which means he could get plenty o' pill. Less injury concerns compared to Lake too for mine.
I have had Lake in my side since the very start but i am looking closely at Hargrave as he looks like he could be a good scorer and is at a price close to Lake's. Had Grimes in my side from the start as well but after the most recent injury ive moved him on. Thats not to say u couldn't have at least two of these players in u back line, but of course this where it becomes risk vs reward.
just looked up Grimes' record and he has played 11, 14 and 6 games in the last 3 seasons. Thats way too risky to take on and he is too expensive to keep for a short while as a cash cow. So I dont know how people can consider him especially with other cheap potential keeps in Lake, Hargreave and Waters available with proven past records of seeing through several full seasons or Clarke and Bower as rookie-priced, non-rookie cash cows.
No to Grimes. Can't in any good conscience put him in the side considering his run with injuries. I mean, if you pick Grimes over Lake or Hargraves (or Davis, etc) you may as well take a gun out of your pocket, load up the bullets and try to shoot off all your toes.
Listen to crew and chris88. I'm sure everyone agreed last year that Grimes was on the "never to be considered again" list. Great player, great scorer but his injury history has led us to despair. That leaves Lake, if your up for it.
Hargreave for mine...another coming back from injury but his pre season form looks better that any of those mentioned.
I agree it should be deciding between Lake or Hargrave, Grimes shouldn't even be in the equation! FWIW Currently I think Lake > Hargrave (but have neither in my team currently)