What's everyones view on Pendlebury and his hefty price tag($700,500)? Is it a case of jump on board from the start and enjoy the ride or wait it out for his price to drop, spend the money elsewhere and make him a tasty upgrade?
I won't start with Pendlebury because he will have to average about 140 for his price to maintain. I think you'd be better off to start with someone like Selwood who is about 100k cheaper and will only average about 5 less.
And if the news that Vardy could be right by round 1 is correct, Big O may not get a gig - that would upset the planning. There's a real risk with super premiums like Pendles because you can then only afford rookies, who are all stars this time of the year.
I'll be staying away from Pendles for the exact reason SCSS pointed out, he needs to average 140 odd ppg to maintain his price, which he won't be able to do, so he'll be a good upgrade target or great replacement if someone gets injured. Now, is everyone else having problems setting up their backline? I'm finding it the hardest of the lot, mainly because all my planned keepers seem to have byes in round 13.
9 out of the 12 of the highest defenders have round 13 byes. You probably don't won't anymore than 3 premiums having a bye in the same. Two obvious locks are Deledio and Goddard. There is also Heath Shaw if you have forgiven him for his suspension. Broughton might be an option depending how he is used by Ross Lyon. You also have Adcock. Brian Lake would be in most people's starting sides. You probably could get another player round 13 bye group player. That is pretty much your starting prems for the backline.
ROund 13 bye isnt necessarily a bad thing. It could mean you can just trade out couple after the other guys have had their Round 11 & 12 bye!! Meaning your playing premiums every week and not relying on a rookie to cover for couple week...
Care to put it in an example STK? Sorry mate it's early saturday morning and the brain is pretty fried from a long week!!!
Im interested in some group therapy on the following question (which is camparing GnR against bargain hunter): Pls tell me why its a no-brainer to take someone like DSwan (660k) and some rookie mid (with maybe 80k leftover in change) in preference to Barlow (450k)and KJack (who is a sweet 438k). (who may become 550k reliables all season) Thanks in advance
@GaryReal I'm pretty sure the way it works is thus: There is a set total value of all of the players, thus as some go up others have to go down to keep the status quo. This is why, when prices are calculated at the start of the season based on last season average, if a player maintains that average his price will go down since all of the playing rookies are increasing in value, and the total player value can't increase. So, you pick Swan for a rotating captain or permacap role (expecting 120odd each week) and a rookie to offset the cost. Swan more-or-less maintains his average but his price goes down (which is generally ok because he's a keeper), however your rookie starts increasing in value, becoming a cow ready to moo, and you upgrade him to someone better and more consistent. Alternatively you pick Barlow and Jack for around the same price, but you don't bother putting the C on either of them most weeks because you'll be loosing out on around 50ppg, so you still need to find another elite player (120+). Meanwhile Barlow and Jack improve their averages on last year, but by less than 5ppg, and thus with the huge price increases in rookies there is not enough cash to go around, so both of them loose a little bit of value. You plan on keeping both, but you're now loosing out on more points, because the guy who picked Swan and a rookie has now upgraded his rookie to either Barlow or Jack at a discount to what you paid, and you don't have the cash to upgrade one of them to the now cheaper Swan. So you still have Barlow and Jack running around, but someone on a GnR strategy has Swan and Barlow / Jack, and heaps more points than you do. Its basically about getting as many points on the board as possible each week, but also setting yourself up to upgrade to the best possible players asap. I hope that makes some sense.
Thanks JPK - i get that idea but also think there's other scenarios, such as Jack and Barlow having mega seasons and being way underpriced. One main aspect is - if they improve 20pts, that a trade is saved, whereas the swan rookie double requires a trade at some point. Further arguments against Jack/Barlow include: a)by round 20 everyone loads up in the mids, and 2 spaces are taken by 2players not considered elite (at this point in the season). b)The point increase dfferential between a rookie's gain versus 2 less dramatic gains from Jack/Barlow.
What do think is the limit for the number of GWS players in your team? I reckon you don't many more than 4 or 5. With Gold Coast out of all rookies that played more than three games there were only 4 that averaged over 70.
Just put a quick team together using my new 2012 prospectus obviously got to watch all the rookies in the nab. Let us know what you think positive or negative quite welcome. DEF: B. Goddard, H. Shaw, N. Grima, N. Malceski, M. Buntine, A. Tomlinson, S. Docherty (B. Ellis, J. Webberley) MID: S. Pendlebury, G. Ablett jnr, B. Deledio, D. Beams, S. Coniglio, D. Tyson (T. Greene, T. Mitchell) RUC: T. Goldstein, J. Roughead (D. Gorringe, J. Giles) FWD: L. Franklin, N. Fyfe, M. Pavlich, A. Didak, J. Patton, N. Haynes, A. Kennedy (J. Hamling, J. Paine) CASH LEFT: $1,300 Oh and i have put 8 GWS players in but that will probably change.
i thought i changed him out Ill do that a bit later. I have read that he will be out for the first 5-7 games is this still the current estimate? Previous years i have not gambled with so many rookies but it has never worked well for me so this year i am going to try something new, first year i have purchased the prospectus and it gives you good info on the draftees etc so we'll see how it works out i suppose lol.
There are a lot of flaws in that team: -you've got eight starting rookies -Patton is injured -Roughead probably isn't the best player to start because he might not be right by the start of the season -Fyfe had groin surgery There are other flaws in that team.
Yeah i have to do a fair bit more research on the rookies and fyfe definitely aint locked in and i was unaware of roughead's issues? Like i mentioned before i have never had so many rookies i will be watching all the stats through out the nab to see how they all perform obviously. Cheers for the comments.
There is nothing wrong with 8 starting rookies if you have 4-4-2-4 (14) prems on the field as well...
What are people expecting from Petrie this coming season? With H.Mac back in the picture it looks as though he will become just a FWD. Will he score enough points on a weekly basis as a pure forward or did the advantage of having stints in the ruck help inflate his scoring?
I think mostly Petrie was in the forward 50 being a big lump - he wont ruck much, and he certainly wont improve his numbers (by much, if at all). hes prone to very bad scoring days, and was gr8 last year as a bargain but to me anyone who gets him this year doesnt understand footy