Interesting to see the Andy Otten love here. I'm not completely feeling it at the moment given his injury worries, and the fact he's not a rookie. At the price, though, he's probably one of the best value candidates.
A word of warning for those thinking of starting Goddard in the mids: Last year I started with Goddard & Chappy in the mids and Mitch Farmer & Mitch Duncan back and forward respectively to enable dual-positioning. I found it extremely useful to have DP from the start - more so than later in the season. However, it did make my structure deceptive. As I had Goddard & Chappy in the middle I thought I was starting 5 premium mids. But switch them around and suddenly I'm only starting 3. I went cheaper on my rookie mids because I thought I had the depth to get away with it. The reality is you will be aiming to upgrade mids asap and move a DP premium BAC/FWD. So while you will have the flexibility to put Gaddard in the middle and have Heppell back, I would advise putting your premiums in the position you want them to end up when assessing your structure. This may seem obvious but if you are looking at a midfield with 4 premiums including Goddard, it is easy to think you only need to upgrade 2 mids, whereas you will actually need to upgrade 3.
I echo Wal's point. Though when the comp is open and you start to play around with your squad, you'll soon work out what you've actually got and where the upgrades actually need to happen.
Wal I got stung by a similar thought having a few DPs in position more up forward, but it was the same thinking behind it. Suther not just at the start but throughout the comp you will have to adjust. It's not great coming into the end of the year and finding you're one trade short of the full upgrade (happened to me last year and lost in the finals by a handful of points) In the end I think you need to really think of your squad as a squad and your 22 as a 22 not on the lines, because if you sprinkle a few DPs in there (on merit, not just for their versatility) you should be able to get the upgrades you need in the areas you require. So then if you aim to start 13 premiums, you need to upgrade 9 others with 24 trades which initially sounds quite doable. (So long as squads are 33 and trades are 24 as is mooted) The 24 trades would need to cover injuries, and then you might need a couple of 3 ways to get an upgrade. That's why you'll probably find yourself 2 or 3 positions short at end of year from a perfectly upgraded squad.
"Newman said he and Brett Deledio would again be stationed at half-back this year either side of David Astbury or Alex Rance." Do you guys reckon that is good or bad for Deledio's scoring? On one hand i suppose it means less midfield taggers, but it does introduce the defensive forward. It also means less contested ball out of the centre.
Ruddy, I would say good. I thought he used to get a bit lost in the midfield. Since he's been moved back he's looked more settled, like he knows what his role is. Either way he has always been a pretty consistant SC scorer. Thats my 2 cents.
I don't really recall him playing on a defensive forward, but given the likes of Fletcher, Shaw and Enright can get completely tagged out of a game, i reckon it will be a danger for him. Most teams are using defensive forwards these days, and i wouldn't have considered it urgent to tag Deledio in previous years, but given he seems to be improving more this year, i reckon it could be the first thing on a teams list to beat Richmond.
good discussion about delidio! I jumped on here to ask about him and Gibbs. Both seem to be certainties for a lot of people, but they will both be fairly expensive - so im wondering if they are worth it. Im not sure i can justify having both in my team.
I dont watch many Richmond games but im sure he got tagged alot of games, even tho he wasnt a huge scorer he was a very consistent scorer alot better than players like Enright and Malceski who had some down games. Delidio can only improve and i expect him to average 105-110 this year. On the otherhand will Broughton get tagged?
Likewise, in that i didn't watch many Richmond games, but i don't think he was tagged every week was he? At least not once he moved into defence. I would expect him to get tagged most weeks this year, and i reckon that could hurt his average, and he won't get the kind of points rise that everyones hoping for.
I think people are underestimating Gibbs and Deledio, as they are normally compared with ultra premium mids in years gone by. This year, they are simply must have's in the backline. Gibbs and Deledio are 2 of only 3 players available in the backline that have averaged > 100 in both '09 and '10. In fact Deledio has gone three years in a row. Those 3 players should be in everyone's backlines, with your 4th or 5th coming from the likes of Enright, Broughton, Duffield, Bruce (prob better as an upgrade based on uncertainty of a new environment), Hurn, Grimes, etc.
I'll be looking to load up by backline fairly well this year, because I can see more value in the forward line as far as underpriced keepers go. So I'll probably go something like: Goddard Gibbs Deledio Broughton + one of Grimes, Hurn, Drummond etc. I'm leaning towards players who are likely to have more of a midfield role rather than the Shaw/Fisher/Duffield players who are likely to cop a forward tag and so have more variation in their scoring.
I went along to most Richmond games last season and can only recall Logan from PA going to Lids as a tagger, he still managed to knock out 83 points.
And that's my worry. Evidently not many teams thought that tagging Deledio was going to be the difference between them winning or losing. With Richmond on the improve, it may become a more common tactic. I suppose the best thing about Deledio is that most people should have him.
<blockquote>Quote from austin on January 28, 2011, 10:57 I'll be looking to load up by backline fairly well this year, because I can see more value in the forward line as far as underpriced keepers go. So I'll probably go something like: Goddard Gibbs Deledio Broughton + one of Grimes, Hurn, Drummond etc. I'm leaning towards players who are likely to have more of a midfield role rather than the Shaw/Fisher/Duffield players who are likely to cop a forward tag and so have more variation in their scoring.</blockquote> Yeah I've been thinking along the same lines. Whilst last year there were a ton of underpriced improvers in the backline, this year there are at least a couple in the forward line and none that I can find in the backline, bar Otten.
I'm surprised those here looking at a 4-5 premium backline aren't considering Brian Lake. True that he had some surgery over the pre-season but here are a few pros: -Lost 6kg over the pre-season - will be fitter. -First 3 games are against Bombers, Lions & GC. -Only comes up against the Pies, Saints and Cats once. -Byes are timed nicely at R4 and R20. -Has played full seasons the last 3 years. But the downside is that if players are going Goddard, Gibbs and Deledio or an extra premium then they might not be able to squeeze him in. He's an ideal upgrade but would you be missing out on some points? I mean with the Doggies draw he might not come down like halfway through last season.
Lake makes a better upgrade option than starter IMO. His scores tend to fluctuate more than other backs, so should be cheap at some stage through the year. Plus he averaged > 10 points per game less in 09 than he did in '10, so I'm yet to be convinced he will avg 100 this year. Should still finish in the top 7 backs though.
Agreed, Lake will be No. 1 on my watchlist of backmen to upgrade to. I am not convinced that he will start strongly or offer value at the start of the year.
Against Collingwood Lids was tagged very well by 2V. Still managed to pump out 82. I think that's a very good sign, that teams were tagging him and he kept getting a score over 75 with the occasional 140 or so keeping the average over 100. With Lake, when he goes big, he goes massive. 4 scores over 150 do wonders for your average (ask Alastair Cook ) I think with that draw he could go big early, and not really be a realistic upgrade target. And there will probably be other cheaper reasonable ones to get, so most would just go "oh I missed him" when those who have him will be laughing to the bank. So long as his fitness is good, he's a chance to start for my team, even if I have to work out which of the other 3 I leave out (or play Goddard in the midfield and sub back later) The only danger to Lake is if Eade decides on a more aggressive game plan than chipping round the back. I'm not convinced what the Dogs have put forward in September is going to be good enough to win a flag without some changes (though raped by injury last year) so unless it's personnel that does the job, they might play a more direct game. This could definitely affect Lake who tends to need a fair amount of possessions to get a score. If the Dogs don't chip around he will be forced to rely on his contested marking, which is the best in the league, so I'm sure other teams will rethink the way they enter the forward 50 against the Dogs - e.g. more precision passing than long bombs.
<blockquote>Quote from Holey on January 28, 2011, 10:16 I think people are underestimating Gibbs and Deledio, as they are normally compared with ultra premium mids in years gone by. This year, they are simply must have's in the backline. Gibbs and Deledio are 2 of only 3 players available in the backline that have averaged > 100 in both '09 and '10. In fact Deledio has gone three years in a row. Those 3 players should be in everyone's backlines, with your 4th or 5th coming from the likes of Enright, Broughton, Duffield, Bruce (prob better as an upgrade based on uncertainty of a new environment), Hurn, Grimes, etc.</blockquote> 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.