@Stew: Yeah I currently have only 2 premiums in my mids atm (Judd, Pendles). Still juggling my selections around though
i am considering going only 2 premiums too... A lot will depend on what rookies are named for the first round matches. at this stage, i have 2 big premiums, and also Jack. but i am strongly considering dropping Jack down to Gaff, as I have needed to leave out Gaff. dont have krakouer either so it may be him i bring in. interesting discussion though - im not sure if its a good or bad idea yet. Does anyone know if the Judd injury rumours are true?
Bingo. That said I have only two prems haha. But yeah the bye rounds are going to need some manipulation. I think the key is to make sure you have something like 14 prems every round, then increasing this as the season progresses. That and ensuring your rookies get a game which hopefully in the GC case is not that difficult (thinking though it will be harder than it appears at the moment)
Is the idea that you take advantage of the greater potential of midfield rookies and stack your forward, back, and ruck lines with more premiums?
Looking at the midfield rookie depth (plus maybe 1 or two mid price bargains) I reckon you could nearly start with no premiums in the midfield, except maybe swinging Goddard/Gibbs/Lids into the midfield and stacking your backline & forward line with premiums. Crazy strategy but i reckon theres 3 GC rookies that you have to have and then when you add in Gaff & co its quite possible. (ill probably chicken out of this strategy come the start of the season though)
especially if you include players like ROK, Goodes, Higgins into the mix. and lets face it. Gaff, Conca etc are priced as mid-pricers anyway. they are more expensive than rooks of years gone by, even though the magic number is lower. so if we include these high priced rookies, it almost needs to be at the expense of another prem. (because there are a few midpricers that are too hard to pass up)
Yea exactly. I guess the thing is when you have the 2nd most expensive forward at $529K and in the midfield there is 11 players more expensive then that it gives you ample room to spread your money around.. To give you an idea ill post a draft team i made up with this strategy. B: Goddard, Gibbs, Deledio, Broughton, Grimes, Connors, Hurn, (Otton, Toy, Duigin) Mid: Ward, Swallow, Bennel, Gaff, Heppell, Conca (Harris, Hibberd, Mzungu) Rucks: Jolly, McEvoy (Petrie, Bailey) Fwds: Riewoldt, OKeefe, Brown, Pavlich, Rioli, Higgins, Gray (Knights, Richardson, Matera) Obviously you may lose out in the premium mid points but if you have a good bench cover on each line your able to swing a decent player into the midfield to cover... Probably a very risky strategy but could be massive reward if it works... Its probably a strategy you wouldnt try any other year except this year or next with a new side coming in and guaranteeing their kids will get game time nearly every week....
PK started 4 rookie in the midfield(2 prems) last year if memory serves me correctly, and he didn't do half bad either. Seemed to have a very aggressive trading strategy however in order to get the points accumulating as soon as possible as I guess with each round that passes, teams become that much more similar and making up the difference becomes harder and harder. I usually suffer from the "it will be better value next week" train of thought. Rookie may go up another 15k next week and the prem i want to upgrade to looks like falling another 10k or so, but by waiting that extra week, sure, i might save myself 25-30k, but I'll miss out on the points gained which most of the time far outweighs the money saved. That, and I get attached to my starting rookies We become like a family, and it's hard to let go sometimes.
With a number of forwards such as Okeefe, Goodes, N.Roo, Pav, Brown et all having perhaps less impressive than usual years last year, we're in a situation where stacking the forward line (and back) and going light on in the middle could really work. It's even better that the big forwards having their 'slower' years the year before has coincided with the entry of the GC where there are a number of rookie mids who should get a lot of game time. In years gone by I personally have been hesitant about starting too many premiums up forward as they have been priced fairly highly due to exceptional years the year before. Also, we know they are usually relatively volatile scoring wise, particularly those forwards that rely solely on contested marks/goals scored for their SC points. So I have previously chosen to stack up elsewhere and wait for the inevitable price swing to pick up those big forwards later in the season when they dip (and dip they do!) This year, however, as stated a number of them were either played out of position, coming back from injury or had injury niggles last year so that their starting prices this year are perhaps more towards the middle of what their season price-swing will be. As such, waiting to pick them up when they dip might not prove nearly as beneficial as in previous years as there is less to be gained. The abundance of rookie mids, especially for the GC, that should get games is giving support to a "light midfield/heavy elsewhere" strat as well.
We shall see. It is tempting to go a full-on rookie midfield but I'm still thinking you might need a few big scorers I know there is a theory about forwards dipping in price but while they do dip in price, that's because they are dipping in scores... Most teams want "a good spread of goal kickers" which is retarding the great scoring potential of individuals. Similarly, as will become evident in my (future) post on previous year premiums in 2007 the pass mark for a defender was over 100, where now it's more like 90. Why? Because teams have ramped up defensive intensity. No more chip and charge with Bowdens. They would be gobbled up in today's game. So, what does this all mean? It means midfielders all the way. Well, almost all the way. There are still the few very good players who teams build around, most notably the consistent Riewoldt. But outside of him (and Lurch, who is now basically a mid) as a genuine key position player I can't think that you'd have too many more premiums. Lake made it last season (I think because the Dogs wanted to play the chip and charge game...to their own detriment) My advice is to go with midfielders in all lines, in all positions. If your selected player cannot get a run through the midfield during a game, rule a line through and find someone else. The only exceptions to this: Sandilands Your Second Ruckman (try mobile forward rather than dinosaur) N Riewoldt Maybe Lake if fit and cheaper after mid year *** Finally back to the discussion on the mid selection, well it probably scarcely matters. What matters more is the mix of premiums you have on the ground. Can you allocate your team such that you can always have 16 premiums on the field until upgrade time (say Round 6)? Then 17 (R6), 18 (R7), 19 (R8), 20 (R9), 21 (R10), 22 (R11) Can you get to say R14 and have a fully upgraded team with a bench that can cover you? That's how I think the overall game will be won/lost. (Sure it doesn't hurt that quite a few of the really decent looking rookies are MPP, that's why initial structure matters less on the individual lines)
Agree Spud. Obviously you need to be careful about ending up with too many GC rookies in your mids though. Your big risk remains that you have a lot of guys on the one line who are not guarranteed games, so you would need to ensure you have some mpp coverage. Something like Montagna, Pendlebury, Swallow, Gaff, Polec, Harris, Heppell(MD), Prestia(MF), Wallis with some DM and FM premiums forward and back could work well.
Good read Lucas, well written. Definitely agree with the last paragraph regarding number of prems and the mix you have. It's enjoyable having something different to have to focus on this year to break it up a bit. No more putting ablett+bartel+chapman+selwood+enright in the initial starting team and keeping them there for 22 rounds. It will be exciting to reflect back at years end whether it would have been beneficial to play sub-optimal players from different teams to help combat the byes and ensure teams were only ever missing a few premiums in any given round or not. Looking forward to reading that future post of yours - the game changes so quickly these days.
The decision should ulimtately be based on your belief that your extra mid rookie will make more points than the alternative F/D rookie. And that amount more than compenstates for the difference between the premium mid you are passing on and the extra F/D premium you have taken. I think under the circumstances outlined by Spud above, it's easier than ever this year to be convinced of this.
True that, BJ. Rounds 1 and 9 would be killers if we went too heavy on GC rookies. Round 9 maybe not so troublesome as a few upgrades might have been done by then, albeit they've have a weeks less chance to appreciate than some other teams. Would definitely want to have some serious MPP action happening if running a handful of GC rookies as you stated. I don't think I have the courage to run less than 3 premiums but I can certainly see the arguments for doing so. I'm seeing a few people here and there still talking about 4 premiums in the mids which to me seems one too many, but every strat has it's pros and cons no doubt. Hopefully this weekends NAB cup games unearth some hidden gems! Edit: I like that first bit BJ, a nice easy rule of thumb to follow when thinking about it.
Seems I should spend less time composing and more time checking responses. Easy to get out of sync on a hot topic! 100% agree Lucas with mids all the way. In the backline especially, there is really no reason you can't have 10 midfielders in there Spud - and let's hope that once the mickey mouse half games get out of the say we get a better idea of how these guys might actually go points wise.
I personally think I'll be going with 4 premium mids. I've loaded up in the backline as I believe there are a lot of great players available back there...but down forward is an absolute minefield. Looking through the forward premiums, I only have 1 lock in Riewoldt (Chapman is in the mids until after the bye as it would clash with other forwards). Everyone else has a question mark to some degree... ROK/Goodes too old/new coach Boomer too old Didak's off a limited preseason Cyril might not take the next step Franklin is always a yo-yo Brown injured Pav has an unclear role after a bad year Gilbert down fwd is a no J Riewoldt not after a breakout year Pods no way I'm finding it hard to sell myself on three of them, whereas there are plenty of great and consistent options in the mids.
They're all legitimate concerns, Matt, and I'd say it's those exact questions that most of us are hoping we get some kind of answers to over the next month or so worth of games to help us in our decision making.
This one might not be at the top of thoughts right now, but is anyone weighing in the GWS factor when selecting their premiums. The role of premiums is to ideally play 22 games, and hit their average more or less. Therefore anyone who is less likely to achieve this has a risk factor associated to them. The potential for GWS to sign players prior to the end of the season must be considered, particularly when looking at Nathan Bock last year. He was fit to play the final rounds, however, not selected due to his future departure. Ablett's season could similarly be said to have been significantly influenced by his contract negotiations (being dumped in the forward pocket by an unhappy Thompson). With Paul Roos coming out and saying that he would not be selecting any player who signs with GWS,... surely a cautious approach must be taken with rumoured midfield targets such as dare I say it ...Bartel, Swan and co. On the flip side... players in the last season of their contract often play their best football. Has this GWS factor influenced anyone's midfield selections thus far?