2015; Player X or Player Y or Player Z

[Super Hans]

Dangerfield vs Buddy.

 

[kenneje]

Dangerfield vs Buddy.

Danger for me. No idea how he'll cope with the media pressure, but surely he scores better than he did last year.

M3 + M4

Watson + Boak/Dangerfield
OR
JPKennedy + Wines

 

[lopylaa]

Jpk and wines for me, just can bring myself to pick Watson, that beng said think heppell will cop the no 1 tag a lot this year

 

[Stickers32]

J.Selwood v Danger?

And what will they both average? I'm thinking 115ppg each

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[spangleduck]

J.Selwood v Danger?

And what will they both average? I'm thinking 115ppg each

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Selwood for me - a lot less unknowns. Dangerfield generally starts a bit slower, is significantly more inconsistent (with a higher ceiling however), and has a potential move on the cards; so a no for me. I think you could lock in a 117 av for Selwood and anywhere from 105 to 115 for Danger.

 

[PACatter]

M3 + M4

Watson + Boak/Dangerfield
OR
JPKennedy + Wines

JPK and Wines, no doubt. I've built my team around them having permanent (bar injury) spots in the midfield.

 

[MightyDons4]

J.Selwood v Danger?

And what will they both average? I'm thinking 115ppg each

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Selwood - 121

Danger - 100-115

 

[TheOz]

Selwood - 121

Danger - 100-115

Pretty specific on Selwood, not particularly specific on Dangerfield.

 

[GAsnr]

J.Selwood v Danger?

And what will they both average? I'm thinking 115ppg each

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Selwood without question.

 

[MightyDons4]

Should have just said 0-300, would have been just as informative

107.5 happy?

 

[TheOz]

107.5 happy?

No because you just produced a number without any substantiation.

 

[MightyDons4]

No because you just produced a number without any substantiation.

I doubt whether he has the motivation to get back to his 2012/2013 at Adelaide and think that his contested possession numbers will carry him to 100. How far he exceeds this mark will be determined by his de%

 

[Scott_Wolf]

Goddard v Deledio v Bartel

 

[richolovesgoal]

Goddard v Deledio v Bartel

Deledio/Bartel/Goddard in that order, regardless of Essendon outcome.

 

[richolovesgoal]

Hibberd (D3), Steven (M5), Hogan (F6) - this setup leaves me with 3 rookies in the forward line and 3 in the midfield

vs

Newnes (D3), Griffin (M5), Hogan (F6) - same as above

vs

Hibberd (D3), Vandenberg/another rookie (M6), Swan (D4) - 2 rookies in fwd line and 4 in middle

Leaning towards option 1, but seeing 3 rookies in the forward line looks scary, even though I drop a rookie in the middle meaning I have the same total amount of rookies across the park. Thoughts?

 

[Flandersss]

MilneMagic said: ↑
Swan, Adcock & Leuy

V

Salem, Kelly & Goldy


Still looking for a second opinion, cheers lads!

 

[Scott_Wolf]

Hibberd (D3), Steven (M5), Hogan (F6) - this setup leaves me with 3 rookies in the forward line and 3 in the midfield

vs

Newnes (D3), Griffin (M5), Hogan (F6) - same as above

vs

Hibberd (D3), Vandenberg/another rookie (M6), Swan (D4) - 2 rookies in fwd line and 4 in middle

Leaning towards option 1, but seeing 3 rookies in the forward line looks scary, even though I drop a rookie in the middle meaning I have the same total amount of rookies across the park. Thoughts?

I like option 3, don't like Hogan on the field either.

 

[Scott_Wolf]

MilneMagic said: ↑
Swan, Adcock & Leuy

V

Salem, Kelly & Goldy


Still looking for a second opinion, cheers lads!

Salem, Kelly & Goldy.

 

[Flandersss]

Salem, Kelly & Goldy.

Why?

Swan @ F4 is very tempting.

 

[PoopingHindi]

Why?

Swan @ F4 is very tempting.

overall score output will be about the same but with the added bonus of Salem generating cash

 

[Flandersss]

overall score output will be about the same but with the added bonus of Salem generating cash

Fair enough.

I look at it as another trade I gotta find for Salem but then again I have Leuy if I go down that track..

 

[Super Hans]

Goddard v Deledio v Bartel

Bartel.

Hibberd (D3), Steven (M5), Hogan (F6) - this setup leaves me with 3 rookies in the forward line and 3 in the midfield

vs

Newnes (D3), Griffin (M5), Hogan (F6) - same as above

vs

Hibberd (D3), Vandenberg/another rookie (M6), Swan (D4) - 2 rookies in fwd line and 4 in middle

Leaning towards option 1, but seeing 3 rookies in the forward line looks scary, even though I drop a rookie in the middle meaning I have the same total amount of rookies across the park. Thoughts?

Hibberd, Steven, Hogan (pending ASADA)

MilneMagic said: ↑
Swan, Adcock & Leuy

V

Salem, Kelly & Goldy


Still looking for a second opinion, cheers lads!

Second option. Can't trust Luey.

 

[freo grover]

Lachie Neale VS Andrew Swallow

and

Dustin Martin VS Jimmy Bartel

 

[Monya Meow Meow]

Lachie Neale VS Andrew Swallow

and

Dustin Martin VS Jimmy Bartel

Swallow and Bartel

 

[karaoke]

MilneMagic said: ↑
Swan, Adcock & Leuy

V

Salem, Kelly & Goldy


Still looking for a second opinion, cheers lads!

Leuy = Salem (IMO)

Kelly > Adcock

Goldy = Swan

Although Swan DPP could be handy.