Position 2017 Midfielders

[Hairy Lager]

My wife did this to me once. She just walked right in and looked me straight in the eye.

...go on.

 

[Feerits Elf]

...go on.

That's what she said

 

[Here2tellyouwhy]

...go on.

looked me straight in the eye
That's the joke

But it's true she did catch me once. Told me mates and their partners. Stopped when I got it out one time while she was telling the story

 

[Sydney Kicker]

Keen for a serious discussion about Danger. Assuming you start with him, at 716k what does he have to do in the first 8 rounds to put you ahead of the people that don't start him? I ask because his week to week scoring pattern is seemingly a little more volatile than Ablett (the old Ablett), Pendles and I think Rocky and Fyfe. If you start with Pendles, Rocky and Fyfe does this give you the captaincy power to get by without Danger given Dangers propensity for big scores?

If 90% of serious coaches start with Danger (as will probably be the case) and he goes ballistic you are behind the 8 ball, however if he started slowly it would be a huge advantage towards winning the 50k to the 10% who didn't.

 

[toxic]

Keen for a serious discussion about Danger. Assuming you start with him, at 716k what does he have to do in the first 8 rounds to put you ahead of the people that don't start him? I ask because his week to week scoring pattern is seemingly a little more volatile than Ablett (the old Ablett), Pendles and I think Rocky and Fyfe. If you start with Pendles, Rocky and Fyfe does this give you the captaincy power to get by without Danger given Dangers propensity for big scores?

If 90% of serious coaches start with Danger (as will probably be the case) and he goes ballistic you are behind the 8 ball, however if he started slowly it would be a huge advantage towards winning the 50k to the 10% who didn't.

My biggest query about Danger is his role. Cats keep speaking about spreading the load, does this mean more time deep fwd for Danger, is this good or bad?
Anything above a 120 average is good imo

 

[Seymour Skinner]

Keen for a serious discussion about Danger. Assuming you start with him, at 716k what does he have to do in the first 8 rounds to put you ahead of the people that don't start him? I ask because his week to week scoring pattern is seemingly a little more volatile than Ablett (the old Ablett), Pendles and I think Rocky and Fyfe. If you start with Pendles, Rocky and Fyfe does this give you the captaincy power to get by without Danger given Dangers propensity for big scores?

If 90% of serious coaches start with Danger (as will probably be the case) and he goes ballistic you are behind the 8 ball, however if he started slowly it would be a huge advantage towards winning the 50k to the 10% who didn't.

The coaches that don't start with him have to make sure that the extra 100k they have on the other is actually put to good use, about 10 points per game, if he doesn't explode out of the gates, are they gonna make that up from say a 123k rookie to a McCluggage type? Or maybe they use it to turn a Heeney or Beams into a bonafide premo which could work or could backfire if Beams stays on the park and Heeney takes it up a notch.
He's arguably the one of the safest C options with the the highest ceiling, if my VC were to score 120 I'd most likely take that, Danger went 120+ 15 times.

He was like Pendles last year in that he refused to drop under 600k, so he isn't easy to trade in. I'd rather pay the premium to have him from the get go and then laugh when I see people trying to figure out how to trade him in after the first 5 rounds.

 

[Metapod]

Re: Swallow. For those not considering him, are you contemplating starting with any high priced rookies? Take McGrath for example, for "only" 70k you could take a bloke with a much higher ceiling and much better JS.

 

[toxic]

Re: Swallow. For those not considering him, are you contemplating starting with any high priced rookies? Take McGrath for example, for "only" 70k you could take a bloke with a much higher ceiling and much better JS.

No 200K rookies for me - have avoided them like the plague all my SC life

It'll be 280K or 150K and below

If i was committing to Dswallow it'd be with a view of last one upgraded or M9 capability (knowing he may miss a couple as he is "managed" along the way

 

[Super Hans]

I think 2012 was when I first played SC with some idea of what I was supposed to be doing (I was 16 and school mates got me into it). Murphy was my #1 guy, mainly because it was him at M1 then Cotchin then 16 midpricers.
I had him as captain when he did his shoulder and scored 38. I didn't log back in until about round 20 after that.
I've learned a lot since then, and if Beams doesn't line up round 1 I'd give Marc a second chance.

I've got a soft spot for Murph. I started with him the year he broke out and averaged 118. I don't think he can do that again, he hasn't been the same since Hodge broke his face. Should still be good for 105, though.

 

[toxic]

I've got a soft spot for Murph. I started with him the year he broke out and averaged 118. I don't think he can do that again, he hasn't been the same since Hodge broke his face. Should still be good for 105, though.

105 doesnt justify picking him tho imo.

I think he can go higher than that - 112+

 

[stevebbb]

105 doesnt justify picking him tho imo.

I think he can go higher than that - 112+

aside from the fact that is "fit" again, there's nothing to suggest 112+


105 way more realistic
and at $430k, that's pretty damn good

 

[Flandersss]

Won't be touching Smurphy.

Just doesn't seem SC relavent anymore

 

[toxic]

aside from the fact that is "fit" again, there's nothing to suggest 112+
View attachment 328526

105 way more realistic
and at $430k, that's pretty damn good

at 105 he'll need to be traded as there will be 10-15 guys who go higher than 105 and you'll be losing points to the rest of the comp

2012 averaged 113 - including a 38 in a game his ankle was injured, 9 games from 15 he scored 112+ ...(have not included injury game)
2013 9 of his 19 games were 102+ (5 of those 9 were 114+) - remove his two injury games and his average goes to 99ish
2014 remove his injury game in Rd 22 and his average goes to 110 (with 10 games of 117+)
2015 8 of 19 games - 109+
2016 - write off due to injury preseason and beyond - bloody horrid year for MM

I can certainly see scope for a 112 average and he has the proven ability to go big in games - the 135+ type games

 

[Keg on legs]

at 105 he'll need to be traded as there will be 10-15 guys who go higher than 105 and you'll be losing points to the rest of the comp

2012 averaged 113 - including a 38 in a game his ankle was injured, 9 games from 15 he scored 112+ ...(have not included injury game)
2013 9 of his 19 games were 102+ (5 of those 9 were 114+) - remove his two injury games and his average goes to 99ish
2014 remove his injury game in Rd 22 and his average goes to 110 (with 10 games of 117+)
2015 8 of 19 games - 109+
2016 - write off due to injury preseason and beyond - bloody horrid year for MM

I can certainly see scope for a 112 average and he has the proven ability to go big in games - the 135+ type games

I have him at M6. For now anyway

 

[Falchoon]

aside from the fact that is "fit" again, there's nothing to suggest 112+
View attachment 328526

105 way more realistic
and at $430k, that's pretty damn good

nothing in the last 4 years.....

he was a consistent 112+ scorer prior to that, ........ when he was almost my first picked every year

 

[Falchoon]

Marc Murphy this year is very similar to Bryce Gibbs last year. With slightly more upside.

 

[Hairy Lager]

Marc Murphy this year is very similar to Bryce Gibbs last year. With slightly more upside.

K

 

[Falchoon]

K

 

[Flandersss]

Marc Murphy this year is very similar to Bryce Gibbs last year. With slightly more upside.

And what are your thoughts Marc?

 

[Goats]

My wife did this to me once. She just walked right in and looked me straight in the eye.

"Go on finish, you lil bitch."

 

[gutsroy]

Keen for a serious discussion about Danger. Assuming you start with him, at 716k what does he have to do in the first 8 rounds to put you ahead of the people that don't start him? I ask because his week to week scoring pattern is seemingly a little more volatile than Ablett (the old Ablett), Pendles and I think Rocky and Fyfe. If you start with Pendles, Rocky and Fyfe does this give you the captaincy power to get by without Danger given Dangers propensity for big scores?

If 90% of serious coaches start with Danger (as will probably be the case) and he goes ballistic you are behind the 8 ball, however if he started slowly it would be a huge advantage towards winning the 50k to the 10% who didn't.

Do you have a specific comparison in mind?

 

[Sydney Kicker]

Do you have a specific comparison in mind?

Not really any specific comparison. Just keen for a bit of general discussion (and perhaps even banter from the "you can't be serious" brigade).

I think he's heavily overpriced for his likely output - his average last year was 12 ppg higher than any other year. Yes he has improved and has hit the prime age career wise but (as often happens) I think people are putting too much weight on his SC performance last year and not enough on his whole career. Geelongs early draw also presents some challenges.

That said, his top end scores scare me. If I leave him out I'm hoping Rocky, Pendles or Fyfe (or a combination of these 3 guys) will give me the same or similar return as Captain option.

Just keen for a few opinions especially if others may have reservations.

 

[gutsroy]

Not really any specific comparison. Just keen for a bit of general discussion (and perhaps even banter from the "you can't be serious" brigade).

I think he's heavily overpriced for his likely output - his average last year was 12 ppg higher than any other year. Yes he has improved and has hit the prime age career wise but (as often happens) I think people are putting too much weight on his SC performance last year and not enough on his whole career. Geelongs early draw also presents some challenges.

That said, his top end scores scare me. If I leave him out I'm hoping Rocky, Pendles or Fyfe (or a combination of these 3 guys) will give me the same or similar return as Captain option.

Just keen for a few opinions especially if others may have reservations.

Will have a look. Fwiw am not going with him - more than one way to skin a cat.

 

[Moustachio]

Not really any specific comparison. Just keen for a bit of general discussion (and perhaps even banter from the "you can't be serious" brigade).

I think he's heavily overpriced for his likely output - his average last year was 12 ppg higher than any other year. Yes he has improved and has hit the prime age career wise but (as often happens) I think people are putting too much weight on his SC performance last year and not enough on his whole career. Geelongs early draw also presents some challenges.

That said, his top end scores scare me. If I leave him out I'm hoping Rocky, Pendles or Fyfe (or a combination of these 3 guys) will give me the same or similar return as Captain option.

Just keen for a few opinions especially if others may have reservations.

Danger is playing North in round 2. He rodgered north so hard last year it wasn't funny (actually, it was pretty funny). If you can handle the anxiety then feel free to avoid him =)

 

[Sydney Kicker]

Danger is playing North in round 2. He rodgered north so hard last year it wasn't funny (actually, it was pretty funny). If you can handle the anxiety then feel free to avoid him =)

Actually was wondering if North might try and hard tag him.