Position 2019 Midfielders

Remove this Banner Ad

Prochard123 said:
Ok so but has he ever even gone above 100?

Like what do you base this on?
Click to expand...
The only reason he hasn’t gone over 100 yet was because of his hamstring issues. This kid is a huge and somewhat forgotten talent. Perhaps better than his brother. I remember when he was coming through the ranks he was rated the next Dangerfield. Big contested possession winner and a tackling machine. He showed this in 2017, averaging 28 touches with an average of 96.2. Finished his last 12 games averaging 106.6. That’s what I’m tapping on and I think he has a bigger ceiling, health permitting. I was bullish on him a couple seasons ago to break out and my gut says to back him again.
 
Last edited:
Scared off Piggy Oliver a bit, someone posted a stat earlier showing he averaged almost 20 less when Viney was in the side, pretty decent inside brigade at the Dees with Oliver, Viney and Brayshaw might leave them fighting over points a bit.

Have Merrett at M5, his injury scare and the lack of guys I like in his price range (have Dusty and Crouch at M3/4) has me interested in turning Merrett + rookie into 2 of Libba/Hanners/Miles at M5/6. If a few of those guys are looking promising I’ll be pretty tempted.

Alternatively I could just take one of them and upgrade Greene to sexy Robbie up forward, which becomes more tempting the longer Greene is on the sidelines and Robbie trains with the mids over at Port.
 
Kadog said:
The only reason he hasn’t gone over 100 yet was because of his hamstring issues. This kid is a huge and somewhat forgotten talent. Perhaps better than his brother. I remember when he was coming through the ranks he was rated the next Dangerfield. Big contested possession winner and a tackling machine. He showed this in 2017, averaging 28 touches with an average of 96.2. Finished his last 12 games averaging 106.6. That’s what I’m tapping on and I think he has a bigger ceiling, health permitting. I was bullish on him a couple seasons ago to break out and my gut says to back him again.
Click to expand...
Fair enough I get where you're coming from. Although MANY MANY players have had hotstreaks during which they outperform their historic average. Jordan Lewis in his second last season, Brodie Smith/Grant Birchall awhile back... I wouldn't base a 5 year career off just a 12 weeks interval.

FYI I actually also have Brad Crouch in my team currently, although I'm expecting more of a 95 average than 105+. At an average of 95, it is questionable whether the selection is worth it to begin with. And during my most successful season in years (last year) I went completely guns and rookies in the midfield, so for our sake I hope Brouch works out.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Prochard123 said:
Fair enough I get where you're coming from. Although MANY MANY players have had hotstreaks during which they outperform their historic average. Jordan Lewis in his second last season, Brodie Smith/Grant Birchall awhile back... I wouldn't base a 5 year career off just a 12 weeks interval.

FYI I actually also have Brad Crouch in my team currently, although I'm expecting more of a 95 average than 105+. At an average of 95, it is questionable whether the selection is worth it to begin with. And during my most successful season in years (last year) I went completely guns and rookies in the midfield, so for our sake I hope Brouch works out.
Click to expand...

Did you not start with Coniglio last year? His starting price was only 30k more than B Crouch is this year.
 
Lindsay_Gilbee said:
If Merrett misses a fair bit of footy my back up plan is Luke Shuey. Last season was his equal lowest average since his second season.
Click to expand...
Plus as in the GF teams will tag Yeo so Shuey went nucking futs.

I want that in my team. He lock.
 
I had Shuey last year after he was injured and jumped on board at his low price.


Didn't do it for me personally. I think he's a gun, always has been, but his game just doesn't transfer very well to SC. Dynamic player, not a stat padder.


He just doesn't seem to get the inflated "sympathy" points from CD like Dangerfield does.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

nahnah said:
talk me out of Sloane
Click to expand...

Here's what I've looked at - he's susceptible to a tag, yes, but not many have his capability to go as big.

2018 - 2 120+ scores, 6 scores below 90
2017 - 10 120+ scores (plus a 119), 9 below 90 (22 games) - 8 of those high games were 139+
2016 - 6 120+ scores, 4 below 90 (21 games)
2015 - 6 120+ scores (plus a 117), 6 below 90 (16 games) - 5 of those high games were 134+
2014 - 9 120+ scores, 3 below 90 (22 games)
2013 - 6 120+ scores (plus a 116), 6 below 90(21 games)
2012 - 5 120+ scores (plus a 118), 6 below 90 (21 games)

From his 135 games, he's had 44 120+ scores and 40 below 90. Fairly wildly inconsistent on supercoach scores. For a guy whose average in those 135 games is 107.8, and is considered an elite player overall, it seems odd he would have as many games in the 90-120 range as he does above and below that. 22 of those games were 140+, with 5 in the mid 130s (1x 136, 2x 137, 2x 139). So 14% of those games were 140+...can't imagine may other players have that scoring ability.

I guess where you take into consideration - do you start with him and hope he pulls out those 140 games early, or do you wait for those sub 90 games which on average he will have 6-7 of a year?

Adelaide's fixture - Hawthorn (home), Sydney (SCG), Geelong (home), North (Marvel), Gold Coast (home), St Kilda (Marvel), Fremantle (home), Port Adelaide (home). First 8 games.

5x home games, 2x Marvel (Etihad), 1x SCG.

Adelaide Oval is by far his best ground. Average of 116.2 from 50 games, so that's a positive for that early fixture. Some of his biggest games have come there. 140, 151, 169, 177, 140, 168 in 2017, 141, 145, 141, 137, 137 in 2016 etc.

Marvel (Etihad) isn't as good for him. Scores of 89, 78, 92, 96, 92, 80 in his last 6 (2016-2018) with his last 100 being in 2015. SCG is probably an overall lack of data - 2 games, a 75 in 2015 and 125 in 2012 for an average of 100.

In terms of teams played
Hawthorn - mid-range, career average of 93.1 but more relevant (since 2012 i.e. when he became a star) average of 102
Sydney - good career average, 114.3, including a 140, 137 and 122 in his last 4
Geelong - indicative of his career - average of 107.9 (close to his career), with scores of 141, 169 and 127 but also an 83 and 89
North - 115.3, good overall score
Gold Coast - again, a 139 and 136, but also 95, 87, 76
St Kilda - 66 and 78 in 2018 and 2017, went on a hot streak of 4 100's in a row since 2013 (129, 127, 141, 139) but dropped off since then
Fremantle - good overall average, 114.6
Port - probably his best current team, with last 3 scores being 168, 151, and 111.

So Sydney, North, Fremantle, Port is a good record (4/8), Gold Coast and Geelong he is hot and cold, Hawthorn and St Kilda average/not great.

I don't think these stats tell us either way. I set out to see if he would be a good pick based on history but he is just a hot and cold player.

Essentially the risk is really do you risk picking him for a slow 90s odd start and he drops a lot, and have the confidence to wait it out for these big 140s+ that seem likely to come OR do you have him as an upgrade target and hope he doesn't pull of those big 140s, even 160s early?

Personally, my rule is if you don't start him, you simply cannot chase his big scores that he may make - you'll miss out and while his season average may be high, his average for you isn't as good. It's an often missed point I think - people will chase him because he is averaging in the top 10 etc, but if you look at 2017 for example, he averaged 131.8 for the first 6 rounds, but if you went and chased that 131, he averaged 101.9 for the next 16 rounds...hardly worth getting even if his 110.2 season average was decent. You'd need to have picked him after round 2 or 3 to make it worthwhile.

Secondly, my other rule is you need to wait on him if you do start him. Because his average is dictated by such huge highs and lows, you can't just cop his lows and trade him out with impatience. And that's the risk - if he just went on to average 96 for the year, you've lost out massively.

If you think you can keep him despite lows, then go for it. But if you don't start with him, and he comes out averaging 130 after 6, on probability reasons you need to be able to look at it and say "no, history suggests he will come back to earth, and I need to cop these short-term losses while most others rush him in not realising they aren't going to get those big scores they missed out on back".

That's really all I found with this post. Gut feel to start/not start him, but be disciplined with your trade-ins either way. I'm fairly confident if he starts with 140s and so on, there will be much better guys to trade in that will give you better bang for your buck. Buy low, sell high.
 
Overall, the trick is not to get sucked in to picking "top 10 season scorers". Matt Priddis was a classic example - regardless if he was a top 10 or not overall for 22 rounds, he was a poor player to start with and a top player to trade in at around round 12. He probably was around top 10 anyway but if you traded him in at around round 12, you'd often get a 120 average from him - whereas other players who were more consistent for the year are better to start with.
 
The thing about trying to pick top 10 overall players that will be consistent and play most games is making me wonder re: Fyfe.

From 2018 backwards, he's played 18, 21, 5, 18, 18, 19 (H&A) in the last 6 seasons.

If he pulls out a 120 average and misses 4 games, then the 70 you get from your bench player in those 4 weeks is worth it. It's still a 111 average from that 'spot' (18 games from Fyfe, 4 from his bench spot). If he misses games late in the year, then obviously it changes - you can sideways him for a 110 player or have a M9 averaging 100 odd.

But if he averages 114 (his last season, although it's not his peak 2014-2015 scoring it seems likely he may have an injury affected game at some stage to make getting a 120 average difficult), it's closer to 102.5 with Fyfe + bench player. Again, changes late in the season.

Meanwhile you look at Lachie Neale - he's played 108 out of his last 110 H&A games. Yes, he doesn't have the capability (or hasn't shown it) to go 120+. But there is a strong consistent history of 110 from 22 games. He's got reasonable consistency. He is a starting player that you just plug in - whereas a Fyfe could well be a top 10 (or 5) average scorer, but is he going to score that much in total points? For reference, in 2018 he scored as many points as Cale Hooker did (114th).

Food for thought when it comes to starting him. But then he seems to start well and miss games late which means you just trade him to Clayton Oliver or Josh Kelly for some late season 120s...
 
Brad Crouch has potential but he's at an awkward price, will require an upgrade, has Sloane, Crouch and Squib and if all fully fit can go large so too risky for me. I was more confident that Cogs last season could be carried through most if not all of the season and average 105+, not as confident with with Brouch
 
SterlingArcher said:
The thing about trying to pick top 10 overall players that will be consistent and play most games is making me wonder re: Fyfe.

From 2018 backwards, he's played 18, 21, 5, 18, 18, 19 (H&A) in the last 6 seasons.

If he pulls out a 120 average and misses 4 games, then the 70 you get from your bench player in those 4 weeks is worth it. It's still a 111 average from that 'spot' (18 games from Fyfe, 4 from his bench spot). If he misses games late in the year, then obviously it changes - you can sideways him for a 110 player or have a M9 averaging 100 odd.

But if he averages 114 (his last season, although it's not his peak 2014-2015 scoring it seems likely he may have an injury affected game at some stage to make getting a 120 average difficult), it's closer to 102.5 with Fyfe + bench player. Again, changes late in the season.

Meanwhile you look at Lachie Neale - he's played 108 out of his last 110 H&A games. Yes, he doesn't have the capability (or hasn't shown it) to go 120+. But there is a strong consistent history of 110 from 22 games. He's got reasonable consistency. He is a starting player that you just plug in - whereas a Fyfe could well be a top 10 (or 5) average scorer, but is he going to score that much in total points? For reference, in 2018 he scored as many points as Cale Hooker did (114th).

Food for thought when it comes to starting him. But then he seems to start well and miss games late which means you just trade him to Clayton Oliver or Josh Kelly for some late season 120s...
Click to expand...

I always pick Fyfe. If he goes down it's easy to sideways him to another top mid.

If Fyfe is averaging 120 after the first 10 weeks do you risk trading him in if you didn't start him? He is an injury time bomb. It's not if with Fyfe anymore, it's when.

I just think he's too good not to pick, we all know how good he is and how well he can score, you've just gotta hope the explosion is towards the end of the year and not the very start (and that you still have a trade left!).
 
NT.Thunder said:
Brad Crouch has potential but he's at an awkward price, will require an upgrade, has Sloane, Crouch and Squib and if all fully fit can go large so too risky for me. I was more confident that Cogs last season could be carried through most if not all of the season and average 105+, not as confident with with Brouch
Click to expand...

His price is fine IMO. Despite some good mids around him I think he will average 95-100.

It’s his constant injuries that are the concern for me.

I actually think his inclusion in the team has more of an impact on M Crouch and Sloane, rather than the other way around.

Great record against good teams too, and slips under the radar due to opposition midfields focusing on Sloane, M Crouch and even Gibbs first.
 
Average doesn’t matter unless you start with the player. I remember picking up Macrae one season and his average was 97, but his average for me was 110 or so.
 
NT.Thunder said:
Brad Crouch has potential but he's at an awkward price, will require an upgrade, has Sloane, Crouch and Squib and if all fully fit can go large so too risky for me. I was more confident that Cogs last season could be carried through most if not all of the season and average 105+, not as confident with with Brouch
Click to expand...

1548156284317.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

WaynesWorld19
Position 2024 Midfielders
39 40 41 42 43
Replies
1K
Views
63K
WaynesWorld19
WaynesWorld19
WaynesWorld19
Position 2023 Midfielders
49 50 51 52 53
Replies
1K
Views
73K
evo
evo

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top