Teams 2019 My RDT Team: H&A

[Bandicoot]

yeah I know, just trying to think of reasons why the anomaly exists.

There is a possibility it is a mistake and when the game actually opens it is different as there is this note on the team picker. You'd think its unlikely but not impossible.

PLEASE NOTE: All 2019 Team Picker player prices are currently tentative and subject to change. Be sure to check back often for any possible updates as you trial various team selections.

I queried his price with vapormedia and they have confirmed that all prices shown in the team picker are correct and will not change.

 

[SELFCONFESDAFLNERD]

I don't have the team picker but i believe this team will fit inside the salary cap. If not, i have a couple downgrades in mind. Obviously rookies will be selected later

B: Laird, Williams, Newman, Smith
C: Macrae, Neale, Merrett, Treloar, Hall, Hannebery
R: Grundy, Kreuzer
F: Danger, Heeney, Westhoff, Greene

B: Laird, Newman, Williams, Smith, Collins, Williamson (Hore, Wigg)
C: Macrae, Neale, Merrett, Treloar, Hall, Hannebery, B.Smith, Stocker (Constable, Valente, Bewley)
R: Grundy, Kreuzer (Bines)
F: Danger, Heeney, Wingard, Rankine, Setterfield, McAdam (Parker, Cavarra)

 

[Pea Nut]

2 players which I have a lot of interest in, Blakely with Neale going to Brisbane. Is also a defender. And Taranto with Shiel going to Essendon. Thoughts ??
Also, not seeing many teams with Coniglio, he's a lock in my side.

 

[Tex Danger]

2 players which I have a lot of interest in, Blakely with Neale going to Brisbane. Is also a defender. And Taranto with Shiel going to Essendon. Thoughts ??
Also, not seeing many teams with Coniglio, he's a lock in my side.

Blakely I currently have and think he's a good option. Not a guarantee though so depending on leftover funds he could be upgraded to one of the 3 names (Laird, Lloyd, Whitfield) back there
Taranto was a lock for me before he lost fwd status so not in consideration at all now.

 

[Pea Nut]

Blakely I currently have and think he's a good option. Not a guarantee though so depending on leftover funds he could be upgraded to one of the 3 names (Laird, Lloyd, Whitfield) back there
Taranto was a lock for me before he lost fwd status so not in consideration at all now.

At the moment I've got Blakely alongside those 3. Looks good. If a plethora of rookie defenders show up it may change.

 

[Tex Danger]

At the moment I've got Blakely alongside those 3. Looks good. If a plethora of rookie defenders show up it may change.

Thats a heavy invest in the Def but I dont mind it. Generally its more predictable who the top must have defenders will be whereas mids can be a lot more in a similar bracket and able to get some cheaper after an injury or on a hot run with a good fixture.

Hard not to get seduced by the big mid names though.

For the defenders for me its actually the mid price options making it hard to go so strong. Williams (I actually dont have him at the moment as not sure he is top 6 and other cheaper stepping stone options), Smith, Hanley, Roberton (not so keen on), even Birchall if he gets a run at it from now (id be nervous taking him but if in rd 1 at 280k almost too risky to ignore!).

 

[Pea Nut]

Thats a heavy invest in the Def but I dont mind it. Generally its more predictable who the top must have defenders will be whereas mids can be a lot more in a similar bracket and able to get some cheaper after an injury or on a hot run with a good fixture.

Hard not to get seduced by the big mid names though.

For the defenders for me its actually the mid price options making it hard to go so strong. Williams (I actually dont have him at the moment as not sure he is top 6 and other cheaper stepping stone options), Smith, Hanley, Roberton (not so keen on), even Birchall if he gets a run at it from now (id be nervous taking him but if in rd 1 at 280k almost too risky to ignore!).

This might sound crazy but I've got Brodie Smith as well. The forward premos really don't excite me, and there are only a few mid premos that are must have for me. This initial team that I have also requires a budget second ruckman as well. Which I think will work this year.

 

[happy_eagle]

Brodie Smith has never been a premium, don't quite understand the hype even at a cheaper price.
Far more upside in Roberton, Birchall or Hanley if they can get on the field

 

[Tex Danger]

Brodie Smith has never been a premium, don't quite understand the hype even at a cheaper price.
Far more upside in Roberton, Birchall or Hanley if they can get on the field

Smith more durable than Birchall, Hanley

While Smith has never had an end of year premium average, he has the ability to score big and go on runs of 90-100+. As a cash generator that is highly valuable, as long as you dont get sucked into thinking he is a keeper you can cash him in at max value.

I can see why you wouldnt, but I will

 

[Bandicoot]

My defense seems to change from day to day.
Originally had all the value defenders in Williams, Roberton, Smith, Hanley and Birchall.
Birchall and Smith have now been replaced and have added a couple of premiums in Llyod and Blakely.
This is the problem with having assistant coach. I've made 25 changes to my team whereas most people haven't even started.

 

[nameless]

Sorry to be THAT guy, but is there news on when the site opens for 2019?

 

[happy_eagle]

Smith more durable than Birchall, Hanley

While Smith has never had an end of year premium average, he has the ability to score big and go on runs of 90-100+. As a cash generator that is highly valuable, as long as you dont get sucked into thinking he is a keeper you can cash him in at max value.

I can see why you wouldnt, but I will

I usually try and set myself a certain value for each line where if I'm spending over that then it's for a player that I consider is keeper worthy, as this is where the mid price trap catches people out each year I reckon (players that you spend up on in comparison to rookies, but don't end up delivering many more ppg and still need trades to facilitate upgrades)


Smith is priced at around 54, and probably capable of going around 80 at best (his career best is 82). Thats value of 26ppg or +$187k (Theoretical Max Price = $575,000)
A rookie at $157k is priced at 21, and history tells us that a good rookie can go at around 55. Thats value of 34ppg or +244k (Theoretical Max Price = $395,600)

Is the extra 25 ppg and +179k in theoretical max price enough reason to justify the $230k price tag between Smith and a rookie, given that both will require upgrading at some stage.

just thinking out loud here

 

[Bandicoot]

Sorry to be THAT guy, but is there news on when the site opens for 2019?

Normally the first week of February.

 

[Bandicoot]

I usually try and set myself a certain value for each line where if I'm spending over that then it's for a player that I consider is keeper worthy, as this is where the mid price trap catches people out each year I reckon (players that you spend up on in comparison to rookies, but don't end up delivering many more ppg and still need trades to facilitate upgrades)


Smith is priced at around 54, and probably capable of going around 80 at best (his career best is 82). Thats value of 26ppg or +$187k (Theoretical Max Price = $575,000)
A rookie at $157k is priced at 21, and history tells us that a good rookie can go at around 55. Thats value of 34ppg or +244k (Theoretical Max Price = $395,600)

Is the extra 25 ppg and +179k in theoretical max price enough reason to justify the $230k price tag between Smith and a rookie, given that both will require upgrading at some stage.

just thinking out loud here

You make perfect sense, Happy. It is so,so easy to get sucked into that mid price theory of value for money. In saying that though, I feel that Williams and Roberton can be defense keepers and that Hall, Hanners and Miles, as mids, can be great stepping stones whilst scoring well in the early rounds. Problem with a pure guns & rook strategy is that not all the rooks we initially pick continue to play and end up being liabilities.

 

[Pea Nut]

I usually try and set myself a certain value for each line where if I'm spending over that then it's for a player that I consider is keeper worthy, as this is where the mid price trap catches people out each year I reckon (players that you spend up on in comparison to rookies, but don't end up delivering many more ppg and still need trades to facilitate upgrades)


Smith is priced at around 54, and probably capable of going around 80 at best (his career best is 82). Thats value of 26ppg or +$187k (Theoretical Max Price = $575,000)
A rookie at $157k is priced at 21, and history tells us that a good rookie can go at around 55. Thats value of 34ppg or +244k (Theoretical Max Price = $395,600)

Is the extra 25 ppg and +179k in theoretical max price enough reason to justify the $230k price tag between Smith and a rookie, given that both will require upgrading at some stage.

just thinking out loud here

Other things to consider, points on ground and how quickly they make that cash. If Adelaide's ball movement is on Smith is a key part of that and has the ability to punch out regular 90's. And he is a lock in their best 22. Max price is also misleading, as all it takes is a couple of hundreds in a row and they go screaming up in price before dropping back in price. Seedsman last year is a great example. Went up massively in price off the back of a couple of good scores, lots of people jumped on then at max price after seeing consistent 100's from him and ended up getting burnt hard. If you had banked that cash you would have been miles ahead.

 

[happy_eagle]

You make perfect sense, Happy. It is so,so easy to get sucked into that mid price theory of value for money. In saying that though, I feel that Williams and Roberton can be defense keepers and that Hall, Hanners and Miles, as mids, can be great stepping stones whilst scoring well in the early rounds. Problem with a pure guns & rook strategy is that not all the rooks we initially pick continue to play and end up being liabilities.

Exactly, which is why the theoretical max price is always a major plus for mid pricers. They can reach a reasonable upgrade spot after 5/6 rounds.

But I look back over the past few years to the mid-pricers I had in my side, and almost all of them frustrated the hell out of me until I rage upgraded them early on.
Last year it was Christensen, Bonner, Lycett.
Year before it was Zak Jones, WHE and others i'm probably forgetting

Most of them fit into that awkward bubble where they aren't scoring enough to be keepers, and are very up and down which affects their ability to rise in price.

 

[Tex Danger]

I usually try and set myself a certain value for each line where if I'm spending over that then it's for a player that I consider is keeper worthy, as this is where the mid price trap catches people out each year I reckon (players that you spend up on in comparison to rookies, but don't end up delivering many more ppg and still need trades to facilitate upgrades)


Smith is priced at around 54, and probably capable of going around 80 at best (his career best is 82). Thats value of 26ppg or +$187k (Theoretical Max Price = $575,000)
A rookie at $157k is priced at 21, and history tells us that a good rookie can go at around 55. Thats value of 34ppg or +244k (Theoretical Max Price = $395,600)

Is the extra 25 ppg and +179k in theoretical max price enough reason to justify the $230k price tag between Smith and a rookie, given that both will require upgrading at some stage.

just thinking out loud here

thats always the decision to be made and I do a similar thought process.

End of the day it depends how many "good" rookies there look like being also and the more reliable rookies there appear to be, then the less midpricers I will end up with. I always have more midpricers at this stage of planning and they invariably drop off as their injuries recur and they don't look so reliable and/or confidence in more rookies grow. Almost like I have them there so I dont forget about them!

The benefit of a smith is he is best 22 without question and ACL aside rarely misses games aside from a few concussions. Also as I suggested, while he may average 80, it is a 110 with a 90 nearby that can see his price jump and the trade value is more than his average value if you don't get greedy and keep him too long.

Your though process is why I currently dont have Williams when most do. Hs is priced at 66. Id expect an average of 86 so 20 points growth and still just short of a keeper. Id rather a Smith who I see with more upside and put that 100k into my premiums given both have similar growth and neither I want come years end.

 

[Pea Nut]

Exactly, which is why the theoretical max price is always a major plus for mid pricers. They can reach a reasonable upgrade spot after 5/6 rounds.

But I look back over the past few years to the mid-pricers I had in my side, and almost all of them frustrated the hell out of me until I rage upgraded them early on.
Last year it was Christensen, Bonner, Lycett.
Year before it was Zak Jones, WHE and others i'm probably forgetting

Most of them fit into that awkward bubble where they aren't scoring enough to be keepers, and are very up and down which affects their ability to rise in price.

The key to mid pricers is picking the right ones. I started Sicily and McLean last year and it puts you ahead of the game and allows you to bank a trade or two as everyone else is bringing these players in that you already have in your starting side.

In saying that, It's also why nailing your premos is so important. I started Dusty last year and he was a disaster all season. Paid top dollar, he lost so much money, so I basically had to ride it out and made him M9 as quickly as I could. Was good back up at the end but my side could have been much stronger.

 

[Tex Danger]

You make perfect sense, Happy. It is so,so easy to get sucked into that mid price theory of value for money. In saying that though, I feel that Williams and Roberton can be defense keepers and that Hall, Hanners and Miles, as mids, can be great stepping stones whilst scoring well in the early rounds. Problem with a pure guns & rook strategy is that not all the rooks we initially pick continue to play and end up being liabilities.

Thats a good point.
We often pick ups and rookies as it theoretically leaves us with less players to upgrade.
But if the rookies dont play enough then you end up sideways trading them to fresh rookies and wasting just as many trades that way.

 

[Tex Danger]

You make perfect sense, Happy. It is so,so easy to get sucked into that mid price theory of value for money. In saying that though, I feel that Williams and Roberton can be defense keepers and that Hall, Hanners and Miles, as mids, can be great stepping stones whilst scoring well in the early rounds. Problem with a pure guns & rook strategy is that not all the rooks we initially pick continue to play and end up being liabilities.

Why so bullish on Roberton? 2 of his 3 fun games were 60s last year.
Year before he started on fire but his last 10 games he cracked 80 once. So over 100 ave 1st half but then under 80 2nd half to settle at 90.
Going back before that year he averaged in the 60s, a low 80 and barely cracked 50 before that.

I can see the interest due to that patch in 2017 (and the overall total) but remove the start to that year and Im not sure I can do it (although he will make money)

 

[go you pups]

Smith could easily do a 2017 Seedsman, start hot then fade

By the time he's fading you either upgrade him or bench him as coverage

At 388k he's worth it to start with imo

 

[happy_eagle]

I'm surprised that Birchalls highest career average is 89, mostly around early to mid 80s. My memory was of him being a clear Top 6 defender in his day.
I will probably take a risk on at least 2-3 mid pricers all up. A Birchall/Hanley/Smith/Roberton type at D4 (depending on injury recovery), possibly Hannebery at M5/6 and then Toby Greene at F4.

All depend on these guys playing some form of Pre season

 

[Pea Nut]

Why so bullish on Roberton? 2 of his 3 fun games were 60s last year.
Year before he started on fire but his last 10 games he cracked 80 once. So over 100 ave 1st half but then under 80 2nd half to settle at 90.
Going back before that year he averaged in the 60s, a low 80 and barely cracked 50 before that.

I can see the interest due to that patch in 2017 (and the overall total) but remove the start to that year and Im not sure I can do it (although he will make money)

Roberton and Savage are frauds. Big ones. I won't be going anywhere near either of them.

 

[go you pups]

I'm surprised that Birchalls highest career average is 89, mostly around early to mid 80s. My memory was of him being a clear Top 6 defender in his day.
I will probably take a risk on at least 2-3 mid pricers all up. A Birchall/Hanley/Smith/Roberton type at D4 (depending on injury recovery), possibly Hannebery at M5/6 and then Toby Greene at F4.

All depend on these guys playing some form of Pre season

Birchall and Westhoff went mega the first month of 2013, then Birchall got injured and Westhoff faded a bit but averaged high 80s I think

Birchall has probably scored better in SC though, I'd imagine he's gone 90-95 a few times there, pretty sure he went 94 for me once there when I had my best ever year in 2014.

 

[Tex Danger]

I'm surprised that Birchalls highest career average is 89, mostly around early to mid 80s. My memory was of him being a clear Top 6 defender in his day.
I will probably take a risk on at least 2-3 mid pricers all up. A Birchall/Hanley/Smith/Roberton type at D4 (depending on injury recovery), possibly Hannebery at M5/6 and then Toby Greene at F4.

All depend on these guys playing some form of Pre season

I think you are right despite not having an ave over 90. He was pushing out 80s in a time where dream team didn't have a lot of high scoring defenders I think, pretty sure he was often round the 5-10 mark where he wasn't must have but was always in the mix and reliable