Bartel and Cox

[The Cotch]

Who's getting both of them?

Personally, I am, otherwise I think you'll be behind the eight ball from day 1, but that's just my opinion.

Really regretted it last year.

 

[adam10]

Who's getting both of them?

Personally, I am, otherwise I think you'll be behind the eight ball from day 1, but that's just my opinion.

Really regretted it last year.

Starting with Bartel isnt a must. As he is likeley to go down in cash like he did last year.

IMO, Cox is a must from the start. Theres no other ruckmen that compares.

 

[Hirdy_5]

Depends on what strategy you go for. If you go with a rookie/premium line-up then these top end players become more affordable. Were if you go for a mid ranger type strategy then i doubt you would be able to fit both in, but one is a possibility.

 

[chadleverington]

Who's getting both of them?

Personally, I am, otherwise I think you'll be behind the eight ball from day 1, but that's just my opinion.

Really regretted it last year.

Both locked in for me. I think i will go Bartel captain most weeks. Pondering the first week going with Cox because he scores so well against the lions.

 

[lifelike_]

Starting with Bartel isnt a must. As he is likeley to go down in cash like he did last year.

Just like almost every other gun.

 

[Saint KFC]

Bartel no, Cox probably not.

 

[abs_of_STEELE]

I'll have Cox but not Bartel.

 

[Power House]

Cox yes, Bartel no, I'll take Corey or Swan and save some $$

 

[Kid A]

neither. I've always gone with cox before but this year I don't think I'll have the moolah as I'm going for more mid-range guys. As for the A-B-C-S midfield elite four, the presence of great value mids combined with the fact that likely all of those four will drop in value at some point in the first half of the season means that I will trade them in when the time is better.

 

[Lakey91]

Cox yes yes yes yes yes.... bartel, hmm, can see why you would get him, but i think ill wait. Im going kane instead for my top mid.

 

[Cynic]

I'll be starting with both.

Banking on Bartel as captain to average around 110 again and Cox as the premier ruckmen to ensure that any loss of potential value they have is made up by the points they make me as opposed to their other options.

 

[Jolldo87]

No one is a must.

You can win with neither, you can win with both. It's down to personal preference. It's a myth that you must have Cox from the start to win the competition.

 

[Schulzenfest]

I always start with Cox, but I definitely won't be starting with Bartel. Even if I had the cash I'd get Corey instead because Corey is super consistent and Bartel has been a slow (by his standards) starter and fast finisher two years in a row now, making him a great upgrade target.

 

[Ausyid]

I always start with Cox, but I definitely won't be starting with Bartel. Even if I had the cash I'd get Corey instead because Corey is super consistent and Bartel has been a slow (by his standards) starter and fast finisher two years in a row now, making him a great upgrade target.

I disagree with regards to Corey vs Bartel

Average score rounds 1-11
Corey - 105.45
Bartel - 105.36

Average score rounds 12-22
Corey - 113.18
Bartel - 121.09

The only benefit last season to getting Corey in earlier than Bartel was the money saved. If your end goal is having Bartel in your team you may aswell save the trade and pick him in your initial 22. Obviously last season the gap in prices between Bartel and Corey in price was a lot larger last season so it was worth picking Corey to save the money but this season it is different as you're only paying a tad extra cash to pick up a traditionally higher scorer.

I, however, have a man-crush on Corey and will be picking him because I love everything about the way he plays footy and will enjoy having him in my team from round 1 onwards. Is it a weakness of mine that in a player A vs player B when it is quite evenly matched I always go for the player I like more?

 

[chadleverington]

The concern for Corey for me is where is he going to play. With the rumour that J Selwood would get more midfield time someone needs to get less midfield time. And i seen Joel Corey play half back against the eagles in round 22 last year (and put up a low score by his standards). I will take my boy bartel from the start i reckon. Lock him is as captain thanks Eddie.

 

[bloods01]

Who's getting both of them?

Personally, I am, otherwise I think you'll be behind the eight ball from day 1, but that's just my opinion.

Really regretted it last year.

I have them both. I had them both last year also. You cannot go wrong IMO.

 

[abs_of_STEELE]

I've been tinkering with my team and I've added Bartel but it depends if I want to start with 2 rookies+Vesz+Higgins in my forwards.

 

[adam10]

I've been tinkering with my team and I've added Bartel but it depends if I want to start with 2 rookies+Vesz+Higgins in my forwards.

IMO, Starting with Bartel helps a lot. Actually starting with AB or C gives you an early break. Instead of trying to fit them in later on. Problem is though they will almost most definatley come down in price. Although for me, sometimes i dont worry if theyll come if there that good to start in your DT and if you have th cash why not start with them?

 

[Lakey91]

I love the point dogs made - bartels fall in price, would be countered by extra points he gives you as captain in the early rounds.

Although its early days, who do you think the captain choice for round one would be at this stage? Bartel or Cox? (say you had both, and had to pick now).

 

[54Dogs]

Interesting thoughts in this thread with most going for Cox before Bartel. I would tend to go for someone I think will hold or improve their average or the absolute premium captain to gain extra points. Based on Cox and Bartels last 2 seasons against their first 8 opponents they would start as follows:

Cox

Brisbane______ 138
Port _________ 97
St Kilda______ 116
Dogs ________ 85
Hawks _______ 103
Freo _________ 83
Melbourne_____ 89
Sydney_______ 82

If Cox holds true to form based on his last 2 seasons against these teams he will average 99 through the first 8 rounds. The concern here is that one of the main reasons he would be selected in the starting squad is as a captain option and he's really only an option in 2 (possibly 3) of the first 8 games. Also based on this with the MN flattening out to around 4000 I have his price by Rd 8-10 at around 390K which is a drop of 80K on his SP.


Bartel

Hawks _____ 114
Tigers______ 123
Pies________ 99
Crows______ 141
Lions_______ 108
Melbourne___ 125
Swans______ 97
North_______ 127

If Bartel holds true to form for the last 2 seasons he will average 117 through the first 8 and be a captain option in 6 games. With the MN dropping I have his price at around 470K by Rd 8-10 with these averages.

Ultimately though DT is a game of points scored and Cox would score 793 points while Bartel would score 934.

Food for thought as to who may be the best option early on.

 

[abs_of_STEELE]

IMO, Starting with Bartel helps a lot. Actually starting with AB or C gives you an early break. Instead of trying to fit them in later on. Problem is though they will almost most definatley come down in price. Although for me, sometimes i dont worry if theyll come if there that good to start in your DT and if you have th cash why not start with them?

Yeah I was going to have Gibbs, hoping I could upgrade him to Bartel later on but I think I may aswell take him now and take the risk on Vesz/Higgins.

 

[drummoyne]

Love your work Dogs!

I wont be starting with Cox, but will select a lock in captain (ie. Ablett, Bartel, Swan) from the start. Bartels slowish start last season (slow by his standards) and Swans modified pre-season leans me towards Ablett.

I think it important to be that little bit unique with your starting squad. The majority of top DTers will be starting with Cox I beleive and as much as it pains me I would like to be that little bit different.

 

[Lakey91]

Yeah I was going to have Gibbs, hoping I could upgrade him to Bartel later on but I think I may aswell take him now and take the risk on Vesz/Higgins.

If you pick gibbs, he should be a keeper for you - dont waste a trade upgrading him to someone else.

GREAT work as always dogs.

Very interesting. Im starting to lose in interest in cox due to his slowish start. To be honest, i think he will do a kane - average around 100 in 2009, after averaging ~105-106 the year before. Dont know why, just see a similarity despite complete different circumstances and positions :S. Not sure who else to start with instead of cox though. What would HMAC have to average to be 390k by the 8-10 mark? What about ottens?

 

[Jolldo87]

If you pick gibbs, he should be a keeper for you - dont waste a trade upgrading him to someone else.

I'm not sure if that's necessarily true.

I'm looking at someone around the same price as Gibbs not as a keeper but a guy to make some early cash and then be used as a sideways trades to one of Ablett, Bartel, Corey or Swan.

I know it's against all normal conventions but i still think it's a good option.

GREAT work as always dogs.

Very interesting. Im starting to lose in interest in cox due to his slowish start. To be honest, i think he will do a kane - average around 100 in 2009, after averaging ~105-106 the year before. Dont know why, just see a similarity despite complete different circumstances and positions :S. Not sure who else to start with instead of cox though. What would HMAC have to average to be 390k by the 8-10 mark? What about ottens?

You have too look at why Kornes lost those points. Tagging role, lower kick to handball ratio and less marks iirc.

Do you think similar things will happen to Bartel? If so don't select him.

 

[Lakey91]

No i meant, cox and kane had sorta similar averages trend. Its confusing and doesnt make any sense!

Nah, i think gibbs should be picked as a keeper only. I think you could get bartel in for maybe 0.5-1 trade more in place of a rookie or low mid pricer.