SC Forwards Discussion Thread

[MightyMark]

Re: 2011 SC Forwards Discussion Thread

Tossing up between Pav and Goodes??
maybe Pav!!

Pav. If he plays more as a forward we should see him score like he used too. Fingers crossed!

 

[J6shSC]

I've got 380k for another fwd. Anyone thinking about j Brennan? Or should I stick with zaharakis?

Dangerfield.

 

[marky53]

Dangerfield.

thanks I'll go dangerfield

 

[ThePezDispenser]

Re: 2011 SC Forwards Discussion Thread

So I'm the only one getting on Zaharakis?

Most likely - Good luck with that

Roughead anyone??

If you want someone to score like the following 50, 130, 70, 80, 30, 25, 110, 40, 90, 50

No... But a blinder in the NAB cup may move me. It would have to be blinders though.

Roughead will play a few blinders this year, however it will never make up for his inconsistency.

Thoughts on Ryan O'Keeefe people?

Stay away!

 

[HallamHawk]

thoughts on macaffer..

 

[ThePezDispenser]

Keepers or cash cows - Anything in the middle is just rubbish.

 

[CaptainChardonnay]

Keepers or cash cows - Anything in the middle is just rubbish.

Not always.... But it does tend to be the case....

 

[ThePezDispenser]

Not always.... But it does tend to be the case....

So you would deliberately pick up a $300k player to average 60-70 points?

When would it not be the case?

 

[Ed D]

So you would deliberately pick up a $300k player to average 60-70 points?

When would it not be the case?

Someone like Petrie.

Guess it depends on your definition of a cash cow or mid pricer.

 

[Spudregus_87]

mzungu

A lock on either my MID/FWD bench.

 

[Super Gusto]

Keepers or cash cows - Anything in the middle is just rubbish.

There is more than one strategy. Choosing a $200-$300K player isn't always a rubbish decision. By your reasoning players only go from cash cows to keepers without anything in between. Plenty of mid ranged players have break out years. Anyhow you always have the option of getting rid of a Player not performing by trading for a rookie who is scoring well, that you may not have previously had and making $200K profit.

 

[NinjaHamster]

So you would deliberately pick up a $300k player to average 60-70 points?

When would it not be the case?

Damn - the only option for a $300,000 player is to average 60-70 points ?? ... hmmn, let me call up History to let him know he has been wrong. Let's speak to anyone who has every used a midpricer strategy rather than the guns/rookies strategy and tell them their teams are rubbish.

It would be a waste of anybody's time to show you the numerous players $300,000 or just over who have either a) Had breakout years or b) had a deflated price that year due to injury the previous year, and who went on to become "keepers" (even averaging OVER 60-70 points !!) as the tone of your post and it's irrationality would suggest you are just trolling for such a response.

 

[ThePezDispenser]

There is more than one strategy. Choosing a $200-$300K player isn't always a rubbish decision. By your reasoning players only go from cash cows to keepers without anything in between. Plenty of mid ranged players have break out years. Anyhow you always have the option of getting rid of a Player not performing by trading for a rookie who is scoring well, that you may not have previously had and making $200K profit.

What?

You either make money out of a player, or the player becomes good enough to keep. If you don't think the player can make a substantial amount of money (around $200k) then why buy him? With this years talent pool you are much better off going for the rookies in the first place who will score the same as these 300k players who don't have the scope to improve

Damn - the only option for a $300,000 player is to average 60-70 points ?? ... hmmn, let me call up History to let him know he has been wrong. Let's speak to anyone who has every used a midpricer strategy rather than the guns/rookies strategy and tell them their teams are rubbish.

It would be a waste of anybody's time to show you the numerous players $300,000 or just over who have either a) Had breakout years or b) had a deflated price that year due to injury the previous year, and who went on to become "keepers" (even averaging OVER 60-70 points !!) as the tone of your post and it's irrationality would suggest you are just trolling for such a response.

Clearly mis-read what I wrote. Might be best for you to have a check back at what I first wrote in that there is no point picking someone up in the $300k price range unless they will become keepers or an upgrade option. Getting a $300k player that is neither of these would be someone who averages the 60-70 and I queried why anyone would want such a player.

Someone like Petrie.

Guess it depends on your definition of a cash cow or mid pricer.

Petrie is a dead set keeper if he gets back to top form - 90 plus average in the ruck is hard to come by

 

[NinjaHamster]

Yes, OK - that certainly makes sense and I agree with it entirely ... apologies for the confusion, as I did misread what you were saying !!

 

[Hu$tler]

Any1 risking Petterd?

And Jack Riewoldt has a lot of upside in him I feel. Especially since he's improved his fitness and will play a bit more up the ground.

JB back to being a gun this year after a good PS?

**** I wish the season would just start already

 

[MightyMark]

Any1 risking Petterd?

And Jack Riewoldt has a lot of upside in him I feel. Especially since he's improved his fitness and will play a bit more up the ground.

JB back to being a gun this year after a good PS?

**** I wish the season would just start already

Petterd played some good games last year, but I think there are probably better choices than him at around the same price, with less risk but more upside.
I'm not really sure about Reiwoldt, teams seemed to let him go a bit last year, which wont happen this year. Also, moving up the ground might not be better for his scoring, if he plays like Nick then yes, but if he plays like Cloke, his scoring will stay pretty much the same (Maybe less). I'm not saying that Cloke doesnt play well, but that supercoach wise Nick is far superior atm.

Finally, I am not sold on JB anymore, even with a full preseason he is still injury prone and not getting any younger. When fully fit, he is awesome, but when was the last time he played the majority of the season at full flight.

 

[Hu$tler]

Petterd played some good games last year, but I think there are probably better choices than him at around the same price, with less risk but more upside.
I'm not really sure about Reiwoldt, teams seemed to let him go a bit last year, which wont happen this year. Also, moving up the ground might not be better for his scoring, if he plays like Nick then yes, but if he plays like Cloke, his scoring will stay pretty much the same (Maybe less). I'm not saying that Cloke doesnt play well, but that supercoach wise Nick is far superior atm.

Finally, I am not sold on JB anymore, even with a full preseason he is still injury prone and not getting any younger. When fully fit, he is awesome, but when was the last time he played the majority of the season at full flight.

Yeh fair points.

JB averaged 99 in 2009 AND played every game. Last year he averaged 98 from his 16 games WITH that groin injury. There is also no Fevola to steal the ball off him.

I'm not totally sold though, need to see a bit of NAB form!

Can't believe he averaged 137 in 2006 though, that's better than Goddard last year by nearly 7 points!

 

[SJ]

Yeh fair points.

JB averaged 99 in 2009 AND played every game. Last year he averaged 98 from his 16 games WITH that groin injury. There is also no Fevola to steal the ball off him.

I'm not totally sold though, need to see a bit of NAB form!

Can't believe he averaged 137 in 2006 though, that's better than Goddard last year by nearly 7 points!

Limited games that year if I remember correctly though.

 

[MightyMark]

Yeh fair points.

JB averaged 99 in 2009 AND played every game. Last year he averaged 98 from his 16 games WITH that groin injury. There is also no Fevola to steal the ball off him.

I'm not totally sold though, need to see a bit of NAB form!

Can't believe he averaged 137 in 2006 though, that's better than Goddard last year by nearly 7 points!

If fully fit you would want him averaging more than 99, which he can, as we saw at the start of last year. He was killing it before he tweaked his groin, averaging well above 100, which is the only reason he managed to finish the season with 98. After he came back his respectable scores only dribbled in.

 

[Super Gusto]

What?

You either make money out of a player, or the player becomes good enough to keep. If you don't think the player can make a substantial amount of money (around $200k) then why buy him? With this years talent pool you are much better off going for the rookies in the first place who will score the same as these 300k players who don't have the scope to improve

P

It's just as bigger risk choosing rookies who either may not get good scores or may not get games than it is choosing a $300k player who doesn;t improve his value.

My point was that if there was a Rookie (like Barlow) who started posting good scores and you didn't have him in your team, then you'd be in a better position trading the $300K player who wasn;t scoring than the $100K rookie who wasn;t playing.

Alot of people will be going the rookie/gun strategy and good luck too them.

Others like myself will be going for a few $200-300K players, and there is a few this year that have a good chance of having a break out year.

 

[ThePezDispenser]

It's just as bigger risk choosing rookies who either may not get good scores or may not get games than it is choosing a $300k player who doesn;t improve his value.

My point was that if there was a Rookie (like Barlow) who started posting good scores and you didn't have him in your team, then you'd be in a better position trading the $300K player who wasn;t scoring than the $100K rookie who wasn;t playing.

Alot of people will be going the rookie/gun strategy and good luck too them.

Others like myself will be going for a few $200-300K players, and there is a few this year that have a good chance of having a break out year.

Everyone will have a few of those players it's a matter of choosing the right ones. Trying to find something from players like Sherman, Bolton, Brennan, Roughhead, Okeefe etc is just a waste of time though, they've proven they are not reliable. Therefore the simple rule get cash cows or potential keepers.

I'm not quite sure how you aren't getting this. Why waste a trade after picking up a 300K dud when you could have picked up the $100k rookie before round 1 (not many get through the NAB/pre season without getting spotted these days) who will have plenty of opportunity. Your example is ridiculous btw, everyone who took this game even slightly serious last year had Barlow from the start. And it's must easier for a rookie to make $200k (all they need to do is average 60-70) than it is for a $300k player who would need to average 100ppg

My team will and always has consisted of the 30 odd players who will play from week to week. I will have my premiums, my cash cows and my potential keepers - nothing else. There is nothing worse than carrying dead wood. Yes, it's hard to trade away a non playing rookie but that's why research has to go in before round 1 and then tinker with it slightly before the price rises.

 

[Super Gusto]

Everyone will have a few of those players it's a matter of choosing the right ones. Trying to find something from players like Sherman, Bolton, Brennan, Roughhead, Okeefe etc is just a waste of time though, they've proven they are not reliable. Therefore the simple rule get cash cows or potential keepers.

I'm not quite sure how you aren't getting this. Why waste a trade after picking up a 300K dud when you could have picked up the $100k rookie before round 1 (not many get through the NAB/pre season without getting spotted these days) who will have plenty of opportunity. Your example is ridiculous btw, everyone who took this game even slightly serious last year had Barlow from the start. And it's must easier for a rookie to make $200k (all they need to do is average 60-70) than it is for a $300k player who would need to average 100ppg

My team will and always has consisted of the 30 odd players who will play from week to week. I will have my premiums, my cash cows and my potential keepers - nothing else. There is nothing worse than carrying dead wood. Yes, it's hard to trade away a non playing rookie but that's why research has to go in before round 1 and then tinker with it slightly before the price rises.

You're obviously a super coach guru who will kill it this year. What are you planning to spend the $50K on?

 

[ThePezDispenser]

You're obviously a super coach guru who will kill it this year. What are you planning to spend the $50K on?

I love it when people write this tripe when they have nothing else to add.

 

[NinjaHamster]

Trying to find something from players like Sherman, Bolton, Brennan, Roughhead, Okeefe etc is just a waste of time though, they've proven they are not reliable.

OK - one thing to quibble with (or entirely disagree with) here, and I'm making sure I didn't misread this time

I have stated my reservations about O'Keefe on a couple of occassions earlier in this thread, but to suggest he has proven he is not reliable ?? O'Keefe is the very EPITOMY of Supercoach reliability. Last year was the first year he has dropped below 100 (probably 110 if my memory is to be trusted) in MANY years, and this can be accounted for by his groin injury.

I actually think it is a credit to his durability that he was able to struggle through last year and maintain a reasonable average. My doubts over him relate to what role he will play with Goodes moving back to midfield and with the emergence of Jack as an attacking midfielder, but O'Keefe truly doesn't deserve to be lumped in with inconsistent players of the ilk of Sherman no matter how much he may have disappointed us last year !!

 

[ThePezDispenser]

Fair call. However I've been burnt by him twice now. He has a great average, however his consistent scores of less than 60 are completely unacceptable for a premium and someone I will never touch again.

Yes, it has a lot to do with his position, but i feel after watching him last year he has lost all confidence in himself and the role he has in that team and unless he finds a role in that team under the new coach I just can't seem him scoring as well as he used to.

You also have to remember that massive average in 09 came off the back of a huge 8-9 weeks for him and then he dropped right off. Similarly last year great start however only five 100 plus scores after round 6