SC Forwards Discussion Thread

[ThePezDispenser]

That's what I was thinking Ed. I guess with league wins in mind, you'd probably rather the 1 low score over 3 average scores thus providing an even better reason to select from the same team imo. I'd rather assure myself 2/3 competitive games as opposed to relying on the other teams score taking 3 average scores instead.

If you had league wins in mind you fill your side with Hawks, Geelong, freo players etc.

This is for mostly for overall.

You cannot lock in your premiums this year and let them go. You will have to make some changes in some places to ensure you are scoring well week to week.

 

[Ed D]

Read what I wrote in another thread somewhere. Player x v y i think it was.

You have trades that you can use over the year to ensure you have as many premiums playing as possible. Going into the season knowing you will be missing players on a certain week and you do nothing to try and overcome that problem is not a very good game plan.

Like I said in the other thread make the most of the byes, bring in GC and Pies players after rounds 10 and 14 respectively, and try your best to work out a way to ensure you don't have an excessive amount of premiums on your bench for no reason.

I read it but it's the same deal as here. You're going to pick premiums that will play the whole year and will miss 2 games no matter what, so it doesn't matter when they have their byes as long as they don't clash with players of the same position.

If they're a premium you're not going to want to trade them unless they get injured or by luck you end up with trades at the end of the year and have nothing else to use them on.

If you look into it, in theory there is no loss of points from having this happen, so avoiding more than one player from a team from different positions is pointless. Avoiding players from the same team in the same position I can see the problem as you'd need to use bench player (eg mid #1 sub + mid #2 sub + mid #3 sub), but when they're from other positions you're just using your best sub for each missing premium (eg def #1 sub + mid #1 sub + fwd #1 sub). You're going to have to use your best sub for every single missing player anyway, you might not however ever have to use your #2 sub or #3 sub.

Even if you plan on upgrading a player it wouldn't matter, you'd just want their byes to be later in the year, but being from the same team is irrelevant because of what I said above with using your best sub when they're out.

 

[Vamos Juddamente]

Yeah, it most likely would be. You don't go into a season knowing someone will be suspended a certain week though. From the get go, you should be trying to avoid having premiums missing.

I think Warnock is a terrible choice, whilst Yarran is a fair risk. He needs to average 90 plus to be worth picking up.

I would have thought that a guy who is going to start as the number 1 ruckman for under 300 k is a decent 2nd ruck pick to go with Sandi. Just got better and better as he got games into him late last year. He even looked dangerous up forward in our final. He has finally had an uninterupted preseason and I think is reallly ready to step up. He is not going to score big hundreds but I think he will get solid scores. I think he is the best pick value ruckman there.

 

[Badga]

People don't like searching, do they?

Well I went through this thread and the ruck thread and people seemed to be high on him to start off with and now not so much. Just asking a question mate but thanks for your help

 

[MightyMark]

Richardson, Matera, Prestia, Smith, McKernan or Darling would be your best bets for FWD bench spots.

I'm actually backing Richardson to play at my F7, with Prestia, Matera & Smith on my bench.

Haven't ruled out Darling or McKernan however, especially with Tippett going down yesterday.

Cheers Spud, already had Richardson (F7) Matera and Darling, with Smith in the mids as MPP. Didn't want Prestia because I already have 5 GC players rotating through my bench. I was leaning towards Mckernan after his game against Carlton but just wanted to see what peoples thoughts were on Butcher (considering he was the only other viable choice for me at the given time)

 

[MightyMark]

Well I went through this thread and the ruck thread and people seemed to be high on him to start off with and now not so much. Just asking a question mate but thanks for your help

I think the fact that Petrie is going to miss 2 of the first 3 games has put people on egde. Add that to the fact that David Hale is performing very well and it gives people options. i'm sticking with Petrie, but thats because he is my bench cover in the rucks. If he was starting on my field i would probably be looking at my options as well.

 

[Badga]

I think the fact that Petrie is going to miss 2 of the first 3 games has put people on egde. Add that to the fact that David Hale is performing very well and it gives people options. i'm sticking with Petrie, but thats because he is my bench cover in the rucks. If he was starting on my field i would probably be looking at my options as well.

Thanks mate, appreciate the reply. I have just taken him out mainly due to Tippett not likely to get a game so won't be able to use him as a MPP. But could very well change in the next couple of weeks

 

[MightyMark]

Thanks mate, appreciate the reply. I have just taken him out mainly due to Tippett not likely to get a game so won't be able to use him as a MPP. But could very well change in the next couple of weeks

If your willing to sit on Tippet early in the season, Fraser will be rested or injured at some point which will open up some space for Tippet. It depends on whther you want to make money of him or are just using him for the MPP option.

 

[dlanod]

If your willing to sit on Tippet early in the season, Fraser will be rested or injured at some point which will open up some space for Tippet. It depends on whther you want to make money of him or are just using him for the MPP option.

I wouldn't be betting on Tippett actually getting a game. He filled the last slot on GC's rookie list, and would be pretty low on their ruck list - behind Fraser, Smith, Tom Nicholls and probably even behind Gorringe.

 

[MightyMark]

I wouldn't be betting on Tippett actually getting a game. He filled the last slot on GC's rookie list, and would be pretty low on their ruck list - behind Fraser, Smith, Tom Nicholls and probably even behind Gorringe.

Actually thats true, I forgot about Nicholls. I think he would be ahead of Gorringe though. But being the forth ruck is not going to amount to much these days with the sub rule.

 

[Rayzorwire]

Cheers Spud, already had Richardson (F7) Matera and Darling, with Smith in the mids as MPP.

Has there been anything to suggest Smith (or Puopolo for that matter) is going to play a lot this year Mark? I still have both firmly in the maybe pile, not an easy side to break into AND retain your spot.

Seems a lot of people have these two or at least one of them locked in as near certainty rookies, maybe I've missed something?

 

[ThePezDispenser]

Well I went through this thread and the ruck thread and people seemed to be high on him to start off with and now not so much. Just asking a question mate but thanks for your help

Petrie has his own thread

 

[ThePezDispenser]

I read it but it's the same deal as here. You're going to pick premiums that will play the whole year and will miss 2 games no matter what, so it doesn't matter when they have their byes as long as they don't clash with players of the same position.

If they're a premium you're not going to want to trade them unless they get injured or by luck you end up with trades at the end of the year and have nothing else to use them on.

If you look into it, in theory there is no loss of points from having this happen, so avoiding more than one player from a team from different positions is pointless. Avoiding players from the same team in the same position I can see the problem as you'd need to use bench player (eg mid #1 sub + mid #2 sub + mid #3 sub), but when they're from other positions you're just using your best sub for each missing premium (eg def #1 sub + mid #1 sub + fwd #1 sub). You're going to have to use your best sub for every single missing player anyway, you might not however ever have to use your #2 sub or #3 sub.

Even if you plan on upgrading a player it wouldn't matter, you'd just want their byes to be later in the year, but being from the same team is irrelevant because of what I said above with using your best sub when they're out.

So you're not interested in listening at all? You have completed missed what I'm saying. Here it is in layman's terms....

Lets just say you don't pick up Ablett, Pendlebury or Montagna from the start to ensure not too many premiums from the one team miss out. After Round 10 you bring Ablett in as an upgrade or a straight swap. Therefore no more byes for this player whereas the player you swapped him for could have another bye left.

Ablett averages 130 - Rookie who would play in place of the other player - Averages 60. Therefore a 60 - 70 point differential.

Now you also trade in Montagna after Round 15 for say a Freo player who will miss the following round anyway. Again you will gain another 40-60 points.

And again if you bring Pendles in Round 14 for any player who has another bye remaining (geelong, Carlton, North, Essendon, Freo, Adelaide etc) again you are giving your side and extra 40-60 points.

Now please ponder over that and realise the importance of picking the appropriate players at the start and then trading the right players in, at the right time throughout the year.

 

[MightyMark]

Has there been anything to suggest Smith (or Puopolo for that matter) is going to play a lot this year Mark? I still have both firmly in the maybe pile, not an easy side to break into AND retain your spot.

Seems a lot of people have these two or at least one of them locked in as near certainty rookies, maybe I've missed something?

Smith should get a good run, has been training well from all accounts and is in line for round 1. Will hopefully play most games, or at least enough early in the season to get a good price rise. I dont think he will score overly high, but he is my 3rd bench in the mids, so I dont really need him to be a gun, 50 or so should be fine. His MPP his what makes him worth while.
Puopolo is at the moment considered a good chance to play the majority of the season. Baring any injury or bad form he loooks likely to settle in across half back. Does have his competition but will probably fill the role that Ladson has held in the past. He seems confident, and runs the ball well which will bode well for his scoring.
If you only want one, go with Puopolo, as there are more quality rookie mids than rookie backs. Use Smith for his MPP if you are lacking mid/fwd MPP options.

 

[Wittman10]

Cheers Spud, already had Richardson (F7) Matera and Darling, with Smith in the mids as MPP. Didn't want Prestia because I already have 5 GC players rotating through my bench. I was leaning towards Mckernan after his game against Carlton but just wanted to see what peoples thoughts were on Butcher (considering he was the only other viable choice for me at the given time)

FWIW I put a line through Butcher after I heard Laidley say in an interview on SEN, that they didn't expect him to play seniors this year, barring a bad run of injuries. McKernan for me.

 

[Will.B.Worth.Da.Waite]

did clarkson say after the game rioli wont be in the midfield once more regulars come back?

 

[Canyouhearthedrums]

Smith should get a good run, has been training well from all accounts and is in line for round 1. Will hopefully play most games, or at least enough early in the season to get a good price rise. I dont think he will score overly high, but he is my 3rd bench in the mids, so I dont really need him to be a gun, 50 or so should be fine. His MPP his what makes him worth while.
Puopolo is at the moment considered a good chance to play the majority of the season. Baring any injury or bad form he loooks likely to settle in across half back. Does have his competition but will probably fill the role that Ladson has held in the past. He seems confident, and runs the ball well which will bode well for his scoring.
If you only want one, go with Puopolo, as there are more quality rookie mids than rookie backs. Use Smith for his MPP if you are lacking mid/fwd MPP options.

Smith hasn't really impressed yet. I'd say he's only an outside chacne to get a game early on.

 

[The80s]

has anyone considered banfield from the lions. seems to find a lot of it and uses it well while he also converts a few goals. got him in my forwards at the moment. thoughts?

 

[toxic]

has anyone considered banfield from the lions. seems to find a lot of it and uses it well while he also converts a few goals. got him in my forwards at the moment. thoughts?

take him out

 

[douls]

did clarkson say after the game rioli wont be in the midfield once more regulars come back?

he did, but you'd assume he'd get a run there throughout the year

 

[The80s]

take him out

care to elaborate a little?

 

[Selective Retention]

care to elaborate a little?

Is he going to run through the midfield? Doubtful IMO and the Brisbane forwardline will be a barren place you'd have to suggest.

 

[ThePezDispenser]

Might have something to do with his poor average from last year and the fact his DT scores are better than his SC scores.

 

[Ed D]

So you're not interested in listening at all? You have completed missed what I'm saying. Here it is in layman's terms....

Lets just say you don't pick up Ablett, Pendlebury or Montagna from the start to ensure not too many premiums from the one team miss out. After Round 10 you bring Ablett in as an upgrade or a straight swap. Therefore no more byes for this player whereas the player you swapped him for could have another bye left.

Ablett averages 130 - Rookie who would play in place of the other player - Averages 60. Therefore a 60 - 70 point differential.

Now you also trade in Montagna after Round 15 for say a Freo player who will miss the following round anyway. Again you will gain another 40-60 points.

And again if you bring Pendles in Round 14 for any player who has another bye remaining (geelong, Carlton, North, Essendon, Freo, Adelaide etc) again you are giving your side and extra 40-60 points.

Now please ponder over that and realise the importance of picking the appropriate players at the start and then trading the right players in, at the right time throughout the year.

You just don't get it. I'm sorry but you haven't listened to anyone in these threads with your theory of starting players from the one team that play in seperate positions. We're talking about players you pick to START in your INITIAL team, not upgrades. How is having Reiwoldt, Montagna and Goddard or Yarran, Judd & Gibbs (they play in different positions and are from the same team) going to cost someone points overall (and your example above does not show it as it's talking about when to use upgrades).

You seem to be missing the point that no matter who you pick in your STARTING team they will miss 2 games minimum and you don't trade out keepers. You're saying you trade premiums in later, great, but who are the keepers you started with? Do they suddenly not have 2 byes?

Please show us where is this disadvantage of having guys from different positions missing on the same round is going to cost teams points, and then I'll agree with you.

 

[ThePezDispenser]

Please show us where is this disadvantage of having guys from different positions missing on the same round is going to cost teams points, and then I'll agree with you.

You can't be so simple minded this year. You may have to trade premiums out like I am suggesting.

Just say you go for Travis Boak in your side instead of another Collingwood/Saints player (who will have both missed a game by round 10). You can then trade him out after Round 10 for Ablett (therefore neither player misses a round due to the byes).

In this scenario you are saving yourself being a Premium down on 4 occasions - That could be a gain between 250-400 points, if you're near the top it could be the difference between winning and losing.

I'm not saying I'm some sort of guru, however some pretty simple math here shows how this sort of approach will help you.