Trading out Barlow?

[DungeonsNDragons]

Given this is Barlow's first year in the AFL, does anyone see any potential upside by trading him out for a Ultra-Premium before year's end. At 496k, you would think that there is a good chance that he won't finish the year off as well as some other veterans such as Montagna 550k , Bartel 512k , Murphy 515k, Pendelbury 514k.

My midfield at the moment is:
Ablett, Judd, Swan, Bartel, Dal Santo, Barlow.

I really like the look of having Montagna in the place of Barlow.

Would anyone consider trading out Barlow THIS WEEK in a preemptive move, before the ultra-premiums listed above jump in price?

It could give you a jump over the competition if Barlow drops in performance, which wouldn't be unexpected (rarely does a first year player plays so well over the whole year). Barlow's breakeven is still only 65-odd this week, so maybe not this week, but it is something to think about.

Thoughts?

 

[BlueGibbs2011]

Barlow's break even score is only 62. Which probably means he will rise another 20k+. Due to this, i'd wait.

Overall, not a bad strategy if you have the trades up your sleeve but maybe wait until he is due to drop in value.

 

[RWnBluey]

Given this is Barlow's first year in the AFL, does anyone see any potential upside by trading him out for a Ultra-Premium before year's end. At 496k, you would think that there is a good chance that he won't finish the year off as well as some other veterans such as Montagna 550k , Bartel 512k , Murphy 515k, Pendelbury 514k.

My midfield at the moment is:
Ablett, Judd, Swan, Bartel, Dal Santo, Barlow.

I really like the look of having Montagna in the place of Barlow.

Would anyone consider trading out Barlow THIS WEEK in a preemptive move, before the ultra-premiums listed above jump in price?

It could give you a jump over the competition if Barlow drops in performance, which wouldn't be unexpected (rarely does a first year player plays so well over the whole year). Barlow's breakeven is still only 65-odd this week, so maybe not this week, but it is something to think about.

Thoughts?

It all depends on what value you place on a trade I guess, also I think you are making the mistake of putting Barlow in the same category as all young first year players, what you are forgetting is that Barlow is 23 and has a mature body that should easily see out the season with a rest for one or two weeks. No way I am trading him unless he gives me a reason to, and that would only be if he fell below ~90 avg or got injured for 3+ weeks

 

[Barnzy]

You must have more pressing issues in your side than trading out a bloke who's averaging 112? If not, then the prize is probably in the bag for you.

 

[SHAKESPEARE]

Barlow is a keeper. If someone like Swan or Montagna started playing like Ablett on roids and i had one trade left, i'd maybe consider upgrading him

 

[Ed D]

I think you are making the mistake of putting Barlow in the same category as all young first year players, what you are forgetting is that Barlow is 23 and has a mature body that should easily see out the season with a rest for one or two weeks. No way I am trading him unless he gives me a reason to, and that would only be if he fell below ~90 avg or got injured for 3+ weeks

This.

 

[Ed_Gein]

Would be a waste of a trade i reckon. Trading out a bloke thats averaging 112 would be madness, i can't see the benefits of using up a trade for another player that may be averaging 5-10 points more. It's pretty minimal especially considering the trade can be used into upgrading a cash cow to a premium which would benefit your team a lot better.

True, initially before round 1 Barlow was probably considered a cash cow, but his average has elevated him to keeper/premium status, thus making him a stayer in (what should be) 100% of teams.

 

[Judd_Magic]

Would be a waste of a trade i reckon. Trading out a bloke thats averaging 112 would be madness, i can't see the benefits of using up a trade for another player that may be averaging 5-10 points more. It's pretty minimal especially considering the trade can be used into upgrading a cash cow to a premium which would benefit your team a lot better.

True, initially before round 1 Barlow was probably considered a cash cow, but his average has elevated him to keeper/premium status, thus making him a stayer in (what should be) 100% of teams.

This!

 

[roosaints]

The only circumstance I would agree with trading Barlow is you have 5 other premium mids already and don't have Ablett. In this case you could maybe justify that he is less likely to maintain his scoring than more experienced premiums.

Averaging 112, trading him for anyone but Ablett is just not worth it.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

If you didn't have Ablett, or maybe Judd, had 10+ trades left and he was your sixth midfielder, then yeah...maybe. But I'd be surprised if you had five midfielders doing better than him. Like Pods, he was picked up as a cash cow, but has been one of the best five or so performers at his position. I'd try to find some other holes with my team, before worrying about trading Barlow. And with seven trades left (probably six by the lockout) the only way I'm trading him is if he has a 4+ week injury.

 

[DungeonsNDragons]

Cheers for the advice. It all does sound logical.

I guess I'm assuming/predicitng that Barlow might only avg 95-100 from here on out (based on wear and tear of first year in AFL + possible tag).

Also I'm predicting that Montagna might avg 125 from here on out, especially with St Kilda's easy run home.

This could be a potentialy 30ppg increase. Plus Barlow may be more likely to be rested than Montagna

I know this might not happen but is a plausible scenario. If this was to happen, and you came to the end of the season, would anyone look back and say that this trade Barlow 496k to Montagna 550k (probably better to do it next week) would be worth the trade?

If you guessed this right you would be one up on the competition, since everyone else will be hanging onto him.

I guess this week will be interesting. If he knocks up another 100+ this discussion goes away. But if it's in the 65-85 zone we might think twice.

 

[vjknight]

The only circumstance I would agree with trading Barlow is you have 5 other premium mids already and don't have Ablett. In this case you could maybe justify that he is less likely to maintain his scoring than more experienced premiums.

Averaging 112, trading him for anyone but Ablett is just not worth it.

im in this situation - but i have 6 other premiums too (yeah i know ive had that talk and it will be remedied in coming weeks). only have 6 trades left and so am in 'slow & steady' mode - only trade to fix real problems, as team is going ok.

i think the mid season break is goona decide a lot going forward.

 

[Impromptu]

Given this is Barlow's first year in the AFL, does anyone see any potential upside by trading him out for a Ultra-Premium before year's end.

My midfield at the moment is:
Ablett, Judd, Swan, Bartel, Dal Santo, Barlow.

I really like the look of having Montagna in the place of Barlow.

Would anyone consider trading out Barlow THIS WEEK in a preemptive move, before the ultra-premiums listed above jump in price?

I'm in a similar situation and I would also like to take a pre-emptive move... In short, ranked 1,592 and AFTER this week with 7 trades left with 1 upgrade in the midfield currently:

Judd, Swan, Montagna, Hayes
Barlow, Bastinac (Armstrong, Stevenson)

Option 1 - Russian Roulette (leaving 3 trades)

Barlow> Ablett
Bastinac> Gysbert; then in a few weeks

Armstrong > Selwood/Gibbs/NDS
Stevenson > Rookie

Leaving 3 trades and: Ablett, Judd, Swan, Montagna, Hayes, Selwood (Gyberts, Rookies)

Option 2 - Hedging the bets (leaving 4 trades)

Bastinac> Gysbert; then in a few weeks

Armstrong > Ablett
Stevenson > Rookie

Leaving 4 trades and: Ablett, Judd, Swan, Montagna, Hayes, Barlow (Gyberts, Rookies)

Option 3 - Safe and Sound (leaving 5 trades)

Bastinac > Selwood/Gibbs/NDS
Stevenson > Rookie

Leaving 5 trades and: Judd, Swan, Montagna, Hayes, Selwood, Barlow (Gyberts, Rookies); No Ablett

I'm thinking the same as the OP; to get rid of Barlow and in place get Ablett then Selwood; but it will be quite embarrassing if Barlow averages 112 year end... I know the obvious question is what do you think Barlow will average from now to the end...If Barlow averages 90 and you think say Montagna will average an extra 30ppg then I'd say yes....but Barlow is an animal...(in a good way)

 

[DungeonsNDragons]

Impromptu:

Option 2 in your scenario.

I don't think anyone other than Montagna, Judd, Ablett or Swan has the likelihood of avg 125 for the run home (basing a lot of this on last years stats, so could be wrong).

So I wouldn't trade Barlow for someone like Selwood because I don't think the PPG increase is large enough. Maybe someone like Murphy, Bartel or Pendelbury who are only around 515k maybe worth it only because they are very undervalued.

 

[DungeonsNDragons]

143 from Montagna would have been nice tonight.

 

[Lockyer24]

Brought in Gysberts for Barlow today in the midfield, and upgraded my forward line with Didak for Mitch Duncan. Think I have some change too to upgrade some of my weak defenders at some point.

 

[SHAKESPEARE]

Brought in Gysberts for Barlow today in the midfield, and upgraded my forward line with Didak for Mitch Duncan. Think I have some change too to upgrade some of my weak defenders at some point.

lulz epic fail

 

[TerryTait]

Brought in Gysberts for Barlow today in the midfield, and upgraded my forward line with Didak for Mitch Duncan. Think I have some change too to upgrade some of my weak defenders at some point.

lol this has to be a contender for worst double trade of the year!!

 

[BOMBERBLITZ]

Barlow will be traded in the next few weeks......

...just like Palmer was in '08
...and Rich in '09

He has been an excellent COW!

He was NEVER part of my plans and will be turned into Judd or Montagna...

 

[THE_GUN]

trade barlow next week to gysberts who will remain in the team for the rest of the season & use the remaining 380k to upgrade 3 other mid price players to premium keepers.

cant see much wrong with that unless i'm missing something !

 

[djay40]

trade barlow next week to gysberts who will remain in the team for the rest of the season & use the remaining 380k to upgrade 3 other mid price players to premium keepers.

cant see much wrong with that unless i'm missing something !

cant see much wrong? maybe the fact barlow is average 113 plus, which is higher then most premiems? crazy to get rid of him unless that goes down dramatically.

 

[Jack4814]

This is the most ridiculous thread in the history of this forum. Barlow has the 5th best average of any pure midfielder. How the **** can anyones team be that good and have that many trades that they can trade out Barlow? Anyone who does should be have to have a label put into their signature to warn everybody of how much of a n00b they are. Please delete thread

 

[Alfonz]

Also, Freo have a fairly easy run home ... I think he could even improve his average.

If you break down his two poorer games ... without being a Freo fan you might not know that he suffered a heavy knock to the ribs early in the game against Geelong, plus he had to contend with Ling (even though he copped a similar knock ... but still). The following week was against defensive kings St Kilda, but he was still carrying the knock around the ribs (and I saw the strapping vs Richmond the following week)

I can see maybe a lower score against the Saints in a few weeks (depending how they play him), but apart from that we have games against the defensive forces of Adelaide, Carlton, Richmond, WC, Port, North, Melbourne etc. ... I think he could still rack up some huge numbers coming home. For example, he has already scored a 151, 132, 126 vs Ade-Rich-WC.

His TOG% is actually relatively low across the season (say, 75% instead of 85-90%)... so hopefully he doesn't burn out.

 

[bestin]

Why would you trade out someone averaging 112? He is a premium now and more consistent than many other premiums available

 

[Big Fozza]

Food for thought but I don't have enough trades to even consider. Unfortunately