2013 Player/s X versus Y

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.

Log in to remove this ad.

I dunno, I kind of like the look of Ablett, Swan, Pendlebury, Watson, Kennedy in the mids.

Swan wasn't on my radar as an upgrade target (too dear) and Fyfe was a keeper until this suspension. Now I'm contemplating it.
 
Very strong midfield that!

I'm tossing up whether to go Dwyer -> Murphy or Watson?

Know what you're gonna get with Watson, but Murphy is underpriced and could go bang with the easy draw.
 
To retain - M Jones v J Pittard?

Jones - ave 66 (played 5), increased ~$140k, worth $300-350k (IMO) + net $140k if traded to 115k rookie

Pittard - ave 76 (4), increased ~$107k, worth $350-400k (IMO) + net $120k if traded to 115k rookie

Was thinking M Jones >> Laird/ Docherty (Goodes to Mid bench)??

Pittard & Gibbs on Def bench

Still waiting on Thursday night teams......
 
To retain - M Jones v J Pittard?

Jones - ave 66 (played 5), increased ~$140k, worth $300-350k (IMO) + net $140k if traded to 115k rookie

Pittard - ave 76 (4), increased ~$107k, worth $350-400k (IMO) + net $120k if traded to 115k rookie

Was thinking M Jones >> Laird/ Docherty (Goodes to Mid bench)??

Pittard & Gibbs on Def bench

Still waiting on Thursday night teams......
Pittard is most likely to miss another match atfter this one doubt they would risk him hes had injury worries before.
 
Pity about pittard so hes got to go had injury worries before also have 3 port backs so hes time is up trade out for who?

Laird V's Wright (saint)V's V's Dochery who i think might be in and out fighting for a spot with Yeo.Laird has kinda unknown role played well after been subbed in kinda played browns role because he got knocked out if brown plays wheres laird fit in??
 
Pity about pittard so hes got to go had injury worries before also have 3 port backs so hes time is up trade out for who?

Laird V's Wright (saint)V's V's Dochery who i think might be in and out fighting for a spot with Yeo.Laird has kinda unknown role played well after been subbed in kinda played browns role because he got knocked out if brown plays wheres laird fit in??

Wright has the best JS out of those 3. Don't think any of them will be good scorers though. Bench fodder.
 
Wright has the best JS out of those 3. Don't think any of them will be good scorers though. Bench fodder.
Yeah thats the downside,trade out a player with av of 75 ish plus for a player likely to 50's but there not much else only other ones i can think of are ellis and Vlastin are more pricey both should score more but both could be subs with morris comming back.
 
Yeah thats the downside,trade out a player with av of 75 ish plus for a player likely to 50's but there not much else only other ones i can think of are ellis and Vlastin are more pricey both should score more but both could be subs with morris comming back.

Try and upgrade Pittard if you can.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Try and upgrade Pittard if you can.
Dont think i can unless i downgrade a pemo ruffhead and danger the worst ones.Quiet funny really if i had of (key word "had") pulled the trigger on the viney> mayes trade i could of gone bilcaves> gawn and pittard Hshaw.So might just do the double downgrade up grade viney to fallen cheapish premo murphy/swallow.
 
Dont think i can unless i downgrade a pemo ruffhead and danger the worst ones.Quiet funny really if i had of (key word "had") pulled the trigger on the viney> mayes trade i could of gone bilcaves> gawn and pittard Hshaw.So might just do the double downgrade up grade viney to fallen cheapish premo murphy/swallow.

**** your posts are hard to read! :p
 
I think Shaw you're paying unders (because he will knock out a few 120s and get back up to $540K or so) whereas Dixon you might be paying marginal overs (because his average might flatten out from here on in).

The attraction of Shaw is that you know his role, you know he can score, you know he's solid. Negative is durability.

The attraction of Dixon is that he's sharing ruck duties with Smith while playing as the go-to tall forward for the likes of Ablett, Swallow and O'Meara. He loves the contested stuff and is having his breakout season. And he has a higher ceiling than Shaw. And he's a P.O.D. Negative is he's unproven beyond more than five games.

I'm thinking Dixon if only for the rollercoaster ride.
 
I think Shaw you're paying unders (because he will knock out a few 120s and get back up to $540K or so) whereas Dixon you might be paying marginal overs (because his average might flatten out from here on in).

The attraction of Shaw is that you know his role, you know he can score, you know he's solid. Negative is durability.

The attraction of Dixon is that he's sharing ruck duties with Smith while playing as the go-to tall forward for the likes of Ablett, Swallow and O'Meara. He loves the contested stuff and is having his breakout season. And he has a higher ceiling than Shaw. And he's a P.O.D. Negative is he's unproven beyond more than five games.

I'm thinking Dixon if only for the rollercoaster ride.

I like your thinking.

They're both probably gonna be rollercoasters - but Dixon is a new and exciting one whereas I've ridden the Shaw one a few times before, sometimes with disastrous consequences...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top