Position 2015 SuperCoach midfielders

[toxic]

Murph was having a really good pre-season until the calf injury. Realistically, he's only going to have missed 2-3 weeks out of the entire (and very long) pre-season. Probably would have only played 1 or 1 and a 1/2 NAB praccie games even if he didn't get injured. I don't believe this short term injury will affect him much at all, if at all come Rd1. Look at Gibbs for instance, he only played his first praccie in NAB2 and bugger all minutes.

FWIW i still think SuperEliteGiftedSuperlativeAmazingWonderfulPremo Murphy is an option.

I was referring to the fact that the poster had eliminated Murph due to injury and no game time versus having Jobe as a viable option

 

[Krujan]

FWIW i still think SuperEliteGiftedSuperlativeAmazingWonderfulPremo Murphy is an option.

I was referring to the fact that the poster had eliminated Murph due to injury and no game time versus having Jobe as a viable option

I don't see how Jobe is a viable option since the chances of him playing anywhere near 22 games is remote at best.

 

[toxic]

I don't see how Jobe is a viable option since the chances of him playing anywhere near 22 games is remote at best.

Agreed completely
if march 31st went his way then I'd be very interested

 

[TheOz]

CD have a massive hard on for Fyfe, needs to be considered despite the negatives.

 

[Krujan]

CD have a massive hard on for Fyfe, needs to be considered despite the negatives.

Contested possies, clearences AND contested marks = SC gold

 

[karaoke]

Fyfe is to the midfield (for SC players), what Shaw is to the defenders.

You know you'll get elite scoring in their position, but what the **** will they miss games for this year?

Could even put SJ in that category too.

 

[SureBuddy]

Fyfe is to the midfield (for SC players), what Shaw is to the defenders.

You know you'll get elite scoring in their position, but what the **** will they miss games for this year?

Could even put SJ in that category too.

Think with the new MRP we don't have too much to worry with Fyfe or SJ for that matter. It is Fyfe's shoulders and hammies that are the slight worry and SJ's foot.

 

[cdcanman]

Gaz averaged 132 as a small forward in 2010, what's your point?

Did he average 132 pro rata the percentage of minutes he spent forward in 2010, or are you suggesting he spent the whole year forward?

 

[Krujan]

Did he average 132 pro rata the percentage of minutes he spent forward in 2010, or are you suggesting he spent the whole year forward?

Do you really think GAJ will spend ALL his minutes up forward for GC?

 

[KardiniaPark]

I think Sloane is fully priced, better options around his price-range.

Fyfe i've outlined why i think he's a bad pick. He's got red flags everywhere. Will cop a hard tag, injury prone, suspension prone, never played a full season, dodgy shoulder. Add to this that i think he's fully priced.

Fyfe is clearly the second best player in the game. It seems a bit silly to miss out on 125+ a week because he might hurt his shoulder, maybe. If he does you trade him.

 

[karaoke]

Think with the new MRP we don't have too much to worry with Fyfe or SJ for that matter. It is Fyfe's shoulders and hammies that are the slight worry and SJ's foot.

Yes, I wasn't actually referring to 'miss' games due to being reported, just from an overall sense.

 

[karaoke]

Fyfe is clearly the second best player in the game. It seems a bit silly to miss out on 125+ a week because he might hurt his shoulder, maybe. If he does you trade him.

So, are you choosing Shaw in your backline this year?

 

[KardiniaPark]

So, are you choosing Shaw in your backline this year?

Yes.

 

[KardiniaPark]

Mumford too krk004

 

[karaoke]

Mumford too krk004

Starts with laughter, ends in..........

 

[Souup]

I understand the philosophy behind picking a player regardless of his red flags. I currently have Mumford in my team, so the idea of picking a player regardless of the huge risk is something I'm doing too.

However, the reason I'm willing to do it with Mumford and not Fyfe is because I don't like the ruck options this year. I believe taking the risk of Mumford is fully worth it (especially considering who he's facing in the ruck in the first 6 rounds) , and I completely understand the fact that he will almost certainly injure himself and I'll have to trade him out at some point, but I'm banking on him being able to string together enough games to get him to the bye rounds. If not, he's highly priced enough to be able to trade to any other ruckmen.

When I look at Fyfe as an option, the risk doesn't outweigh the reward for me, especially when I much prefer the other options around his price in the midfield. I don't see why I'd want to take a risk in a position where the premium options are great. I can't afford to take both him and Mumford (along with Shaw) into the season. A little bit of risk is always good, but I think you can push your luck too much.

A lot of teams I'm seeing around here generally have a starting backline with Shaw, 2-3 mid-pricers and a rookie, Fyfe in the midfield, and Naitanui in the rucks. Tom Mitchell used to be in every 2nd forward line too, but not so much anymore.

If this isn't a recipe for disaster I don't know what is. But, this is supercoach and anything can happen - if people have mulled over different options and like their structure and have confidence in the players they've chosen than I'm all for that.

 

[cdcanman]

Do you really think GAJ will spend ALL his minutes up forward for GC?

Of course I'm not, he's the best midfielder of all time, why would he spend all his time forward? But he didn't spend all his time forward in 2010 either as you have suggested, that was the point I was trying to make

 

[KardiniaPark]

Starts with laughter, ends in..........

$50,000

 

[KardiniaPark]

I understand the philosophy behind picking a player regardless of his red flags. I currently have Mumford in my team, so the idea of picking a player regardless of the huge risk is something I'm doing too.

However, the reason I'm willing to do it with Mumford and not Fyfe is because I don't like the ruck options this year. I believe taking the risk of Mumford is fully worth it (especially considering who he's facing in the ruck in the first 6 rounds) , and I completely understand the fact that he will almost certainly injure himself and I'll have to trade him out at some point, but I'm banking on him being able to string together enough games to get him to the bye rounds. If not, he's highly priced enough to be able to trade to any other ruckmen.

When I look at Fyfe as an option, the risk doesn't outweigh the reward for me, especially when I much prefer the other options around his price in the midfield. I don't see why I'd want to take a risk in a position where the premium options are great. I can't afford to take both him and Mumford (along with Shaw) into the season. A little bit of risk is always good, but I think you can push your luck too much.

A lot of teams I'm seeing around here generally have a starting backline with Shaw, 2-3 mid-pricers and a rookie, Fyfe in the midfield, and Naitanui in the rucks. Tom Mitchell used to be in every 2nd forward line too, but not so much anymore.

If this isn't a recipe for disaster I don't know what is. But, this is supercoach and anything can happen - if people have mulled over different options and like their structure and have confidence in the players they've chosen than I'm all for that.

I don't see the point of picking a 'safe' Goldstein knowing that when both are fully fit Mumford could have upwards of 15ppg on him. I've played it safe for years and it's got me no where. I'd much rather go into the season excited about the team I have and every single player in it. Injuries are going to occur, it's not netball no matter how much Marc Murphy wants it to be Gingy Risks like Charlie Dixon are stupid going off past history, I don't believe ones like Shaw/Mumford/Fyfe are.

 

[Super Hans]

I don't see the point of picking a 'safe' Goldstein knowing that when both are fully fit Mumford could have upwards of 15ppg on him. I've played it safe for years and it's got me no where. I'd much rather go into the season excited about the team I have and every single player in it. Injuries are going to occur, it's not netball no matter how much Marc Murphy wants it to be Gingy Risks like Charlie Dixon are stupid going off past history, I don't believe ones like Shaw/Mumford/Fyfe are.

It depends on the rest of your team too. If you have Shaw down back, Stevie J in the guts and Rioli up from you probably wouldn't want Mummy. Taking risks is fine, but you don't wanna go overboard.

 

[KardiniaPark]

It depends on the rest of your team too. If you have Shaw down back, Stevie J in the guts and Rioli up from you probably wouldn't want Mummy. Taking risks is fine, but you don't wanna go overboard.

I learnt my Rioli lesson last year SJ is an awful pick. I you were to pick him you would want to see a full pre season and be absolutely flying going into the season and he would have to be more around the $500 mark.

 

[cdcanman]

I learnt my Rioli lesson last year SJ is an awful pick. I you were to pick him you would want to see a full pre season and be absolutely flying going into the season and he would have to be more around the $500 mark.

$500!!!! How quickly can I get him in?

If he shows some improved form heading into mid season, he could be a juicy priced upgrade target post the bye rounds

 

[KardiniaPark]

$500!!!! How quickly can I get him in?

If he shows some improved form heading into mid season, he could be a juicy priced upgrade target post the bye rounds

For sure, he's a good mid season pick up type because he can throw in a couple of stinkers and drop a bundle of cash. With any luck by time you get him in he would have already belted someone and done his time.

 

[Souup]

I don't see the point of picking a 'safe' Goldstein knowing that when both are fully fit Mumford could have upwards of 15ppg on him. I've played it safe for years and it's got me no where. I'd much rather go into the season excited about the team I have and every single player in it. Injuries are going to occur, it's not netball no matter how much Marc Murphy wants it to be Gingy Risks like Charlie Dixon are stupid going off past history, I don't believe ones like Shaw/Mumford/Fyfe are.

Summed up perfectly by the post below.

It depends on the rest of your team too. If you have Shaw down back, Stevie J in the guts and Rioli up from you probably wouldn't want Mummy. Taking risks is fine, but you don't wanna go overboard.

Risk is fine. Filling a team with a bunch of players who have never played a full season, prove themselves to be injury prone and there are safer players around their option is just silly. Playing it safe may have got you nowhere slowly, but stacking a team with a bunch of ticking timebombs is going to get you nowhere fast. There needs to be balance

 

[TheOz]

I understand the philosophy behind picking a player regardless of his red flags. I currently have Mumford in my team, so the idea of picking a player regardless of the huge risk is something I'm doing too.

However, the reason I'm willing to do it with Mumford and not Fyfe is because I don't like the ruck options this year. I believe taking the risk of Mumford is fully worth it (especially considering who he's facing in the ruck in the first 6 rounds) , and I completely understand the fact that he will almost certainly injure himself and I'll have to trade him out at some point, but I'm banking on him being able to string together enough games to get him to the bye rounds. If not, he's highly priced enough to be able to trade to any other ruckmen.

When I look at Fyfe as an option, the risk doesn't outweigh the reward for me, especially when I much prefer the other options around his price in the midfield. I don't see why I'd want to take a risk in a position where the premium options are great. I can't afford to take both him and Mumford (along with Shaw) into the season. A little bit of risk is always good, but I think you can push your luck too much.

A lot of teams I'm seeing around here generally have a starting backline with Shaw, 2-3 mid-pricers and a rookie, Fyfe in the midfield, and Naitanui in the rucks. Tom Mitchell used to be in every 2nd forward line too, but not so much anymore.

If this isn't a recipe for disaster I don't know what is. But, this is supercoach and anything can happen - if people have mulled over different options and like their structure and have confidence in the players they've chosen than I'm all for that.

Mumford's risk outweighs Fyfe's imo as you at least have bench coverage in the midfield if he's out for a game or two, if Mumford is out, you're starting at a donut.