Position 2017 Midfielders

[King_Steele]

Bont has a broken toe and hasn't done much of the pre season at all. Similar to last year it may take him a while to get going during the year because of a lack of pre season.

586k is a bargain

 

[toxic]

What are peoples expectations of the Bont this year. Seems to be getting lots of love. I'm seeing him as a tier below Rocky, Fyfe, JPK etc and likely to average around 105-110. Got a lot of big scores last year thanks to his heroic acts in the last few minutes of close games which isn't really sustainable in the long term. I feel he's still a year or maybe 2 off being a Super Premo.

Thoughts?

I dont think he'll ever be super premo, agree on the 105-110 range

 

[Super Hans]

I don't think Bontempelli having a broken toe is true seeing as there is vision of him on the dogs website training...

 

[Super Hans]

From 2013-2016

Patrick Dangerfield: 85 games @ 116 average
Scott Pendleburry: 87 games @ 121 average
Tom Rockliff: 72 games @ 113 average
Nat Fyfe: 60 games @ 116

Dangerfield = not a lock. Only thing he has on Rocky/Fyfe is durability, which is admittedly a pretty big thing. Is that worth 100k+ though? I don't think so.

 

[Super Hans]

Cotchin in that same period played 83 games at 103 average. Has no relevancy to the discussion, just wanted to point out he's been an overrated little bitch.

 

[King_Steele]

Cotchin in that same period played 83 games at 103 average. Has no relevancy to the discussion, just wanted to point out he's been an overrated little bitch.

That's Mr Brownlow Medallist to you

 

[DraftPunk]

From 2013-2016

Patrick Dangerfield: 85 games @ 116 average
Scott Pendleburry: 87 games @ 121 average
Tom Rockliff: 72 games @ 113 average
Nat Fyfe: 60 games @ 116

Dangerfield = not a lock. Only thing he has on Rocky/Fyfe is durability, which is admittedly a pretty big thing. Is that worth 100k+ though? I don't think so.

Danger is in his prime. The next few years will be his best footy.
He is worth the extra 100k and will go close to 130avg again IMO. Lock.

 

[toxic]

Danger is in his prime. The next few years will be his best footy.
He is worth the extra 100k and will go close to 130avg again IMO. Lock.

LIKE * 100

 

[Super Hans]

Danger is in his prime. The next few years will be his best footy.
He is worth the extra 100k and will go close to 130avg again IMO. Lock.

Fyfe is 25, Rocky 26, Pendles 28. They're all in their prime.

 

[DraftPunk]

Fyfe is 25, Rocky 26, Pendles 28. They're all in their prime.

Pendles is 29 in Jan, closer to 30 than his prime, as suggested by his average dropping below 120 the last two years.

Rocky/Fyfe are 100k cheaper for a reason - they get injured every year.

 

[Seymour Skinner]

From 2013-2016

Patrick Dangerfield: 85 games @ 116 average
Scott Pendleburry: 87 games @ 121 average
Tom Rockliff: 72 games @ 113 average
Nat Fyfe: 60 games @ 116

Dangerfield = not a lock. Only thing he has on Rocky/Fyfe is durability, which is admittedly a pretty big thing. Is that worth 100k+ though? I don't think so.

How much value do you put on a trade? Chances are Fyfe or Rocky will cost you at least one throughout the year.
It's nice to pick and chose what data you want to use also. If you make the averages over 5 years instead of 4 Fyfe's and Rocky's output become even worse, and Danger's and Pendle's get better.
Danger has scored more total points every year, has a higher ceiling too. He's a lock.

 

[Super Hans]

How much value do you put on a trade? Chances are Fyfe or Rocky will cost you at least one throughout the year.
It's nice to pick and chose what data you want to use also. If you make the averages over 5 years instead of 4 Fyfe's and Rocky's output become even worse, and Danger's and Pendle's get better.
Danger has scored more total points every year, has a higher ceiling too. He's a lock.

I'd love to know how I'm picking and choosing data to presumably favour everyone but Dangerfield. Four years is a long enough time in footy, or I can go back 10 years and say Ablett is a lock over Dangerfield if you like?

 

[croweyrocks]

I wouldn't mind seeing Dangerfield as a POD....keep the doubt coming!

 

[Seymour Skinner]

I'd love to know how I'm picking and choosing data to presumably favour everyone but Dangerfield. Four years is a long enough time in footy, or I can go back 10 years and say Ablett is a lock over Dangerfield if you like?

Why not 3, or 5 or 2 or yes even 10.
Danger is a better scorer no matter how you try to spin it.

 

[Sydney Kicker]

How much value do you put on a trade? Chances are Fyfe or Rocky will cost you at least one throughout the year.
It's nice to pick and chose what data you want to use also. If you make the averages over 5 years instead of 4 Fyfe's and Rocky's output become even worse, and Danger's and Pendle's get better.
Danger has scored more total points every year, has a higher ceiling too. He's a lock.

There are very few absolute starting locks in this game since Ablett. Accounting for price/value, in some ways Pendles is a more of a lock than Danger. It really comes down to other Captain choices and how they perform too.

If you start with Danger, what do you think he needs to average before the Port/GC bye for it to be the correct decision?

Without doing any stats I'd say you would want an average of 120+ to feel content given his price, perhaps even more.

What adds to the challenge and (conversely) makes him good as a captain choice is the volatility of his scoring.

His first 7 rounds in 2015 ... 123,109,74,101,119,90,116 (in a season where he averaged 120). Yes I am picking and choosing data but imagine he started like that this year.

Risk if you take him, risk if you don't.

 

[1989]

View attachment 319839

Out Double Chin

Double Points in

Lockliff

At least a 3 out of 10.

 

[DraftPunk]

There are very few absolute starting locks in this game since Ablett. Accounting for price/value, in some ways Pendles is a more of a lock than Danger. It really comes down to other Captain choices and how they perform too.

If you start with Danger, what do you think he needs to average before the Port/GC bye for it to be the correct decision?

Without doing any stats I'd say you would want an average of 120+ to feel content given his price, perhaps even more.

What adds to the challenge and (conversely) makes him good as a captain choice is the volatility of his scoring.

His first 7 rounds in 2015 ... 123,109,74,101,119,90,116 (in a season where he averaged 120). Yes I am picking and choosing data but imagine he started like that this year.

Risk if you take him, risk if you don't.

Prior to 2016, Danger had always started each season slowly. The argument from 2013-2015 was he was an upgrade target because his early season form was always average.

This year his first 8 were: 162, 77, 154, 99, 137, 132, 119, 126 for an average of 125.75

Fact is he took his game to a new level in 2016. You can look back over 4, 5, 7 years if you want, but 2016 is clearly the most relevant and all the evidence I need to lock him away at M1.

 

[Sydney Kicker]

Prior to 2016, Danger had always started each season slowly. The argument from 2013-2015 was he was an upgrade target because his early season form was always average.

This year his first 8 were: 162, 77, 154, 99, 137, 132, 119, 126 for an average of 125.75

Fact is he took his game to a new level in 2016. You can look back over 4, 5, 7 years if you want, but 2016 is clearly the most relevant and all the evidence I need to lock him away at M1.

SC is littered with players who "take their game to a new level" only to revert to type the next year. Todd Goldstein 2015 and 2016 the latest in a long line.

You are implying that because he burst out of the blocks in 2016 (new club, point to prove), in contrast to the 3 years previous where he started slowly, he has now going to kill it from round 1. To me the evidence you quote says he's far more likely to start slow in 2017 and come home with a bang.

Don't get me wrong. I'm strongly considering Danger to start in my team in 2017 but your evidence is more likely to put me off than encourage me!

 

[Moustachio]

Re: Danger, figure out who you are going to VC and C, how often, and how likely you are to accept their VC scores.

In 2016 Danger had a 120+ score (i would accept VC) 68% of games, and av of those scores was 148. That is a lot of extra VC points. Gawn averaged same in his 120+ scores, but only got those in 45% of games.

For C scores you will need to know how often you would reject VC when the VC is not Danger... So I'll let you do the maths, but for mine he is massive value.

TL;DR perma C = 130 av x 2 = 260 av, so worth north of $1.3 mil =p

 

[Sydney Kicker]

Re: Danger, figure out who you are going to VC and C, how often, and how likely you are to accept their VC scores.

In 2016 Danger had a 120+ score (i would accept VC) 68% of games, and av of those scores was 148. That is a lot of extra VC points. Gawn averaged same in his 120+ scores, but only got those in 45% of games.

For C scores you will need to know how often you would reject VC when the VC is not Danger... So I'll let you do the maths, but for mine he is massive value.

TL;DR perma C = 130 av x 2 = 260 av, so worth north of $1.3 mil =p

It is so hard to start without him even if he's potentially overvalued because of his frequency of big scores. If he rips out a few 150+ games early on it's good night irene if you don't have him. Conversely the normal slow Danger start at his price is also a season killer if you paid top dollar.

Mind you, you are still basing your analysis of captain worthy scores on last years season which was an outlier.

In any case risky either way. High averaging, high variance players make of break a season even more than midpricers for mine.

 

[Moustachio]

It is so hard to start without him even if he's potentially overvalued because of his frequency of big scores. If he rips out a few 150+ games early on it's good night irene if you don't have him. Conversely the normal slow Danger start at his price is also a season killer if you paid top dollar.

Mind you, you are still basing your analysis of captain worthy scores on last years season which was an outlier.

In any case risky either way. High averaging, high variance players make of break a season even more than midpricers for mine.

Its true that he could have a bad year, but I think not so risky to start him anyway as everyone will be in the same boat. Especially those who think they have a serious chance at the cash, I think selection % will be HIGH.

 

[DraftPunk]

It is so hard to start without him even if he's potentially overvalued because of his frequency of big scores. If he rips out a few 150+ games early on it's good night irene if you don't have him. Conversely the normal slow Danger start at his price is also a season killer if you paid top dollar.

Mind you, you are still basing your analysis of captain worthy scores on last years season which was an outlier.

In any case risky either way. High averaging, high variance players make of break a season even more than midpricers for mine.

Just out of interest, did you pay $695k for Goldstein last season?

 

[pulpdriver]

Mentally he's still a knob though.

Touché. Hopefully for the Lions and SCers he's able to slim down his ego and obnoxiousness too.

 

[Sydney Kicker]

Just out of interest, did you pay $695k for Goldstein last season?

no. I argued strongly against taking Goldy. I backed myself to find better value Captains in midfield (I chose Fyfe ahead of Danger which was my season killer - I was in the "Danger will be a slow starter" camp). I also had Leuenburger so it's not like my ruck strategy was any good either!!!

I try and look for value everywhere, the exception generally being the Superpremo mids. You need the highest scorers as C and VC from round 1. You can see why I'm torn on Danger. I'm sure one or maybe even two of Pendles, Rocky, Ablett, JPK and Fyfe will be his equal or even outscore him early on. Which ones however I have no idea!

 

[Super Hans]

I reckon I've found the bloke who is gonna benefit from Mitchell and Lewis leaving the Hawks.. he's averaged 96 and 88 in past seasons and comes in priced at an average of 70. Going to be a lot of ball for Liam Shields to win this year. 105+.