Midfield structure - your theories

[LemmingMaster]

How did you go last year?

Shhhh he is still a little touchy about that subject.

 

[SELFCONFESDAFLNERD]

<snip> You are jumpin on and off players way too quickly your not the only one though. <snip>

This is very common indeed, i think i am the only one who hardly takes NAB into account when making my selections. In fact I haven't even changed my rookies since NAB cup has started.

For my midfield; i have a very similar structure to Virgil & Ausyid. I have two 'premiums' though and one keeper with 3 mid priced players.

 

[Colin D'Cops]

I have still kept my original mid plan...

400+
400+
400+
400+
400+
Haselby

Rich
Beams/Robinson

I can see merit in that. If you can get 22 starters each week, you'll be laughing. The points are there to be won in the midfield, no doubt about it.

 

[kingyubbo]

I can see merit in that. If you can get 22 starters each week, you'll be laughing. The points are there to be won in the midfield, no doubt about it.

Agreed. Essentially means 600 points (inc. captain) every week without counting the other 17 players on the pitch.

 

[Dunn - Well Done]

But you could get 700 points each week including captain in your forwards as well. At the end of the day you have to select players where the value lies. If that means 5 x 400k players in the mids than so be it. But with that you are only bringing in 1 other player. So you would need to start some really top end mids.

 

[Colin D'Cops]

So you would need to start some really top end mids.

I think that's what he has in mind. Could sky-rocket him up the rankings, or alternatively sky-rocket him down the rankings because of a few donuts. High risk/high reward. That strategy can be very rewarding.

 

[Cartman121]

But you could get 700 points each week including captain in your forwards as well. At the end of the day you have to select players where the value lies. If that means 5 x 400k players in the mids than so be it. But with that you are only bringing in 1 other player. So you would need to start some really top end mids.

Also means you miss out on the value picks around the $200-$300k mark - Mackay, Swallow, Selwood, Haselby, Grigg, Tuck, Reilly, Masten.

 

[Colin D'Cops]

Also means you miss out on the value picks around the $200-$300k mark - Mackay, Swallow, Selwood, Haselby, Grigg, Tuck, Reilly, Masten.

Meh. Most / if not all players mentioned will be flops anyway IMO.

 

[Pie Legend]

Meh. Most / if not all players mentioned will be flops anyway IMO.

Can I borrow your crystal ball?

 

[Cartman121]

Meh. Most / if not all players mentioned will be flops anyway IMO.

I personally see alot of value there. Mackay, Selwood, Haselby, Grigg, Tuck and Reilly would be chosen purely to generate cash. If fit and playing they will certainly be effective at this. Masten is in a very awkward price range. A little too expensive to be a really effective cash cow, yet (probably) not good enough to become a keeper (90+). Really undecided as to what i'm doing with him.

My current midfield structure is;
Bartel - premium
Gibbs - keeper (will make the move to premium)
Mid-ranger - Cash Cow
Mid-ranger - " "
Mid-ranger - " "
Rookie - " "

Happy to name my first two players, they aren't exactly smokies . The idea is to upgrade my cash cows up to players averaging 90+. Ideally into Corey, Ablett, Swan and Thompson, but quite unrealistic so i'll aim for 90+. Initially loved the concept of not starting any rookies. It provided fantastic cover for short-term injuries and you can feel alot more comfortable starting a few riskier selections on the field knowing that there is solid support. But a couple of rookies have caught my attention lately and I feel i'm missing out on too much value if I only start with two.

 

[Colin D'Cops]

Can I borrow your crystal ball?

Yeah, just hang on a tick.

-------

If all goes to plan Cartman, that strategy also has some merit. But can't personally see it being overly successful.

 

[Cartman121]

Yeah, just hang on a tick.

-------

If all goes to plan Cartman, that strategy also has some merit. But can't personally see it being overly successful.

TBH i'm not overly confident in it either. But it has allowed me to basically perfect the rest of my team, well perfect it to my likening that is. I am confident in every other player selected bar one who i'm 50/50 on; other than that I love my squad. The midfield is by far my cheapest section ($ per player), hence it's also my most 'iffy' section.

My very basic line of thinking is that there is a plethora of premium midfield options; Ablett, Bartel, Corey, Swan, Kornes, Thompson, Green, Murphy, Bruce, Hodge, Cross, Dalziell, Salopek, Hayes, Stanton, Boyd, Mitchell, Selwood, Tuck, Priddis, Black etc. who are all capable of averaging 90+. Clearly the midfield has the greatest pool of players who can average 90+. With so many premium priced players it is more likely you will find a number of players who have had a bad run of form and drop in price in the midfield than in other positions. Nothing concrete to back this up (besides the MN), but it's just common sense.

 

[Mordecai]

TBH i'm not overly confident in it either. But it has allowed me to basically perfect the rest of my team, well perfect it to my likening that is. I am confident in every other player selected bar one who i'm 50/50 on; other than that I love my squad. The midfield is by far my cheapest section ($ per player), hence it's also my most 'iffy' section.

My very basic line of thinking is that there is a plethora of premium midfield options; Ablett, Bartel, Corey, Swan, Kornes, Thompson, Green, Murphy, Bruce, Hodge, Cross, Dalziell, Salopek, Hayes, Stanton, Boyd, Mitchell, Selwood, Tuck, Priddis, Black etc. who are all capable of averaging 90+. Clearly the midfield has the greatest pool of players who can average 90+. With so many premium priced players it is more likely you will find a number of players who have had a bad run of form and drop in price in the midfield than in other positions. Nothing concrete to back this up (besides the MN), but it's just common sense.

Thought the same thing, and tried the same thing, last year.

The problem with it is you don't know which midfielders will arrest their run of bad form. Knife catching is a difficult game.

I also think midfielders put in bad runs of form like this - 55, 100, 83, 67, 119. It isn't very often they have a run 3 weeks in a row where they don't find the ball.

For forwards and defenders though I think they do have off months with their numbers more dependant on how their team is going (nothing to back up this assumption).

Disclosure -
Premium (Sustain their average and could be captain - no trade unless injured)
Premium (Sustain their average and could be captain - no trade unless injured)
Premium (Sustain their average and could be captain - no trade unless injured)
Midrange (Beat their average by 10 - 1 trade to a keeper/premium)
Midrange (Beat their average by 10 - 1 trade to a keeper/premium)
Rookie (Beat their average by 10 - 2 trades to a keeper/premium)

 

[thebaxters]

I think it's right to say the mids have a pool who can avg 90+, but that's the same as saying the backs have a pool who can avg 70+... You'd rather mids that can avg 105/110 and backs that can avg 90.

Interested to see your final mids dbt - really isn't the worst idea this year. Thumbs up for sticking with it.

 

[Colin Grigson]

I think you need to be a bit flexible with your approach here. I'm not sure that its simply a matter of saying, Ok, pick 1 of these 2 approaches: 1. 2 400k, 2 300k, 1 200k, 1 100k or 2. 1 400k, 3 300k, 2 100k, etc...

Personally, I'm wary that a lot of people like having 2 or 3 premium mids. because they feel having these can be a decisive factor later on. I mean if you had Ablett, Bartel & Corey in from R1 last season that's going to be a huge advantage because your getting constant big points and not having to upgrade at a later stage. So, personally I want 1 premium mid in the starting lineup to counteract this to some extent, who will be guaranteed to rack in big points without decreasing in value. I look for a player like Dane Swan who fits all the necessary criteria here. He's consistent in his scores (avg. around 102 3 seasons in a row), he's durable (i.e. doesn't miss many games), and he's in the peak of his career. Perfect candidate.

However, I think that what seperates the good dt players from the rest is an ability to identify those 'mid-range' types who will move into 'premium' territory by the seasons end. Theoretically, you don't even need 1 premium mid. so long as you can identify 6 low-mid range players who will enter premium territory (or close to). not an easy task i know.

So really, i'm closely looking at the 200k-350k lot as a group, and trying to figure out which one's are most likely to end up in the 380+ category. I tend not to rate whether a player has dropped dramatically in price due to an injury in the previous season (this can be something of a trap imo). Im more interested in where that player is at in their career (whether they have peaked or not) & what their role in the team is, and their consistency/durability over the past 5 seasons, which combined give a reasonably good indication of what kind of output you can expect.

I generally don't like including a rookie in the starting lineup, because if he gets injured in round 1 or 2, and you have no money to spend, it can leave you in a bit of a pickle.

I'm more likely to get premium players in the other areas, as there are fewer premium options, and fewer likely to be elevated into premium territory.

I like to look for the mid range types in the midfield, with maybe one premium player & the two best rookies for the bench. Though there are other ways to skin a cat, I generally try to find players who will add 50k-100k in value in every position to give me bigger spending power later on, regardless of how good the premiums are.

 

[Walesy]

There's two pertinent points involved here.

Firstly, and this was said on page one- Rarely can you take any strategy with more than a grain of salt, of you're only talking about a quarter of your players.

Secondly, Begin with the end in mind. If you feel that your six 400k players will give you a strong team come week 22 - Then go for it.

 

[pieman123]

my mids atm are swan, kornes, s.tuck, gibbs,heselby,rich you guys think i should downgrade one of the premiums and upgrade my forward line of deledio,pavlich,goodwin,holihan,higgins,skipworth,ziebell?

 

[Decipher]

I would.
My opinion would be to drop Tuck down to a Masten/Tuck/Griggs sort of player.

Then upgrade a Higgins or Skipworth to a keeper.
keep the keeper / risks spread out abit.

 

[Pumbi]

I dont know about anyone else but i see little, little value in midfield rookies. Sure there might be a few little gems im missing but what are they gonna do at best? I can't see any averaging more than around 55-60 for the first 6-8 weeks. I have gone with a strategy of:

Premium
Premium
Keeper
Midrange
Midrange
Midrange

I have faith that my midrange midfielders will increase sufficiently in price to become a simple upgrade for a falling premium.

The sooner my midfield is filled with premiums the better.

 

[_RT_]

After playing around with my midfield for the last 5-6 days, I've finally settled on the following:
Premium
Premium
Potential Premium
Potential Premium
Potential Premium
Rookie

While I realise there is a heap of value in the mid range catergory, for me there are just too many questions on these players and less questions about those I chosen in the backs/forwards who are of similar price. Despite loading up on my midfield, I have still managed to get what I believe to be 13 premium/keepers in my starting line up. The one possible negative is I will have to start 3 rookies: 1 back, 1 mid & 1 forward. Which I'm not too unhappy about as I feel that the 6 rookies I have as emergency options in these 3 areas will provide me with adequate cover in case the starter doesn't play.

 

[ANGEL DARK]

After playing around with my midfield for the last 5-6 days, I've finally settled on the following:
Premium
Premium
Potential Premium
Potential Premium
Potential Premium
Rookie

While I realise there is a heap of value in the mid range catergory, for me there are just too many questions on these players and less questions about those I chosen in the backs/forwards who are of similar price. Despite loading up on my midfield, I have still managed to get what I believe to be 13 premium/keepers in my starting line up. The one possible negative is I will have to start 3 rookies: 1 back, 1 mid & 1 forward. Which I'm not too unhappy about as I feel that the 6 rookies I have as emergency options in these 3 areas will provide me with adequate cover in case the starter doesn't play.

I think most of the good teams will start with 2 or 3 rookies and theres nothing wrong with that.The only way you can afford 13 premiums/keepers is if you pick some rookies in starting positions anyway.I dont see much value in the mid ranges of 200k-300k so your better off spending the money at the top end to get as many premiums as you can and offset that by starting some rookies in your back.mids and forwards.
Ive got 13 premium /keepers in my team which i am happy about but ive even thought about starting a rookie in the ruck just so as i can perhaps snag myself a 14th keeper

 

[Lord_Travis]

Premium - Ablett
Premium - Swan
Potential Premium - Gibbs
Mid range - Masten
Rookie - Rich/Beams
Rookie - Anthony/Robinson

Leaves lots of cash to sure up the other positions on the ground, which IMO are tougher to get right. The midfield is full of decent picks from all price ranges, so I'm prepared to take a risk here.

 

[Virgil]

I dont know about anyone else but i see little, little value in midfield rookies. Sure there might be a few little gems im missing but what are they gonna do at best? I can't see any averaging more than around 55-60 for the first 6-8 weeks.

Keep in mind though that the rookies are priced at low averages anyway. People have posted that Daniel Rich is priced at an average of 28 points per week, so if he averages 55-60 for those first 6-8 weeks he is underpriced by 100k.

I think most of the good teams will start with 2 or 3 rookies and theres nothing wrong with that.

I disagree on both counts. The problem with starting two or three rookies is that you are then trying to find 10-11 rookies who'll get a game. Personally I think it is hard enough finding 8. The best teams will start no more than 2 rookies, IMO.

The only way you can afford 13 premiums/keepers is if you pick some rookies in starting positions anyway.

Depends on the quality of the keepers, obviously. If you load up on Bartel/Hodge/Pavlich then you will definitely struggle to fit in more than 12 without starting a rookie or a lot of lower-end priced players. If your keepers are lower end (Mundy, Gibbs, Chapman, etc) then you can probably fit in an extra 1-2.

 

[Tippaz]

my current mids:
Kornes - premium
Boyd - keeper
Gibbs - keeper
Hasleby - middle-tier
Coughlan - middle-tier
Rich - rookie
Beams - rookie
Robinson - rookie

by the end of the year:
Bartel
Corey
Swan
Kornes
Boyd
Gibbs

well, that's the plan.

 

[bulldogsman]

No Ablett