Will the good d'ters pick Drummond and Chapman?

[FredNerk69]

Dummond has changed his running style?
Maybe they should just geld him like a horse?

Sorry for quoting facts maybe this will convince you and maybe in the future you can do some research before taking a pot shot at somebody else.


http://www.afl.com.au/tabid/208/default.aspx?newsid=72513

 

[Faruge]

Sorry for quoting facts maybe this will convince you and maybe in the future you can do some research before taking a pot shot at somebody else.


http://www.afl.com.au/tabid/208/default.aspx?newsid=72513

No I'm very sorry you have taken me the wrong way, that wasn't meant to be a potshot.
Thanks for that link it makes for some interesting reading.
Sorry once again.

 

[FredNerk69]

No Worries. Still a risk but maybe not as big as we all think.

 

[the egg]

They are potentially 2 of the biggest scorers in the game if fit. Apparantly they are both flying, so that's good enough for me. If they get injured just use trades, it's what there for.

If the risk pays off, you'll be cheering...if not just trade them out. No big deal?

 

[DaVe86]

They are potentially 2 of the biggest scorers in the game if fit. Apparantly they are both flying, so that's good enough for me. If they get injured just use trades, it's what there for.

If the risk pays off, you'll be cheering...if not just trade them out. No big deal?

whether i get him or not i dont know...but you are 100% right

 

[Kid A]

this exactly the thinking process you should be using

my estimation of Drummond is (18games x 85ppg) + (4 x 45) from reserves.
that comes out 1710pts over 22rds = 77.73ave
good value for 304k, but i fear he is a waste of a trade. especially if he misses 4 games in a row.

It's not good value for 304k considering that you'd only be making around a 40k gain (ie someone starting with a 78 average would have a base price of around 346k). I'm sure I could be picking better than a 40k differential. My hope with Drummond is that he plays the first half of the season with no injury thereby meaning that if he goes down late I can either trade him up to someone who's dipping at the right time or I can try to survive through emergencies. At least that way I get both useful scores & a useful trade out of him which is worth it overall.

 

[Cruiser23]

As much as i love Chapman i just can't take the risk with his hamstrings, soft tissue injuries are hell. As for Drummond, no way, absolutely no way.

 

[kingyubbo]

With the number of good rookies going about, I see both as good risks. Chappy less so due to price and other forwards which are similarly priced but probably more durable and with more potential. I think risky DTers will pick Drummond, not neccesarily good ones.

 

[Strachuniee]

It's not good value for 304k considering that you'd only be making around a 40k gain (ie someone starting with a 78 average would have a base price of around 346k). I'm sure I could be picking better than a 40k differential. My hope with Drummond is that he plays the first half of the season with no injury thereby meaning that if he goes down late I can either trade him up to someone who's dipping at the right time or I can try to survive through emergencies. At least that way I get both useful scores & a useful trade out of him which is worth it overall.

That 78 average is including the scores obtained by the reserves so in the case quoted the price gain should be greater than 40k. I see big value and risks in players such as drummond, adcock, raines and malceski and am seriously considering all of them in my starting line-up

 

[Knight Ryders]

I dont think its such a bad idea having Hill as insurance as an 8th back to cover for Drummond as Hille only costs about 55k more than a rookie back that you would otherwise have if you didnt have Hill.If you put that 55k towards upgrading Drummond to a more durable back that leaves you open to not having any emergencies to use should 1 off your starting backs gets injured as there are no certainty rookies you can bank on starting games in the backline

Having Hill as a reserve back is a solid strategy, but to get him for the sole reason of covering Drummond is not. If you pick Drummond, you should pick him because you have the belief he is going to play enough to be an asset to your team.

 

[Brown Bottle]

I'm torn. I like Drummond. I've had him in my starting squad for the last two years. When he plays he's gold. Unfortunately he's never stayed on the park. I've re-cut my squad half a dozen times already and he's out at the moment, but he'll probably make it back in.

Hmmm.

Mind you, I'm shit at DT so my opinion is probably irrelevant.

 

[SkankDanker]

Having Hill as a reserve back is a solid strategy, but to get him for the sole reason of covering Drummond is not. If you pick Drummond, you should pick him because you have the belief he is going to play enough to be an asset to your team.

Not entirely sure I agree with that Knight Ryders - I agree you should pick him as an asset, but for me solid back-up is sound policy. I guess the point you are raising is that you could you get sound back-up anyway, but that shouldn't necessarily justify the selection of injury prone players. Interesting...see below...

With the number of good rookies going about, I see both as good risks. Chappy less so due to price and other forwards which are similarly priced but probably more durable and with more potential. I think risky DTers will pick Drummond, not neccesarily good ones.

What good rookies? Sorry to be blunt. Be careful believing too much of what you read, AFL is a tough game. Rookies this year are not necessarily stronger than last year - hopefully we end up with a class act in each position (Ibbo, Palmer/(Dalziell too late), Rioli) but I wouldn't be picking my team with that in mind.

By the time Drummond/Chapmen/anyone got injured (if he did) there is a strong chance your back-up may not be playing too.

I think I have successfully done contradicting posts which shows conclusively what a difficult & personal decision this is.

 

[LemmingMaster]

I think I have successfully done contradicting posts which shows conclusively what a difficult & personal decision this is.

You are seriously playing mind games with myself and many other posters.

I think it is a case of going with your gut feeling and taking the good with the bad.

If you select him and he plays 22 games, pat yourself on the back for a good job. (I would assume he would average around 90ppg)

If you select him and he drops down injured, just hope to god it was in the 4th quarter after scoring 120points.

If you don't select him and he plays 22 games, tell yourself that the risk was not worth that reward.

If you don't select him and he drops down injured, tell every man and his dog that complains about his injury... I TOLD YOU SO.....

 

[SkankDanker]

You are seriously playing mind games with myself and many other posters.

I think it is a case of going with your gut feeling and taking the good with the bad.

If you select him and he plays 22 games, pat yourself on the back for a good job. (I would assume he would average around 90ppg)

If you select him and he drops down injured, just hope to god it was in the 4th quarter after scoring 120points.

If you don't select him and he plays 22 games, tell yourself that the risk was not worth that reward.

If you don't select him and he drops down injured, tell every man and his dog that complains about his injury... I TOLD YOU SO.....

Er, yeah thanks for clearing that up Tarqs.

I should have made it clear I didn't intentionally contradict my earlier post just happened that way.

Just for interest's sake and to provide some more info for consideration only 13 players who player 15 games or less in 07 played 22 in 08. Lift that to 17 and only 15 players played 22 in 08.

However 33 players who played 22 in 07 played 22 in 08. In other words 40% of those who played 22 in 08 had played 22 in 07.

So basically the odds are against someone who has a history of injury suddenly playing 22. Might happen, but generally the more games you eked out the year before the better.

 

[Cassius_Clay]

I'm torn.

lol, appropiate.

Dont know where the 'If Drummond plays 18 games' came from but its highly unlikely. He'll play 21-22 or 10-16. If you think he'll get injured then you cant get him. If you think he wont and will average 90ppg then good luck to you cos you'll need it.

Chapman is a different kettle of fish. Alot more durable and proven than Drummond.

 

[Dunn - Well Done]

not touching any of these players. They cost you trades and trades are gold. Their becoming more and more higher in cost each year due to the speed increase in the modern game.

Alot of people are hoping Drummond plays a straight first 10 games adn avgs 90. 1) I dont think he could play 10 straight games and 2) i also think people are overrating his ability. Sure he can produce these massive scores 120's. But he can also produce 50's and 60's just as easily. Alot of people may pick Drummond hoping he plays 8-10 straight games than upgrading him to a Hodge. But the reality is you would want to upgrade other players before him unless he is injured. You may still have a S.Hill or Raines in your side.

Im also looking to pick a very durable backline. Due to me not having great backup in the backs on the bench and also because we saw what happened last year. Sure im taking a risk with a Raines or even maybe a C.Cornes but these risk are needed if you want to win. With Raines i would be delighted if he avgd 65-70 in his first 6-8 games and than broke his leg (sorry rainesy).

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

Drummond only scores his 50's or 60's when he's carrying an injury though. It's really hit or miss I feel. He will increase his price just by being fit at the beginning of the year, but as a previous post said: he'll either play 21-22 or 10-16. The corresponding average being positive related. I'm thinking 90-95, or 60-70. Brisbane's higher possession style should help.

 

[Juddtastic]

Even though i wont be taking the punt on drummond, i've just got a feeling he'll break his injury curse this year.... After doing all sorts of lower body strength conditioning and going as far as changing his running style i can really see him staying on the park for the whole year

 

[Dolokk]

Just on Drummond.
A scenario that people are contemplating is that if Drummond gets injured in round 7-10, then at least you could upgrade to a keeper and not lose that many points, only a trade.
However in his career:

Games played round 1 - 7
2005: 0 games*
2006: 1 game
2007: 0 games
2008: 2 games

*elevated to senior list in round 8 so can't be blamed for missing games

which would mean if this repeats, not only would you have to make a trade early, he would not even play enough games to get a price increase.

Reports have said he has had a good preseason, so these stats may mean nothing but it is something to think about.

 

[blues4flag]

I'm taking the punt on Drummond and will have Hill as emg as "insurance". Drummond is better value than any other defender between 250K-370K IMO (if he can stay fit of course - maybe Ellis aside).

Chapman is different as he is valued as a premium and could be outscored by a few in that price range.

Same here. Had 70k to trade Malceski, but nobody in that price range enticed me expect for Drummond.

 

[Kaizen]

There are many players coming back from injury who are priced to tempt (Malceski, Raines, Hurn, Rivers, Hasleby, Coughlan, Butler, Houlihan, Higgins, Lucas, Hentshel and even Cornes..... to name a few) but to me, the player with the biggest potential upside has to be Drummond.

When he scores big, he can score really big and will be a keeper if he can stay on the park. Others may make you more cash but will cost you 1-2 trades upgrading them.

I'm going to take a put on him this year - the kid's due some luck! He could almost be reasonably unique given the known downside which will keep most coaches away.

I will probably regret it but.............meh

 

[Beau_Waters for PM]

If you don't select him and he drops down injured, tell every man and his dog that complains about his injury... I TOLD YOU SO.....

I'm leaning towards this option at the moment.

 

[lifelike_]

Drummond's caused me plenty of headaches over the years, but I feel he could be one that really benefits from the rolling zone. I guess the major benefit is that he's only priced at a 68 average this year, compared to 86 last year.

Like a few others, I'm going to be making the choice between him and Malceski. If I was to pick both of them it'd be as 5th and 6th backs.

Matthews' low-possession style game also didn't work in his favour.

 

[Dunn - Well Done]

There are many players coming back from injury who are priced to tempt (Malceski, Raines, Hurn, Rivers, Hasleby, Coughlan, Butler, Houlihan, Higgins, Lucas, Hentshel and even Cornes..... to name a few) but to me, the player with the biggest potential upside has to be Drummond.

When he scores big, he can score really big and will be a keeper if he can stay on the park. Others may make you more cash but will cost you 1-2 trades upgrading them.

I'm going to take a put on him this year - the kid's due some luck! He could almost be reasonably unique given the known downside which will keep most coaches away.

I will probably regret it but.............meh

Thats the question and the answer can be found in the last 3 years of his career. If i picked him i would be rapt if he got through to round 6 avg 80 than try and upgrade him.

 

[the_insid3r]

Drummond has burnt coaches in the past and therefore he is a risky proposition given the amount of games he has missed over the past 4 seasons.
So far in 2009 pre-season he has shown good form and no signs of any issues that caused him to miss so much footy, therefore, if he stays fit and in form, for just over $300K he could reward you handsomely and with that said I think if you want to pick him then you need to do so by doing either one of the 2 points;

1) make sure you have a decent reserve option to cover him should he go down.

2) have reasonable amount of money left over in the bank to trade him out to another defender in case of long term injury.

If you select him under one of those scenarios then you should feel safe enough, knowing that if he goes down you have adequate cover be it a reserve or money to trade him out.