SuperCoach Scores Twitter SuperCoach Scores Facebook

View Poll Results: Which midfielders will you start in 2018?

Voters
36. REGISTER to Vote.
  • Dangerfield

    22 61.11%
  • Martin

    14 38.89%
  • Titch

    19 52.78%
  • Ablett

    0 0%
  • Kelly

    14 38.89%
  • Oliver

    7 19.44%
  • Zorko

    4 11.11%
  • M Crouch

    10 27.78%
  • Sloane

    1 2.78%
  • Duncan

    0 0%
  • Zerrett

    6 16.67%
  • Neale

    1 2.78%
  • Fyfe

    26 72.22%
  • Pendles

    10 27.78%
  • Bont

    6 16.67%
  • JPK

    0 0%
  • Jelwood

    2 5.56%
  • Treloar

    1 2.78%
  • Hannebery

    4 11.11%
  • Rockliff

    2 5.56%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 6 of 9 FirstFirst ... 3456789 LastLast
Results 101 to 120 of 170
  1. #101
    Best and Fairest
    Join Date: 12-10-2013
    AFL Club: Western Bulldogs
    Posts: 2,810
    Likes: 1,357
    Rep Power: 3494


    2 Not allowed!

    Quote Originally Posted by Juzzo View Post
    I like this kid. Maybe not this year (but maybe ), especially in the 300k price range, but I reckon will be a gun in the future

    Attachment 3457
    Quote Originally Posted by Bontempele View Post
    Not sure he'll quite be elite, but could get to 100+ when he's bulked up a bit. Not sure how he's mid only, clearly played forward quite a bit last year.
    Quote Originally Posted by Goodie's Guns View Post
    Loved what this bloke did last year and the way he goes about it. As Bontemepele said, surprised he is not FWD eligible to be honest. Definitely one to monitor over the coming year or so.
    Quote Originally Posted by BigRuss View Post
    Quite often mistook him for Macrae when watching on TV. Looks to have some real talent.
    Give him another few years to fill out. I reckon we'll use him predominantly at half forward. Loved what he did this year. Flabbergasted how he didn't get M/F eligibility. Though, he is another reason why I'm scared to pick Dahl due to this dude's growing confidence. At times, he seemed to be the only person who knew how to play forward in our team. Excited to see our new look forward line setup and who actually plays there permanently because I have no idea.
    SuperCoach:  8,870 (2016)  6,999 (2015)  14,765 (2014)  25,858 (2013) 

    "It's not the size of the dog in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the dog," Tony Liberatore.

  2. #102
    Dual Best & Fairest
    Join Date: 12-04-2014
    AFL Club: Collingwood
    Posts: 3,246
    Likes: 1,859
    Rep Power: 6563


    0 Not allowed!

    Quote Originally Posted by Manikato1 View Post
    I have liked your post Darkie just because you used the word enunciated. That is the word of the day for sure. English teacher in another life?????
    Haha - I do a fair bit of writing in my work, although I think an English teacher would probably encourage me to be more concise!

    Quote Originally Posted by Leroy View Post
    Great post Darkie, very eloquently put.

    On a complete change of topic, what do people think of Jack Graham? Debuted R22 last year and played 5@80 (including 3 finals) - averaged 14 disposals, 7 tackles and a goal per game.

    Awkward price for a 20yo (call him a high, high priced rookie) but he certainly had some poise about him and looked right at home on the big stage. Probably a no for me but interested in people's thoughts.
    Thanks mate. I am inclined to agree with Bontempele, and have Griffen in my side.

    Quote Originally Posted by chels View Post
    Darkie - congrats on a well thought out post. A comment designed to clarify if you will bear with me. Thus may seem pedantic but it is not. You say:

    "The other way is to pick players with high expected return. This is really my focus. All of the potential cash cows I select are chosen on this basis - their job is to make cash, so it's all about outperforming their price, ideally fairly quickly. I'm pretty agnostic about their other attributes. I will likely end up with more mid-pricers than most because I think Griffen, Bennell and others can make at least as much cash as a good rookie, somewhat more in my view."

    You use two concepts here "return" and "cash" (generation). They are not interchangeable. For ease of exposition assume two players; player X is a $100 rookie and player Y is a $300 mid pricer. Assume X increases in value by $50 - a 50% return. To give the same return Y needs to increase in price by $150 rather than by the $50 X's price increased. That is the notion of a return - it is adjusted by the amount of the investment. Which player would you rather have held? For cash generation Y, but note there is an opportunity cost in holding Y, you could have spent $200 elsewhere, which would in turn have generated cash. You need to factor in the foregone return on that investment to conclude whether X or Y performed better. On a return basis you should be indifferent between X and Y.

    BTW, I am sure you understand this - I am just making sure we use the terms return and cash generation consistently.
    Thanks chels - I agree with your comment regarding return calculations in a cash sense. I generally prefer to think in terms of SC points for most decisions - I figure that they are what ultimately determine the winner, and the value of cash changes over time (because of the changing magic number, and the impact on how long you can deploy it for). In a points sense, a high return player could be anyone who contributes more points to my team than the benchmark (a cash cow, or a keeper who outperforms his price) - and to your point, I agree that factors like loose change need to be accounted for.

    On a note I suspect you will be familiar with, it occurred to me overnight that Warren Buffett has generated outstanding performance over an extremely long track record, and become the world's most successful investor (ie, he is in the extreme right tail), by allocating capital to high expected return, rather than high variance, investments. He may be a good example of a case in which taking additional risk is not only not required, it is counterproductive. The question I was pondering is whether the SC season is long enough for that to be a useful analogy.
    SuperCoach:  589 (2016)  3225 (2015)  8243 (2014)  AFL Dream Team:  397 (2016) 


  3. #103
    100 Games Club
    Join Date: 12-01-2014
    AFL Club: West Coast
    Posts: 722
    Likes: 536
    Rep Power: 1897


    0 Not allowed!

    a high return player could be anyone who contributes more points to my team than the benchmark
    So to clarify that term benchmark, do you mean an expected score per game? And is that a score you set as an educated guess or is it based on price? eg 100pts = $500k @ 5k per point
    There are no shortcuts to anywhere that is worth going to.
      Quote Quote

  4. #104
    Dual Best & Fairest
    Join Date: 12-04-2014
    AFL Club: Collingwood
    Posts: 3,246
    Likes: 1,859
    Rep Power: 6563


    2 Not allowed!

    Quote Originally Posted by Manikato1 View Post
    So to clarify that term benchmark, do you mean an expected score per game? And is that a score you set as an educated guess or is it based on price? eg 100pts = $500k @ 5k per point
    I would say it is based on their price - so at the start of the season it's around $5,500 per point (slightly lower in recent years) and more like $5,000 in season. For example, take a Rocky type who may be priced at 100 - let's say I guesstimate he will average 115, and he delivers 110. I would say that's above benchmark by 10, and adding value to my team (just less value than I expected).
    SuperCoach:  589 (2016)  3225 (2015)  8243 (2014)  AFL Dream Team:  397 (2016) 


  5. #105
    100 Games Club
    Join Date: 12-01-2014
    AFL Club: West Coast
    Posts: 722
    Likes: 536
    Rep Power: 1897


    3 Not allowed!

    Quote Originally Posted by Darkie View Post
    I would say it is based on their price - so at the start of the season it's around $5,500 per point (slightly lower in recent years) and more like $5,000 in season. For example, take a Rocky type who may be priced at 100 - let's say I guesstimate he will average 115, and he delivers 110. I would say that's above benchmark by 10, and adding value to my team (just less value than I expected).
    Okay I can go with that. In terms of your earlier Warren Buffett comment the season isn't long enough. Buffett could not care if a player had a good season next year or a bad one. He would only look back over the players entire career to consider it a success or not. As SC coaches we are the worst kind of investors. We are cyclical speculators trying to time the market. The riskiest profile of all and one that usually loses. That is why trading is the deal breaker during the season. Make more right trades than wrong ones and you are well ahead of the pack.
    There are no shortcuts to anywhere that is worth going to.
      Quote Quote

  6. #106
    Rising Star Winner
    Join Date: 08-01-2015
    AFL Club: Sydney
    Posts: 256
    Likes: 287
    Rep Power: 1463


    3 Not allowed!

    Yep, one year way too short to "Buffett." Plus investment theory you can form a portfolio where risk is minimised* and return maximised for a given risk level.

    When the late 1990's, early 2000's tech boom was raging Buffett famously did not invest in tech stocks. Why? Because he rfused (and still refuses) to invest in something he did not understand. He was a ludite.

    The principle holds in SC. If you cannot understand how player A gets big SC points - especially when you have watched a game you thought he did stuff all in - then don't trade him in. Look for the guys youy can see playing in a way that should attract SC points but the CD observer is not crediting. Couple this up with timing (not a feasible real world investment strategy) and there may be a "Buffett" rule. Ade and Port players seem to get better treated at home than they do when away. I now try to trade players from those teams in when they are about to play in SA not after. The suns do not play at Metricon until after their round 10 bye. I won't look at suns players until then and then only when a player appears to have been underscored.

    Apologies if this got a bit off track.



    * Through the co-variances of the portfolio's individual investmetns. I keep meaning to try to model this in a SC context but have not got my head around it yet.
    SuperCoach:  5257 (2017)  29649 (2016)  21972 (2015)  18713 (2014) 

      Quote Quote

  7. #107
    300 Games Club
    Join Date: 16-06-2013
    AFL Club: Adelaide
    Posts: 1,494
    Likes: 622
    Rep Power: 2426


    1 Not allowed!

    Quote Originally Posted by chels View Post
    Yep, one year way too short to "Buffett." Plus investment theory you can form a portfolio where risk is minimised* and return maximised for a given risk level.

    When the late 1990's, early 2000's tech boom was raging Buffett famously did not invest in tech stocks. Why? Because he rfused (and still refuses) to invest in something he did not understand. He was a ludite.

    The principle holds in SC. If you cannot understand how player A gets big SC points - especially when you have watched a game you thought he did stuff all in - then don't trade him in. Look for the guys youy can see playing in a way that should attract SC points but the CD observer is not crediting. Couple this up with timing (not a feasible real world investment strategy) and there may be a "Buffett" rule. Ade and Port players seem to get better treated at home than they do when away. I now try to trade players from those teams in when they are about to play in SA not after. The suns do not play at Metricon until after their round 10 bye. I won't look at suns players until then and then only when a player appears to have been underscored.

    Apologies if this got a bit off track.



    * Through the co-variances of the portfolio's individual investmetns. I keep meaning to try to model this in a SC context but have not got my head around it yet.
    Interesting!

    On the Adelaide and Port players getting better treated at home, my take would be that they just play better at home. Same as 95% of players.
    SuperCoach:  16974 (2016)  49k (2015)  7316 (2014)  10k (2013) 


  8. #108
    Rising Star Winner
    Join Date: 08-01-2015
    AFL Club: Sydney
    Posts: 256
    Likes: 287
    Rep Power: 1463


    1 Not allowed!

    Quote Originally Posted by Juzzo View Post
    Interesting!

    On the Adelaide and Port players getting better treated at home, my take would be that they just play better at home. Same as 95% of players.

    Interesting view indeed. I hope we can develop a testable hypothesis, playing better is quite subjective whereas scoring better (in SC terms) we can be objective about. I am sure Rowsus has provided home and away SC scores at the team level.

    My thinking has been that SA players at home (and equally, Q, NSW and WA players at home) are scored by CD observers who do one game a round. In Vic there are typically 5 games a week that an SC observer can be assigned to. The observer(s) become more familiar with the characteristics of the players they see every second week and a bias may creep into the scoring. After all apparently they are human. In Vic they see teams less frequently (perhaps once every five weeks) and hence do not get used to player characteristics to the same extent. When a player is just a number (as opposed to a name) the probability of a dispassionate score is higher.

    All thoughts appreciated.
    SuperCoach:  5257 (2017)  29649 (2016)  21972 (2015)  18713 (2014) 

      Quote Quote

  9. #109
    100 Games Club
    Join Date: 04-03-2013
    AFL Club: Geelong
    Posts: 714
    Likes: 430
    Rep Power: 1393


    2 Not allowed!

    ^ I pick players who wear numbers i like and have cooler haircuts than others.

    Each man to his on theory

  10. #110
    Rising Star Winner
    Join Date: 08-01-2015
    AFL Club: Sydney
    Posts: 256
    Likes: 287
    Rep Power: 1463


    1 Not allowed!

    Quote Originally Posted by GoGeta View Post
    ^ I pick players who wear numbers i like and have cooler haircuts than others.

    Each man to his on theory

    Colour of their boots may be underrated as a predictor!
    SuperCoach:  5257 (2017)  29649 (2016)  21972 (2015)  18713 (2014) 

      Quote Quote

  11. #111
    100 Games Club
    Join Date: 04-03-2013
    AFL Club: Geelong
    Posts: 714
    Likes: 430
    Rep Power: 1393


    1 Not allowed!

    I want to talk about the reliable, durable, consistent premos that score around that 110 mark but don't seem capable of 115 or 120 feats!

    I am talking about your Zorkos, Sloanes, and i think Z.Merrett fits into this category.
    Where is there (if there is at all) a place in your team for these types?

    Most of us are more inclined to take risks on fallen premos bouncing back, the Sydney boys and Pendlebury are prime examples this year
    or injury risk players like Beams/Rocky, Ablett for the value they provide but each year i wonder if taking these more secure ''know what your getting''
    type players is a more sound option in pursuit of a consistent high ranking?

    So, do you like to mix a few safer bets in with some not so safe bets?
    Has anyone tried rolling with a C like Danger plus a few of these guys and hope other teams run into injury trouble and/or missed games?
    while your 22 game 110'er comes out trumps overall?

    Interested to hear perspectives on this.

  12. #112
    300 Games Club
    Join Date: 16-06-2013
    AFL Club: Adelaide
    Posts: 1,494
    Likes: 622
    Rep Power: 2426


    0 Not allowed!

    Quote Originally Posted by chels View Post
    Colour of their boots may be underrated as a predictor!
    Yeah, especially that weird colour a handful of players are wearing these days, I think it's called black.
    SuperCoach:  16974 (2016)  49k (2015)  7316 (2014)  10k (2013) 


  13. #113
    Moderator
    Join Date: 08-03-2012
    AFL Club: Essendon
    Posts: 24,117
    Likes: 11,972
    Rep Power: 9380
    Moderator


    1 Not allowed!

    Quote Originally Posted by GoGeta View Post
    I want to talk about the reliable, durable, consistent premos that score around that 110 mark but don't seem capable of 115 or 120 feats!

    I am talking about your Zorkos, Sloanes, and i think Z.Merrett fits into this category.
    Where is there (if there is at all) a place in your team for these types?

    Most of us are more inclined to take risks on fallen premos bouncing back, the Sydney boys and Pendlebury are prime examples this year
    or injury risk players like Beams/Rocky, Ablett for the value they provide but each year i wonder if taking these more secure ''know what your getting''
    type players is a more sound option in pursuit of a consistent high ranking?

    So, do you like to mix a few safer bets in with some not so safe bets?
    Has anyone tried rolling with a C like Danger plus a few of these guys and hope other teams run into injury trouble and/or missed games?
    while your 22 game 110'er comes out trumps overall?

    Interested to hear perspectives on this.
    It's an interesting one. If we see their ceiling at 110, which is what they're priced at (or more) we're probably better off not starting them as there's so many capable of averaging in that range, that we're certain to get a few discounted throughout the year.

    The goal would have to be to try and pick a Zorko type, hoping he might be able to go 115 with Rocky gone, or a Sloane who may get less attention with the rise of the Crouches and Gibbs, or a Merrett who's yet to realise his ceiling.

    I'll almost certainly pick one of these types but i feel the underpriced mids are better options with your starting teams. I'll have a keen eye on Bont/Cripps/the Sydney boys/the Collingwood boys over the preseason, expecting at least a couple of these to bounce back.
    SuperCoach:  1,895 (2017)  4,853 (2016)  5,202 (2015)  479 (2014)  7,684 (2013) 

    Highest overall ranking: 18th (Rd 18, 2014)

  14. #114
    100 Games Club
    Join Date: 12-01-2014
    AFL Club: West Coast
    Posts: 722
    Likes: 536
    Rep Power: 1897


    1 Not allowed!

    Has anyone tried rolling with a C like Danger plus a few of these guys and hope other teams run into injury trouble and/or missed games?
    while your 22 game 110'er comes out trumps overall?
    I have tried this for a couple of seasons a while ago. Two core lock mids (it was Gablett and Pendles back then) plus three 500k ish mids. The idea was that hopefully two of the 500 group would step up to 110pt mids. The other would be a dud but even then would only be 150k away from a reasonable premium. And fixing one dud was manageable.

    The problem was that there are just too many players out there that could be the one that jumps to 110 and you just cannot pick them all. In the end I found myself with 3 ave mids that weren't scoring enough to achieve what I wanted but were not scoring badly enough to get fixed. Something else always needed fixing before them. I still believe that if you jagged three good ones that this strategy could work very well and have you on the track to being near the top of the pack. But it is all or nothing.
    There are no shortcuts to anywhere that is worth going to.
      Quote Quote

  15. #115
    Best and Fairest
    Join Date: 27-01-2014
    AFL Club: Fremantle
    Posts: 2,858
    Likes: 2,903
    Rep Power: 7902


    0 Not allowed!

    Quote Originally Posted by Manikato1 View Post
    Okay I can go with that. In terms of your earlier Warren Buffett comment the season isn't long enough. Buffett could not care if a player had a good season next year or a bad one. He would only look back over the players entire career to consider it a success or not. As SC coaches we are the worst kind of investors. We are cyclical speculators trying to time the market. The riskiest profile of all and one that usually loses. That is why trading is the deal breaker during the season. Make more right trades than wrong ones and you are well ahead of the pack.
    It would be interesting to see a list of best coaches over the years. Maybe an overall and last 5 years.
    SuperCoach:  8293 (2017)  10922 (2016)  9214 (2015)  653 (2014) 


  16. #116
    Vice Captain
    Join Date: 10-02-2014
    AFL Club: Essendon
    Posts: 4,452
    Likes: 2,734
    Rep Power: 4674


    1 Not allowed!

    Quote Originally Posted by jarrad_ View Post
    highly unlikely i.m.o even with their easy draw which is no surprise seeing how much the afl love them

    beat no good teams and got done by the good teams and are to reliant on beating up on the lower teams but having said that managed to lose to brisbane
    L O L!!! And from a Brisbane fan, that's pretty rich.

    More than that,we didn't beat up on lower teams, we fell over the line, or lost to them, ie. Bris. Only teams of note we beat were Geelong, West Coast. There needs to be a fair bit of improvement in our two way running and consistency for Essendon to get any higher than 6 - 8, again.

    Anyway, Merry xmas everyone. Looking forward to another SC year.
    SuperCoach:  352 (2016)  5675 (2015)  5778 (2014) 

    2017 Coach of: Led Zimmermen X (SCS - Division 1)

    Highest Position: 301 - Rd 16 Season 2016

    Put the pointy pencil in the pepper po.

  17. #117
    Rising Star Nominee
    Join Date: 19-02-2017
    AFL Club: Brisbane
    Posts: 179
    Likes: 90
    Rep Power: 263


    0 Not allowed!

    Quote Originally Posted by Lost In The Sky View Post
    Redden came to the Eagles with an adductor injury. He had it operated on in August 2015, but the injury didn't heal and he had to have another operation in December 2015 and that completely ruined his pre-season. He still managed to play in round 1 but a combination of coming to a new team, no pre-season and then being played out of position led to a season where he just couldn't fit in... and as a result a poor SC avg.

    Don't fall into the trap of just judging a player by a single number like his SC avg for a year without knowing the reasons for that number being what it is.

    It's all about looking for which players are going to get new opportunities.

    He may not be for everyone but sure will be a good POD for those that pick him.
    I won't say Redden can't play a valuable role for the Eagles this season, but his decline before leaving Brisbane has accelerated rapidly in Perth- even if you account for injuries. With the exception of 2016 his numbers have been similar since 2011, but it's been a while since he's had any meaningful impact on games.

    Personally I'm not convinced he is what he used to be physically and I also worry that he's been going through the motions a lot for quite some time. He'll get enough of the ball, but that's about it. Meh.
      Quote Quote

  18. #118
    Best and Fairest
    Join Date: 07-07-2012
    AFL Club: West Coast
    Posts: 2,811
    Likes: 2,812
    Rep Power: 5248


    3 Not allowed!

    Quote Originally Posted by McLovin View Post
    I won't say Redden can't play a valuable role for the Eagles this season, but his decline before leaving Brisbane has accelerated rapidly in Perth- even if you account for injuries. With the exception of 2016 his numbers have been similar since 2011, but it's been a while since he's had any meaningful impact on games.

    Personally I'm not convinced he is what he used to be physically and I also worry that he's been going through the motions a lot for quite some time. He'll get enough of the ball, but that's about it. Meh.
    That's fair enough mate. He's not for everyone. And certainly not a "lock".

    But I will certainly be keeping a very close eye on him. An average of 97.25 when he returned to the team in Round 15 last season (and that was with Priddis & Mitchell), and the change of role from HFF/MID in 2017 to full time MID in 2018 is enough to warrant a very close look at him in my opinion. I'm not going to write off a 27yo who has played good footy for numerous seasons before in his career, and is coming into a prime opportunity being a full time mid again at the feet of Naitanui... Too much to simply write off as meh in my opinion.
    SuperCoach:  3,690 (2016)  4,619 (2015)  1,084 (2014)  5,623 (2013)  3,392 (2012)  206 (2011)  3,705 (2010)  2,022 (2009)  2,795 (2008)  3,626 (2007)  1,026 (2006) 


  19. #119
    Rookie
    Join Date: 14-11-2016
    Posts: 29
    Likes: 8
    Rep Power: 157


    1 Not allowed!

    Jelwood is a near lock. Ave 122 until he got cleaned up last yr. GAJ being there wont hurt him. Ave 110 then 117 the last 2 yrs GAJ was there, with a team that had Bartel, Corey, Stevie J, Chappy etc. 1st 2 games @ MCG where Danger has ave 110 in his last 5, then they travel to Perth. Round 6 is the time to grab Danger. Will be a fair bit cheaper (im banking) than what he will be starting. Jelwood with a full pre, is a near no brainer.
      Quote Quote

  20. #120
    100 Games Club
    Join Date: 04-03-2013
    AFL Club: Geelong
    Posts: 714
    Likes: 430
    Rep Power: 1393


    0 Not allowed!

    Quote Originally Posted by HotShame View Post
    Jelwood is a near lock. Ave 122 until he got cleaned up last yr. GAJ being there wont hurt him. Ave 110 then 117 the last 2 yrs GAJ was there, with a team that had Bartel, Corey, Stevie J, Chappy etc. 1st 2 games @ MCG where Danger has ave 110 in his last 5, then they travel to Perth. Round 6 is the time to grab Danger. Will be a fair bit cheaper (im banking) than what he will be starting. Jelwood with a full pre, is a near no brainer.
    Someone loses out of Danger, Ducan,Selwood and Ablett, the Pies and swans have had 3 premos go at around 110 before but has any team had 4!

Page 6 of 9 FirstFirst ... 3456789 LastLast


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •