SuperCoach Scores Twitter SuperCoach Scores Facebook
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 47
  1. #21
    Vice Captain
    Join Date: 22-02-2013
    AFL Club: Hawthorn
    Posts: 4,819
    Likes: 4,140
    Rep Power: 8474


    0 Not allowed!

    I am holding Watts for another week, not sure why, probably only because the longer you hold trades, the more flexibility you have.
    SuperCoach:  72 (2016)  22,451 (2015)  2,593 (2014)  33,325 (2013) 

    SC 2017 Final Lesson: Well done, the season is finished! Thank goodness the season is finished...

  2. #22
    Statistician
    Join Date: 19-03-2012
    AFL Club: Melbourne
    Posts: 14,244
    Likes: 12,154
    Rep Power: 22457
    Moderator


    0 Not allowed!

    Quote Originally Posted by whateverittakes View Post
    I agree with everything you say in theory Rowsus, but what if Danger only scores 60-80 points this week? Should we consider trading him out before round 3 or would you still keep him? I noticed that Chewylizard made a call on Montagna last year who was his M.4 premium and brought in Mitchell. Could the Dangerfield decision be considered in this way if we believe he isn't going to back up his breakout year...? It would still be a big call from 2 games but how much would he drop in price? cheers.
    Personally, if that happens, I will still keep him. That is a decision each Coach can only make for themselves, though. I can't guarantee my decision is the right one, or the best fit for your plans.

    If you believe it means you have enough evidence he won't back up last year, then yes. I would point out the difference in circumstances though. Dangerfield made a stellar jump last year, and while history says he won't completely back up his 118.9 average, if he plays to anything 110+ he is worth persisting with. Montagna on the other hand was showing signs of decline coming into last season. His numbers coming into 2012 were 21/125.2, 22/114.8, 20/100.7. Obviously Chewy was backing him to get back to somewhere around his 2010 figure, and decided quickly, and correctly, that probably wouldn't happen. Is the trade right if you think he won't back up last year? Yes, but it's not quite the same situation as Chewy and Joey last year.

    Using a mid point of your scenario, and lets say he scores 70 this week. His break even would look something like:

    BE = 3 x 118.86 (pricing average) - 63 (round 1 score) - 70 (round 2 score) = 223.

    His price drop would be (round 3 score - 223) x $442, so if he scored 123 in round 3 his price drop would be $44,200.

    This is an approximation only, but will be very close. You can substitute your figures in for rounds 2 & 3 to see what your guess says his price will drop. If this scenario plays out, you are much better to trade him out after round 2, than trade him out in say round 4. I still wouldn't trade him out though, I'm backing him to reach that 110+ we need him to play to by seasons end.
    We're goin' to need a bigger boat...

  3. #23
    Statistician
    Join Date: 19-03-2012
    AFL Club: Melbourne
    Posts: 14,244
    Likes: 12,154
    Rep Power: 22457
    Moderator


    0 Not allowed!

    Quote Originally Posted by whateverittakes View Post
    What about Jack Watts? My inclination is to keep him and back my judgement that he would average 95-100 this season playing across half back. However if I hold off a week then it ties my hands for next week if I need to make more than 2 corrections considering Dangerfield may be one and my rucks as well. My though is to downgrade Watts to Terlich and upgrade Blicavs/Daw to a Mumford/Griffin/Kreuzer but I just can't bring myself to hit the button due to being burnt from previous round 1 trades. Any help with this one?
    My inclination is also to keep him. He is a "mental" player, and if/when he gets his head back in the right place, we'll be glad we stuck with him. Obviously the other 2 options are:
    If you decide to trade Danger out, you could go for value on your replacement, or do a complete downgrade to a Rookie, and use that cash on your Rucks.
    Back in your original plan, what ever that happened to be, that you made prior to round 1, and see how it plays out. I like this 2nd option better, and it still includes the possibility of down grading Watts, if you thought coming into the season that a player around that price was a possible correction.
    We're goin' to need a bigger boat...

  4. #24
    Rising Star Winner
    Join Date: 13-01-2013
    AFL Club: Adelaide
    Posts: 388
    Likes: 183
    Rep Power: 1541


    0 Not allowed!

    Quote Originally Posted by quickie View Post
    I am extremely tempted to do Danger > Mundy, mainly because I think he will match him at a much lower cost, and that cash could be used to grab someone like Moloney as well.
    I like the danger to mundy trade too but not this week , looks like mundy will be the big improver while danger will probably maintain his 118 ave that 159k will come in handy

  5. #25
    Deputy Vice Captain
    Join Date: 27-02-2013
    AFL Club: Collingwood
    Posts: 3,613
    Likes: 1,364
    Rep Power: 3065


    0 Not allowed!

    I think lower could be the 2nd best tagger in the competition atm. Blanketed cotchin, rich this season so far, but this is probably too early to call.
    Well, one of my fremantle midfielders will get tagged D:
    SuperCoach:  N/A (2015) 

      Quote Quote

  6. #26
    150 Games Club
    Join Date: 06-03-2013
    AFL Club: Carlton
    Posts: 970
    Likes: 310
    Rep Power: 1073


    1 Not allowed!

    Quote Originally Posted by davo View Post
    I like the danger to mundy trade too but not this week , looks like mundy will be the big improver while danger will probably maintain his 118 ave that 159k will come in handy
    Why would you trade a player who will "maintain" an average of 118 out of your side?
      Quote Quote

  7. #27
    Rising Star Nominee
    Join Date: 28-03-2013
    Posts: 93
    Likes: 64
    Rep Power: 415


    0 Not allowed!

    Quote Originally Posted by AngryAnt View Post
    Why would you trade a player who will "maintain" an average of 118 out of your side?
    Because I think Mundy will match him, and I can use the cash to get someone like Moloney as well.
      Quote Quote

  8. #28
    Moderator
    Join Date: 08-03-2012
    AFL Club: Essendon
    Posts: 23,610
    Likes: 11,732
    Rep Power: 9229
    Moderator


    1 Not allowed!

    Watts, i don't know what I would do because similar to Ryder, he'll be quite inconsistent but the monsters will hopefully even out his average (somewhat).

    I think the Danger to Mundy + 150k discussions is quite an interesting proposition. Generating cash for the same points at the cost of a trade (if they average the same) would be very appealing. I'm going to keep my faith in Danger because I think he and the crows will bounce back this week but if you truly believe Mundy can average the same as Danger, it definitely does have some merit. I'd be doing it next week though unless you have other trades planned.
    Last edited by IDIG; 05-04-2013 at 6:30pm.
    SuperCoach:  1,895 (2017)  4,853 (2016)  5,202 (2015)  479 (2014)  7,684 (2013) 

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

  9. #29
    Rising Star Winner
    Join Date: 13-01-2013
    AFL Club: Adelaide
    Posts: 388
    Likes: 183
    Rep Power: 1541


    0 Not allowed!

    Quote Originally Posted by quickie View Post
    Because I think Mundy will match him, and I can use the cash to get someone like Moloney as well.
    yeah what i was saying is i think mundy will ave close to danger and is alot cheaper

  10. #30
    Rising Star Nominee
    Join Date: 24-03-2012
    AFL Club: Essendon
    Posts: 81
    Likes: 57
    Rep Power: 1277


    0 Not allowed!

    Quote Originally Posted by Rowsus View Post
    My inclination is also to keep him. He is a "mental" player, and if/when he gets his head back in the right place, we'll be glad we stuck with him. Obviously the other 2 options are:
    If you decide to trade Danger out, you could go for value on your replacement, or do a complete downgrade to a Rookie, and use that cash on your Rucks.
    Back in your original plan, what ever that happened to be, that you made prior to round 1, and see how it plays out. I like this 2nd option better, and it still includes the possibility of down grading Watts, if you thought coming into the season that a player around that price was a possible correction.
    Thanks Rowsus your reasoning makes sense and I was thinking along the same lines. I will hold for now and make a call on Watts next week.
    SuperCoach:  60th (2014)  8th (2013)  64th (2011) 

      Quote Quote

  11. #31
    Rising Star Nominee
    Join Date: 28-03-2013
    Posts: 93
    Likes: 64
    Rep Power: 415


    0 Not allowed!

    This could be quite the season defining trade. Adelaide's form is worrying.

    Think safe option is Watson/Cotchin, but I see a lot of value in Mundy/Swallow. Not sure what I will do but I have a whole heap of other issues to deal with!
      Quote Quote

  12. #32
    All Australian Captain
    Join Date: 11-11-2012
    AFL Club: Essendon
    Posts: 9,549
    Likes: 6,055
    Rep Power: 11000


    0 Not allowed!

    Mundy struggled with the tag, I'll bet he cops the Hocking tag next week.
    I'm keeping Danger with his favourable draw.

  13. #33
    Rising Star Nominee
    Join Date: 28-03-2013
    Posts: 93
    Likes: 64
    Rep Power: 415


    0 Not allowed!

    My expectation is that the mids ranked say 7-10th. Will all average very similar, so it may just come down to value.

    I think Mundy will be there abouts and is still very good value, although I do expect a tag next week.

    Also his TOG is 74%, so I do expect his scores to improve.

    Expecting another big one from Swallow this week, who is also on my radar.
      Quote Quote

  14. #34
    Rising Star Nominee
    Join Date: 28-03-2013
    Posts: 93
    Likes: 64
    Rep Power: 415


    0 Not allowed!

    Well I ended up turning Danger into Moloney & Mundy, so not sure really whether I have won out on that!

    Any Danger owners concerned with his score against Port Adelaide?
      Quote Quote

  15. #35
    Michael Tuck Club
    Join Date: 18-03-2012
    AFL Club: Essendon
    Posts: 2,248
    Likes: 1,342
    Rep Power: 4030


    0 Not allowed!

    im not concerned i picked danger for the season not just the start , he is one of the most SC relevant players since ablett in my opinion as he can influence a game so much like ablett with his strength and burst of speed also his ability to kick goals . someone like mundy is very consistant but once again in my opinion doesnt have the highs that danger can go (just has to get there again) i could end up with egg on my face but i will hold'em
    SuperCoach:  4172 (2017)  2154 (2016)  14,722 (2015)  9,800 (2014)  7,329 (2013)  14,077 (2012)  45,000+ (2011) 

    Beer is good !

  16. #36
    Strategist
    Join Date: 01-03-2012
    AFL Club: Essendon
    Posts: 5,328
    Likes: 4,392
    Rep Power: 27131


    0 Not allowed!

    Quote Originally Posted by Maso View Post
    im not concerned i picked danger for the season not just the start , he is one of the most SC relevant players since ablett in my opinion as he can influence a game so much like ablett with his strength and burst of speed also his ability to kick goals . someone like mundy is very consistant but once again in my opinion doesnt have the highs that danger can go (just has to get there again) i could end up with egg on my face but i will hold'em
    It makes me sick but I'm also holding on to Dangerfield.

    The thing good is that Adelaide have acknowledged that Dangerfield needs protection.
    SuperCoach:  Winner (2011)  724 (2010)  188 (2009)  AFL Dream Team:  26 (2011) 

    Sooner or later you're going to realize, just as I did, that there's a difference between knowing the path, and walking the path - Morpheus
    Let no man forget how menacing we are, we are lions! Do you know what's waiting beyond that beach?Immortality! Take it! It's Yours! - Achilles

  17. #37
    Michael Tuck Club
    Join Date: 12-03-2012
    AFL Club: Essendon
    Posts: 2,106
    Likes: 1,736
    Rep Power: 4616


    2 Not allowed!

    Quote Originally Posted by Maso View Post
    im not concerned i picked danger for the season not just the start , he is one of the most SC relevant players since ablett in my opinion as he can influence a game so much like ablett with his strength and burst of speed also his ability to kick goals . someone like mundy is very consistant but once again in my opinion doesnt have the highs that danger can go (just has to get there again) i could end up with egg on my face but i will hold'em
    Stop making sense and being the voice of reason Maso!!! I've been going back and forth on Danger the last few days. I'm so tempted to trade, but then a voice of reason (similar to yours) tells me I've gotta keep him.

    Kinda like this...

  18. #38
    Captain
    Join Date: 19-06-2012
    AFL Club: Collingwood
    Posts: 5,031
    Likes: 3,105
    Rep Power: 6180


    0 Not allowed!

    Personally I would trade him. Remember he has had one great year, that's it. He is no proven performer as is Pendlebury, Swan for example.
    Not quite the same, but by analogy, I've traded Roughead.
    SuperCoach:  755 (2016)  3,658 (2015)  1,894 (2013)  43 (2012)  AFL Dream Team:  170 (2016) 


  19. #39
    Michael Tuck Club
    Join Date: 12-03-2012
    AFL Club: Essendon
    Posts: 2,106
    Likes: 1,736
    Rep Power: 4616


    0 Not allowed!

    Quote Originally Posted by Courtesans View Post
    Personally I would trade him. Remember he has had one great year, that's it. He is no proven performer as is Pendlebury, Swan for example.
    Not quite the same, but by anology, I've traded Roughead.
    Maso the good angel... Courtesans the bad one...

  20. #40
    300 Games Club
    Join Date: 29-11-2012
    AFL Club: Hawthorn
    Posts: 1,471
    Likes: 222
    Rep Power: 734


    0 Not allowed!

    Quote Originally Posted by Courtesans View Post
    Personally I would trade him. Remember he has had one great year, that's it. He is no proven performer as is Pendlebury, Swan for example.
    Not quite the same, but by analogy, I've traded Roughead.
    Wait to see if they continue to play Bailey. Roughead has had bad numbers because Bailey is in. Wait for Thursday at least.
    SuperCoach:  1132 (2014)  1339 (2013) 


Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 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
  •