Round 6 trades...... Fyfe to ???
- Thread starter captainchardonnay
- Start date
Had him from the start. With Danger. In years past, it never stopped me getting Pendles and Swan, or JPK and Hanners. This is no different. My Geelong bias may or may not have played a part.
Fwiw I think I will end up with Parker too, making my first 5 mids : Gaz, Danger, Selwood, Hanners and Parker.
I started Danger+Selwood, considering bringing in two Sydney mids this week... With certain teams I think it's acceptable to have 2 midfielders from them, wouldn't go to three though
Nice. If I do the Fyfe to Murphy trade I'll have Danger, GAZ, Parker, Pendles, Murphy, Libba, Mills, Bennedy.
Sloane is a gun but I'd be slightly concerned bringing in a player that relies heavily on the contested side of the game to generate points. With stoppages down so markedly this year, I think we're already seeing a drop off in scoring for the pure inside midfielders like JPK, Priddis, Rocky and perhaps to lesser extent Sloane and Pendles. In my opinion, mids with a good mix of inside and out, Hanners, Parker, Selwood, Shuey, are better options.
Well I'm not sure yet I may put shaw down back and I don't know who to get up forward cause there is not that many cheap forwards but i am just gonna upgrade menadue or Harwood
Even thinking about Simpson for my backline to boost that up and waiting for Selwood next week but I dunno
What's the general consensus on Parker?
I don't have him, and I'm not really considering him. Having a great year, though doesn't have a history of 100+ scores. Whilst he's averaging 125 I just can't see him averaging 120+, I say he's ceiling is closer to 110 for the year given the ridiculous depth of Sydney's team/midfield.
Am I crazy for not strongly considering Parker? Realistically my only argument for bringing him in is to negate the 24% of teams that have him as a POD against me. Of course I can gamble and go a Pendles (or Hannebery, etc) to outscore him vs remainder of season. Thoughts?
I don't have him, and I'm not really considering him. Having a great year, though doesn't have a history of 100+ scores. Whilst he's averaging 125 I just can't see him averaging 120+, I say he's ceiling is closer to 110 for the year given the ridiculous depth of Sydney's team/midfield.
Am I crazy for not strongly considering Parker? Realistically my only argument for bringing him in is to negate the 24% of teams that have him as a POD against me. Of course I can gamble and go a Pendles (or Hannebery, etc) to outscore him vs remainder of season. Thoughts?
IF Parker has a clear run with injury he'll go close to 120 IMO, he has the game & the role for it.
I agree that he certainly has the game, he's such a dynamic player on the offensive side of his game.
I guess there is an argument that someone from Sydney will go 120+. The lack of scoring history is what scares me, but that's supercoach.... RiskReward.
That 24% is more likely to be 40% by this week. And it's a lot of the reason I'm bringing him in. Barring injury I see him averaging at least 115 with a drop off from Kennedy and Jack adding to his slice of the pie every week. I'm getting tired of watching him outscore my other mids every week. You have to ask yourself which 9 mids will average more than him from here? If you can't find 9 that you are certain will outscore him, then at 580k you have to have him.
I think the prevailing logic you've got here is the overwhelming value he presents. Even at $580k say he has an 'underwhelming' rest of season and averages 110, that's still a great result. I'm ranked quite well and haven't really been bothered by having him, but to maintain that rank I think getting on-board him to negate everyone else is going to be what makes me bring him in.
Thanks for your input mate.