Brodie Smith
- Thread starter J-Dog
- Start date
If you have 3 or less trades then I think you just have to hold him.
Against Port on weekend he didn't touch the ball in the 3rd quarter.
The previous two games he has been getting his hands on the ball but his disposal (usually an asset) has been poor as seen by his DT:SC ratio.
If you have 4+ trades then you could consider the swap to Malceski or Kelly.
Against Port on weekend he didn't touch the ball in the 3rd quarter.
The previous two games he has been getting his hands on the ball but his disposal (usually an asset) has been poor as seen by his DT:SC ratio.
If you have 4+ trades then you could consider the swap to Malceski or Kelly.
Fitzroy Guerrilla
Moderator
Staff member
Patron '16
Patron '17
Patron '18
Patron '19
Patron '20
Veterans
Malceski and Kelly may score better, but you might just be buying in to another problem, given some of their issues this year. You also have to question just how much better Malceski or Kelly will score anyway and whether the projected points gain will be worth the trade.
I think if you were talking Hodge or Shaw, it might be a different matter, given that they might be expected to score at a significantly higher rate.
Unfortunately I've got both Smith and Lumumba on my field. If they both get 70+ each week, I'm considering it a win! I've got two trades and $50k left - part of me would love to bring in another defender (McDonald, for instance) and then loophole Smith and Lumumba for D6 each week. But I think I'm just best keeping the trades and using them in the case of injury elsewhere, because it may end up saving me more points than trying the upgrade.
At this stage of the year, I think there'd only be a few players who you'd think you could justify burning trades on to upgrade failed mid-pricers or fallen premiums. I'd have the following players on the list:
* Hodge in defence (some might make a case for Picken as well and I am certain that most already have Shaw)
* Ablett and possibly Rockliff given that he is still cheap (and assuming everyone has Fyfe, Dangerfield and Pendlebury)
* Possibly Goldstein if you are in the minority who don't have him (he is risky at his huge price though, given that most teams don't have ruck coverage)
* Deledio up forward, as he just seems to be ready to round out the year as the best scorer alongside Gray (who most people already have)
There are probably other unique options who might go alright, such as Hannebery, Zorko, Priddis and Mundy and guys like Rance and McDonald might be tempting (but with significant risk), but the benefits may not be as considerable as say adding Ablett, Hodge or Deledio to your ranks and picking up 50+ points from each compared to an under-performer.
I think if you were talking Hodge or Shaw, it might be a different matter, given that they might be expected to score at a significantly higher rate.
Unfortunately I've got both Smith and Lumumba on my field. If they both get 70+ each week, I'm considering it a win! I've got two trades and $50k left - part of me would love to bring in another defender (McDonald, for instance) and then loophole Smith and Lumumba for D6 each week. But I think I'm just best keeping the trades and using them in the case of injury elsewhere, because it may end up saving me more points than trying the upgrade.
At this stage of the year, I think there'd only be a few players who you'd think you could justify burning trades on to upgrade failed mid-pricers or fallen premiums. I'd have the following players on the list:
* Hodge in defence (some might make a case for Picken as well and I am certain that most already have Shaw)
* Ablett and possibly Rockliff given that he is still cheap (and assuming everyone has Fyfe, Dangerfield and Pendlebury)
* Possibly Goldstein if you are in the minority who don't have him (he is risky at his huge price though, given that most teams don't have ruck coverage)
* Deledio up forward, as he just seems to be ready to round out the year as the best scorer alongside Gray (who most people already have)
There are probably other unique options who might go alright, such as Hannebery, Zorko, Priddis and Mundy and guys like Rance and McDonald might be tempting (but with significant risk), but the benefits may not be as considerable as say adding Ablett, Hodge or Deledio to your ranks and picking up 50+ points from each compared to an under-performer.
Last edited:
Yeah don't think I'll be able to do it realistically, only two trades and 47k left for the year. Best I can do is sideways to Eski/Kelly or go Lever and Smith to Fields and Picken. Rage trading rarely works out for the best so unfortunately I think I'll be holding.
I've had Smith all year and finally lost patience after watching him on Sunday. Luckily I have 9 trades left and did a virtual sideways move to Malceski. I'm sure the concussions have affected his headspace in terms of winning the ball - he just seems to be totally outside, actually well outside. At worst I expect Eski to score the same as Smith does but Eski's last 2 weeks have been pretty encouraging. I wonder if Gaz being back has made a difference.
No doubt about it, Gaz lifts the team single-handedly!
Judd used to do the same at Carlton, and look what it did to his shoulders!
- May 1, 2015
- 2,652
- 1,947
- 113
I have smith at d5 and lever at d6. Seriously considering moving him onto hodge this week. Had planned to move lever on and keep smith at d6. With 5 trades left. Not sure if smith is even worthy of d6 now.
Would still have to move lever just before finals though
Would still have to move lever just before finals though
I was thinking of getting Smith as a D7 a few weeks back incase he hit form and might be a usefull bit of cover but figured he wasn't worthy of that if he's just scoring 60s... however in saying that surely you guys with Smith in D6 would be better off downgrading+upgrading 2 rookies to someone like Picken/Hodge and Riley Knight than sidewaysing Smith to Malceski? that way you're keeping Smith with good job security in D7 and getting Picken/Hodge's 100+ scores on field rather than Malceski's best scores for the season of 90?
If you'd rather not get the expensive blokes around 500k then isn't Grant Birchall a better pick than Malceski? Birchall will confidently average 90-95 where as Malceski's best scores for the season have just pipped 90... I understand Ablett's back which no doubt has an influence, but conveniently Saad's also out in the same weeks wouldn't that influence it too? I'd rather cop another 50k hit in the bank to atleast get Birchall, my opinion is Malceski has too many question marks and this time of the season is not the time to take risks because we no longer have trades to fix the mistakes we make.
That's my read on the situation
If you're really bullish on Malceski and can afford him in D7 then definitely worth the punt but if he's stuck on field I don't think he'll be worth it.
If you'd rather not get the expensive blokes around 500k then isn't Grant Birchall a better pick than Malceski? Birchall will confidently average 90-95 where as Malceski's best scores for the season have just pipped 90... I understand Ablett's back which no doubt has an influence, but conveniently Saad's also out in the same weeks wouldn't that influence it too? I'd rather cop another 50k hit in the bank to atleast get Birchall, my opinion is Malceski has too many question marks and this time of the season is not the time to take risks because we no longer have trades to fix the mistakes we make.
That's my read on the situation
If you're really bullish on Malceski and can afford him in D7 then definitely worth the punt but if he's stuck on field I don't think he'll be worth it.
I'm facing the Birchall v Malceski question this week as I need to replace McGovern.
I don't know how you can say that Birchall will confidently average 90-95 when he has done that 3 times in 10 years (2011-2013) and only played 14 games in one of those years.
So far this year he is averaging 86 from 11 games.
I don't know how you can say that Birchall will confidently average 90-95 when he has done that 3 times in 10 years (2011-2013) and only played 14 games in one of those years.
So far this year he is averaging 86 from 11 games.
If the answer is Birchall or Eski, I guess the question must be who, instead of Gibson or Burgoyne??
I've got Smith at D6 and also picked him up in the byes. The "he'll come good" feeling is fading, but I'd hate to see him pick up once I ditched him. Thanks to Ablett, my trading plans changed, leaving me with 9 midfield premiums, but no F6 (Steele at present) and our Brodie at D6.
Rather than continue with a premo on the bench and a rookie & spud on field, I'm looking to trade my M9 (Lachie Neale or J Lewis) + Keakouer to either:
- Deledio + Malceski, or
- Bartel + Marley Williams
What about keeping Smith and having both him and Malceski as a D6/7 loophole option (Hamling or McKenzie D8)?
Why Williams? Good POD & coming off 2 tons, but could easily be Burgoyne or Birchall.
Rather than continue with a premo on the bench and a rookie & spud on field, I'm looking to trade my M9 (Lachie Neale or J Lewis) + Keakouer to either:
- Deledio + Malceski, or
- Bartel + Marley Williams
What about keeping Smith and having both him and Malceski as a D6/7 loophole option (Hamling or McKenzie D8)?
Why Williams? Good POD & coming off 2 tons, but could easily be Burgoyne or Birchall.
@Clint in Scotland - can you edit 3 of your posts so that they don't take up the whole page. Just write repost, or sorry or whatever 3 word story you can come up with.
You didn't say how many trades you have left but I prefer Deledio & Malceski as trade in targets.
As to whether you should trade out Neale or Lewis you might want to compare their SoS. Hawks look to be in better form atm but Freo will be desperate to hold a top 2 position on the ladder. I would say Neale (just) as he needs less of the ball to score his 100 SC points.
EDIT - from CD regarding remaining SoS:
Freo: the Dockers have a challenging draw, playing three top-eight sides in their last seven matches. They have played six matches against top-eight sides, winning four by an average margin of just 17 points.
Hawks: the Hawks have the second-easiest draw in the competition. They play three bottom-four sides in the run home after playing these teams only twice so far this season.
If you really like Marley Williams as a POD then back yourself in.
@Prospector - I already have Gibson. Burgoyne is someone I recommended when Hodge & Lewis missed games. That is because we knew he would spend more time in the midfield with those two out. In rounds 6 & 7 when both those guys were out Burgoyne scored 127 & 103. In r8, when Lewis came back, he scored 74. Since then he has averaged 78. Burgoyne is the ultimate utility player (a bit like Bartel has been in the past) and his scores fluctuate too much depending upon his roll in each game.
You didn't say how many trades you have left but I prefer Deledio & Malceski as trade in targets.
As to whether you should trade out Neale or Lewis you might want to compare their SoS. Hawks look to be in better form atm but Freo will be desperate to hold a top 2 position on the ladder. I would say Neale (just) as he needs less of the ball to score his 100 SC points.
EDIT - from CD regarding remaining SoS:
Freo: the Dockers have a challenging draw, playing three top-eight sides in their last seven matches. They have played six matches against top-eight sides, winning four by an average margin of just 17 points.
Hawks: the Hawks have the second-easiest draw in the competition. They play three bottom-four sides in the run home after playing these teams only twice so far this season.
If you really like Marley Williams as a POD then back yourself in.
@Prospector - I already have Gibson. Burgoyne is someone I recommended when Hodge & Lewis missed games. That is because we knew he would spend more time in the midfield with those two out. In rounds 6 & 7 when both those guys were out Burgoyne scored 127 & 103. In r8, when Lewis came back, he scored 74. Since then he has averaged 78. Burgoyne is the ultimate utility player (a bit like Bartel has been in the past) and his scores fluctuate too much depending upon his roll in each game.
Last edited:
Just used my final two trades to turn Lever into Fields and Smith into Picken, and I'm having a bloody hard time hitting the reverse button. Hear me out:
Right now I have Smith on field averaging 65 since his bye and doesn't look like improving. A move to Picken is potentially a 50 ppg increase. Now if I were to pick up an injury on any line, I can cover with a player averaging at least 65 (Hamling/Fields in def, Steele in mids, Steele in fwd via Lambert, also McKernan up fwd and in ruck via Cox), which leaves me in be exact position I'm in now. So I'm effectively picking up 50 ppg and risking playing a 65 average, or I'm sacrificing 50 ppg and definitely playing a 65 average.
Am I crazy?
Right now I have Smith on field averaging 65 since his bye and doesn't look like improving. A move to Picken is potentially a 50 ppg increase. Now if I were to pick up an injury on any line, I can cover with a player averaging at least 65 (Hamling/Fields in def, Steele in mids, Steele in fwd via Lambert, also McKernan up fwd and in ruck via Cox), which leaves me in be exact position I'm in now. So I'm effectively picking up 50 ppg and risking playing a 65 average, or I'm sacrificing 50 ppg and definitely playing a 65 average.
Am I crazy?
@J-Dog - Yes. Smith & Lever are both playing and unlikely to lose their spot (barring injuries).
Who knows how the remaining rounds will play out? What if you lose two premiums from the same line? What if they are your most expensive players and you can't trade them out?
Sometimes you just have to accept that this is your team and hope they lift their performance.
Who knows how the remaining rounds will play out? What if you lose two premiums from the same line? What if they are your most expensive players and you can't trade them out?
Sometimes you just have to accept that this is your team and hope they lift their performance.
Thanks writeoff, needed some sense knocked into me haha
