the vanberlo monologues (nice name mate!) from BigFooty writes:
Monty, as the respected runner of fanfooty.com i value your opinion. I posted this on the forums but i didn’t get any decent replys. The question is, is lockyer or fletcher better to get considering the 10 point difference in average and the 50,000 difference in price?
A loyal fan, gilbee
Okay, so you’re trying to choose between two players who have stepped up markedly this year. Tarkyn Lockyer is on $385,600 and averaging 107.5, while Dustin Fletcher is priced at $339,000 with an average of 97.8.
You probably can’t go wrong with either player, but I think Fletcher is a little better value for money. Fletcher’s breakeven score this week is 57 compared to Lockyer’s 80, and the FFGenie program rates Lockyer’s “real price” (based on his 2007 scoring) as only $11k more than his actual price, while Fletcher still has $21k to make up. Outside of the raw numbers, you have to worry a bit more about Fletcher’s aging body, but then again you also have to worry a bit about Collingwood dropping away after the April/May period, which they did last year and is a bit of a long-term trend for them.
I’d give it to Fletcher by a long nose. Spend that extra $50,000 on upgrading your rookies, that’s my advice.
