Swan vs pendlebury

[cortez]

Just thinking. I know one of everyones first picked is dane swan. But what about scott pendlebury as your Collingwood midfielder? He is already averaging well over 100 and will only improve. Where as swan can't really up his average. Wouldn't at the start of the year get more value out of picking pendlebury?

[Red Dirtie]

I was thinking the same as you cortez, Pendles i much cheaper and should hit his average more often as Swan needs to smash out high scores in order for his price to not drop,

Saying that you will be able to buy Swan at a cheaper price later on, Butttttttttt do you wanna risk those 120+ games that swanny hits time to time.

[cortez]

If pendlebury keeps improving he will end up scoring as high as swan won't he well close anyway. I'm just thinking cause it saves a bit of cash too. Does anyone know when Collingwood has there second bye?

[ando_10]

seems to be the big question so far and alot of debate personally i think swan will average more BUT not by much at all. Its not worth going with swan hes alot more expensive than pendles im guessing swan will average 120 and pendles around 115 so in the end your paying more money for only a few more points a game

so for me im picking the 2011 brownlow medalist Scott Pendlebury

[cortez]

Thats exactly what I'm thinking. Maybe put swan in after there second bye?

[Alex7089]

Swan is an upgrade target.
Second bye is round 13 so I'll probably pick him up no long after that. Pendles will up it a lot this year, and it would be very difficult for Swan to improve, if he does it will be extremely slight.