Kyle Langford

[H1bb3i2d]

$188,200: Priced to average 34.88.

What's the general consensus to be a good cash cow, average 30 points higher than your implied price? So 65.

In his 4/8 unsubbed games he averaged 60.5, so on that note he's almost there with no sub vest in '16. His subbed scores include a 3 when injured in Q1 and an appearance in the 4th when the game was already over for an 8 (but 20 DT points).

He's looking mighty fine (in a, ahh, physical sense) and I can easily see him playing 16 games and averaging between 60-70, depending where he's played. Most Bombers supporters see him in the best 22, I already had him pencilled in for 10-12 games with a full squad. Most of his games and points you'd think would come early, and if/when he and the rest of the youngsters fade late I'd have already said adios.

On anybody else's watchlist?

[MC]

Probably too expensive for what he's shown thus far, especially with all of the cheaper Essendon rookies around.

I might reassess if he gives me a reason to during the NAB.

[enzedder]

Probably too expensive for what he's shown thus far, especially with all of the cheaper Essendon rookies around.

I might reassess if he gives me a reason to during the NAB.

Agree with this.
Bit too expensive. Similar to Cockatoo. Pass for me.

[RaisyDaisy]

Yep, ^ what they said

[meow meow]

He's not on my watchlist. He's in my team.

[Ricochet]

Yeh bit too pricey for me