Sloane ...

Started by Money Shot, January 04, 2016, 01:02:54 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Bully

Quote from: HotTiges on April 17, 2016, 11:52:07 PM
Quote from: Bully on April 17, 2016, 11:44:45 PM
Quote from: HotTiges on April 17, 2016, 11:22:10 PM
hopefully no more whacks to the jaw lol

Hopefully not, better not be the curse of Rocky & Sloane for a second time.
haha he should be fine..is he someone you really want in your final 8 mids??

I have two spots left, the guys in contention are Sloane, Gray, Priddis, Parker, Ward & JPK. Don't see a huge amount of difference between them so I'll be looking for the best deals available.

Holz

Quote from: Bully on April 18, 2016, 12:02:50 AM
Quote from: HotTiges on April 17, 2016, 11:52:07 PM
Quote from: Bully on April 17, 2016, 11:44:45 PM
Quote from: HotTiges on April 17, 2016, 11:22:10 PM
hopefully no more whacks to the jaw lol

Hopefully not, better not be the curse of Rocky & Sloane for a second time.
haha he should be fine..is he someone you really want in your final 8 mids??

I have two spots left, the guys in contention are Sloane, Gray, Priddis, Parker, Ward & JPK. Don't see a huge amount of difference between them so I'll be looking for the best deals available.

Sloane averaged 115 in 2014
117 if you remove his 3 red vests and the game he got concussed in 2015

he isnt a almost premo if he really is in form.

the worry was crouch was out does he come back and take ball away.


Jimmykidd

hes had 1 good game. not even on my radar right now. if he strings a few togehter, maybe..

RaisyDaisy

Quote from: Jimmykidd on April 18, 2016, 10:42:59 AM
hes had 1 good game. not even on my radar right now. if he strings a few togehter, maybe..

Holz

Quote from: RaisyDaisy on April 18, 2016, 10:58:16 AM
Quote from: Jimmykidd on April 18, 2016, 10:42:59 AM
hes had 1 good game. not even on my radar right now. if he strings a few togehter, maybe..

to be fair he has had 1 bad game

96 against north and 92 against richmond isnt terrible.


RaisyDaisy

Quote from: Holz on April 18, 2016, 11:00:38 AM
Quote from: RaisyDaisy on April 18, 2016, 10:58:16 AM
Quote from: Jimmykidd on April 18, 2016, 10:42:59 AM
hes had 1 good game. not even on my radar right now. if he strings a few togehter, maybe..

to be fair he has had 1 bad game

96 against north and 92 against richmond isnt terrible.

If he was under 500K the conversation makes sense, but there are better options for a little more atm

Has not shown enough to warrant one of our 8 mid spots yet

Holz

Quote from: RaisyDaisy on April 18, 2016, 11:02:21 AM
Quote from: Holz on April 18, 2016, 11:00:38 AM
Quote from: RaisyDaisy on April 18, 2016, 10:58:16 AM
Quote from: Jimmykidd on April 18, 2016, 10:42:59 AM
hes had 1 good game. not even on my radar right now. if he strings a few togehter, maybe..

to be fair he has had 1 bad game

96 against north and 92 against richmond isnt terrible.

If he was under 500K the conversation makes sense, but there are better options for a little more atm

Has not shown enough to warrant one of our 8 mid spots yet

who has two seasons were they have gone 115 (unsubbed)?

Pendles has but he looks average

im giving sloane one more week too but he is top of the list.

RaisyDaisy

Don't put too much weight on previous seasons

Pendles is a classic example. I'm stuck with him averaging 100 because his role has changed, and Sloane isn't relied on as much

Not saying he's a bad pick - he's a gun, but I'd be waiting a little longer

Jimmykidd

Quote from: RaisyDaisy on April 18, 2016, 11:11:18 AM
Don't put too much weight on previous seasons

Pendles is a classic example. I'm stuck with him averaging 100 because his role has changed, and Sloane isn't relied on as much

Not saying he's a bad pick - he's a gun, but I'd be waiting a little longer

+1

Holz

Quote from: RaisyDaisy on April 18, 2016, 11:11:18 AM
Don't put too much weight on previous seasons

Pendles is a classic example. I'm stuck with him averaging 100 because his role has changed, and Sloane isn't relied on as much

Not saying he's a bad pick - he's a gun, but I'd be waiting a little longer

Fair point on Pendles with the change in role.

but I dont understand your point on Sloane. what do you mean he isnt rellied on as much? he is relied on more with danger gone. You could say you are worried about tags with Danger gone, but sloane has often had tags.


RaisyDaisy

Quote from: Holz on April 18, 2016, 11:37:56 AM
Quote from: RaisyDaisy on April 18, 2016, 11:11:18 AM
Don't put too much weight on previous seasons

Pendles is a classic example. I'm stuck with him averaging 100 because his role has changed, and Sloane isn't relied on as much

Not saying he's a bad pick - he's a gun, but I'd be waiting a little longer

Fair point on Pendles with the change in role.

but I dont understand your point on Sloane. what do you mean he isnt rellied on as much? he is relied on more with danger gone. You could say you are worried about tags with Danger gone, but sloane has often had tags.

My point about Sloane is that he has only had 1 good score out of 4 matches

The 90 odd scores are serviceable, but not good enough for a mid spot

Need to see more

Judd Magic

Got burnt by Sloane last year and still have that bitter taste in my mouth whenever I see his name.

No thanks!!!!

RaisyDaisy

Watching him first hand tonight and he is everywhere

Definitely looking like he is back to his best now

Only in 2.9% of teams, and should smash his BE of 87 so he'll cost about 550k next week

I won't be getting him, because I need to upgrade other lines first, but he does look good tonight and was big last week too

fanTCfool

So tempted now, have the cash in hand too.
We'll see how we go for the rest of the week now.

Holz

Seen enough is in next week.

Midfield complete