Nathan Fyfe to who trade

[TexR74]

Crazy for thinking Sidebottom?

[jvalles69]

Crazy for thinking Sidebottom?

Nope, he's prob the only guy not on that list that I'd consider.

[RoughRed]

Crazy for thinking Sidebottom?

Nope, he's prob the only guy not on that list that I'd consider.

Have Danger, Priddis, Ablett, Libba, Kennedy, Crouch
Unsure of pendles
Take Sidebottom to cover Round 14 bye

[Gavdroid]

Thoughts on Cotchin as a POD? Averaging well despite the tigers being rubbish.

Personally considering because I can only just afford Dea > Simpson and Fyfe > Cotchin

Otherwise I'll be going Fyfe > Pendles and Dea > ? (maybe Lee)

[WizzFizz]

Parker vs Pendles?

[Raiden]

Parker vs Pendles?

Parker

[Bill Manspeaker]

Parker vs Pendles?

Parker

I can't read that name any more without hearing that stupid chick on that ad

[WizzFizz]

If I could get one next week as well who should I get in that order - pendles then parker or parker then pendles

[Raiden]

If I could get one next week as well who should I get in that order - pendles then parker or parker then pendles

I'd go Pendles BE 105  > Parker BE 120 (This is if you plan to grab both in consecutive weeks, if you are not sure then grab Parks)

[GCSkiwi]

Let's be honest, if the point is to rank your three top mids regardless of if you have them or not, I'd be surprised with anyone who doesn't put Danger and DanHan as no1 and no2... 3rd could take some debating, but those two are the standouts if you don't have them imo. DanHan over Parker as a massive first game drags parker up a bit, but I reckon you can count on DanHan to pump out more 120+ scores...

[Ringo]

Let's be honest, if the point is to rank your three top mids regardless of if you have them or not, I'd be surprised with anyone who doesn't put Danger and DanHan as no1 and no2... 3rd could take some debating, but those two are the standouts if you don't have them imo. DanHan over Parker as a massive first game drags parker up a bit, but I reckon you can count on DanHan to pump out more 120+ scores...

Thanks Kiwi that was the point as some would not have the Top 4 or 5 hence asking for voting to be done that way. I am one of those that does not have Danger btw,

[Torpedo10]

Parker vs Pendles?

Parker

I can't read that name any more without hearing that stupid chick on that ad

Hahaha yep, I think of her every time I see him touch the ball.

[GoLions]

Parker vs Pendles?

Parker

I can't read that name any more without hearing that stupid chick on that ad

Hahaha yep, I think of her every time I see him touch the ball.

Omfg it's so annoying haha

[Jay]

Parker vs Pendles?

Parker

I can't read that name any more without hearing that stupid chick on that ad

Hahaha yep, I think of her every time I see him touch the ball.

Omfg it's so annoying haha

Paaahhhhhhhkaa

[MontyJnr]

Let's be honest, if the point is to rank your three top mids regardless of if you have them or not, I'd be surprised with anyone who doesn't put Danger and DanHan as no1 and no2... 3rd could take some debating, but those two are the standouts if you don't have them imo. DanHan over Parker as a massive first game drags parker up a bit, but I reckon you can count on DanHan to pump out more 120+ scores...

I think Danger is a clear number 1, so he should've been left off the poll. Captain/VC loophole material. Obviously get him if you don't have him.

Dan Hannebery's price counts against him IMO. Is he really worth 40k more than Selwood, Parker, Pendles or Priddis? I honestly think the output of these guys will be similar, so the extra cash spent on Hannebery could probably be better spent elsewhere.