Nathan Fyfe to who trade

[_wato]

Why GC? Because he played in the middle finally (thanks Bucks), and he has about 7-8 years of scoring to prove he's worth it

One game, one score, against the bombers. Let's see what happens this week before we get too excited? For sure if he's in the guts again this week he will rapidly rise in my sights, regardless of his score... But factor in that Pendles had all that history of killing it when playing in the guts, and Bucks still looked to shift him out... So is it an experiment that he has decided has failed, or was this a flash in the pan?

Yep, and he still averaged 100 playing out of position

I started with him, so not really considering him ;)

For sure, but if he goes back to playing out of position, I reckon I can do better than 100 for an M8, if that's all I'm getting I'll just keep Libba :P

Hypothetically if you hadn't started him, do you really think you'd be looking to pull him in now? Or would you be waiting?

I'm not saying Pendles is a spud, I'm saying Bucks is a spud and until he demonstrates that his brain explosion phase is done, Pendles is far from a must have player in your SC team.

Said it yourself.

[Wanderer]

I don't have him, but I am seriously considering him for these reasons:

- if you take out first round he is actually averaging around 112
- other than Sidey and maybe Treloar, he doesn't have much competition for points now that Swan is out and Beams is no longer there
- he is super consistent, even while playing out of position
- super durable and very rarely gets injured....even with broken ribs he keeps playing and still pumps out reasonable score
- Pies have been awful (other than last game) and couldn't get any worse, so there is some upside in points scoring you would think
- his price is about as low as it's going to get
- already have a number of captain choices in the team, so don't need him for that
- and he is Dependlebury after all

Yes, the whole playing out of position is a worry, but Buckley did choose to play him in the guts on the weekend and they won, so there is a good chance he keeps him in there

[Jay]

The appeal to Pendlebury is his whole career of elite scoring, not one big game vs Essington.

[RaisyDaisy]

Before the Anzac Game, Bucks said that Pendles is going back into the mids

I see no reason why he would go into the mids vs Ess, and not against any other team

[elephants]

I'm one of those fools without Dangerfield so I'll be grabbing him.

[GCSkiwi]

Before the Anzac Game, Bucks said that Pendles is going back into the mids

I see no reason why he would go into the mids vs Ess, and not against any other team

True. Though I hadn't seen Bucks saying he's going back to the mids permanently - so taking that into account maybe fair enough.

The appeal to Pendlebury is his whole career of elite scoring, not one big game vs Essington.

Let's see what happens this week before we get too excited? For sure if he's in the guts again this week he will rapidly rise in my sights, regardless of his score... But factor in that Pendles had all that history of killing it when playing in the guts, and Bucks still looked to shift him out...

I'm not saying Pendles is a spud, I'm saying Bucks is a spud and until he demonstrates that his brain explosion phase is done, Pendles is far from a must have player in your SC team.

- if you take out first round he is actually averaging around 112

Yes, the whole playing out of position is a worry, but Buckley did choose to play him in the guts on the weekend and they won, so there is a good chance he keeps him in there

Agree with most of your other points but you can't just whip a bad score out and then claim he has a new average, from the 4 games he played in the back he averaged 101. Then 131 from one in the middle. I know/we all know he plays best in the middle, as long as Bucks leaves him there I'm ok with it. But Bucks knew that too, and I'm not sure I buy the whole 'protecting his ribs' angle.

I won't be bringing him in this week, if he gets played in the middle again, confirming that Bucks has had some sense knocked into him, I'll almost certainly pick him up next week.

[Ringo]

I'm one of those fools without Dangerfield so I'll be grabbing him.

Was first trade I made when SC opened as I was of the 44% as well.  ;)

[Hazza09]

I can't decide between Parker and Hanners for my replacement for Fyfe.

To get Parker I can go B Kennedy-Parker and to get Hanners I need to go Dea-Hanners

Can't decide  :-[

[jvalles69]

I can't decide between Parker and Hanners for my replacement for Fyfe.

To get Parker I can go B Kennedy-Parker and to get Hanners I need to go Dea-Hanners

Can't decide  :-[

I'd roll with Hanners at this stage, most people have already jumped on Parker so gives you a slight POD.

[Nige]

I can't decide between Parker and Hanners for my replacement for Fyfe.

To get Parker I can go B Kennedy-Parker and to get Hanners I need to go Dea-Hanners

Can't decide  :-[

I'd roll with Hanners at this stage, most people have already jumped on Parker so gives you a slight POD.

Yep, would be somewhat of a POD but also costs the extra 40k (iirc). Got Parker at this stage, but I can see myself reversing it to bring Hanners in instead.

[GCSkiwi]

I can't decide between Parker and Hanners for my replacement for Fyfe.

To get Parker I can go B Kennedy-Parker and to get Hanners I need to go Dea-Hanners

Can't decide  :-[

Por que no los dos?

At the moment I'm going Fyfe and Dea to Parker and Hanners, they both have BE of 120 but playing the lions could easily make it...

[jvalles69]

I can't decide between Parker and Hanners for my replacement for Fyfe.

To get Parker I can go B Kennedy-Parker and to get Hanners I need to go Dea-Hanners

Can't decide  :-[

Por que no los dos?

At the moment I'm going Fyfe and Dea to Parker and Hanners, they both have BE of 120 but playing the lions could easily make it...

No worry about when the byes come around?  It's the reason I'm going Pendles instead of Hanners as it evens up the byes a bit for me, plus he's bottomed out.

[GCSkiwi]

No worry about when the byes come around?  It's the reason I'm going Pendles instead of Hanners as it evens up the byes a bit for me, plus he's bottomed out.

I'll be on the Pendles train next week so long as he plays in the middle this week. As for byes in all honesty every year I've planned my bye strategy very carefully, and it's all gone to shower in the couple of weeks before byes anyway. This year I'm on a mission to get the best players as soon as I can, as I figure the points I can gain having them in earlier can count against having to tank a round if needed. With that said, The majority of my round 12 bye players are rookies that may well have already been shifted on, or will be able to be upgraded by then anyway (in theory  :-X )

[jvalles69]

No worry about when the byes come around?  It's the reason I'm going Pendles instead of Hanners as it evens up the byes a bit for me, plus he's bottomed out.

I'll be on the Pendles train next week so long as he plays in the middle this week. As for byes in all honesty every year I've planned my bye strategy very carefully, and it's all gone to shower in the couple of weeks before byes anyway. This year I'm on a mission to get the best players as soon as I can, as I figure the points I can gain having them in earlier can count against having to tank a round if needed. With that said, The majority of my round 12 bye players are rookies that may well have already been shifted on, or will be able to be upgraded by then anyway (in theory  :-X )

Haha, too true!  I just have way too many players in my side from the middle bye round, it'll prob even out as it gets closer, but still want to be relatively safe.

[MC]

 Priddis vs Ward vs Sloane vs Gray (Will be 6th prem mid)

Already locked in Joel this week, and already have Pendles, JPK, GAJ, Danger