Danger

[enzedder]

Danger is clearly a good pick, a must have and will be in every good SC team.
Yet at his price is he going to be in your starting team?
If the answer is yes, then it will impact elsewhere.
If the answer is no, then surely he is an upgrade target.
I'm presently in the undecided camp... he's not in my plans to start at the moment.
Danger could explode from the outset and pump out a 200+ in his first five games or he could have a sluggish start and lose coin like Fyfe did last year....$27k after the first price drop, $45k when he played in R5 for the last time in 2016.
All those who didn't fork out $670k for Fyfe last year and weren't tempted to bring him in after R3 did well.
Not saying or hoping that will happen to Danger but it's food for thought and one low score seriously hurts the value of the most expensive players. The opposing viewpoint though is if he maintains a healthy average, he'll be hard to afford and bring in.
It's a big decision.

[shaker]

His big scoring is just to hard to say no to first picked

[Holz]

Captain option if not auto captain who has missed 1 game in the last 3 years.

gotta be a lock.

unlike Ablett or Fyfe he is super durable.

If he averages only 120 i dont care, hes the guy i want in my squad.

[PiPies]

Happy to pay the price knowing he will drop some cash early for the solid C option.

[Ringo]

Can only get better as he settles at Cats. Solid permanent C 10 scores above 130 last year so what more do you want.

Hope I do not jinx him but only missed 3 games in the last 6 years as well.

[JBs-Hawks]

Can only get better as he settles at Cats. Solid permanent C 10 scores above 130 last year so what more do you want.

Hope I do not jinx him but only missed 3 games in the last 6 years as well.

Not sure that the only outcome is he gets better :P

But a lock nonetheless

[enzedder]

Coming up against opponents with Danger would test the nerves.
Agree about the C option as a major benefit to owning him but Gawn, Pendles, Rockliff, Goldy and Fyfe are decent C options too.

[RaisyDaisy]

[enzedder]

One could think you're saying "Don't think! Do"
But I might be overthinking it.

[RaisyDaisy]

That's exactly what that meant :)

[AaronKirk]

Given the likes of Heppell, Beams and Fyfe even are going to be quite cheap if they are ready to go for round one there is no reason not to have Danger  locked in your side for round 1.

[LordSneeze]

Leave him out. Clearly picking a gun like Trent Cotchin is a better option

[enzedder]

Leave him out. Clearly picking a gun like Trent Cotchin is a better option

Someone's being silly.
My original post mentions that Danger is clearly a good pick, a must have....but questioning him as a starting option.
FWIW my planned Dangerless mids were: Pendles, Bont, Fyfe, Rocky, Beams, Swallow, Myers, Rookies...no Cotchin or equivalent in sight.
If I were to downgrade Goldy, Gawn, Shaw etc then Danger becomes an option but how many premiums is it worth downgrading to get Danger. Mid pricers don't appeal.

[Kenny27]

Leave him out. Clearly picking a gun like Trent Cotchin is a better option

Both have just won brownlow medals... you couldn't split them at this stage. I think we need to wait for pre-season form  =)

[crowls]

Leave him out. Clearly picking a gun like Trent Cotchin is a better option

Both have just won brownlow medals... you couldn't split them at this stage. I think we need to wait for pre-season form  =)

Kenny I look forward to my danger led team taking your Cotchin led team.   It is like have a kilo of gold vs a kilo of brass.     They may look the same but one is worth a lot more than the other.   
  PS I understood it was in jest.     


LS what is the strategic advantage of having a gawn goldy or shaw over Danger.     Certainly we can expect to pick up goldy and shaw at significant lower prices to starting price.  In the meantime you are losing 10+ points per game by not having Danger.