Is Taranto worth it?

[AaronKirk]

If Taranto averages 70 till the bye (based on Tooserious calculator) he will make approximately 105k

If Pickett averages 50 till Carlton's bye (based on same calculator) he also will make approx 105k

If you pick 1-2 rookies who are cheaper than the Taranto/Turner/McCarthy's of the world you can use the extra cash around the 150-200k to pick premiums who will could make the points difference back up which ends up being a better result.

It is better to pick cheaper rookies if you can pick more premos over mid pricers to get more points.

If enough cheap rookies are selected I'll roll the dice and pick them over the likes of Taranto.

[Mat0369]

Just a few guys missing off Bully's list

Adam Treloar: 83.1

Toby Greene: 94.5

David Swallow: 79.5

Coniglio: 75.8

Scully: 71

Dustin Martin: 77.9

Daniel Rich: 85.6

Jack Trengove: 74.7

Whitfield: 73

Dylan Shiel: 75.3

A lot of those kids stepped into poor sides and were thrown in the deep end, however that means they had more pressure on them to perform week in and week out. Someone that is as good as Taranto should be able to put up similar numbers which is perfect.

[plumdog millionaire]

Starting him based off that emotional call he had with his dad

[Mat0369]

If Taranto averages 70 till the bye (based on Tooserious calculator) he will make approximately 105k

If Pickett averages 50 till Carlton's bye (based on same calculator) he also will make approx 105k

If you pick 1-2 rookies who are cheaper than the Taranto/Turner/McCarthy's of the world you can use the extra cash around the 150-200k to pick premiums who will could make the points difference back up which ends up being a better result.

It is better to pick cheaper rookies if you can pick more premos over mid pricers to get more points.

If enough cheap rookies are selected I'll roll the dice and pick them over the likes of Taranto.

I don't disagree with this, but you aren't wanting to hold guys like Pickett until our bye. Also downgrading Taranto to an available 120k rookie will net more cash then trading down a low scoring 120k rookie. There is nothing wrong with picking 2-3 pricier rookie options. I normally think 1 on each line is fine but this year I'm not taking any in the mids so 2 in the forward line and 1 in defense looks the go.

[AaronKirk]

If Taranto averages 70 till the bye (based on Tooserious calculator) he will make approximately 105k

If Pickett averages 50 till Carlton's bye (based on same calculator) he also will make approx 105k

If you pick 1-2 rookies who are cheaper than the Taranto/Turner/McCarthy's of the world you can use the extra cash around the 150-200k to pick premiums who will could make the points difference back up which ends up being a better result.

It is better to pick cheaper rookies if you can pick more premos over mid pricers to get more points.

If enough cheap rookies are selected I'll roll the dice and pick them over the likes of Taranto.

I don't disagree with this, but you aren't wanting to hold guys like Pickett until our bye. Also downgrading Taranto to an available 120k rookie will net more cash then trading down a low scoring 120k rookie. There is nothing wrong with picking 2-3 pricier rookie options. I normally think 1 on each line is fine but this year I'm not taking any in the mids so 2 in the forward line and 1 in defense looks the go.

Very true, Pickett is a bench option and Taranto is someone who you would prefer on field.

[RaisyDaisy]

Just a few guys missing off Bully's list

Adam Treloar: 83.1

Toby Greene: 94.5

David Swallow: 79.5

Coniglio: 75.8

Scully: 71

Dustin Martin: 77.9

Daniel Rich: 85.6

Jack Trengove: 74.7

Whitfield: 73

Dylan Shiel: 75.3

A lot of those kids stepped into poor sides and were thrown in the deep end, however that means they had more pressure on them to perform week in and week out. Someone that is as good as Taranto should be able to put up similar numbers which is perfect.

Most of those numbers are from GWS and GC so of course they should be higher because they were brand new clubs with 18+ rookies on field - the points had to go somewhere

Dusty, Rich and Trengove walked into shower clubs

Hopper and Kennedy are the perfect comparison for Taranto - same scenario, just as good

[TomK]

It is better to pick cheaper rookies if you can pick more premos over mid pricers to get more points.

This is true but it can depend on the situation, for example, I don't have any midpricers I want to upgrade so the best I could do if I downgraded WHE and Taranto to cheaper rookies is moves like TMitch - Treloar, Howe - Adams and Ryder - Buddy.

I feel like my total points would still be higher with WHE, Taranto, TMitch, Howe, Ryder than it would be with Treloar, Adams, Buddy, and for example let's say Parfitt and Houston.

[Bully]

basically it comes to how you spend the 80K and what extra points you gain- Taranto I think will average 85/90 meaning a possible $250k rise but all be it slow. However if you use that on a rookie who still may go 70/80 price rise is more and quicker.
I am still tossing up which of WHE and Taranto to start.

I'd say very unlikely he averages that. I posted this list on the rookie thread but it's worth noting that no other first year player in history has registered that average over the course of a season. O'meara averaged 90 but spent a year playing NEAFL whilst GC prepared for their AFL debut.

Andrew Gaff - 61
Jordan Lewis - 62
Bryce Gibbs - 63
Angus Brayshaw - 65
Trent Cotchin - 66
Harley Bennell - 68
Marc Murphy - 70
Isaac Heeney - 70
Clayton Oliver - 70
Jack Viney - 71
Nat Fyfe - 72
Brett Deledio - 74
Ollie Wines - 75
Callum Mills - 77
Dustin Martin - 77
Joel Selwood - 77
Marcus Bontempelli - 78
David Swallow - 79
Dyson Heppell - 83
Jaeger O'Meara - 90 *was held back a year due to GC inception

Bit of a tough ask but finding averages from these blokes from rounds 1-10 would be a far more effective way to assess rookies worth. All rookies hit the wall eventually that drags down their season average, it's about what they can do in those early rounds for cash generation and place-holding.

Also no sub rule takes away some of the potential shockers from rooks that effect their average - probably not too many on your list that it applies to, but I remember Gaff getting vested a couple of times in his debut season, dragging down his average.

I did go over the burn out factor but it's not necessarily true. I haven't got time to do them all but here's the main examples for the first 8 games.

Dusty - 72, 83, 74, 53, 100, 56, 66, 69
Selwood - 14, 53, 50, 113, 59, 49, 55, 65
Mills - 71, 68, 56, 84, 94, 70, 36, 59
Wines - 125, 51, 121, 91, 82, 74, 61, 75
Swallow - 70, 72, 95, 91, 82, 88, 75, 84

The only guy who dropped off was Wines, his start to the year was the absolute best that can be expected. I think there's an argument that players get more accustomed to the pace of the game, hence their scores increase.

[Mat0369]

Most of those numbers are from GWS and GC so of course they should be higher because they were brand new clubs with 18+ rookies on field - the points had to go somewhere

They were also getting smashed by 100 points most weeks. Normally top end draftees go to weak teams, it's not often that the team favoured for the premiership get the 2nd overall selection.

Daniel Rich might actually be the best comparison. Brisbane made the 2nd week of finals and he played 22 games at an 85 average.

Playing in that stacked GWS team should make the transition to senior football easier for someone like Taranto then Scully/Trengove playing in those crappy Melbourne sides.

[My Chumps]

If Taranto averages 70 till the bye (based on Tooserious calculator) he will make approximately 105k

If Pickett averages 50 till Carlton's bye (based on same calculator) he also will make approx 105k

If you pick 1-2 rookies who are cheaper than the Taranto/Turner/McCarthy's of the world you can use the extra cash around the 150-200k to pick premiums who will could make the points difference back up which ends up being a better result.

It is better to pick cheaper rookies if you can pick more premos over mid pricers to get more points.

If enough cheap rookies are selected I'll roll the dice and pick them over the likes of Taranto.

I don't disagree with this, but you aren't wanting to hold guys like Pickett until our bye. Also downgrading Taranto to an available 120k rookie will net more cash then trading down a low scoring 120k rookie. There is nothing wrong with picking 2-3 pricier rookie options. I normally think 1 on each line is fine but this year I'm not taking any in the mids so 2 in the forward line and 1 in defense looks the go.

Haha, a seemingly simple point that is very valid and often gets overlooked in these discussions.

I've currently got WHE, Mccarthy and Taranto at F4-6

[RaisyDaisy]

Hopper and Kennedy are the perfect comparison for Taranto - same scenario, just as good

[Mat0369]

Haha, a seemingly simple point that is very valid and often gets overlooked in these discussions.

I've currently got WHE, Mccarthy and Taranto at F4-6

It's because the argument is you could use the initial 80k elsewhere. That's fair and valid, however to generate cash during the season and grab a guy that's dipped in price you can probably grab said premium at a 40k-80k discount. while not losing points.

[Bully]

Just a few guys missing off Bully's list

Adam Treloar: 83.1

Toby Greene: 94.5

David Swallow: 79.5

Coniglio: 75.8

Scully: 71

Dustin Martin: 77.9

Daniel Rich: 85.6

Jack Trengove: 74.7

Whitfield: 73

Dylan Shiel: 75.3

A lot of those kids stepped into poor sides and were thrown in the deep end, however that means they had more pressure on them to perform week in and week out. Someone that is as good as Taranto should be able to put up similar numbers which is perfect.

Toby Greene as the outlier started with scores of 84, 81, 59, 96, 99, 77, 52, 71. I think that's a fairer representation, and as Raisy has pointed out, the points had to go somewhere.

Rich probably on par with Heppell so you are looking at a 10% chance of replicating these scores.

[Mat0369]

Hopper and Kennedy are the perfect comparison for Taranto - same scenario, just as good

Taranto is ahead of Kennedy at the same point in their development. Hopper I guess you can use as an example even though he is more of a pure mid while Taranto is more a half forward mid. I see him more in a Petracca model who also averaged 72. 70-72 isn't a horrible output on return and what I said his floor would be.

[My Chumps]

I did go over the burn out factor but it's not necessarily true. I haven't got time to do them all but here's the main examples for the first 8 games.

Dusty - 72, 83, 74, 53, 100, 56, 66, 69
Selwood - 14, 53, 50, 113, 59, 49, 55, 65
Mills - 71, 68, 56, 84, 94, 70, 36, 59
Wines - 125, 51, 121, 91, 82, 74, 61, 75
Swallow - 70, 72, 95, 91, 82, 88, 75, 84

The only guy who dropped off was Wines, his start to the year was the absolute best that can be expected. I think there's an argument that players get more accustomed to the pace of the game, hence their scores increase.

Cheers for the numbers Bully, much appreciated. Seems like it could be a bit of a myth. I'll have another look at it tomorrow but I wonder if playing pure mid has something to do with a burn out effect. Mills definitely improved as the season went on, but was well managed and playing off half back. Wines pure mid, etc etc