To Danger, or Not to Danger

[Bully]

Danger down to 19%, Dusty up to 54%. Reckon I'm gonna hold & go the double shot with Banfield & Holman. Worst case is I lose 80 points (140 - 60). For those who picked Zerrett it's a 40 loss, for those who picked Crouch only a 40 point gain.

Your forgeting the points from the 150k. Unless people kept the cash in the bank to bring in danger next week which is silly.

That's certainly another factor, in my situation I'm probably up 20 points by fielding Doedee so that is largely wiped. Would have been Sicily up to Heeney so will be watching with interest.

Once the dust settles this week I'm hoping to get a few of those points back with the C choices. Danger has recently dominated his next few opponents too -

vs Hawks (141 & 90)
vs West Coast (141)
vs Saints (120)
vs Port (163)
vs Swans (135)
vs GWS (163 & 196)

So if this is replicated there will be no discounts & will require some serious tinkering. Those with two mid pricers are best placed. Those without will need to offload a premo in all likelihood.

Dusty by comparison has -

vs Crows AAMI (93) *150 at MCG
vs Hawks (119)
vs Lions (111 & 54)
vs Demons (92)
vs Coll (118)
vs Freo (130 & 105)

So it's probably unlikely Dusty becomes a viable C option, that's what I'm hoping anyway.

[shaker]

If you are only interested in mini-League then keeping Danger will be a massive POD.

There are no head to head matches this week. So nothing is lost.

Add to that, if those without take him as the 1st upgrade target then that could be 6 weeks before they start banking his scores, otherwise it's a correction trade or 2 to bring him in earlier (trades that will be handy come finals).

Thinking more of overall and starting Cripps for Danger has worked so far , there is no point for me getting Danger if he plays next week I've committed to see how he goes now bit of a punt but you just have to do it sometimes  :D

[tkringle]

I’m considering going Mitchell instead of Danger and dropping Libba for Armitage which gives me $260K to eventually bring Danger in..

If Armitage averages ~95, anyone know how long before he would hit ~$450K?

[Ricochet]

I’m considering going Mitchell instead of Danger and dropping Libba for Armitage which gives me $260K to eventually bring Danger in..

If Armitage averages ~95, anyone know how long before he would hit ~$450K?

RD9 mate

[Bully]

I’m considering going Mitchell instead of Danger and dropping Libba for Armitage which gives me $260K to eventually bring Danger in..

If Armitage averages ~95, anyone know how long before he would hit ~$450K?

Armitage - 109 HS, likely 95, profit 125k by round 7
O'Meara - 97 HS, likely 90, profit 100k by round 7
Coniglio - 106 HS, likely 105, profit 60k by round 7
Redden - 103 HS, likely 95, profit 30k by round 7
Liberatore - 110 HS, likely 95, profit 30k by round 7

[tkringle]

I’m considering going Mitchell instead of Danger and dropping Libba for Armitage which gives me $260K to eventually bring Danger in..

If Armitage averages ~95, anyone know how long before he would hit ~$450K?

RD9 mate

Thanks. Round 9 is a bit late to be bringing Danger in

[GoLions]

I’m considering going Mitchell instead of Danger and dropping Libba for Armitage which gives me $260K to eventually bring Danger in..

If Armitage averages ~95, anyone know how long before he would hit ~$450K?

Armitage - 109 HS, likely 95, profit 125k by round 7
O'Meara - 97 HS, likely 90, profit 100k by round 7
Coniglio - 106 HS, likely 105, profit 60k by round 7
Redden - 103 HS, likely 95, profit 30k by round 7
Liberatore - 110 HS, likely 95, profit 30k by round 7

Has hit 95+ once in the last 8 years...wouldn't say it is that likely haha

[Bully]

I’m considering going Mitchell instead of Danger and dropping Libba for Armitage which gives me $260K to eventually bring Danger in..

If Armitage averages ~95, anyone know how long before he would hit ~$450K?

Armitage - 109 HS, likely 95, profit 125k by round 7
O'Meara - 97 HS, likely 90, profit 100k by round 7
Coniglio - 106 HS, likely 105, profit 60k by round 7
Redden - 103 HS, likely 95, profit 30k by round 7
Liberatore - 110 HS, likely 95, profit 30k by round 7

Has hit 95+ once in the last 8 years...wouldn't say it is that likely haha

Has a very good draw, could start with two tons. But in any case he hasn't been too far off -

2013 - 92.4
2014 - 93.6
2015 - 109.7
2016 - 87.3

That last year he was given tagging duties too, from all reports that won't occur this year.

[js19]

I've currently got Danger on the bench, but starting to question the plan...

Here's why:

I've got Finlayson and Fritsch to play as the weakest links. As it stands, I can trade Danger to a combo of either:
Hibberd & Dunkley
Any combo of Shaw/Lloyd/Mills & Toby/Petracca to take the field instead via Finlayson to mid bench and trade out Venables to bench Fritsch.

I've got no idea who to pick on the FWD bench as rookies anyways, so foresee a correctional trade there regardless. Could live without Danger for a couple of weeks and then trade the worst performing ~400k to a rook/Danger.

I know it costs 2 trades, but if one is a likely correctional anyways, will it be worth it...?

[tkringle]

I've currently got Danger on the bench, but starting to question the plan...

Here's why:

I've got Finlayson and Fritsch to play as the weakest links. As it stands, I can trade Danger to a combo of either:
Hibberd & Dunkley
Any combo of Shaw/Lloyd/Mills & Toby/Petracca to take the field instead via Finlayson to mid bench and trade out Venables to bench Fritsch.

I've got no idea who to pick on the FWD bench as rookies anyways, so foresee a correctional trade there regardless. Could live without Danger for a couple of weeks and then trade the worst performing ~400k to a rook/Danger.

I know it costs 2 trades, but if one is a likely correctional anyways, will it be worth it...?

Assuming you will have no left $$ left over it would mean that you would need to get rid of two bad performing ~400-450K players?

One down to rookie, one midfielder up to Danger. Not sure how you know already that you will have two midprice players that will fail?

[js19]

I've currently got Danger on the bench, but starting to question the plan...

Here's why:

I've got Finlayson and Fritsch to play as the weakest links. As it stands, I can trade Danger to a combo of either:
Hibberd & Dunkley
Any combo of Shaw/Lloyd/Mills & Toby/Petracca to take the field instead via Finlayson to mid bench and trade out Venables to bench Fritsch.

I've got no idea who to pick on the FWD bench as rookies anyways, so foresee a correctional trade there regardless. Could live without Danger for a couple of weeks and then trade the worst performing ~400k to a rook/Danger.

I know it costs 2 trades, but if one is a likely correctional anyways, will it be worth it...?

Assuming you will have no left $$ left over it would mean that you would need to get rid of two bad performing ~400-450K players?

One down to rookie, one midfielder up to Danger. Not sure how you know already that you will have two midprice players that will fail?

;D Call it experience I guess...

Probably won't do it, but so tempting to eliminate rookie scores

[Ringo]

I think I posted elsewhere I went Danger down to Gazz with the intent of hopefully sideways trade to Danger when the inevitable resting occurs.

[RaisyDaisy]

I think I posted elsewhere I went Danger down to Gazz with the intent of hopefully sideways trade to Danger when the inevitable resting occurs.

+1

Specifically started 5 super prems this year to counter not having Danger for a while

[Bully]

I've had to trade down to deal with Libba, not sure if it's the right move but absolutely need to free up cash.

[no eye deer]

I’m feeling pretty good about benching him atm, avoided carnage so far, got Titch C, Laird,  Billings, Sicily, Holman on the field. Could have kept Dusty as well, but I was worried about having zero cash for correction trades.