James Sicily

[Holz]

No chance am i paying 400k+ for him.

if you compare him to forwards in a similar price range you have Devon Smith who has gone 90 88 82 80 the last 4 years and is looking like a role change. So he has more upside with less downside for what 30k more.

I understand he put up 91 in his last 10 games, including a few monsters. There are way too many question marks around him. At his price he has to basically become a premo to be a good pick and anything less then 80 would be a huge failure. The hawk back line is in flux, who knows what happens if birchall comes back. Soo many question marks the odds of this of paying off great is extremely high, id say the odds of people walking out of this on par is high.

Not the same position but Armitage and JOM could beat him easily for 100k less.

He's also a back and can be swung there throughout the year. Then there's the floating donut that many are considering, not to mention the flexibility over the bye period. Think you are over thinking this one a bit. The stat that clinched it for me was his intercept marking, second only to Alex Rance over the last 10 games.

I really dont think im the one overthinking this.

Im hearing alot of talk of his DPP and floating donuts, yeah that might be a good play in the back half of the year. That is overthinking it for now.

realistically people are selecting a 10 game period and then it seems just locking that in as his average. The guy has played 43 games and people just want to take a snap shot of that. I get that was with a role switch but your banking on a guy keeping the fantasy favorable role and also keeping up a purple patch.

@ele

i think the comparison to Smith is very fair. There are quite a few good cheap options up front in my books and I have never even had to consider Sicily at all, i just brought in Smith yesterday for Heeney. Smith is the direct correlation as he is almost the same price with the same upside (or more) with far far less downside.

If people think he is going to go 90+ then pick him. All i can say is good luck, if he goes 75-80 what in the world will you do. Armitage is just an example, you could even say Congilio v Sicily. Conigs has gone 91 105 and a injury affected 91 and is only 50k more.

Sicily to me is a crazy pick. I might turn out wrong as the upside is certainly there but the odds are certainly in my favour. the DPP and floating donut strategy is great but why wouldn't you wait to see if he proves himself? he has already shown that he can put up a couple of shockers (which hawk defenders historically do).

I just looked at his predicted price if he repeated his last 10 games back to back last year. He goes up from 402k to 476k then back to 456k then he rises up to 500k then goes back down to 463k. So thats if he averages 91 you can pick him up later in the season for 50k or more with alot more certainty then you can have your F/D play.

[Bully]

No chance am i paying 400k+ for him.

if you compare him to forwards in a similar price range you have Devon Smith who has gone 90 88 82 80 the last 4 years and is looking like a role change. So he has more upside with less downside for what 30k more.

I understand he put up 91 in his last 10 games, including a few monsters. There are way too many question marks around him. At his price he has to basically become a premo to be a good pick and anything less then 80 would be a huge failure. The hawk back line is in flux, who knows what happens if birchall comes back. Soo many question marks the odds of this of paying off great is extremely high, id say the odds of people walking out of this on par is high.

Not the same position but Armitage and JOM could beat him easily for 100k less.

He's also a back and can be swung there throughout the year. Then there's the floating donut that many are considering, not to mention the flexibility over the bye period. Think you are over thinking this one a bit. The stat that clinched it for me was his intercept marking, second only to Alex Rance over the last 10 games.

I really dont think im the one overthinking this.

Im hearing alot of talk of his DPP and floating donuts, yeah that might be a good play in the back half of the year. That is overthinking it for now.

realistically people are selecting a 10 game period and then it seems just locking that in as his average. The guy has played 43 games and people just want to take a snap shot of that. I get that was with a role switch but your banking on a guy keeping the fantasy favorable role and also keeping up a purple patch.

@ele

i think the comparison to Smith is very fair. There are quite a few good cheap options up front in my books and I have never even had to consider Sicily at all, i just brought in Smith yesterday for Heeney. Smith is the direct correlation as he is almost the same price with the same upside (or more) with far far less downside.

If people think he is going to go 90+ then pick him. All i can say is good luck, if he goes 75-80 what in the world will you do. Armitage is just an example, you could even say Congilio v Sicily. Conigs has gone 91 105 and a injury affected 91 and is only 50k more.

Sicily to me is a crazy pick. I might turn out wrong as the upside is certainly there but the odds are certainly in my favour. the DPP and floating donut strategy is great but why wouldn't you wait to see if he proves himself? he has already shown that he can put up a couple of shockers (which hawk defenders historically do).

I just looked at his predicted price if he repeated his last 10 games back to back last year. He goes up from 402k to 476k then back to 456k then he rises up to 500k then goes back down to 463k. So thats if he averages 91 you can pick him up later in the season for 50k or more with alot more certainty then you can have your F/D play.

It's risk/reward and given the uncertainty with the forwards this year he's a good selection. As an absolute worst case scenario, he averages 80 and you keep him as a roving bench option on two lines. As a best case scenario he does a Jeremy Howe and averages 95.

And just one final word on the floating donut, this isn't a distant plan, it could happen very early in the piece, especially given small forwards tend to rip out 100s every 5 or 6 games.

[Holz]

It's risk/reward and given the uncertainty with the forwards this year he's a good selection. As an absolute worst case scenario, he averages 80 and you keep him as a roving bench option on two lines. As a best case scenario he does a Jeremy Howe and averages 95.

And just one final word on the floating donut, this isn't a distant plan, it could happen very early in the piece, especially given small forwards tend to rip out 100s every 5 or 6 games.

I guess we will see.

locking in a worse case scenario of 80 for a guy who's career best average is 73 is interesting to say the least.

[elephants]

It's risk/reward and given the uncertainty with the forwards this year he's a good selection. As an absolute worst case scenario, he averages 80 and you keep him as a roving bench option on two lines. As a best case scenario he does a Jeremy Howe and averages 95.

And just one final word on the floating donut, this isn't a distant plan, it could happen very early in the piece, especially given small forwards tend to rip out 100s every 5 or 6 games.

I guess we will see.

locking in a worse case scenario of 80 for a guy who's career best average is 73 is interesting to say the least.

Clearly a very obvious role change from the rest of his career...

This is standard Holz, just about every year you pick a popular player to flop just to be different hahaha

[Money Shot]

It's risk/reward and given the uncertainty with the forwards this year he's a good selection. As an absolute worst case scenario, he averages 80 and you keep him as a roving bench option on two lines. As a best case scenario he does a Jeremy Howe and averages 95.

And just one final word on the floating donut, this isn't a distant plan, it could happen very early in the piece, especially given small forwards tend to rip out 100s every 5 or 6 games.

I guess we will see.

locking in a worse case scenario of 80 for a guy who's career best average is 73 is interesting to say the least.

Clearly a very obvious role change from the rest of his career...

This is standard Holz, just about every year you pick a popular player to flop just to be different hahaha

Every year a popular player does flop....

[Bully]

It's risk/reward and given the uncertainty with the forwards this year he's a good selection. As an absolute worst case scenario, he averages 80 and you keep him as a roving bench option on two lines. As a best case scenario he does a Jeremy Howe and averages 95.

And just one final word on the floating donut, this isn't a distant plan, it could happen very early in the piece, especially given small forwards tend to rip out 100s every 5 or 6 games.

I guess we will see.

locking in a worse case scenario of 80 for a guy who's career best average is 73 is interesting to say the least.

Ten games as a rebounder is a big enough sample size. I gather you didn't watch the praccie match on the weekend, Clarko was waxing lyrical about the way Sicily had grabbed his opportunity in defence. Then there was the actual performance, plenty of intercepts, plenty of run and carry, a few dummy spits but overall a very impressive performance.

Just for a reminder, he averaged 91 as a rebounder but also scored 5 tons & had 8 scores over 80. Can't see him ever scoring 25 again either.

[Adamant]

It's risk/reward and given the uncertainty with the forwards this year he's a good selection. As an absolute worst case scenario, he averages 80 and you keep him as a roving bench option on two lines. As a best case scenario he does a Jeremy Howe and averages 95.

And just one final word on the floating donut, this isn't a distant plan, it could happen very early in the piece, especially given small forwards tend to rip out 100s every 5 or 6 games.

I guess we will see.

locking in a worse case scenario of 80 for a guy who's career best average is 73 is interesting to say the least.

Clearly a very obvious role change from the rest of his career...

This is standard Holz, just about every year you pick a popular player to flop just to be different hahaha

He certainly got Aaron Hall right a couple of years ago.

[Holz]

It's risk/reward and given the uncertainty with the forwards this year he's a good selection. As an absolute worst case scenario, he averages 80 and you keep him as a roving bench option on two lines. As a best case scenario he does a Jeremy Howe and averages 95.

And just one final word on the floating donut, this isn't a distant plan, it could happen very early in the piece, especially given small forwards tend to rip out 100s every 5 or 6 games.

I guess we will see.

locking in a worse case scenario of 80 for a guy who's career best average is 73 is interesting to say the least.

Clearly a very obvious role change from the rest of his career...

This is standard Holz, just about every year you pick a popular player to flop just to be different hahaha

He certainly got Aaron Hall right a couple of years ago.

Thanks Ada,

I work very much on analytics and reading reports as opposed to actually watching games so a few times i get very different opinions based on this.

Sicily does have good signs, but at 400k the analytics dont stack up from a risk reward payoff. Your paying a almost proven price for a guy who isn't proven. The reason i mentioned Devon Smith is Smith has been 80+ for years so you can pay 400k+ for him with more confidence. Could Sicily be a better pick then Smith, yep 100%. Does the analytics back that up, nope.

Sicily can have all the signs in the world indicating that he could be a premo, but he has only been a premo for less then half a year, so your not getting a big enough discount in my book.

If he was 350k then i can see the hype.

[elephants]

It's risk/reward and given the uncertainty with the forwards this year he's a good selection. As an absolute worst case scenario, he averages 80 and you keep him as a roving bench option on two lines. As a best case scenario he does a Jeremy Howe and averages 95.

And just one final word on the floating donut, this isn't a distant plan, it could happen very early in the piece, especially given small forwards tend to rip out 100s every 5 or 6 games.

I guess we will see.

locking in a worse case scenario of 80 for a guy who's career best average is 73 is interesting to say the least.

Clearly a very obvious role change from the rest of his career...

This is standard Holz, just about every year you pick a popular player to flop just to be different hahaha

Every year a popular player does flop....

And where did I say they don't? I just dont think Sic-Dog is the one to do it.

[Bully]

It's risk/reward and given the uncertainty with the forwards this year he's a good selection. As an absolute worst case scenario, he averages 80 and you keep him as a roving bench option on two lines. As a best case scenario he does a Jeremy Howe and averages 95.

And just one final word on the floating donut, this isn't a distant plan, it could happen very early in the piece, especially given small forwards tend to rip out 100s every 5 or 6 games.

I guess we will see.

locking in a worse case scenario of 80 for a guy who's career best average is 73 is interesting to say the least.

Clearly a very obvious role change from the rest of his career...

This is standard Holz, just about every year you pick a popular player to flop just to be different hahaha

He certainly got Aaron Hall right a couple of years ago.

Thanks Ada,

I work very much on analytics and reading reports as opposed to actually watching games so a few times i get very different opinions based on this.

Sicily does have good signs, but at 400k the analytics dont stack up from a risk reward payoff. Your paying a almost proven price for a guy who isn't proven. The reason i mentioned Devon Smith is Smith has been 80+ for years so you can pay 400k+ for him with more confidence. Could Sicily be a better pick then Smith, yep 100%. Does the analytics back that up, nope.

Sicily can have all the signs in the world indicating that he could be a premo, but he has only been a premo for less then half a year, so your not getting a big enough discount in my book.

If he was 350k then i can see the hype.

Same data set as Howe from the previous year & he turned out be a fine selection. If i recall last year you slated Ryder in the beginning who was roughly the same price, sometimes you have to factor in positional changes.

[Adamant]

It's risk/reward and given the uncertainty with the forwards this year he's a good selection. As an absolute worst case scenario, he averages 80 and you keep him as a roving bench option on two lines. As a best case scenario he does a Jeremy Howe and averages 95.

And just one final word on the floating donut, this isn't a distant plan, it could happen very early in the piece, especially given small forwards tend to rip out 100s every 5 or 6 games.

I guess we will see.

locking in a worse case scenario of 80 for a guy who's career best average is 73 is interesting to say the least.

Clearly a very obvious role change from the rest of his career...

This is standard Holz, just about every year you pick a popular player to flop just to be different hahaha

He certainly got Aaron Hall right a couple of years ago.

Thanks Ada,

I was being sarcastic. If I remember correctly you said that Hall wouldn't average more than 80 and would play in the NEAFL when Gold Coast get all of their midfielders back from injury. He averaged 95 and was the 9th best forward for the season.

[Ricochet]

 :-X

[LordSneeze]

It's risk/reward and given the uncertainty with the forwards this year he's a good selection. As an absolute worst case scenario, he averages 80 and you keep him as a roving bench option on two lines. As a best case scenario he does a Jeremy Howe and averages 95.

And just one final word on the floating donut, this isn't a distant plan, it could happen very early in the piece, especially given small forwards tend to rip out 100s every 5 or 6 games.

I guess we will see.

locking in a worse case scenario of 80 for a guy who's career best average is 73 is interesting to say the least.

Clearly a very obvious role change from the rest of his career...

This is standard Holz, just about every year you pick a popular player to flop just to be different hahaha

He certainly got Aaron Hall right a couple of years ago.

Thanks Ada,

I work very much on analytics and reading reports as opposed to actually watching games so a few times i get very different opinions based on this.

Sicily does have good signs, but at 400k the analytics dont stack up from a risk reward payoff. Your paying a almost proven price for a guy who isn't proven. The reason i mentioned Devon Smith is Smith has been 80+ for years so you can pay 400k+ for him with more confidence. Could Sicily be a better pick then Smith, yep 100%. Does the analytics back that up, nope.

Sicily can have all the signs in the world indicating that he could be a premo, but he has only been a premo for less then half a year, so your not getting a big enough discount in my book.

If he was 350k then i can see the hype.

Holz is sounding very much like me with Cripps. Risk vs Reward is not at the level it should be.

Sicily is one that I have been on then off then on then off with all preseason. Will likely depend on what else is about

[Bully]

It's risk/reward and given the uncertainty with the forwards this year he's a good selection. As an absolute worst case scenario, he averages 80 and you keep him as a roving bench option on two lines. As a best case scenario he does a Jeremy Howe and averages 95.

And just one final word on the floating donut, this isn't a distant plan, it could happen very early in the piece, especially given small forwards tend to rip out 100s every 5 or 6 games.

I guess we will see.

locking in a worse case scenario of 80 for a guy who's career best average is 73 is interesting to say the least.

Clearly a very obvious role change from the rest of his career...

This is standard Holz, just about every year you pick a popular player to flop just to be different hahaha

He certainly got Aaron Hall right a couple of years ago.

Thanks Ada,

I work very much on analytics and reading reports as opposed to actually watching games so a few times i get very different opinions based on this.

Sicily does have good signs, but at 400k the analytics dont stack up from a risk reward payoff. Your paying a almost proven price for a guy who isn't proven. The reason i mentioned Devon Smith is Smith has been 80+ for years so you can pay 400k+ for him with more confidence. Could Sicily be a better pick then Smith, yep 100%. Does the analytics back that up, nope.

Sicily can have all the signs in the world indicating that he could be a premo, but he has only been a premo for less then half a year, so your not getting a big enough discount in my book.

If he was 350k then i can see the hype.

Holz is sounding very much like me with Cripps. Risk vs Reward is not at the level it should be.

Sicily is one that I have been on then off then on then off with all preseason. Will likely depend on what else is about

A few major differences, Cripps is a breakout contender in a field loaded with blue chip players. The forward line is a total crap-shoot this year and probably warrants a punt or two. With the added bonus of DPP Sicily compensates for his speculative downside. Need I remind people of Yeo last year who went back and starred. He was also a no-name at the start of the year. Sicily is playing in one of the most productive spots for SC scoring, he has some sort of form line and his coach has given him a big wrap in the media.

[Hippo]

100% locked

and still is