Mid Price Mids

[Bully]

I'm still undecided on what I want to do with Conigs and Libba

No doubt they will average more than they're currently priced, but for 450k you need to pick them to become keepers. You don't start these types and then upgrade them once they've made 100k - it just doesn't happen, and despite what you might want to believe you don't trade them when they are cruising along averaging 100-105 either - issues arise elsewhere and next thing you know they are your M7/M8

885k for the two, and I am just deciding whether it might actually be better to start a prem and rookie

Dusty + Brodie + 40k vs Conigs + Libba

Neale/Crouch/whoever + Brodie + 100k vs Conigs + Libba

Conigs vs Libba might outscore Super prem + rookie in the early stages, but then later when you upgrade the rookie to another super prem it reverses

Tough decision, but I'm starting to think that long term Super prem + rookie might actually be the better option

You only need 1 of those guys to become a keeper & the trade argument becomes redundant. As far as money goes, it will be much of a muchness, Brodie will probably hit 300-350k, that's 100-150k in the pocket. Both Cogs & Libba should make at least 75k each. Then there's Dusty being fully priced so will come at a discount down the track.

[ubeaut]

I'm still undecided on what I want to do with Conigs and Libba

No doubt they will average more than they're currently priced, but for 450k you need to pick them to become keepers. You don't start these types and then upgrade them once they've made 100k - it just doesn't happen, and despite what you might want to believe you don't trade them when they are cruising along averaging 100-105 either - issues arise elsewhere and next thing you know they are your M7/M8

885k for the two, and I am just deciding whether it might actually be better to start a prem and rookie

Dusty + Brodie + 40k vs Conigs + Libba

Neale/Crouch/whoever + Brodie + 100k vs Conigs + Libba

Conigs vs Libba might outscore Super prem + rookie in the early stages, but then later when you upgrade the rookie to another super prem it reverses

Tough decision, but I'm starting to think that long term Super prem + rookie might actually be the better option

That's why I prefer a 110+ premo plus JOM. U get a set premo, and for 310k u get someone who can go 90+, make 150k + and get the same points as Conigs+Libba 100 each. U only have to  upgrade one.
If u are going all three like I think I saw in your team ( u have Armo instead?) it's too many to upgrade. And if more than one fail ( say JOM get injured and Libba only gets 90s) then it's unlikely that you'll have two missed rookies to downgrade to especially if it happens after round 3/4 and before more rookies surface.
I think there's merit in starting a 450k player without them being certain premos as they allow great points per dollar and give u money to improve team elsewhere. As long as u plan to trade when maxed out for a top premo for that extra 10+ points a round. I just wouldn't start more than one.

[Bully]

I'm still undecided on what I want to do with Conigs and Libba

No doubt they will average more than they're currently priced, but for 450k you need to pick them to become keepers. You don't start these types and then upgrade them once they've made 100k - it just doesn't happen, and despite what you might want to believe you don't trade them when they are cruising along averaging 100-105 either - issues arise elsewhere and next thing you know they are your M7/M8

885k for the two, and I am just deciding whether it might actually be better to start a prem and rookie

Dusty + Brodie + 40k vs Conigs + Libba

Neale/Crouch/whoever + Brodie + 100k vs Conigs + Libba

Conigs vs Libba might outscore Super prem + rookie in the early stages, but then later when you upgrade the rookie to another super prem it reverses

Tough decision, but I'm starting to think that long term Super prem + rookie might actually be the better option

That's why I prefer a 110+ premo plus JOM. U get a set premo, and for 310k u get someone who can go 90+, make 150k + and get the same points as Conigs+Libba 100 each. U only have to  upgrade one.
If u are going all three like I think I saw in your team ( u have Armo instead?) it's too many to upgrade. And if more than one fail ( say JOM get injured and Libba only gets 90s) then it's unlikely that you'll have two missed rookies to downgrade to especially if it happens after round 3/4 and before more rookies surface.
I think there's merit in starting a 450k player without them being certain premos as they allow great points per dollar and give u money to improve team elsewhere. As long as u plan to trade when maxed out for a top premo for that extra 10+ points a round. I just wouldn't start more than one.

Both Cogs & Libba could hit 110, unlikely to be both but reasonable chance 1 player gets there. Now let's say Dusty starts 2018 like he did 2017 and tumbles to 520k, the money required to switch your underperforming mid pricer would be 70k or thereabouts (presuming a 95 average).

Supecoach is as much about picking up premos on the cheap as it is picking 'keepers' in the beginning. High standard deviation players should be picked off once they have bottomed out.

[frenzy]

I'm still undecided on what I want to do with Conigs and Libba

No doubt they will average more than they're currently priced, but for 450k you need to pick them to become keepers. You don't start these types and then upgrade them once they've made 100k - it just doesn't happen, and despite what you might want to believe you don't trade them when they are cruising along averaging 100-105 either - issues arise elsewhere and next thing you know they are your M7/M8

885k for the two, and I am just deciding whether it might actually be better to start a prem and rookie

Dusty + Brodie + 40k vs Conigs + Libba

Neale/Crouch/whoever + Brodie + 100k vs Conigs + Libba

Conigs vs Libba might outscore Super prem + rookie in the early stages, but then later when you upgrade the rookie to another super prem it reverses

Tough decision, but I'm starting to think that long term Super prem + rookie might actually be the better option

The pair of them would be doing well to finish in the top 40 MIDS, they're not keepers.

[Bully]

I'm still undecided on what I want to do with Conigs and Libba

No doubt they will average more than they're currently priced, but for 450k you need to pick them to become keepers. You don't start these types and then upgrade them once they've made 100k - it just doesn't happen, and despite what you might want to believe you don't trade them when they are cruising along averaging 100-105 either - issues arise elsewhere and next thing you know they are your M7/M8

885k for the two, and I am just deciding whether it might actually be better to start a prem and rookie

Dusty + Brodie + 40k vs Conigs + Libba

Neale/Crouch/whoever + Brodie + 100k vs Conigs + Libba

Conigs vs Libba might outscore Super prem + rookie in the early stages, but then later when you upgrade the rookie to another super prem it reverses

Tough decision, but I'm starting to think that long term Super prem + rookie might actually be the better option

The pair of them would be doing well to finish in the top 40 MIDS, they're not keepers.

So you expect them both to average 85?

[AaronKirk]

I'm still undecided on what I want to do with Conigs and Libba

No doubt they will average more than they're currently priced, but for 450k you need to pick them to become keepers. You don't start these types and then upgrade them once they've made 100k - it just doesn't happen, and despite what you might want to believe you don't trade them when they are cruising along averaging 100-105 either - issues arise elsewhere and next thing you know they are your M7/M8

885k for the two, and I am just deciding whether it might actually be better to start a prem and rookie

Dusty + Brodie + 40k vs Conigs + Libba

Neale/Crouch/whoever + Brodie + 100k vs Conigs + Libba

Conigs vs Libba might outscore Super prem + rookie in the early stages, but then later when you upgrade the rookie to another super prem it reverses

Tough decision, but I'm starting to think that long term Super prem + rookie might actually be the better option

That's why I prefer a 110+ premo plus JOM. U get a set premo, and for 310k u get someone who can go 90+, make 150k + and get the same points as Conigs+Libba 100 each. U only have to  upgrade one.
If u are going all three like I think I saw in your team ( u have Armo instead?) it's too many to upgrade. And if more than one fail ( say JOM get injured and Libba only gets 90s) then it's unlikely that you'll have two missed rookies to downgrade to especially if it happens after round 3/4 and before more rookies surface.
I think there's merit in starting a 450k player without them being certain premos as they allow great points per dollar and give u money to improve team elsewhere. As long as u plan to trade when maxed out for a top premo for that extra 10+ points a round. I just wouldn't start more than one.

Both Cogs & Libba could hit 110, unlikely to be both but reasonable chance 1 player gets there. Now let's say Dusty starts 2018 like he did 2017 and tumbles to 520k, the money required to switch your underperforming mid pricer would be 70k or thereabouts (presuming a 95 average).

Supecoach is as much about picking up premos on the cheap as it is picking 'keepers' in the beginning. High standard deviation players should be picked off once they have bottomed out.

Dusty's first 3 rounds were 159, 118 and 155 so he went up in price a bit before his worst game of the year against Brisbane in Round 4 when he scored 55 then had 3 subsequent scores sub 100 albeit 92,93 and 87. His average in those first 8 games was 108.28

Then went 100+ in all bar 1 game from Round 8 to the Grand Final.

For an uber premo such as Dusty i'd take the 108 average instead of waiting for his price to fall given how valuable trades are. This leads also into whether or not to start Dangerfield even if he doesn't play round 1.

Only 9 mid only players went 110+ in 2017 and 10 in total (adding Docherty).

The conundrum in relation to the mid price midfielders is whether the cash you save by picking 1 of these mid pricers can be used to pick a premium or higher quality rookie elsewhere and bridge the points gap.

You probably will eventually need to trade the likes of Dusty in at some stage for these mid pricers who generally over the years the majority do not end up as keepers so you are potentially burning trades, cash and points.

I have Coniglio in my side and am happy to take the punt on him at M6 but with my M1-M5 I am picking premium priced mids who IMO will be a great chance to be in the top 8-10 mids and taking the risks on mid pricers in other lines where there is less confidence about the premo options.

[Bully]

I'm still undecided on what I want to do with Conigs and Libba

No doubt they will average more than they're currently priced, but for 450k you need to pick them to become keepers. You don't start these types and then upgrade them once they've made 100k - it just doesn't happen, and despite what you might want to believe you don't trade them when they are cruising along averaging 100-105 either - issues arise elsewhere and next thing you know they are your M7/M8

885k for the two, and I am just deciding whether it might actually be better to start a prem and rookie

Dusty + Brodie + 40k vs Conigs + Libba

Neale/Crouch/whoever + Brodie + 100k vs Conigs + Libba

Conigs vs Libba might outscore Super prem + rookie in the early stages, but then later when you upgrade the rookie to another super prem it reverses

Tough decision, but I'm starting to think that long term Super prem + rookie might actually be the better option

That's why I prefer a 110+ premo plus JOM. U get a set premo, and for 310k u get someone who can go 90+, make 150k + and get the same points as Conigs+Libba 100 each. U only have to  upgrade one.
If u are going all three like I think I saw in your team ( u have Armo instead?) it's too many to upgrade. And if more than one fail ( say JOM get injured and Libba only gets 90s) then it's unlikely that you'll have two missed rookies to downgrade to especially if it happens after round 3/4 and before more rookies surface.
I think there's merit in starting a 450k player without them being certain premos as they allow great points per dollar and give u money to improve team elsewhere. As long as u plan to trade when maxed out for a top premo for that extra 10+ points a round. I just wouldn't start more than one.

Both Cogs & Libba could hit 110, unlikely to be both but reasonable chance 1 player gets there. Now let's say Dusty starts 2018 like he did 2017 and tumbles to 520k, the money required to switch your underperforming mid pricer would be 70k or thereabouts (presuming a 95 average).

Supecoach is as much about picking up premos on the cheap as it is picking 'keepers' in the beginning. High standard deviation players should be picked off once they have bottomed out.

Dusty's first 3 rounds were 159, 118 and 155 so he went up in price a bit before his worst game of the year against Brisbane in Round 4 when he scored 55 then had 3 subsequent scores sub 100 albeit 92,93 and 87. His average in those first 8 games was 108.28

Then went 100+ in all bar 1 game from Round 8 to the Grand Final.

For an uber premo such as Dusty i'd take the 108 average instead of waiting for his price to fall given how valuable trades are. This leads also into whether or not to start Dangerfield even if he doesn't play round 1.

Only 9 mid only players went 110+ in 2017 and 10 in total (adding Docherty).

The conundrum in relation to the mid price midfielders is whether the cash you save by picking 1 of these mid pricers can be used to pick a premium or higher quality rookie elsewhere and bridge the points gap.

You probably will eventually need to trade the likes of Dusty in at some stage for these mid pricers who generally over the years the majority do not end up as keepers so you are potentially burning trades, cash and points.

I have Coniglio in my side and am happy to take the punt on him at M6 but with my M1-M5 I am picking premium priced mids who IMO will be a great chance to be in the top 8-10 mids and taking the risks on mid pricers in other lines where there is less confidence about the premo options.

Have spoken about Dusty at length so I'm not going over old territory but he just had a season out of the box based on previous years. He will throw in the occasional stinker, has done so his whole career.

As for this notion you can nail the top 10 mids just by using the previous season's data, that theory was blown apart last year when none of the top scorers apart from Danger came from the 600k+ category.

Crouch was around 510k, Kelly 490k, Oliver 310k, Murphy 430k, TMitchell 520k. Macrae 510k. If you had started with this group you would have had a massive leg up on the competition and come close to winning the comp.

[ubeaut]

Not sure if Conigs and Libbs can do what Kelly,Mitchell,Murphy and Oliver did tho.
Last year was an anamoly for so many outside top players breaking in. Kelly was always going to be elite. Oliver broke out a year early. Mitch always had the ability to score but didn't have the opportunity at Swans. Murphy has been elite before.
Conigs and Libba don't have as much scoring history as Murphy, and have a hell of a lot of mids to compete with for points. I don't know I just see them as 100-105 at absolute best which still justifies selection but will have to be upgraded or be M9 as cover at the end.

[frenzy]

I'm still undecided on what I want to do with Conigs and Libba

No doubt they will average more than they're currently priced, but for 450k you need to pick them to become keepers. You don't start these types and then upgrade them once they've made 100k - it just doesn't happen, and despite what you might want to believe you don't trade them when they are cruising along averaging 100-105 either - issues arise elsewhere and next thing you know they are your M7/M8

885k for the two, and I am just deciding whether it might actually be better to start a prem and rookie

Dusty + Brodie + 40k vs Conigs + Libba

Neale/Crouch/whoever + Brodie + 100k vs Conigs + Libba

Conigs vs Libba might outscore Super prem + rookie in the early stages, but then later when you upgrade the rookie to another super prem it reverses

Tough decision, but I'm starting to think that long term Super prem + rookie might actually be the better option

The pair of them would be doing well to finish in the top 40 MIDS, they're not keepers.

So you expect them both to average 85?

not sure where you get 85 from ? B. Crouch finished 2017 as the 40th mid, with 96.2 ave. and they'll be doing well to finish higher than that.

[Bully]

Not sure if Conigs and Libbs can do what Kelly,Mitchell,Murphy and Oliver did tho.
Last year was an anamoly for so many outside top players breaking in. Kelly was always going to be elite. Oliver broke out a year early. Mitch always had the ability to score but didn't have the opportunity at Swans. Murphy has been elite before.
Conigs and Libba don't have as much scoring history as Murphy, and have a hell of a lot of mids to compete with for points. I don't know I just see them as 100-105 at absolute best which still justifies selection but will have to be upgraded or be M9 as cover at the end.

Coniglio is a former top 2 pick who already has a 106 season to his name, nothing to suggest he can't push that up another 4 points. Still only 24 which means he's about to enter his prime, he will also be in a winning side.

Libba already has 106 & 110 to his name, obviously he came crashing down to earth but his preseason has been very good this year & he appears to be hungry for success.

In the end most people will make a blunder with an expensive pick, happens every year & very often one is stuck with the decision because of the 'never trade a premo' mantra. At least with mid pricers there's no such reluctance. It can very often be an advantage because one gets a bit of time to check form lines.

I'm still undecided on what I want to do with Conigs and Libba

No doubt they will average more than they're currently priced, but for 450k you need to pick them to become keepers. You don't start these types and then upgrade them once they've made 100k - it just doesn't happen, and despite what you might want to believe you don't trade them when they are cruising along averaging 100-105 either - issues arise elsewhere and next thing you know they are your M7/M8

885k for the two, and I am just deciding whether it might actually be better to start a prem and rookie

Dusty + Brodie + 40k vs Conigs + Libba

Neale/Crouch/whoever + Brodie + 100k vs Conigs + Libba

Conigs vs Libba might outscore Super prem + rookie in the early stages, but then later when you upgrade the rookie to another super prem it reverses

Tough decision, but I'm starting to think that long term Super prem + rookie might actually be the better option

The pair of them would be doing well to finish in the top 40 MIDS, they're not keepers.

So you expect them both to average 85?

not sure where you get 85 from ? B. Crouch finished 2017 as the 40th mid, with 96.2 ave. and they'll be doing well to finish higher than that.

Taking out the DPP guys the cut off should be around the 90 mark. Both will exceed that in all likelihood.

[frenzy]

Not sure if Conigs and Libbs can do what Kelly,Mitchell,Murphy and Oliver did tho.
Last year was an anamoly for so many outside top players breaking in. Kelly was always going to be elite. Oliver broke out a year early. Mitch always had the ability to score but didn't have the opportunity at Swans. Murphy has been elite before.
Conigs and Libba don't have as much scoring history as Murphy, and have a hell of a lot of mids to compete with for points. I don't know I just see them as 100-105 at absolute best which still justifies selection but will have to be upgraded or be M9 as cover at the end.

Coniglio is a former top 2 pick who already has a 106 season to his name, nothing to suggest he can't push that up another 4 points. Still only 24 which means he's about to enter his prime, he will also be in a winning side.

Libba already has 106 & 110 to his name, obviously he came crashing down to earth but his preseason has been very good this year & he appears to be hungry for success.

In the end most people will make a blunder with an expensive pick, happens every year & very often one is stuck with the decision because of the 'never trade a premo' mantra. At least with mid pricers there's no such reluctance. It can very often be an advantage because one gets a bit of time to check form lines.

I'm still undecided on what I want to do with Conigs and Libba

No doubt they will average more than they're currently priced, but for 450k you need to pick them to become keepers. You don't start these types and then upgrade them once they've made 100k - it just doesn't happen, and despite what you might want to believe you don't trade them when they are cruising along averaging 100-105 either - issues arise elsewhere and next thing you know they are your M7/M8

885k for the two, and I am just deciding whether it might actually be better to start a prem and rookie

Dusty + Brodie + 40k vs Conigs + Libba

Neale/Crouch/whoever + Brodie + 100k vs Conigs + Libba

Conigs vs Libba might outscore Super prem + rookie in the early stages, but then later when you upgrade the rookie to another super prem it reverses

Tough decision, but I'm starting to think that long term Super prem + rookie might actually be the better option

The pair of them would be doing well to finish in the top 40 MIDS, they're not keepers.

So you expect them both to average 85?

not sure where you get 85 from ? B. Crouch finished 2017 as the 40th mid, with 96.2 ave. and they'll be doing well to finish higher than that.

Taking out the DPP guys the cut off should be around the 90 mark. Both will exceed that in all likelihood.

cool, take out Menegola and Heeney as the only two DPP in the top forty. That leaves Sidebottom as the 42nd, with an ave of 96.

[Bully]

Not sure if Conigs and Libbs can do what Kelly,Mitchell,Murphy and Oliver did tho.
Last year was an anamoly for so many outside top players breaking in. Kelly was always going to be elite. Oliver broke out a year early. Mitch always had the ability to score but didn't have the opportunity at Swans. Murphy has been elite before.
Conigs and Libba don't have as much scoring history as Murphy, and have a hell of a lot of mids to compete with for points. I don't know I just see them as 100-105 at absolute best which still justifies selection but will have to be upgraded or be M9 as cover at the end.

Coniglio is a former top 2 pick who already has a 106 season to his name, nothing to suggest he can't push that up another 4 points. Still only 24 which means he's about to enter his prime, he will also be in a winning side.

Libba already has 106 & 110 to his name, obviously he came crashing down to earth but his preseason has been very good this year & he appears to be hungry for success.

In the end most people will make a blunder with an expensive pick, happens every year & very often one is stuck with the decision because of the 'never trade a premo' mantra. At least with mid pricers there's no such reluctance. It can very often be an advantage because one gets a bit of time to check form lines.

I'm still undecided on what I want to do with Conigs and Libba

No doubt they will average more than they're currently priced, but for 450k you need to pick them to become keepers. You don't start these types and then upgrade them once they've made 100k - it just doesn't happen, and despite what you might want to believe you don't trade them when they are cruising along averaging 100-105 either - issues arise elsewhere and next thing you know they are your M7/M8

885k for the two, and I am just deciding whether it might actually be better to start a prem and rookie

Dusty + Brodie + 40k vs Conigs + Libba

Neale/Crouch/whoever + Brodie + 100k vs Conigs + Libba

Conigs vs Libba might outscore Super prem + rookie in the early stages, but then later when you upgrade the rookie to another super prem it reverses

Tough decision, but I'm starting to think that long term Super prem + rookie might actually be the better option

The pair of them would be doing well to finish in the top 40 MIDS, they're not keepers.

So you expect them both to average 85?

not sure where you get 85 from ? B. Crouch finished 2017 as the 40th mid, with 96.2 ave. and they'll be doing well to finish higher than that.

Taking out the DPP guys the cut off should be around the 90 mark. Both will exceed that in all likelihood.

cool, take out Menegola and Heeney as the only two DPP in the top forty. That leaves Sidebottom as the 42nd, with an ave of 96.

And 41st is Gaff at 93, big drop off here, especially if you take out Wingard, Steele, Higgins & Dahlhaus. You are basically around the 90 mark.

[RaisyDaisy]

Good to see some healthy discussion about this

I currently have all 3 Conigs, Libba and Arma  but I'm definitely leaning towards dumping two of them for a premo and rookie now and  just keeping 1

Having just 1 reduces the risk significantly because worse case it doesnt work and is easy to fix

Of course if both Libba and Conigs go 105-110 it's a success, but is it going to have a massive gain overall? Not sure

Arma is different, like JOM they're just stepping stones which provide better cover due to the lack of good cheap rookies to field and can make just as much cash

As for the talk re Dusty, it could be anyone else, Kelly, Crouch, Neale etc and they won't drop 100k so that argument doesn't really matter

For me it's either all 3, or just 1, and thats the decision I'll need to figure out.

[Bully]

As for the talk re Dusty, it could be anyone else, Kelly, Crouch, Neale etc and they won't drop 100k so that argument doesn't really matter

The guys you mentioned seem to be more flatliners with their scoring hence they probably won't drop to the same extent. Kelly had a lowest score of 88 and a top score of 176.

Crouch was uber consistent too, but I'm not keen due to the Gibbs factor.

Neale is a bit like Dusty in that he can throw in the occasional shocker, 44 & 55 tells me he's a wait & see prospsect.

So if it were me I would probably grab Kelly if I was adopting the guns & rookie strategy. He's more of a POD too. I keep reminding people that Dusty finished third in the Brownlow & was AA in 2016 yet only managed 108. That year included 7 sub 90 scores. The chances of him breaking Brownlow records and scoring 119 again are remote.

[Ricochet]

Only have Conigs atm. Can see why a few would seriously look at all 3 though. Could easily be a lot of points shared between the 3 and an early jump for those that start them.