2019 Premium Mids

[hawkers65]

8 scores >140

Were 142, 141, 189, 156, 177, 147, 153, 163

Throw in scores above 120

120, 131, 131, 121

Thank you very much. Will love taking those scores in this year.

Fair, we know he has a high ceiling and was consistent last year. However, picking him from the start means you will be paying top (or extremely close to top) dollar for him, which also means you will be sacrificing points elsewhere.

If he doesn't start off the first few rounds with 130+, he will drop in price from the get-go.

Other cheaper but also gun mids posted similar high numbers last year, albeit not as many times, but cost 70k+ less, and the few points more than Macrae may score over them hardly justifies the massive price difference IMO.

The one thing that worries me about Macca is Hewitt R1. Its not ideal forking out 680k for someone you expect to more than likely barely tonne up week one. But with your point of paying top dollar, sometimes its better to cop the 50k loss and bank the best scorer in the league, other people may scramble to get him, or have to double trade just to get him. Plus with playing Sydney first he'll most likely have one of his worst scores Round 1 which doesnt help the people who want to upgrade to him cause its too early and only in 1 price rise. I just think its one less big headache just smacking him in at M1 and not having to worry about it.

[Holz]

Gotta say I am a bit surprised

Several coaches here that have strong history and know their shower, it's very surprising to see how much you guys are reacting off 1 JLT game

Macrae got 40 against the worst midfield in the comp

I dunno, 690k is so much, and when I look at putting him in my side he really throws the rest of my side out of whack, and overall I lose a starting prem

Surely there are guys who are 130-170k cheaper than him and that can get close enough.

I guess you only pick Macrae if you think he can go 115+ minimum. I'm not sure he will. Certainly won't be surprised if he does, but it's a lot of cash, and reacting against a JLT vs shower GC is probably jumping the gun

How do you see him losing over 12 points per game though? I agree its expensive but theres nothing suggesting it was a one off season or an obvious reason why he'd decline.

2018: 127
2017:  107

average 117 that seems reasonable to expect around that so 115-120. Thats still really elite and worth starting

im personally saving abit of cash and going Oliver.

Oliver

2018: 114
2017: 111

average 112   

Macrae certainly can go 125+ historically though you need to be an elite player such as Ablett Pendles Fyfe (which Macrae isnt in this class yet) he really isnt much more then an Oliver type he is alot more then a Zerret type.

that 70k is helpfull though its the difference in say an Atkins and Walsh/Cousins or almost a atkins to Libba for a Zerret Crouch type over Macrae.

[RaisyDaisy]

8 scores >140

Were 142, 141, 189, 156, 177, 147, 153, 163

Throw in scores above 120

120, 131, 131, 121

Thank you very much. Will love taking those scores in this year.

Fair, we know he has a high ceiling and was consistent last year. However, picking him from the start means you will be paying top (or extremely close to top) dollar for him, which also means you will be sacrificing points elsewhere.

If he doesn't start off the first few rounds with 130+, he will drop in price from the get-go.

Other cheaper but also gun mids posted similar high numbers last year, albeit not as many times, but cost 70k+ less, and the few points more than Macrae may score over them hardly justifies the massive price difference IMO.

The one thing that worries me about Macca is Hewitt R1. Its not ideal forking out 680k for someone you expect to more than likely barely tonne up week one. But with your point of paying top dollar, sometimes its better to cop the 50k loss and bank the best scorer in the league, other people may scramble to get him, or have to double trade just to get him. Plus with playing Sydney first he'll most likely have one of his worst scores Round 1 which doesnt help the people who want to upgrade to him cause its too early and only in 1 price rise. I just think its one less big headache just smacking him in at M1 and not having to worry about it.

All makes sense. Sometimes we pay overs, because we know it won't cost us trades during the season. I know I'd much rather lose 50k or so in equity than give up precious trades

[crowls]

8 scores >140

Were 142, 141, 189, 156, 177, 147, 153, 163

Throw in scores above 120

120, 131, 131, 121

Thank you very much. Will love taking those scores in this year.

Fair, we know he has a high ceiling and was consistent last year. However, picking him from the start means you will be paying top (or extremely close to top) dollar for him, which also means you will be sacrificing points elsewhere.

If he doesn't start off the first few rounds with 130+, he will drop in price from the get-go.

Other cheaper but also gun mids posted similar high numbers last year, albeit not as many times, but cost 70k+ less, and the few points more than Macrae may score over them hardly justifies the massive price difference IMO.

The one thing that worries me about Macca is Hewitt R1. Its not ideal forking out 680k for someone you expect to more than likely barely tonne up week one. But with your point of paying top dollar, sometimes its better to cop the 50k loss and bank the best scorer in the league, other people may scramble to get him, or have to double trade just to get him. Plus with playing Sydney first he'll most likely have one of his worst scores Round 1 which doesnt help the people who want to upgrade to him cause its too early and only in 1 price rise. I just think its one less big headache just smacking him in at M1 and not having to worry about it.

All makes sense. Sometimes we pay overs, because we know it won't cost us trades during the season. I know I'd much rather lose 50k or so in equity than give up precious trades

The other issue is not even trades it is the opportunity to trade them in when you want them.   Once the season starts and we begin reacting to injuries, dropped players, upgrades bubble boys etc it gets difficult to make that real expensive upgrade happen.

[SilverLion]

8 scores >140

Were 142, 141, 189, 156, 177, 147, 153, 163

Throw in scores above 120

120, 131, 131, 121

Thank you very much. Will love taking those scores in this year.

Fair, we know he has a high ceiling and was consistent last year. However, picking him from the start means you will be paying top (or extremely close to top) dollar for him, which also means you will be sacrificing points elsewhere.

If he doesn't start off the first few rounds with 130+, he will drop in price from the get-go.

Other cheaper but also gun mids posted similar high numbers last year, albeit not as many times, but cost 70k+ less, and the few points more than Macrae may score over them hardly justifies the massive price difference IMO.

The one thing that worries me about Macca is Hewitt R1. Its not ideal forking out 680k for someone you expect to more than likely barely tonne up week one. But with your point of paying top dollar, sometimes its better to cop the 50k loss and bank the best scorer in the league, other people may scramble to get him, or have to double trade just to get him. Plus with playing Sydney first he'll most likely have one of his worst scores Round 1 which doesnt help the people who want to upgrade to him cause its too early and only in 1 price rise. I just think its one less big headache just smacking him in at M1 and not having to worry about it.

All makes sense. Sometimes we pay overs, because we know it won't cost us trades during the season. I know I'd much rather lose 50k or so in equity than give up precious trades

The other issue is not even trades it is the opportunity to trade them in when you want them.   Once the season starts and we begin reacting to injuries, dropped players, upgrades bubble boys etc it gets difficult to make that real expensive upgrade happen.

It's not so much that he is expensive, its more so that he is significantly more expensive than the rest of the mids (excl. Cripps).

It's a similar price difference to Danger over the other forwards, or Gawn/Grundy over the other rucks. To justify it, you'd probably want him to be a standout in his position like these guys are. I don't disagree he'll score well and people who don't start him will try to find a way to get him in at some stage, but I just don't see why you'd be picking him over guys like Kelly, Conigs, Fyfe, Oliver, Neale etc. etc., who will all likely start the year in a similar fashion and should all tonne up each week like Macrae, but are significantly cheaper.

[hawkers65]

8 scores >140

Were 142, 141, 189, 156, 177, 147, 153, 163

Throw in scores above 120

120, 131, 131, 121

Thank you very much. Will love taking those scores in this year.

Fair, we know he has a high ceiling and was consistent last year. However, picking him from the start means you will be paying top (or extremely close to top) dollar for him, which also means you will be sacrificing points elsewhere.

If he doesn't start off the first few rounds with 130+, he will drop in price from the get-go.

Other cheaper but also gun mids posted similar high numbers last year, albeit not as many times, but cost 70k+ less, and the few points more than Macrae may score over them hardly justifies the massive price difference IMO.

The one thing that worries me about Macca is Hewitt R1. Its not ideal forking out 680k for someone you expect to more than likely barely tonne up week one. But with your point of paying top dollar, sometimes its better to cop the 50k loss and bank the best scorer in the league, other people may scramble to get him, or have to double trade just to get him. Plus with playing Sydney first he'll most likely have one of his worst scores Round 1 which doesnt help the people who want to upgrade to him cause its too early and only in 1 price rise. I just think its one less big headache just smacking him in at M1 and not having to worry about it.

All makes sense. Sometimes we pay overs, because we know it won't cost us trades during the season. I know I'd much rather lose 50k or so in equity than give up precious trades

The other issue is not even trades it is the opportunity to trade them in when you want them.   Once the season starts and we begin reacting to injuries, dropped players, upgrades bubble boys etc it gets difficult to make that real expensive upgrade happen.

Yeah it happens every year. "Oh... I'll just upgrade to him, he'll be one of my final mids" Come round 10, we've used a few too mnay trades than we'd like, we have injuries, we make rash bye trades and then we see some premium be cheap cause of injury or concussion so we pick him to save 150k on Macrae and all of a sudden you dont have the highest scoring mid ever in your side. Its just safe to pick him R1 and have no worries.

[_wato]

Is Hewett really an issue? Macrae seems untaggable to me because of his inside/outside game.

Plus the Round 1 score is in the price changes for 1 week. Bulldogs then have Hawthorn (no Titch & Wingard so midfield is smashed) and then he has GC (just pumped out a 143 against, and 189 against last year) and then Collingwood (who don't tag) and then Carlton (well well well)

Could easily go 130+ over his first 5. Good luck scrambling him in. After that he has Freo who really only have Fyfe and Mundy, and then Richmond and Brisbane whom he pumped a 163 and 156 against last year.

Macrae also has 2 MCG games in the first 4 rounds this year, both games he went 131 and 163. Suggests his superior work rate and extra space means he is hard to man up on. Not for me to keep him out but upto you, good luck moving heaven and earth for him!!

[SilverLion]

8 scores >140

Were 142, 141, 189, 156, 177, 147, 153, 163

Throw in scores above 120

120, 131, 131, 121

Thank you very much. Will love taking those scores in this year.

Fair, we know he has a high ceiling and was consistent last year. However, picking him from the start means you will be paying top (or extremely close to top) dollar for him, which also means you will be sacrificing points elsewhere.

If he doesn't start off the first few rounds with 130+, he will drop in price from the get-go.

Other cheaper but also gun mids posted similar high numbers last year, albeit not as many times, but cost 70k+ less, and the few points more than Macrae may score over them hardly justifies the massive price difference IMO.

The one thing that worries me about Macca is Hewitt R1. Its not ideal forking out 680k for someone you expect to more than likely barely tonne up week one. But with your point of paying top dollar, sometimes its better to cop the 50k loss and bank the best scorer in the league, other people may scramble to get him, or have to double trade just to get him. Plus with playing Sydney first he'll most likely have one of his worst scores Round 1 which doesnt help the people who want to upgrade to him cause its too early and only in 1 price rise. I just think its one less big headache just smacking him in at M1 and not having to worry about it.

All makes sense. Sometimes we pay overs, because we know it won't cost us trades during the season. I know I'd much rather lose 50k or so in equity than give up precious trades

The other issue is not even trades it is the opportunity to trade them in when you want them.   Once the season starts and we begin reacting to injuries, dropped players, upgrades bubble boys etc it gets difficult to make that real expensive upgrade happen.

Yeah it happens every year. "Oh... I'll just upgrade to him, he'll be one of my final mids" Come round 10, we've used a few too mnay trades than we'd like, we have injuries, we make rash bye trades and then we see some premium be cheap cause of injury or concussion so we pick him to save 150k on Macrae and all of a sudden you dont have the highest scoring mid ever in your side. Its just safe to pick him R1 and have no worries.

The last 2 years I haven't started with Danger (to be fair, yes he missed Round 1 last year, and I probably would've had him if he played), and brought him in during the year for about 100k discount. Last year I picked Martin instead, who more than matched Danger in the first half of the year (I can't remember who I started instead of him in 2017).

It'd be naive if there is a player dominating in a position to not find a way to get them in (maybe with the exception of ruck, that almost always means a sideways trade which generally isn't easy to allow for), so if you're in the position to upgrade to a player during the season and you cut corners, obviously expect a lower output.

And for Macrae to be 150k more than other options, he'd essentially have to not have a sub 110 game for the season, which is asking a lot.

[_wato]

if we just look at history from last year and the year before alone

Sydney - 98, 123, 103 = ~108
Hawthorn - 119 = ~119
GC - 108, 189 = ~149
Collingwood - 92,102 = ~97
Carlton - 141, 110 = ~125
Fremantle - 108, 98 = ~103
Richmond - 117, 163 = ~140
Brisbane - 121, 162, 156 = ~146

So 108, 119, 149, 97, 125, 103, 140, 146 for the first 8 game = ~123.5 average with 4 captain scores and not one stinker. And he's only improving.

If someone said here pay 690k for a 124 average over the first 2 months you'd take it.

[hawkers65]

Is Hewett really an issue? Macrae seems untaggable to me because of his inside/outside game.

Plus the Round 1 score is in the price changes for 1 week. Bulldogs then have Hawthorn (no Titch & Wingard so midfield is smashed) and then he has GC (just pumped out a 143 against, and 189 against last year) and then Collingwood (who don't tag) and then Carlton (well well well)

Could easily go 130+ over his first 5. Good luck scrambling him in. After that he has Freo who really only have Fyfe and Mundy, and then Richmond and Brisbane whom he pumped a 163 and 156 against last year.

Macrae also has 2 MCG games in the first 4 rounds this year, both games he went 131 and 163. Suggests his superior work rate and extra space means he is hard to man up on. Not for me to keep him out but upto you, good luck moving heaven and earth for him!!

Hewitt is the best tagger in the league. He is a scary proposition for SC. Absolutely mugged Titch twice last year (Averaged 22 touches on him) I would barely bank a tonne if he lines up on Macca R1. But that shouldn't change your mind if you start him or not.

[Money Shot]

Cripps, Oliver, Kelly, Fyfe and Neale all just as likely to average 120 over the first 5 rounds. Save the cash.

[SilverLion]

Cripps, Oliver, Kelly, Fyfe and Neale all just as likely to average 120 over the first 5 rounds. Save the cash.

That's my point^

[crowls]

Cripps, Oliver, Kelly, Fyfe and Neale all just as likely to average 120 over the first 5 rounds. Save the cash.

That's my point^

This is crux of the issue.   You believe Macrea is superelite or your dont and save the bucks.    Anybody who has danger, grundy, goldy, oliver, fyfe, neale, cripps is not short on captains options either.

[_wato]

Already got Cripps and Oliver.

I love Fyfe, Kelly and Neale as picks but I am only going four mid premos and MCrouch is my other guy.

All have question marks though. Fyfe how many games? Kelly interrupted PS and interrupted past 12-18 months, how does he fare with the extra added attention he's gonna get? And Neale at a new club?

Also, I know it was a PS game but Coniglio and Taranto went absolutely bananas the other day against the Swans.

I honestly think the new 6-6-6 rule means taggers take away way too much for teams. You're pretty much sacrificing an on baller from the start, so its a ruck and 2 on ballers from the middle.

I honestly think there is a lot of disrespect going around for Macrae at this stage, a lot of people are forgetting just how good he was last year hahah, if you take out that injury affected game where he was on 51 at half time he averages 130+ for the season, thats 15+ points per game better than all those guys mentioned.

And if you really wanna put a perspective on it, he was 47 points off Neale, 109 points off Oliver, 213 points off Cripps and smashed the other two guys on total points. And guess what? He MISSED 3.5 games. He would've beaten Titch as #1 mid scorer, yet everyone was happy to choose Titch as a starting MID prem before he went down. Just don't understand the disrespect hahahhaa

[crowls]

Already got Cripps and Oliver.

I love Fyfe, Kelly and Neale as picks but I am only going four mid premos and MCrouch is my other guy.

All have question marks though. Fyfe how many games? Kelly interrupted PS and interrupted past 12-18 months, how does he fare with the extra added attention he's gonna get? And Neale at a new club?

Also, I know it was a PS game but Coniglio and Taranto went absolutely bananas the other day against the Swans.

I honestly think the new 6-6-6 rule means taggers take away way too much for teams. You're pretty much sacrificing an on baller from the start, so its a ruck and 2 on ballers from the middle.

I honestly think there is a lot of disrespect going around for Macrae at this stage, a lot of people are forgetting just how good he was last year hahah, if you take out that injury affected game where he was on 51 at half time he averages 130+ for the season, thats 15+ points per game better than all those guys mentioned.

And if you really wanna put a perspective on it, he was 47 points off Neale, 109 points off Oliver, 213 points off Cripps and smashed the other two guys on total points. And guess what? He MISSED 3.5 games. He would've beaten Titch as #1 mid scorer, yet everyone was happy to choose Titch as a starting MID prem before he went down. Just don't understand the disrespect hahahhaa

all fair points wato.  still got the dusty to bcrouch fyfe to macrea option on the backburner.   I just promised myself this year no last minute changes.