2011 Head2Head: Chris Knights Vs Drew Petrie

[Junktimer]

Chris Knights Vs Drew Petrie

Stats:

Chris Knights:
Age: 24
Career Games: 75
Career Goals: 55
2010 Games: 5
Average: 61
Standard Deviation: 29.6
Centuries: 0 out of 5
Scores over 125: 0
Scores below 50: 1
High: 92
Low: 6 (injury)
Selections at end of year: 1,762 (Owned by 0.45% of all teams)
Past year averages:
2009: 83.1
2008: 84.5
2007: 90.6
Predicted Price for 2011: $246,800 (Based on m0nty's fanplanner)

Drew Petrie:
Age: 28
Career Games: 178
Career Goals: 166
Games: 2
Average: 55.5
Standard Deviation: 67.5
Centuries: 0 out of 2
Scores over 125: 0
Scores below 50: 1
High: 63
Low: 48
Selections at end of year: 3,840 (Owned by 0.98% of all teams)     
Past year averages:   
2009: 91.2
2008: 95.6
2007: 88.7
Predicted Price for 2011: $224,500 (Based on m0nty's fanplanner)


Pros and Cons:

Chris Knights:
Pros:
- Under priced for a player of his ability.
- Averaged two goals a game in his last full season.
- May get more midfield time with Crow vets retiring.
- Effective player

Cons:
- Injury prone- never played a full season.
- More of a DT player.

Drew Petrie:
Pros:
- Average around 90 over the last 3 years, very underpriced.
- MPP FWD/RUCK
- Good K:HB ratio
- Takes a lot of marks
- Gets hitouts whilst scoring goals

Cons:
- Troublesome foot injury stopped a normally durable Petrie this year.
- Suspected to have had a minor setback preseason.
- With two other big men in McIntosh and Goldstein, may not get too much time or will play deep forward, however playing deep forward may not be too bad.
   
Verdict:

As Petrie can be taken as a ruck, there is a chance to be able to take them both, so I will summarise this purely from a forward perspective.

Both returning from long injuries, both very cheap for their talent. 

Knights, provided fit, will slot in perfectly into the Crows team, will most likely play half forward, even midfield due to the recent vacancies.  Knights is a dangerous player with a great ability to kick goals.

Petrie has been battling this stress fracture in his foot for nearly a year now, and hopefully the setback report that was reported is false.  If Petrie was fit, I would see him playing as a Full Forward, as they already have HMac and Goldstein for rucks.  This could either be good or bad, as he will kick more goals and take more contested marks but is likely to get less hitouts and possession.

Overall, there are good reasons to take both.  But gun to my head, in a nail biter, I would select Petrie, just.

Who would you select?

[MajorLazer]

I don't know if I will have either. If I had to choose though, I think I would go Knights. Most likely won't be looking at R/F MPP so Petrie isn't needed for that.

Great one Junk. ;D

[Junktimer]

thanks major yeah its a very tough call.

[Knowall]

Knights not really going to consider Petrie the risk of him reinjuring his foot is alot higher than knights.  The other thing that makes the decision easy is that Knights is guaranteed a game when fit while Petrie could well be the sub. 
But it was said that JT will play in the midfield, he may play a small portion in the midfield but hell be pretty much permantly across HF

[ossie85]

For some reason, I'm just not a fan of Knights! Can't really put my finger on it, so Petrie almost gets it by default

[ronl]

I see Knights as more of a mark and kick half-forward who doesn't have the skills of a true midfielder.  As for Petrie, I can't see him not spending 90% of his time as a tall marking deep forward.  If both remain injury-free and if forced to choose one, I'd go Petrie on the grounds that North have got a very classy midfield in the making very capable of keeping him well supplied, his MPP status is a bonus.

[Heater]

I have given both players some thought though Petrie is in my side ATM due mainly to his price.  His form in particular during the NAB cup games will convince me either way...

[Torress]

if i was to pick only 1 it would be knights. are they keepers?? i doubt the person who wins SC will have either 2 late in the season if they started them. but for many one of these guys might end up in the squad for entire year if not injured

[Barlow 21]

I see Knights as more of a mark and kick half-forward who doesn't have the skills of a true midfielder.  As for Petrie, I can't see him not spending 90% of his time as a tall marking deep forward.  If both remain injury-free and if forced to choose one, I'd go Petrie on the grounds that North have got a very classy midfield in the making very capable of keeping him well supplied, his MPP status is a bonus.

I disagree Ronl because Knights often accumulates 20+ possessions and kicks goals. These are the types of forwards to look for I believe. :)

[Holz]

i wouldnt choose between the two, i m picking up both

[Barlow 21]

Probably a smart idea Holzman. :)

[LiveTheDream]

i wouldnt choose between the two, i m picking up both

+1

I think they're both too cheap to ignore

[Junktimer]

i know theyre both good options, but if you could only have 1, who would you choose?

[roo boys!]

I've got both, but I think if I could only have 1 then I would go with Petrie.

[nas]

Petrie for me also