Does the 2nd year rule really exist?

[Usman]

Is the 2nd year rule a myth i mean you look at the real class players it doesnt effect them at all really. Just food for thought.

[meow meow]

I have a couple of 2nd year players in my team so im going with no.

[meow meow]

Trengove/Scully/Duncan will prove this rule to be utter BS.

[sid3bysid3]

yes it does...

they sit at a price where they wont make you as much dosh as a rookie and wont average any higher than a safer bet like anthony or j kennedy.

i disagree meow meow... mitch duncan only racked up the scores because geelong where practically playing there 2s. he wont get the opportunities to get his hands on the ball like last game. take it with a grain of salt.

[meow meow]

I'm talking about the potential he showed last year, from minimal games/game time. I dont rate the nab at all.

[Usman]

But if you look through the records quality players like Swan, Ablett, Dal Santo, Judd all these high class players increase their output significantly in thier second season of football. How many rookies can you pick at the start of the year and say they are going to be a keeper? Barlow and Pods did it last year but it is a real rarity to get a player avg 90+ in SC to be considered a scoring keeper. you choose a rookie realistically you cant ask for much more than an avg of 70 and for a secnd year player mayb that avg increses to 90 and you can keep them for the entire year paying mid price for a keeper.

[meow meow]

Well ive got a 2nd year player in my team and i can see him averaging 100 for the year. If not, he'll be my last player to upgrade.

[Fletch74]

Well ive got a 2nd year player in my team and i can see him averaging 100 for the year. If not, he'll be my last player to upgrade.

I reckon he'll be one of your first players you're trying to fix up because you made the wrong choice....

[meow meow]

You don't even know who I'm talking about so why would you assume something like that?

[Fletch74]

Would it be Scully? The only player worthy of defying the 2nd year rule would be Barlow.

[cortez]

There are players that will keep improving this year such as trengove, Martin, scully and Sheppard to some extent but alot don't. The ones that are going to be superstars keep improving and also the ones that may have had an injury riddled first year. The rule does apply but only to a certain extent.

[bottlemart]

yes it does...

they sit at a price where they wont make you as much dosh as a rookie and wont average any higher than a safer bet like anthony or j kennedy.

i disagree meow meow... mitch duncan only racked up the scores because geelong where practically playing there 2s. he wont get the opportunities to get his hands on the ball like last game. take it with a grain of salt.

Well said.  I think you have covered it thoroughly.  There may be an exception who someone has come across,but no second year players in my team.

[Fletch74]

There are players that will keep improving this year such as trengove, Martin, scully and Sheppard to some extent but alot don't. The ones that are going to be superstars keep improving and also the ones that may have had an injury riddled first year. The rule does apply but only to a certain extent.

That I agree with, but see the point with the 2nd year rule is that they're not worthy of being selected because they are not full guns yet, and are capable of having lapses, due to inexperience, etc. They may rise in price, but they are not worth being selected. There is better value on the market to choose from...

[meow meow]

Dustin Martin.

[Fletch74]

Dustin Martin.

lol, he might be ok next year, but not this year.