Too Risky?

[jcobyoung]

Is it too risky to have BOTH lake and hargrave?

[turry17]

As long as it fits in with ur bye structure i cant see why it will be, worst case they both average 70 and u upgrade/downgrade, best case one or both turn into keepers

[Edge]

its a risk im willing to take
however i think any mid priced defenders are a risk at the beginning of the season.

[fertalong]

If they stick to the hawthorn-like defensive game they played in NAB, it could potentially be like starting with birchall and suckling last year.
On the flip side, they could both get injured early.
Either way, I think the risk is worth it.

[Mr.Craig]

I've got 3 mid pricers in the back.  I like that better than the option of having a premium/midprice/rookie combo in those positions for a couple of reasons. Firstly, there are probably 6 or 7 midpricers who have a reasonable chance of upping their averages 20-30pts and I want to be a part of that action. And secondly, I do not like the look of this year's batch of back rookies so I'd rather go a little deeper in that position.

So to answer your question - no I don't think it's necessarily any more risky than other options.

[Artax]

I never thought either would feature in my team..now it's time to go & they are both there!

[upthemaidens]

at one point i had hargraves/lake/howard  and also golby.. since they all share rd.11 bye,  had to cut 2 of them.  if it wasnt for the byes i could see myself taking all 4