The Playing Rookies Thread

[eaglesman]

One problem I have with the Boekhorst looked rubbish argument.

2011. I watched 2 rookies in the one team. One looked solid, was a mature body, and could slot straight in. The other was the hyped up kid, he was tentative and shaky with possession, and I just wasn't entirely sure about him.

The shaky one, Dyson Heppell, smashed the doors off playiing 22 games and averaging 83. Hibberd played 9 games.


There's just something about pre season that keeps us coming back, even though most of it is bullshower. Just like I lay belly up thinking flower this is the last time I ever have KFC, then tomorrow I want KFC.

Well hopefully boekhorst had some food poisoned KFC on the day and that's why he looked so rubbish
:)

[Holz]

I think there needs to be a clear distinction for rookie priced players and actual rookies.

I agree I would very rarely get a 200k+ rookie e.g brayshaw petrecca etc...

However the guys I'm planning to pay for are not rookies.

Nathan Van berlo is an established former captain derailed by injury. He is probably the best afl player in the under 250k category and he should be very solid.

Biggs is a 23 year old in his third year in the afl system. He was fringe at the strongest afl club and now is playing at a weak team that just got hit by injury and it's best player leaving.

Those two are not rookies. I have cripps and Newton who you can make cases for not picking

But Newton is a 22 year old who cracked 4 games in a top 4 team and like Biggs is coming to a club for oppurtunity.

Cripps is kinda there because I had the cash and is a place holder.

[RaisyDaisy]

Fair reasoning and makes sense holz, but curious as to what your thoughts are if a bunch of the cheaper options become available rd1 and seem to have decent JS. Would you go get them, or will you still keep the expensive guys?

Also, just in regards to Biggs. He missed the first NAB with bone bruising, and then he missed the intraclub yesterday with hamstring tightness. Do these niggles concern us?

[meow meow]

Fair reasoning and makes sense holz, but curious as to what your thoughts are if a bunch of the cheaper options become available rd1 and seem to have decent JS. Would you go get them, or will you still keep the expensive guys?

Also, just in regards to Biggs. He missed the first NAB with bone bruising, and then he missed the intraclub yesterday with hamstring tightness. Do these niggles concern us?

From what I head Biggs has done his hammy and won't take part in any preseason games so that pretty much rules him out for round 1 too.

[honza]

Biggs not being  D/M makes me want to break something

[Holz]

Fair reasoning and makes sense holz, but curious as to what your thoughts are if a bunch of the cheaper options become available rd1 and seem to have decent JS. Would you go get them, or will you still keep the expensive guys?

Also, just in regards to Biggs. He missed the first NAB with bone bruising, and then he missed the intraclub yesterday with hamstring tightness. Do these niggles concern us?

Over cripps yes

Over nvb no way.

Newton and Biggs need to keep watching

[RaisyDaisy]

Reckon we might have a plethora of forwards to select from, which is great and makes my Premo F1, Swan F2, Belly F3 followed by rookies allowing me to bolster all other lines look like the right structure to go with

I had Salem at F4, but have now downgraded him, not because of his NAB match, just that the extra cash helped me in my mids

F4-8 Clark, Karnezis, Lambert, Hogan, Lonie for now, and then there are guys like Lamb who is a good chance to replace Darling and play, Krakouer, Steele, Daniel etc

[Pokerface]

Why is Anderson the best scorer? Just because he scored well in a NAB match?

I expect Lambert and Vandeberg to get elevated, and can see both of them, especially Lambert playing a lot

Lang, Miller, Freeman, Cockatoo, Heeney and Boekhorst should see plenty of game time this year too

Historically, we never pick 200k+ rookies because they score the same as 120k rookies, but all the hype around the 200k rookies is because everyone thinks there are no cheap rookies who will get regular games, but I don't think that's the case

80-100k is a massive difference. In order to outlay 200k+ they need to average 20 points per game more than the cheaper options, and there is next to no chance they will.

With 200k+ rookies, you're just paying for JS, but I think some of the cheaper options will have just as good JS

Like I said, time will tell, but don't expect these 200k rookies to come out averaging 80-90+. There might be one bolter, but I'd much rather get go with the cheap options IF they appear to have decent JS

Its not just the JS you pay for with the 200k+ rookies, its the scoring. I remember last year tossing up whether to go dom tyson or viv michie. Of course I was the cheapskate, and wasted a corrective trade to get in Dom. The upside is it taught me a valuable lesson, and I'll definitely be starting with Newton this year. Biggs is a different story with injury issues.

[Bully]

Why is Anderson the best scorer? Just because he scored well in a NAB match?

I expect Lambert and Vandeberg to get elevated, and can see both of them, especially Lambert playing a lot

Lang, Miller, Freeman, Cockatoo, Heeney and Boekhorst should see plenty of game time this year too

Historically, we never pick 200k+ rookies because they score the same as 120k rookies, but all the hype around the 200k rookies is because everyone thinks there are no cheap rookies who will get regular games, but I don't think that's the case

80-100k is a massive difference. In order to outlay 200k+ they need to average 20 points per game more than the cheaper options, and there is next to no chance they will.

With 200k+ rookies, you're just paying for JS, but I think some of the cheaper options will have just as good JS

Like I said, time will tell, but don't expect these 200k rookies to come out averaging 80-90+. There might be one bolter, but I'd much rather get go with the cheap options IF they appear to have decent JS

Its not just the JS you pay for with the 200k+ rookies, its the scoring. I remember last year tossing up whether to go dom tyson or viv michie. Of course I was the cheapskate, and wasted a corrective trade to get in Dom. The upside is it taught me a valuable lesson, and I'll definitely be starting with Newton this year. Biggs is a different story with injury issues.

NVB will average 70-75, that's certainly not in the Tyson realms. Don't know a hell of a lot about Newton but can't see him doing a Tyson either, he's not nearly as polished and isn't a former top 3 pick in his third year. The players being mentioned will be lucky to crack 80, that's why I'm inclined to spend a little more and grab a guy like Daniel Wells. 

[frenzy]

surely them westcoast kids would be on most peoples radar.... McInnes and Lamb... sorry if their already been mentioned, cos I aint going over 24 pages to check Lol.

[RaisyDaisy]

Yeah Lamb is pretty much a lock for a bench spot as long as he gets named, and he has a good chance to with Darling out

Agree with Bully, none of the 200k options this year are anywhere near Tyson. We all paid up for Tyson because we knew how good he was. None of the 200k players this year are amazing

[Drak]

Tyson was in f all teams for round 1 because he was just under 200k. And Macrae was also in bugger all coz of his awkward 300k. I know this because I started both and remember looking at the % owned. Majority had no idea Tyson was going to do what he did, Macrae either. Potential is always there, but their consistency shocked everyone. Jumping on them before the price rises of round 3 and then passing it off as knowledge of their legitimacy for scoring is bs.

There are plenty of kids who could pump out 90-100 scores. Whether they will do it consistently is anyones guess. Just like last year, or the year before that, or the year before that. Its what makes fantasy footy so much fun.

[H1bb3i2d]

Tyson was in many teams before round 1 because he dominated the NAB Cup.

[Pokerface]

Wasn't 200k, but we also were happy to fork out 170k-ish(?) for ollie in first year because it looked like he would score so well. So I think it comes back to your own call as to which rookies you think are going to have reasonable JS and score consistently well. Fair call that there is no Dom in this year's crop. But personally I think Newton looks like scoring head and shoulders above everyone else. More than the price difference between him and the cheapies. But thats just my opinion. Fair enough if people don't have the same assessment of him.

[Big Mac]

Tyson was in many teams before round 1 because he dominated the NAB Cup.