Post up your scores for the weekend
3/302
Nank :D
Docherty :D
Marchbank :D
Quote from: RaisyDaisy on March 23, 2017, 11:28:16 PM
3/302
Nank :D
Docherty :D
Marchbank :D
Not a bad start! I am secretly hoping that one of your rookies scores less than SPS though ;)
2/211 nank and marchbank
Quote from: GoLions on March 23, 2017, 11:31:47 PM
Quote from: RaisyDaisy on March 23, 2017, 11:28:16 PM
3/302
Nank :D
Docherty :D
Marchbank :D
Not a bad start! I am secretly hoping that one of your rookies scores less than SPS though ;)
Oh and I'm 361/4 :P
Quote from: crowls on March 23, 2017, 11:38:46 PM
2/211 nank and marchbank
Mine to im happy, Butler :) and Pickett >:( on the bench
389/5
SPS and Pickett :(
Pretty average start:
4/298 Nank 114, Marchbank 97; Rance 59; and Pickett 28 with Butlers 97 on bench. >:(
Quote from: Ringo on March 23, 2017, 11:41:26 PM
Pretty average start:
4/298 Nank 114, Marchbank 97; Rance 59; and Pickett 28 with Butlers 97 on bench. >:(
drop houston, put in Ben Long and loophole the score.
Quote from: RaisyDaisy on March 23, 2017, 11:28:16 PM
3/302
Nank :D
Docherty :D
Marchbank :D
Exactly the same for me :D
Quote from: crowls on March 23, 2017, 11:43:11 PM
Quote from: Ringo on March 23, 2017, 11:41:26 PM
Pretty average start:
4/298 Nank 114, Marchbank 97; Rance 59; and Pickett 28 with Butlers 97 on bench. >:(
drop houston, put in Ben Long and loophole the score.
This...only using Cameron
4/366
Nankervis, SPS, Marchbank, Butler
Moved Strnadica from R3 to F6 and put Preuss on the bench at R3 to get Butler's score.
380/4 Caddy, Nank, Bank, Butler with Pickett at M11 where he belongs.
Not too shabby.
I remember a few years ago McIntosh or Oxley score 110 or so in round one and I got a donut in that week and it ended up screwing up the whole season for me so just be ware hahaha
Nank,Simp,Doch 300ish
197 from Murphy and fkn Rance. Didn't pick SPS. Have Butler and Pickett on bench.
Kreuzer looked good!
239/3 Nank, Marchbank, and Pickett. Would've rather been 308/3 with Butler who is on my bench.
2/210
Nank and Butler
Can't complain so far ;D
354 from 4. Simmo, Doc, Marchbank and SPS
197/2 started butler, marchbank
270/3
Rance, Nank & Marchbank
Rance ill take after he was on 8 at half time.
5/457 Nank, Marchbank, Butler, Doc and Rance. Happy with most and Rance from half a game wasn't bad
Quote from: SilverLion on March 24, 2017, 08:34:50 AM
2/210
Nank and Butler
Can't complain so far ;D
^^
Couldn't fit Marchbank in so missed one there but happy with that so far
Cannot believe people paid 535k for Rancid. KPP, high variability versus Def who will be spending bulk of time in mids.
Quote from: crowls on March 24, 2017, 11:15:56 AM
Cannot believe people paid 535k for Rancid. KPP, high variability versus Def who will be spending bulk of time in mids.
Name all these other defenders who are playing midfield not including Laird who everyone has and Adams who is a major injury risk?
Quote from: TomK on March 24, 2017, 11:19:17 AM
Quote from: crowls on March 24, 2017, 11:15:56 AM
Cannot believe people paid 535k for Rancid. KPP, high variability versus Def who will be spending bulk of time in mids.
Name all these other defenders who are playing midfield not including Laird who everyone has and Adams who is a major injury risk?
Macmillan, vince, LLoyd
Quote from: crowls on March 24, 2017, 11:22:58 AM
Quote from: TomK on March 24, 2017, 11:19:17 AM
Quote from: crowls on March 24, 2017, 11:15:56 AM
Cannot believe people paid 535k for Rancid. KPP, high variability versus Def who will be spending bulk of time in mids.
Name all these other defenders who are playing midfield not including Laird who everyone has and Adams who is a major injury risk?
Macmillan, vince, LLoyd
why would I start any of them over Rance
Quote from: crowls on March 24, 2017, 11:22:58 AM
Quote from: TomK on March 24, 2017, 11:19:17 AM
Quote from: crowls on March 24, 2017, 11:15:56 AM
Cannot believe people paid 535k for Rancid. KPP, high variability versus Def who will be spending bulk of time in mids.
Name all these other defenders who are playing midfield not including Laird who everyone has and Adams who is a major injury risk?
Macmillan, vince, LLoyd
None of those are playing Bulk Mid and I wouldn't take any of them over Rance.
Rance should be a lock for a top 10 defender average. Like all players he is prone to poor games, it took until 2 mins before the end of the 1st half before he got his first mark & possession. Yet he still managed to score 59.
Im still expecting a 90-95 average minimum
90 wouldn't be a good starting average for 535k you would want 95+
Rance actually scored more last year in loses IIRC when the ball was down there a lot more.
Richmond have a good early draw.
Rance a decent trade in option approaching the byes i reckon.
Quote from: TomK on March 24, 2017, 11:24:11 AM
Quote from: crowls on March 24, 2017, 11:22:58 AM
Quote from: TomK on March 24, 2017, 11:19:17 AM
Quote from: crowls on March 24, 2017, 11:15:56 AM
Cannot believe people paid 535k for Rancid. KPP, high variability versus Def who will be spending bulk of time in mids.
Name all these other defenders who are playing midfield not including Laird who everyone has and Adams who is a major injury risk?
Macmillan, vince, LLoyd
why would I start any of them over Rance
Maybe not them but Doch,Simo,Shaw,Laird are all capable of 105 type averages Shaw more even, at not much more of a spend than Rance.
In a year where the backs look full of high scorers why would you settle for 95 at 535k?
Quote from: Grufflez on March 24, 2017, 12:07:19 PM
Quote from: TomK on March 24, 2017, 11:24:11 AM
Quote from: crowls on March 24, 2017, 11:22:58 AM
Quote from: TomK on March 24, 2017, 11:19:17 AM
Quote from: crowls on March 24, 2017, 11:15:56 AM
Cannot believe people paid 535k for Rancid. KPP, high variability versus Def who will be spending bulk of time in mids.
Name all these other defenders who are playing midfield not including Laird who everyone has and Adams who is a major injury risk?
Macmillan, vince, LLoyd
why would I start any of them over Rance
Maybe not them but Doch,Simo,Shaw,Laird are all capable of 105 type averages Shaw more even, at not much more of a spend than Rance.
In a year where the backs look full of high scorers why would you settle for 95 at 535k?
I don't expect there to be the 105 averages others are expecting.
Maybe 1 or 2 of Doc, Simpson, Shaw could but I don't expect Laird, Adams, Boyd, Montagna, Rance to go over 100, nor the breakouts going over 90.
I feel Rance is one of the safer options, especially with the amount of risk required on other lines.
I am not worried about Rance at all - As LS says 50 points in a half after being on 8 at HT will do me. He has a huge deviation which I Knew when I started him but banking him in to still be in Top 10 Mids. 10 100+ scores from 22 starts last year is the basis. Also CD seem to love him in SC compared to other comps eg only scored 44 in DT.
Not worried about price set up my team with premiums I suspect to be in top 10 at years end and Rance is one.
Quote from: Ringo on March 24, 2017, 12:18:46 PM
I am not worried about Rance at all - As LS says 50 points in a half after being on 8 at HT will do me. He has a huge deviation which I Knew when I started him but banking him in to still be in Top 10 Mids. 10 100+ scores from 22 starts last year is the basis. Also CD seem to love him in SC compared to other comps eg only scored 44 in DT.
Not worried about price set up my team with premiums I suspect to be in top 10 at years end and Rance is one.
I am definitely biased. Dont like large deviation players. Took me 3 years to get over dusty doing me over in games I needed to win. Since I only play one cash league and more focussed on Overall nowdays I have mellowed somewhat. When in doubt mid over KPP for fwds and defs. Just one of my SC rules. This year more than others we have a lot of mid high 500k players in def to select from. I just dont see Defs worth it for points generation compared to similar priced mids. my starting defs are adams, laird and macmillan. I expect macmillan to spend most of the year in mids for North and get plenty of ball. Not a huge fan of adams as he misses a lot of games but not willing to pay for Simmo, Doc and Shaw at their prices. Plan on having all three by end of season though.
2/187. Caddy & Nank.
1/91 Docherty
Butler on bench :(
Pickett on bench :)
4/398 Doch, March, Nank and Butler. ;D
Quote from: Grufflez on March 24, 2017, 12:07:19 PM
Quote from: TomK on March 24, 2017, 11:24:11 AM
Quote from: crowls on March 24, 2017, 11:22:58 AM
Quote from: TomK on March 24, 2017, 11:19:17 AM
Quote from: crowls on March 24, 2017, 11:15:56 AM
Cannot believe people paid 535k for Rancid. KPP, high variability versus Def who will be spending bulk of time in mids.
Name all these other defenders who are playing midfield not including Laird who everyone has and Adams who is a major injury risk?
Macmillan, vince, LLoyd
why would I start any of them over Rance
Maybe not them but Doch,Simo,Shaw,Laird are all capable of 105 type averages Shaw more even, at not much more of a spend than Rance.
In a year where the backs look full of high scorers why would you settle for 95 at 535k?
Well I already have Shaw and Laird and you've only named 4 premium defenders, we end up with 6 so still two other spots mate and Rance is an excellent option for one of those, nothing wrong with starting him while waiting for the others to hopefully drop in price, also couldn't just pull the 60k from anywhere to start Doch over Rance.
4/398 Doch, Marchbank, Nank & Butler
With 2 rookies locked down I'm reasonably pleased.
502/5 - Dusty, Docherty, Marchbank, Rance & Butler.
V on Dusty = Double BOOM
So effectively 661/5 with C played :)
706/7
Treloar, Adams, Macrae, Dahl, Howe, Marchbank, Nank done.
8/963 captain Pendles
911 from 8. Took Pendles as VC and locked it in for that total. Marchbank, Simmo, Doc, SPS, Pendles, WHE, Dahl and Macrae.
5/504
747/7
Marchbank, Nank, Pendles, Treloar, Macrae, Dahl, Adams
6/771 (Pendles VC locked)
707/8 yuckkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk
Marchbank, SPS, Nank, Rance, Treloar, Howe, Macrae, Dahlhaus
791/8
Not awful but no Pendles puts me behind the ball a touch. Just couldn't afford him with Treloar being my best option.
I hear you Tom and to make matters worse I took the VC off Pendles 10 minutes before bounce and put on JPK..
722/8
Marchbank, Pickett, Nank, Rance, Howe, WHE, Pendles, Dahlhaus.
716/8
:'(
Starting Treloar over Pendles right now doesn't seem a great decision but Treloar still played well but got a bit of harsh CD treatment. Had him VC as well :(
8/752
Marchbank, SPS, Butler, Nankervis, Treloar, Adams, WHE, Dahlhaus.
Considering only 3 premos played am not too disappointed. Only 2 on field rookies left to play as well.
6/734 - Taking Pendles VC score.
471 from 5
Bob a little low
Rance a lot low
MMurphy great
Adams super
Dahl okay
9/1063 (Pendles VC)
591 from 6, JJ, Nank, Dahl, Ramsay, Trealor and Mbank. Will take that although I don't know how I didn't start Pendles in the first year ever, why oh why...
846 from 6 With Pendles Captain loophole. Started strong, so I'm expecting the rest of the round to go sour..
7/771 - C still to play
679/7, quite a few below average scores, however all not too horrible
624/6.
Pendles (x2), Adams, Treloar, Dahl, Macrae and WHE.
600/6 looking like a high scoring R1
963/8 Pendles C
Quote from: Mat0369 on March 24, 2017, 11:58:07 PM
911 from 8. Took Pendles as VC and locked it in for that total. Marchbank, Simmo, Doc, SPS, Pendles, WHE, Dahl and Macrae.
Great start Mat. should have just copied your team. didnt like WHE, stuffed up VC and had C on Treloar and VC on Danger. so have 6/751 with C played.
Still tossing up on witts/sandi and goldy sandi. except after dropping goldy I upgrade to steele in fwds and have 220K sitting on the bench. Dont want to change balance of team so Goldy went back in and 70k in the bank for corrective trades.
1270/11 with captain Pendles.
Looks like it's going to be another year of avoiding this thread so I don't get too bummed out haha
Quote from: Gigantor on March 25, 2017, 11:12:11 AM
Looks like it's going to be another year of avoiding this thread so I don't get too bummed out haha
Ha ha... we are only 2 games in
484/5 Took Pendles off last min to strengthen Fwds. But still no one really disappointing for me. Treloar was harshly done by from CD.
Treloar, Dahl, Macrae, Nank, Marchbank
539/6
Quote from: crowls on March 25, 2017, 10:43:45 AM
Great start Mat. should have just copied your team. didnt like WHE, stuffed up VC and had C on Treloar and VC on Danger. so have 6/751 with C played.
Still tossing up on witts/sandi and goldy sandi. except after dropping goldy I upgrade to steele in fwds and have 220K sitting on the bench. Dont want to change balance of team so Goldy went back in and 70k in the bank for corrective trades.
There are lot of rookies to come though.
I prefer Goldy/Sandi by a mile. I found enough cash to turn Goldy into Gawn and that is something I'm contemplating. That's pretty much a decision I'll have to make in the next 4 hours.
While Treloar scored under 100, at least you C didn't pump out a 60 for you. It's something that can be made up in future weeks and everyone will have a few poor captains choices through the season.
Quote from: Mat0369 on March 25, 2017, 01:08:30 PM
Quote from: crowls on March 25, 2017, 10:43:45 AM
Great start Mat. should have just copied your team. didnt like WHE, stuffed up VC and had C on Treloar and VC on Danger. so have 6/751 with C played.
Still tossing up on witts/sandi and goldy sandi. except after dropping goldy I upgrade to steele in fwds and have 220K sitting on the bench. Dont want to change balance of team so Goldy went back in and 70k in the bank for corrective trades.
There are lot of rookies to come though.
I prefer Goldy/Sandi by a mile. I found enough cash to turn Goldy into Gawn and that is something I'm contemplating. That's pretty much a decision I'll have to make in the next 4 hours.
While Treloar scored under 100, at least you C didn't pump out a 60 for you. It's something that can be made up in future weeks and everyone will have a few poor captains choices through the season.
yes, also have the cash for Gawn. Just think I can get him cheaper in about 6 weeks. Miss his VC/C options though. As for poor captain scores. last year had gawn sub 50, fyfe sub 50. so at least it is better than that.
Quote from: crowls on March 25, 2017, 02:26:22 PM
yes, also have the cash for Gawn. Just think I can get him cheaper in about 6 weeks. Miss his VC/C options though. As for poor captain scores. last year had gawn sub 50, fyfe sub 50. so at least it is better than that.
You are probably right that Gawn will drop in price and I could probably use the cash to downgrade to Goldy (only 1k in the bank at the moment) but for some reason my gut is saying Gawn.
I started the last two seasons with Selwood (69) and Fyfe (61) as my round 1 captain. It put me behind the 8 ball from the start which hurt and I started chasing points in certain cases. It's tempting to change your strategy because of a poor captains score but stick with your guns.
Quote from: Gigantor on March 25, 2017, 11:12:11 AM
Looks like it's going to be another year of avoiding this thread so I don't get too bummed out haha
12/1306 (C) JPK
Quote from: upthemaidens on March 25, 2017, 08:47:41 PM
Quote from: upthemaidens on March 25, 2017, 08:43:23 PM
Quote from: upthemaidens on March 25, 2017, 12:31:12 AM
846 from 6 With Pendles Captain loophole. Started strong, so I'm expecting the rest of the round to go sour..
As expected.. Have Eddy and Smith on field and didn't find out about Swallow until after lock out..
Wait I tell a lie. Have Eddy on the bench in SC, well that's some relief. Other comps not so lucky..
Another lie :) Apparently Swallow wasn't locked out, traded out just in time. Everything is coming up Milhouse..
1238 / 13 Danger as C. Happy so far so touch wood.
Par score?
Quote from: Jay on March 25, 2017, 11:37:42 PM
Par score?
Some huge scores from popular players so my guess will be 2200. It's hard to guess without Danger/Fyfe no playing.
1582/15 Rocky VC
Higgins, Laird, Hampton, Danger, Sandi, Fyfe, GHS to go.
1240/13 with maxys 128 on the bench as I'm taking pendles VC score.
1582 from 15 :o
Sandi, Otten, Hampton, Shaw, Taranto, Fyfe and Dangerfield remaining.
Hanners is the one that has killed me.
1323/12, Pendles C
Simpkin, Goldy, Laird, Hampton, Taranto, Shaw, Sandi, Fyfe, McCarthy/Turner, Danger to come. Still haven't decided on McCarthy vs Turner :P
I reckon 2300 might be par for the elite players.
im running slightly under at 1174/12 with no captains.
1608/15 with the loopholes included.
Quote from: Holz on March 26, 2017, 12:19:12 AM
I reckon 2300 might be par for the elite players.
im running slightly under at 1174/12 with no captains.
Depends how some of the rookies like Taranto, Hampton, Otten, Hibberd, etc go.
14/1479 (C) JPK.
Only copped Florent and Hannebery.
13/1365 (C)
Roughy and JOM a little unders, and I don't have JPK, Rocky, Heppell who have gone big so far. Jelly is my man tomorrow!
Only 3 people over 100, heaps of 70-100 scores so far
Quote from: RaisyDaisy on March 26, 2017, 12:26:37 AM
13/1365 (C)
Roughy and JOM a little unders, and I don't have JPK, Rocky, Heppell who have gone big so far. Jelly is my man tomorrow!
Only 3 people over 100, heaps of 70-100 scores so far
Absolutely furious I didn't go with my gut and get Hepp in for Beams, it's only round one but geez Hepp stepped up in the final quarter.
Thought it was just my favourite player bias, turns out he actually is looking pretty good!
15/1526 with JPK VC score added
Otten, Hampton, Laird, Sandi, Fyfe, Danger, Jelwood to come.
Quote from: GoLions on March 26, 2017, 12:20:30 AM
Depends how some of the rookies like Taranto, Hampton, Otten, Hibberd, etc go.
I still say 2200 is probably about right. Some big scores from popular picks like JPK, Adams, Gawn and Pendles will see it around there. I'm probably going to be sitting a tad under due to Hanners from my calcs.
1535/15 Gawn c
15/1453. Danger (C).
Quote from: Holz on March 26, 2017, 12:19:12 AM
I reckon 2300 might be par for the elite players.
im running slightly under at 1174/12 with no captains.
I reckon 2200-2300 will be par
Anything 2300+ at this stage is above par.
I really need some big 100+ scores tomorrow
1205/14, had enough already.
Hanners, Rance, SPS, and JOM the main culprits, Swallow out didn't help but SPP's 78 was okay.
Hampton, Laird, Shaw, Taranto, Sandi, Fyfe (C), Danger, Parfitt to come.
1549/15 Nank, Steele, Rocky and vc JPK did well. Rough and Omeara not as good but hoping they'll improve. Didn't realise Swallow was out so took SPP's score.
Danger, Fyfe, Laird, Shaw, Sandi, Otten and Hampton to come
1044 from 11
Pretty happy except os at the moment and could not react to swallow out
SPP helps there but Eddy on the field instead of Butler
Very happy with Steel and Nankervis
Plenty of power to come but reckon 2100 will top me out
13/1345 Pendles Captain
Laird, Otten, Hampton, Shaw, Taranto, Fyfe, Sandi, Danger, Tuohy to come.
13/1219
Danger is capt
Good- Murphy, JPK, Nank R2.
Bad- Pickett, Eddy, Dahl.
1328/13 Pendles C
Good: WHE Pendles Butler Marchbank
Bad: Hanners, Roughy Dahl
12/1141
SPS and JOM main disappointments
C to come
1041/11 just have to decide Fyfe or Danger for C
Wouldn't have a clue if going well compared to others But I am 1309 with 10 to come I'm guessing slightly above par.
Got issues however with Riewoldt going down injured.
1182/13
Looks down compared to others but after Goldy smashes out a 200x2 I'll be okay.
Seriously though not bothered yet, long way to go... in R1 and season.
1566/16 with JPK's captain score to come in. Not unhappy so far.
12/1155 Danger (C)
Took a big hit from Hickey. Happy with the Z.Merrett/Howe pods. No Beams,Roughy,O'meara,or Swallow. Need my 4 remaining mid guns to fire.
My prediction: 2250
1301 from 14 Danger capt
15/1406
Hanners :'(
Swallow out meant I had to tak SPP's score.
Hannan on the bench, Butler on the field so...
Edit: Shaw, Laird, Hampton, Otten, Fyfe (C), Sandilands and Taranto to come.
1219/11 taking Pendles VC
Pretty happy so far, but swapped Rocky for Selwood last minute, so my mood may change...
1499/15. Still have Shaw, Danger, Otten, Taranto, Hampton, Danger (C), Sandi, Fyfe..
So far I'm..
Happy with: Steele 113, Gawn 128, WHE 88, Marchbank 97 and Nank 114
Annoyed with: Beams 91 (will be better for the run) and loosing Swallow pregame so I decided to take Barrett's score (46-yuck)
1204/13
Rance and Hanners hurt, but pretty happy as avoided all the mp spuds.
1333/12 (Pendles VC loophole) Hannebery let me down but fairly happy so far.
Shaw, Taranto, Laird, Otten, Hampton, J.Selwood, Dangerfield, Fyfe, Sandilands, Mcarthy to play today.
1825 with Fyfe, Sandi, Selwood and Danger.
1839 with Sandi, Fyfe and Danger left. The Adelaide/GWS game was a disaster for me.
Quote from: Mat0369 on March 26, 2017, 07:31:05 PM
1839 with Sandi, Fyfe and Danger left. The Adelaide/GWS game was a disaster for me.
Don't think you are the Lone Ranger there
1910 with sandi, fyfe, danger to go. Pendles VC.
Angered by not choosing some players (even though it's only round 1); Nank, Gawn, adams, JJ, witts
Rookie mayhem with so many sub-50 scores...wtf
Quote from: Mat0369 on March 26, 2017, 07:31:05 PM
1839 with Sandi, Fyfe and Danger left. The Adelaide/GWS game was a disaster for me.
Laird and Shaw's awesome scores were nulled by Hampton and Taranto -.-, at least most people have both
1749 with Sandi, Danger, Fyfe, Tuohy left. Took Pendles as captain.
Lol at people crying about a 2200+ score
I might scrape in a 2150 if captain Fyfe goes big
1890 with Sandi Danger Fyfe GHS to go.
Quote from: _wato on March 26, 2017, 07:42:28 PM
1890 with Sandi Danger Fyfe GHS to go.
Looks like you've got me just
I'm 1725 with the same 4 plus Jelwood left
I swear only the top 1% post their scores in these threads lol.
Quote from: Gigantor on March 26, 2017, 07:41:47 PM
Lol at people crying about a 2200+ score
I might scrape in a 2150 if captain Fyfe goes big
My calcs have me hit that if I'm lucky. It doesn't really matter anyway because most have the 3 I have left plus an extra. I was looking so good early this week as well
Quote from: miamis_finest on March 26, 2017, 08:06:37 PM
I swear only the top 1% post their scores in these threads lol.
lol, well I dont think I'll be top 1%, currently 1352 with Danger, Jelwood, Fyfe, Sandi and G H-S to come, plus Butlers score for Strnadica and Rocky's score as VC. Will be lucky to break 2100
1683 With Sandi Fyfe Danger (C) GHS to go.
Will all depend on Danger. I reckon im on track for 2150-2200.
Will make you all feel better: 1691/20. Danger (C) and Fyfe to go.
1677/17
Danger (C), Fyfe, Sandi, Horlin Smith and Parfit to go
Having a good start and hopefully get close to 2400
Currently 1869 with Dangefield, Fyfe, Selwood, Sandilands, Stewart and Parfitt.
Quote from: Holz on March 26, 2017, 08:16:19 PM
1683 With Sandi Fyfe Danger (C) GHS to go.
Will all depend on Danger. I reckon im on track for 2150-2200.
We'll go close. I'm 1640 with Sandi, Fyfe, Danger (C), Jelwood
2269 taking Pendles' 149 as C.
Not the 3000 and a new car that I wanted, but I guess it's alright.
Quote from: Southstorm on March 26, 2017, 11:25:16 PM
2269 taking Pendles' 149 as C.
Not the 3000 and a new car that I wanted, but I guess it's alright.
Scores aren't finalised yet, although 2269 is looking good!
Quote from: PowerBug on March 26, 2017, 08:29:36 PM
Will make you all feel better: 1691/20. Danger (C) and Fyfe to go.
I think you have me covered PB!
2230 all done.
2140. Rubbish
Rookie rubbish scores + JOM, Rough, Hanners, Greene, Macmillan all disappointments so a lot of upside.
2262 all she wrote...I guess it's a pass? Sure there'll be some monster scores out there
2284
2192 :-\
2273
Best opening score I've ever had, despite Hibberd on field.
2205 it just updated the scores too
2306
Quote from: Frankfaust on March 26, 2017, 11:41:58 PM
2273
Best opening score I've ever had, despite Hibberd on field.
2243, would've been yours if I'd captained Danger!
2215, ok but feel a bit robbed with the Swallow situation
2275 all done
2222 and overall happy enough as no issues in team ATM.
2036 8)
2237 with JSmith and Otten on the field. I'll take it
2247
All things considered, I'll take it
2236
I'm not even going to bother looking. I'm going to get started on my 2018 team instead.
2227 revised down - Only issue fielding Pickett on field with Butler on pine.
2254
2191
Hurt mainly by Rookies, most of my premos and even midpricers did the job
some of the scores people are complaining about lol my god
2069
2429 with Pendles Captain, hopefully it puts me right up there.
2267 :D
Pretty happy with that by the looks of things.
Quote from: poondog on March 26, 2017, 11:53:57 PM
2429 with Pendles Captain, hopefully it puts me right up there.
Good luck, you'll be damn close.
2262, not too bad considering took Pendles and Adams out last 5 min for Treloar and Lloyd to fund Steele and bolster the fwd line.
Obviously Otten and Hampton a bit below par, but happy with Steele, Nank and Marchbank as my mids pricers. JOM and Roughy should improve, so will Dahl and Lloyd.
2280
$314,700 in the bank so pretty happy with the score
2184, not a bad start.
2234
Not a bad start. A few player let me down.
I'm looking at you Treloar and Dahlhaus
Anyone here have JJK?
2202 all done. Not the worst start, might need to dip into my saved 200k to make some adjustments with the rookies though!
2310 all done. Pretty happy, usually takes me five rounds in to crack 2300!
2186, who knows if that's correct. I sure hope not
2121
Hibberd and Greene and Neale hurt me
2120 2214
Swallow out
Tantan2 and eddy :(
Pleased overall
2269
2236. Happy with that for the opening round.
Can't be upset with 2225. Only really disappointed in Taranto and not being home to trade out Swallow before it was too late.
2180, difficult weekend. Cheap rookies sucked, Macmillan failed. stuffed C allocation as well. Take a couple of days and decide if I want to wait a week for corrective trades or not. I start SC as well as Webber starts a grand prix.
2267 which I am quite happy with.
Pretty happy with all my selections but the rookies are looking shower this year.
Quote from: LaHug on March 27, 2017, 09:47:54 AM
Can't be upset with 2225. Only really disappointed in Taranto and not being home to trade out Swallow before it was too late.
Same boat LaHug except I deliberately left Swallow in. Still hoping it turns out for the better in the long run. I mean $280 for a guy that should go 85-95 is great value if he can just get on the deck.
Quote from: HappyDEZ on March 27, 2017, 12:45:18 PM
Quote from: LaHug on March 27, 2017, 09:47:54 AM
Can't be upset with 2225. Only really disappointed in Taranto and not being home to trade out Swallow before it was too late.
Same boat LaHug except I deliberately left Swallow in. Still hoping it turns out for the better in the long run. I mean $280 for a guy that should go 85-95 is great value if he can just get on the deck.
Yeah, that's a pretty good point. Just gotta hop he plays this week.
Quote from: HappyDEZ on March 27, 2017, 12:45:18 PM
Quote from: LaHug on March 27, 2017, 09:47:54 AM
Can't be upset with 2225. Only really disappointed in Taranto and not being home to trade out Swallow before it was too late.
Same boat LaHug except I deliberately left Swallow in. Still hoping it turns out for the better in the long run. I mean $280 for a guy that should go 85-95 is great value if he can just get on the deck.
Problem here is he is still in 38% of sides. Great value if he can hit that, but the injury justified to me not taking that risk over WHE
Quote from: LordSneeze on March 27, 2017, 01:09:40 PM
Quote from: HappyDEZ on March 27, 2017, 12:45:18 PM
Quote from: LaHug on March 27, 2017, 09:47:54 AM
Can't be upset with 2225. Only really disappointed in Taranto and not being home to trade out Swallow before it was too late.
Same boat LaHug except I deliberately left Swallow in. Still hoping it turns out for the better in the long run. I mean $280 for a guy that should go 85-95 is great value if he can just get on the deck.
Problem here is he is still in 38% of sides. Great value if he can hit that, but the injury justified to me not taking that risk over WHE
85-95 might be a bit optimistic I suppose Lord but even 75-85 will do if he can just play a game. If he is not named this week he will be tough to hold.
2307 rank #1627
2231 for me. Premos were mostly really good, and rookies were really bad :p
An interesting note - the top rd 1 team doesn't have Danger, and used the money well elsewhere.
Vc on Dusty, but no loop so got Fyfes C score
Quote from: js19 on March 27, 2017, 08:42:01 PM
An interesting note - the top rd 1 team doesn't have Danger, and used the money well elsewhere.
Vc on Dusty, but no loop so got Fyfes C score
That is interesting...I guess the argument I'd have against that he doesn't have a perma captain option, whereas danger offers that.
The guy coming first had pretty much the perfect rd 1 team with JJK + butler + mcgrath starting (not to mention his mid-pricers in tuohy & mills putting in respectable scores). If I compare him to my team and swap out buddy for JJK and otten/taranto for mcgrath/butler (+ a small buffer for my mid-pricer not working), our scores would be within ~15 points of each other.
Whether or not omitting dangerfield has strongly contributed to that, I'm not entirely sure.
Good observation, though.
Quote from: js19 on March 27, 2017, 08:42:01 PM
An interesting note - the top rd 1 team doesn't have Danger, and used the money well elsewhere.
Vc on Dusty, but no loop so got Fyfes C score
Yeah I noticed that. No Danger or Pendles.
Somehow managed 2,378. Ranked 159 after round 1. Can't complain with that.
Quote from: Hagebear on March 28, 2017, 01:32:57 PM
Somehow managed 2,378. Ranked 159 after round 1. Can't complain with that.
Nice one.
got 2239 but am only ranked 9224th.
good score, but quite a few got better...
ah well happy with that start
2175 I'll take it, altho Hanners still hurts & had Smith on the ground down back