FanFooty Forum

FanFooty => Real Dream Team Archive => Archives => 2013 DT Player Archive => Topic started by: popedelio on January 30, 2013, 03:50:08 AM

Poll
Question: Who should be in my rd 1 team?
Option 1: Coniglio votes: 13
Option 2: Treloar votes: 4
Title: Coniglio vs Treloar
Post by: popedelio on January 30, 2013, 03:50:08 AM
Who do you think will start well in the 2013 season? Leave your opinion below :)
Title: Re: Coniglio vs Treloar
Post by: Jukes on January 30, 2013, 04:04:51 AM
Coniglio, wouldn't be starting with either though.
Title: Re: Coniglio vs Treloar
Post by: elephants on January 30, 2013, 04:11:45 AM
Quote from: Jukes on January 30, 2013, 04:04:51 AM
Coniglio, wouldn't be starting with either though.

Yep agree.

Both will be genuine superstars in coming years though!!
Title: Re: Coniglio vs Treloar
Post by: Adamant on January 30, 2013, 05:03:49 AM
Quote from: elephants on January 30, 2013, 04:11:45 AM
Quote from: Jukes on January 30, 2013, 04:04:51 AM
Coniglio, wouldn't be starting with either though.

Yep agree.

Both will be genuine superstars in coming years though!!

Yeah, Coniglio for me too.

I would rather take a punt on someone like David Swallow from this price range though.
Title: Re: Coniglio vs Treloar
Post by: Andrew on January 30, 2013, 05:06:22 AM
Both are disgustingly priced, another $100k and you get a proven premo. GWS are close to the most irrelevant DT team this year. Only Toby Greene and Devon Smith spark my interest, but I still can't justify starting either. Their top-priced rookies don't seem worthwhile just like last season as well.
Title: Re: Coniglio vs Treloar
Post by: Jukes on January 30, 2013, 05:10:47 AM
Quote from: Andrew on January 30, 2013, 05:06:22 AM
Both are disgustingly priced, another $100k and you get a proven premo. GWS are close to the most irrelevant DT team this year. Only Toby Greene and Devon Smith spark my interest, but I still can't justify starting either. Their top-priced rookies don't seem worthwhile just like last season as well.

"Disgustingly priced"
I lol'd
Title: Re: Coniglio vs Treloar
Post by: essendon2 on January 30, 2013, 10:22:31 AM
I really liked Dom Tyson! was definitely going to start but unfortunately did his pcl
Title: Re: Coniglio vs Treloar
Post by: elephants on January 30, 2013, 02:58:48 PM
Quote from: Andrew on January 30, 2013, 05:06:22 AM
Both are disgustingly priced, another $100k and you get a proven premo. GWS are close to the most irrelevant DT team this year. Only Toby Greene and Devon Smith spark my interest, but I still can't justify starting either. Their top-priced rookies don't seem worthwhile just like last season as well.

Hahah brutal! I reckon Greene could go even bigger than last year.. Mmmmm.
Title: Re: Coniglio vs Treloar
Post by: Football Factory on January 30, 2013, 09:12:23 PM
If Treloar kept his DPP i would have seriously considered him for my forward line .. i played him over Roughhead and WhiteX late last year and it helped me win a couple of my leagues ... last 4 games  96,112,99,90
Title: Re: Coniglio vs Treloar
Post by: popedelio on January 30, 2013, 09:16:16 PM
Quote from: FOOTBALL FACTORY on January 30, 2013, 09:12:23 PM
If Treloar kept his DPP i would have seriously considered him for my forward line .. i played him over Roughhead and WhiteX late last year and it helped me win a couple of my leagues ... last 4 games  96,112,99,90

Thats what stood out for me, and the fact that Coniglio showed heaps of potential in his first season. Why not take the punt when there is unlimited trades :P
Title: Re: Coniglio vs Treloar
Post by: Ziplock on January 30, 2013, 09:21:04 PM
coniglio was carrying injury for a large chunk of the season as well... I can see him pushing 90 this year, but not much higher though :/
Title: Re: Coniglio vs Treloar
Post by: tbagrocks on January 30, 2013, 09:45:15 PM
If you're going down this path better to pick a non discustingly priced Wingard
Title: Re: Coniglio vs Treloar
Post by: Ziplock on January 30, 2013, 09:51:02 PM
Quote from: tbagrocks on January 30, 2013, 09:45:15 PM
If you're going down this path better to pick a shower scorernon discustingly priced Wingard

fixed
Title: Re: Coniglio vs Treloar
Post by: tbagrocks on January 30, 2013, 09:59:29 PM
No need to respond to such crap i'll just let Chad do the talking!
Title: Re: Coniglio vs Treloar
Post by: Ziplock on January 30, 2013, 10:38:37 PM
haha, wingard, despite being fully fit all season only averaged 53.4 without his green vests (keeping in the vest in which he scored 60, and keeping a red vest where he was subbed off just before the 4th quarter on 30 points), compared to coniglio who averaged unsubbed (removing his green vest since it was injury affected, not form  affected) 82.3, despite playing injured since round 3...

basically, even if wingard shakes off the vests, he's a 70 avg. player at best next year- I'd hope he would improve his scoring, but looking at talented port rookies like jacobs, that's not guaranteed. Coniglio on the otherhand is a better player, who should push 90 this year, at worst, he'll hold his price.

Nonetheless

Quote from: tbagrocks on January 30, 2013, 09:59:29 PM
No need to respond to such crap i'll just let Chad do the talking!

nothing that I said was untrue- wingard is a shower scorer.
Title: Re: Coniglio vs Treloar
Post by: tbagrocks on January 30, 2013, 10:44:15 PM
Sounds like somebody is jealous that Western Sydney made a mistake ;D
Title: Re: Coniglio vs Treloar
Post by: nrich102 on January 30, 2013, 10:45:51 PM
Don't take either
Title: Re: Coniglio vs Treloar
Post by: Ziplock on January 30, 2013, 11:45:16 PM
Quote from: tbagrocks on January 30, 2013, 10:44:15 PM
Sounds like somebody is jealous that Western Sydney made a mistake ;D

haha, taking coniglio over wingard? not likely.

coniglio averaged: 21.5 avg disposal at 68.6%, 2.6  tackles, 4.8 marks, 2.7  clearances

compared to

wingard averaged:  12.5 average disposals at 69.6%, 2.4 tackles, 1.9 marks, 1.5 clearances
wingard comes tops slightly in disposal efficiency, and is close in tackles... apart from that, he gets dominated in everything else. Coniglios and wingards vests about balance eachother out, considering that wingards lower stats means that despite having more vests, his low stats from those don't affect his average as much as coniglios one vested poor score does.

You can make a possible argument for wingard in that he might have spent more time forward rather than mid unlike coniglio, but you'd be wrong- wingard only averaged 0.5 goals per game, and clearly didn't spend enough time out of the mids to be given dpp.

point is, you can't under really any circumstances argue at this stage that choosing coniglio over wingard was a mistake...
Title: Re: Coniglio vs Treloar
Post by: tbagrocks on January 31, 2013, 12:02:06 AM
They had a few chances to take him, maybe not at 2, Port Adelaide are very grateful

Chad would have had similar numbers to other WS boys had he been selected by the Giants, silly comparison really. Let's look at all the great numbers the star young guns had at the Suns in their second season ... oh wait ???

It is more likely Chad to greatly increase than for the Giants to do much more, for this reason Chad would be a better pick for your fantasy team ;D

We all know the Giants needed their top picks to perform much more than Port need Chad in 2012, trying to compare start is useless. Expect greater things from Chad Wingard in 2013 is all i'm saying ;)
Title: Re: Coniglio vs Treloar
Post by: kilbluff1985 on January 31, 2013, 12:55:03 AM
neither