With all of the talk about the RedRock combo; and little talk of a comparison between the two – I thought it was time the two young Lions were put up against each other. Both guys enjoyed massive breakout seasons in 2011, taking their averages from 87 and 79 respectively to 112 and 109 by the end of the year. Now typifying the ‘3rd year breakout’, Rocky and Redden will be looking to build on their ascendance and improve yet again in 2012.

With an improving Lions side, they will get every opportunity to continue their rise – whilst DT coaches start to notice them as stars on the big stage. But who has better value, consistency, durability and potential? Read on to find out more about the two young guns that are taking the AFL and Fantasy world by storm.

Tom Rockliff

Price: $554,200
Position: MID
Bye round: 11
Age: 22 this year

2011 Details
Avg: 112
Games played: 20
High Score: 151
Low Score: 59 (sub affected)
No. 100 + scores: 15
Expected avg for 2012: 116

Jack Redden

Price: $540,100
Position: MID
Bye round: 11
Age: 22 this year

2011 Details
Avg: 109.1
Games played: 22
High Score: 138
Low Score: 64
No. 100 + scores: 16
Expected avg for 2012: 114

Scoring Potential/Consistency

Rocky had an amazing breakout year in 2011, scoring 15 tons – with 10 of those 115 +. Assuming he continues to improve this season, not only will he be a reliable premium – but a solid captain choice most weeks. Considering it took him the first half of the year to truly ‘breakout’; we should pay more attention to his last 11 games – where he averaged 121 points, never once dropping under 100!

Redden scored more 100 + totals than Rock in 2011, however has a lower scoring ceiling. With so many of his points coming from +4’s; he should be able to comfortably increase his average if he can gather a few more possessions around the ground. I can easily see this happening as the 22 year old continues his progression. With an average of 115 from R11 – R23, he too has shown that he can take that step up to DT elite in 2012. Assuming Black and Rich still attract most of the tags, I expect the Rock to have the higher average this year –but not by much.

Durability

Redden has the edge over Rockliff in this match up as he hasn’t missed a game in the past 2 years, playing 44 out of a possible 44 games. Rocky on the other hand has missed 5 games during the same timeframe – playing 19 games in 2010; and 20 in 2011. His injury last year was due to a calf injury he sustained in R9 v North. Despite this, these figures should give coaches confidence that both players will be durable enough for a spot in your mids this season. Barring injury, I expect both to play another 20 + games in 2012 with Redden the more assured of the two.

Value

Knowing the extent of their improvement in 2011, the value of RedRock in 2012 is dwarfed by comparison. However given my prediction for their expected/potential average, both players still offer sound value for high-end premiums. If Rocky can increase his avg from 112 to 116, he is priced around 4 ppg below his potential (although based on the love for this guy, many think he could go for a lot more than 116 this year). Similarly, I think Red will increase his avg to around the 114/115 mark, therefore being priced 6 ppg below his potential. With an arguably easier draw in the second half of the year, I expect both players to start fairly strong; have a few so-so games; then come home with a wet sail from R13. Who has the best value? From my perspective it seems like Redden. However this all depends on your personal opinion on their expected output at different parts of the year.

Health/Fitness

In a recent interview with Tom Rockliff, he stated that Brisbane are keen to move forwards and make a play for the top 8 in 2012. Jack Redden and himself have been earmarked as key players in their quest to achieve their goal. From all reports both players are having an excellent preseason and should both factor in the NAB cup at some stage. With no minor injuries or niggles, RedRock is well poised to fire this season on the back of a problem free start to the year.

Team Draw

Both Lions will face the same draw in 2012, however this is far from irrelevant as they boast different records against certain teams. Starting off with Melbourne, Carlton and Gold Coast, the Lions have a reasonable but challenging draw. Playing 2011 Finalists Carlton and West Coast twice, they will be looking to their games against Gold Coast and their round 8 game v GWS to push their claims for top 8 honours.

Looking at the teams Brisbane play twice in 2012, consider these statistics from 2011:

Rockliff

Melbourne – 134
Carlton – 95
Gold Coast – 86 + 112
West Coast – 151
Western Bulldogs – 91

Redden

Melbourne – 119
Carlton – 109
Gold Coast – 64 + 118
West Coast – 113
Western Bulldogs – 82

From these stats it looks pretty even as both players seem to have scored similarly in all of these matches. It’s also positive to note that when they played Gold Coast for the second time, they improved their scores dramatically; which could be considered indicative of their strong finish to the year. If you put all of the scores together from above, Rocky has a slight edge. However these are only their 2011 scores against their double up opponents, not the rest of the competition.

Bye Week Relevance

Brisbane share the R11 bye with Adelaide, GWS, North, West Coast and the Bulldogs in 2012. The main clashes people may have in the midfield are Thompson, Sloane, Swallow, Priddis and Boyd. Aside from Thompson (due to Adelaide’s draw), I’d say RedRock are better options than all of these guys anyway – so it shouldn’t really affect your decision to pick them too much. Also, depending on how many GWS kids you have in your mids, you may want to keep your R11 premiums to 1 to start the year – with the option (nay, certainty) of upgrading to one in R12 when our best premiums (Swan, Pendles, Selwood & Barlow) will be missing.

The Numbers

Finally, as a quick summary I’ve put together some interesting stats on each player to outline their DT credentials.

Rockliff

• Scored 100 + 75% in 2011
• Scored 115 + 50% in 2011
• Averaged 121 between R13 – R24, scoring 100 + every week
• Take out his sub affected score of 59 in R9 and his avg is 115 for the year
• Is currently owned by around 4.5% of coaches

Redden

• Scored 100 + 73% in 2011
• Scored 115 + 45% in 2011
• Has not missed a game in 2 years
• Showed his consistency with an avg of 115 between R11 – R23
• Is currently owned by less than 2% of coaches

Conclusion

With all of the hype about these two emerging guns, opposition coaches will be more aware of them coming into the new season. Rockliff is arguably a better AFL player (and DTer) with a higher ceiling and much talked about leadership qualities to boot. Whilst Redden appears to have just as much potential, he will most likely spend his career in Rocky’s shadow. I can see a lot of coaches upgrading to one of the two after their R11 bye – or both if they don’t get a start in your team. Rocky is tipped to have a higher average, including a few massive scores – however comes with the risk of copping a tag most weeks. Redden should naturally improve and avoid being tagged most weeks; and given his likeliness of being extremely unique, he could be a real point of difference in your midfield make up for 2012. Whichever you choose, you won’t be disappointed.

Cheers for reading – Feedback appreciated.

McRath

Undoubtedly two of the best guns in the land of DT, most good teams will end up with both of these boys by the time finals roll around. But who should we start the year with? Last year I took the unheralded and much criticised decision to start with Pendles instead of Swannie. Fortunately for me it paid off with Swan having a mid-season breakdown, before becoming the perfect upgrade target and storming home in the second half of the year. But will this happen again in 2012? Both are absolute champions and will be among the first picked, but the key questions will be who to start with; and who to upgrade to after the bye?

Also, it must be considered that the pies are one of many teams that will line up behind a new coach in 2012. It remains to be seen how different Buckley’s game plan will be; and what effect this will have on their DT scores. However given the ability of both players to find the ball, I’d suggest that this won’t have a negative effect on eithers output.

Dane Swan

Price: $598,300
Position: MID
Bye round: 12
Age: 27

2011 Details
Avg: 120.9
Games played: 21
High Score: 171
Low Score: 83
No. 100 + scores: 16
Expected average for 2012: 120

Scott Pendlebury

Price: $576,900
Position: MID
Bye round: 12
Age: 24

2011 Details
Avg: 116.6
Games played: 22
High Score: 166
Low Score: 87
No. 100 + scores: 18
Expected average for 2012: 118

Scoring Potential/Consistency

Everyone already knows that both of these guys have amazing scoring potential and have already proven their ability to produce this week in, week out. Swan has averaged 119, 123 and 121 in the past 3 years to be known as the best DT player the game has ever seen. His ability to consistently rack up possessions, whilst simultaneously finding space makes him almost unstoppable once he gets going. Only dropping below 100 points in 5 games last year (3 of which were when he was carrying an injury); he will give you a ton almost every week, all the while giving you a reliable, walk up captain choice. He also had some outstanding games last year (including a massive 171 v Essendon), further elevating his standing as the game’s best Dream Teamer. His fellow magpie and captain-in-waiting, Scott Pendlebury has enjoyed a much faster rise to prominence. Having averaged 116.6 in his sixth year, he is a 24 year old ball magnet who continues to get better in each year he plays. Similar to Swan, he rarely drops below 100 (4 times in 2011) and is an extremely reliable option for a spot in your midfield group. Having also scored 140 + on four occasions, Pendles will give you more than a few titanic scores in 2012. Based on 2011 alone, no one in the AFL can take this one from Swan – but Pendlebury is fast catching him. Could 2012 be the year he takes over?

Durability

Using the past 6 years as a guide, Swan has played 129 games out of a possible 132, only missing 3 (prior to 2011 he played 4 seasons without missing a game). Pendlebury has also shown himself to be ultra-durable during his first 6 years in the AFL. Taking out his first year, he has played 105 out of a possible 110 games. Keeping in mind Swan took 3 seasons to get to his durable best; Pendles has once again gotten to where he sits much faster. This one is as close as it is irrelevant – barring a massive injury shock expect both of these men to play out a full season in 2012. As a sidenote, the only thing that could hurt coaches that pick either this season is the issue of resting. If the Pies are sitting pretty in pole position coming into their last few rounds, we could see a raft of Collingwood stars sit out their final match against Essendon in R23.

Value

This section is arguably irrelevant when talking about super premiums. We pay a high price based on the guarantee they will dominate and give us 100 + points every week. Sure, the likes of Swan, Pendles, Boyd and Mitchell will all drop in price at some point – but unless they improve their avg by more than a few ppg, so too will everyone else. And do the price changes really matter if we’re going to keep them anyway? Not if we have them to begin with, no. Now, whilst I’m a Subscriber of finding ‘underpriced premiums’ and love a bargain; when choosing our top players (who may also be a regular captain), value simply does not weigh as heavily as other factors. As a side note: if you are looking for ‘value’ in your midfield, see my previous ‘Versus’ article on Barlow v Hayes.

For the record – whilst I still believe Swan will average slightly more, Pendles is improving rapidly and may well take over this year as the best Dream Teamer in the league. And at roughly $22k cheaper, one could argue that Pendles offers more value. Whilst Swannie will still be the no. 1 man in most coaches’ eyes at this point; I believe that it is no longer a massive risk to pick Scotty over the Great Dane.

Team Draw

Whilst both players are enjoying trouble free preseasons, Pendlebury looks to be a man on a mission with everything he does. After recently being praised for his commitment, professionalism and leadership; he appears to be on a quest to take the mantle of # 1 player at Collingwood from Swan in 2012. With Swan also recently being removed from the Pies’ leadership group; could this be a sign of things to come in the upcoming season? With Swan’s injury worries from 2011 now well behind him, both men should start the year in peak fitness – resulting in high DT scores and quality football from round 1.

Playing for the same team, some may think this section is irrelevant. However I beg to differ. Aside from playing Richmond, Port, Essendon, Bulldogs and Brisbane inside the opening 7 rounds; the Pies appear to have the toughest draw – being the only team to play 4 of the top 5 teams from last year twice. Now, whilst they play the same teams, both players have different records against certain teams – particularly against their ‘double up’ opponents. Looking at the teams Collingwood play twice in 2012, consider these statistics from 2011:

Swan

Essendon – 104 + 171
Carlton – 116 + 101
West Coast – 89 + 144 (QF)
Hawthorn – 130 + 122 (PF)
Geelong – 115, 84 + 68 (GF)

Pendlebury

Essendon – 166 + 141
Carlton – 95 + 123
West Coast – 131 + 138 (QF)
Hawthorn – 105 +103 (PF)
Geelong – 89, 106 + 131 (GF)

From these stats it doesn’t seem that either will particularly struggle against their ‘double up’ opponents, however Swan did falter against the Cats twice last year. Whilst Pendlebury scored higher on aggregate against these 5 teams, both players boast an encouraging record against all of the top teams. So the ‘tough’ draw should not be considered in any way a negative factor in choosing either Collingwood gun in your midfield.

Bye Week Relevance

Collingwood share the round 12 bye with other midfield jets in Selwood, Bartel, Watson, Mundy, and Barlow; along with fellow pie guns Thomas and Beams. Ideally, you don’t want to start the season with more than two of these guys however an upgrade to another in R13 and beyond will be a popular choice. Starting with both Swan and Pendles would be expensive, but not overly costly as most coaches will be missing 2 midfield guns in this round as well.

The Numbers

Finally, as a quick summary I’ve put together some interesting stats on each player to outline their DT credentials (like I really need to at this point).

Swan

• Scored 100 + 76% in 2011 (80% in the past 3 years)
• Scored 120 + 48% in 2011 (54% in the past 3 years)
• After returning from Arizona in R14 he averaged 128.45 between R14 – R24
• In 2010, he returned 13 consecutive 100 + scores
• Take out his injury affected R9 – R11 and he averaged 126.33 in 2011

Pendlebury

• Scored 100 + 82% in 2011
• Averaged 153.5 v Essendon in 2011 (play twice in 2012)
• Scored 12 consecutive 100 + scores from R9 – R21 in 2011
• Just turned 24 in January this year and is years above his super premium peers in Matthew Boyd (29), Gary Ablett Jnr (27), Dane Swan (27) and Sam Mitchell (29)

Conclusion

This has become a bigger debate than usual this year – due largely to the rise of Scott Pendlebury. Dane Swan still remains as the best player the DT world has seen however with a new coach and more competition in the Pies’ midfield in 2012; his time at the top may soon come to an end. Both players have a remarkable ceiling, whilst their consistency is startling. But with so many great picks in the midfield this year, it will be difficult to fit both players in as they are the two most expensive names in the game. The word from team McRath is that Scotty Pendlebury has one foot in the door; with Swan on the radar for a mid–season upgrade. Choose one to start with and upgrade to the other. Which one you pick is up to you. However can you really go wrong with either?

Cheers for reading – Feedback appreciated.

McRath

Suckers and Birch both had super years in 2011, especially Suckling (lifting his previous year average by over 40 points!) and both are seriously being considered by many dreamers to fill that D3 position in 2012, and for good bloody reason! However you will probably only be able to fit one of these guys in due to that treacherous R13 bye that will affect so many of our better defence options. Placed within 6k of each other, being in the same team and averaging similarly in 2011 really makes this a hard choice to make so hopefully by the end of this article your choice will be made a lot clearer.

Matt Suckling

Price – $448, 900
Position – Def
Bye Round – 13
Age – 23

 2011 Details:
Average – 90.75
Games played – 20
High Score – 141
Low Score – 55
No. of 100+ scores –6
No. of sub 70 scores – 4

Grant Birchall

Price – $443, 500
Position – Def
Bye Round –13
Age – 24

 2011 Details:
Average – 89.67
Games played – 21
High Score – 129
Low Score – 58
No. of 100+ scores – 7
No. of sub 70 scores – 3

Scoring Potential& Consistency:

In 2011 both Suckling & Birchall stood up as premium dream team defenders with each of them at times showing there huge scoring potential. With Suckling really stealing the spotlight in some games, racking up scores like 141, 133, 126 & 120 throughout the season. However, just like it appears with all players with huge ceilings (bar the midfield uber premos), Suckling can be a tad inconsistent at times, with Birchall certainly taking the cake when it comes to the consistency stakes.Birchall also showed his capabilities of scoring big in 2011 averaging 104.5 over 8 games from the rounds 7-14 (including a 115, 124 & 129), eclipsing suckling’s best 8 game streak (containing a 141, 133 & a 120) by just over 4pts per game.

The following graphs display Suckers and Birch’s scores over the year and show the difference in their consistency.

Round 1 goes to…. Birchall, for his superior consistency over Suckling, despite his slightly lower ceiling.

Scoring Potential Rating – Suckling (8.5/10), Birchall (7.5/10)

Consistency Rating – Suckling (6/10), Birchall (8.5/10)

Durability:

With Suckling entering just his fourth year since his debut there is not much to talk about here regarding him, it is worth noting however that he played just 1 & 5 games in his first 2 seasons (not in best 22) and missed 2 games last year with a couple of niggles. Birchall on the other hand is entering his 7^th season on the back of missing just 5 games over the course of the last 5 seasons and also played 16 games in his debut year and from my knowledge hasn’t really struggled with injury in any season to date.

Round 2 goes to…. Going off Birchall’s great track record over the course of his career he wins out quite easily in this category.

Durability rating – Suckling (7/10), Birchall (9/10)

Value:

Being priced within 6k of each other and both having the potential to be in the top 7 defenders by years end, these two seem to present decent value for money. They are priced at an average of around 90 which seems pretty reasonable for defenders of their caliber who could and should push 95+ by years end.

Round 3 goes to…… Both of them, cant really be split in this category, but in saying that if Suckers adds some more consistency to his game he looms as the better value pick here.

Value Rating – Suckling (7.5/10), Birchall (7/10)

Health/Fitness:

Seems to be absolutely no news of late regarding the two players in discussion, but one can assume this can only be a good thing. One thing of note is an article on the Hawthorn website previously regarding a more aggressive style through there back line this year but this also can only be a good thing for Suckling and Birchall one can assume.

Round 4 goes to… Hard to decide really with the little news available but one would assume that with the no news they would both be in peak physical shape, resulting in a tie in this category.

Team Draw:

Obviously being in the same team they both have the same draw so it really comes down to how they average against the teams they play twice (Collingwood, Geelong, West Coast, Port, Sydney), and how they perform at the prominent venues in their fixture.

Average against teams they play twice:

Suckling – Collingwood (83/1game), Geelong (92/2), West Coast (55/2), Port (111/1), Sydney (50/2) – in total (72.375/8)

Birchall – Collingwood (77.75/8), Geelong (77.44/9), West Coast (89.34/7), Port (75.5/8), Sydney (69/9) – in total (77.8/41)

In 2012 Hawks play 19 of their games spread across 3 venues, MCG (13), Etihad (2) and Aurora (4) so their averages at these grounds over their career could play a crucial roll in your selection in either of these 2 players.

Suckers – MCG (89.38/13), Etihad (86.33/3), Aurora (88/4) – in total (87.9/20)

Birch – MCG (79.92/53), Etihad (80.48/21), Aurora (78.41/22) – in total (79.6/96)

Round 5 goes to… Once again a tough call and I am unable to split it due to Suckling and Birchall both holding distinctly better records than the other in average against teams played twice and average at major venues respectively.

Fixture Rating – Suckling (7/10), Birchall (7/10)

Conclusion:

Overall Ratings – Suckling (36/50), Birchall (39/50)

All in all I believe both of these players will provide coaches with really good seasons and both should rate in the top 7 defenders for 2012. In saying this I would pick Birchall if you were looking for the safer consistent option or suckling if you were looking for more upside and a few 130+’s throughout the year.

In my opinion it all comes down to personal preference and what you are looking for in a defender, let us know what you think and who you will choose in the poll and comments below.

Hope you enjoyed this article and if you want you can swing some suggestions my way for the next one of these I hope to do (as long as I don’t get hit with too many school assignments in the meantime).

Once again a big shout out to McRath for starting these articles and setting a really strong structure for me to follow.

Cheers for reading, Robdog

This clash looms as a real unique comparison as they are both at different ends of their careers. Once is a dominant big man who, for years has been the first picked ruckman in Dream Team. The other is a young, emerging ruck who is starting to take the AFL by storm with his size and ability. In many ways, Leuenberger is the Obi-Wan Kenobi to Cox’s Qui-Gon Jinn; however 2012 should see Leuey step out of the shadows and become a ruck master in his own right (hopefully not at the expense of Cox to the lightsabre of injury that is Darth Maul).

In the blue corner we have Dean Cox, the most expensive (justifiably so) ruckman in DT who has the ability to consistently dominate his opponents and synonymously rack up massive scores; and in the red corner we have the most promising big man in the game, who is quickly carving out a reputation as one of the best talents in the game.

Dean Cox

Price: $532,000
Position: RUC
Bye round: 11
Age: 30

2011 Details
Avg: 107.55
Games played: 22
High Score: 155
Low Score: 57
No. 100 + scores: 12

Matthew Leuenberger

Price: $459,100
Position: RUC
Bye round: 11
Age: 23

2011 Details
Avg: 92.82
Games played: 22
High Score: 140
Low Score: 48
No. 100 + scores: 9

Scoring Potential

Cox was THE premier ruckman in 2011. As the only ruck to average over the 100 mark, he was also the only man in his class to sit inside the top 20 players’ bracket at the end of the year (Ranked #11 overall). Big Coxy enjoyed his 4th year with a 100 + average and is primed to do so again in 2012. With an amazing scoring potential, he is undoubtedly the best ruckman in the game. Taking himself to a new level in 2011, Cox scored over 110 in all but one of his 100 + games, including 4 games over 135! Enough said.

Take aside his first 5 games where he played primarily in attack (and averaged a solid 76.2), Leuey returned to the ruck in round 7 and made an immediate impact averaging an encouraging 97.7 ppg over his remaining 17 games. Scoring over 100 x 9 times, with 6 of those 109 or more; he has shown the definite ability to dominate all around the ground. Equally adept at amassing possessions as he is at gaining hitouts, Berger’s natural improvement should see him continue to score from everywhere; as well as improve his average to be verging on the 100 mark.

Cox wins this battle hands down, however I expect the margin will be a lot closer by Round 23 this year.

Durability

Both men played 22 games in 2011 (with Cox also playing all 3 finals for West Coast) so are coming off strong, consistent seasons. Starting with the master, he has managed to play a full season 5 times in his 11 seasons, including 3 out of the last 4 years. Based on recent years he has been one of the more reliable options in terms of durability. With the exception of a freak injury, the only factor that may play against Cox this year is that of resting. Depending on how strongly West Coast are positioned at the end of the year, Woosha could look at resting the big man in round 21 against Port (rnd 2 of finals in DT). However if 2011 was anything to go on, the chances of this happening are fairly slim.

The apprentice on the other hand has only had 2 seasons we can judge as it took him 3 years to break into Brisbane’s line up behind Jamie Charman. Since his breakout into the best 22 in 2010, Berger has played 44 games out of a possible 44. This suggests he is going to be a dependable option in the ruck, whilst steadily improving his DT scores in the process. Going on the last 2 years as a comparison due to the above reasoning, these two are hard to split – with both being affected by injuries in the past however now appear fit and ready for another 22 games in 2012.

Value

As two players at opposing ends of the spectrum, the question of value is debateable. Whilst Cox is coming off his best year in the AFL, many will think he can continue to improve and push his average even higher in 2012. However with his age now over the topical 30 mark, statistics suggest he may start to decline – especially with a talented and youthful Nic Natinui waiting in the wings to take over. Therefore, based on his high price, Cox isn’t a ‘value pick’ by any stretch. This argument will be made null and void by many given coaches usually don’t look for value in their top premiums.

Leuenberger on the other hand is just starting to hit his straps; and by no means has he peaked yet in terms of DT. In a year where he will be primed to elevate his average to between 95-100; being priced at 93 will give him the edge over Cox as his price may not be this low again. If he breaks into the true ruck premium range of 100 +, he will be one of the ruck steals of the season.

Health/Fitness

There has been no negative news out of the Eagles camp about the ruck veteran. I’m going to go along the lines of the popular mantra in this case – no news is good news. This suggests that he is travelling along fine and should be primed for a strong start to the season. Coach John Worsfold will be looking to manage his experienced players through the preseason so as to not overload them. For this reason, we may not see much of Cox until round 1.

Similar to Cox, Leuenberger hasn’t put a foot wrong in the offseason, looking to extend his run off 44 consecutive games in 2012. We will likely see him in a game or two during the NAB series as Voss looks to work out how he will use new recruit Ben Hudson in 2012. It is highly possible that Hudson is simply insurance for the Berger, however even if he does have to share the ruck load with the former Bulldog; this may end up helping his DT scores with a few more goals the likely result. As always, keep an eye on the club injury lists for any surprises; however barring some terrible luck, expect to see both big men suit up for game 1 of the season in the # 1 ruck spot for their respective teams.

Team Draw

West Coast have a great start to the year in 2012, only playing 3 x top 8 teams from last year before their bye. Starting off with the Dogs, Demons and Giants; expect your Eagles’ stars to fire early. Their draw does get harder in the second half though, playing the Pies twice inside 10 rounds. The teams they play twice in 2012 are the Pies, Hawks, Kangaroos, Dockers and Lions. Of the top 4 teams from last year, they appear to have the best draw. The Lions on the other hand have an even more favourable one – particularly in the latter half of the year. In total – they only play 2011 finalists Blues and Eagles twice, along with the Demons, Suns and Bulldogs. In the wake of their round 11 bye, Brisbane have a strong finish to the year; playing the Saints, Suns, Tigers, Crows, Port and Dogs all inside the final 8 rounds. This should enable them to come home with a wet sail and give the finals a real crack in 2012.

Bye Week Relevance

Cox and Leuey both have the round 11 bye in 2012 so will share it with the likes of Adelaide, GWS, North and Western Bulldogs. The round 11 bye is undoubtedly the worst for rucks this year. As well as these two, teams will also be missing popular choices Goldstein, HMac, Giles, Nic Nat and Jacobs in this round. Based on the way the byes are structured this season it is advisable that coaches don’t pick more than 1 player with the round 11 bye unless they are sacrificing the round (more on this from Warnie soon). If you are one of the brave coaches going into the season with 1 premium ruck and 3 rookies, you could consider starting with one of the above, then upgrading to another in round 12 – this would be one of the only viable ways to have two R11 rucks and get away with it. Starting with two would be a sure-fire muck up.

Conclusion

In a battle of Master v Apprentice, there is no clear winner here. Your choice of one of the above will come down to a matter of opinion and structure. At over $70k cheaper, Leuenberger provides better value and more upside. However Dean Cox is an absolute champion and has been the best ruckman in Dream Team for years. I have a feeling both may average over 100 in 2012 and may just finish the year as the top 2 rucks in the land. Choose one and upgrade to the other; or pick one and stick to your guns. Whatever you choose – rest assured that these two big men are both great choices for your team in 2012.

Cheers for Reading – Feedback Appreciated.

McRath

After reading the comments of the previous two ‘Versus’ articles by McRath their seemed to be a lot of support and a push for the continuation of these articles. So following the basic blueprint laid out by McRath I have put together this article opposing two players that may well step into the top echelon of dream team defenders this year.

Following some reading of comments in both the ‘My Team’ post and the DoDT articles of both Greg and Dyson respectively, it appears that these two players are really fighting it out for that D4/5 position. Placed at almost the exact same price, with the same bye, both players provide obvious upside and could be in line for big years. In saying that which one will you be recruiting to fill one of those precarious defender spots in 2012? Hopefully this article will help you decide just that.

Greg Broughton

Price – $416,200
Position – Def
Bye Round – 12
Age – 25

2011 Details:
Average – 84.14
Games played – 21
High Score – 149
Low Score – 46
No. of 100+ scores – 6
No. of sub 70 scores – 8

Dyson Heppell

Price – $415,900
Position – Def
Bye Round –12
Age – 19 (20 in may)

2011 Details:
Average – 84.09
Games played –22
High Score – 108
Low Score –52
No. of 100+ scores – 5
No. of sub 70 scores –4

Scoring Potential& Consistency:

Over the course of Broughton’s 3 years in the AFL he has shown the dream team world that he has huge scoring potential, and from what was seen in 2011 a much higher ceiling than Heppell, clearly represented by Greg’s HS of 149 compared to Dyson’s 108. The downside of Broughton is however, that he can consistently score sub par scores, as shown in the first 8 and last 5 rounds of 2011 where he averaged just 64. In fact even in Broughton’s purple match mid season he knocked out 3 games of 90 or below including one, which was sub 50, just highlighting his inconsistency. Heppell showed us all in his debut year that he may not have the scoring potential of Broughton but what he lacks there he certainly makes up for in his consistency of high standard games, hitting the 90+ mark an incredible 9 times in his debut year. Sure 90 isn’t a huge score but keep in mind that Fyfe (a similar type of silky outside player with a strong grab, however in a amore attacking manner) reached the 90 mark just 3 times and averaging only 68 in his debut year before upping his average to 98 in just his second season.And with a solid pre season in the gym and on the track surely we can expect Heppell to enhance his ceiling and build on his scoring potential, right?

The graphs below show both Greg and Dyson’s scores from each round, clearly highlighting the disparity of consistency between the two.

Round 1 goes to……. Heppell, just, for his above par consistency and likelihood to increase his scoring potential and ceiling. However if Broughton added some consistency to his game then he definitely seems to have greater upside due to his higher ceiling. (Score: 0-1)

Durability:

Not really too much too say here considering both players are still very early on in there careers, entering there 2^nd and 4^th careers respectively. However it is worth noting that since his debut Broughton has missed 13 of a possible 64 games and has struggled with different injuries at times throughout his 3year career. Dyson however seemed to show great durability playing in all 23 of Essendon’s games in his first season despite rumors going around pre draft day 2010 that he was struggling with an injury.

Round 2 goes to……. Once again it’s Heppell, but with not much to go off I wouldn’t be paying too much attention to this category. (Score: 0-2)

Value:

Being two of the minimal defenders not sharing the round 13 bye both represent great value, money and structural wise, provided they average in excess of 90 that is. As it is expected both will do this it can be assured that they probably wont be too much cheaper throughout the season, however probably wont rise too much either unless they really push their avg. to in excess of 95+

Round 3 goes to…… Broughto, if he can add some consistency to his game he offers incredible value, but we will need to see how Ross Lyon uses him first.

(Score: 1-2)

Health/Fitness:

The words an pictures leaking out from Essendon are representing that Heppell is having an incredible pre season and is in absolute tip top shape and is gearing up for another big year and looking to build on his debut season. Ross Lyon appears to be giving away nothing over in the west with minimal to no news on Broughto, or any of his teammatesfor that matter. Which is probably a good thing considering Greg’s history of getting injured because if there had been an injury you would think it would be reported?

Round 4 goes to…… Once again nothing to really go off here but given the hype on Heppell’s pre season he wins out in this category. (Score: 1-3)

Team Draw:

Both teams seem to face relatively easy draws in 2012 with Essendon playing 10 games at Etihad and 7 games at the ‘G’ through the course of the season (where Heppell averages 82.33 and 92.25 respectively), meanwhile, like always, Freo will play 12 games at Patersons (where Greg has averaged 91 over the course of his 29 games there).

Now looking to the teams that they play twice, in brackets is there average against that team and from how many games:

Essendon & Heppell: Collingwood (102/2), Richmond (105/2), Port (102/1), Carlton (81/2), North (58/1) – in total 91.875/8

Freo and Broughto: Port (96/3), West Coast (92.4/5), Adelaide (88.5/4), Richmond (82/3), Melbourne (60.33/3) – in total 85.05/18

When scanning over the fixture it seems as though Essendon have a larger portion of easier games in the first 11 rounds with Freo being the opposite, leading to Broughton perhaps being an upgrade target post Rd 12 and starting with Heppell a better option

Round 5 goes to…… Heppell, with minimal travel and a better average against the team he faces twice I would assume that Heppell would be the better option for a starter if deciding by this category. (Score: 1-4)

Conclusion:

Overall I believe that both will push for an average of 90+ and slip into the top 10 defenders come years end if they stay fit. However given the unknowns of Lyon’s game plan & Broughton’s knack of slipping into a lockdown defender roll, coupled with his inconsistency, hangs huge question marks over his head going into the 2012 season, making Heppell the safer and better choice in my opinion. Let us know your thoughts and comments below, feedback appreciated. (Once again thanks to McRath because I wouldn’t of been able to write this without the structure he set in his first two of these articles)

Good luck to all for the 2012 season

Robdog

Barlow and Hayes are undoubtedly the two biggest ‘premium bargains’ of 2012. Both are DT guns capable of amazing feats, with both having injury affected campaigns in 2011. Priced in a similar range, many will be choosing between the two for their 4th position in their all important midfield make up. Tempting as it is to take both, it will be difficult to do so within the salary cap; whilst still trying to maintain solid structure in the rest of your team.

With their injury woes hopefully behind them; watch for these guys to make amends for last year and make up for lost ground on the field. With a spot in their team’s best 21 assured; both are important players at their clubs and should be given every opportunity to return to their best in 2012.

Michael Barlow

Price: $424,800
Position: MID
Bye round: 12
Age: 24

2011 Details
Avg: 85.9
Games played: 9
High Score: 117
Low Score: 25 (sub affected)
No. 100 + scores: 3

2010 Details
Avg: 109.8
Games played: 13
High Score: 146
Low Score: 46
No. 100 + scores: 9

Lenny Hayes

Price: $382,800
Position: MID
Bye round: 13
Age: 32

2011 Details
Avg: 86
Games played: 2
High Score: 107
Low Score: 65
No. 100 + scores: 1

2010 Details
Avg: 108
Games played: 21
High Score: 140
Low Score: 65
No. 100 + scores: 17

Scoring Potential

Tossing aside the aberration that was their 2011 season, both players have a proven record of high scoring. With 9 out of 13 hundreds in his first season of AFL footy, Michael Barlow became an instant hit at the Dockers and was a fixture in the middle until his bad leg break mid 2010. With a high ceiling of 146 (against Collingwood no less), he has shown he can score and; score consistently when fit. Hayes on the other hand is a veteran at the Saints and is now coming into his 13th season in the AFL. Until last year he looked to be getting even better in his age, averaging 108 in 2010 over 21 games. In terms of his ceiling, he too can score highly gaining 7 x 120 + games in 2010 out of his 17 tons. It’s a bit hard to divide the two here as they are at different ends of their careers; however I’d say Hayes has the edge based on his sustained brilliance over time.

Durability

This ones a bit of a no brainer, however also isn’t really a fair comparison as Barlow has been affected by freak injuries during the start of his career. Playing just 13 games in his first season and 9 in his second; he won’t tick this box just yet however one can argue he hasn’t really had a fair chance to do so at AFL level just yet given his circumstances. Hayes on the other hand has a better looking record. Before last year’s anomaly, he played 80 of a possible 88 games in the preceding 4 years between 2007 and 2010. Having had 8 seasons of 19 games or more, Lenny has proven that when he is fit he can play out a whole season. As both are returning from injury, this contest is hard to predict and it all depends on how they come through the preseason and start the year.

Value

As mentioned above, these two guys present amazing value based their previous feats and potential. If Barlow hadn’t had his 2010 season cut short, who knows what he could’ve done? He could very well have been a Brownlow winner in his first year of AFL football (a truly amazing feat). Despite his injuries and absence of supposed durability, he appears to be largely underpriced as he is capable of a 110 + average and has unlimited future potential. Hayes however is priced with a juicy discount; meaning he is around the same price as someone with a 77 average. Given he could comfortably average 100 + if fit; he too is massively underpriced and presents himself as an underpriced premium who, barring injury should be worth his place in your final six midfielders come the business end of the year. It’s hard to say who offers more value out of the two; but with the discount and his lower price one would have to say Hayes takes the prize on this occasion.

Health/Fitness

Encouragingly, the recent news surrounding Barlow is that he is pain free and flying in the preseason; closing in on full fitness. He appears to be running freely and has recently completed a full 40 minute simulated match practice session without any signs of soreness. This is fantastic news for Fremantle fans and prospective DT coaches alike; as Barlow is primed to play a lot more football in 2012. Luckily for us, Hayes’ injury was well timed in that he went down early in 2011. This in turn means that he’s had almost a full year to recover. All reports out of the Saints camp indicate he is looking fit and well on track to start the season. Expect him to be eased back to match fitness with the NAB cup and early rounds. New coach Scott Watters may even look to rest him up forward ala Gary Ablett until he gets back to 100%. It’s hard to tell, but it looks like Barlow is looking the more likely of the two at this stage, however I’d expect both to be ready to go come round 1.

Team Draw

Fremantle have a mixed start to the year, playing Geelong, Sydney and Carlton all in the first five rounds, but then go on to play Gold Coast, Port, Adelaide and Richmond in the following 6 games. Overall though, they have a positive draw – playing only one top 8 team from 2011 twice (traditional rival West Coast). Ross Lyon will also be licking his lips at the prospect of playing Richmond, Melbourne, Port and Adelaide twice in the 2012 draw. Whilst Freo have a favourable draw, St Kilda has an even better fixture. Their first 3 rounds see them play Port, the Suns and the Bulldogs – before playing Freo, Melbourne and Hawthorn in Melbourne. In all, they play last years finalists Carlton and Sydney twice, but also have the benefit of playing the Dogs, Suns and Dees on multiple occasions. Expect the flattering draws to have a positive effect on these teams’ scoring in 2012, in particular both Barlow and Hayes.

Bye Week Relevance

Barlow has the round 12 bye, which means he will be missing in the same week as popular DT studs Dane Swan, Scott Pendlebury and Joel Selwood. Coaches wanting to have more than one of these will have to think twice if they also want to cash in on the Freo gun. Have too many stars missing in any given week and it could result in a heavy loss or drop in ranking. Hayes similarly shares his bye with some big names in Gary Ablett Jnr, Marc Murphy and Sam Mitchell. As above, no matter what your strategy is; it may not serve you best having more than 2 midfield guns from the same bye week – so if you go with the Saints veteran, look to avoid starting with more than one of the above guns who have the bye in round 13.

On a side note, a popular strategy will be to choose the best midfield guns and 1 or 2 mid price bargains who will turn ‘keeper’ in 2012; then simply upgrade to the next best stars after the bye rounds. Based on their differing byes, teams could realistically start with both Barlow and Hayes without being drastically affected, given you don’t overload on guns in any given week.

Conclusion

These two lads are both excellent choices for your team and will be among the most popular players come round 1. All good coaches will strongly consider having at least one of them to start the season. Whilst Barlow is yet to put together a full season, his price offers amazing value for what we all know he can do – he just has to stay fit and out of Rhys Palmer’s way (luckily for him, Freo doesn’t play GWS until round 17). Hayes was touted as being a lock as soon as he went down last year; however with an awkward price and an aging body, coaches will have to think very hard about selecting him in their initial squad. As with all players returning from injury, we will need to wait until the last minute to confirm both players are fit and healthy; however I’m tipping both to fire from the start. For the record, Barlow is my pick for most likely of the two to return to DT prominence in 2012.

Click here to see the last ‘Versus’ article: Robinson v Martin

With the generous bestowal of MID/FWD DPP in 2012, these two gents will be among the most popular forward line options for coaches. Effectively having an additional midfielder sitting in your forward line; this appears to be a recipe for success for coaches in the upcoming season.

Poised at a similar price with high potential, Robbo and Martin may well be fighting it out in your team for that all important DPP spot. Many will opt for both; or may be considering others like Sidebottom, Beams, Fyfe or Zaharakis. However, it is my belief that these two offer the most upside in what will hopefully be a great year for both young players.

Mitch Robinson

Price: $456,200
Position: MID/FWD
Bye round: 13
Age: 22

2011 Details
Avg: 92.2
Games played: 21
High Score: 141
Low Score: 39 (sub affected)
No. 100 + scores: 8

Dustin Martin

Price: $442,500
Position: MID/FWD
Bye round: 13
Age: 20

2011 Details
Avg: 89.5
Games played: 22
High Score: 141
Low Score: 59
No. 100 + scores: 7

Scoring Potential

In 2011, both players showed they have a similar high ceiling of 141 and are capable of dominating games with their physicality and their ability to accumulate possessions. Robinson had a mixed start to the year, scoring 2 x hundreds and bottoming out during his season turning 39 against Geelong in round 9. From there he scored 6 tons and averaged 99.3 from round 10 to the Blues Semi-Final loss to West Coast. Martin had a slightly different year, starting off in a blaze of glory with scores of 98, 94, 113, 141 and 119 in the first 6 rounds. Whilst he had a slight lull in the latter half of the year, he finished off strongly with 3 consecutive scores above 90. Even with his sub affected 39 against Geelong, Robinson had a better year scoring wise and takes the edge here – however expect his counterpart to surge ahead in 2012.

Durability

Due to both players being quite young and only coming into their 4^th and 3^rd seasons respectively, it is difficult to confirm any real durability; however it is worth noting that Robinson played in all but 1 of Carlton’s games in 2011, with Martin not missing a single one – chalking up 22 games to go with his 21 in his debut season. Both players have promise to become very durable and are fit enough to run out a whole season. However if I had to choose, I’d say Martin has the edge here as he’s played 43 out of a possible 44 games in his first 2 seasons showing that he won’t likely miss a game in 2012. There is also the risk that Robinson may be suspended or injured due to his kamikaze playing style and hard at it approach.

Value

As two midfielders able to be chosen in the forward line, both players represent great value as they head into (what should be) their true ‘breakout’ years. With both capable of; and expected to average between 95 and 105, we can safely pick either of the two knowing it’s unlikely they’ll be this cheap again. I’d say Martin presents more value than Robinson as he should get more opportunities in his team; whilst I’m expecting him to turn out a higher average for 2012.

Health/Fitness

Word out of Carlton is that Mitch Robinson has returned from the break stronger and fitter than ever; and is set for an even bigger year after last year’s 2^nd half breakout. Martin has also come back fitter, however is looking leaner than last year – whilst also adding some more muscle to his frame. Expect both boys to make a bigger impact on the AFL stage this year with another year under their belts. It’s also handy to note that Martin is streets ahead of where he was last year; so with a better fitness platform coming into 2012, he will be ready to make a lasting impact from the get go.

Team Draw

Carlton appear to have the better draw in 2012, with the only troublesome games in the opening half of the year a clash with Collingwood in round 3; and back to back away games against Geelong and West Coast in rounds 11 + 12. Robinson should also end the year well, playing Brisbane, Essendon, Gold Coast and St Kilda for the DT finals.  Richmond has a slightly worrying opening to the year, having to play all 8 finalists from 2011 in the first 10 rounds. Expect Martin to still get plenty of the ball; however at times he may struggle in a team that is still improving. Like his opposite number here, he has a great finish to the year; playing Brisbane, the Bulldogs, Freo, Essendon and Port in his final 5 games for the year.

Conclusion

Whilst Robinson appears to be a great option with his DPP, value and expected increase in output for 2012; Martin can be considered the safer pick out of the two. Playing against the best of 2011 so early will give him a chance to really step up and prove himself on the big stage. With a good price and plenty of upside, Dustin Martin will be among the most picked players in 2012. As they share the same bye in what appears to be a dreaded round 13 for coaches; many will be sceptical about picking both in their teams to start with. However barring injury or suspension, expect these two to both be inside the top 10 scoring ‘forwards’ for 2012.

What the Ruck?

The big question here is… who are your starting two rucks for 2011? Of course there are many different options this year and Calvin’s takes a look at (what he believes) are the 6 most common combinations. But which one are you?

Mr. Big Spender: Sandilands + Ryder = $762,600

This coach has recently been impressed with old Patty Ryder and teamed him up with the giant from Freo. With rumours of Ryder playing a ‘roaming/wingman’ role this year, paying the big bucks here might pay off.

Mr. Boring: Sandilands + Cox = $758,300

This coach has gone for the old school approach of picking the gun of 2010, with the old gun from the past. Great selection either way! Cox is massively underpriced and has been in wicked form and pairing up with the best ruck of 2010 is a good call… but boring!

Mr. Toey: Cox + Ryder = $707,900

This coach probably has some deep dark secrets that they would probably like to leave alone in a dark closet somewhere, but expresses their hidden emotions with the names of their rucks. They have gone for a bargain along with the guy who is pushing to be in the top 2 rucks by the end of 2011. Ryder just may be there in the top 2 by the end of 2011 – look out.

Mr. Morning Glory: Jolly + Cox = $682,900

You wake up in the morning with a jollycox, oh and with a combined total of 200+ on the board and you’re a happy man. Jolly and Cox will be a dynamic duo this year and will be pushing a combined average of 200 easy I reckon!

Mr. Rich ‘n’ Poor : Sandilands + Petrie = $616,200

This is a confused coach. They bought Sandilands in as the guy who got the job done in 2010 and then felt guilty they spent so much money so they added old broken legged Petrie to the line up. Good call and if that makes you feel better, do it… but do you know that Petrie is also a forward? Oh no – now they are really confused. Seriously, not a bad combo through… cause Petrie will certainly rise in value and maybe a keeper, if not… you trade him with the money you’ve made and he turns to the 2^nd best guy! It’s not even a gamble, but a calculated strategy. I like it.

Mr. Pissonatree: Cox + Petrie = $561,500

You get it?? Cox… Pee Tree?? Oh well…I’ll explain it to you later Warnie. This coach has gone for two bargain dudes and a call that will certainly pay off. Both will go up in value and it’s a great call. This is a very cheap option and one that is low risk based on their price. Unless Pee Tree breaks another foot or leg, which he won’t.

Which combo have you gone for in 2011?

Sadly at this stage we are experiencing problems with the ‘poll’, so please just leave comments with your combo.

Most of the answers I’ve seen so far relate to personal preference or opinion, or cash available. Because of this, it’s hard to get a good idea of which of the two you should have (if not both). I’m going to have a look at things statistically in a bit, but for now let’s get the obvious out of the way.

Boyd is slightly more expensive at $478,200 than Montagna, priced at $465,100, so technically this is a factor. But I would argue that $13,000 is play money when choosing between premiums of this quality – it really shouldn’t make a difference. And besides, it’s only a function of their averages last year (Boyd 115.15, Montagna 112.00), so you get what you pay for.

A much bigger factor is what other Bulldogs or Saints are in the midfield with them. With the byes this year we all know how important it is to not have too many players from the same team. For that reason, if you have Cross or Higgins, you have a choice to make where Boyd is concerned. Similarly; Goddard, Hayes and Dal Santo are all legitimate options, so Montagna needs to be weighed up if you are dead-set on any of these players. But in my opinion it shouldn’t matter too much – Boyd and Montagna should be considered first on their own merits.

Speaking of the byes, Round 4 is a big reason why the Montagna v Boyd conversations have such weight. The Lions, Saints and Bulldogs each have a game off in the multi-bye round, which is why some will only consider having one of the two, as covering two premiums is too risqué for these people. Boyd’s second game off is Round 20 while Montagna’s is 14 – meaning that Montagna is the better upgrade target, and if you wanted both in your team by season’s end, Boyd would be the logical choice to start out with.

When considering premiums, injury concerns and durability is one box that must be ticked off. With Boyd and Montagna, there is no reason to worry. Boyd has only missed 2 games in the last 5 years, from a broken hand last season. Which, by the way, should have taken a month to heal properly, meaning he’s not only durable but very tough. His career track-record is even more impressive, playing in 144 of 154 games since his second year of AFL football. Montagna is in the same vein – only 3 games missed in the last 5 years, and never playing less than 21 in a season in that time. So if you expected durability to be a deciding factor, unfortunately you’re going to have to look deeper – these two are equally solid. Which is another reason why the comparisons between them have such merit.

Okay, now let’s get serious. Before I get into too much detail, I’ll clarify some assumptions we have to make. Firstly, their pre-season form is negligible. We all know senior players are nursed through the preseason so that they are fresh for the season proper, so any scores are not a true or accurate representation of their abilities. Hence I won’t be taking them into account. Secondly, I will assume that the best way to predict their future value is to analyse the more recent data with a greater emphasis. Basically, last years scores are a better indication of what is to come than the year before, or the year before that, so I will be weighting it accordingly. And thirdly, I’ve made a point not to analyse any data without a decent sample size – no point declaring that Montagna’s average score at Princess Park is 87, when he’s only played the one game there. Also, I’ll put any math-related jargon in italics so if you don’t care how I came to the conclusions I did, skip these parts.

CONSISTENCY

Consistency is a big factor to consider when picking a premium. It will be even more important if you plan not to have Swan and one of these two is your captain option! At any rate, one of these guys should be your vice-captain behind Swan and will be important in Rounds 7 and 13.

Some see consistency as continually scoring over than magic 100 point barrier. Last season, Boyd only scored under the ton 4/20 times, while Montagna was more frequent with 6/22 games. Both very impressive, but Boyd just wins there. On the other hand, having a look at the Game-Winner scores, Montagna scored over 130 7 times to Boyd’s 5. At a glance, this tells me that Boyd is the more consistent, continually scoring closer to his average than Montagna does. Not satisfied with taking things at face value, I did a few calculations.

I decided to use the Standard Deviation as a measure of consistency. Basically, the lower the Standard Deviation, the more consistent the player.  And seeing as we have all the data (thanks M0nty) I used the Population Standard Deviation method. This gives Montagna a std. of 26.42 to Boyd’s 21.53. But the problem with standard deviations is that it’s affected by the mean, which means that the results were affected by the difference in averages (Boyd’s 115.15 to Mont’s 112.0). To counter this I used the percentage of the difference rather than the difference itself in calculations (math nerds should know what I’m talking about). This gave Montagna a score of 1.1942 and Boyd 1.1484.

So I was right, Boyd is the more consistent player because he scores close to his average more often than Montagna. And when your average is 115.15, this is a very good thing! From this, I can see Montagna is more of a game-winning, all-or-nothing captain option. He can smash out those 151’s but he can also deliver you a 67.

FIXTURE

One stat I have seen thrown around is Boyd’s huge average at Etihad – 124 per game over 10 games last year. Conversely, his average away from Etihad is 106.3, which is by no means a negative, but it is good to keep in mind. Montagna on the other hand is much less variable in his scores in terms of location, averaging 112.6 at Etihad and 110.9 away. But he did score 6 of his 7 130+ games at home…

The fixture this year is such that Montagna plays 10 at Etihad, while Boyd plays 13 there, including the first three games of the year. This is interesting, because assuming Boyd performs there like he has in the past, it doesn’t look good for a drop in price anytime early in the year.

TEAMS

Some players play better against some teams than others (think Dane Swan vs West Coast – last 4 scores are 158, 133, 158, 162) and vice versa. And because clubs only play 6 teams twice this year, knowing who the bunny teams are will help with predicting scores for 2011.

To find out which teams Montagna and Boyd were more/less effective against, I took their average against each team and compared it to their overall average over the last two years. Why the last two years? Because 2009 was the year they both became premiums and averaged over 100 for the first time. As I said before, the more recent scores are more important than scores from 6 or 7 years ago.

In doing this I discovered Montagna enjoys playing against Brisbane, Melbourne and West Coast, while averaging less than the ton against Hawthorn and Fremantle. Boyd dominates against Hawthorn, Carlton and Collingwood but doesn’t do so well against Sydney, Richmond or Adelaide. So how do they do overall against the teams they play twice?

Montagna has a bad draw personally, with a 106.2 average against these teams, compared to his 113.86 avg over the last 2 seasons. Boyd’s isn’t as bad, but still only averages 107.4 against the 5 teams he plays twice (WB play Gold Coast twice, for which we have no data obviously) compared to his 109.18 avg. To put this in perspective, had Montagna and Boyd had the same draw last year, their averages would have been: Montagna 109.9 instead of 112, Boyd 114.7 instead of 115.15.

Overall, the draw for Montagna doesn’t excite me based on his track record. Boyd’s is basically negligible, because while I calculated a lesser average, this didn’t include Gold Coast, for which we can assume he’ll perform better than normal.

Unfortunately, the teams who you play twice are usually the ones you play at the end of the season, just in time for DT finals. Montagna plays against Collingwood, Sydney, North and Carlton. All four of these teams are teams he averages less than normal against, which is not encouraging for coaches. Boyd’s is better, facing Essendon and Fremantle who he doesn’t fare as well against, but takes on Port and the Hawks – whom he averages a massive 134 against.

VALUE

Value is often an objective term, but to quantify it in DT, we use $ per Point. Priced as they currently are, and based on last year’s scores, Montagna is $4152.7/pt and Boyd is $4152.8/pt. So basically the same, as per Virtual Sports’ pricing formula. But if you use the predicted averages calculated before, Montagna is $4232.03/pt and Boyd is better value at $4169.14/pt.

I started this exercise not knowing who to pick between these two, with only my personal preferences separating them. But after everything considered, I think Boyd will be lining up for me in Round 1.