Every player has positions and all but I thought I'd open up the floor for people to present players for others to discuss where I should set their position eligibility. I can have up to three rows of preference (Full back/half back/centre/half forward/full forward. + ruck obv) and set key/non key. Players can have 1, 2 or 3 positions. Primary, secondary and tertiary so the 2nd position is less effective than the 1st etc. However will make a forewarning that if people just post the stupidest shit regarding players they drafted and obviously try and get others' players to be restricted unfairly positionwise then I'll just lock the thread and be a dictator regarding positions.
I'll start us off. Jack Watts. I've currently got him as 1. Half Back 2. Half Forward 3. Full Back 4. Non Key as I did these 2 months ago. I was thinking of a change to 1. Half Forward 2. Full Forward 3. Half Back was in order which I think most will agree on. The question for me is - is he a key position player? No doubt IMO he's been playing genuine key for the last month or so but is it enough to grant him that in this when before he'd been a flanker type not a genuine key? I'm leaning towards yes for when forward - but if he's played in defence he's not key.
Agree with him being a key when forward but not when in defence. Andrew Walker: 1. Half back 2. Half forward 3. Full forward? 4. Non key First 2 are obvious, not sure about the 3rd though. He sometimes plays as a leading forward out of the square but he hasn't really done that much this season. Does he go into the midfiled much?
On Watts, I'd have him as a key. Merrett 1. FB 2. CHB 3. FF Kreuzer 1. Ruck 2. FF 3. CHF Trengrove 1. CHB 2. FB 3. Ruck Hurley 1. CHF 2. CHB 3. FF/FB??? Tippett 1. FF 2. CHF 3. Ruck All as key position players, obv.
Griffiths 1. CHB 2. CHF Staker - really struggling on this one 1. CHB 2. HBF 3. CHF No clue if he's a key either Struggling on Campbell Brown too
Just my opinion here fellas I'd say HB - HF - Mid - Non Key I'd swap the ff/hf. Cloke plays more CHF in their structure while he's a roamer. Probably doesn't matter much. If a dude has 3. Ruck in this though it essentially means they'll be looked upon as a genuine backup 1R option. I don't think Lynch is - so I wouldn't include him as a ruck. Doesn't mean he isn't capable of relieving though. Agree on Merrett. Would swap FF/HF on Kruze - when he plays forward often he & waite both start from the square but he ends up more up the ground in the true CHF spot bringing the ball to ground. Agree on Trengove. I'd go Hurley CHF/FF/CHB. He's a gun CHB but really, the diff between ff/hf in roles is so small it'd be stupid to penalise a coach who wanted to play him at FF. He's one that can change quickly depending on where he plays though. Griff FB 2. IMO. Plays genuine fullback a bit more than he would CHF. RE: Staker. Can't do the whole chb/hbf. They've got a line and either key or non key, so he's either half back - key or half back - non key. I'd probably have CHF/CHB/FF though, probably one of few I'd say CHF/FF should be separated by CHB. Can't do the FP/FF unfort. He's forward fifty - key or non key. I'd probably say for the purposes of this sim and the role you'd want to get out of him, Gunston FP/HFF Non Key with a view to switching him to key when Lance leaves. I don't have an issue with him being Key though.
Gonna dump some Dereks in here with what I think. Feel free to tl;dr Code: J. Brennan 1. fuck knows 2. fuck knows 3. fuck knows 4. This is a tough one. I'd probably lean no but obv. with his skillset if i placed him at full forward he wouldn't suffer much L. Henderson 1. CHB 2. FB (whichever order really, could go either way) 3. FF 4. NK A. Mullett 1. HBF 2. C 4. NK T. Rockliff 1. C 2. HFF 4. NK P. Ryder 1. Ruck 2. CHF 3. FF 4. K S. Higgins 1. HFF 2. C 3. FF 4. NK C. Sylvia 1. HFF 2. C 3. FF 4. NK A. Siposs 1. HFF 2. HBF 3. FF 4. NK (tough one though, he often plays a key role down fwd due to lack of options) J. MacRae 1. C 2. HFF 4. NK T.T. Lynch 1. HF 2. FF 3. HBF 4. NK (I think that's probably fair. He's clearly a marking target as shown by being like 4th in the comp for MarksPG but he just doesn't seem ultra key to me) R. Henderson 1. HF 2. FF 3. HB 4. NK (could change if he continues in new role) N, Naitanui 1. Ruck 2. FF 4. K J. Winderlich 1. HFF 2. FF 3. HBF 4. NK
Yeah pretty much agree with what you said about my blokes. Still hoping one day Griffiths will become a true CHF.
Time to bump this thread again now that I'm doing a database update. Really struggling with some defenders - do I give them key or not? It's the blokes like Jonas and Garland I'm talking about. Blokes who man up on Jeremy Cameron or Travis Cloke one week and then Lindsay Thomas or Jamie Elliott the next. For reference Jonas's opponents: 2014: Kreuzer, Dangerfield/Betts, Thomas/Black, Paine, Josh Hill, J Cameron, T Simpkin 2013: Howe, Tex, Dixon, LeCras, L Thomas, J Riewoldt, Podsiadly, Tom Williams, J Cameron, Sam Reid, Elliott, Hurley, Milne, Tim Sumner, Ballantyne, Troy Menzel, Cloke Garland's opponents: Monfries, LeCras, Sam Frost, Cornelius, Betts, Campbell Brown, King, Hannath, Roughead, Cloke, Giansiracusa, Dennis-Lane, Murdoch, Staker, Tomlinson, Sumner, Mayne, Petrenko, Giansiracusa Looking at opponents I think there's a little bit more of a case for Jonas but both are in the same boat - they've played on key forwards in the past and done very well at it but are both also capable and adept at playing on smaller crumbers. So the question is - should these types of 3rd talls who play key if the matchup suits be granted KEY position status in the DB or not?
