NRL Fantasy 2021 Part 4 - Praying that nobody gets hurt

mattnz wrote:
“He should play about 20-25 minutes,” Griffin said.

“It’s just more about letting him play and we would extend his minutes and let him go in the Charity Shield.

“The plan is start him in the back-row”.

Bird has spent the off-season training between the backrow, centre and the halves. He was slated to play fullback for the Broncos last year.

Thanks for this.

Back row meaning edge or lock I wonder? Completely different roles. Either way, get in my team (was actually already in my team).

Someone want to explain CHT to me? Certainly seems like a 40s player to me priced at 35. Can't figure out if low 40s or high 40s. I've got Lam ahead of him, for no particularly good reasons.

Edit: Milf did tend to kick 500+ kms when paired with K Nikorima.....

Mulvy wrote:Someone want to explain CHT to me? Certainly seems like a 40s player to me priced at 35. Can't figure out if low 40s or high 40s. I've got Lam ahead of him, for no particularly good reasons.

Edit: Milf did tend to kick 500+ kms when paired with K Nikorima.....

I can see the warriors scoring alot more points this year with their forward pack. So alot of opportunity for cht to kick goals what will boost his average

Mulvy wrote:Someone want to explain CHT to me? Certainly seems like a 40s player to me priced at 35. Can't figure out if low 40s or high 40s. I've got Lam ahead of him, for no particularly good reasons.

Edit: Milf did tend to kick 500+ kms when paired with K Nikorima.....

CHT is less than half the price of Cleary. Even if he is only mid 40’s then that’s a win.

Mulvy wrote:Someone want to explain CHT to me? Certainly seems like a 40s player to me priced at 35. Can't figure out if low 40s or high 40s. I've got Lam ahead of him, for no particularly good reasons.

Edit: Milf did tend to kick 500+ kms when paired with K Nikorima.....

I also have Lam ahead of him because every half that has been partnered with Keary in his career has had monster kick metres. Also outside chance at goal kicking

CHT interests me as he averaged 43.5 in his 7 games starting next to Kodi. Including the round 14 game where CHT inexplicably only had 25 kick metres, he kicked an average of 220 metres per game, up on his season average of 169. Take out that round 14 game and it jumps to 251 and average points jumps to 46.

As you said I expect somewhere in the 40 point range, but not sure there is enough upside over my other current options

I am constantly sitting around the top 2000-4000 each year but I’m just can’t crack into that elite category of the top 1000 or so players. With so much luck around injuries and wether gambles will come off how do people like MTB consistently crack the top 100?

FalconSloth wrote:I am constantly sitting around the top 2000-4000 each year but I’m just can’t crack into that elite category of the top 1000 or so players. With so much luck around injuries and whether gambles will come off how do people like MTB consistently crack the top 100?

Not taking unnecessary gambles in the first place helps.

Milchcow wrote:

Not taking unnecessary gambles in the first place helps.

But in fantasy you can’t avoid them as nothing is known for certain

EDIT: I wasn’t talking about big gambles but just smaller ones like Liam Knight not turning out to be good last year and ones like that

Mighty Fishes wrote:

Welshy wrote:
avatar bet Brailey out scores his current average by more than LAM.

Make sure you specify punishment length......

Speaking of punishing avatars... are you coming back again thus year?

Any Lomax love this year?

RandomSil wrote:Any Lomax love this year?

Depends which one.

The elder? No, too expensive and surely can't keep scoring tries in a terrible Dragons team.

The younger? No, not registered and a few players in front of him.

So I guess it doesn't depend on which one; no.

L-Jimmy wrote:

RandomSil wrote:Any Lomax love this year?

Depends which one.

The elder? No, too expensive and surely can't keep scoring tries in a terrible Dragons team.

The younger? No, not registered and a few players in front of him.

So I guess it doesn't depend on which one; no.

That is what we said all last year...

FalconSloth wrote:

But in fantasy you can’t avoid them as nothing is known for certain

EDIT: I wasn’t talking about big gambles but just smaller ones like Liam Knight not turning out to be good last year and ones like that

Every decision is a gamble of sorts. But some people go around deliberately filling their team with players unlikely to do well believing that their crazy pick will come off and propel them to victory.


I had Liam Knight and Stimson to start last year, traded Drinkwater in after lockdown, and never owned Lomax. Got as high as about rank 25.

Crashed in the end (150 final rank), one of the chief reasons for which was picking Munster instead of Moses the week Munster got injured. That trade alone cost me over 200 points. Was Munster over Moses an unnecessary gamble.

Just on Luke Brooks;

I'm a little mystified why people think he will get a significant boost in his Kick Metres?
Over the past 7 years in 70+ minute games (142 of them) he's averaged 233KM.

His average over the past 3 years playing next to Benji is 256KM
His average over the past 3 years when playing without Benji is 265KM (essentially barely any difference).

His average prior to Benji coming to the club was 214KM.

He's kicked over 400 metres in a game on 6 occasions across 142 games.
He's kicked over 300 metres in under 30% of his games (to put that into context, Milford's quiet year last year where his KM's were massively down, still had him kicking over 300KM in just over 30% of his games). There's no real point comparing him to the big KM halves, because it's just not even close to being comparable.

Benji's average playing next to Brooks was 195KM.
Adam Doueihi averaged 235KM from 5 games playing in the halves - which suggests he is at the very least competent enough to keep doing in-play kicking - so there's no real reason that I can see why Luke Brooks should suddenly dominate the kicking.
I'd also mention that the pre-season "It's Luke Brooks' team to run" has become an annual press release for a number of years now...

Don't get me wrong, I think Brooks should have upside, a little from slightly reduced minutes last year (still averaged 70 minutes per game), but it seems to me that any upside is most likely to be from boosting other attacking stats back to their normal levels? - which kind've makes it a hunch pick

FalconSloth wrote:I am constantly sitting around the top 2000-4000 each year but I’m just can’t crack into that elite category of the top 1000 or so players. With so much luck around injuries and wether gambles will come off how do people like MTB consistently crack the top 100?

My tips, things that I've found have helped me in the last couple of years.
- a bit less over-analysing stats (i think people fall in to the trap of seeing what they want to see when looking at stats)
- patience, don't need to chase every cow or big score.
- realising you can start with a couple of duds and it wont end your season, even if you hold them a bit longer than others.
- dont concern yourself with ownership %'s early on. PODs make more of a difference in the run home (whether good or bad).
- i dont really think about byes/origin for round 1 squad. (i mean, 10 origin players would be silly, but you get the idea)

- but you do need to take a few gambles along the way. hard to really quantify that though. more gut feel on a guy who's hit form/etc. it goes both ways though, some times it works, some times it doesnt. my late season trades (eg last 1 or 2 trades) have been awful in the last two years tbh.

RandomSil wrote:

That is what we said all last year...

And we were right to say it. Random chance doesn't change good logic: Dragons are terrible. They scored all their points through one person last year - an improbable event. Assuming they will be less terrible is a strong assumption. Assuming they will score all their points through the same person is a strong assumption.

I'm not against making strong calls, but not on a 600k centre playing for the worst team in the comp.

L-Jimmy wrote:

RandomSil wrote:

That is what we said all last year...

And we were right to say it. Random chance doesn't change good logic: Dragons are terrible. They scored all their points through one person last year - an improbable event. Assuming they will be less terrible is a strong assumption. Assuming they will score all their points through the same person is a strong assumption.

I'm not against making strong calls, but not on a 600k centre playing for the worst team in the comp.

It was a bit tongue in cheek there mate. Your reasoning is sound, and there is a good reason why he hasnt been talked about and thats because of his price. Though he is currently in my team.... we wont talk about that though.

Now tell me about RFM.

easytiger wrote:Don't get me wrong, I think Brooks should have upside, a little from slightly reduced minutes last year (still averaged 70 minutes per game), but it seems to me that any upside is most likely to be from boosting other attacking stats back to their normal levels? - which kind've makes it a hunch pick

I think you summed it up well. Brooks has been around long enough, he's an OK footballer but I don't trust him to become a better player all of a sudden.

RandomSil wrote:

It was a bit tongue in cheek there mate. Your reasoning is sound, and there is a good reason why he hasnt been talked about and thats because of his price. Though he is currently in my team.... we wont talk about that though.  

Now tell me about RFM.

Yep, I bit!

RFM played a full season of edge last year, with price fluctuating between 5 and 600k. No room for role change, no major injury burden, game-setting half to put him through holes (because Doggies pack and spine couldn't punch their way through a damp macca's napkin) ... no real reason to be interested.

L-Jimmy wrote:

Yep, I bit!

RFM played a full season of edge last year, with price fluctuating between 5 and 600k. No room for role change, no major injury burden, game-setting half to put him through holes (because Doggies pack and spine couldn't punch their way through a damp macca's napkin) ... no real reason to be interested.

Fractionally underpriced due to five games below 60 minutes with four of those under 40. Averaged almost 54 points while being priced at 46. Had a fair few tries though. Good lowcut keeper potentially