Round 5 - who to trade out

Our trade ins have been determined - Bateman and Chanel Harris-Tavita

But voting was very tight on who makes way.

Vote for the 2 people to leave our team. Total cash out must equal $1000k or more, so if one of your votes is for Dylan Brown, then the other vote must be McCullough

Why trade Burns out when he is a great performer, earning cash, due back soon and plays 12. In the interim he provides a loop option. Lane and McCullough are both under performing, trading them out leaves cash for a nice upgrade next week.

Milchy wrote:
Our trade ins have been determined - Bateman and Chanel Harris-Tavita

But voting was very tight on who makes way.

Vote for the 2 people to leave our team. Total cash out must equal $1000k or more, so if one of your votes is for Dylan Brown, then the other vote must be McCullough

I am not sure if we are able to lobby here, but Burns is gonna be gold when he comes back and there are much better options around than Brown who will be out for much longer. I also want to change my vote as I did not read the instructions before I voted. Take one off Lane and add one to McCullough.

I voted Lane, should have read rules.

I'll add Brown to that

Buramada wrote:

I am not sure if we are able to lobby here, but Burns is gonna be gold when he comes back and there are much better options around than Brown who will be out for much longer. I also want to change my vote as I did not read the instructions before I voted. Take one off Lane and add one to McCullough.

Anyone can lobby here, its a community team and almost every decision is taken by community vote, so feel free to express your opinion and give reasons

The way this vote is set up is a bit of a problem cause Maaca the only one who gets a vote by default with brown in there.

Burns is a sensible option to trade cause 1) he’s not out for an insignificant amount of time 2) he’s not worth an i significant amount of $ 3) by trading someone else instead of him u weaken ur 17 4) we may have to trade him anyway In Coming weeks anyway 5) value of looping over rated 6) have brown to loop anyway.

Typing on phone, hope that made sense!!

mattnz wrote:Why trade Burns out when he is a great performer, earning cash, due back soon and plays 12. In the interim he provides a loop option. Lane and McCullough are both under performing, trading them out leaves cash for a nice upgrade next week.

Burns is not earning cash, and it could be a month before he comes back.

No doubt he's good value if playing, but its not a certain thing to want to keep him around. Brown is in a similar situation so I'd be happy losing either

I don't think trading out both McCullough and Lane is a good idea though. We need the scoring and bringing one out for CHT is a points downgrade I don't think we can afford.

Rippin and Tearin wrote:The way this vote is set up is a bit of a problem cause Maaca  the only one who gets a vote by default with brown in there.

In the original poll, Macca, Lane and Burns/Brown all received a lot of votes (they were equal when I set up this poll)

With Bateman/CHT the clear winners of the trade-in poll, then it means we are restricted in the tradeout combo. not sure if there is a way around that.

Maybe set up 6 more options
eg Lane+Macca
Lane + Burns
Macca+ Lane
Macca + Burns
covering all possible combos?

Yeah I think all
Possible combos would be better. Avoids the Macca issue. It’s close so any distortion could skew it too much.

Milchy wrote:

Burns is not earning cash, and it could be a month before he comes back.

No doubt he's good value if playing, but its not a certain thing to want to keep him around. Brown is in a similar situation so I'd be happy losing either

I don't think trading out both McCullough and Lane is a good idea though. We need the scoring and bringing one out for CHT is a points downgrade I don't think we can afford.

Its one round, next week we have bank to get another keeper or 2 that will outperform both Lane and Macca

Multiple rounds of not earning $ though. That could kill a season! Also u need to look ahead a few rounds. He’ll end up being traded anyway if not this week....

Rippin and Tearin wrote:Multiple rounds of not earning $ though. That could kill a season! Also u need to look ahead a few rounds. He’ll end up being traded anyway if not this week....

My own team is keeping him. No point wasting a trade out and a trade back in ahead of round 12.

mattnz wrote:

My own team is keeping him. No point wasting a trade out and a trade back in ahead of round 12.

I believe u, think it’s a bad call for this team though (no idea the state of ur team).FWIW I have him in my team but trading him out this week.

mattnz wrote:Why trade Burns out when he is a great performer, earning cash, due back soon and plays 12. In the interim he provides a loop option. Lane and McCullough are both under performing, trading them out leaves cash for a nice upgrade next week.

It's a different team but I had all the loop options too and I've traded them all for cash makers hoping the 10 points in looping will be offset by the extra money I make in the meantime. I do spend a trade but I don't think hoping players come back off a long term injury at peak form is necessarily wise. Also to restart cash making Burns will be a slow start so if hes back at a keeper level he's an easy trade in again. (Burns 24, Brown is better with a BE of 1).

Macca will be close to the same price next week and can go straight to Ponga while getting his 45 score as well.
Alternately we play Burr/Lawrie/CHT this week and get 35 + a loop of 10 points maybe.

Keeping Burns is the risky play but it does have great upside in saving a trade, plays first bye and some looping. But you have to be certain in everything you have said and know its a short term sacrifice to cash making, scores and team makeup/comp (harder to cover all spots with one dead spot).

Normally I vote first but coming in late damn thats close still.