With a price tag of just $347,000, and scores of 110 and 86 in the last two weeks, many coaches are considering whether or not to bring in Isaac Heeney. With a breakeven of 11, now is probably a good time to make that decision if you’re going to do so.
But should we?
Loading ...
Got any thoughts on Heeney? Know of someone better around the same price? Let us know in the comments below!
8
0
Leave a comment / Scroll to bottom
It’s a tough one.
Pros:
– Price (can be the difference between Bont/ Clarry to a Brayshaw / Cunnington)
– Has shown he can score well and has a huge ceiling
– #2 at the Swans for uncontested possies in the last 2 rounds (behind who you think)
– he is getting up the ground
– forward line is carnage.
Cons:
– held together by duct tape and glue
– very likely even if he doesn’t hurt himself, that he’ll be rested at some stage
– can get lost in the fwd 50
– awkward price if he does go down
Missing anything?
My verdict is I’m still 50/50
If I had more trades handy I’d definitely lock it in. If I do go ahead, I’m going in knowing I’ll most likely need to use another trade at some point to move him.
As tempting as it appears (trust me, I have contemplated bringing him in for the past three weeks, and is in my Watchlist), unfortunately, he and others like Boak, sit in my ‘never trade in again’ category. Also, it doesn’t suit my bye structure or team plan.
Why is Boak a never trade in again.
I’ve had Boak in my team a number of times. In all those times, he either got injured or when he did play, would score poorly in the first three quarters. Sometimes he compensated for a low score by flying in the final quarter. Nothing personal, just burnt me overall.
A moneyball approach to SC would advise against never again lists. A function I would like to see on in SC is to hide player names to take this bias out of choosing the best statistical options when trading.
Maybe if this happened I’d get Dusty into my team for the first time ever.
A moneyball approach to SC would advise against never again lists. A function I would like to see in SC is to hide player names to take this bias out of choosing the best statistical options when trading.
Maybe if this happened I’d get Dusty into my team for the first time ever.
Too tricky @ $350k. Certainly not someone you would consider a ‘keeper’, and too expensive to be a real cash cow, even if only for a few weeks before his BYE. You’d need everything to go right over the next few weeks for it to work.
I said never again with Heeney – too injury-prone and Horse just loves to play him forward which tends to blunt his scoring. But given the lack of forward options this year my will is faltering a little.
Shaun Higgins ($421K) is coming off 86, 88 and 112. Might bring him in instead. 😉
Pass for now may access next week after another weeks of data.
A train wreck of a season has meant I’ve had to roll the dice. I can’t see myself going some messed up version of full premo without risks. Best case scenario I get a useful f6/7 with a high ceiling in a season with very few forward options… better then getting stuck with a rookie.
Maybe we need a more up-to-date positional role description, so we know what’s exactly expected from each named player every week, and along with a provided skills assessment report of each selected player in that role, would make are job so much easier……