I think Soldo had an issue with his finger and has been managed because of it so I wouldn't read too much into the Sweet comment, although he is a watch. Like the Sinn info and Wines has been training all season on the inside with the coaches saying that's where he'll play but with stints on the wing if needed.
Opinion 2024 AFL SuperCoach Planning Thread
- Thread starter MC's Mix
- Start date
The other thing that I wonder about and I might be barking up the wrong tree, is that those pts lost early in the season are difficult to make up once teams are getting close to completed, so does the ~3pts difference in average become applicable over the whole season? Or should there be more weighting as to when those loss of pts have the most effect?
I thought that he was susceptible to being tagged last season and didn't start him because of that assumption. Took a long time for any coach to realise that tagging him and nullifying his output was an effective tool. Cost me a lot in early pts leakage to those that did start him.
Of course I'll start him this year and he'll be tagged to within an inch of his life.
Of course I'll start him this year and he'll be tagged to within an inch of his life.
I'm not sure about my logic with the following picks, but hear me out and then shoot me down in flames if you want.
I'm wanting to start Guthrie and Crouch and swap them out before their byes to premos who are coming off their byes, so players like Gulden and Petracca, or any other premo that I think has low ownership (and high scoring potential) because of them having an early bye.
I'm fairly satisfied that providing their roles stack up then they'll warrant holding and deliver an average that'll be very close to a premo that has 2 byes, ie; around 10PPG less. Crouch went at 108 and Petracca 119, Guthrie should pull a 105 and I'd expect Gulden to go around 115 (111 ave. last season) The biggest advantage for me however is that I'm saving $480k on those 2 positions which allow me to turn a rookie into Amon (yes, I know that's another risk) who I think will be a Def. keeper as well run with Williams, Chapman and/or Billings instead of rookies. I'm not sure if I have my numbers right but I'm assuming that those last 3 should average 10PPG over a rookie and Amon maybe 40-50PPG better than a rookie.
Running with the 2 cheaper MP's and Amon (the $480k saving) should give me (theoretically) an extra 60-70PPG better scoring ability than starting with premos that have an early bye, if I start with non rnd0 premos then that better scoring is reduced to around 50-60PPG.
Upgrading Guthrie and Crouch to $600k+ players should cost about 2 trades each, starting Amon over a rookie should save 2 trades and having say Williams and Billings should save another trade each upgrading them. So starting the aforementioned players would work out to be cost neutral in terms of trades but over 14 rounds there's the possibility of being, at a minimum 700pts, or maximum 980pts better off. Oh, and my M5 and M6 wouldn't have a bye at all.
I must be doing something wrong because those numbers seem outrageous.
I'm wanting to start Guthrie and Crouch and swap them out before their byes to premos who are coming off their byes, so players like Gulden and Petracca, or any other premo that I think has low ownership (and high scoring potential) because of them having an early bye.
I'm fairly satisfied that providing their roles stack up then they'll warrant holding and deliver an average that'll be very close to a premo that has 2 byes, ie; around 10PPG less. Crouch went at 108 and Petracca 119, Guthrie should pull a 105 and I'd expect Gulden to go around 115 (111 ave. last season) The biggest advantage for me however is that I'm saving $480k on those 2 positions which allow me to turn a rookie into Amon (yes, I know that's another risk) who I think will be a Def. keeper as well run with Williams, Chapman and/or Billings instead of rookies. I'm not sure if I have my numbers right but I'm assuming that those last 3 should average 10PPG over a rookie and Amon maybe 40-50PPG better than a rookie.
Running with the 2 cheaper MP's and Amon (the $480k saving) should give me (theoretically) an extra 60-70PPG better scoring ability than starting with premos that have an early bye, if I start with non rnd0 premos then that better scoring is reduced to around 50-60PPG.
Upgrading Guthrie and Crouch to $600k+ players should cost about 2 trades each, starting Amon over a rookie should save 2 trades and having say Williams and Billings should save another trade each upgrading them. So starting the aforementioned players would work out to be cost neutral in terms of trades but over 14 rounds there's the possibility of being, at a minimum 700pts, or maximum 980pts better off. Oh, and my M5 and M6 wouldn't have a bye at all.
I must be doing something wrong because those numbers seem outrageous.
You're right, doing math in my head and stuffed it up a bit, nonetheless the pts generation from the savings is still substantial, back to a minimum of 560 and maximum of 840.
Crouch scored at an average of 108 over the last 6 games and has a proven history of going 110, Guthrie has history of scoring 105. Of course their output is related to where they play, but I don't think that those projections are too far out given the reports of where they'll be lining up. It's definitely risky and goes against the recognised way of thinking for SC but I think I'll give it a shot given the complexities that have been dealt this season.
Crouch scored at an average of 108 over the last 6 games and has a proven history of going 110, Guthrie has history of scoring 105. Of course their output is related to where they play, but I don't think that those projections are too far out given the reports of where they'll be lining up. It's definitely risky and goes against the recognised way of thinking for SC but I think I'll give it a shot given the complexities that have been dealt this season.
- Joined
- 14 Jan 2024
- Messages
- 2
- Likes
- 7
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
I am not a fan of all these extra trades. I was getting rolled by players in my leagues who never got near me in the past. Back in the days when you needed a bit of skill and planning, including using your trades strategically. They may as well let everyone pick a team full of premiums now, as every man and his dog will get to premo stage eventually.
- Joined
- 6 Jul 2012
- Messages
- 4,890
- Likes
- 11,150
- AFL Club
- West Coast
Agree that it is easier to complete a team, although, some people will react to having trades by sideways in byes or a short injury.
How has your ranking gone over the years. Not sure I have noticed a difference, maybe the team that use to run out of trades has a bit more sustainability, however, those they are wise should in theory end up with a better completed team.
Structure, premiums and rookies in starting squad has always defined my performance.
How has your ranking gone over the years. Not sure I have noticed a difference, maybe the team that use to run out of trades has a bit more sustainability, however, those they are wise should in theory end up with a better completed team.
Structure, premiums and rookies in starting squad has always defined my performance.
- Joined
- 14 Jan 2024
- Messages
- 2
- Likes
- 7
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Joined
- 3 Jul 2017
- Messages
- 38,961
- Likes
- 126,629
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
Welcome aboard and good luck for the season.
Could have this been attributed to not adjusting and adapting your strategies to the changes, if a trend has been established over the past seasons in line with the increase in trades? Do you play for league (eg cash leagues) or pay no interest to leagues and play for overall?
Finding it hard to comprehend how extra trades equates to less skill and an easier game given I don’t seem to see the same crowd active in AFL Fantasy and comfortably coming away with hats or major prizes each season given there are no cash barriers to entry. Also seems that players bemoan that sides look so similar season after season and I would have thought that more trades might lead to more variation especially with how coaches decide to handle the byes. Add to that less trades (30 or 22,etc) places more pressure on nailing those picks which can compound in case a few untimely injuries to premiums, slow cash gen, etc occur and with how emotional coaches are with their decision making (never again lists, etc) or beating themselves up about those 50-50 picks, impatience, etc I don’t think those clamouring for greatly reduced trades would enjoy less if things don’t start to go their way.
I may be a tad biased given this is the format I tend to struggle with and the large entry pool comparative to the rest.
There was an interesting discussion in the NBL thread earlier this season (quotes below) about how members have used boosts over the past season/since introduction across all fantasy formats that use them. Personally I have enjoyed the introduction in all formats of the boosts as I get to burn through them as quickly as possible until the next format starts up and continue the vicious cycle but it has been extremely beneficial for early restructures (premiums/rookies, etc) and to maximise cash gen to compensate for lack of knowledge/confidence/etc in the format and to exploit those playing too conservatively. The longer the season goes the less confident I am in making astute picks to chase the pack and thus I would rather try to establish a buffer early.
Could have this been attributed to not adjusting and adapting your strategies to the changes, if a trend has been established over the past seasons in line with the increase in trades? Do you play for league (eg cash leagues) or pay no interest to leagues and play for overall?
Finding it hard to comprehend how extra trades equates to less skill and an easier game given I don’t seem to see the same crowd active in AFL Fantasy and comfortably coming away with hats or major prizes each season given there are no cash barriers to entry. Also seems that players bemoan that sides look so similar season after season and I would have thought that more trades might lead to more variation especially with how coaches decide to handle the byes. Add to that less trades (30 or 22,etc) places more pressure on nailing those picks which can compound in case a few untimely injuries to premiums, slow cash gen, etc occur and with how emotional coaches are with their decision making (never again lists, etc) or beating themselves up about those 50-50 picks, impatience, etc I don’t think those clamouring for greatly reduced trades would enjoy less if things don’t start to go their way.
I may be a tad biased given this is the format I tend to struggle with and the large entry pool comparative to the rest.
There was an interesting discussion in the NBL thread earlier this season (quotes below) about how members have used boosts over the past season/since introduction across all fantasy formats that use them. Personally I have enjoyed the introduction in all formats of the boosts as I get to burn through them as quickly as possible until the next format starts up and continue the vicious cycle but it has been extremely beneficial for early restructures (premiums/rookies, etc) and to maximise cash gen to compensate for lack of knowledge/confidence/etc in the format and to exploit those playing too conservatively. The longer the season goes the less confident I am in making astute picks to chase the pack and thus I would rather try to establish a buffer early.
I note a lot of coaches in the leagues thread commenting that 2023 was a down year for them - for many their worst ever.
There must be something to this - and something to learn.
What did you learn from 2023?
What will you do differently in 2024?
https://supercoachscores.com/thread...interest-to-join-an-official-scs-league.5260/
There must be something to this - and something to learn.
What did you learn from 2023?
What will you do differently in 2024?
https://supercoachscores.com/thread...interest-to-join-an-official-scs-league.5260/
Last edited:
