I think I’ve just seen a lot of people talk themselves out of strong picks because of round 0. Not saying you don’t need to find balance, but avoiding them altogether or taking compromised picks instead isn’t the answer. There are going to be a lot of teams with sub par premiums that they can’t justify getting rid of without falling behind everyone else upgrading.
Opinion 2024 AFL SuperCoach Planning Thread
- Thread starter MC's Mix
- Start date
What I was trying to illustrate is team B has one less premium and one more rookie, but score the same due to the strength of their premiums. Actually scoring will absolutely skew this as there will be a bunch of crappy scores. But if all your premiums score 100 and all mine score 110, that 19th score becomes irrelevant.
- Joined
- 18 Sep 2014
- Messages
- 848
- Likes
- 493
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
A lot of this comes down to whether you think two premium players priced similarly will score differently. I don’t think the people who are mostly avoiding Opening Round players think they are picking premiums who will score less, they are just picking different premiums who will score similarly.
The thing we shouldn’t be avoiding though is great underpriced options who would be locks under normal circumstances.
The thing we shouldn’t be avoiding though is great underpriced options who would be locks under normal circumstances.
- Joined
- 18 Sep 2014
- Messages
- 848
- Likes
- 493
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
Just thinking through how to word to myself what happens if I pick a premium who has an early bye.
Assuming all premiums score a premium score, mid-pricers score like mid-pricers, and rookies score like rookies, 1 premium missing with an early bye will be covered by the best score of your 19th-22nd best scores (likely rookies) + the extra rookie you put on the field to cover your bye premium.
It’s pretty solid cover really.
The person who was first overall after round 1 last year had 26, 55, 56, and 64 as his 19th-22nd scores, and his rookies on main 3 lines of the bench scored 33, 77, and 93. So the cover would have scored either 64, 77, or 93 (or on average 78). I think the fact this extra player comes on isn’t factored into a lot of our calculations, but it bumps the expected score up from 64 to 78, a 14 point gain which isn’t a small number. It moves it from a rookie covered score, to a mid-pricer covered score.
Hopefully what I’m saying makes sense and I’m not just too tired of SC 😂
Assuming all premiums score a premium score, mid-pricers score like mid-pricers, and rookies score like rookies, 1 premium missing with an early bye will be covered by the best score of your 19th-22nd best scores (likely rookies) + the extra rookie you put on the field to cover your bye premium.
It’s pretty solid cover really.
The person who was first overall after round 1 last year had 26, 55, 56, and 64 as his 19th-22nd scores, and his rookies on main 3 lines of the bench scored 33, 77, and 93. So the cover would have scored either 64, 77, or 93 (or on average 78). I think the fact this extra player comes on isn’t factored into a lot of our calculations, but it bumps the expected score up from 64 to 78, a 14 point gain which isn’t a small number. It moves it from a rookie covered score, to a mid-pricer covered score.
Hopefully what I’m saying makes sense and I’m not just too tired of SC 😂
Just checking our members are ok? Including Harley Reid. 😉
View: https://twitter.com/EarthquakesGA/status/1756266439080833472
View: https://twitter.com/EarthquakesGA/status/1756266439080833472
^This is an interesting discussion.
Perhaps to make it a bit more concrete:
Which players are you forgoing because of their early bye?
Some potentially common names that come to mind for me:
Walsh (owner)
Touk (owner)
Neale (don’t think I’ve even heard him mentioned … and he won a Brownlow in a down year!)
Trac
Flanders (owner)
Perhaps to make it a bit more concrete:
Which players are you forgoing because of their early bye?
Some potentially common names that come to mind for me:
Walsh (owner)
Touk (owner)
Neale (don’t think I’ve even heard him mentioned … and he won a Brownlow in a down year!)
Trac
Flanders (owner)
I think you start off with the basics of a team and then tweak that as you go. The very first thought I had was before Rd 0 was announced and I had Walsh and Touk on my list. But as my team evolved Touk dropped out and then Walsh. So I have none of those mentioned. I would start Walsh and if so he would replace Freoshaw. It depends on what the final make up of my team looks like come Rd 1.
Never considered Neale. Ignoring 2021 IMO he is on a downward trend and Brisbane have some quality mids to complete for points now.
Never considered Neale. Ignoring 2021 IMO he is on a downward trend and Brisbane have some quality mids to complete for points now.
- Joined
- 3 Jul 2017
- Messages
- 38,963
- Likes
- 126,636
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
Depends on personal preference.
Myself, I often fall into the trap of trying to spend as much as possible at both the start of the season and throughout, given no interest is earned on the remaining salary and unexpected injuries/omissions, etc could cause a delay for the funds to be used, if a considerable amount is on hold.
A high price doesn't automatically equate to similar or greater production nor perceived security.
Myself, I often fall into the trap of trying to spend as much as possible at both the start of the season and throughout, given no interest is earned on the remaining salary and unexpected injuries/omissions, etc could cause a delay for the funds to be used, if a considerable amount is on hold.
A high price doesn't automatically equate to similar or greater production nor perceived security.
