Opinion 2024 AFL SuperCoach Planning Thread

Joined
13 Jan 2019
Messages
9,424
Likes
42,037
AFL Club
Sydney
I'm not that concerned even if he is mostly forward, he'll still have relieving duties whenever injury magnet is having a rest and he can mark a ball and kick goals, no reason why he can't average in the mid 90's or beyond, and then when Darcy gets his inevitable niggle....lol, bounty time!
Thats why i think load up in the midfield and defence.
Have a sub 300k fwd line, you wont get burnt if macrae and jackson come out doing well because you will have a young, sheezel, steele types on the other lines for the same coin who are more likely to do better anyway.
Worry about the fwd line when we are more certain on the premos or when Darcy does go down.
Few assumptions that Darcy will definitely get injured. Was the same set of assumptions for those who didn’t take Tim English at the beginning of last season (me included).

1708138458262.gif
 
Joined
13 Jun 2022
Messages
5,231
Likes
17,250
AFL Club
St Kilda
Few assumptions that Darcy will definitely get injured. Was the same set of assumptions for those who didn’t take Tim English at the beginning of last season (me included).

View attachment 67858
I'm not picking Jackson assuming Darcy will get injured, I'm hoping / believing Jackson will improve more this season even if he remains as a forward/part time Ruck, just reckon he has tons of talent and can still get better.
 
Joined
13 Jun 2022
Messages
5,231
Likes
17,250
AFL Club
St Kilda
Thats why i think load up in the midfield and defence.
Have a sub 300k fwd line, you wont get burnt if macrae and jackson come out doing well because you will have a young, sheezel, steele types on the other lines for the same coin who are more likely to do better anyway.
Worry about the fwd line when we are more certain on the premos or when Darcy does go down.
Fair enough, a lot of coaches are thinking similar, I believe Jackson will improve this year, as I do with Flanders, that's why I'm starting both as keepers and also, I don't want to have to replace my whole forward line.
 
Joined
20 May 2014
Messages
3,346
Likes
8,275
AFL Club
St Kilda
I’ll give some thoughts based on my 2023, and what I’m thinking for 2024 based on that.

- My overall rank in 2023 was 2,745. That was lower than my regular goal of top 1,000, but I don’t hit that goal in most years (details in signature), so I would characterize it as a reasonable outcome overall.

- I generally take a GnR approach for the most part, with 2-3 key value (midpriced?) picks. I find that this works relatively well with lowish risk (and saves time, which has been helpful for me in the last few years).

- For me the key change to the game in 2023 was the extra trades and boosts we had at our disposal (/trades that we had in prior seasons, but were no longer likely to need for pandemic-related reasons in 2023 … which is much the same thing from my perspective).

- My view was that this would have several effects, and that adapting strategy accordingly would be important.

- More trades would reduce the risk of donuts, improve finished teams, possibly reduce the cash generation required from a trade to make it worthwhile, allow more injury risk to be taken, and allow more midpriced selections to be taken.

- Boosts would allow restructures to occur more readily, allow more cash cows to be grabbed on the bubble, reduce the need for one-down/one-up trades, reduce the importance of upgrade cadence (meaning that sideways injury trades during upgrade season were less damaging, because their effects don’t necessarily compound), allow more slingshots, and make it easier to navigate the byes.

- Basically all of those changes suggest that taking somewhat more risk (albeit still calculated risk) is viable, and potentially quite a logical response.

- For me this suggested taking slightly more injury risk in starting picks, trading cash cows a fraction earlier than normal, using trades earlier in the season than normal, and probably using boosts early on (to maximize the benefit gained).

- The main caveat is that I expected finished teams to be better than in previous years, so ensuring that I had the best scorers after upgrades was key. This also constrained the appropriate amount of midpricer, and perhaps injury, risk somewhat.

- I essentially finished the season with a trade in hand. I recall that there were relatively few injuries late in the season - certainly in my side, and I think overall - but I wasn’t able to extract full value from that last trade. To me that suggests that I was a little too conservative (albeit one collision or twist could have changed this outcome at the margin) and could probably take a bit more risk than I did. Even if I had copped a late donut due to an injury, that may not have been disastrous (or even a bad thing net-net) if I had generated additional points from an earlier upgrade or the like.

- The rule changes in 2024 seem to represent a further step in a similar direction. 40 trades is 10 more than we had - and still managed to complete our teams with - not so many years ago, and the structure of the game is otherwise pretty similar. That’s 10 more cash cows, or 10 more sideways injury trades, or 10 more slingshots, or some combination of the above. It’s a massive change in my view.

- Given all of this, I plan to take a further step in a similar direction to what I did last year, in dialing up my risk/aggressiveness further, in a calculated way.

- I do think that completed teams will be very strong this year (especially at the pointy end), so I am keen to start the players that I feel are a very high chance to be top scorers on their line, especially if they are not overpriced. For me this includes names like Daicos and Stewart. This squares those positions away and gives more flexibility to jump on fallen premiums and/or breakouts during the season.

- I’m inclined to take a bit more midprice and injury risk than normal - the downside risk is reduced, and accessing some of this upside may be important to keep up with the very best sides. I need to figure out how to balance this, and whether I increase the number of cheap midpricers (say 200-300k), or increase the price point at which I’m prepared to take a non-keeper value pick (eg a 375k or 425k stepping stone). I suspect it may be both, but largely the latter given these names have been somewhat “off limits”.

- The other thing I want to think through further is the byes. My current thinking is that there may be an opportunity in not reacting to them too significantly (particularly with extra trades and best 18 scoring in place), and using the extra trades to help navigate them … but it is an important change versus last season, and so warrants further thought before settling on a strategy.
Thanks Darkie, very interesting.

I think the main point for me to consider is the quality of the finishing teams. This has always been a weak point for me as I've generally faded away in the last few rounds. Last year I see I went from 711 after RD19 to 3567 at season's end.

There doesn't seem to be much wiggle room anymore in terms of finishing team, if you want to finish right at the pointy end. Possibly the best use of the extra trades this year is for that final push coming out of the byes, committing to culling the underperforming premos and targeting the absolute best of each line.

Of course the ultimate skill issue remains - can I tell the difference between an underpriced premo about to bounce back and one on the decline, or between a broken-out bona fide premo and a fake one on a surge.

I agree that the basic strategy seems pretty clear: balanced starting side of G&R with a few breakout gambles; avoid rd0 players unless you perceive at least +5pt/rd value over their next best alternative; don't stint on correction trades to get all the best cash cows; upgrade as fast as possible, using all boosts, from RD6 onwards, with aim of completing team before byes; slingshot through byes to get worst premos off field and all must-haves in; cruise to victory.

Simple?
 

Ben's Beasts

Leadership Group
Joined
6 Jan 2013
Messages
19,081
Likes
80,373
AFL Club
Melbourne
If today’s training is anything to go by, we’ll see six rookie priced players starting for the Dees against the Tigers tomorrow morning.

Windsor, Laurie, Schache, Howes, Verrall & K Brown.

At this stage, I think just the first three mentioned are a round 1 chance.

Several best 22 players are likely to be missing from the starting team for various reasons including Brayshaw, Hunter, Petty & McAdam.
 

Connoisseur

Leadership Group
Joined
3 Jul 2017
Messages
38,989
Likes
126,706
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Few assumptions that Darcy will definitely get injured. Was the same set of assumptions for those who didn’t take Tim English at the beginning of last season.

View attachment 67858
And that cycle continues every season. Player X did not play his full allotment of games last season and thus is not capable of playing the full amount this season whereas Player Y played all matches last season and will do so again this season … cause. Depends on the risk appetite of the individual and that they make sure to take into account and not overlook the perceived upside rather than just the perceived risk.

If the player goes on a scoring run do we continue to avoid for the remainder of the season due to the perceived risk since this should be an inherent risk, no matter the arbitrary point cut off, or do we jump on and possibly use an extra trade compared to selecting them as a starter?
 
Joined
23 Jan 2024
Messages
38
Likes
160
AFL Club
St Kilda
Fair enough, a lot of coaches are thinking similar, I believe Jackson will improve this year, as I do with Flanders, that's why I'm starting both as keepers and also, I don't want to have to replace my whole forward line.
ATM I am similar to your Russty, with Jackson and Flanders at F1 & F2 (after Moore glandular fever news). I'm wondering though if it would be better to move Reid out of my mids to the Fwd line and swap Jackson for Walsh who would probably be less of an unknown scoring-wise. So while it means I have 5 spots in my forward line to fill hopefully it meant I only had 2 mid-spots to fill. This may not be a positive though as less chance of picking up mid-bargains. A real balancing act btw going with a lesser unknown, and I think I would always pick Walsh ahead of Jackson, but is not leaving me a lot of flexibility with mid choice
 
Joined
13 Jun 2022
Messages
5,231
Likes
17,250
AFL Club
St Kilda
ATM I am similar to your Russty, with Jackson and Flanders at F1 & F2 (after Moore glandular fever news). I'm wondering though if it would be better to move Reid out of my mids to the Fwd line and swap Jackson for Walsh who would probably be less of an unknown scoring-wise. So while it means I have 5 spots in my forward line to fill hopefully it meant I only had 2 mid-spots to fill. This may not be a positive though as less chance of picking up mid-bargains. A real balancing act btw going with a lesser unknown, and I think I would always pick Walsh ahead of Jackson, but is not leaving me a lot of flexibility with mid choice
If you're super keen on Walsh then go ahead mate, I believe Jackson will improve this year but there's no guarantee he will, he could regress for all I know lol, I put Reid in my fwd line to make room for an extra mid spot for a bit of a speculative choice :) Seems like a decent crop of rookies in the mids though so if you're only going with 2 we'll know soon enough who the best few are.
 
Joined
23 Jan 2024
Messages
38
Likes
160
AFL Club
St Kilda
If you're super keen on Walsh then go ahead mate, I believe Jackson will improve this year but there's no guarantee he will, he could regress for all I know lol, I put Reid in my fwd line to make room for an extra mid spot for a bit of a speculative choice :) Seems like a decent crop of rookies in the mids though so if you're only going with 2 we'll know soon enough who the best few are.
I have had Jackson in my team the last 2 years, mainly as a ruck backup in the Fwd line and it hasn't worked too well. But I just know the year the year I leave him out will be his best. A bit to ponder. My decision may even depend on how Walsh goes in Rnd0
 
Joined
20 May 2014
Messages
3,346
Likes
8,275
AFL Club
St Kilda
I’ll give some thoughts based on my 2023, and what I’m thinking for 2024 based on that.

- My overall rank in 2023 was 2,745. That was lower than my regular goal of top 1,000, but I don’t hit that goal in most years (details in signature), so I would characterize it as a reasonable outcome overall.

- I generally take a GnR approach for the most part, with 2-3 key value (midpriced?) picks. I find that this works relatively well with lowish risk (and saves time, which has been helpful for me in the last few years).

- For me the key change to the game in 2023 was the extra trades and boosts we had at our disposal (/trades that we had in prior seasons, but were no longer likely to need for pandemic-related reasons in 2023 … which is much the same thing from my perspective).

- My view was that this would have several effects, and that adapting strategy accordingly would be important.

- More trades would reduce the risk of donuts, improve finished teams, possibly reduce the cash generation required from a trade to make it worthwhile, allow more injury risk to be taken, and allow more midpriced selections to be taken.

- Boosts would allow restructures to occur more readily, allow more cash cows to be grabbed on the bubble, reduce the need for one-down/one-up trades, reduce the importance of upgrade cadence (meaning that sideways injury trades during upgrade season were less damaging, because their effects don’t necessarily compound), allow more slingshots, and make it easier to navigate the byes.

- Basically all of those changes suggest that taking somewhat more risk (albeit still calculated risk) is viable, and potentially quite a logical response.

- For me this suggested taking slightly more injury risk in starting picks, trading cash cows a fraction earlier than normal, using trades earlier in the season than normal, and probably using boosts early on (to maximize the benefit gained).

- The main caveat is that I expected finished teams to be better than in previous years, so ensuring that I had the best scorers after upgrades was key. This also constrained the appropriate amount of midpricer, and perhaps injury, risk somewhat.

- I essentially finished the season with a trade in hand. I recall that there were relatively few injuries late in the season - certainly in my side, and I think overall - but I wasn’t able to extract full value from that last trade. To me that suggests that I was a little too conservative (albeit one collision or twist could have changed this outcome at the margin) and could probably take a bit more risk than I did. Even if I had copped a late donut due to an injury, that may not have been disastrous (or even a bad thing net-net) if I had generated additional points from an earlier upgrade or the like.

- The rule changes in 2024 seem to represent a further step in a similar direction. 40 trades is 10 more than we had - and still managed to complete our teams with - not so many years ago, and the structure of the game is otherwise pretty similar. That’s 10 more cash cows, or 10 more sideways injury trades, or 10 more slingshots, or some combination of the above. It’s a massive change in my view.

- Given all of this, I plan to take a further step in a similar direction to what I did last year, in dialing up my risk/aggressiveness further, in a calculated way.

- I do think that completed teams will be very strong this year (especially at the pointy end), so I am keen to start the players that I feel are a very high chance to be top scorers on their line, especially if they are not overpriced. For me this includes names like Daicos and Stewart. This squares those positions away and gives more flexibility to jump on fallen premiums and/or breakouts during the season.

- I’m inclined to take a bit more midprice and injury risk than normal - the downside risk is reduced, and accessing some of this upside may be important to keep up with the very best sides. I need to figure out how to balance this, and whether I increase the number of cheap midpricers (say 200-300k), or increase the price point at which I’m prepared to take a non-keeper value pick (eg a 375k or 425k stepping stone). I suspect it may be both, but largely the latter given these names have been somewhat “off limits”.

- The other thing I want to think through further is the byes. My current thinking is that there may be an opportunity in not reacting to them too significantly (particularly with extra trades and best 18 scoring in place), and using the extra trades to help navigate them … but it is an important change versus last season, and so warrants further thought before settling on a strategy.
I guess the other thing I hadn't given much thought to till now is the effect of so many best 18 rounds in the early part of the season. At first blush this seems to make midpricers less desirable as usually their best advantage is pushing off the really fringe rookies we normally have to played at 21st and 22nd spots, but there's usually not such a big fall off at the 18 mark. Haven't put much thought into it (and sorry if this has been covered at length elsewhere) but I might do some sums along that line of thinking.
 
Joined
22 Jun 2023
Messages
409
Likes
1,889
AFL Club
Richmond
If today’s training is anything to go by, we’ll see six rookie priced players starting for the Dees against the Tigers tomorrow morning.

Windsor, Laurie, Schache, Howes, Verrall & K Brown.

At this stage, I think just the first three mentioned are a round 1 chance.

Several best 22 players are likely to be missing for various reasons including Oliver, Brayshaw, Hunter, Salem, Petty & McAdam.
Hey Ben. I haven't been up to date with any preseason stuff and my mind has been 100% on the NBA the past few months, but do you know how Hore is tracking so far?
 

Ben's Beasts

Leadership Group
Joined
6 Jan 2013
Messages
19,081
Likes
80,373
AFL Club
Melbourne
Hey Ben. I haven't been up to date with any preseason stuff and my mind has been 100% on the NBA the past few months, but do you know how Hore is tracking so far?
Sounding as though he is down the pecking order a bit.

Unlikely to start the match against your Tigers tomorrow from what I’ve heard. Likely to play with the VFL players instead.

I think our round 1 back six will be;

McVee, May, Tomlinson
Salem, Lever, Rivers

With Bowey also in the 23.
 
Joined
22 Jun 2023
Messages
409
Likes
1,889
AFL Club
Richmond
Sounding as though he is down the pecking order a bit.

Unlikely to start the match against your Tigers tomorrow from what I’ve heard.

I think our round 1 back six will be;

McVee, May, Tomlinson
Salem, Lever, Rivers

With Bowey also in the 23.
Ah interesting. He was in my mock squad so will have to revise that now, but I've heard that Windsor has been killing it on the wing. As a Dees fan, do you rate him so far?
 

Ben's Beasts

Leadership Group
Joined
6 Jan 2013
Messages
19,081
Likes
80,373
AFL Club
Melbourne
Ah interesting. He was in my mock squad so will have to revise that now, but I've heard that Windsor has been killing it on the wing. As a Dees fan, do you rate him so far?
Rate him very highly.

With Hunter in serious doubt for the start of the season, Windsor is a genuine chance of playing round 1 on a wing. If his form warrants it, he may even keep Hunter out of the side once he’s fit.

Hopefully he puts in a good showing tomorrow morning.
 

Diabolical

Leadership Group
Joined
17 Jun 2014
Messages
9,625
Likes
37,753
AFL Club
Essendon
I guess the other thing I hadn't given much thought to till now is the effect of so many best 18 rounds in the early part of the season. At first blush this seems to make midpricers less desirable as usually their best advantage is pushing off the really fringe rookies we normally have to played at 21st and 22nd spots, but there's usually not such a big fall off at the 18 mark. Haven't put much thought into it (and sorry if this has been covered at length elsewhere) but I might do some sums along that line of thinking.
This is something that I have been trying to get my head around. I have seen mentioned that best 18 means that we can go a little more mid-priced to get rookie scores off field. However, I am wondering if it means we should actually go harder at GnR targeting higher end premiums? It might mean an extra on field rookie or two but in the best 18 scoring the risk of rookie score fluctuations is mitigated through lower scores dropping out. Potentially this could allow for quicker cash generation too?

However there will be a mid pricers who do extremely well. Maybe instead of starting them we target them when we have more information and just be prepared to sacrifice a starting premium? Odds are at least one of our starting premiums will start poorer than expected, so we would just need to be prepared to make early calls. I think 40 trades means we can’t waste time and need to learn to react quicker.
 
Joined
18 Sep 2014
Messages
848
Likes
493
AFL Club
Fremantle
If you think you’re getting more than about a 5ppg discount on the player (call it 25-30k), you should come out ahead taking them even if they have an early bye. It’s arguably only 2-3ppg that’s needed.
I’ve been thinking about this more, and I think using players like Sam Walsh and Rozee are good option for an example (Kane Cornes would be proud).

Walsh should be a good starting pick, but we aren’t selecting anyone (round 0 bye or not) who is outside the top 8 in a line and we don’t think will increase their average by 5ppg. i.e. people are picking Butters, Rozee, LDU, Parish, N Anderson because we can foresee they’ll increase by at least 5 (likely hoping for 10 if picking Parish or Anderson). So coming out ahead becomes relative, as they actually have to increase their average relative to more expensive picks, who also increase their average, in order to close that points gap.

Then comes in early scoring rate and price increase vs extra scoring, as people aren’t avoiding round 0 players all year, just very early. If over the first 6 SC rounds, Team A picks Walsh who averages 110 (7pt increase), and Team B picks Rozee who averages 112.5 (5pt increase), they’ll likely both increase modestly or hold price, with Walsh making money at a slightly faster rate. In round 7, Team A trades in Rozee and Team B trades in Walsh. They now have the same teams, with Team A having more money (maybe $35k ($10k extra gain based on magic number + $25k starting price difference)) and Team B with more points (no bye round + Rozee averaging more = about 55 more points (15 due to Rozee scoring, 40 due to extra premo in best 18)).

Which team is ahead at this point? You’ve got the exact same teams, so would you rather the $35k or 55 point head start?

This is a very specific example, but I think it shows a little bit of this challenge. If you start round 0 bye players who will be keepers (top group of scorers in a line), then you’re trying to pick they ones who can fire early and outscore other great options by closer to 10-15 points per game in the first few rounds to get an advantage and make the extra cash and not lose too many points before the POD is closed.
 
Top