Discussion 2024-2025: NBL Supercoach- Thurs 2nd Jan 7:30pm
- Thread starter Connoisseur
- Start date
- Joined
- 3 Jul 2017
- Messages
- 39,267
- Likes
- 127,709
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
Sorry for the late reply.
Most formats I try and use the boosts as early as possible to ideally maximise cash gen and exploit those playing conservatively as I feel it is a better point of difference than falling into the trap of starting or targeting players for pod sake. I do not enter any cash leagues so unrestricted in terms of strategy compared to those that may be playing to breakeven (more noticeable in coaches in AFL SC- not likely in NBL SC) and thus more restricted. They usually hold hope for the rainy day scenario eventuating, to maximise their opportunity but what if it never comes?
Better to remain flexible and opt for the leading approach rather than the Bradbury approach. Lack of prizes outside first place in a small entry pool in which ghostships and interest waning over the course of the season could be prominent along with a fixture based format that may be difficult for newcomers/returning players that do not have enough familiarity with formats such as NBA, BBL, etc. Last season it seemed that the bench was not taken full advantage of early on by some coaches, so the leg up with cash gen, less donuts, more bench points and greater ability to hold through non doubles rather than limiting outs can be taken advantage of.
For this season I feel RD3 is a must to use one boost. RD5 or RD6 to navigate the next few rounds could be popular. Cotton-less teams in RD9 could use a third boost since Perth and Brisbane are the only teams on a double, or around that period to navigate the next few rounds. A boost in RD15 could also be popular to setup for the final five rounds.
Most formats I try and use the boosts as early as possible to ideally maximise cash gen and exploit those playing conservatively as I feel it is a better point of difference than falling into the trap of starting or targeting players for pod sake. I do not enter any cash leagues so unrestricted in terms of strategy compared to those that may be playing to breakeven (more noticeable in coaches in AFL SC- not likely in NBL SC) and thus more restricted. They usually hold hope for the rainy day scenario eventuating, to maximise their opportunity but what if it never comes?
Better to remain flexible and opt for the leading approach rather than the Bradbury approach. Lack of prizes outside first place in a small entry pool in which ghostships and interest waning over the course of the season could be prominent along with a fixture based format that may be difficult for newcomers/returning players that do not have enough familiarity with formats such as NBA, BBL, etc. Last season it seemed that the bench was not taken full advantage of early on by some coaches, so the leg up with cash gen, less donuts, more bench points and greater ability to hold through non doubles rather than limiting outs can be taken advantage of.
For this season I feel RD3 is a must to use one boost. RD5 or RD6 to navigate the next few rounds could be popular. Cotton-less teams in RD9 could use a third boost since Perth and Brisbane are the only teams on a double, or around that period to navigate the next few rounds. A boost in RD15 could also be popular to setup for the final five rounds.
- Joined
- 25 Dec 2022
- Messages
- 3,522
- Likes
- 17,400
- AFL Club
- West Coast
0/73
Davis 45, Harrell 28
Ended up boosting. Days and DWJ to Magnay and Davis were settled. Was tossing up between Olbrich to Waardenburg, Loe to Waardenburg, and the one I ended up choosing in Loe to Harrell. Waardenburg should make more over this round, but over the 2-3 rounds I’ll own them I expect Harrell to make as much or potentially more than Waardenburg, and score at a higher rate. Was initially on the Olbrich to Waardenburg option but got FOMO on Harrell. 33 and 35 points in 21 and 22 minutes had me scared of what he could do if given the minutes. And on top of that, Waardenburg’s 50 came in 37 minutes and his 18 came in 25 minutes. I highly doubt he plays anywhere close to 37 minutes again. Ended up starting and playing 28 minutes but didn’t have as much PPM this time around, mainly thanks to 5 TOs. Still happy with the call so far.
Lining up with 7 double gamers:
MAGNAY C, WHITE VC (Oliver, HENSHALL)
HARRELL (Olbrich)
DAVIS, ILI (Hickey, PEPPER)
Davis 45, Harrell 28
Ended up boosting. Days and DWJ to Magnay and Davis were settled. Was tossing up between Olbrich to Waardenburg, Loe to Waardenburg, and the one I ended up choosing in Loe to Harrell. Waardenburg should make more over this round, but over the 2-3 rounds I’ll own them I expect Harrell to make as much or potentially more than Waardenburg, and score at a higher rate. Was initially on the Olbrich to Waardenburg option but got FOMO on Harrell. 33 and 35 points in 21 and 22 minutes had me scared of what he could do if given the minutes. And on top of that, Waardenburg’s 50 came in 37 minutes and his 18 came in 25 minutes. I highly doubt he plays anywhere close to 37 minutes again. Ended up starting and playing 28 minutes but didn’t have as much PPM this time around, mainly thanks to 5 TOs. Still happy with the call so far.
Lining up with 7 double gamers:
MAGNAY C, WHITE VC (Oliver, HENSHALL)
HARRELL (Olbrich)
DAVIS, ILI (Hickey, PEPPER)
2 disaster weeks to start the season. Don’t think I’ll be backing up my 36th overall from last year 
Using 1st boost this week to fix some serious issues.
DWJ > Davis
Days > Magnay
3rd trade I’m considering is either Olbrich > Waardenburg or Loe > Harrell. Bit of a toss up. Would’ve been able to go Olbrich > Harrell if DWJ didn’t spud it up and lose 30k in his second game last round.
Leaning just skipping Harrell and getting Waardenburg for the assured cash gen and 3/4 doubles coming up considering I lost 40-50k on DWJ, Ili last week.
Using 1st boost this week to fix some serious issues.
DWJ > Davis
Days > Magnay
3rd trade I’m considering is either Olbrich > Waardenburg or Loe > Harrell. Bit of a toss up. Would’ve been able to go Olbrich > Harrell if DWJ didn’t spud it up and lose 30k in his second game last round.
Leaning just skipping Harrell and getting Waardenburg for the assured cash gen and 3/4 doubles coming up considering I lost 40-50k on DWJ, Ili last week.
Just a better quality player then Waardenburg.
- Joined
- 7 Jul 2012
- Messages
- 11,762
- Likes
- 34,834
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Joined
- 7 Jul 2012
- Messages
- 11,762
- Likes
- 34,834
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Joined
- 6 Jan 2013
- Messages
- 19,482
- Likes
- 82,683
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
- Joined
- 3 Jul 2017
- Messages
- 39,267
- Likes
- 127,709
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
Field Goals made, attempted and percentage is a good starting point. Would disregard minutes per field goal attempt given it rehashes the previous metrics. Some of the advanced shooting stats are good to consider as well. Points are lost in NBA RDT for missed shots so is of more importance there but still good to help identify those that can shoot well from high or limited volume. With no negative points for misses in NBL, then volume is key in comparison to NBA RDT. Expectation is the greater the volume the tougher it is to maintain a high shooting clip.
Turnover ratios or assist to turnover ratios could be another interesting one for the key ball handlers (PJC, etc) and to identify the forwards who could be prone to turnovers in the post or those that handle the ball well, etc.
The following site is a great resource for the AFL and also look to have some NBL stats and advanced stats as well.
https://www.wheeloratings.com/nbl_stats.html
The issue with the eye test is the observer needs to know what they are looking for otherwise it is redundant and best not to be used in isolation. Do they have cataracts, are they sober when viewing, etc if relaying information on a public forum as others may place too much importance in the view or allocate instant credibility.
I wouldn’t bother about when the points where scored moreso how they were scored. Poor shot selection, good defence, poor decision making for passes, etc could be a greater contributing factor and with a high usage rate then the expectation would be eventually some shots or passes start to fall rather than falling Into the trap of the hot hand fallacy.
Filling up the stat sheet is the main thing as long as it is not in the turnovers column. Steals, blocks, rebounds or assists provide a solid floor and helps compensate for off shooting nights.
Turnover ratios or assist to turnover ratios could be another interesting one for the key ball handlers (PJC, etc) and to identify the forwards who could be prone to turnovers in the post or those that handle the ball well, etc.
The following site is a great resource for the AFL and also look to have some NBL stats and advanced stats as well.
https://www.wheeloratings.com/nbl_stats.html
The issue with the eye test is the observer needs to know what they are looking for otherwise it is redundant and best not to be used in isolation. Do they have cataracts, are they sober when viewing, etc
if relaying information on a public forum as others may place too much importance in the view or allocate instant credibility.I wouldn’t bother about when the points where scored moreso how they were scored. Poor shot selection, good defence, poor decision making for passes, etc could be a greater contributing factor and with a high usage rate then the expectation would be eventually some shots or passes start to fall rather than falling Into the trap of the hot hand fallacy.
Filling up the stat sheet is the main thing as long as it is not in the turnovers column. Steals, blocks, rebounds or assists provide a solid floor and helps compensate for off shooting nights.
- Joined
- 6 Jan 2013
- Messages
- 19,482
- Likes
- 82,683
- AFL Club
- Melbourne