Discussion 2025: AFL SuperCoach Discussion - OPEN

[MagpiePotato]

He is $ 99,100.00 in SC

Lolz, i was still on team picker (where he isn't available) didn't realise SC had opened now, thank you.

 

[Miller is a Steele]

So in bbl we're people ensuring the flex was someone who played early in the round?

I usually went this way. Bowlers tend to get scored more favourably than batters in BBL SuperCoach, so as a result I often find myself in a situation where I have lots of BWL and BAT/BWL (DPP) players and little BAT only players. Due to this I would usually field a BWL only option who played early in the round at the FLEX position.

The main thing in my opinion is that it is a player who plays in a game that you know you’ll be available to see late outs. It’s the only position where you don’t have cover if they miss out.

I don’t think the FLEX position will be all that important in the first half of the season. The main advantage the FLEX has when choosing your starting team is that IF you value 3 premiums rucks over the alternative premium options across other lines, you can now do that.

In the back half of the season it will be useful for the byes (which has been a strength of mine and why I don’t like the addition of the FLEX!) as you have another number. When teams are completed it allows you to get a score from a 9th mid or 3rd ruck over a forward (where the lowest score is likely going to be barring injuries). It also allows the “23rd premium” we used to stash on our bench to cover all positions on the field.

Probably a bit confusing if you didn’t play SuperCoach BBL, but it shouldn’t take too not to get ahold of. The overwhelming majority of the BBL community at SCS understood the ins and out of the FLEX position by the end of it.

 

[donnybuang]

I can’t speak for everyone, but I would say to some extent, especially early in the season.

The main thing is to ensure that player isn’t a late out that you have zero cover for. Late outs are themselves quite rare, and for it to be a player you own, are relying on on field, and to have no ability to cover that spot, is a few hoops to jump through.

You can largely address that risk by picking someone who tends to play every game (a Merrett type)/isn’t under a cloud/doesnt play in the last game or two of the round, etc.

[In BBL, players miss for unexpected reasons more often, and there are fewer matches each round to pick a backup player from, so the risk of a late out you can’t cover is greater.]

Even if your flex player is a late out and you can’t or don’t do anything, it’s not the end of the world … you effectively get a 0 as your 23rd score, so it just means you don’t get to drop off the next worst score. This means the impact is less than if it was a typical uncovered late out (ie a donut).

Yeah, I'm thinking early on you can shift say a Thursday night player in to the flex, then use E and subs to cover any late outs later on, knowing your 23rd is locked away. As you say, only a minor consideration though.

 

[Herbie66]

Way to early to lock in Rookies , just having a quick look at some of the more "experienced" F options

Lynch $ 183,200.00
SPP $ 180,500.00
Curtin $ 158,600.00
Martin , J $ 150,900.00
Spargo $ 135,800.00
Hewett * $ 122,800.00
Stone $ 119,900.00

I am sure their are others

Add in JHF and the Fab 4 (or 5 including Parker) mid priced/value & their might not be a lot of room available

 

[Ricky Bobby]

Thanks for all the comments on the Flex position. It’s an interesting new concept and all views are helpful in deciding how to approach this.
Several people have commented that the Flex score is something we can decide to “take” or not. I may have misinterpreted what was said, however my understanding is that the Flex score will automatically replace the lowest on field score (rather than needing to be activated or “taken”) Is this correct ?

 

[Darkie]

Thanks for all the comments on the Flex position. It’s an interesting new concept and all views are helpful in deciding how to approach this.
Several people have commented that the Flex score is something we can decide to “take” or not. I may have misinterpreted what was said, however my understanding is that the Flex score will automatically replace the lowest on field score (rather than needing to be activated or “taken”) Is this correct ?

That’s correct.

It’s a bit like best 18 bye scoring in that regard. It’s just best 22 from 23.

 

[wogitalia]

So you have to take a ruck as your flex right? The added cover just makes it too good to do anything else doesn't it? I guess you can run the gauntlet early days but I just cant see a world where not having a 3rd ruckman late in the year when trades are sparse is the play.

I fell into this thinking initially on reading the flex also but I believe it will actually be the reverse. You can use the Flex to replace a missing R2 regardless of position, so it's likely that a mid there is going to be by far the best option as the M/F and D/M links are the most common so far more likely you can get 22 on the field via that.

Will need to double check the rules to make sure that the Flex will cover a missing 22nd player and isn't just capable of replacing the 22nd score but I would think that's how it would work.

If it is a case where it can only replace lowest score, so if you have 21 it replaces the 21st rather than filling in the 22nd, then in that case having a ruck there could be a huge advantage, especially if the 3rd best ruck is matching the 9th best midfielder scoring, which they normally will.

 

[Mike262]

I fell into this thinking initially on reading the flex also but I believe it will actually be the reverse. You can use the Flex to replace a missing R2 regardless of position, so it's likely that a mid there is going to be by far the best option as the M/F and D/M links are the most common so far more likely you can get 22 on the field via that.

Will need to double check the rules to make sure that the Flex will cover a missing 22nd player and isn't just capable of replacing the 22nd score but I would think that's how it would work.

If it is a case where it can only replace lowest score, so if you have 21 it replaces the 21st rather than filling in the 22nd, then in that case having a ruck there could be a huge advantage, especially if the 3rd best ruck is matching the 9th best midfielder scoring, which they normally will.

If you have 21 players playing plus the flex it just takes all 22 scores.

If you have 22 playing plus the flex the lowest score of the 23 will drop out.

 

[Under The Dome]

View attachment 83055

I've had this team sitting in a numbers document for a good while, really liking the structure and just thought I'd share. It's still only January so plenty of water to go under the bridge, not locked into any of these picks individually but keen to keep this structure.

I don't really count premiums in a starting team but more the rookies on field, currently only have 5 which is a number I'd like to try and stick with or even bring down. Looking at my starting team from last year by round 6 I had 4 rookies that hadn't been affected by the sub rule so feel like it's going to be key getting them off field ASAP. It's probably been talked about enough and will be a popular strategy this year but I'm only targeting round 0 players if they present enough value to warrant starting. I was also burnt starting Bont and Daicos last year so trying to avoid paying up for guys that will inevitably come down in price.

Defence:
Fairly cookie cutter barring Sicily, currently 6% owned which is ridiculously low for what he can produce especially for the price. I see no reason why he'll play large chunks forward this year. The acquisitions of Barrass and Battle to me should help him to be freed up back to that 2023 type scoring. There will be times he's thrown forward but I can only really see that happening late in games when it's close and there's no matchup for him. If Hawthorn improve again this year and have less close games there's less of a reason to throw him forward.

Midfield:
Keen on all this mids as I believe they can all outperform their price, also keen on Ollie Hollands if it gets another rookie off field.

Rucks:
Very keen on Darcy with his soft run early. This whole structure sort of depends on a playing rookie/midpriced ruck so hopefully Flynn can fit that mould.

Forwards:
Very cookie cutter, would be happy to go without JHF but this seems to be the line with the least amount of fieldable rookies so unless something presents I'll probably stick with this.

Having five rookies on field is already fine with the most likely score dropping out being the 5th worst one.
If you can upgrade right after the byes at R5 then you are already down to 3 out of 4.

 

[Chumpion]

I fell into this thinking initially on reading the flex also but I believe it will actually be the reverse. You can use the Flex to replace a missing R2 regardless of position, so it's likely that a mid there is going to be by far the best option as the M/F and D/M links are the most common so far more likely you can get 22 on the field via that.

Will need to double check the rules to make sure that the Flex will cover a missing 22nd player and isn't just capable of replacing the 22nd score but I would think that's how it would work.

If it is a case where it can only replace lowest score, so if you have 21 it replaces the 21st rather than filling in the 22nd, then in that case having a ruck there could be a huge advantage, especially if the 3rd best ruck is matching the 9th best midfielder scoring, which they normally will.

The flex isn’t an independent score from the other 22 “traditional” positions. At the end of the round you’ll have 23 scoring players from all positions and SC will remove your lowest. This could be a mid.. forward.. even flex player!

I think people are falling into the trap of viewing the flex spot as seperate from the team. It’s a positional change that means you can field a 23rd player from any position, rather than an independent score that has to replace one of the other 22 spots. Overwhelmingly it will because odds are the worst score will be in the 22, but if your flex scores poorly then it will be the score that drops off.

 

[Singapore Flyers]

Way to early to lock in Rookies , just having a quick look at some of the more "experienced" F options

Lynch $ 183,200.00
SPP $ 180,500.00
Curtin $ 158,600.00
Martin , J $ 150,900.00
Spargo $ 135,800.00
Hewett * $ 122,800.00
Stone $ 119,900.00

I am sure their are others

Add in JHF and the Fab 4 (or 5 including Parker) mid priced/value & their might not be a lot of room available

We may have to decide if we like these experienced rookies more than the new blood. If you do, it might be that a Philippou goes into the mids, and put an extra one of these in the forward line.
The question between the new blood and experienced rookies will be interesting. From all accounts these new rookies are top shelf from a high quality draft. Then have to balance that against role and sub risk. Last year it felt like McKercher Sanders and Windsor were always getting subbed off. It would be understandable if clubs were protective of their new talent.
Then there’s role. Jagga Smith apparently is a ball magnet as an inside mid. But how much will he play there with Cripps, Walsh and Hewett. Is there room at Carlton for 10-20% CBA’s? Even two absolute guns in Sheezel and Daicos didn’t start in the centre. Yes they were great scorers because of their HB role and their class, but it feels like if Jagga Smith is playing more forward, then we can’t really expect him to score like Sheezel or Daicos. And because he’s more expensive he actually has to score more than SPP etc to be value.
personally looking at the experienced guys. Currently running Lynch as flex, in the forwards, SPP onfield and Martin and Curtin on the bench. In the mids, Tsatas, O’Driscoll and Hewett onfield, Sharp L Ashcroft and ElHawli on the bench. Defence is the newbies with Travaglia, Allan and a little bit of experience in Reid.
I would be happy to find room for Erasmus and or Spargo if they play. For Erasmus there is a little bit of hype at the moment, but I am not sure if that isn’t just wishful thinking from us SC coaches. But I see HS did have him in best 23. Nothing on Spargo so far.
In these early days of rookie abundance these sort of dilemmas are really interesting. With so many other similar players in our teams, this might be one area where we see differences in approach between teams.

 

[freowho]

Bear with me, sometimes writing things out helps me comprehend.

I'll use JHF as an example, if I place him in the Flex position then I'll have to field my F7 which more than likely leads to that score from F7 being knocked out. If JHF is a late out then that score from F7 (now on field) would count.

If I fielded JHF then I'd have a rookie at Flex, if JHF was a late out then the score at F7 would cover him. Even if I had another premo scorer at Flex then that would lead to a different rookie on ground but the outcome would be the same.

Yes, it's possible that it makes no difference. But you want to give yourself the chance where it could be a positive. It also depends on how JHF gets to the flex. Can you loop in the forward line. The flex means we have best 22 of 23, but looping could give us best 22 of 26.

 

[Under The Dome]

We may have to decide if we like these experienced rookies more than the new blood. If you do, it might be that a Philippou goes into the mids, and put an extra one of these in the forward line.
The question between the new blood and experienced rookies will be interesting. From all accounts these new rookies are top shelf from a high quality draft. Then have to balance that against role and sub risk. Last year it felt like McKercher Sanders and Windsor were always getting subbed off. It would be understandable if clubs were protective of their new talent.
Then there’s role. Jagga Smith apparently is a ball magnet as an inside mid. But how much will he play there with Cripps, Walsh and Hewett. Is there room at Carlton for 10-20% CBA’s? Even two absolute guns in Sheezel and Daicos didn’t start in the centre. Yes they were great scorers because of their HB role and their class, but it feels like if Jagga Smith is playing more forward, then we can’t really expect him to score like Sheezel or Daicos. And because he’s more expensive he actually has to score more than SPP etc to be value.
personally looking at the experienced guys. Currently running Lynch as flex, in the forwards, SPP onfield and Martin and Curtin on the bench. In the mids, Tsatas, O’Driscoll and Hewett onfield, Sharp L Ashcroft and ElHawli on the bench. Defence is the newbies with Travaglia, Allan and a little bit of experience in Reid.
I would be happy to find room for Erasmus and or Spargo if they play. For Erasmus there is a little bit of hype at the moment, but I am not sure if that isn’t just wishful thinking from us SC coaches. But I see HS did have him in best 23. Nothing on Spargo so far.
In these early days of rookie abundance these sort of dilemmas are really interesting. With so many other similar players in our teams, this might be one area where we see differences in approach between teams.

I didn't realise Spargo was 135k, nice find!

 

[Diabolical]

So in bbl we're people ensuring the flex was someone who played early in the round?

That is how I thought that I would approach it in BBL, but I found myself doing the opposite. However, BBL has a lot of DPPs which may have leant itself to being able to play it late. The main thing that I was keeping an eye on was that I didn’t set myself up to be forced to take a donut. So I only saved it to last if I had multiple players playing in the last game (more likely in BBL than AFL) to make it easier to switch things around if any players were an unexpected out. Being a DPP It helped to get the non player off field or get the non player into the position that would give me the best E score.

 

[Vicwood]

Perth Ch 7 reporting that Sean Darcy heading to Doha to continue rehab from pre season treatment done last Aug.

Only 6 years remaining, not a wise contract extension from Freo. The hype has already strart about how strong and fit he looks, exit stage left for more rehab.

 

[Singapore Flyers]

Only 6 years remaining, not a wise contract extension from Freo. The hype has already strart about how strong and fit he looks, exit stage left for more rehab.

I had him in my side! His first 6 weeks looked more tempting than TDK. Glad it’s only January and we are allowed to have these brain fades.

 

[bluesbrothers]

Only 6 years remaining, not a wise contract extension from Freo. The hype has already strart about how strong and fit he looks, exit stage left for more rehab.

I had him in my side! His first 6 weeks looked more tempting than TDK. Glad it’s only January and we are allowed to have these brain fades.

I wouldn't be too deterred by this (at least not yet). Sounds like something that had been planned from a long way out, and is only going to be beneficial for him. We are seeing more and more clubs commit to sending players overseas, so while it seems like a bad thing it may not be. Having said that, it would be hard to pick a player who hasn't got back into full training yet. Have to think he will be managed throughout at least the first part of the season, and perhaps the whole, especially with his history of injuries.

 

[Herbie66]

We may have to decide if we like these experienced rookies more than the new blood. If you do, it might be that a Philippou goes into the mids, and put an extra one of these in the forward line.
The question between the new blood and experienced rookies will be interesting. From all accounts these new rookies are top shelf from a high quality draft. Then have to balance that against role and sub risk. Last year it felt like McKercher Sanders and Windsor were always getting subbed off. It would be understandable if clubs were protective of their new talent.
Then there’s role. Jagga Smith apparently is a ball magnet as an inside mid. But how much will he play there with Cripps, Walsh and Hewett. Is there room at Carlton for 10-20% CBA’s? Even two absolute guns in Sheezel and Daicos didn’t start in the centre. Yes they were great scorers because of their HB role and their class, but it feels like if Jagga Smith is playing more forward, then we can’t really expect him to score like Sheezel or Daicos. And because he’s more expensive he actually has to score more than SPP etc to be value.
personally looking at the experienced guys. Currently running Lynch as flex, in the forwards, SPP onfield and Martin and Curtin on the bench. In the mids, Tsatas, O’Driscoll and Hewett onfield, Sharp L Ashcroft and ElHawli on the bench. Defence is the newbies with Travaglia, Allan and a little bit of experience in Reid.
I would be happy to find room for Erasmus and or Spargo if they play. For Erasmus there is a little bit of hype at the moment, but I am not sure if that isn’t just wishful thinking from us SC coaches. But I see HS did have him in best 23. Nothing on Spargo so far.
In these early days of rookie abundance these sort of dilemmas are really interesting. With so many other similar players in our teams, this might be one area where we see differences in approach between teams.

Thanks for the detailed response.

I admit I don't know a lot about the recent Draft class but every year is the same with the media hype (actually seems to get worse year by year)

Let the kids actually play before declaring them the next best thing.

Massive difference in under age football to the AFL where they most likely will be playing a completely different position/role.

Obviously a long way out as to what rookies will be playing Round 1.

IF Lynch & Martin can actually stay on the park for long enough they possibly could be last upgrades.

Smith , Parker , Phillipou , Daniel all with DPP so possibly could start some as a mid if the F rookies look more plentiful (playing and scoring wise)

was keen on using Peatling as a "stepping stone" but it might actually be more beneficial to start one of the above mentioned DPP instead (again depending on where the rookies land)

I gather the Crows got him for a reason but a lot of mouths to feed in that Crows midfield even before his & Neal-Bullen's arrival.

Similar with Oliver , if he doesn't get back to that 110 range is he worth starting ?

Speculation on Ashcroft & Day at similar price point getting to that level as well.

Seems to be hype on Erasmus ever since he was drafted , coming into his 4th year , he needs to grab that Best 22 opportunity before it is to late.

Big year for Tsatas as well.

Missed Sharp going to Melbourne , although only realised yesterday that Stringer was now a Giant 😀

Lots of AFL reading to catch up and research for SC.

Macrae , Lynch , SPP , Curtin , Martin , Spargo / Hewett * , Stone is probably wishful thinking

2 premium mids + Smith , Parker (?) , Phillipou, Daniel + 5-6 rookies

Follow the rookies

Only 50 days to go

 

[Herbie66]

So have I got this right for Bailey Smith (Holmes as well) + Coleman & Mills with the Round 3 Bye

Round 0 - doesn't count for SC
Round 1 - plays
Round 2 - plays
Round 3 - BYE

so his price changes before Round 4

so either start him or wait until Round 4 to bring him in (part of correction trades or is that just a waste ?)

Estimate 90+90+50 = 230

Start all 3 of Coleman , Mills & Smith could be down approximately 120 points in Round 3 🤔

Find rookies to score equivalent probably not trading them out though after Round 3

Start a rookie though (instead of Coleman , Mills , Smith ) 50 + 50 + 50 = 150 so worse off

Money saved wouldn't turn 2 rookies into 2 extra starting premiums

 

[Ben's Beasts]

I’m thinking at this stage that the player I have in the flex position will be someone who I can’t quite squeeze into an on field def/mid/ruc/fwd position but is capable of putting up fieldable scores.

So thinking a Lynch, SPP or one of the glut of expensive mid rookies who look likely types this season.