Opinion Questions For Rowsus

[Jurn Stern]

I think that comes with a caveat this year, in that there's a shortage of reliable DEF premiums. In previous years, when we've had the likes of the bankable Goddard, Deledio, Hodge, Malceski, Mitchell, Gibbs etc, there's been no need to divert from the Guns and Rookies strategy. This year, with many of the Def premiums losing their defender status, and the top echelon of the remaining defenders likely to drop in price due to age/position/team factors, the mid-priced rookie, particularly in the 325-400k range has become more prevalent. So while historically those awkwardly priced players have little utility, I think this year more than any other, they are crucial selections.

Agreed to some degree. Goddard, Deledio, Younger Hodge, and Gibbs were all reliable D/M selections. S.Mitchell, Bartel and McVeigh were all worthy selections last year. Malceski was no bankable selection last year and was priced 490k, and his only other 100+ year was in 2007.

The lesson that "the percentage of players in the $325-$375k range that go on to be keepers is very low. Well under 10%, and probably closer to 1%" is that this is a historically unreliable area to select players from. This is regardless of the upper crop available, as the amount of premium reliable defensive options does not correlate to the amount of breakout players in the $325-$375k range.

While I agree that it makes the mid priced option seem more valid than in any other year, there is still 10 defenders that will be the best 10 for 2015, and it is unlikely that anymore than 1 of the 45 players in this price range will be up there. I would suggest like every other year that there will be 2-3 defensive rookie options that will average +70 (like Langdon, Langford and McDonald) and these guys should score as well as or better than most of the 45 in the 325-$375k range.

Take the most likely options from the top, maybe a breakout player from that range if you dare, an injured warrior that is at a discounted price, and some rookies because they will score well enough and generate more cash than the non-premium, non-cash cow, non keepers.

 

[Hondo]

The lesson that "the percentage of players in the $325-$375k range that go on to be keepers is very low. Well under 10%, and probably closer to 1%" is that this is a historically unreliable area to select players from. This is regardless of the upper crop available, as the amount of premium reliable defensive options does not correlate to the amount of breakout players in the $325-$375k range.

While I agree that it makes the mid priced option seem more valid than in any other year, there is still 10 defenders that will be the best 10 for 2015, and it is unlikely that anymore than 1 of the 45 players in this price range will be up there. I would suggest like every other year that there will be 2-3 defensive rookie options that will average +70 (like Langdon, Langford and McDonald) and these guys should score as well as or better than most of the 45 in the 325-$375k range.

Take the most likely options from the top, maybe a breakout player from that range if you dare, an injured warrior that is at a discounted price, and some rookies because they will score well enough and generate more cash than the non-premium, non-cash cow, non keepers.

Exactly my view as well

Just because the $550K+ options are gone does not mean the $325K-$375K price range is any more attractive or likely to succeed. Yes, those $500K options are likely to drop in price later but apart from Ablett and a few others this is true of almost every $500K+ player. It's just part of the game. It doesn't mean we don't start them.

I say again, $325K-$375K is a fantasy minefield. Apart from the inherent risk with picking one, picking one inevitably forces you to pick another somewhere else v a premium and a rookie combined for $700K. In the vast majority of cases there is a rookie option that does just as well for $250K cheaper and you kick yourself when in R3 you trade down your struggling breakout candidate to the bolting rookie.

At least with a rookie correction it is 1:1 and you don't end up with spare cash that you wish you had invested somewhere else from the start.

I don't think I have ever picked a $300K genuine mid-pricer (someone with NO premium scoring history - the true "breakout contender") from the start that worked. I have waited two rounds and traded a few in with much more success like JJK two years ago.

As I said before, these types of "rules" are made to be broken and you can't pick your entire side using rules from previous seasons. That said, there is a lot of history working against the $350K breakout picks.

 

[Courtesans]

Jordan Lewis Rowsus?
The Hawks are different to other sides in the mids, shared all around it seems. I have Lewis pencilled in as M 5. Brilliant end to last year. This bloke can play. Under the radar at the moment it seems...

 

[Rowsus]

g'day Rowsus
thanks for more statistic based sense. I am intrigued by your comment "At this stage I will be having all 3 of Newnes, Docherty and JJ, but not Harwood. I had Broady in my team right up until the lockout last season, then axed him, and wouldn't touch Yarran or Atley if you paid me." The last bit I get, but I am puzzled by the no Harwood? Budget constraints perhaps but that is a wild guess. Or balance for the byes - although I think that is more a concern with midfielders? I would be intrigued to know your reasoning - if you would be so kind.

g'day chels,
for no other reason than balance. I will probably start with Hibberd, Hurn and 3 of Newnes, Docherty, JJ and Harwood. Harwood may be the one to miss out, but only due to the perceived depth of Brisbanes Mids. This is likely to push Rich, and possibly another Mid-type player to the Half-back line, and if it does the scoring of the other Brisbane Defs will probably suffer.

 

[Rowsus]

Jordan Lewis Rowsus?
The Hawks are different to other sides in the mids, shared all around it seems. I have Lewis pencilled in as M 5. Brilliant end to last year. This bloke can play. Under the radar at the moment it seems...

Not with a 10 foot Barge Pole Courtesans.
A player that will be near as dammit 29 when the season starts, with a very consistent record in 6 of the previous 7 seasons to 2014 of playing 19 to 22 games, and scoring between 90.9 and 96.6. That is nearly consistency personified, and really establishes his ESP. The missing season in those 7 was 17 games at 80.4, and it all screams that his 21 games at 109.4 last season was a spike year.
Add to that, that he plays for Hawthorn, and that's all I need to avoid him.
Hawthorns highest scoring Mid players by year:
2014: 109, 94, 91, 91
2013: 104, 97, 97, 88
2012: 111, 101, 96, 86
2011: 113, 106, 95, 91
There's not a lot of depth in those scores, and until their game plan changes, I won't be taking any Hawthorn Mids for Mid Prem positions.

 

[chels]

Much obliged Rowsus.

There is potentially a delicious irony in this: "Harwood may be the one to miss out, but only due to the perceived depth of Brisbanes Mids. This is likely to push Rich, and possibly another Mid-type player to the Half-back line, and if it does the scoring of the other Brisbane Defs will probably suffer." Might we see Pearce Hanley, now a M in SC, playing as a defender after all those years of him as a D playing in midfield?

 

[Rowsus]

Much obliged Rowsus.

There is potentially a delicious irony in this: "Harwood may be the one to miss out, but only due to the perceived depth of Brisbanes Mids. This is likely to push Rich, and possibly another Mid-type player to the Half-back line, and if it does the scoring of the other Brisbane Defs will probably suffer." Might we see Pearce Hanley, now a M in SC, playing as a defender after all those years of him as a D playing in midfield?

Exactly what I'm thinking. He will be D/M again in 2016!

 

[Nathan]

Hi Rowsus, got an easy one for you.

I'm just after A.Swallow's TOG% for 2010-13.
Last year he was at 77%, wondering if this was because he was coming back from injury?

Thanks

 

[fodzilla]

You can look that sort of thing up yourself, surely.

www.afltables.com

 

[Nathan]

You can look that sort of thing up yourself, surely.

www.afltables.com

If I'd known about it I would have.

 

[sven_inc]

Always happy to answer interesting questions, sven_inc.
You won't be pleased with what I have to tell you here.
We know from post #2839, that there have been 23 ocassions where a player has done all 3 of:
Jumped their average from one season to the next by 20+/game
Had their new average reach 110+
Played a subsequent season.
Swan and Ablett managed to increase their average in the subsequent season, 7 players dropped by between 2.6 and 9.9 per season, and the other 14 dropped by between 10.4 and 58.5. 21 out of 23 players dropped their average in the subsequent season, and the average for all 23 players was -15/game.
If we look at the players that raised their average by between 15 and 20, and reached 110+, there are another 15 players to look at. Two of those 15 achieved it in 2014, Fyfe and Ward. That leaves us 13 players to add to the analysis.
Ablett, who achieved a 20+ jump in 2007 to 114.2, then jumped 15+ to 132.2 in 2008 then went +7.9 in 2009.
The other 12 fell by between 0.05 and 42.1,
The average of all 13 players is a reassuring (to this statistician! ) -14.8!

Clumping the 2 sets of players together, we get:
36 players have jumped their season average, from one year to the next, by 15+/game, and recorded an average of 110+/game.
On three occassions the player has recorded an increase in average the following season: Ablett twice, Swan once.
The other 33 players have all dropped in average the next season by between 0.05 and 58.5/game.
The average of all 36 players is -14.96
The average of the 33 players that dropped in average is -17.22

There is no doubt statistical patterns like this will be broken, as more seasons are recorded, but a 33 out 36 drop, by an average of 17/game is pretty hard to confidently predict against!

Awesome mate. I must admit I thought the stats would favour me a little more than that! I guess the answer lies somewhere within those 33 as he may have Ablett/Swan like potential, but it's more likely he's just like everyone else.

Do you happen to have the list of who those 33 were readily available? If you don't please don't worry as I'm sure its a painful job.

The reason I ask is that my thoughts around selecting Robbie aren't for value purposes. It's obvious through your stats that he in all likelihood won't improve on a 110 average, but as a listed forward he doesn't have to. I believe value is somewhat overrated when searching for premiums as someone like Ablett could drop from 140 to 130 and still be incredibly vital. As long as he is still consistent and his average of 130 didn't include a horribly low score to make him easy to grab later, then he's still worth it IMO.

I think we had a similar discussion around JPK a few years ago, and I'm feeling somewhat similar in regards to Robbie. If he ends up still averaging 105-110 I still think he's a mighty option. Most seem to put a Premo into either the "Value" or "Pick them up when they drop in price" pile. And I think most forget about the "Hovering around about the same" group. If Robbie can almost average 110 he's more than likely going to still be the number one forward option. Yes there are cheaper options, but none may get above 105, and if they do, it'll take a smarter man than me to pick who they'll be. But hopefully they will be somewhat obvious and they can fill my F2-4 spots

Certainly has me thinking!

Cheers again mate!

 

[Rowsus]

Hi Rowsus, got an easy one for you.

I'm just after A.Swallow's TOG% for 2010-13.
Last year he was at 77%, wondering if this was because he was coming back from injury?

Thanks

You can look that sort of thing up yourself, surely.

www.afltables.com

If I'd known about it I would have.

Hi Nathan, yes that is an easy one.
fod, you are quite right, but having said that, every question asked of me pertaining to statistics can be answered by the asker himself/herself.

Swallow A (home and away only)

2010 - 22 games between 73% - 86%, average 80.6%
2011 - 22 games between 70% - 85%, average 80.9%
2012 - 22 games between 72% - 88%, average 80.2%
2013 - 17 games between 37% - 87%, average 77.1%
2014 - 15 games between 61% - 84%, average 76.1%

 

[OzRulesFootball]

You can look that sort of thing up yourself, surely.

www.afltables.com

Excellent!
I knew I had seen TOG stats somewhere but could not remember where I saw them when wanting to know a few days ago.

 

[Zagbag]

Hi Rowsus - apologies if this has come up before, have you given any consideration to a Stephen Coniglio breakout?

Also not sure how he's looking fitness wise, but lachie Whitfield is another one who i'd appreciate your thoughts on

Many thanks.

 

[Rowsus]

Awesome mate. I must admit I thought the stats would favour me a little more than that! I guess the answer lies somewhere within those 33 as he may have Ablett/Swan like potential, but it's more likely he's just like everyone else.

Do you happen to have the list of who those 33 were readily available? If you don't please don't worry as I'm sure its a painful job.

The reason I ask is that my thoughts around selecting Robbie aren't for value purposes. It's obvious through your stats that he in all likelihood won't improve on a 110 average, but as a listed forward he doesn't have to. I believe value is somewhat overrated when searching for premiums as someone like Ablett could drop from 140 to 130 and still be incredibly vital. As long as he is still consistent and his average of 130 didn't include a horribly low score to make him easy to grab later, then he's still worth it IMO.

I think we had a similar discussion around JPK a few years ago, and I'm feeling somewhat similar in regards to Robbie. If he ends up still averaging 105-110 I still think he's a mighty option. Most seem to put a Premo into either the "Value" or "Pick them up when they drop in price" pile. And I think most forget about the "Hovering around about the same" group. If Robbie can almost average 110 he's more than likely going to still be the number one forward option. Yes there are cheaper options, but none may get above 105, and if they do, it'll take a smarter man than me to pick who they'll be. But hopefully they will be somewhat obvious and they can fill my F2-4 spots

Certainly has me thinking!

Cheers again mate!

I agree 100% about Gray still being a good pick if he averages 105. Yes, there are definitely 2 piles we (should) put Prems in. Get them now, or wait for their price to drop. Anyone thinking Gray will average anything like 105 would be crazy not to start with him, unless they have some theory he will either start slow, or get injured again. There's not that much money to be saved if does go at about 105, unless he does throw in a low score or two early on.

Here is a table of all the players that have made a 15+ jump into the 110+/game area.

 

[Bontempele]

Last year I used your spreadsheet throughout the season simply for calculating price changes (thank you, it was great!). I did this by putting in what I thought the player would score and their current price in a random row (therefore using your pricing formula). I didn't necessarily need to use the row of the player I was wanting price changes for. Just wondering whether that will work again this year if I use last year's spreadsheet? Or has the magic number of whatever changed?
Thanks very much

 

[sven_inc]

Wow mate thankyou. Thats insanely useful for me.

 

[anfa18]

That table is awesome, thanks Rowsus for sharing it!! And that's why i won't be starting with any of Ward, Fyfe, Gray, Jacobs or Martin.

 

[Bob Loblaw]

Yeah great table, great info. Never knew browny had a 140 season.

Really makes me question my two picks in there in Rocky and Fyfe however I think they do have some sort of special circumstance, Rockcliff's being more logical.
From your great thread Real Deal or Bank Buster you reinforced a few key facts about Rocky.
1.) Has averaged 130 over a season and a half, after Voss's decided to move I'm to the midfield.
Here you can argue that while playing in that position a jump of less than 10 was made this year.
2.) His years where he spent large portions of time up forward are directly linked to poor SuperCoach scoring and if he had been given a clear midfeild run in the past two years we may have seen say 113, 107, 125, then 132 this year. Had this been the case he would be an out and out lock in every side.
3.) Because his scoring is so high (132) and has the ability to average 150 for I think it was 8 games, even if he does drop 5 he will still most likely be the second highest scoring player in the comp and pumping out huge double point captain opportunities.

For Fyfe it's just the fact that he's so bloody talented. I haven't been a true blue avid footy fan for long but he just oozes class. His 108 in his second year is simply incredible especially considering how underdeveloped he was when he was picked up. It would be interesting to know which other players reached such heights in their second year. The only player I can think of is Judd and supercoach points weren't around at the time but I'd suggest it would be around the 105-110 mark and he was well built when he entered the system.

 

[siwel]

ROWSUS your analysis on players that have seen an avg increase of 20+ points in one season is great along with that table. From this I like a few above have a question about Fyfe now. What are your thoughts on him and is there any statistical evidence that supports him either increasing, maintaining or decreasing his SC avg other that the fact that so many have done this and failed the following year?

For what its worth he is in my team atm but I am questioning it and analysis on players who have seen 20+ point increases and Ross's words of him wanting Fyfe to spend more time closer to goal have me second guessing myself.