Opinion Questions For Rowsus
- Thread starter Rowsus
- Start date
- Status
Hi Btj,
at the moment it looks like a lot of teams will go skinny on Prems, and long on Rookies in the Fwd line. The combination of a good showing by the Fwd Rookies, and a bit of confidence about which are the Fwd Prems to target seems to make it an easy choice.
If I took Rich, which I won't be doing, I would want him to average around 100. This way he makes $150k or there abouts when you upgrade him. Any less than that, and you may as well roll the dice on a Mid Rookie, and use the $200k leftover from the Rich to Rookie swap elsewhere. I really don't think he can do it, but you are only wanting him to manage it in the first third-half of the season, not the whole season, so it's not impossible. Also, he only has to hit one big score, and follow it with a 100+, and as long as he hasn't stunk it up elsewhere, he can hit the goal. It seems to be a lot of "ifs", and ifs are best left to other lines. As to NVB, I think he may be a better pick than Rich, but I'm still not convinced he won't quickly resume his run-with roles, which means he won't make the dollars or points we're hoping for. Start with one at most, and probably make it NVB. Wait for next season with Rich, when he may possibly be listed as D/M after playing HB so much this season.
at the moment it looks like a lot of teams will go skinny on Prems, and long on Rookies in the Fwd line. The combination of a good showing by the Fwd Rookies, and a bit of confidence about which are the Fwd Prems to target seems to make it an easy choice.
If I took Rich, which I won't be doing, I would want him to average around 100. This way he makes $150k or there abouts when you upgrade him. Any less than that, and you may as well roll the dice on a Mid Rookie, and use the $200k leftover from the Rich to Rookie swap elsewhere. I really don't think he can do it, but you are only wanting him to manage it in the first third-half of the season, not the whole season, so it's not impossible. Also, he only has to hit one big score, and follow it with a 100+, and as long as he hasn't stunk it up elsewhere, he can hit the goal. It seems to be a lot of "ifs", and ifs are best left to other lines. As to NVB, I think he may be a better pick than Rich, but I'm still not convinced he won't quickly resume his run-with roles, which means he won't make the dollars or points we're hoping for. Start with one at most, and probably make it NVB. Wait for next season with Rich, when he may possibly be listed as D/M after playing HB so much this season.
G'day Rowsus,
Just a couple of things.
Firstly, Griffen and Swallow. Are you keen on any of them?
I am leaning towards A. Swallow because I think he has less competition in the middle with North Melbourne as opposed to Griffen who has to contend with Ward, Greene and a few other of the young guns.
Secondly, Geary or Newnes or neither. Initially I was all over Newnes but I am still not sure at that price he can become a Premium. Geary showed alot of promise before being injured and I guess is better priced to take a risk with. Or do I just leave the Saints players alone. Also looking at McMillan but just struggling to fill remaining defensive positions.
Any thoughts?
Just a couple of things.
Firstly, Griffen and Swallow. Are you keen on any of them?
I am leaning towards A. Swallow because I think he has less competition in the middle with North Melbourne as opposed to Griffen who has to contend with Ward, Greene and a few other of the young guns.
Secondly, Geary or Newnes or neither. Initially I was all over Newnes but I am still not sure at that price he can become a Premium. Geary showed alot of promise before being injured and I guess is better priced to take a risk with. Or do I just leave the Saints players alone. Also looking at McMillan but just struggling to fill remaining defensive positions.
Any thoughts?
G'day Slammer,
I will admit I am biased. I've never been a Griffen fan, and I agree with you, he has a lot of competition at GWS now. I also have never had A Swallow out of my team, he has been sitting anywhere between M4 and M7
in all of the iterations of my team. I think he is the best valued Mid that is likely to fill a M7/8 role this season. It's easy to get carried away with Geary in this difficult Def season. Priced at 61.8, and scored at around 80 the last time he had an uninterrupted season, coupled with the Saints having two vacancies in their Midfield has some people thinking "how can I lose?!". Especially after he posted a 152 in NAB1. My problems with him are many. I don't think he is the answer or the future of the St Kilda Midfield. The Saints have a few young guys that are showing promise, that they'd be better served getting some good Midfield experience into, rather than Geary. He is nearly 27, and has played 100 games, that usually means, that other than a potential spike season, his Expected Scoring Pattern is pretty much set. his 152 in NAB1 came on the back of 25 possessions, only 9 contested, and a Dis Eff of only 68%, 1 tackle, 1 goal and no clearances. While we all know the make up of a SC score is more complicated than just looking at key stats, they are a great indicator, and you don't need to be a SC veteran realise, that that 152 is a hollow score. Looking at those numbers, you'd normally expect something around 100-110, not a 150+. He buttered that up with a more typical for Geary 23 possession (4 contested, no goals, Dis Eff 74%) 79. When you look at those 2 games, which score is more likely to get repeated during the season? In 2012 Geary averaged 73.6 (20 games), 17.6 possessions (6 contested) and 83% TOG, in 2013 his numbers were 79.9 (21 games), 17.6 possessions (5.2 contested) and 88% TOG, in 2014 he averaged 68.4 (7 games), 16.4 posessions (5 contested) and 76% TOG. Looking at those seasons we see some consistency:
2012 - 21.2 poss/100%TOG, 88.7 SC/100%TOG, 4.2 SC/possession.
2013 - 20.0 poss/100%TOG, 90.8 SC/100%TOG, 4.5 SC/possession.
2014 - 21.6 poss/100%TOG, 90.0 SC/100%TOG, 4.2 SC/possession.
It's pretty consistent, isn't it. His ESP is set, and outside of a spike season, and maybe 5 or 10% benefit from some extra Mid time this season, why should we expect anything greatly different, or sufficiently different to be a Def Keeper, this season? He's not the future of the St Kilda Midfield, and I think it would be detrimental to their long term future if they played him like he is the future. Yes, with Ross and Ray down as well, that created even more opportunity, but I'm still not confident he benefits enough. I would be quite surprised if he doesn't make some dollars for those that take him, but that's not enough for me. He won't make enough, or score enough. While Newnes is considerably more expensive than Geary, his ESP is not set, he has upside, and is considered somewhat to be a future regular Mid player. Despite the price advantage to Geary, I would have Newnes over him, and I give him more hope of making a Def Keeper level than Geary.
I'm not sold on Macmillan yet either, but once again, I'd risk him before Geary. I watched quite a bit of the Nth V Haw NAB game, and I didn't see MacM do that much that made me sit up and take notice. Has he just replaced Atley as the North player everyone says will step up, and break out this season? Quite possibly. Once again, should increase his price, but I'm not sold on his potential to achieve Def Keeper level.
I will admit I am biased. I've never been a Griffen fan, and I agree with you, he has a lot of competition at GWS now. I also have never had A Swallow out of my team, he has been sitting anywhere between M4 and M7
in all of the iterations of my team. I think he is the best valued Mid that is likely to fill a M7/8 role this season. It's easy to get carried away with Geary in this difficult Def season. Priced at 61.8, and scored at around 80 the last time he had an uninterrupted season, coupled with the Saints having two vacancies in their Midfield has some people thinking "how can I lose?!". Especially after he posted a 152 in NAB1. My problems with him are many. I don't think he is the answer or the future of the St Kilda Midfield. The Saints have a few young guys that are showing promise, that they'd be better served getting some good Midfield experience into, rather than Geary. He is nearly 27, and has played 100 games, that usually means, that other than a potential spike season, his Expected Scoring Pattern is pretty much set. his 152 in NAB1 came on the back of 25 possessions, only 9 contested, and a Dis Eff of only 68%, 1 tackle, 1 goal and no clearances. While we all know the make up of a SC score is more complicated than just looking at key stats, they are a great indicator, and you don't need to be a SC veteran realise, that that 152 is a hollow score. Looking at those numbers, you'd normally expect something around 100-110, not a 150+. He buttered that up with a more typical for Geary 23 possession (4 contested, no goals, Dis Eff 74%) 79. When you look at those 2 games, which score is more likely to get repeated during the season? In 2012 Geary averaged 73.6 (20 games), 17.6 possessions (6 contested) and 83% TOG, in 2013 his numbers were 79.9 (21 games), 17.6 possessions (5.2 contested) and 88% TOG, in 2014 he averaged 68.4 (7 games), 16.4 posessions (5 contested) and 76% TOG. Looking at those seasons we see some consistency:2012 - 21.2 poss/100%TOG, 88.7 SC/100%TOG, 4.2 SC/possession.
2013 - 20.0 poss/100%TOG, 90.8 SC/100%TOG, 4.5 SC/possession.
2014 - 21.6 poss/100%TOG, 90.0 SC/100%TOG, 4.2 SC/possession.
It's pretty consistent, isn't it. His ESP is set, and outside of a spike season, and maybe 5 or 10% benefit from some extra Mid time this season, why should we expect anything greatly different, or sufficiently different to be a Def Keeper, this season? He's not the future of the St Kilda Midfield, and I think it would be detrimental to their long term future if they played him like he is the future. Yes, with Ross and Ray down as well, that created even more opportunity, but I'm still not confident he benefits enough. I would be quite surprised if he doesn't make some dollars for those that take him, but that's not enough for me. He won't make enough, or score enough. While Newnes is considerably more expensive than Geary, his ESP is not set, he has upside, and is considered somewhat to be a future regular Mid player. Despite the price advantage to Geary, I would have Newnes over him, and I give him more hope of making a Def Keeper level than Geary.
I'm not sold on Macmillan yet either, but once again, I'd risk him before Geary. I watched quite a bit of the Nth V Haw NAB game, and I didn't see MacM do that much that made me sit up and take notice. Has he just replaced Atley as the North player everyone says will step up, and break out this season? Quite possibly. Once again, should increase his price, but I'm not sold on his potential to achieve Def Keeper level.
Last edited:
- Joined
- 6 Jan 2013
- Messages
- 19,074
- Likes
- 80,340
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
Hi Rowsus.
The spot I am having the most trouble with at the moment is R2. I have Nic Nat at R1. I had Leuey at R2 for a while but his NAB Showing with Martin in the same side has turned me off selecting him.
I am not confident on going for a 'set and forget' combo in the ruck as I would like to see how the new SC ruck scoring will affect the premium rucks.
So my question to you is aside from Leuenberger who do you think is the best option for R2 between 200-450k and why?
Also, as an aside. If I was to go with a Nic Nat/200-450k ruck setup, do you think it would be ok to go without ruck cover in the forward line, at least to start the season? My plan would be to bring in a RUC/FWD link in the forwards asap.
Cheers.
The spot I am having the most trouble with at the moment is R2. I have Nic Nat at R1. I had Leuey at R2 for a while but his NAB Showing with Martin in the same side has turned me off selecting him.
I am not confident on going for a 'set and forget' combo in the ruck as I would like to see how the new SC ruck scoring will affect the premium rucks.
So my question to you is aside from Leuenberger who do you think is the best option for R2 between 200-450k and why?
Also, as an aside. If I was to go with a Nic Nat/200-450k ruck setup, do you think it would be ok to go without ruck cover in the forward line, at least to start the season? My plan would be to bring in a RUC/FWD link in the forwards asap.
Cheers.
Last edited:
While I do not disagree with your analysis of Geary, there is an implicit assumption that I am not sure about Rowsus - that the Saints will do what is best for the long term, rather than look for a (possible) short term benefit. In a sensitivity analysis the variable would probably not lead you to a different conclusion, but it is an assumption and not a given.
Hey Rowsus once again just like to thank you for this thread and the effort you put into every post. Your answers are just brilliant to read and the statistical data to back them up fascinating.
Now question time. If you had to rank the top 5 most expensive mids (Ablett, Rocky, Pendles, Fyfe and Selwood), in what order would you do it when you take into account scoring history, price and importance to our teams?
I have Ablett and Rocky locked due to their ridiculous ceilings but really unsure where to go with the others. Pendles is Pendles but I can't see him hurting me as much as not say, not having Fyfe who probably has the most potential. I'll probably go with 3 of them but keep changing it up.
Also as a second part to the question, I know that stats and history tell us otherwise but can you really see, barring injury, any of these 5 not being top 8 mids at seasons end?
Cheers
Now question time. If you had to rank the top 5 most expensive mids (Ablett, Rocky, Pendles, Fyfe and Selwood), in what order would you do it when you take into account scoring history, price and importance to our teams?
I have Ablett and Rocky locked due to their ridiculous ceilings but really unsure where to go with the others. Pendles is Pendles but I can't see him hurting me as much as not say, not having Fyfe who probably has the most potential. I'll probably go with 3 of them but keep changing it up.
Also as a second part to the question, I know that stats and history tell us otherwise but can you really see, barring injury, any of these 5 not being top 8 mids at seasons end?
Cheers
Last edited:
- Joined
- 18 Sep 2014
- Messages
- 848
- Likes
- 493
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
Hi Aneil915,
I do remember writing that, but can't find it either.
Looking at it in roundish numbers, you hopefully start your team with at least 12 Keepers, leaving you 10 Upgrades to complete your team. Not all upgrades can be achieved with a one-up-one down type trade, ie 2 trades to achieve the Upgrade. Let's assume you can make 5 that way, and 5 end up with 3 trades to achieve. That's 15 downgrades, and 10 Upgrade trades right there! That leaves you with 5 for injury cover. We used to think 30 trades was a lot, but if you want to complete your team with close to the best 22 possible, then 30 is what is required. In the good old days, with 20 and 22 trades, it was nearly impossible to complete your team, without nearly every line having "compromised" selections filling the last spot or two on each line.
I do remember writing that, but can't find it either.
Looking at it in roundish numbers, you hopefully start your team with at least 12 Keepers, leaving you 10 Upgrades to complete your team. Not all upgrades can be achieved with a one-up-one down type trade, ie 2 trades to achieve the Upgrade. Let's assume you can make 5 that way, and 5 end up with 3 trades to achieve. That's 15 downgrades, and 10 Upgrade trades right there! That leaves you with 5 for injury cover. We used to think 30 trades was a lot, but if you want to complete your team with close to the best 22 possible, then 30 is what is required. In the good old days, with 20 and 22 trades, it was nearly impossible to complete your team, without nearly every line having "compromised" selections filling the last spot or two on each line.
Rowsus do you have an opinion on starting either defenders or forwards that have a duel status in the midfield?
I have always planned by a rule that there are plenty of good mids so if a player has duel status (DEF/MID or FOR/MID) he is more valuable as a forward or DEF (making sure that I have a rookie MID with duel status to allow some flexibility) ...... but I am starting to rethink this.
I am seeing a few decent rookie forwards and am considering starting Delidio as a MID and planning that once a forward rookie is ready I will swap Delidio and upgrade the forward rookie to a MID.
It has been a long pre season and maybe I had it right in the first place (never play them as mids) and am now starting to over think!!
I have always planned by a rule that there are plenty of good mids so if a player has duel status (DEF/MID or FOR/MID) he is more valuable as a forward or DEF (making sure that I have a rookie MID with duel status to allow some flexibility) ...... but I am starting to rethink this.
I am seeing a few decent rookie forwards and am considering starting Delidio as a MID and planning that once a forward rookie is ready I will swap Delidio and upgrade the forward rookie to a MID.
It has been a long pre season and maybe I had it right in the first place (never play them as mids) and am now starting to over think!!
Hi Ben,
it's something I'm working on for my own team right now. I can't quite make up my mind if I go a traditional road with Goldy + a lower priced commodity to upgrade later, or if we will see a dramatic fall in Ruck output/prices, and so to go with possibly 2 Rucks that need upgrading, once the prices have compressed. The problem with the 2nd option is having to find 2 Rucks that will increase in value, or at the very least if the prices really drop, just hold their price.
There is no doubt some teams are easier for Rucks to score against than others. Both Melbourne and St Kilda have had periods in the last 2 seasons where they regularly gave up 120+ scores to opposition Rucks. The table below is based on 2014 numbers only. Below each team is the number of times they gave up 110+ scores last season, and what the average of those 110+ scores were. This is useful to identify which teams can give up the big scores. The teams in bold red gave up 110+ scores 6 or more times last season. The final number in blue indicates how many times that team plays one of the bold red teams in the first 10 Rounds.
From the table, it would look like the GC and Collingwood Rucks have the best early draw. Both teams have young(ish) Rucks that should still be on an upward plane, as far as their scoring/output is concerned. They also have Rucks that have the negative of sharing the workload, but that might just be unavoidable in the price range we are looking at.
GC start with: Melb, StK, Geel, GWS, Bris, Ade, WC, Coll to round 8.
This gives Smith and/or Nicholls every opportunity to start well, and increase or hold their price. Smith in particular is in a good area for Ruck Growth, having just turned 25, and having played 54 games. He had 10 games back at the end of 2014 after recovering from an ACL, so if his pre-season is ok, he should be good to go this season. He has shown the ability to score 100+ and 120+, which makes him a clear choice over Nicholls, the obvious problem being, do they just cut each others throat?
Collingwood start with: Bris, Ade, StK, Ess, Carl, Geel, Rich, GC in the first 8 rounds.
Grundy and Witts are still a bit younger than most Rucks are before they start improve their scoring/output, but also have more games and game time under their belt than most Rucks their age. Neither have shown as much as Smith, in regards as of ability to score high.
To be honest, I'm still none the wiser as to what direction I will take, though I am leaning towards Goldy + a cheaper option. That could easily change in the next 3 weeks though.
it's something I'm working on for my own team right now. I can't quite make up my mind if I go a traditional road with Goldy + a lower priced commodity to upgrade later, or if we will see a dramatic fall in Ruck output/prices, and so to go with possibly 2 Rucks that need upgrading, once the prices have compressed. The problem with the 2nd option is having to find 2 Rucks that will increase in value, or at the very least if the prices really drop, just hold their price.
There is no doubt some teams are easier for Rucks to score against than others. Both Melbourne and St Kilda have had periods in the last 2 seasons where they regularly gave up 120+ scores to opposition Rucks. The table below is based on 2014 numbers only. Below each team is the number of times they gave up 110+ scores last season, and what the average of those 110+ scores were. This is useful to identify which teams can give up the big scores. The teams in bold red gave up 110+ scores 6 or more times last season. The final number in blue indicates how many times that team plays one of the bold red teams in the first 10 Rounds.
From the table, it would look like the GC and Collingwood Rucks have the best early draw. Both teams have young(ish) Rucks that should still be on an upward plane, as far as their scoring/output is concerned. They also have Rucks that have the negative of sharing the workload, but that might just be unavoidable in the price range we are looking at.
GC start with: Melb, StK, Geel, GWS, Bris, Ade, WC, Coll to round 8.
This gives Smith and/or Nicholls every opportunity to start well, and increase or hold their price. Smith in particular is in a good area for Ruck Growth, having just turned 25, and having played 54 games. He had 10 games back at the end of 2014 after recovering from an ACL, so if his pre-season is ok, he should be good to go this season. He has shown the ability to score 100+ and 120+, which makes him a clear choice over Nicholls, the obvious problem being, do they just cut each others throat?
Collingwood start with: Bris, Ade, StK, Ess, Carl, Geel, Rich, GC in the first 8 rounds.
Grundy and Witts are still a bit younger than most Rucks are before they start improve their scoring/output, but also have more games and game time under their belt than most Rucks their age. Neither have shown as much as Smith, in regards as of ability to score high.
To be honest, I'm still none the wiser as to what direction I will take, though I am leaning towards Goldy + a cheaper option. That could easily change in the next 3 weeks though.
Good point, and quite true, not all teams can play to the long term view. I also doubt Geary is as good as some the Saints younger prospects, and the only advantage he has over them is a bit of experience, and an older, harder body. It is those 2 things that will buy him a bit of extra Mid time, but I still believe the younger players are probably already better at being Mids than Geary will ever be. For that reason and the long term view, I think Geary's Mid time will potentially be limited in most games this season.
Hey ZP, thanks for the kind words.
Assuming Ablett is right, and good to go, I rate them like this:
1 - Ablett - Greatest SC player of all time, and the exception to every rule.
2 - Rockliff - Best "ceiling" player to couple with Ablett for the Captaincy loophole in the last season and a third. Even better, we get to make Ablett VC in most games, if we have Rocky as our loophole plan player.
3 - Pendles - He's close to knocking of Swan as the 2nd best SC player of all time. Mr Consistency with his amazing 100+ score record.
4 - Selwood - In my mind the 4th Super Premium: Ablett, Swan, Pendles, Selwood then daylight. Those 4 have it all over the rest of the field for consistency over a number of years in producing high scores. Also beats Fyfe with his Rnd 13 bye for this season.
5 - Fyfe - Is piecing together a consistent record, but also consistently misses games, and has the Ross Lyon factor to deal with as well. I have no doubt he will appear as a must have player at some stage this season, but I'm also confident he will do one or two Things to really frustrate his SC Coaches too. Still one of the best and most exciting players to watch we've seen emerge in recent years, which makes him good to have in your team, and cheer his freakish quarters he has more consistently these days.
As you know we could argue back and forth on average vs aggregate points, which is why I prefer the PIT system. If we use a PIT70 system and look at those 5 players, I would think there is a good chance one, maybe two of them will miss the top 8 PIT70 Mids this season. I am basing this one the fact that given any group of 5 players, even the "best 5", and there is a strong chance one or more of them will miss more games than you hoped or planned on, or will produce scores in a section of the season, that will have you scratching your head as to why they are so low!
Assuming Ablett is right, and good to go, I rate them like this:
1 - Ablett - Greatest SC player of all time, and the exception to every rule.
2 - Rockliff - Best "ceiling" player to couple with Ablett for the Captaincy loophole in the last season and a third. Even better, we get to make Ablett VC in most games, if we have Rocky as our loophole plan player.
3 - Pendles - He's close to knocking of Swan as the 2nd best SC player of all time. Mr Consistency with his amazing 100+ score record.
4 - Selwood - In my mind the 4th Super Premium: Ablett, Swan, Pendles, Selwood then daylight. Those 4 have it all over the rest of the field for consistency over a number of years in producing high scores. Also beats Fyfe with his Rnd 13 bye for this season.
5 - Fyfe - Is piecing together a consistent record, but also consistently misses games, and has the Ross Lyon factor to deal with as well. I have no doubt he will appear as a must have player at some stage this season, but I'm also confident he will do one or two Things to really frustrate his SC Coaches too. Still one of the best and most exciting players to watch we've seen emerge in recent years, which makes him good to have in your team, and cheer his freakish quarters he has more consistently these days.
As you know we could argue back and forth on average vs aggregate points, which is why I prefer the PIT system. If we use a PIT70 system and look at those 5 players, I would think there is a good chance one, maybe two of them will miss the top 8 PIT70 Mids this season. I am basing this one the fact that given any group of 5 players, even the "best 5", and there is a strong chance one or more of them will miss more games than you hoped or planned on, or will produce scores in a section of the season, that will have you scratching your head as to why they are so low!
Last edited:
- Status