Opinion Questions For Rowsus

Drifter74 · 23 Apr 2015

Hi Rowsus,

Firstly thanks to yourself and everyone on this site for all their hard work. I don't usually ask for advice that involves crystal balling, so this one is more a structural/numbers issue.

I've got off to an OK start, which can mainly be put down to bullet dodging if anything. Have used 2 trades and have around 200k in the kitty.

My question is in regards to TBC sitting in my forward line. So far he's only come up against Pyke, Ceglar and Wood and has been less than impressive. I realise he should improve as fitness improves.

Obviously he's picked for coverage with Read at R3, but at what cost? If he continues to average 70 and I fail to upgrade him to probable 100 point premium, I feel like I'm losing 30 points a round for every week I dont need to cover a donut. For example if I go 5 rounds without needing ruck cover that's 150 points lost.

On top of that he'll only come in handy if NicNat or Goldy are named early to miss. If either is a late out, and TBC has already played I'll be unable to swing him in anyway. On top of that you'll need to keep a decent scoring F7 to bring on to the field to make it worthwhile.

On the flip side I'm more than happy with my ruck combo, and wouldn't want to sideways trade for missing a week or 2.

Other thought is to just upgrade TBC now, and target Ryder later on as a F6 especially with Lids, Bartel and Goddard for differing reasons not looking like the locks we thought they might be.

I see you've got Lycett for more than likely the same reason, so I'd be interested to hear your views.
Cheers.

Rowsus · 23 Apr 2015

Adrenaline said:

Hi adrenaline,
your right on both accounts. You have to keep pace with the teams in your League, particularly the better ones if you want a top 4 finish, and you have to show patience as well! So how do you keep pace, and show patience? There is really only one way. Efficient trading. Make every trade count.
Your decision seems to come down to a simple question. How desperate are you to get the Bont? No one can say with certainty he is a must have, that's a given. Even if plays well, then falls apart some time after the byes, he could be a bit problematic. Having said that, he could be a different version of last years D Swallow. I would think for a League player, the risk in not having him, is slightly greater than the risk of bringing him in. A lot depends on how you think your team sits in your League right now, on a player for player basis. If you think you have a strong team, you can block a POD against you by bringing Bont in, if you think your team is just a little off the pace, you can either close a POD against you by bringing him in, or explore the avenue of getting a POD against the teams you consider currently better than yours.
I'm not a fan of grabbing one game Rookies. It quite often leads to regrets. I don't mind culling a Rookie early, as long as it is to good use, so culling Clarke before he maxes out shouldn't be seen as a problem. Mind you, I would think he has around $100-$125k of growth left in him. Not many teams that haven't had injury problems are making upgrades right now, unless they kept cash in reserve. You have 14 Keepers, and I would think you are not losing ground if you don't trade this week. The other thing to keep in mind, is you are 2-0. Every win you register without trading, is nearly like getting an extra trade, as you can be sure most teams will be trading!

Rowsus · 23 Apr 2015

Alex_26 said:

Hey Alex,
I would be surprised if he could maintain a 95 average, but he should do ok in most of his next 5 games. My guess is he might finish the season around 90. There's arguments for both NicNat and Grundy. Grundy would appear to be less likely to miss games, and is cheaper. NicNat is more likely to turn into a good Keeper, and save you a trade. If you think you are facing another trade down the track, no matter which one you take, then Grundy might help you to an upgrade elsewhere a bit quicker.

Rowsus · 23 Apr 2015

SC FANATIC said:

Hey SCF, I'm well enough, and I hope you can say the same.
I certainly detailed in the pre-season, well before the NAB, my thoughts on Neale. His end run in 2014 was nothing short of superb. I had him pegged as a breakout candidate for 2015 from September last year, and I was quite keen to start him in 2015. I went a little cold on him, when I was hearing reports his running times were down on previous years, and further research showed he was a FTB (as Round 3 emphasised!), that usually scored better as the season progressed. In the last week before Round 1 I axed Neale, Hannebery and Heppell from my team. When Rocky went down, I explored a lot of options. I narrowed it down to getting one of my pre-season boys, Hannebery or Neale. I had actually decided on Hannebery, but Neale was going to allow me to reach Bontempelli in one simple trade in Round 3. So Neale it was. Since then I have decided to go without Bontempelli, so luck fell my way there, otherwise I'd have Hannebery, who is going ok as it is anyway. Round 3 comes, and Ablett has to go. I wanted a player I was comfortable in sticking my C on, and had a history of not missing too many games. In the end it was Sloane or Fyfe. Fyfe misses too many games, and Sloane scored 120+ in 40% of his last 25 games and was in a fraction of teams that Fyfe was in. Sloane it was, with V put straight on him.
When fixing a Yarran type, it is best to stick to the simple Up or Down rule. Upgrade him to the best Keeper you can reach, and if you can't reach a Keeper you want, downgrade him to the best money making option available. I doubt Hunt meets either description, and I doubt he can average over 90 across 18 or more games this season. He has already risen $50k, and has a B/E of 31, so his money making potential has nearly been halved already. He strikes me as, it was ok to start him, but don't trade him now type.
Mcgovern plays a very SC friendly game for a tall Def, and tall Defs are usually SC poison. The key to his scoring is intercept marks, and particularly contested intercept marks. 2 of his 3 scores so far this season fall into the outlier catagory, in that they are unlikely to be repeated. He won't take 12 marks in too many games (Rnd 1), and he certainly won't score at 9 points/disposal (rnd 3) too often either. With WC's dwindling tall stocks, particularly in Def, McGovern will have to sacrifice his own game for the good of the team a few times this season. Without those injuries, Mcgovern might have been a 95/game swing man. With those injuries, I think he may end up in the mid to high 80's.
If you are short on cash, take Yarran down to the best cash making option you don't have.

Rowsus · 23 Apr 2015

Rickwood said:

Spot on. Sportsbet pick 16 players they think will be the highest scoring players for the week, and offer odds on who will be the best.
Well done on Duke!

Rowsus · 23 Apr 2015

Ben's Beasts said:

Hiya BB,
I'm not sold on it, but I can understand where you are coming from.
I guess I'm a little biased, in that I have decided to persevere with Newnes, and decided to not get Bontempelli. Like many, I expect Newnes to improve his decision making/DE%, and start scoring better soon. The Bont is just too popular for my liking, and has a bit of history against him. The funny thing is, if he was in 10% of teams, I might have him, but he will probably be in 50% of teams after this week, and that tips the risk/reward scale against him for mine. If he bombs or gets injured, I am another trade behind those that started him, and those that never had him. I'm already 3 Ablett/Rocky/Bartel trades behind many, so I don't want to risk another, on a player history says is less than a 50% chance to succeed, but is/will be in 50% of teams.
Having said all that, you are a chance to fix 2 problems in one trade, so there is no way I am going to say don't do it, just that it's not for me.
Good luck

Rowsus · 23 Apr 2015

Prochard said:

Let's use my new toy (the new Ruck thread) as a prediction tool, just for fun!
As McC did in post #2 in the ruck thread, let's apply the relevant factor to each of their scores, and get an average, and then see what that average says they will score, by applying the Round 4 factor. I must note, there is a bit failed "loop" theory in using this as a prediction tool.

Mumford: (98/1.13 + 108/.82 + 61/.89)/3 = 95.7 => 95.7 x 1.29 = 123
Goldstein: (100/.93 + 154/1.05 + 110/.91)/3 = 125.0 => 125.0 x 1.03 = 129

If Mumford scores 123 on his B/E of 170 he will drop around $20,700 in price to $550,400
If Goldstein scores 129 on his B/E of 83 he will rise around $20,200 in price to $604,900

The rough formula for their price difference next week is:

$51,900 + ((Goldy's score - Mummy's score) x 440) = cost of Mummy to Goldy +/- $600.

Rowsus · 23 Apr 2015

Saintellica said:

Hi Saint,
I must admit, I was a bit gun shy with Malceski coming into the season. He had only scored at a rate we'd be happy with, given his buy in price, 3 times in the last 10 seasons. That seemed like bad odds to me. With his B/E of 192, I'd jump ship before all his trade value disappears.
I think the biggest problem is, he's not playing with a strong Defensive unit, that is so well drilled and disciplined, that it can cover a Malceski type, if he sneaks up the ground a bit. I think he is being made to play a more disciplined, than creative role, and that is forced upon him by the lack of personal around him. Imagine if he ran off, like he did at Sydney often, and the ball rebounds quickly, and his man kicks a goal or two. They would be howling for his blood. When he did that at Sydney, they were disciplined enough to pick up his man. They were in the best 2 or 3 drilled Defence units in the game. GC would appear to be a long way from that, hence the different approach to his game.

Rowsus · 23 Apr 2015

THCLT said:

Happy to help THCLT,
If you're doing a like for like on Bartel, I'm not sure where Lycett enters that equation. The loss of Bartel's points is being covered by his replacement. I think if you trade Lycett, then you need to commit to trading Mummy out, if he misses a game, unless you are 90% sure it is only one game he is missing. It's risky starting Ruck cover and Mummy, then dropping it this early in the season, but it might pay off to being a good move in the long run. It's a tough call. I'd want to be getting something good by trading Lycett out, if I was doing it.

Rowsus · 23 Apr 2015

Drifter74 said:

Hi Drifter, I'm glad you are enjoying the site.
I understand what you are saying about Bellchambers spot costing you points, but I think you need to look at it a bit differently. He's averaging 71, and has a B/E of 58 and this week plays possibly the easiest team for a ruck to score against. Given his price is just over $300k, he is actually returning, point-wise, a bit more than what you paid for, even if it is lower than you hoped for. The better question you need to ask is, what better use can I put this $200k towards? I'd be happily surprised if TBC is the biggest problem in your team, that that $200k can help fix. If it is, I say have at it, and boost your Fwd line. But if there is something you can do this week that fixes a bigger problem, or next week, that gives you a better upgrade, I'd keep TBC. I'd especially keep him this week, given the 3 games Collingwood have played so far, have seen 2 opposition Ruckmen score their best score for the season, and another score their 2nd best.
I really would only move on him this week, if you can't see any better use for that money this week, or next week.
Nice record you have in your signature there, I hope you can go top 100 this season!

Zim^zuM · 23 Apr 2015

Hi Rowsus. First time poster lol. Too late to bring in Oxley? Obviously have missed the $75k price rise. Is now spending that extra $75k plus a trade worth the extra cash generation? Or just save that trade and concede defeat and maybe use it to sideways Griffen. He is bothering me, but trading a non injured player also bothers me

Drifter74 · 23 Apr 2015

Rowsus said:

Others might disagree but apart from Newnes, I do think TBC is the biggest problem in my side hence the thought of upgrading with the spare cash but....

....your point about holding the 200k for an upgrade is a more than valid one. Whilst I might be losing a few points now, it can be easily gained back with say an early Vanderberg to mid premium for example or bringing another back mid. How long can I really keep rolling the dice with Ox/Mc/Saad at D4,5,6? If one hits the wall and I have no cash, what then?

I guess watching first hand TBC get beaten by that ruck colossus in Cameron Wood had me questioning his worth, but you've convinced me to hold. As usual I'm looking at this week, and not focusing on the bigger picture.

I hope I can go Top 100 too, but it's getting harder. I've had time in there mid year but always find a way to undo my start. 2011 was my best chance after nailing the starting team, only trading once in the first 6 weeks (Hibberd to Curnow), but then because of only being my second year I had no idea how to hold nerve and upgrade to a premium side. I got sucked in by bringing in "place holders", such as the early Krakourer to JRoo trade after his concussion rather than aiming for the Top 6-8 in each position. From memory JRoo went on to average around 80 odd, so I sideways traded him to LeCras who had an easy draw and he ended up doing the same!

Cant remember exactly what happened in 2013, but I do remember an infamous Franklin to Ibbotson move prior (or perhaps after

) a Saturday lunch that completely stuffed up my structure late in the year As well as blowing my last trade I was rewarded with a pair of 50's and then an injury from Garrick and had to stumble to the line with Mitchell as a M8 as well as other problems.

Last year missing again was a mixture of bonehead trading (Caddy to Merrett for example), missing late out's whilst out (Mumford Round 4, Pendles 0 as Captain, after VC JPK was subbed off with hammy etc), and the end of year carnage. Holding Murphy and Pavlich and not jumping to Rockliff or Gray was another move (or lack of) that starting costing 50-60 points a week.

We've all got our horror stories, but sometimes I look back at my trades and wonder how I managed to get as close as I do....

I've always tried to lurk around forums and take the advice given to others and make it relevant to my side, but I'm thinking every now and then I need a second set of eyes to be able to look at something at smack me around a bit to stop me pulling the trigger, so thanks again.

dyii · 23 Apr 2015

Hey Rowsus,

Been reading up on the 'champions league discussion thread' and learnt some good advice about not picking PODs for the sake of it. For this reason, Bartel>Swan is pretty much locked in, and will pick him over Motlop.

Now I'm left with a dilemma of getting in Sloane/Gray. With my cash at hand, I'm more inclined to pick up Sloane as I think he'll be top 6 mids this year, but I'm not sure how. I have two underperforming premos in Goddard and Griffen but have been told not to trade out either this week.. Cooney out for three weeks = more mid time for Goddard? Griffen vs Gold Coast historically scores well, so it doesn't make much sense trading him out this week either.

With no rookies/midpricers to upgrade I don't see really how else I can get Sloane in.. would love some advice.

Cheers mate!

THCLT · 23 Apr 2015

Rowsus said:

Sorry Rowsus as I was not clear in my post with regards to the Lycett scenario. Indeed, Bartel will be turned into a forward premium. However, I was trying to compare running Lycett at F4 as ruck cover versus running a genuine premium at F4 (and losing my ruck cover). Lycett has been underwhelming so far and coupled with a struggling WCE outfit decimated with injuries, I think that he'll be more a 70-75 player which is about 15-20 points lower than what I had hoped at the start of the season. I can turn Lycett into any MID premium, probably Sloane at this stage.

The question that is STILL bugging me is...Mumford or Lycett OUT? Which will benefit my team in the long run? I acknowledged that they both have their pros and cons. I think there's only 3 options available, team link available if you want to have a squiz.

1. Mumford OUT, moving Lycett to R2: Pocket the 170K difference over trading Lycett which allows me to bring in 2 MID premiums by the start of round 8. The points difference from running Mumford v Lycett at R2 is sweetened by the fact I'll have a 6 premiums MID by round 8. I can live with Lycett mediocre score at R2 for the meantime and deal with it as necessary. Obviously, I'm deviating from my initial ruck cover strategy but the potential increased scoring output for my team cannot be ignored.

2. Lycett OUT, leaving Mumford at R2: Lose my ruck cover and running an injury prone R2 with no guarantee of premium output. Lack of funds generated will delay my MID upgrade. Potential positive is Mumford may stay on the park for the season and be a top 3 ruckman saving me a trade in the process, history would suggests that this is unlikely to happen.

3. Stick FAT with Mumford & Lycett: Ignore their performances to date and hope that they will come good eventually. Wait for things to happen rather than 'pre-empting' what will happen.

I must admit that after reading through my options, Option 1 gives my team the greatest potential going forward provided that Lycett delivers on his potential (I'm happy enough with 70-75 as this won't be too far short from other R2 alternatives) and doesn't get axed due to poor form. Thank goodness I already have Goldy at R1 as this is giving me much comfort at the moment.

I've been guilty in that past of sitting back and 'meandering' through the season without going early on those tough bold 50/50 decisions. I've had to deal with Ablett, Rockliff and Bartel so surely something good is just around the corner.

Thinking aloud...Lycett at R2 versus Mumford at R2...risk versus reward...which one has the lowest associated risk?

Lycett: Risk - may continue to underwhelmed or worst gets dropped and needs trading; Reward - 6th MID premium by round 8
Mumford: Risk - injury, lose trade value over the next 3 rounds; Reward - may surprise and stay on the park, top 3 ruckman

I think keeping Mumford will only benefit if I have ruck cover, so I guess this rules out Option 2 from above.

Am I over thinking this whole scenario? You can be honest here...

Rowsus · 23 Apr 2015

Zim^zuM said:

Hi Zim,
in a situation like this, I think you need to forget what he was, and look at what he is.
You can look back, and say WOW! He went up $75k last week, and I missed it, while nearly everyone else got it!
Or
You can look at what he has become. He is a player under $200k, who has the best B/E in the competition (-94), and has scored 116 and 97 in his last 2 games.
If you didn't know anything about Rounds 1 and 2, and were just entering the competition now, would you even hesitate in trading him in? Of course not! So no, it is nowhere near too late to get him!
As to Griffen. Damned if you do, and damned if you don't. If you are really in doubt as to keep him, or chop him, I think you have to keep him. Siding on the decision that doesn't burn a trade is the best idea, if you really can't decide. Having said that, you could easily decide, nope, enough's enough, out you go. I would temper it by saying you'd need to find a suitable replacement, or Cash him out to a Rookie, don't sideways him to a speculative pick!

..... of course, you could always: Griffen out, Saad up to Mids, Oxley in!

Rowsus · 23 Apr 2015

Drifter74 said:

Others might disagree but apart from Newnes, I do think TBC is the biggest problem in my side hence the thought of upgrading with the spare cash but....

....your point about holding the 200k for an upgrade is a more than valid one. Whilst I might be losing a few points now, it can be easily gained back with say an early Vanderberg to mid premium for example or bringing another back mid. How long can I really keep rolling the dice with Ox/Mc/Saad at D4,5,6? If one hits the wall and I have no cash, what then?

I guess watching first hand TBC get beaten by that ruck colossus in Cameron Wood had me questioning his worth, but you've convinced me to hold. As usual I'm looking at this week, and not focusing on the bigger picture.

I hope I can go Top 100 too, but it's getting harder. I've had time in there mid year but always find a way to undo my start. 2011 was my best chance after nailing the starting team, only trading once in the first 6 weeks (Hibberd to Curnow), but then because of only being my second year I had no idea how to hold nerve and upgrade to a premium side. I got sucked in by bringing in "place holders", such as the early Krakourer to JRoo trade after his concussion rather than aiming for the Top 6-8 in each position. From memory JRoo went on to average around 80 odd, so I sideways traded him to LeCras who had an easy draw and he ended up doing the same!

Cant remember exactly what happened in 2013, but I do remember an infamous Franklin to Ibbotson move prior (or perhaps after

) a Saturday lunch that completely stuffed up my structure late in the year As well as blowing my last trade I was rewarded with a pair of 50's and then an injury from Garrick and had to stumble to the line with Mitchell as a M8 as well as other problems.

Last year missing again was a mixture of bonehead trading (Caddy to Merrett for example), missing late out's whilst out (Mumford Round 4, Pendles 0 as Captain, after VC JPK was subbed off with hammy etc), and the end of year carnage. Holding Murphy and Pavlich and not jumping to Rockliff or Gray was another move (or lack of) that starting costing 50-60 points a week.

We've all got our horror stories, but sometimes I look back at my trades and wonder how I managed to get as close as I do....

I've always tried to lurk around forums and take the advice given to others and make it relevant to my side, but I'm thinking every now and then I need a second set of eyes to be able to look at something at smack me around a bit to stop me pulling the trigger, so thanks again.

Thanks for sharing, Drifter.
There are many here that enjoy reading stories of past top performers in SC, whether it be stories of their successes or failures, it is always good reading!

Rowsus · 23 Apr 2015

dyii said:

Hey dyii,
the CL thread is a goldmine of good advice, and they are spot on. forcing a POD, for a POD's sake is wrong, and will fail way more often than it succeeds. Having said that, trusting your instincts/research/gut and bringing one in, with good cause is a different story. Having also said that, following the History over Potential rule, Swan is a clear choice over Motlop. I still think Motlop is worth a risk, for those that like rolling the dice on a decent POD, but I would only take him over Swan, if I was of the opinion that Swan's aging body won't hold up, and Motlop won't do anything more silly for the rest of the season! It's interesting looking at how some players bounce back from disciplinary matters. Greene last season, Walters a few years ago. There might be something to it, but how long until they lapse into old habits again?
If you decide to axe one of Griffin/Goddard, I'd axe Griffen. He has further ground to make up to be considered a successful Midfield pick, than Goddard has to make up to be considered a successful Forward pick.
Good luck, I hope you jump the right way...... twice!

Rowsus · 23 Apr 2015

THCLT said:

Sorry Rowsus as I was not clear in my post with regards to the Lycett scenario. Indeed, Bartel will be turned into a forward premium. However, I was trying to compare running Lycett at F4 as ruck cover versus running a genuine premium at F4 (and losing my ruck cover). Lycett has been underwhelming so far and coupled with a struggling WCE outfit decimated with injuries, I think that he'll be more a 70-75 player which is about 15-20 points lower than what I had hoped at the start of the season. I can turn Lycett into any MID premium, probably Sloane at this stage.

The question that is STILL bugging me is...Mumford or Lycett OUT? Which will benefit my team in the long run? I acknowledged that they both have their pros and cons. I think there's only 3 options available, team link available if you want to have a squiz.

1. Mumford OUT, moving Lycett to R2: Pocket the 170K difference over trading Lycett which allows me to bring in 2 MID premiums by the start of round 8. The points difference from running Mumford v Lycett at R2 is sweetened by the fact I'll have a 6 premiums MID by round 8. I can live with Lycett mediocre score at R2 for the meantime and deal with it as necessary. Obviously, I'm deviating from my initial ruck cover strategy but the potential increased scoring output for my team cannot be ignored.

2. Lycett OUT, leaving Mumford at R2: Lose my ruck cover and running an injury prone R2 with no guarantee of premium output. Lack of funds generated will delay my MID upgrade. Potential positive is Mumford may stay on the park for the season and be a top 3 ruckman saving me a trade in the process, history would suggests that this is unlikely to happen.

3. Stick FAT with Mumford & Lycett: Ignore their performances to date and hope that they will come good eventually. Wait for things to happen rather than 'pre-empting' what will happen.

I must admit that after reading through my options, Option 1 gives my team the greatest potential going forward provided that Lycett delivers on his potential (I'm happy enough with 70-75 as this won't be too far short from other R2 alternatives) and doesn't get axed due to poor form. Thank goodness I already have Goldy at R1 as this is giving me much comfort at the moment.

I've been guilty in that past of sitting back and 'meandering' through the season without going early on those tough bold 50/50 decisions. I've had to deal with Ablett, Rockliff and Bartel so surely something good is just around the corner.

Thinking aloud...Lycett at R2 versus Mumford at R2...risk versus reward...which one has the lowest associated risk?

Lycett: Risk - may continue to underwhelmed or worst gets dropped and needs trading; Reward - 6th MID premium by round 8
Mumford: Risk - injury, lose trade value over the next 3 rounds; Reward - may surprise and stay on the park, top 3 ruckman

I think keeping Mumford will only benefit if I have ruck cover, so I guess this rules out Option 2 from above.

Am I over thinking this whole scenario? You can be honest here...

Hi THCLT,
I don't think you are over thinking it, but reading between the lines, you have decided it is Mumford, you are just worried about regretting later. If that is the case, I say full steam ahead, and damn the regrets! The worst case scenario is that it costs you a trade and a few points, the best case scenario, you look back and see it as a turning point in your season.
Funnily enough, it might be a turning point one way or another!

THCLT · 23 Apr 2015

Rowsus said:

Thanks Rowsus for taking the time, I have another 48hrs to mull over this one...I like how you took me 'round a full circle with that last comment.

jarrad_ · 23 Apr 2015

Alex_26 said:

the fact that witts hasnt played yet is no doubt impacting grundys scoring

it will be interesting if they could potentially be a cox-nicnat

Opinion Questions For Rowsus

Drifter74

Rising Star Winner

Rowsus

Statistician

Rowsus

Statistician

Rowsus

Statistician

Rowsus

Statistician

Rowsus

Statistician

Rowsus

Statistician

Rowsus

Statistician

Rowsus

Statistician

Rowsus

Statistician

Zim^zuM

Drifter74

Rising Star Winner

dyii

THCLT

BBL|05 Winner

Rowsus

Statistician

Rowsus

Statistician

Rowsus

Statistician

Rowsus

Statistician

THCLT

BBL|05 Winner

jarrad_