Opinion Todd Goldstein $695,100 - Trust Or Trap?

Rowsus · 14 Dec 2015

Season - 21 games at 128.8 (2014 21 games at 106.9)
MCG - 2 games at 144.5 (MCG wins 1 at 155.0, MCG losses 1 at 134.0)
Etihad - 10 games at 133.8 (Etihad wins 6 at 149.7, Etihad losses 4 at 110.0)
Simonds - 1 games at 154.0 (Simonds wins 1 at 154.0, Simonds losses 0 at 0.0)
Blundstone - 3 games at 116.7 (Blundstone wins 3 at 116.7, Blundstone losses 0 at 0.0)
Interstate - 5 games at 114.8 (Interstate wins 2 at 140.5, Interstate losses 3 at 97.7)
Wins - 13 games at 141.4
Losses - 8 games at 108.4

Of note...
It's rather a remarkable table, isn't it? 10 x 130+ scores! He averaged 137 in Victoria (151 in 8 wins, and 115 in 5 losses), and he averaged 116 outside of Victoria (126 in 5 wins, and 98 in 3 losses). I think it is absolute folly to hope he can go close to a 130 average again in 2016. There are just so many history factors against him doing it. So the question becomes, what do you think he will average? And is he worth paying top dollar for if he averages that? Even if he averages 115, you need to weigh up a potential saved trade, against the points you gained over having him in front of another Ruck, and then toss in the around $130k you saved by bringing Goldy in later. It's a tough equation to work out! Goldstein plays 3 of his first 5 games Interstate: Rnd 2 Brisbane at the Gabba, Rnd 3 Melbourne at Blundstone, Gold Coast at Metricon. Their other 6 games in the first 9 are all at Etihad. Then from Rounds 10 to 16 they play 4 Interstate, and 2 at Etihad. So in their first 15 games it 7 Interstate, and 8 at Etihad!
For those interested in the numbers:
Small grounds 12 at 132.7 (150 in 7 wins, 108 in 5 losses)
Medium grounds 4 at 118.5 (140 in 2 wins, 97 in 2 losses)
Large grounds 5 at 127.8 (126 in 4 wins, 134 in 1 loss)
Their Draw is: SMLSMSSSSSLSSS[bye]MSSSSLLS
Interstate games

So what is this history I am talking about?
Here is a table of every player to ever average 120+ in a season in SC.
The table is sorted alphabetically, and shows what age they were when the season started.

In this table of 23 players, we can see only 4 players have recorded more than one 120+ season: Ablett (7), Swan (4), Pendlebury (4), Fyfe (2). Straight away we can see, that if Goldy is to go 120+ again, ever, he is joining pretty elite company. If you look at how these players have faired since they recorded their first 120+ season, they have played between them a further 120 seasons. Those 120 seasons average out at 104. In those 120 seasons there are:
13 seasons that were 120+ (the 4 players listed above)
32 seasons that were between 110 and 120
36 seasons that were between 100 and 110
39 seasons that were below 100
The 21 players that have recorded a 120+ season then recorded a season below 120 have averaged a drop of 16/game.
Looking at all 34 seasons where a player has averaged 120+, then played a subsequent season, the average drop is just under 10/game.
Bottom line, 120+, there are 19 one timers, and 4 multiples, and the multiples are the elite of the elite Midfielders.

Since 2007, how has the number 1 Ruck fared the following season?
2007 Cox 99 - top Ruck again 112
2008 Cox 112 - top average 111, but 13th in aggregate (11 games)
2009 Cox (ave) 111, Clark (agg) 2063 - Cox 4th ave 88, Clark 13th agg 1384 (19 games)
2010 Sandilands 114 - 4th ave 111, 16th agg 1440 (13 games)
2011 Cox 122 - 4th ave 112, 1st agg 2470
2012 NicNat (ave) 114, Cox (agg) 2470 - NicNat 8th ave 96, Cox 3rd agg 2351
2013 Minson 114 - 9th ave 93, 6th agg 1959
2014 Jacobs 115 - 4th ave 107, 2nd agg 2267

It is possible that Goldy is about to embark on a Cox like domination of the Rucking tables, but even if he does, history suggests it is more likely to be a 115 ave, than a 120+ that will get him there. We can see from that list, not too many number one Rucks back it up from season to season.

Ricky Bobby · 14 Dec 2015

2015 was truly a bizar season for the rucks in SC. It started with the change to the ruck scoring for H/O's and the first few rounds saw very low SC scores and all sorts of noise from the SC community. Then (from memory) all "good" rucks started to score consistently better scores, but it wasn't clear as to why this was the case - was it due to an "unofficial" change in scoring methodology by Chanpion Data" ? I'm really not sure, but it wouldn't surprise me in the least if the SC scoring for rucks was "tweaked" down in 2016 to bring their relative scores back in line with historical treands. If this occurs, then Goldy may well be impacted harder than most others.

I haven't based this on any hard analysis, it's just a gut feeling I have

BC · 15 Dec 2015

Ricky Bobby said:

I can see that scoring dip happening again from the get go.
If mumford can stay on the park for the first 7 or so games he could be the same price as goldy pretty quick if the ruck scoring dip happens again from the get go.

freowho · 15 Dec 2015

Ricky Bobby said:

There were also teams that fell apart in the second half of the year because of injury and coaching panels looking for answers and experimenting. Geelong, GWS and Essendon gave up some pretty big scores to rucks.

couchPOTATO · 15 Dec 2015

Rowsus - the 120 plus table you posted under Goldy's stats was a great read, and reinforces that you have to factor in Goldy averaging around the 110 mark as a reasonably likely potential outcome when shelling out the big bucks for him from Rd1

Obviously time is a limiting factor but it would be great to see a larger set of data for 115 plus or 110 plus scorers if anyone cares to extend this great work

I am Cursed :( · 15 Dec 2015

Rowsus said:

Not to poo poo your efforts, you do a lot of great work but there is no correlation between other players history and Todd Goldstein's 2016 campaign. Your breakdown of small / medium / large grounds actually contradicts the "gut feel" that he will drop off in 2016, at least early on in the season.

I appreciate what you are saying, it's hard to back it up over a prolonged period of time. Unless there are changes to the way they score rucks there is no reason he can't repeat 2016. I don't think he will, personally and I don't want to shell out $700k for him but I see nothing in those stats to explain why he can't replicate 2015. Gut feel obviously plays a huge part in Supercoach, so this one is going to be a tough call no matter what. As a statistician though, you know you can find stats for just about anything. I'm sure you could find stats to prove he will go on to even greater heights in 2016!

Rowsus · 15 Dec 2015

I am Cursed :( said:

The numbers you quoted with his break up on small, medium and large grounds, followed by how is Draw looks, wasn't to illustrate that he couldn't repeat. It was more to give a complete view of what he did in 2015, and what he faces in 2016. I think his ground size break up, and his Draw would actually offer some hope to those keen on him, that he could go close to repeating his 2015 efforts. I still think history says he faces an uphill battle though, and a more reasonable expectation is something like 110-115.

As to other players histories being irrelevant, I believe you have no choice but to look at other players histories, otherwise your sample pool on the one player is way too small.
Think of it in these terms. When Beams had his 123 in 2012, JPK had his 120 in 2012, Watson scored his 121 in 2012 and Goddard had his 130 in 2010, a great many Coaches had them pegged as 120+ players in the coming year/s. History shows they have failed to achieve 120 ever again. It helps serve as a predictive tool, and should have forewarned us, that Selwood really is/was a 115-118 player, and that he hit what was probably going to be a career high in 2014 with his 121. He had enough history to support the fact he wasn't really a 120 player, and the performances of those before him should have helped confirm that, as they prove how hard it is to repeat a 120+ season.
Some will say it would have predicted that Fyfe wouldn't back up his 122 from 2014. I would say that was the safer assumption coming into 2015, with the glaring difference being, Fyfe had played well under 100 games (as had Beams) coming into 2014, and was still setting his scoring pattern, and Selwood had had 5 solid seasons of 111-118 coming into his 121 in 2014.
It will happen at some stage, but the other thing of note is, that no player (yet!), who has ever had a 120+ season, then dropped below the 120 mark, has ever returned to the 120+ area again!
More things to note, possibly in regard to Ablett (though he has defied all SC rules), is the highest average returned by a player at the age of 31 is B Johnson in 2006 with 113. The highest average recorded by someone older than 31 is L Montagna's 111 in 2015 at age 32. Only S West (102/2007 and 102/2008) and B Harvey (101/2011, 104/2013 and 108/2014) have ever recorded 100+ seasons at the age off 33 or older.

Drew · 15 Dec 2015

Your analysis is spot on as always Rowsus but it left me wondering where do you see Goldy in relation to the other ruckman next year and is it worth paying overs even though you may not see him as 120+?

blue dreamer · 15 Dec 2015

Drew said:

This Drew is very concise, and a very good question.

One which many coaches will be asking themselves.

With very little personal research yet I admit to starting Goldy last year in one of my very few good decisions.

I think right now I will take sauce instead next year though as it does seem that Rucks in particular (although Rowsus' table shows it is true for other possies too) seem to find it hard to back up year on year.

Where do you see him in relation to other rucks yourself?

I am Cursed :( · 15 Dec 2015

blue dreamer said:

Well a 115 average for the season would leave him priced around $600k. Do you want to pay $700k for someone who you think will be worth $600k at seasons end? If you think he will maintain his score, or think he could do it in the first half of the season on the smaller grounds then he is a good prospect. If you think he will drop off, you are paying overs.

The more pertinent question is - is it worth to get him from the start and conserve a trade, or if you think he will decrease in value do you start someone like Leuenburger with a view to upgrade in 5-10 rounds.

With regard to your response Rowsus, I agree that the best predictor of future behavior is to look at the past. They also say records are made to be broken. My point is that I don't think there is much relevance to the history you have provided. 20 of the 23 players in your table are midfielders whose scores can be more heavily impacted by positional changes, role changes, other players around them. The only other ruck is Cox and his stats suggest he dropped off 10 ranking points the following season, which would still give Goldstein an average of 119 in 2016. Cox was also 30 when he had his 120+ average, Goldstein is only 26 which is prime time for the big men. Cox's second and third best seasons were ages 27 and 28.

I see where you are coming from I just think it's a bit of apples and oranges given he is a ruck and the rest are midfielders (excluding Bowden). The Kangaroos haven't lost much in the middle so he is hitting it down to the same guys as he was this year. If anything, his TOG will go up with the reduction in interchanges, meaning he is a strong chance to rest forward and kick more goals (he's already a proven goal kicking ruck).

So as I said, unless there are changes to the ruck interpretations in 2015 I don't see where he is losing 15 points per game. At least early in the season, all signs point to more of the same.

Anyway - I won't de-rail the thread. As you know the beautiful thing about statistics is that they can be interpreted a million different ways depending on the point you are trying to prove! It's great work all the same, that's just my 2 cents on Goldy.

Rowsus · 16 Dec 2015

Drew said:

blue dreamer said:

You could write pages on this, and still not cover it completely.
Some people see taking Goldy as a trade saving move. It's not necesaarily true, even if he does play the majority of games, and scores as one of the top 2 Rucks. It depends on how the player you would have taken instead of Goldy performs, AND what you did with the loose change. Say you followed blue dreamers lead, and took Jacobs. What if the $112,300 you saved on Jacobs over Goldy pushed one of your speculative or Mid Price picks up to a solid Premium. Assuming you want to trade Goldy in later, you are square on the trade side of the ledger now.
It really comes down to setting reasonable expectations. Goldy can average 115, and still be a good pick, but it is still very hard to quantify, with so many variables in play. If Goldy does average 115, without having one half of the season outscoring the other half by too much, then his price by Mid season should have hit something in the $540-$580k mark at some stage. That supposedly puts you at $110-$150k advantage over the Coaches that started him. You then have to look at points difference between Goldy, and the Ruck you chose instead, and points difference between the player the extra dollars allowed you to get, and the player you would have been forced to choose, if you started Goldy. After you've done that, you weigh into the equation whether it has cost you a trade or not.
Bottom line, in my opinion, if you think Goldy will be top or 2nd top Ruck, and average over 110, and the extra cash you would have from starting an alternative to Goldy won't give you at least a 60-70% chance of upgrading another pick to a Keeper, then take Goldy. If you think Goldy will average 110 or less, don't start him, if you think he will average 120+ again, I'd lock him in.
My opinion is, he'll be in the 110-115 area, so I need to see if I can upgrade another pick to a Keeper by not taking him.

sven_inc · 16 Dec 2015

Rowsus said:

You could write pages on this, and still not cover it completely.
Some people see taking Goldy as a trade saving move. It's not necesaarily true, even if he does play the majority of games, and scores as one of the top 2 Rucks. It depends on how the player you would have taken instead of Goldy performs, AND what you did with the loose change. Say you followed blue dreamers lead, and took Jacobs. What if the $112,300 you saved on Jacobs over Goldy pushed one of your speculative or Mid Price picks up to a solid Premium. Assuming you want to trade Goldy in later, you are square on the trade side of the ledger now.
It really comes down to setting reasonable expectations. Goldy can average 115, and still be a good pick, but it is still very hard to quantify, with so many variables in play. If Goldy does average 115, without having one half of the season outscoring the other half by too much, then his price by Mid season should have hit something in the $540-$580k mark at some stage. That supposedly puts you at $110-$150k advantage over the Coaches that started him. You then have to look at points difference between Goldy, and the Ruck you chose instead, and points difference between the player the extra dollars allowed you to get, and the player you would have been forced to choose, if you started Goldy. After you've done that, you weigh into the equation whether it has cost you a trade or not.
Bottom line, in my opinion, if you think Goldy will be top or 2nd top Ruck, and average over 110, and the extra cash you would have from starting an alternative to Goldy won't give you at least a 60-70% chance of upgrading another pick to a Keeper, then take Goldy. If you think Goldy will average 110 or less, don't start him, if you think he will average 120+ again, I'd lock him in.
My opinion is, he'll be in the 110-115 area, so I need to see if I can upgrade another pick to a Keeper by not taking him.

I see it similarly. The answer isn't obvious or straight forward so there will be no "right" call until the season rolls on and we have some hindsight. The only thing that would give us some clear direction is word of Nth playing a 2nd ruck or a little niggly injury to Goldy throughout the preseason.

For me it probably won't be which decision is the most likely to pan out best, but which I feel minimises the most risk of the rest of you peeps getting a leg up on me!

I am Cursed :( · 16 Dec 2015

The decision could be made a bit easier by the number of bargain midfielders on offer this season. Libba ($360k), JOM ($315k), Rockliff ($550k), Crouch ($300k - risky) are all capable of averaging 100 points which is at least good enough as a stepping stone. The money you save in the middle could go towards Goldy.

Jurn Stern · 16 Dec 2015

I am Cursed :( said:

Someone else could still spend the money more effectively in a different line. You are right though, it does soften the blow.

THCLT · 16 Dec 2015

From the pre-season thread...maybe we can discuss this dilemma with the man himself!

Philzsay said:

NakinakiFC · 16 Dec 2015

The issue I have with starting Goldstein is that at 700k, the only way his price is going is down. People have already alluded to the fact that he has a roughish start, if you take his avg from his last 4 games vs each opponent reads 109,101,142,104. At 700k, he will need to average close to 140 to maintain his price through the initial phase of the year. If you take the avg of his last 40 scores vs his first 10 opponents, it yields an average of 116. I think this is the kind of average we can expect Goldstein to average. I'm liking the idea of starting Leuenberger R/F with Naismith R/F in the R3 hole with the intention to upgrade to Goldstein early for either a rookie (petracca/kerridge/yarran etc) or a stepping stone (Thomas). The question then becomes who is the next best option after Goldstein. For me, martin ticks all the boxes for what I am looking for. He is now the undisputed no1 ruck at Brisbane, hes signed a contract extension, he has produced two seasons consecutively of +110 averages. Wouldn't mind seeing what Martin's scoring was like without a bonafide ruck (leuenberger/west) in the team.

Adrenaline · 16 Dec 2015

great write up row..its really interesting to see goldies stats in particular the size of the ground. in some ways it is a bit of risk of paying 700k for goldie services. he has been durable throughout his career however if something does happen to him, his price will drop dramatically. i guess it is similar to the ablett of 2015.

i would love to start to him however like most people it depends on the structure and if i can fit in another premium then i will probably wait until his price drops. if you do start him you are obviously saving yourself a trade and probably playing the safe game as you can start leui and then upgrade to a high scoring ruck man. there is a lot to consider

Amazing Bombers · 16 Dec 2015

NakinakiFC said:

The issue I have with starting Goldstein is that at 700k, the only way his price is going is down. People have already alluded to the fact that he has a roughish start, if you take his avg from his last 4 games vs each opponent reads 109,101,142,104. At 700k, he will need to average close to 140 to maintain his price through the initial phase of the year. If you take the avg of his last 40 scores vs his first 10 opponents, it yields an average of 116. I think this is the kind of average we can expect Goldstein to average. I'm liking the idea of starting Leuenberger R/F with Naismith R/F in the R3 hole with the intention to upgrade to Goldstein early for either a rookie (petracca/kerridge/yarran etc) or a stepping stone (Thomas). The question then becomes who is the next best option after Goldstein. For me, martin ticks all the boxes for what I am looking for. He is now the undisputed no1 ruck at Brisbane, hes signed a contract extension, he has produced two seasons consecutively of +110 averages. Wouldn't mind seeing what Martin's scoring was like without a bonafide ruck (leuenberger/west) in the team.

At the moment I'm also looking at picking Martin and a slightly lower priced ruck such as Nicnat.

Drew · 16 Dec 2015

blue dreamer said:

Rowsus said:

Many thanks for your responses, it's funny before i read this Blue Dreamer, i had a play with the SC Gold team picker and selected Jacobs and NicNat. I think what i was alluding to (in my own head at least) is that Goldy will/should fall in SC average and value, i guess the question is how far?

I can kind of see him being on par with the other main prominent ruckmen this year but i can see a big curveball coming in the reduction of the interchange limit and the removal of the sub and i'm not quite sure how that will effect things but i reckon it could change things a bit depending on the team.

Will teams keep playing the one main ruckman or will they have a "junior" ruck filling in off the bench? Will ruck/forwards become more prominent and popular? I've selected Luenberger in my forward line thanks to his DPP status next season and i reckon (gut feel) this could be one of the big "steals" of the year.

Ben's Beasts · 16 Dec 2015

I don't think I'll start with Goldstein but will certainly plan on bringing him in once he inevitably drops in price.

I will most likely start with a ruckman that I intend on keeping and a ruckman that I think will be a stepping stone such as Leuey or Sinclair.

These are my early thoughts anyway.

Opinion Todd Goldstein $695,100 - Trust Or Trap?

Rowsus

Statistician

Ricky Bobby

BC

freowho

couchPOTATO

I am Cursed :(

Rowsus

Statistician

Drew

blue dreamer

I am Cursed :(

Rowsus

Statistician

sven_inc

I am Cursed :(

Jurn Stern

THCLT

BBL|05 Winner

NakinakiFC

Adrenaline

Amazing Bombers

Drew

Ben's Beasts

Leadership Group