Opinion Mid-Price Madness: It's a fine line between pleasure and pain

[KLo30]

Mid-Price Madness:
It's a fine line between pleasure and pain


Lover lover why do you push
Why do you push, why do you push
Baby baby, did you forget about me


Liberatore, O'Meara, Crouch, Wells and Leunenberger, these are just some of the names the lyrics could be referring to as we enter Supercoach season 2016. Given their history and/or potential it's hard not to heed to the screams of pick me, pick me. Before we lock in our teams and become attached to any or all of the above let's take a look at how cash generation is achieved and the level of performance required to achieve benchmark levels, for:


It's a fine line between pleasure and pain
You've done it once you can do it again
Whatever you've done don't try to explain
It's a fine, fine line between pleasure and pain (it's all the same)


We picked Sandilands at $310000 in 2014 who went on to average 108 across the season, surely we can do it again. Maybe you've picked another along the way and consider them a success, so let's set some criteria for selections in our sides, both for keeper status and cash generation (cash cows), based on historical records.

Keeper Status:
Defenders: 95+ Top 10 (90 acceptable)
Midfield: 110+ (105)
Rucks:108+ Top 4 (100)
Forwards: 100+ (95)

You may have higher or lower benchmarks for your keepers, and they will change for M5 compared to M8 for example. Ideally you will end up with the top scorers in each of the positions.

Cash Generation:
$150,000: minimum acceptable (blue)
$175,000: Good (green)
$200, 000: Excellent (gold)
$200,000+ Lionel Richie #

We want our cash as soon as we can get it for upgrades, so we will set 10 rounds as the maximum time acceptable to generate our desired benchmarks.

The following terms will be used in the explanations below, they are explained more eloquently by Rowsus in multiple threads as well as the means of determination:
Magic Number (MN): Player pricing coefficient
Breakeven (BE):Score a player must achieve to maintain their current price
Weekly Price Rise (WRise): Rise in player price from the previous week
Cumulative Price Rise (PRise): Rise in player price from their starting price




# Lionel Richie = Dancing on the ceiling

 

[KLo30]

2016 sees the long awaited returns of three potential midfield stars. Liberatore who joined the elite company of Ablett and Swan in overcoming the Chasing last year's points curse, and O'Meara and Crouch who have announced themselves in their initial two seasons only to succumb to injuries which cost them their entire 3rd , and expected breakout, year in 2015.


I've been standing in the back of your life
Back row center just above the ice
Please don't ask me how I've been getting off
No please don't ask me how I've been getting off


In 2016: SuperCoach Pre-Preseason + Mid Price Madness (link) freowho gives an explanation as to whether Liberatore, O'Meara and Crouch are worthy of selection in our sides.

"Here is how our stepping cows projected profit compares to last years best cash cows assuming a 105 average and a consistently declining magic number. In reality the magic number can go up occassionally. The green boxes are not maximum profit but a reasonable time to cash out and the yellow boxes were the best round to trade in cash cows that didn't start round 1."


"You would have to pick Libba believing he is a keeper. O'Meara and Crouch might be cheap enough to be stepping cows."


Break my body, with the back of your hand
Doesn't make sense from where I stand
Baby, baby! oh why you want to mess it up


Remember we set 105 as our minimum to be a midfield keeper, and we really wouldn't want to have more than one of those, so with that score in mind we see that Liberatore reached our minimum acceptable level of cash generation in round 11 (round 10 if we don't split hairs) and hovers around this for the remainder of the season. If he averaged 2 points lower at 103 he won't reach the threshold at all. Therefore, he must score at keeper status or not be worth picking.



If O'Meara scored at the same level of 105 he would break the $150K threshold after round 7 and have increase $186K after round 10, whilst Crouch would break the $150K threshold after round 6 and have an increase $196K after round 10.

But let's be a little more realistic with these two, Liberatore has two seasons of 110+ scoring whilst O'Meara and Crouch have yet to break the ton. So let's see how they fare if they hit this average. O'Meara and Crouch meet our minimum threshold after rounds 8 and 7 respectively, but neither hit our green benchmark by the end of round 10. At their historical seasons high of 98 and 95 they would hit the blue threshold after rounds 9 and 10 respectively.



freowho "You would have to pick Libba believing he is a keeper. O'Meara and Crouch might be cheap enough to be stepping cows." is spot on the money, though the distinct possibility of performing below these marks after returning from long term injuries looms large. A slow start for all three would not be unexpected.

A $300K player scoring 80, 90 and 100 looks like this:

 

[KLo30]

Sooner or later I'll find my place
Find my body better fix my face
Please don't ask me
How I've been getting off
No please don't ask me
How I've been getting off


What would it take for a rookie priced player to generate the same cash?

$250K: If we don't take players such as Liberatore, O'Meara or Crouch we begin to look at the rookie priced players $250K or below. Let's start by looking at the rung below. Wells is a $243K MID/FWD, what does he need to do to be an equal or better pick than our trio above?

If Wells scores at 85, which is not unrealistic given he has a career 92.4 average, then he would meet our minimum threshold after round 8 and generate $162K after round 10. But as you can see in the table below, we still need a player like Wells to score, with a little wriggle room, around the (forward) keeper level to be a good selection.




A $250K player scoring 80, 90 and 100 looks like this:



$200K: Our next level sits around the first round draft picks and blooded rookies (debuted with little initial impact). Here we start to see our first real opportunity to hit the gold threshold and/or hit blue threshold in quick time. These players need to play a significant role within their side to reach these levels. They aren't going to be lock down defenders, run with players or small forwards.

A $200K player scoring 70, 80, and 90 looks like this:

 

[KLo30]

$117 -150K: Finally our rookie level players up to $150K. It's here that we can see realistic opportunities to generate some real cash, good and excellent thresholds are well within reach and expected, with the opportunity to go Lionel Richie with patience on one or two well researched choices. Also, the opportunity to cash the cow early to upgrade or bring in new cows exist.

A $150K player scoring 60, 70, 80, and 90 looks like this:


A $123K player scoring 60, 70, 80, and 90 looks like this:


A $117K player scoring 60, 70, 80, and 90 looks like this:

 

[KLo30]

It's a fine line between pleasure and pain
You've done it once you can do it again
Whatever you've done don't try to explain
It's a fine, fine line between pleasure and pain (it's all the same)

No, no, no...


Side by Side Comparison

Comparing the price points side by side it's obvious that the cheaper the entry point the greater the cash generation upon exit, but it also begins to point to output levels required by each of those entry points. For example, if you're set on Anderson MID/FWD at $223K he needs to score mid 80s+ to be a good cash cow and 90+ to be an excellent one.

Rookies scoring at 70pts.


Rookies scoring at 80pts


Rookies scoring at 90pts

 

[KLo30]

Sooner or later I'll find my place
Find my body better fix my face
Please don't ask me
How I've been getting off
No please don't ask me
How I've been getting off


Meeting our targets

In order to complete our sides we need to generate cash in the quickest time possible to make the necessary upgrades.

TARGET $150000 at Round 8
Hitting our minimum threshold of $150K after round 8, which would be on the slow side for most players liking, requires $117Ks to score at 60, $123Ks 62, $150Ks at 66, $200Ks at 77 and $300Ks at 96. By the end of round 10 these scenarios would have generated between $161-168K by our cash cow.






TARGET $200000 at Round 10
Hitting our desired threshold of $200K after round 10 requires $117Ks to score at 68, $123Ks at 70, $150Ks at 75, $200Ks at 85 and $300Ks at 105, generating between $201-204K by our cash cow.

 

[KLo30]

You've done it once you can do it again
Whatever you've done don't try to explain
It's a fine, fine line between pleasure and pain


Conclusion

When we select our initial sides we look at the Risk v Reward of players and the Points v Cash Generation balance. This is especially important when it comes to our Mid-Price Madness and high-end rookie level players. Set yourself targets/thresholds, be realistic with the expected outcome of players and buy low/sell high.



A parting scenario, remember Wells $243K had to score at 85 to meet our minimum threshold after round 8 and a low rookie 60. Do you take Wells expecting 85 or a low rookie (actually you could get two for the price of one) expecting 60-62? One outperforms that average by 10, 15 or 20 points, who is the more likely? How do you use the $120K differential?


You've done it once don't do it again
Whatever you've done don't try to explain
It's a fine, fine line between pleasure and pain



And please don't ask how I've been getting off.

 

[siwel]

WOW awesome work KLo30 BANG BANG BANG quality stuff

 

[Juzzo]

You make this game sound too easy

 

[Courtesans]

Self inflicted this pain. Not going near it bar Liberatore.

 

[Adrenaline]

Well done klo it's one of the best write ups that I have seen. U make it sound so easy. I am sorry in advance if people have discussed the structure of your teams but it's one of the burning questions for me. Last year some or most went with mid price players in the backline. I was one of them and it didn't work out. I am wondering if it's best to have a 3 premium def structure followed by
4 premiums midfield and 2 mid pricers
2 premium rucks or 1 mid pricer such as leuy
3-4 premium forward line depending on the cash flow.

Imo Libba and crouch look like the stand out mid pricers this year but I could be wrong. Is it best to fit them in or just fit one of them in.

 

[sven_inc]

Excellent work KLo!

I especially like the parting scenario. If I might add to the cash generation vs points decision - A lot for me would depend on whether the player is on the field or benched.

Naturally anyone on the ground needs to be heavily biased towards point scoring over cash generation as thats essentially the name of the game. Points then become largely irrelevant when a player is benched as they dont count to your weekly score.

Obviously the more points the more cash generated for your bench, but anything on field should be set to an exceedingly high standard - one which we probably need to be certain of before selecting a mid pricer AND the cheaper rookies.

 

[Rowsus]

As someone who has done a lot of work in similar areas on this site, can I make one very solid recommendation to you all.

Boomark this page, and when you are close to finalising your teams, run through the non-Premiums you have picked, using the above tables as a guide.

One of the big things I have been stressing here the last few seasons is, that you must have/set reasonable expectations. Set your expectations, and then use the tables above to see how your selections come off. It will quite likely cause you to restructure one or two of your riskier picks.

Great work KLo30, I know I for one will be coming back here, especially as we get closer to the seasons start!

 

[BigRuss]

Self inflicted this pain. Not going near it bar Liberatore.

Yep, personally hope the masses jump on Crouch theyve priced him just right that i think a lot of people will think hes value. Crows tough early run will more then likely see him be a failed pick IMO. Wont be surprised if he gets some extra love for opposing teams too.

Wells is a tricky one though if hes over the injury troubles and like the table says, its quite reasonable to expect 85s from him i think. Could prove a very good F4/5 for people confident enough in him

Top work Klo, really quality content here.

 

[Darkie]

^^ Strong point BigRuss. If you're picking someone as a cash cow, what matters is not their average over the season, but their average over the first 8 or 10 rounds or so.

It's worth considering both the draw, and any tendency for players to start the season fast (perhaps young players before they have built their endurance) or slow (perhaps those still recovering from injury) in light of that.

I'll be taking Rowsus/KLo's advice as well

 

[Leroy]

I'd go even further and say that with rookies/cash-cows the deviation in their scoring pattern is just as, if not more important than their average across 10 games: no player gets their average every week!

Take Adam Oxley from last year: KLo's table shows he was good for trading after R7, two games after his massive 148 had worked it's way through his scoring cycle. After the initial price bumps for being a cheap rookie, it only takes perhaps one good score to make great dollars.

Thinking about Libba for this year (who has a bit of a track record of monsters and duds) from 2013 and 2014 he had 5 scores of 130+ in each of those years as well as 5 scores below 85. His 3 round average went as low as 70 and as high as 149! At his price, you'd need at least two good scores in a row to pump his value up high enough to be viable cash cow, but the history is there to suggest that, even if he averages only 100-105 and is not at mid-keeper level, he may still burst high enough to cash in at some stage.

In contrast, picking someone like Crouch would rely on him continually scoring well, as his history doesn't suggest he will have those boom games in the same way that Libba might.

There's a statistical model crying out to be made that uses deviation and predicted averages to estimate the probability of getting to a certain price rise but alas I have not the skill Maybe the masters on this site will find a way.

 

[Darkie]

^^ Good point Leroy, it's certainly not just about the average.

I think the model you describe may need to be based on/might best be based on Monte Carlo simulation, because prices are path-dependent (which is basically your point). Those simulations are not that difficult to put together, although unfortunately they can be quite time consuming!

I think the basic point that it's not just about a player's average, but also about how the scores are distributed and ordered, is probably clear without quantifying it.

Perhaps one way of simplifying it is to say that in your starting side, all else equal, I think you should have a preference for rookies and perhaps mid-pricers with high variability (so they are more likely to get a price spike that allows you to cash them in early - time is points - or for more than their average would suggest) and premiums with low variability (so they don't have a price trough that allows others to trade your premiums in at a discount). That would also leave your upgrade targets as being your intended premiums with higher variability (so you can hopefully take advantage of one of the price troughs you are trying to avoid in your own starting premiums!).

Of course, you want at least one or two of your premiums to have some variability, for VC/C purposes, so it's a balancing act

 

[IDIG]

Phenomenal work KLo. As Rowsus said this thread will be invaluable as we finalise our starting squads but also make our trading decisions throughout the year.

I may be taking a simplistic view to this but if i do decide to start any of these guys, I will aim to eventually trade them or keep them as bench cover. For me the distinct advantage is their presumed points scoring/JS ability over X rookie, cash generation is secondary in these types of picks for mine. My theory on any and all picks is try not to start/trade in negative POD's. There's obvious exceptions to this rule because sometimes you can only afford who you can afford but unless one of them turns into a Sandi like pick, they'll more often than not need to be traded as you simply can't hold one against the Beams/Dangers/JPK's of the world (ie. players who most teams won't start but will be aiming to bring in).

 

[freowho]

I'd go even further and say that with rookies/cash-cows the deviation in their scoring pattern is just as, if not more important than their average across 10 games: no player gets their average every week!

Take Adam Oxley from last year: KLo's table shows he was good for trading after R7, two games after his massive 148 had worked it's way through his scoring cycle. After the initial price bumps for being a cheap rookie, it only takes perhaps one good score to make great dollars.

Thinking about Libba for this year (who has a bit of a track record of monsters and duds) from 2013 and 2014 he had 5 scores of 130+ in each of those years as well as 5 scores below 85. His 3 round average went as low as 70 and as high as 149! At his price, you'd need at least two good scores in a row to pump his value up high enough to be viable cash cow, but the history is there to suggest that, even if he averages only 100-105 and is not at mid-keeper level, he may still burst high enough to cash in at some stage.

In contrast, picking someone like Crouch would rely on him continually scoring well, as his history doesn't suggest he will have those boom games in the same way that Libba might.

There's a statistical model crying out to be made that uses deviation and predicted averages to estimate the probability of getting to a certain price rise but alas I have not the skill Maybe the masters on this site will find a way.

Nice points Leroy.

We often see comments about not wanting someone inconsistent. But if I had to choose between two players who I thought were going to average 100 wouldn't choosing the player who is less consistent increase my chances of winning the weekly prize because they have the ability to occassionally post that big score?

 

[Aenimist]

This is one of the best articles I have read on this site. Thanks for putting it together. Rowsus you have a new challenger!