Opinion Rate My Team (Team Picker Only)

[Darkie]

My favoured team at this point has 13 keepers plus Libba, Crouch and Bird (and Leuey as ruck cover).

Just attempted a team with just GnR (apart from Leuey as ruck cover). I came up with 14 keepers.

McVeigh, Bartel, Smith, Bonner, Hibberd, Brown (Byrne, Hartley)

Fyfe, Pendles, Ablett, Selwood, Rockliff, Wines, Freeman, Cuningham (Keays, Sumner, Morabito)

Goldstein, Martin (Read)

Martin, Barlow, Franklin, Leuey, Kerridge, Petracca (Eades, Adams)

But do I run with the 13 keeper team for a chance of one or two of Libba/Crouch/Bird becoming keepers?
I suppose NAB cup will be the big decider, if it looks like Libba, Crouch and Bird are playing well in the midfield, I may choose team 1. In the end it will probably be a combination of both.

Are 13 of the 14 keepers the same? If not, I'd be wary of reducing quality of the keepers to increase their quantity.

What is the X vs Y?

The changes were:

Yeo (80-100) + Libba (90-105) + Crouch (90-105) + Bird (75-95) = 335-405 ~ 1-2 keepers (2-3 stepping stones)

to

Rookie (50-60) + Fyfe (120-130) + Wines (105-110) + Rookie (50-60) = 325-360 ~ 2 keepers

Thanks Bomber, this looks like a tough one. I largely agree with your point estimates, although I would increase Libba and probably the rookies, and possibly reduce Bird.

The concern I raised about reducing the quality of the keepers to increase their quantity does not look to be an issue here. Fyfe is obviously a very solid pick, and I think Wines will be a reasonable one, albeit that I'm perhaps not as confident in him as some others. I think one of the reasons I'm struggling with the X vs Y is that I think Wines is an okay pick, but Libba is close to a no-brainer for me. It also looks like Bird is quite injury-prone, as is Crouch. The first option has more scoring upside at the top end, but might create a few problems for you, in future trade requirements. I've also cooled a bit on Yeo - check out Rowsus' thread for more on that.

Perhaps you have considered Fyfe + Libba + rookies + loose change? Libba has a better record of premium scoring than Wines to date, so excluding a major issue from play style change/slow recovery, I think he is just as valid a keeper pick as Wines. I suspect you could find a good way to use the loose change, but a couple of options would be to upgrade Leuey (albeit that I quite like him, especially in the forwards, if he is fit) or choosing someone like Wells to sit beside him. The latter would leave you a bit in reserve, which almost always comes handy in either round one or three!

 

[jones711]

Here is my current POD/Midpricer structure. As a bit of a risk taker it's generally the type of team I tend to go with each year, which is probably the main reason why I consistently finish around 25,000 th. Can anyone help me break the top 20k please !!

D - Bartel, Malceski, Simpson, Hampton, Hartley, Brown, Wigg, Wagner

M - GAJ, Rocky, Kennedy, Wines, Miles, Mitchell, Libba, Petracca, Morabito, Beech, Dunkley

R - Mummy, Sandi, Chol

F - Buddy, Barlow, Greene, C Sinclair, Kerridge, Kommer, Whitecross, Adams

About 25k remaining.

Key factors. Dads Army back line, some will doubt the inclusion of the Eski but we all know he can match it with Shaw/McVeigh and comes at 200k less. I'm backing in to perform to at least stepping stone standard if not keeper. Curtley Hampton, a punt/hunch more than anything else, I just sense his style of play fits nicely into Adelaide's run and gun style.

In the mids the focus is on breakouts, namely Miles and Mitchell, again a bit of a punt but one that can reward handsomely. Libba was not a straightforward pick, in the end price gets him over the line. Wines to return to his best.

Love my rucks, Sandi/Mummy carries a certain amount of risk no doubt, but the combination can pump out a handful of 250+ scores in the first few rounds, I don't think anyone would argue with that.

Forwards, Callum Sinclair probably the main talking point. For mine he will carry the ruck duties at Sydney which means he should score at least 90. That works for me as a forward score with the added bonus of swing ruck cover if Mummy/Sandi goes down. I'm backing Toby Greene to get more midfield time and he's proven that he can score well, if inconsistently.

 

[Jordan]

Here is my current POD/Midpricer structure. As a bit of a risk taker it's generally the type of team I tend to go with each year, which is probably the main reason why I consistently finish around 25,000 th. Can anyone help me break the top 20k please !!

D - Bartel, Malceski, Simpson, Hampton, Hartley, Brown, Wigg, Wagner

M - GAJ, Rocky, Kennedy, Wines, Miles, Mitchell, Libba, Petracca, Morabito, Beech, Dunkley

R - Mummy, Sandi, Chol

F - Buddy, Barlow, Greene, C Sinclair, Kerridge, Kommer, Whitecross, Adams

About 25k remaining.

Key factors. Dads Army back line, some will doubt the inclusion of the Eski but we all know he can match it with Shaw/McVeigh and comes at 200k less. I'm backing in to perform to at least stepping stone standard if not keeper. Curtley Hampton, a punt/hunch more than anything else, I just sense his style of play fits nicely into Adelaide's run and gun style.

In the mids the focus is on breakouts, namely Miles and Mitchell, again a bit of a punt but one that can reward handsomely. Libba was not a straightforward pick, in the end price gets him over the line. Wines to return to his best.

Love my rucks, Sandi/Mummy carries a certain amount of risk no doubt, but the combination can pump out a handful of 250+ scores in the first few rounds, I don't think anyone would argue with that.

Forwards, Callum Sinclair probably the main talking point. For mine he will carry the ruck duties at Sydney which means he should score at least 90. That works for me as a forward score with the added bonus of swing ruck cover if Mummy/Sandi goes down. I'm backing Toby Greene to get more midfield time and he's proven that he can score well, if inconsistently.

Alot of your reasoning is based on opinion. I would start looking at the statistics to find out the truth about a player.

I suggest reading some posts in this thread by ROWSUS http://www.supercoachscores.com/threads/2766-Rowsus-Tables-And-Analysis-Of-2015-Season
and reading about the players you have selected in your team.

It will give you a second opinion and it is based on statistics which are far more reliable than gut feeling or opinion.

Hope this helped

 

[jones711]

Jordan, thanks for the feedback. Fair points well made, although though I would respectfully disagree that statistics equate to truth, hence the expression "Lies, damn lies, and statistics !"

I do follow the Rowsus analyses faithfully as it's such a brilliant resource, but for me, taking a bit of a punt in SC adds a bit more fun to the whole thing rather than replicating a cookie cutter side that thousands of others have (give or take a variation or two).

 

[Jordan]

Very true. You have to risk it for the biscuit or in this case the 50k
Good luck for this year

 

[I am Cursed :(]

In Sinclairs case the only statistics you can look at were games where Nic Nat didn't play and he rucked solo (from memory there were only two, and one of them was against the ruck killer Sandilands), or other second string rucks who have moved clubs to become the number 1 ruck. In either case, I don't think you will really get an accurate idea of what 2016 holds for Sinclair so for those who pick him it will be based on NAB cup and gut feel.

 

[Hondo]

It will give you a second opinion and it is based on statistics which are far more reliable than gut feeling or opinion.

The statistics are valuable I think we would all agree but what they won't do is predict the future rather give us a good guide. You can't pick your side solely based on historical statistics as it is those instinctive selections that defy the past that can make a big difference.

Last year the stats would have suggested Danger and Gray (only one big year) were not good starting picks. Ditto Jacobs a year earlier. On the other hand there would be numerous examples where the stats did predict an outcome that was different from many of the "gut feel" suggestions put forward in last year's pre-season.

This in no way is meant to criticize any statistical analysis because (especially Rowsus and others on here) do a fantastic job providing us all with very useful data and I am a regular reader of their fine work.

 

[Pearcey47]

The statistics are valuable I think we would all agree but what they won't do is predict the future rather give us a good guide. You can't pick your side solely based on historical statistics as it is those instinctive selections that defy the past that can make a big difference.

Last year the stats would have suggested Danger and Gray (only one big year) were not good starting picks. Ditto Jacobs a year earlier. On the other hand there would be numerous examples where the stats did predict an outcome that was different from many of the "gut feel" suggestions put forward in last year's pre-season.

This in no way is meant to criticize any statistical analysis because (especially Rowsus and others on here) do a fantastic job providing us all with very useful data and I am a regular reader of their fine work.

Could be argued that Dangerfield wasn't a good starting pick. Averaged 103 for rounds 1-6 when priced at 106 initially. Great first upgrade option though as he went on to average 127 for rounds 7-23.

 

[Hondo]

Could be argued that Dangerfield wasn't a good starting pick. Averaged 103 for rounds 1-6 when priced at 106 initially. Great first upgrade option though as he went on to average 127 for rounds 7-23.

Yes, true but like Gray who also dropped $80K early I think those that started either or both them and held on all year would say they were key starting picks in their sides.

By R7 those doubting say Danger at the start may have been lulled into thinking their pre-season call was right because I expect quite a few traded him in later at close to or even > than his starting price once they realized he was on a run. If he is in your side you ride him out regardless. At the end of last year Danger was in 38% of teams and Gray 56%.

Another example is Goldy. Started around $580K, had a big run early then had two shockers (after I traded him in) and dropped close to $500K at upgrade time and then went on a massive run peaking at $750K. All in all, I think those that started were happy enough even though he shed $90K by upgrade time.

 

[jaca]

Does anyone know what the most expensive any player has gotten on SC?

 

[chels]

The statistics are valuable I think we would all agree but what they won't do is predict the future rather give us a good guide. You can't pick your side solely based on historical statistics as it is those instinctive selections that defy the past that can make a big difference.

Last year the stats would have suggested Danger and Gray (only one big year) were not good starting picks. Ditto Jacobs a year earlier. On the other hand there would be numerous examples where the stats did predict an outcome that was different from many of the "gut feel" suggestions put forward in last year's pre-season.

This in no way is meant to criticize any statistical analysis because (especially Rowsus and others on here) do a fantastic job providing us all with very useful data and I am a regular reader of their fine work.

I do not want to come across as pedantic Hondo. But, statistics do not predict anything. They simply reveal different ways to interpret historic data. For example, at the most simple level breaking down a player's average score for a year into home and away averages.

We, as "supercoaches" will from time to time seek to infer or predict something about the future from the data - for example, what happened next when a player averages greater than 120 SC points in a season. Sometimes we drill down for greater understanding (of the past). For example, how Sinclair scored when Nic Nat did not play. That sort of analysis gives us what we hope are insights into the future on which we might build our teams. Some like me are almost slaves to this approach; in fact I must admit to being so sad that I read Rowsus' new posts before I check to see what the FT100, the Dow and NASDAQ did overnight.

I know I am not increasing your knowledge about data or statistics with this post. It is simple an attempt to try to put the role of statistical analysis into perspective.

 

[Hondo]

I do not want to come across as pedantic Hondo. But, statistics do not predict anything. They simply reveal different ways to interpret historic data. For example, at the most simple level breaking down a player's average score for a year into home and away averages.

We, as "supercoaches" will from time to time seek to infer or predict something about the future from the data - for example, what happened next when a player averages greater than 120 SC points in a season. Sometimes we drill down for greater understanding (of the past). For example, how Sinclair scored when Nic Nat did not play. That sort of analysis gives us what we hope are insights into the future on which we might build our teams. Some like me are almost slaves to this approach; in fact I must admit to being so sad that I read Rowsus' new posts before I check to see what the FT100, the Dow and NASDAQ did overnight.

I know I am not increasing your knowledge about data or statistics with this post. It is simple an attempt to try to put the role of statistical analysis into perspective.

I don't disagree with what you say here. I don't want anyone to think I am knocking the value of statistical analysis as part of the overall puzzle that is fantasy sports.

 

[chels]

Does anyone know what the most expensive any player has gotten on SC?

GAJ at the start of 2013 was $740,500 (2012, 138 average) which I think is the highest ever starting price. I am not sure if late in 2012 he went higher than the $771,100 Goldie hit in round 19 last year.

 

[chels]

I don't disagree with what you say here. I don't want anyone to think I am knocking the value of statistical analysis as part of the overall puzzle that is fantasy sports.

Rest assured, it certainly did not come across that way Hondo. I think we all like a little bit of data. It is a bit like me and red wine - too much and I am unsure why I did what I did.

 

[Jordan]

what i meant by saying stats are more reliable is that it can show you what to expect from an unbiased opinion.
However a combination of both statistical analysis and gut feeling picks are required but if you look at it just from an opinion point of view,
The opinion choices we make can often link to chasing last years points! because that's what we last thought about that player and rarely we think back to 2 or 3 years.
Hope this makes sense

 

[IDIG]

Loving the stats talk and i'll admit i perhaps am guilty of going too much off historical data although id back in a player who has consistently put up good numbers vs a player who hasn't. I guess it's a matter of deciding if you prefer proven player X vs upside player Y and if Proven player X is on his way down or still able to score a proven premium level and if upside player Y will overtake him.

Players in the upside category i like (rightly or wrongly) are players who have the following formline.

2013 - 14 games @ 60 average
2014 - 18 games @ 75 average
2015 - 22 games @ 85 average
2016 - 22 games @ ?? average

I never jump on them because i inevitably jump on the blokes that have been doing it at a premium level for longer but sometimes i wish i'd take a punt on one of these types of guys. The defenders of this year look like a perfect opportunity to do so!

 

[BigRuss]

Does anyone know what the most expensive any player has gotten on SC?

If I remember right I think Jonothan Brown got up over 800k mid season one year had 3 160+ in a 5 or so week period. 2006 maybe? I really can't remember.

Edit. In 2007 from rounds 15-22 he had 4 scores over 150. 151, 167, 177 and 187 for just under a 143 average. Can't find prices but I'd say that probably got him up over 800k

 

[Courtesans]

If I remember right I think Jonothan Brown got up over 800k mid season one year had 3 160+ in a 5 or so week period. 2006 maybe? I really can't remember.

Edit. In 2007 from rounds 15-22 he had 4 scores over 150. 151, 167, 177 and 187 for just under a 143 average. Can't find prices but I'd say that probably got him up over 800k

Find a KPF this year getting anywhere near that be doing OK.

Belted on a bit about KPFs' last year, they are virtually dead fodder in SC and other footy fantasy games.

Too many M/Fs' in my view.

 

[jaca]

I'd actually like them to stipulate some KPPs in SC.

 

[lavenderbandit]

Great talk on statistics. Being an engineer I can't get enough of them! Also means I can blame my poor decision making (at work) on someone else haha.

On an unrelated note does anyone know if when SC 2016 opens officially your team selected now in the planner gets wiped or does it stay? I think this was discussed in another thread so apologies if already answered but can't find where I may have read it atm.