- Joined
- 18 Sep 2014
- Messages
- 848
- Likes
- 493
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
Opinion Questions For Rowsus
- Thread starter Rowsus
- Start date
- Status
Hi Rowsus, Assuming Goldstein scores 110, 106, 120, 75, 138, 109 in the first 6 rounds
and
Wells scores 85, 95, 100, 80, 92, 88 in the first 6 rounds,
What will be their respective prices and the difference inbetween after 6 rounds?
Assuming I have a rookie at 125k scoring 75, 75, 75, 75, 75, 75, what will his price be at the same time as above?
and
Wells scores 85, 95, 100, 80, 92, 88 in the first 6 rounds,
What will be their respective prices and the difference inbetween after 6 rounds?
Assuming I have a rookie at 125k scoring 75, 75, 75, 75, 75, 75, what will his price be at the same time as above?
Goldmembers value on TS after 6 rds is $603,957. Based on that I would assume the others would be pretty close as well.
I have been using TS to work out possible cash value of players in different scoring scenarios for a while. It helps align what you think a player could score with the $ value and helps you work out whether a player can live up to your expectations.
I have been using TS to work out possible cash value of players in different scoring scenarios for a while. It helps align what you think a player could score with the $ value and helps you work out whether a player can live up to your expectations.
I think these scoring estimations are a tad biased for each three.
If this is an analysis for starting team, that 125k rookie is probably the 4th-5th 125k rookie in your team. Based on my observations of the last two years and tables i have seen on a seperate post here recently, that 4-5th 125k rookie is equally as likely to average 60. Fyfe for reference average 72 in his first year (and he was not vested once); Wines averaged 75 with 2 greeen vests - one of which he still scored 116 coming on very early.
I will not be starting Goldy, but I personally think he will average 110-115 to start the season against quality opposing rucks.
If this is an analysis for starting team, that 125k rookie is probably the 4th-5th 125k rookie in your team. Based on my observations of the last two years and tables i have seen on a seperate post here recently, that 4-5th 125k rookie is equally as likely to average 60. Fyfe for reference average 72 in his first year (and he was not vested once); Wines averaged 75 with 2 greeen vests - one of which he still scored 116 coming on very early.
I will not be starting Goldy, but I personally think he will average 110-115 to start the season against quality opposing rucks.
I've looked at the TS calculator, and it's movement of the MN is similar to mine, but mine runs just a little lower. They have the MN tending towards 5000, I have it tending toward 4950. This isn't a great difference, and it means my projections drag the players prices about 1% lower than what THCLT has written here (Thanks for the help! 
).
It is definitely good to look at future price projections. Yes, they can be wildly inaccurate (on occassions), but it is better than having no idea/plan at all.
I definitely agree. It seems Wells is not going to be a suitable Stepping Stone to Goldstein. You either need Goldstein to go terribly poorly early, to drive his price low enough, in which case you might second guess yourself about bringing him in. The other option is, you need Wells to perform ridiculously well, if you are going to reach Goldstein with a single Rookie downgrade from Wells. Wells would have performed so well, you probably second guess yourself again, and keep him. It's hard to see it working out to a point where you'd get the opportunity to pull the trigger on the plan, or have the guts to pull the trigger on the plan.
I'm happy to run with THCLT's numbers. Taking 1% off them won't alter them that dramatically.
TS is indeed tooserious.net
). It is definitely good to look at future price projections. Yes, they can be wildly inaccurate (on occassions), but it is better than having no idea/plan at all.
I definitely agree. It seems Wells is not going to be a suitable Stepping Stone to Goldstein. You either need Goldstein to go terribly poorly early, to drive his price low enough, in which case you might second guess yourself about bringing him in. The other option is, you need Wells to perform ridiculously well, if you are going to reach Goldstein with a single Rookie downgrade from Wells. Wells would have performed so well, you probably second guess yourself again, and keep him. It's hard to see it working out to a point where you'd get the opportunity to pull the trigger on the plan, or have the guts to pull the trigger on the plan.
I do the same thing on a spreadsheet (just don't have it open at the moment). I find it very helpful, especially when looking at diff round-by-round scoring assumptions
The 75 in those assumed scores is probably the main thing which kills Goldys price. If that 75 becomes a 100+ then watch out
TS is indeed tooserious.net
Last edited:
Hi Rowsus
The draw has made the should Goldy stay or should Goldy go question difficult with North looking like having some good early wins and then a tough run home. I can't see the value in waiting for his price to drop if he is still the most expensive ruckman after round 8 and no guarantee to be the best scorer from that point on. You would probably have to bring him in after the Freo game in round 4 with only 2 price drops and only 2 price rises from your sacrificial lamb which seems difficult. I'm not wearing any rose coloured glasses when it comes to Goldy's price and predicted average. The draw last year opened up for a lot of ruckmen with very weak opponents replacing first choice players. This happens each year but not to the same extent. I worked out an adjusted average of about 120 from last year which is still a very good year and he was good enough to take advantage of the situation. I think he can average around 115 this year so he is clearly overpriced.
My question is how much do you pay to have the best player in a position? Is the extra $100k worth 5 points a week or do I need to think he will be 10 points better than the 3rd best ruckman?
Happy Valentines Day (sorry, wrong website)
The draw has made the should Goldy stay or should Goldy go question difficult with North looking like having some good early wins and then a tough run home. I can't see the value in waiting for his price to drop if he is still the most expensive ruckman after round 8 and no guarantee to be the best scorer from that point on. You would probably have to bring him in after the Freo game in round 4 with only 2 price drops and only 2 price rises from your sacrificial lamb which seems difficult. I'm not wearing any rose coloured glasses when it comes to Goldy's price and predicted average. The draw last year opened up for a lot of ruckmen with very weak opponents replacing first choice players. This happens each year but not to the same extent. I worked out an adjusted average of about 120 from last year which is still a very good year and he was good enough to take advantage of the situation. I think he can average around 115 this year so he is clearly overpriced.
My question is how much do you pay to have the best player in a position? Is the extra $100k worth 5 points a week or do I need to think he will be 10 points better than the 3rd best ruckman?
Happy Valentines Day (sorry, wrong website)
- Joined
- 6 Jul 2012
- Messages
- 4,890
- Likes
- 11,150
- AFL Club
- West Coast
I think we have to be careful using draw fixtures and extrapolating out for all players. Take for instance Melb or Carlton were easy to score against unless you were the leading mid getting tagged.
North may have an easy start but judging by Goldy's form against ruckman last year, his initial games start harder. I did some analysis a little while back and think (cannot remember exact games) it turned out his average for first six games was 118 and next six 138. Obviously influenced by two scores against Sandi (one terrible and one ok) but this was balance by essendon (221 and then one ok score). These stats could have been influenced as well by whether he played that team in H215 when he did better.
I am starting with Goldy. i see value in players like Nic Nat and Martin and one of those will be R2, however, not confident going both of those would not see one of them average 10-15 lower than Goldy.
There was some great analysis on this site last year around ruckman scoring patterns and teams conceding +120 players that worked well combined with fixture analysis.
North may have an easy start but judging by Goldy's form against ruckman last year, his initial games start harder. I did some analysis a little while back and think (cannot remember exact games) it turned out his average for first six games was 118 and next six 138. Obviously influenced by two scores against Sandi (one terrible and one ok) but this was balance by essendon (221 and then one ok score). These stats could have been influenced as well by whether he played that team in H215 when he did better.
I am starting with Goldy. i see value in players like Nic Nat and Martin and one of those will be R2, however, not confident going both of those would not see one of them average 10-15 lower than Goldy.
There was some great analysis on this site last year around ruckman scoring patterns and teams conceding +120 players that worked well combined with fixture analysis.
I agree that things change each year and we can't take for gospel that what happened in 2015 will happen in 2016. It's not sensible to pick out 1 game from the draw as a reason to make a selection which is why I pointed out the Freo game in my post. Most of what we discuss on this site is hypothetical which is part of the fun. But I don't think what happened in 2015 gets turned upside down and recognising general patterns in scoring helps us make less bad decisions. I think the fact that the AFL draw is so uneven helps us.
- Status