Hey Row
Keen to get your thoughts on the concept of using a mid priced player as a cash cow, specifically Armitage v Brodie. I've seen people dismiss Armitage because he won't average 110 and become a keeper, but I'm wondering if an average of 90-95 is enough for him to be a decent selection as a cash cow. He's priced at an average of about 60 and will make about 200k if he averages 90-95. Compared to Brodie who is priced at about 40 and will make about 200k if he averages 70. Considering these cash increases are about the same, is Armitage the better selection because he will score more points during this cash generation process? Cheers
You're being overly optimistic with the scores required to make $200K. You might be interested in this thread to understand why
http://www.supercoachscores.com/thr...een-pleasure-and-pain?highlight=price+madness . You are right that points scored are an important aspect of cash cows/stepping stones, especially if they are going to generate the same amount of cash. I'll let Rowsus answer the rest of the question.
Hey Abad,
first of all, I recommend you follow the link KLo30 has provided to his most informative thread. It's an eye opener to most people, and well worth the read.
Having said that, let me first touch on your maths, as KLo30 also mentioned. For ease of using round numbers, multiply your expected player average by $5,000 to get what price he is heading towards. A 90-95 average has Armitage heading towards $450-$457k, which puts him on making $140-$165k, not $200k. To make $200k he needs to average something just over 102/game.
Can these Midprice players be useful Stepping Stones? No doubt.
Part of the problem is defining success, and Libba's comeback season was a good example. For some people he was a success, for some a breakeven, and for some he was a small loss. It might seem inconceivable that the one player fits all 3 descriptions, but it all comes down to how you structured up, and what you were aiming for.
It's possible to take Armitage, and have him average low 90's and call it a success, if all you wanted was points on the ground, and around $100k growth. As I mentioned, it all comes down to how you structure up. What/who did you sacrifice to have Armitage? If you had another Midpricer in your team, would you have been better chopping both of them to a Prem and a Rookie?
I'm generally against Stepping Stones in the Midfield. This area traditionally provides the largest part of both your points, and your cash generation. If you were seriously considering Armitage, my thoughts are, make your side without him, THEN, if you have the cash leftover, contemplate if you should swap him ahead of your least trusted Mid Rookie. Stepping Stones in the other lines are ok, but really hard to price properly. My general rule of thumb is, you want a Stepping Stone to make $100k, as well as give you safe on field points. That really restricts the price ranges you are looking at. Let's look at a Def Stepping Stone. You really want to avoid a trap selection. That's a player that scores just below the level of a Keeper, but close enough to being a Keeper, that you never end up fixing him. You'd be surprised how often, and easily this can happen. So let's say a borderline D6 is a 90/game player. Keep in mind, you don't want to end up with multiple bottom on field selections. ie Many people end up with 3 M8's at the end of the season, that are scoring at around 100/game, and they are leaking 10-20/Round to sides with genuine M6's and M7's. You definitely don't want 2 or 3 D6's. So if 90 is your bottom line D6, then you if you are picking a Def Stepping Stone, you need him to start at $300k or cheaper. Any more expensive than that, and he either has to score at a Keeper level, or he easily becomes a trap selection.
At $300k he needs to score in the low 80's to make you $100k for an easy upgrade.
At $350k, he needs to score low 90's to make your $100k, and bingo, he's a Keeper, or another D6, or a trap!
By all means use a Midpricer as a Stepping Stone, but price them properly, have a plan and reasonable expectations, and unless they blast beyond your expectations, stick to your plan!
As to "is Armitage a better pick than Brodie, if they make the same cash generation?". To generate the same amount of cash, Armitage has to outscore Brodie by 24/game. The question then becomes, how did you use the $120k leftover, if you chose Brodie? If you spent it just because it was there, and it didn't produce much benefit, or if the cash is just sitting there, then Armitage is better. If the $120k pushed say another Midpricer up to a good genuine Keeper, then Brodie is better. There are just too many scenarios to give a straight answer. It's just like I said with Libba, some yes, some maybe, some no. It all depends on structure and circumstances. Sorry, I can't be more definitive.
