Hi Rowsus.
Now that you are a year older, are you now more wiser?
Question 2. I'm just curious why you pick so many PODs. Is it because the popular players that are selected by the majority are so obvious to you that you find it boring, so you want a challenge? Do you find it more exciting to pick the right PODs, then winning $50K?
Another question, just curious again, what job do you do?
Seriously, you don't have to answer these questions, just curious.
I admire your knowledge of SuperCoach and really appreciate all the help you give to others, you are really a nice guy.
I’m not sure if Rowsus is eligible for the $50k not being in Australia?? But maybe I’m confused with cricket? So my guess is he does it for the challenge of swimming against the tide and testing his theories?
It could be what is behind his generosity of sharing opinions and putting it all out there when some of us keep cards close to our chest ... problem is usually those cards don’t turn out to hold too much value in my hand, but I keep living in hope for some reason!
I am sure I am off track, but whatever your reasons Rowsus, we appreciate your sharing of knowledge, and I for one, look forward to seeing what trades you pull each week.
Thankyou Rowsus, I probably don’t say that as often as I should!
Q1 - wiser? Not really, I still do plenty of bonehead things!
Q2 - POD's. Diabolical is correct, I am ineligible to claim any prizes, as it is only open to residents of Australia. That is part of the reason. I could actually write PAGES on this, but I'll try and keep it short(ish). There are two forms of value in a game like this. The obvious points/dollar value, but then there is less appreciated opportunity value. I use a pretty basic formula when considering whether to take a popular player or not. What is higher, the percentage of people that own that player, or my opinion on what percentage chance that player turns out to be a good, or better than good pick. It works the reverse way too, in that if a player has a low ownership, but I consider him a decent chance to be a good pick, then I'm jumping on him. But what do I mean by opportunity value? Let's compare two players to see what I mean. Fyfe and Whitfield. Fyfe has an ownership of 53%, and is priced at $597,900. Whitfield has an ownership of 4% and is priced at $536,600. Now, each persons level of satisfaction is different, so what I am about to write may seem wrong to some, but ok to others. If I start a $600k player (Fyfe), I want at least a 20/110 season. That PIT70's to 106.4, and while I wouldn't be jumping for joy at that, I'd begrudgingly call it ok. Fyfe has only managed 20 games in a season twice in his career, and didn't hit 110 in either of the previous 2 seasons. Combine those things, and say something like 40% chance to play 20+ games, and a 50% chance to be 110+, and you get he's probably around a 25% chance to meet my minimum requirement. Why 25% and, and not 20%? Because the more games he plays, the less he plays injured, in theory, and the higher his average is likely to be. So in my opinion 53% of people have started a player that is around a 75% chance to be just ok or regrettable. Now look at Whitfield. I was quite bullish about Whitfield coming into the season. Why? Because Docherty was the 4th highest point scorer last season, and when I went looking for another Docherty type, the best match I could find was Whitfield, with the added bonus that he pressed Forward a little more than Docherty. I think people overlooked that very simple fact when looking for a Docherty replacement, once he was ruled out for the season. It didn't have to be a Def! If you are finding a player that has the potential to finish top 10 overall, it doesn't matter where he plays! It's a role that takes some growing into, as Docherty shows. Now, keep in mind Whitfield wasn't available until Round 8 last season, after copping a 6 month ban for dodging a drug test. GWS rushed him straight back into the team, which is a measure of their opinion of him. Being out of match practice, naturally his first few games where scratchy, and he went 3/88 in those games. He then finished the season 12/100 in the last 12 games. Given his time out of the game, and his growing into his new role, I was willing to back him for a 21/108 season. I marked his threshold for me to be happy at 21/105 or 20/107, but hoped for more. It's hard to use his history too much for game counts etc, because of that 6 month ban, but I rated him around a 50% chance to make the 20+games, and around a 65% chance to reach 105. So in round numbers around a 35% chance to meet my success criteria. So........
Fyfe priced at $600k a 25% chance to be a success, and in 53% of teams.
Whitfield priced at $540k a 35% chance of success, and in 4% of teams.
53% of my rivals are a 75% chance to have regret at some stage over selecting Fyfe. Just look at Round 1, and the reaction to his 75!
Only 4% share my success, if Whitfields 35% chance of success pulls through.
Remove the names, and look at the numbers. Which one would you choose?
That is opportunity value.
The opportunity is there to cash in, when too many people jump on a player, whose chance of "success" have been overrated. Similarly, the opportunity is there to cash in, when too few people jump on a player, who is a bigger chance of success than people think.
I don't just look at POD value, I look at opportunity value. When picking my team, I started with the Captain's, and decided Danger was too expensive (and before his injury hit, too popular!). I chose my Captain strategy (Dusty, Titch, Sloane). I then hit the sort button on SC, and listed all the players in reverse % order, and looked for players I rated a good chance to be successful picks. And my team had added to Sloane (he was a POD at 6% ownership): S Martin 10%, Parker 10%, Neale 5.5%, Gray 5%, McGovern 5%, Treloar 5%, Whitfield 4%, Lynch 2%.
Put it in overly simplistic terms. 10 times as many people started Fyfe, than started Neale (and 25 times as many that started Lynch!). Neale and Fyfe had remarkably similar output last season, so why not take the road less traveled, and take Neale instead. Was Fyfe really 25 times more likely to be a successful Mid pick, than Lynch was a Forward pick?. If Fyfe "falls over" look at how many people I get a jump on! I put 53% of the field at a disadvantage, with one event. Go Cookie cutter, and try and do that! Keep in mind, it wasn't POD's for POD's sake, I genuinely rated the players I chose as decent chances to be good picks. Certainly not a tenth the chance of Fyfe!
Q2 - POD's pt2. I must admit, I look for ways to enjoy the game where I can, and there's nothing more satisfying than landing a good POD!
Q3 - I work for the local council as a cleaner. I clean a school sports hall, and the changing rooms for them, as well as the cafeteria. I also clean the local council depot, lunch room etc 3 times/week. I've had mainly retail jobs in my work history. I also worked for 13 years as a bookmakers clerk at the races, on the rails at all the big meeting etc. It was in the old days, before computer betting boards, and I had to make 3 to 5 calculations for every bet placed, and the bets could come as quickly as 20/minute. That was twice a week, while I held a full time job at the same time.
Thanks for the kind words at the end there *blush*.
