Discussion 2019: Super Early Player & SC Game Change Discussion

[Beg2Differ]

Having copped the dreaded Kelly C bullet on the weekend which cost me my main money league is there anything less fair in this game than having players concussed or injured and going off for good during the game? In my mind this is a poor simulation of the real game because the real game gives you some ability to absorb injuries via the bench whereas SuperCoach does not.

My idea is that if you have a player go off the ground for good due to injury then you receive a portion of an emergencies total score based on the percentage of the game missed by your player. A similar principle would apply to your Vice Captain if your Captain goes down.

For example Kelly went off on Saturday night at about the 20 minute mark of the 3rd quarter. That means he missed about 40 minutes of a 120 minute game. Under my proposal I would be entitled to one third of my emergencies score (Ahern) who scored 35 so I would get an extra 12 points and because Kelly was my captain I would get one third of my VC score (Mitchell) who scored 102 so I would get an extra 34 points. This would add 46 points to my score which is still a penalty because you are replacing a premium score with with an emergency but isn’t such a drastic penalty and is a reasonable simulation of what happens in an actual game.

btw I lost my league match by 48 so it would have still meant a 2 point loss - Damn it!!

 

[couchPOTATO]

Having copped the dreaded Kelly C bullet on the weekend which cost me my main money league is there anything less fair in this game than having players concussed or injured and going off for good during the game? In my mind this is a poor simulation of the real game because the real game gives you some ability to absorb injuries via the bench whereas SuperCoach does not.

My idea is that if you have a player go off the ground for good due to injury then you receive a portion of an emergencies total score based on the percentage of the game missed by your player. A similar principle would apply to your Vice Captain if your Captain goes down.

For example Kelly went off on Saturday night at about the 20 minute mark of the 3rd quarter. That means he missed about 40 minutes of a 120 minute game. Under my proposal I would be entitled to one third of my emergencies score (Ahern) who scored 35 so I would get an extra 12 points and because Kelly was my captain I would get one third of my VC score (Mitchell) who scored 102 so I would get an extra 34 points. This would add 46 points to my score which is still a penalty because you are replacing a premium score with with an emergency but isn’t such a drastic penalty and is a reasonable simulation of what happens in an actual game.

btw I lost my league match by 48 so it would have still meant a 2 point loss - Damn it!!

I think if in your example your skipper gets injured the much simpler option would be that the Emergency's 12 points would be added then the adjusted skipper's score is doubled - ie you get 24 extra points rather than 46. VC is only there if a Captain doesn't play.

To make things much simpler again I would also only apply the adjustment if the injured player is off for good before half time (ie doesn't play in the 2nd half) and then apply 50% of the emergencies score.

 

[couchPOTATO]

Will 2019 be the year we break the Top Ruck curse?
Who is game to start both Grundy & Gawn ?

I guess it depends on whether any other rucks present value at R1, R2 or get dpp to allow them to swing to F6 a month or two in.

 

[Rowsus]

Having copped the dreaded Kelly C bullet on the weekend which cost me my main money league is there anything less fair in this game than having players concussed or injured and going off for good during the game? In my mind this is a poor simulation of the real game because the real game gives you some ability to absorb injuries via the bench whereas SuperCoach does not.

My idea is that if you have a player go off the ground for good due to injury then you receive a portion of an emergencies total score based on the percentage of the game missed by your player. A similar principle would apply to your Vice Captain if your Captain goes down.

For example Kelly went off on Saturday night at about the 20 minute mark of the 3rd quarter. That means he missed about 40 minutes of a 120 minute game. Under my proposal I would be entitled to one third of my emergencies score (Ahern) who scored 35 so I would get an extra 12 points and because Kelly was my captain I would get one third of my VC score (Mitchell) who scored 102 so I would get an extra 34 points. This would add 46 points to my score which is still a penalty because you are replacing a premium score with with an emergency but isn’t such a drastic penalty and is a reasonable simulation of what happens in an actual game.

btw I lost my league match by 48 so it would have still meant a 2 point loss - Damn it!!

I really like the basis of the idea, unfortunately, we are very unlikely to see something similar come in.
Too many people would be confused by the concept, and not understand it (look at how many people still don't understand and utilise loopholes). Confused players will be temporary players, and while it would be great for the games purists, it would end up in a decline in the number of participants, and that's something they will avoid at all costs. Unfortunately, like most things in life, they are more likely to cater to the uninformed masses, that want the easy road to participation, than make a game that could be slightly more involved, or dare I say it, cerebral.

 

[Beg2Differ]

I really like the basis of the idea, unfortunately, we are very unlikely to see something similar come in.
Too many people would be confused by the concept, and not understand it (look at how many people still don't understand and utilise loopholes). Confused players will be temporary players, and while it would be great for the games purists, it would end up in a decline in the number of participants, and that's something they will avoid at all costs. Unfortunately, like most things in life, they are more likely to cater to the uninformed masses, that want the easy road to participation, than make a game that could be slightly more involved, or dare I say it, cerebral.

I suspect you are right but thought it was worth floating a suggestion for an issue that I think all participants find irritating.

To play devil’s advocate the game does tolerate some pockets of complexity not least of which is how points are earned by players; also (as you mention) loopholes both C and E, top 18 during the byes and what happens with dual emergencies.

I think the concept of being entitled to some points compensation if you have a player who goes off injured is relatively easy to grasp in principle even if you don’t (want to) understand how it is calculated.

 

[Prochard]

Estimated prices for 2019 (after Rd 21)

Lloyd $ 610k
Yeo $ 600k
Laird $ 590k
Sicily $ 585k
Simpson $ 582k

Whitfield $ 571k
Brayshaw $ 527k
Andrews $ 488k
Witherden $ 485k
Short $ 477k
Docherty $ 441k
Williams $ 361k

Titch $ 727k
Macrae $ 700k
Cripps $ 670k
Fyfe $ 653k
Oliver $ 645k
Kelly $ 645k

Hanners $ 354k
Libba $ 305k

Grundy $ 711k
Gawn $ 693k

Danger $ 665k
Bont $ 571k
Dusty $ 567k
Gray $ 552k
Heeney $ 550k

Eeeew these are some disgusting prices... alot of them seem like must haves :\

 

[Brettthejett]

Estimated prices for 2019 (after Rd 21)

Lloyd $ 610k
Yeo $ 600k
Laird $ 590k
Sicily $ 585k
Simpson $ 582k

Whitfield $ 571k
Brayshaw $ 527k
Andrews $ 488k
Witherden $ 485k
Short $ 477k
Docherty $ 441k
Williams $ 361k

Titch $ 727k
Macrae $ 700k
Cripps $ 670k
Fyfe $ 653k
Oliver $ 645k
Kelly $ 645k

Hanners $ 354k
Libba $ 305k

Grundy $ 711k
Gawn $ 693k

Danger $ 665k
Bont $ 571k
Dusty $ 567k
Gray $ 552k
Heeney $ 550k

Def: Whitfield, Doc, Williams
Mid: Oliver, Kelly, scully(maybe)
Ruck: ——————
FWd: Dusty, Heeney

All def premos are to expensive
Top shelf mids also (learnt with danger this year) can easily be picked up 100k cheaper
Top rucks are probs where you spend it but is cruitial you get at least one starter correct can’t afford to waste 3-4 trades on rucks
FOrwards looks like we may get some good dpp options like danger, dusty ect so maybe spend a bit here to.

Can someone give me starting percentage of Pendles behind the ball maybe a d/m chance??? To loop with Whitfield possibly

 

[Herbie66]

Def: Whitfield, Doc, Williams
Mid: Oliver, Kelly, scully(maybe)
Ruck: ——————
FWd: Dusty, Heeney

All def premos are to expensive
Top shelf mids also (learnt with danger this year) can easily be picked up 100k cheaper
Top rucks are probs where you spend it but is cruitial you get at least one starter correct can’t afford to waste 3-4 trades on rucks
FOrwards looks like we may get some good dpp options like danger, dusty ect so maybe spend a bit here to.

Can someone give me starting percentage of Pendles behind the ball maybe a d/m chance??? To loop with Whitfield possibly

Absolutely correct.

Hopefully we get 16 viable rookies for Round 1 (got spoiled with DoeFinMur , Kelly & Holman , English , Fritsch etc

Think the key to next season will be final prices (and recovery) on :-

Doc , Williams
Crouch , Hanners , Scully , Hanners

A wise man from Denmark says pick your C , VC , rucks , rookies and build from there.

Not having both Gawn & Grundy has been a nightmare, maybe Lycett is viable as a starting ruck or Preuss if he moves.

Mids do get cheaper and usually 12-15 that are viable scorers there so start with the right 3-4 and upgrade from there.

I am sure we will be gifted at least 2 F/M's

2019 looks like being a fun preseason.

Wow in theory this should be a easy game to play why am I so crap at it ?

 

[Herbie66]

Eeeew these are some disgusting prices... alot of them seem like must haves :\

could fall under chasing the points from the preceding season

now to work out who has spiked ? who can go higher again ? and who are the value picks for 2019 to fit in to allow all the must haves

 

[freowho]

Will 2019 be the year we break the Top Ruck curse?
Who is game to start both Grundy & Gawn ?

The thing about Gawn and Grundy is that they are such reliable captains without the third man up and they are just entering their prime age for ruckmen so it is not just a rucks question but a captains loophole question as well. If there is a really good value ruck like Preuss could be if he moves clubs then I will probably start Grundy and Preuss and try and get some value by trading in Gawn but otherwise it would be set and forget.

 

[Philzsay]

Will 2019 be the year we break the Top Ruck curse?
Who is game to start both Grundy & Gawn ?

2018 has been a remarkable year of durability for the rucks. After years of hardly any ruckman playing all games in a season, so far we have Gawn, Goldstein, Grundy, Jacobs, Martin, Witts, Sinclair and Lycett all not miss a match yet.

The Set and Forget rucks strategy this year has come out on top; and those that went with Gawn and Grundy from the beginning are well on top.

Interesting to see what happens next year... Can the durability continue or will the ruckmen's body start to take a toll?

 

[couchPOTATO]

2018 has been a remarkable year of durability for the rucks. After years of hardly any ruckman playing all games in a season, so far we have Gawn, Goldstein, Grundy, Jacobs, Martin, Witts, Sinclair and Lycett all not miss a match yet.

The Set and Forget rucks strategy this year has come out on top; and those that went with Gawn and Grundy from the beginning are well on top.

Interesting to see what happens next year... Can the durability continue or will the ruckmen's body start to take a toll?

Fingers crossed this doesn't cause the SC gods to curse us for Rounds 22 and 23.

 

[Lost In The Sky]

2018 has been a remarkable year of durability for the rucks. After years of hardly any ruckman playing all games in a season, so far we have Gawn, Goldstein, Grundy, Jacobs, Martin, Witts, Sinclair and Lycett all not miss a match yet.

The Set and Forget rucks strategy this year has come out on top; and those that went with Gawn and Grundy from the beginning are well on top.

Interesting to see what happens next year... Can the durability continue or will the ruckmen's body start to take a toll?

Wish I could have been on the end of some of this luck with a good combo... Started with the Ryder & Gawn combo only to see Ryder go down in the first match and then traded to Naitanui only to have him go down in round 17 (with no trade left to get rid of him)... and selected Darcy Cameron with the hope of him seeing some games due to the Sydney ruck situation, only for him to play the 1 game this year.

Really wish I'd gone Ryder to Grundy after round 1 but at that stage was still unsure how Mason Cox would impact Grundy... We know how that has panned out.

 

[Darkie]

Having copped the dreaded Kelly C bullet on the weekend which cost me my main money league is there anything less fair in this game than having players concussed or injured and going off for good during the game? In my mind this is a poor simulation of the real game because the real game gives you some ability to absorb injuries via the bench whereas SuperCoach does not.

My idea is that if you have a player go off the ground for good due to injury then you receive a portion of an emergencies total score based on the percentage of the game missed by your player. A similar principle would apply to your Vice Captain if your Captain goes down.

For example Kelly went off on Saturday night at about the 20 minute mark of the 3rd quarter. That means he missed about 40 minutes of a 120 minute game. Under my proposal I would be entitled to one third of my emergencies score (Ahern) who scored 35 so I would get an extra 12 points and because Kelly was my captain I would get one third of my VC score (Mitchell) who scored 102 so I would get an extra 34 points. This would add 46 points to my score which is still a penalty because you are replacing a premium score with with an emergency but isn’t such a drastic penalty and is a reasonable simulation of what happens in an actual game.

btw I lost my league match by 48 so it would have still meant a 2 point loss - Damn it!!

I agree with the frustration, and the idea that this doesn't replicate the real game. Personally I think it clearly detracts from the game ... the burn when it happens to you is not o***et by the pleasure that might be derived from it happening to others.

I think a really simple fix is to set a minimum level of TOG - perhaps 60% - and if a player doesn't hit that figure, they get replaced by the next man in, as though they didn't take the field at all. This would apply to both regular players and captains.

 

[Bomber18]

I agree with the frustration, and the idea that this doesn't replicate the real game. Personally I think it clearly detracts from the game ... the burn when it happens to you is not o***et by the pleasure that might be derived from it happening to others.

I think a really simple fix is to set a minimum level of TOG - perhaps 60% - and if a player doesn't hit that figure, they get replaced by the next man in, as though they didn't take the field at all. This would apply to both regular players and captains.

Could lead to situations where your E player scores 35 and replaces your 50-60%TOG player who scores 60-70. Is it only a DNP if the 60%TOG player doesn't beat your E player's score? Feels a bit too complicated.

Although injury affected Cs and players onfield are frustrating, they've always been part of the game. I think it's better just to keep it this way.

 

[Darkie]

Could lead to situations where your E player scores 35 and replaces your 50-60%TOG player who scores 60-70. Is it only a DNP if the 60%TOG player doesn't beat your E player's score? Feels a bit too complicated.

Although injury affected Cs and players onfield are frustrating, they've always been part of the game. I think it's better just to keep it this way.

I don't see a reason to apply an extra condition to it, I'd just pick the TOG threshold and apply that.

The idea isn't to protect coaches against low scores, at least in my mind, it's to protect against not having the opportunity to post a reasonable score due to bad luck (injury) in a way that doesn't happen in the real game.

 

[Manikato1]

could fall under chasing the points from the preceding season

now to work out who has spiked ? who can go higher again ? and who are the value picks for 2019 to fit in to allow all the must haves

Initial thoughts on spikes for mine

Def Hurn, Suckling and Crisp

Mid Macrae and Gaff

Fwd Breust, D Smith, Hoff and Hawkins.

 

[Beijing_Sting]

Haven't read this in a while, so someone may have already posted.

But I really would like the game engine or calculation logarithm in the app or webpage within GameDay feature change to realise that it should calculate the Emergency player in prediction when there is a non selected player on field rather than just using that non playing chump's score. Grrrr. Hate having predicted so low.

That annoys me a little, and would be so easy to fix.

Did I explain what I mean properly? Probably not. I'm knackered after a long week.

But I can't be the only person this annoys. Olanga and Goldstein owners must know what I'm talking about, yes?.

 

[Beijing_Sting]

the burn when it happens to you is not o***et by the pleasure that might be derived from it happening to others.

Oops. I gloat like a mf actually.

Bad me

 

[Beg2Differ]

I think if in your example your skipper gets injured the much simpler option would be that the Emergency's 12 points would be added then the adjusted skipper's score is doubled - ie you get 24 extra points rather than 46. VC is only there if a Captain doesn't play.

To make things much simpler again I would also only apply the adjustment if the injured player is off for good before half time (ie doesn't play in the 2nd half) and then apply 50% of the emergencies score.

I agree with the frustration, and the idea that this doesn't replicate the real game. Personally I think it clearly detracts from the game ... the burn when it happens to you is not o***et by the pleasure that might be derived from it happening to others.

I think a really simple fix is to set a minimum level of TOG - perhaps 60% - and if a player doesn't hit that figure, they get replaced by the next man in, as though they didn't take the field at all. This would apply to both regular players and captains.

Could lead to situations where your E player scores 35 and replaces your 50-60%TOG player who scores 60-70. Is it only a DNP if the 60%TOG player doesn't beat your E player's score? Feels a bit too complicated.

Although injury affected Cs and players onfield are frustrating, they've always been part of the game. I think it's better just to keep it this way.

Thanks gents for giving the issue some oxygen.

As a general statement I would say that if you are going to make a change to address this issue then you may as well change it in such a way that it works in all circumstances. I don’t really like the min TOG suggestion because even a 30% or 40% loss of a player can make a big difference especially late in the year when most results rest on a handful of PODs.

A couple of specific points around the alternate suggestions made.
> if you C gets injured then he isn’t playing. The appropriate alternate player for the C component is the V rather than the E in my view.
> agree that it is a major detraction from game.
> not sure the “always been that way” argument is that compelling. It has also always been a blight on the game in my view.
> with my suggestion there is no possibility of a quirky circumstance resulting in a lower score replacing a higher one and the extra points points earned is directly proportional to effect that has been suffered.

I get the complexity issue however my suggestion is really only an extension of the principle that already applies in the game in regard to Vs and Es. As it stands if your selected player is active for 0% of the game then you get 100% of you E and V. I am suggesting we extend that principle to say if your player is active for (say) only 60% of the game due to injury then you get 40% of your E and V. I think that most people would find that concept reasonably easy to grasp.