Strategy Round 5: Trades
- Thread starter Herbie66
- Start date
It's a good question, although I think it depends on how you look at it - especially whether you get something out of the other leg of the trade.
If you went Bines => ROB => Bines then I agree with you.
If you went Setterfield (disappointing, suspended, won't make cash for some time albeit DPP) => ROB => another cash cow/a better year-long rookie than Setterfield/a forward keeper, that could change things.
I would only attribute half of each trade to ROB in that scenario (because the other half is also improving your side, in a different way) in which case it is back to $150k for one trade in my view.
If you went Bines => ROB => Bines then I agree with you.
If you went Setterfield (disappointing, suspended, won't make cash for some time albeit DPP) => ROB => another cash cow/a better year-long rookie than Setterfield/a forward keeper, that could change things.
I would only attribute half of each trade to ROB in that scenario (because the other half is also improving your side, in a different way) in which case it is back to $150k for one trade in my view.
- Joined
- 15 Oct 2018
- Messages
- 3,912
- Likes
- 12,177
- AFL Club
- Essendon
Ok I've succumbed to Burgess to O'brien via Bines as long as I have 6 forwards playing this week. Jacobs is confirmed to be out for 4-6 weeks (perhaps more I'd imagine) so O'Brien looks like he could be a handy cash cow.
Setterfield (in my mids) is suspended, Parker is in doubt and Heeney is in doubt. It's annoying that this only makes me 36K but Burgess is surely only going to make another 40-50k at most and is in danger of being dropped with Corbett returning soon.
3rd trade of the year gone with but I'll at least feel like I have escorted a few of the poorer cash cows from side. Maybe O'Brien can come in handy if I need him as well.
Setterfield (in my mids) is suspended, Parker is in doubt and Heeney is in doubt. It's annoying that this only makes me 36K but Burgess is surely only going to make another 40-50k at most and is in danger of being dropped with Corbett returning soon.
3rd trade of the year gone with but I'll at least feel like I have escorted a few of the poorer cash cows from side. Maybe O'Brien can come in handy if I need him as well.
As a general comment, people seem quite worried about forward cover, and it is influencing their trades. Worth flagging a few considerations:
- If you're only planning one trade this week, your second trade provides some flexibility to deal with a late out if it occurs.
- Your forward cover is probably only scoring c. 50s anyway, less if it's Balta
- You will have more trades next week if a forward misses next week
- Setterfield may not be worth keeping anyway
- There has been some discussion here that Heeney's injury issue was clickbait.
- If you're only planning one trade this week, your second trade provides some flexibility to deal with a late out if it occurs.
- Your forward cover is probably only scoring c. 50s anyway, less if it's Balta
- You will have more trades next week if a forward misses next week
- Setterfield may not be worth keeping anyway
- There has been some discussion here that Heeney's injury issue was clickbait.
I would definitely trade this week, you have to take the good second wave rookies when they present, in my view.
Personally I would just cut Setterfield to bring in ROB, and cut Butters to get your favourite out of Stack or Hore. I'm thinking Stack may be the better option for JS, albeit that Hore competing with Lewis etc for a spot this week may clarify his JS somewhat for us before you need to decide. I think Scott is worth keeping if he's back this week, as I expect he will be - versus Setterfield he has a higher average, lower price and is at least available to play the next two weeks.
The only real advantages of Setterfield appear to be his DPP (not much use in the forward line for now, and you already have Bines as a donut) and the fact that he is a warm body that is forward eligible and playing, when not suspended.
Also worth considering whether you can do one trade to get ROB when needed and then finesse the timing of the other so you have extra info by that stage. I haven't checked game sequencing but it may be worth a look.
Personally I would just cut Setterfield to bring in ROB, and cut Butters to get your favourite out of Stack or Hore. I'm thinking Stack may be the better option for JS, albeit that Hore competing with Lewis etc for a spot this week may clarify his JS somewhat for us before you need to decide. I think Scott is worth keeping if he's back this week, as I expect he will be - versus Setterfield he has a higher average, lower price and is at least available to play the next two weeks.
The only real advantages of Setterfield appear to be his DPP (not much use in the forward line for now, and you already have Bines as a donut) and the fact that he is a warm body that is forward eligible and playing, when not suspended.
Also worth considering whether you can do one trade to get ROB when needed and then finesse the timing of the other so you have extra info by that stage. I haven't checked game sequencing but it may be worth a look.
Anyone else thinking about doing something crazy with me. I have 30 trades still and my team is good but nothing too exciting sitting in 20,000th
Gawn -> ROB.
Let me explain, as it seems crazy. I can see ROB scoring 80-90. Say Gawn stays at his 110 average. We are losing 20-30 points a week and a captain option but also Gawn will be losing a slight bit of cash (10-30k) while ROB hopefully hits 350k.
The main benefit here is with the trade I have 700k+ to play with now. That means Balta to R Marshall as F5 and next week Clark to J Lloyd.
Gawn/Parker/Clark = 110, 60, 55 = 225
ROB/Marshall/Lloyd = 80, 90, 110 = 280.
A gain of 55 points per week and cash generation, there are 3 main dangers though.
1. Gawn goes 135+, increases price and proves any ROB gains basically ineffective. Very possible with matchups against Marshall and Nank to come in the next two weeks.
2. ROB/Marshall fail and revert to Z Clarke/Dunkley equivalent selections.
3. If ROB gets injured in the next week or two it’s going to be very hard to turn him into anything significant without burning another two trades.
Thoughts? Has my lack of trading all year sent me loopy?
Gawn -> ROB.
Let me explain, as it seems crazy. I can see ROB scoring 80-90. Say Gawn stays at his 110 average. We are losing 20-30 points a week and a captain option but also Gawn will be losing a slight bit of cash (10-30k) while ROB hopefully hits 350k.
The main benefit here is with the trade I have 700k+ to play with now. That means Balta to R Marshall as F5 and next week Clark to J Lloyd.
Gawn/Parker/Clark = 110, 60, 55 = 225
ROB/Marshall/Lloyd = 80, 90, 110 = 280.
A gain of 55 points per week and cash generation, there are 3 main dangers though.
1. Gawn goes 135+, increases price and proves any ROB gains basically ineffective. Very possible with matchups against Marshall and Nank to come in the next two weeks.
2. ROB/Marshall fail and revert to Z Clarke/Dunkley equivalent selections.
3. If ROB gets injured in the next week or two it’s going to be very hard to turn him into anything significant without burning another two trades.
Thoughts? Has my lack of trading all year sent me loopy?
Hi Cattleherder
maybe below also indicates why Westhoff won't be a good scorer and the fact that Lycett has forced him to play wing and half forward.
So I am trading him out and also it will be less stressful, not knowing each week to play him in the 22 or bench him, because the bench players can outscore him.
PORT ADELAIDE
The Power are now a genuinely entertaining team to watch, morphing from a slow stoppage team to a quicker and more direct outfit in 2019. Ken Hinkley’s men are ranked second for playing on after a mark — a dramatic rise from 17th in 2018.
https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/af...r/news-story/00b40f4cf86d8acb6f818b5c50be38bb
maybe below also indicates why Westhoff won't be a good scorer and the fact that Lycett has forced him to play wing and half forward.
So I am trading him out and also it will be less stressful, not knowing each week to play him in the 22 or bench him, because the bench players can outscore him.
PORT ADELAIDE
The Power are now a genuinely entertaining team to watch, morphing from a slow stoppage team to a quicker and more direct outfit in 2019. Ken Hinkley’s men are ranked second for playing on after a mark — a dramatic rise from 17th in 2018.
https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/af...r/news-story/00b40f4cf86d8acb6f818b5c50be38bb
Those people with Gawn, Grundy and Bines ruck set up, are you still going to get ROB this week? If so, is it straight swap Bines for ROB and he sits on bench until culling time, then Bines back in? Or trade out a Setters type, swing Bines forward, then swing back when culling ROB. I suppose it depends on forwards available this week.
My original plans were to do one up, one down to strengthen my forward line, ie LDU to Stack, Setters to Daniel.
I'm leaning towards passing on ROB and going with original plan of upgrading forward line, but ROB could be good moneymaking rookie, albeit never appearing in R1 or R2 spot?
My original plans were to do one up, one down to strengthen my forward line, ie LDU to Stack, Setters to Daniel.
I'm leaning towards passing on ROB and going with original plan of upgrading forward line, but ROB could be good moneymaking rookie, albeit never appearing in R1 or R2 spot?
- Joined
- 3 Jul 2017
- Messages
- 38,958
- Likes
- 126,616
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
Thanks. Would prefer to keep Setterfield as I'm more confident on his scoring ability and cash generation in comparison to some of the other rookies.
If Scott isn't named this week then my preference would be him to ROB as it allows me to keep Butters meaning I wouldn't have to field one of T Atkins or M Gibbons if the move was completed via Setterfield's DPP plus I would have Burgess as cover if D Moore/I Heeney/ M Parker miss whilst W Setterfield misses.
Also the complex Butters to ROB move via X Duursma and C Burgess is very appealing but it means I have no cover in the forward line until Setterfield returns but it allows more flexibility for future trades such as S Collins to J Hately.
If Scott isn't named this week then my preference would be him to ROB as it allows me to keep Butters meaning I wouldn't have to field one of T Atkins or M Gibbons if the move was completed via Setterfield's DPP plus I would have Burgess as cover if D Moore/I Heeney/ M Parker miss whilst W Setterfield misses.
Also the complex Butters to ROB move via X Duursma and C Burgess is very appealing but it means I have no cover in the forward line until Setterfield returns but it allows more flexibility for future trades such as S Collins to J Hately.