Discussion Round 1: Teams & In Game Discussion
- Thread starter Bomber18
- Start date
What makes you say that...?
From what I've read 'publicly' on the forums, it didn't seem to me that there was a 'majority' that had Pickett (E), nor was there any overwhelming advice to do so.
Coaches that did so would have a plan in place and it's quite feasible that they needed to do so in order to execute on their VC loop (if they were planning on a cash cow at R3 instead). Others could've simply wanted to test the waters first up with the hope of getting a leg up on avoiding a possible poor score from a very popular Rookie, which looked more likely than not at HT.
I'm happy and glad that you've made the right call on playing Pickett on-field, but that decision shouldn't hinge on whether you visited SCS or not.
From what I've read 'publicly' on the forums, it didn't seem to me that there was a 'majority' that had Pickett (E), nor was there any overwhelming advice to do so.
Coaches that did so would have a plan in place and it's quite feasible that they needed to do so in order to execute on their VC loop (if they were planning on a cash cow at R3 instead). Others could've simply wanted to test the waters first up with the hope of getting a leg up on avoiding a possible poor score from a very popular Rookie, which looked more likely than not at HT.
I'm happy and glad that you've made the right call on playing Pickett on-field, but that decision shouldn't hinge on whether you visited SCS or not.
- Joined
- 24 Feb 2015
- Messages
- 6,697
- Likes
- 30,160
- AFL Club
- Sydney
I had the E on Pickett and at half time was confident that was the right thing to do. It was only his last quarter really that pushed his score up, had a number of pressure acts but could have gone either way.
I don't see it as a big deal, I'm usually burning trades early in the first 3 rounds for rookie corrections with 30 trades in 23 rounds let alone 30 trades in 17 if we get there. There's a few rookies named that many have that are pretty sketchy anyway so take a punt.
I don't see it as a big deal, I'm usually burning trades early in the first 3 rounds for rookie corrections with 30 trades in 23 rounds let alone 30 trades in 17 if we get there. There's a few rookies named that many have that are pretty sketchy anyway so take a punt.
It's a tactic for the die-hards. The average joe blow would have Pickett on field.
I have to disagree with you saying all coaches who did it would have had a plan in place because if the discussion in this thread is evidence then I'm not seeing much planning just a string of "oh, what do I do now" posts. I think maybe it was one of those auto-pilot/do it because I can decisions now that looping is so ingrained in the game tactics.
My perplexion is why loop the 1 of our most likely rookies? I don't know what score was acceptable as a cut-off either? Anything over 60 for a rookie is a win for mine and I felt that was Pickett's floor. Now people are putting Steven in there as a donut but doesn't that just push a forward rookie on field over whoever you were spending $367K on? Do mcInerney, Brown, etc inspire confidence that they would even get to 60?
It feels to me like a surefire way to tie up one of our trades. Yes, we have lots.
All that said, I didn't notice much if any discussion on the tactic on here leading up to the game so I don't think it can be called SCS forum official advice. If anything I though from the FD thread that the consensus was no FDs this season. Also, yes I am sure some did indeed have a VC loop plan with Pickett E.
I have to disagree with you saying all coaches who did it would have had a plan in place because if the discussion in this thread is evidence then I'm not seeing much planning just a string of "oh, what do I do now" posts. I think maybe it was one of those auto-pilot/do it because I can decisions now that looping is so ingrained in the game tactics.
My perplexion is why loop the 1 of our most likely rookies? I don't know what score was acceptable as a cut-off either? Anything over 60 for a rookie is a win for mine and I felt that was Pickett's floor. Now people are putting Steven in there as a donut but doesn't that just push a forward rookie on field over whoever you were spending $367K on? Do mcInerney, Brown, etc inspire confidence that they would even get to 60?
It feels to me like a surefire way to tie up one of our trades. Yes, we have lots.
All that said, I didn't notice much if any discussion on the tactic on here leading up to the game so I don't think it can be called SCS forum official advice. If anything I though from the FD thread that the consensus was no FDs this season. Also, yes I am sure some did indeed have a VC loop plan with Pickett E.
Last edited:
He’s my M3 I guess judging from price. He was probably one of 2-3 mids locked in from the beginning though.
For the record other mids are currently Neale, Jelly, Bont and Oliver.
Edit: RE Pickett, I was fiddling with my team nearly all the way up to lockout, so left him on field. Given the uncertainty I had with my other rookies, I didn’t think it was smart to try and loop him with no chance of getting his score when the consensus was he’d score decently for a rookie. By decently I mean 50+ (which I’d happily take for round 1).
For the record other mids are currently Neale, Jelly, Bont and Oliver.
Edit: RE Pickett, I was fiddling with my team nearly all the way up to lockout, so left him on field. Given the uncertainty I had with my other rookies, I didn’t think it was smart to try and loop him with no chance of getting his score when the consensus was he’d score decently for a rookie. By decently I mean 50+ (which I’d happily take for round 1).
Was always going to loop Pickett Round 1 , even before the Corona Virus saga.
Have now brought in Mahony to get his score and it opens up the F/M link with Smith & Budarick which might be useful.
Captain loop was going to be Comben but now going to start Naitanui & may handcuff him to Williams or actually start Naismith as R3 to provide cover , make $$$ or become a premium defender.
Given the uncertainty of how many matches let alone rounds are going to be actually played can't see the big drama in starting Pickett as a Emergency.
And if future rounds do start we basically have 2 trades per round to correct things.
EDIT
Cripps was always going to be VC as well , so factored that into my Pickett E equation to give me more ruck.options instead of Comben
Have now brought in Mahony to get his score and it opens up the F/M link with Smith & Budarick which might be useful.
Captain loop was going to be Comben but now going to start Naitanui & may handcuff him to Williams or actually start Naismith as R3 to provide cover , make $$$ or become a premium defender.
Given the uncertainty of how many matches let alone rounds are going to be actually played can't see the big drama in starting Pickett as a Emergency.
And if future rounds do start we basically have 2 trades per round to correct things.
EDIT
Cripps was always going to be VC as well , so factored that into my Pickett E equation to give me more ruck.options instead of Comben
Last edited:
Hasn't left my side.
My original plan was Cripps , Jelly & the 3 Dogs but now trying something different with my starting side based on the fact that we might still have 30 trades to play with
7 season long keepers
8 happy to trade out players
7 rookies onfield to upgrade
EDIT
One of my season long keepers was going to be TJL but that may change after last night's performance
My original plan was Cripps , Jelly & the 3 Dogs but now trying something different with my starting side based on the fact that we might still have 30 trades to play with
7 season long keepers
8 happy to trade out players
7 rookies onfield to upgrade
EDIT
One of my season long keepers was going to be TJL but that may change after last night's performance