Opinion SC 2021: Rate My Team

[wogitalia]

That last bit is why Steele and Petracca are simply not in consideration for me as starters. It’s only Oliver in recent years who have broken that trend.

Your bullishness on Dunkley getting that mid role has me reconsidering him. I still need to see how the role looks in the one preseason game. If he doesn’t get at least half the CBs there, don’t think I could start him.

I'm not sold on that theory at all, especially for guys with strong progression like those two who are top pedigree prospects from juniors.

Oliver went 70> 111 > 114
Neale went 87 > 104 > 112 and then all the way to the moon.
Macrae from 94 > 107 > 127
Merrett from 88 > 111 > 109
Mitchell 84 > 104 > 120 > 129 (there's an extra 104 in there consolidated)
Fyfe is one of the few who supports with an injury ruined 73 > 108 > 94 > 106 > 122 path
Danger went 80 > 118 > 113 > 105 > 118 > 130, his role at Adelaide was a major issue (Dunkley comparison here).
Selwood went 77 > 98 > 111 > 117 and stated there a couple of years.
Pendles 88 > 103 > 106 > 110 > 129 and stayed 120+ for 3 seasons.
Cripps fell back having done 39 > 96 > 108 > 98 > 120 > 117, again though, after the big jump he hung there.
Ablett 91 > 114 > 132 > 140
Judd went 114 > 132 (not sure what the jump on 114 is prior)
Swan went 102 > 123 > 126 > 122 > 126

Not mids but Grundy > 97 > 130 > 130 > 121, Gawn 62 > 102 > 118 > 92 (injured) > 127.5 > 128 > 140, Docherty 87 > 108 > 115 and Lloyd 87 > 112 > 109 > 122 are also strong examples.

I actually think with the star players the majority actually hang around there for a few years, looking at that list there is probably more risk with a guy like Macrae, most of them struggle to hold that range for more than 3 years although some certainly do!

I'm sure there are more counter arguments, I believe JPK, Beams, Goldstein, Sloane and Dusty would probably support the opposite as they all had down years after breaking out from memory. Think a couple of them had injuries and a couple had role changes.

Basically I wouldn't be ruling guys out because they broke out last year, most of the top players had similar jumps at some point and a significant amount hold up or even improve. Petracca for example is one who should improve as he continues to get fitter and, quite probably, becomes the #1 midfielder in the side.

 

[Bomber18]

I'm not sold on that theory at all, especially for guys with strong progression like those two who are top pedigree prospects from juniors.

Oliver went 70> 111 > 114
Neale went 87 > 104 > 112 and then all the way to the moon.
Macrae from 94 > 107 > 127
Merrett from 88 > 111 > 109
Mitchell 84 > 104 > 120 > 129 (there's an extra 104 in there consolidated)
Fyfe is one of the few who supports with an injury ruined 73 > 108 > 94 > 106 > 122 path
Danger went 80 > 118 > 113 > 105 > 118 > 130, his role at Adelaide was a major issue (Dunkley comparison here).
Selwood went 77 > 98 > 111 > 117 and stated there a couple of years.
Pendles 88 > 103 > 106 > 110 > 129 and stayed 120+ for 3 seasons.
Cripps fell back having done 39 > 96 > 108 > 98 > 120 > 117, again though, after the big jump he hung there.
Ablett 91 > 114 > 132 > 140
Judd went 114 > 132 (not sure what the jump on 114 is prior)
Swan went 102 > 123 > 126 > 122 > 126

Not mids but Grundy > 97 > 130 > 130 > 121, Gawn 62 > 102 > 118 > 92 (injured) > 127.5 > 128 > 140, Docherty 87 > 108 > 115 and Lloyd 87 > 112 > 109 > 122 are also strong examples.

I actually think with the star players the majority actually hang around there for a few years, looking at that list there is probably more risk with a guy like Macrae, most of them struggle to hold that range for more than 3 years although some certainly do!

I'm sure there are more counter arguments, I believe JPK, Beams, Goldstein, Sloane and Dusty would probably support the opposite as they all had down years after breaking out from memory. Think a couple of them had injuries and a couple had role changes.

Basically I wouldn't be ruling guys out because they broke out last year, most of the top players had similar jumps at some point and a significant amount hold up or even improve. Petracca for example is one who should improve as he continues to get fitter and, quite probably, becomes the #1 midfielder in the side.

I probably should’ve explained the theory in a bit more detail. It has been well discussed on SCS for a while now. First put forward in Rowsus’s threads here, 7 years ago now!

https://supercoachscores.com/threads/2014-chasing-last-years-points.926/

What I found in my study I thought was quite interesting.
When a player did both of:
A) Had an increase on his previous years average of 20 or more points/game
B) That increase took him to an average of 102*/game or higher
That every player, outside of Ablett and Swan (possibly the 2 greatest SC players of all time), failed to back up that season. They all went BACKWARDSthe next year.

I have found the above seems to generally hold true and that for those that don’t, they are generally exceptions to the general rule. I think Libba, Bont and Oliver from memory are the ones that improved again after an initial +20ppg breakout.

Dunkley failed last season.

Steele and Trac fit the indicators but can they break the trend...?

I usually prefer to wait and see on these types given the uncanny history.

 

[pizza safety]

That last bit is why Steele and Petracca are simply not in consideration for me as starters. It’s only Oliver in recent years who have broken that trend.

Your bullishness on Dunkley getting that mid role has me reconsidering him. I still need to see how the role looks in the one preseason game. If he doesn’t get at least half the CBs there, don’t think I could start him.

Yeah 100% in agreement with that line of thought on Steele and Petracca,

I'm in no way certain that will happen with Dunkley, it's almost pure conjecture lol. It's just how I imagine things will play out and me thinking about some of the internal workings of that football club. I think they still have some party boys in their side and I know Dunkley is "not" one of those guys and I know they want to keep him to help sustain the good parts of their culture. Anything can happen though.

I think the only thing I feel very sure of is seeing he nearly left for increased midfield time and given they value him I think he at least gets more mid time than the 39% of CBA's he got last year and I therefore see his floor as pushing high 90's rather than at 90. Some of the loss of mid time was probably just bad luck that his replacements did well in his absence, and Bevo starts getting addicted to certain flavours (players) when they play well in the midfield (like Libba taking Macrae's mid time in early 2019).

 

[manyproblems]

Dunkley failed last season.
.

I'm going to bat for this pick to say he was playing plenty midfield in the first 3 rounds with a 108 average, then a bad luck injury forced Libba to move midfield and Bevo didnt take him out when Dunkley returned. Cant really say for sure whether Dunkley stays mid if no injury. Even then, despite 25% cbas when he came back (mostly ruck probably) he still averaged 100 odd.

 

[wogitalia]

I probably should’ve explained the theory in a bit more detail. It has been well discussed on SCS for a while now. First put forward in Rowsus’s threads here, 7 years ago now!

https://supercoachscores.com/threads/2014-chasing-last-years-points.926/



I have found the above seems to generally hold true and that for those that don’t, they are generally exceptions to the general rule. I think Libba, Bont and Oliver from memory are the ones that improved again after an initial +20ppg breakout.

Dunkley failed last season.

Steele and Trac fit the indicators but can they break the trend...?

I usually prefer to wait and see on these types given the uncanny history.

It's quite an interesting study but it's a hyper specific criteria and to be fair it's kind of riddled with anomalies. Would also love to see it for the last 6 years if there's anyone out there with the stats and too much time

Setting at 117+ (which is the range we're really dealing with to remove for the guys you'd need another jump from to be relevant (You can go down to 114 and it only adds another less than 10% in Hodge and NicNat and Tuck to the injured the next year group)

Chapman, Danger, Bartel, Cox and Montagna all dropped less than 10% and remained genuine keepers, not ideal but still a successful starting pick.

Beams and Kerr had injuries in the following season. Brown had an injury and only played 10 games in the testing season, I don't think anyone had him sustaining the 140.5 pace and he quite likely wouldn't have qualified (134 was the requirement).

That leaves JPK, who dropped 12.3% as the only one who was really an unacceptable pick. (Hodge above would also be unacceptable as a mid) Even then it was still a 105+ season that probably could have snuck home as the M8, not what you wanted, but still not a complete disaster.

At a quick glance of the guys I named above it would appear Mitchell would have passed and that Cripps, Merrett and Macrae would have all failed by a couple of points (still winning picks). Neale didn't qualify by a couple of points but would have passed if he had (had an 8 point window to do it in). Grundy failed by 0.4 points but I think a 130 is still ok. Gawn passes, as does Docherty. Lloyd would have failed by 3 points. Josh Kelly another who passes, Marshall failed last year, just. Marc Murphy was an epic failure in 2018. Travis Boak was so close to being a success (19.2 improvement only).

It's actually not that easy to find guys who even qualify to be honest. I guess Steele, Petracca, Menegola (backing a fail here), Hawkins, Miller, Libba (for a 2nd time!), Guthrie and Tim English all get a crack this year! NicNat just missed out on a 2nd crack and Lachie Hunter also just missed out!

 

[Chumpion]

Latest version of my team.. overall I'm quite happy with the distribution of value and the current names in there (rookies are somewhat placeholder but trying to capture the ones in the rumours.. at least for now).

Only thing I don't love about this is team is I only have $4,800 left in the bank.. so flexibility to follow the best rookies is extremely low..

 

[Herbie66]

Liking this set up at the moment

D: WHITFIELD , STEWART , Harmes , Milera

M: NEALE , OLIVER , LAIRD * , D MARTIN * , CRIPPS

R: GAWN , GRUNDY

F: MARSHALL , Heeney (?) , Ziebell , Daniher

Bank = $ 24,100.00

7 onfield rookies are from the 2020 Draft for pricing purposes

Bench rookies are all $ 123,900.00 apart from Treacy.

Plan would be that I 100% nail my starting rookies (hahaha) and be able to start the downgrade/upgrade phase with ease.

Harmes , Milera , Daniher , Ziebell would all perform well enough up to and including the byes then be the final 4 upgrades if required.

Heeney is the concern at the moment so depending on the Round 1 $$$ shuffle he can possibly be upgraded to a F or a M via Dusty.

Now to wait until the rookie picture becomes a lot clearer.

 

[nath_99]

Current iteration of my team... Gee this year has been tricky to pick the midfield hasn't it!


DEF: Lloyd, Laird, Whitfield, DGB, Jones, Highmore, Brand, Gould
MID: Oliver, Macrae, Cripps, Taranto, Heppell, Phillips, Powell, Bowey, Durdin, Spicer, Davies
RUCK: Gawn, Grundy
FWD: Dunkley, Danger, Marshall, Daniher, Cockatoo, Rowe, Cahill, Rowe.

Still thinking my MID may be too lean, was looking at M.Crouch, but don't know if I can trust his hammys.

Heppell & Daniher, hoping to make a bit of money on them to upgrade.

 

[Vicwood]

View attachment 25826

Latest version of my team.. overall I'm quite happy with the distribution of value and the current names in there (rookies are somewhat placeholder but trying to capture the ones in the rumours.. at least for now).

Only thing I don't love about this is team is I only have $4,800 left in the bank.. so flexibility to follow the best rookies is extremely low..

Good to see Cahill Appear. Any updates on his JS.??

 

[Couch Coach]

2020 - Season ended with the Melbourne/Essendon game, I had a third of my team across those two teams. At that point I just focused on my cash leagues. Having been up there at the pointy end I knew that losing ~500 points is not recoverable, was what it was, still think it was a disgraceful action but can't do anything about it. Was also way more focused on daily fantasy and as a result DT, from that point on.
!

Agree, still bitter grrr. 6 players out (4 premiums out I think)

Oh and I finished 39th.

 

[Chumpion]

Good to see Cahill Appear. Any updates on his JS.??

Honestly nothing more than a few "rumour" articles on the AFL and HS sites alongside what's been mentioned on here (few other chats with bomber fans but that's hardly credible or quotable..). He is training with the backline group and looks like getting a genuine shot at filling the Saad/McKenna roles off half back. Still a bit to play out but the bombers have very little to lose giving him a red hot crack so I think he'll get a few games there to try and cement the role - especially as we don't exactly have a stack of other options.

The big unknown is what the backline role looks like.. the plan could be for him to be a pure lockdown small defender or to try and add some dash out of the backline. He was top 10 in the 2km time trial at his draft combine so he can't be slow.. just might look it after watching Saad/Mckenna do their thing.

Worst case he starts in more a lockdown role while he builds his defensive craft before getting unleashed a little more, but if anything that probably boosts his JS.

See what happens in the preseason game but for mine there are more reasons to have him in than to take him out!

 

[Bomber18]

It's quite an interesting study but it's a hyper specific criteria and to be fair it's kind of riddled with anomalies. Would also love to see it for the last 6 years if there's anyone out there with the stats and too much time

Setting at 117+ (which is the range we're really dealing with to remove for the guys you'd need another jump from to be relevant (You can go down to 114 and it only adds another less than 10% in Hodge and NicNat and Tuck to the injured the next year group)

Chapman, Danger, Bartel, Cox and Montagna all dropped less than 10% and remained genuine keepers, not ideal but still a successful starting pick.

Beams and Kerr had injuries in the following season. Brown had an injury and only played 10 games in the testing season, I don't think anyone had him sustaining the 140.5 pace and he quite likely wouldn't have qualified (134 was the requirement).

That leaves JPK, who dropped 12.3% as the only one who was really an unacceptable pick. (Hodge above would also be unacceptable as a mid) Even then it was still a 105+ season that probably could have snuck home as the M8, not what you wanted, but still not a complete disaster.

At a quick glance of the guys I named above it would appear Mitchell would have passed and that Cripps, Merrett and Macrae would have all failed by a couple of points (still winning picks). Neale didn't qualify by a couple of points but would have passed if he had (had an 8 point window to do it in). Grundy failed by 0.4 points but I think a 130 is still ok. Gawn passes, as does Docherty. Lloyd would have failed by 3 points. Josh Kelly another who passes, Marshall failed last year, just. Marc Murphy was an epic failure in 2018. Travis Boak was so close to being a success (19.2 improvement only).

It's actually not that easy to find guys who even qualify to be honest. I guess Steele, Petracca, Menegola (backing a fail here), Hawkins, Miller, Libba (for a 2nd time!), Guthrie and Tim English all get a crack this year! NicNat just missed out on a 2nd crack and Lachie Hunter also just missed out!

Not sure if there would be any interest from @Rowsus or @Connoisseur to update the analysis, it is a mammoth task to look at 7 years!

It is hyper specific criteria but it is uncanny how it generally has held true (ie the player would regress rather than improve). I think another caveat is that I believe it only should be applied to a player’s “first” breakout beyond 102+ (not subsequent +20ppg increases).

One of my more controversial ideas/threads.
30 players in SC history have achieved these 2 Things.
1) A 20/game increase on the previous seasons average
2) The average they avhieved with that increase is 102 or higher.
Of those 30 players, only Swan and Ablett achieved an increase in average the following year, after their 20/game jump.

I have followed it with interest and think it has generally held true with Libba, Bont and Oliver the only strict exceptions (ie improved their average post the year they had a +20ppg breakout beyond 102+ for the first time).

It’s of course a bit controversial and @pizza safety and I butted heads on it last preseason for Dunkley. But in an uncanny matter, it held true. I know people cite injuries as an excuse, but injuries have plagued others in the past too from breaking this “curse”.

 

[wogitalia]

Gawn has actually done it twice. 62 > 102.1 > 118 and 91.6 > 127.5 > 128.3 > 139.8.

Docherty certainly has also with 87.5 > 108.5 > 114.7.

But yeah, it's hard to sustain it, things like tags, injuries, strategy changes, injuries other players, etc, etc will do it. That said I think the data more supports those guys in the 115+ group hanging around than the opposite. Only one non-injury related bad starting pick in that whole group is a pretty good outcome for mine.

I do wonder how much the stats change if you drop it to say 15 point improvement, would get a lot more data in play with that one.

Either way it's cool extra information. Nothing can save me from me though

 

[Toothless Tigers]

Here is my 'White Wings' Vanilla style Team.

I keep changing it but always come back to this set-up.

Would appreciate any critique as I have been looking at it far too long to notice any glaring issues.

Thank you for taking time to reply/review.

Balance: 22,000

 

[Herbie66]

Here is my 'White Wings' Vanilla style Team.

I keep changing it but always come back to this set-up.

Would appreciate any critique as I have been looking at it far too long to notice any glaring issues.

Thank you for taking time to reply/review.

Balance: 22,000
View attachment 25847

Not much to dislike , but pretty much all depends on the Rookies being named Round 1 to make it all work.

 

[Under The Dome]

Here is my 'White Wings' Vanilla style Team.

I keep changing it but always come back to this set-up.

Would appreciate any critique as I have been looking at it far too long to notice any glaring issues.

Thank you for taking time to reply/review.

Balance: 22,000
View attachment 25847

Nice team. Don't know how Atkins is tracking with shoulder surgery but could be use for extra rookie funds if needed. Lloyd would be the first I'd look at going down to that 500-550k if only the more expensive rookies show up. Other 600k+ options I would keep over Lloyd for the VC/C's but that is just down to if extra funds are needed.

 

[Toothless Tigers]

Nice team. Don't know how Atkins is tracking with shoulder surgery but could be use for extra rookie funds if needed. Lloyd would be the first I'd look at going down to that 500-550k if only the more expensive rookies show up. Other 600k+ options I would keep over Lloyd for the VC/C's but that is just down to if extra funds are needed.

Thank you for the feedback, I checked the AFL injury list from 2 weeks ago and there was no mention of Atkins.
https://www.afl.com.au/news/541676/where-s-your-club-at-injuries-time-trial-king-pre-season-star

 

[Connoisseur]

Here is my 'White Wings' Vanilla style Team.

I keep changing it but always come back to this set-up.

Would appreciate any critique as I have been looking at it far too long to notice any glaring issues.

Thank you for taking time to reply/review.

Balance: 22,000
View attachment 25847

An option could be
Out: J Lloyd and R Atkins
In: Z Williams and T Taranto

Prefer Atkins at M6 rather than M5 and considering you have the trio of Laird, Stewart and Whitfield then it isn’t overly necessary to have Lloyd as well. Other than that, very solid premium selections.

 

[Herbie66]

@Connoisseur

Have you looked at a all rookie starting backline yet ?

Allows Taranto @ M7 , Gawn & Grundy , Ziebell F4 , Daniher F5

 

[Connoisseur]

@Connoisseur

Have you looked at a all rookie starting backline yet ?

Allows Taranto @ M7 , Gawn & Grundy , Ziebell F4 , Daniher F5

Not yet and likely will not, considering the defensive premiums available as well as the scheduling of the opening round for the rookie defenders.