Opinion Questions For Rowsus
- Thread starter Rowsus
- Start date
- Status
If you think only Gawn and Neale are dropping, which your notes tend to indicate, then that pair makes little sense.
If you think all the premiums will drop proportionately then they're still clear of the pack and make a lot of sense.
Basically do you think the whole market is overpriced or just those two players?
Honestly, not sure they make a lot of sense if you think they're an isolated 10ppg drop pairing and the others aren't as your notes would indicate.
I say this as someone who didn't start Neale last year because I was pretty sure he was overpriced and would drop and who still has burn marks from applying the same logic to Ablett when he averaged 132 and then doing it again that year he averaged 129, only to then pay absolute top dollar for him and he hurt his shoulder a month after I traded him in, this game can be so good at reminding us we're idiots some times
Pick the best starting picks, captaincy for me is closer to byes in importance than my projections. It's a tie breaker on spending money but the reality is if you're starting Grundy and Cripps, you've got two strong captain options already, every additional option is just more choice but you only get two looks a week, if you're starting Grundy and Cripps and you don't think you've got two captain options, maybe re-think those picks as well!
I say all of this as someone who thinks that both Gawn and Neale can sustain their averages give or take a few points although I'd love an indicator on how Neale's preseason has gone pretty soon!
Cerra - Mid - $484,800
As we said earlier, a SC average of 101 in the 2nd half of the season. Interesting looking at those numbers. The Disposals went up, Clearances went up, a little, but things like Tackles went down, and his CPR stayed about the same. His CP's were 41.6% of disposals in the first part of the season, and 41.2% in the 2nd half. He scored close enough to 10% higher when Freo wins, in both halves of the season.
There's something unsatisfactory in those 2nd half of the season figures, but I'm having trouble putting my finger on it. I think I was expecting his CPR to go up a bit, with more Mid time, his tackles as well, and even his I50's and Rb50's could have gone a little higher.
At his price, he needs to score at a Keeper level, and he's striking me as, if he filled a decent M7/8 he has done well. The problem is, I don't want an M7/8 in my starting team, unless he's a real bargain.
As we said earlier, a SC average of 101 in the 2nd half of the season. Interesting looking at those numbers. The Disposals went up, Clearances went up, a little, but things like Tackles went down, and his CPR stayed about the same. His CP's were 41.6% of disposals in the first part of the season, and 41.2% in the 2nd half. He scored close enough to 10% higher when Freo wins, in both halves of the season.
There's something unsatisfactory in those 2nd half of the season figures, but I'm having trouble putting my finger on it. I think I was expecting his CPR to go up a bit, with more Mid time, his tackles as well, and even his I50's and Rb50's could have gone a little higher.
At his price, he needs to score at a Keeper level, and he's striking me as, if he filled a decent M7/8 he has done well. The problem is, I don't want an M7/8 in my starting team, unless he's a real bargain.
I eagerly await Rowsus' reply, but I completely agree with most of the above...
Pick the super-premo priced players you like (eg. $650k+ types) for your captain choices and then treat the rest like "normal' premiums (almost - caveat below): Would you pick a premium who you felt strongly would drop their average by 10 over the season? Probably not: you could save 100k and pick a player who will increase their average and get the same output.
The caveat to the above comes more as a risk-based thing and having the right players in your team at the end. Take Lachie Neale for example: Even if his average dropped by 10 he is still hands-down a super-elite midfielder, probably top 3 or 4 by season's end. So you can consider the starting price inclusive of a "tax" you pay to almost guarantee a top player on the line, even if his average drops. A more speculative pick like Adams or Walsh doesn't have the tax, but you pay instead in inherent risk: you may end up with a player who averages 110+ or you may end up with a 100 average list clogger that requires a trade.
So for picking the super-premo types, for me the captain angle works, and the 'risk tax' angle works but outside of that, I don't pick players (on purpose! It still happens by accident an awful lot) who I think will drop in average by 10 or more.
Pick the super-premo priced players you like (eg. $650k+ types) for your captain choices and then treat the rest like "normal' premiums (almost - caveat below): Would you pick a premium who you felt strongly would drop their average by 10 over the season? Probably not: you could save 100k and pick a player who will increase their average and get the same output.
The caveat to the above comes more as a risk-based thing and having the right players in your team at the end. Take Lachie Neale for example: Even if his average dropped by 10 he is still hands-down a super-elite midfielder, probably top 3 or 4 by season's end. So you can consider the starting price inclusive of a "tax" you pay to almost guarantee a top player on the line, even if his average drops. A more speculative pick like Adams or Walsh doesn't have the tax, but you pay instead in inherent risk: you may end up with a player who averages 110+ or you may end up with a 100 average list clogger that requires a trade.
So for picking the super-premo types, for me the captain angle works, and the 'risk tax' angle works but outside of that, I don't pick players (on purpose! It still happens by accident an awful lot
) who I think will drop in average by 10 or more.
Hey Jurn Stern, Leroy,
I agree with about 90% of what you say here.
Last point first, and this is just a personal preference. Picking your starting team: Pick your 2 or 3 Captain choices, and don't even look at the prices. Getting Captain's right early is gold! Then choose your Ruck strategy. Set and forget, R1 and value, double value, whatever it is you need to decide where you're going with your Rucks as your 2nd step. Then Rookies, then fill your team. Just my preference for picking your team.
To my mind, you shouldn't be thinking along the lines of "Well, I'll have to get Gawn + Grundy + Lloyd + Neale etc now, otherwise, how will I get them later?". You should just be thinking, how can I best use my $10,000,000? Ideally you want the Keepers you started with to not lose too much value, but this is more about "protecting" your position, than the actual team value. If one or two of your Keepers are losing too much value, then you have a double edged problem. You're not getting the return on your money that you need to, and other Coaches now have the opportunity to bring that player in at a much reduced price, to close that POD you have against them. This comes down to one of my catch cries at this time of the year: Have/Set reasonable expectations! Let's break it down into an overly simple scenario.
You choose 13 Keepers and spend $7,500,000 on them (ave $577k)
You choose 17 Rookies and spend $2,500,000 on them (ave $147k)
From the price you paid for the Keepers, if they can score close to last seasons average, you get 7,500,000 / 5,400 = 1,389 points.
Let's assume you average 65 points from your 9 on field Rookies = 65 x 9 = 585
Your Captain scores 130, so your early scores are 1,389 + 585 + 130 = 2,104.
If you look at your team as two separate divisions, then you can see, the only detriment to your side, if the $7,500,000 division starts to lose too much value is, that you aren't getting near the 1,400 points you need to, to be competitive with the well chosen sides. Aside from that, the actual value of those 13 players is largely irrelevant, as unless there is an injury, or a real lack in starting judgement, you intend to keep them. Their value is a refelection of their output, that is all.
Let's look at expensive players over the last 3 seasons, that have dropped a lot of value by the end of Round 8.
2018
Dangerfield - opened $749,800 - Rnd 8 $604,500 (-$145,300) - sitting on 7/115
Martin D - opened $656,000 - Rnd 8 $519,400 (-$136,600) - sitting on 8/108
2019
Dangerfield - opened $660,500 - Rnd 8 $493,900 (-$164,600) - sitting on 8/99
Macrae - opened $689,700 - Rnd 8 $574,000 (-$115,700) - sitting on 8/117
2020
Cripps - opened $635,900 - Rnd 8 $478,100 (-$157,800) - sitting on 8/96
Whitfield opened $604,100 - Rnd 8 $492,000 (-$112,100) - sitting on 8/90
There are various degrees of disasters there, but ones like 2019 Macrae, while unsavoury, are not a disaster.
I've veered slightly off the track here. The bottom line is, I agree with you, that the most expensive players aren't must haves, as you will supposedly find it too hard to get them in later. The only must have, is a decent return from your largest expenditures.
If your 13 Keeper $7,500,000 divisions is producing 1,500+ points/Round, you are travelling well, and you will find a way to get the Gawn's or Neale's, or whoever you are missing, into your team.
If your 13 Keeper $7,500,000 division is producing 1,250-1,300 points/Round, then you've probably got bigger problems to fix, before you start worrying about the big ticket items you are missing.
It's all relative. If you are travelling well, you have the trades and the time to target the biggies. If you're not travelling well, it's more likely due to some poor picks you have included, rather than big tickets you have left out, unless you left them all out!
Tom Green season 1 averages - 6 games
15 Disps at 1 K to 2 Hb ratio, Cl 3, CPR 58%, DE 64%, Tackles 2.3
Nat Fyfe season 1 - 18 games
16 Disps at 1 K to 0.67 Hb ratio, Cl 1.7, CPR 45%, DE 60%, Tackles 3.0
Clayton Oliver season 1 - 13 games
19 Disps at 1 K to 2.3 Hb ratio, Cl 4.1, CPR 49%, DE 77%, Tackles 4.8
Marcus Bontempelli season 1 - 16 games
16 Disps at 1 K to 1 Hb ratio, Cl 2.2, CPR 47%, DE 67%, Tackles 3.4
Just the fact that he has played so few games, and that GWS are so SLOW to give their young guys an opportunity, I'd have to bet against him doing as well as the other 3 did, in their 2nd seasons.
15 Disps at 1 K to 2 Hb ratio, Cl 3, CPR 58%, DE 64%, Tackles 2.3
Nat Fyfe season 1 - 18 games
16 Disps at 1 K to 0.67 Hb ratio, Cl 1.7, CPR 45%, DE 60%, Tackles 3.0
Clayton Oliver season 1 - 13 games
19 Disps at 1 K to 2.3 Hb ratio, Cl 4.1, CPR 49%, DE 77%, Tackles 4.8
Marcus Bontempelli season 1 - 16 games
16 Disps at 1 K to 1 Hb ratio, Cl 2.2, CPR 47%, DE 67%, Tackles 3.4
Just the fact that he has played so few games, and that GWS are so SLOW to give their young guys an opportunity, I'd have to bet against him doing as well as the other 3 did, in their 2nd seasons.
- Joined
- 6 Jul 2012
- Messages
- 4,890
- Likes
- 11,150
- AFL Club
- West Coast
Perfect, thanks Rowsus. Love the break down split, interesting although maybe not surprising TOG and DE down. Agree, would have hoped CPR would have lifted. Had some concerns he maybe doesnt have quite the inside game to go 105-110.
Guessing if backing him his mid time vs other positions time you would be hoping it is up as in 1st rotation and that he gets there in total disposals.
Not sure what his tank is like, 78pct TOG in short quarters is an amber light. Currently out of side and watching if I push with Cripps Rowell Walsh. Any concerns and will upgrade to Gaff who should benefit from longer quarters.
Guessing if backing him his mid time vs other positions time you would be hoping it is up as in 1st rotation and that he gets there in total disposals.
Not sure what his tank is like, 78pct TOG in short quarters is an amber light. Currently out of side and watching if I push with Cripps Rowell Walsh. Any concerns and will upgrade to Gaff who should benefit from longer quarters.
- Joined
- 18 Sep 2014
- Messages
- 848
- Likes
- 493
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
If you think only Gawn and Neale are dropping, which your notes tend to indicate, then that pair makes little sense.
If you think all the premiums will drop proportionately then they're still clear of the pack and make a lot of sense.
Basically do you think the whole market is overpriced or just those two players?
Honestly, not sure they make a lot of sense if you think they're an isolated 10ppg drop pairing and the others aren't as your notes would indicate.
I say this as someone who didn't start Neale last year because I was pretty sure he was overpriced and would drop and who still has burn marks from applying the same logic to Ablett when he averaged 132 and then doing it again that year he averaged 129, only to then pay absolute top dollar for him and he hurt his shoulder a month after I traded him in, this game can be so good at reminding us we're idiots some times
Pick the best starting picks, captaincy for me is closer to byes in importance than my projections. It's a tie breaker on spending money but the reality is if you're starting Grundy and Cripps, you've got two strong captain options already, every additional option is just more choice but you only get two looks a week, if you're starting Grundy and Cripps and you don't think you've got two captain options, maybe re-think those picks as well!
I say all of this as someone who thinks that both Gawn and Neale can sustain their averages give or take a few points although I'd love an indicator on how Neale's preseason has gone pretty soon!
If you think all the premiums will drop proportionately then they're still clear of the pack and make a lot of sense.
Basically do you think the whole market is overpriced or just those two players?
Honestly, not sure they make a lot of sense if you think they're an isolated 10ppg drop pairing and the others aren't as your notes would indicate.
I say this as someone who didn't start Neale last year because I was pretty sure he was overpriced and would drop and who still has burn marks from applying the same logic to Ablett when he averaged 132 and then doing it again that year he averaged 129, only to then pay absolute top dollar for him and he hurt his shoulder a month after I traded him in, this game can be so good at reminding us we're idiots some times
Pick the best starting picks, captaincy for me is closer to byes in importance than my projections. It's a tie breaker on spending money but the reality is if you're starting Grundy and Cripps, you've got two strong captain options already, every additional option is just more choice but you only get two looks a week, if you're starting Grundy and Cripps and you don't think you've got two captain options, maybe re-think those picks as well!
I say all of this as someone who thinks that both Gawn and Neale can sustain their averages give or take a few points although I'd love an indicator on how Neale's preseason has gone pretty soon!
I certainly have a feeling that most of the market is overpriced, so it’s not an isolated drop, but I’m generally using additional TOG as my yard stick (or in the case of Trac, unsustainable time in midfield for his tank).
The only players who I think represent some value above $600k are those that had a similar average (within say 5-10ppg) in a prior year (Grundy, Macrae, Bont, Kelly, Danger, Mitchell, Goldy). Now this is a massive oversimplification, as I think some players like Oliver and Trac were always going to improve their scores, but there method of improvement (increased TOG, or unsustainably high mid time) will cause somewhat of a reversion to 2019esc level scoring.
That isn’t to say I think Steele, and Petracca will fall back to there 2019 average, but I think premium scoring in 2019 will be closer to 2021, than 2020 premium scoring would be. I also don’t think all will fall back proportionately, because it easy to see a few players holding or extending their current position. But because I don’t have a good point in my mind for what these players would have averaged in longer games, I’m planning on hedging my bets and waiting until the season has started before moving on the mid premiums that I want.
As you’ve pointed out, I have Grundy and Cripps locked as good options. Outside of that, I’m very unsure at this stage. It won’t be Gawn, Lloyd, Steele, Oliver, Trac, Zerrett, or Hunter that make there way in to my side, but maybe Titch, Danger, Macrae or Neale, as I think those guys have the best shot as maintaining there average.
Hey Kit,
"must have" is not a description I use very often, I must admit. I don't see too many must haves across a season, usually 4 or 5 at most. I certainly don't see them often in Fallen Prems, as there is usually a reason they fell. Yes, we can bet against it happening again, but you are also betting they can get back to something like their old ways. Those doubts mean they fail the "must have" tag for me.
Just to give you some thoughts.
Cripps is very popular amongst those looking for FP's this season. His last 3 seasons have been 22/119, 20/117, 17/98. so he's fallen around 20 points on his recent history.
Z Williams 20/94, 20/102, 11/85 will also have some admirers, but keep in mind, he has missed 2+ games every season.
Taranto 21/89, 22/102, 11/85 coming back from injury, and would seem to have some upside.
Players that may be popular as Stepping Stones include Heppel, Ziebel, Daniher and Impey.
"must have" is not a description I use very often, I must admit. I don't see too many must haves across a season, usually 4 or 5 at most. I certainly don't see them often in Fallen Prems, as there is usually a reason they fell. Yes, we can bet against it happening again, but you are also betting they can get back to something like their old ways. Those doubts mean they fail the "must have" tag for me.
Just to give you some thoughts.
Cripps is very popular amongst those looking for FP's this season. His last 3 seasons have been 22/119, 20/117, 17/98. so he's fallen around 20 points on his recent history.
Z Williams 20/94, 20/102, 11/85 will also have some admirers, but keep in mind, he has missed 2+ games every season.
Taranto 21/89, 22/102, 11/85 coming back from injury, and would seem to have some upside.
Players that may be popular as Stepping Stones include Heppel, Ziebel, Daniher and Impey.
It's a good exercise you have done there.
My take is, that there are players that sometimes can be catagorised as a success in Coach A's team, but were not so successful in Coach B or C's team. Obviously some players are a success/failure for whoever have them, but sometimes you need to see what effect having that player had on the structure of the rest of the team.
My guess/opinion on Gawn is, if his price remains above $650-$660k mark until at least late in the season, then it's a win for those that started him. If it falls to $600-$650k area, then it has the potential to be as described, a win from some but a loss for others. Anything below $600k within the first 10-12 Rounds would probably be considered a loss for those that started him.
Using 2.5-3 trades to get a Super Prem is not a disaster in my mind, it all depends on how you are travelling at the time!
My take is, that there are players that sometimes can be catagorised as a success in Coach A's team, but were not so successful in Coach B or C's team. Obviously some players are a success/failure for whoever have them, but sometimes you need to see what effect having that player had on the structure of the rest of the team.
My guess/opinion on Gawn is, if his price remains above $650-$660k mark until at least late in the season, then it's a win for those that started him. If it falls to $600-$650k area, then it has the potential to be as described, a win from some but a loss for others. Anything below $600k within the first 10-12 Rounds would probably be considered a loss for those that started him.
Using 2.5-3 trades to get a Super Prem is not a disaster in my mind, it all depends on how you are travelling at the time!
Hi Rowsus,
Would love your thoughts on the mids that you're looking at in the sub 600k range. I personally am planning on going M1/2 Macrae & Oliver, and then M3-4-5 "value" options. (Cripps, TKelly, Taranto etc.) Would also love to hear your thoughts on TKelly coming into 2021, as I remember you being very big on him coming into 2020, and put some very compelling arguments/statistics forward about him. Looking forward to your insight over the next few weeks
Would love your thoughts on the mids that you're looking at in the sub 600k range. I personally am planning on going M1/2 Macrae & Oliver, and then M3-4-5 "value" options. (Cripps, TKelly, Taranto etc.) Would also love to hear your thoughts on TKelly coming into 2021, as I remember you being very big on him coming into 2020, and put some very compelling arguments/statistics forward about him. Looking forward to your insight over the next few weeks
At the moment, I have no Mids under $600k, outside of Rookies. To be honest, there is not too many in that $500-$600k bracket jumping out at me, though I'm sure a number of them will be a success.
Cripps I'm a little cautious on. Super price ($523,700), if you like him. I'm just a bit hesitant, that his best scoring days were when he carried the team on his back, and I'm just wondering if he still scores well, when their team is improving, especially their Mid depth.
Kelly was 25, nearly 26, last season, and in his 3rd season. I expected more, and would want to see a bit more consistency, before I started him.
Taranto. I'm not sure what to make of GWS, or their Mids. They really disappointed as a team last season, and are right the crossroads. If Taranto was M/F I would consider him, but I'm not willing to risk him (or J Kelly) in my Midfield.
The simple answer is yes. If you feel these are the two most reliable high scorers, then you pay premium on their price, and eat the value loss. Getting your Captain picks right is just that important! To say you don't want to pay the top dollar, means you are willing to compromise, on what is the first, and most important picks you make in your team.
I'll do a little exercise to demonstrate this point. I'll do it for 2019 and 2020.
Taking the 5 players with highest averages from the previous season, make the 10 possible combinations of two players.
We'll start with a budget of $1,500,000 and subtract the two players prices from that starting amount.
ie 2018 highest 2 averages were, and their 2019 opening prices $1,500,000 - Grundy $708,200 - Gawn $692,100 = $99,700.
So we have 10 "teams" of 2 players. We'll look at the first 8 Rounds of each season, and for each Round, the first player in the team to play that Round will be the VC, with the ability to take their score as C, if desired. We'll use 4 scoring levels as a trigger to take that VC score: 115, 120, 125, 130 and look at the result for all 10 teams, using those 4 trigger points. If the two players play against each other, the most expensive players is Captain. If a player misses a game, he will be replaced by the 6th highest averaging player from the previous season. To even out the the lower priced teams potential to score, we'll divide the remaining cash (ie. with Grundy/Gawn in 2019 the $99,700 shown above), by the MN for Rnd 1 of that season, and come up with the number of additional points each team will receive, based on how expensive their teams were. So the Grundy/Gawn combination in the 2019 table received an additional 18.4 points/Round, and the Neale/Fyfe comination (the 4th and 5th biggest averages from 2018) receive an additional 35.2 points/Round.
I hope that makes sense, sometimes I'm not good at explaining things.
So we have ten 2 players teams, and 4 VC trigger scores, that gives us 40 different results for each season.
The color blocking in the table is just to more easily show when combinations tied.
So we can see that the highest priced player (Grundy), and the 5th highest priced player (Cripps) when looped at 115, 120 & 125 points, totalled 3,306.7 points, compared to the worst combination of the 2nd highest (Gawn) and 4th highest player (Dangerfield) totalling 2,743.8 points. That's 509.6 points less, over a period of 8 Rounds. That's pretty enormous, when we are only considering the 5 highest priced players, and using only 2 of them!
The last 4 numbers in the table are what each loop trigger score totalled, across the 10 teams. Interestingly, the old traditional trigger score of 120 was the best performer, while the 130 trigger faired worst.
2020 gives us a similar result. The totals are a lot higher, given the higher scores recorded in 2020, and the difference between the top and the bottom combination is also larger.
Not unexpectedly, the Gawn/Neale combination was the top scorer, and scored the same, no matter which loop trigger score you used. This is due to them both posting so many 130+ scores. The Macrae/Fyfe combination, using the 125 & 130 trigger point fared worst, a whopping 735.3 behind Gawn/Neale!
The trigger points of 120, 125 & 130 were all very similar, once again, due to the number of really high scores recorded, while the 115 trigger point lagged behind, as you once again, might expect in a high scoring year.
The 2 tables demonstrate how crucial it is to get your starting Captain picks right. I really think the potential dollars lost mean next to nothing, if you are giving up 500 or 600 points across the first 8 Rounds.
It comes back to my old team selection process.
Start with your 2 or 3 Captain picks, and don't look at the price, as you just need to get it right!
As I said during the post, sometimes I'm not good at explaining things. If there is anything in here that doesn't make sense to anyone, please just ask, and I'll attempt to clarify it for you.
I'll do a little exercise to demonstrate this point. I'll do it for 2019 and 2020.
Taking the 5 players with highest averages from the previous season, make the 10 possible combinations of two players.
We'll start with a budget of $1,500,000 and subtract the two players prices from that starting amount.
ie 2018 highest 2 averages were, and their 2019 opening prices $1,500,000 - Grundy $708,200 - Gawn $692,100 = $99,700.
So we have 10 "teams" of 2 players. We'll look at the first 8 Rounds of each season, and for each Round, the first player in the team to play that Round will be the VC, with the ability to take their score as C, if desired. We'll use 4 scoring levels as a trigger to take that VC score: 115, 120, 125, 130 and look at the result for all 10 teams, using those 4 trigger points. If the two players play against each other, the most expensive players is Captain. If a player misses a game, he will be replaced by the 6th highest averaging player from the previous season. To even out the the lower priced teams potential to score, we'll divide the remaining cash (ie. with Grundy/Gawn in 2019 the $99,700 shown above), by the MN for Rnd 1 of that season, and come up with the number of additional points each team will receive, based on how expensive their teams were. So the Grundy/Gawn combination in the 2019 table received an additional 18.4 points/Round, and the Neale/Fyfe comination (the 4th and 5th biggest averages from 2018) receive an additional 35.2 points/Round.
I hope that makes sense, sometimes I'm not good at explaining things.
So we have ten 2 players teams, and 4 VC trigger scores, that gives us 40 different results for each season.
The color blocking in the table is just to more easily show when combinations tied.
So we can see that the highest priced player (Grundy), and the 5th highest priced player (Cripps) when looped at 115, 120 & 125 points, totalled 3,306.7 points, compared to the worst combination of the 2nd highest (Gawn) and 4th highest player (Dangerfield) totalling 2,743.8 points. That's 509.6 points less, over a period of 8 Rounds. That's pretty enormous, when we are only considering the 5 highest priced players, and using only 2 of them!
The last 4 numbers in the table are what each loop trigger score totalled, across the 10 teams. Interestingly, the old traditional trigger score of 120 was the best performer, while the 130 trigger faired worst.
2020 gives us a similar result. The totals are a lot higher, given the higher scores recorded in 2020, and the difference between the top and the bottom combination is also larger.
Not unexpectedly, the Gawn/Neale combination was the top scorer, and scored the same, no matter which loop trigger score you used. This is due to them both posting so many 130+ scores. The Macrae/Fyfe combination, using the 125 & 130 trigger point fared worst, a whopping 735.3 behind Gawn/Neale!
The trigger points of 120, 125 & 130 were all very similar, once again, due to the number of really high scores recorded, while the 115 trigger point lagged behind, as you once again, might expect in a high scoring year.
The 2 tables demonstrate how crucial it is to get your starting Captain picks right. I really think the potential dollars lost mean next to nothing, if you are giving up 500 or 600 points across the first 8 Rounds.
It comes back to my old team selection process.
Start with your 2 or 3 Captain picks, and don't look at the price, as you just need to get it right!
As I said during the post, sometimes I'm not good at explaining things. If there is anything in here that doesn't make sense to anyone, please just ask, and I'll attempt to clarify it for you.
It does potentially make a difference.
Watching him last season, he didn't seem to be beasting it around the packs, as often as we are used to. I put this down to wear and tear, from carrying the team so much, with the added excuse of their other Mids improving slightly.
It's definitely something to consider, and keep an eye on!
Watching him last season, he didn't seem to be beasting it around the packs, as often as we are used to. I put this down to wear and tear, from carrying the team so much, with the added excuse of their other Mids improving slightly.
It's definitely something to consider, and keep an eye on!
- Status