Discussion SC 2021: Starting Structure

[Herbie66]

Conservative & safe I will likely go :-

3-0-5
5-0-6
2-0-1
2-3-3

= 12-3-15

 

[jel]

Not too many 13 premo structures

Lots of rookie fog yet to clear.
Plus the structure swaps between 12 & 13 premos at different times. I'm hoping to settle closer to the season start.

 

[BigRuss]

3-1-4
5-1-5
2-0-1
2-2-4

Fingers crossed we get some cheap rookies this year. Already feels a bit too mid priced.

 

[Ben's Beasts]

What were the prices we were using to define rookies, midpricers and premiums?

 

[Connoisseur]

What were the prices we were using to define rookies, midpricers and premiums?

@Darkie

There are varying opinions on what constitutes a premium vs a mid price but based upon this years starting prices I suggest we run with the following:

Defenders:
Premo $450k plus, Midpricers $230k - $449k, Rookies <$230k

Midfielders:
Premo $490k plus, Midpricers $230k - $489k, Rookies <$230k

Rucks:
Premo $490k plus, Midpricers $230k - $489k, Rookies <$230k

Forwards:
Premo $450k plus, Midpricers $230k - $449k, Rookies <$230k

 

[Ben's Beasts]

3-2-3
4-2-5
2-0-1
2-2-4

Hoping that I have 14 keepers though.

 

[Cricket98]

3-1-4
5-0-5
2-0-1
3-1-4

13-2-15. Really liking this.

 

[inwhiterooms]

3-2-3
4-2-5
2-0-1
2-2-4

Hoping that I have 14 keepers though.

Ziebell the hopeful 14th?

 

[Ben's Beasts]

Ziebell the hopeful 14th?

Nope. The 11 that I have that fit into the 'premium' category.

Then Duggan, Taranto and Rozee.

 

[inwhiterooms]

Nope. The 11 that I have that fit into the 'premium' category.

Then Duggan, Taranto and Rozee.

Damn, lotta value in your team then.

I have just Duggan from the above trio. My next cheapest player is Ziebell.

 

[Wheedus]

Rookie cut off is $230k so Impey's a rookie

Personally, I'd classify Impey as MP (just a really cheap one ). To me a rookie is anyone priced under the highest priced first year player (JUH $207,300). At the end of the day, it's just an arbitrary line and discussions about structure are pretty academic until we know which "rookies" are playing.

At this stage, it's really a case of having 4 or 5 structures that you're comfortable with, each based on varying numbers of available rookies. And as @wogitalia has pointed out, use higher priced rookies so you give yourself some wriggle room

 

[Deeman1]

I may still be a bit midpricer tilted but I think it's my preference for this season.

3-1-4
4-2-5
2-0-1
2-3-3

Did you copy my team???

2-2-4
4-2-5
2-0-1
2-3-3

lol PC, not sure about yours but he has definatley copied my team.

3-1-4
4-2-5
2-0-1
2-3-3

exactly the same

 

[Bomber18]

lol PC, not sure about yours but he has definatley copied my team.

3-1-6
4-2-5
2-0-1
2-3-3

exactly the same

Looks good. Name your mid pricers.....?

Milera
Taranto, Heppell

Rozee, Ziebell, Daniher...?

 

[Ironhawk]

lol PC, not sure about yours but he has definatley copied my team.

3-1-6
4-2-5
2-0-1
2-3-3

exactly the same

Wish I could fit 32 players in.

 

[jel]

lol PC, not sure about yours but he has definatley copied my team.

3-1-6
4-2-5
2-0-1
2-3-3

exactly the same

Seems alot of defenders there

 

[Deeman1]

Looks good. Name your mid pricers.....?

Milera
Taranto, Heppell

Rozee, Ziebell, Daniher...?

Milera
Green, Heppell
Ziebell, Daniher, Impey

As it stands right now

 

[Deeman1]

Wish I could fit 32 players in.

Seems alot of defenders there

Didn't you guys know about the special rules I get, lol, I get 2 extra defenders as I need the head-start, I get an extra 300k in salary cap too, just call me the GC of SC

 

[randomcliche]

My objective was to see if there is any inherent advantage to either the G&R or the MPM starting structures, so I deliberately set up fairly extreme examples and stripped back everything to keep the main objective in clearer focus.

I completely agree that, in the real SC world – seems strange using an expression like that for a fantasy game – there would be corrective trades and perhaps there would be some injuries and perhaps some trades would commence before Round 8. However, I am convinced that if these extra events were incorporated into the modelling (at the same time) for both teams, it wouldn’t matter – as in the effects on scoring would be the same. So, I’m ducking a bit as this would significantly complicate my model without (IMO) changing anything.

This proposition wouldn’t hold if there was some beneficial action that one team could access that the other couldn’t. I can’t immediately think of any, but would be interested to hear any ideas.

If I were to allow A-Rooks to score at 70-75ppg, that would force a recalibration of the scoring for the MPM Mids – to keep everything balanced they would then have to score at about 14 ppg over their nominal value. But this thinking is back in the realm of the key finding of my workings. Its not so much the starting structure that matters, it’s the amount of free points (value) that is going to be decisive in the end.

Google sheet? .

Yeah, upload a copy to google docs and you can share a link. Then you can see what changes I'd make. Cheers

 

[warewolves]

Some stats on last year’s rookies. I’m adopting the definition of rookie as anyone from the Number#1 pick down – as per the suggestion of Wheedus in Post #71.

I’m focussing on Starting rookies and am stretching that to all who played their first game for the season before Round 7. And I’m tracking them across their first 7 games – so rounds 1-7 for someone playing R1 or rounds 6-12 for someone starting in R6.


Count – the number of rookies playing their first game of the season in the given round.
All 7 – the number who played in all 7 available games
Over 4 - the number who played in 4-7 of the available games
$150K – the number who made $150K at the end of 7 rounds
$100K - the number who made $100K at the end of 7 rounds
$100K% - the percentage who made $100K at the end of 7 rounds.

The star performers,

 

[warewolves]

Yeah, upload a copy to google docs and you can share a link. Then you can see what changes I'd make. Cheers

I'll tidy it up a bit and then see what I need to do to share..