Discussion SC 2021: Rookie Discussion
- Thread starter Brettthejett
- Start date
That’s the way I would think about it.
Essentially I would work back from the trades you want to do/expect to do before price changes in R3, and if there are 3, do 1 this round.
So long as the sequencing of the cash works (eg you may need to downgrade in order to upgrade, so the downgrade has to be first/at the same time), and any DPP switching works, I usually just do the trade I’m most confident on, to reduce the risk of regretting it when you have more info.
That might even be something like Danger to Jordon, even if you don’t need a downgrade per se - if you’re most sure about Danger amongst your outs, and the Jordon amongst your ins, you could consider pairing those legs up even if it isn’t a trade you would consider in isolation.
Another option - probably not preferred, but viable if the extra info is worth more than the expected price changes - is to do two in R3 and save one for R4. Again, you’d need to check that the sequencing works, and the risk is that you have 2 other trades you want to do in R4, but it is an option. It’s probably one I’d consider if I was, say, trading out Gawn/Grundy but felt somewhat marginal about it, and thought a week or extra info would help maximize my chances of getting the decision right.
Essentially I would work back from the trades you want to do/expect to do before price changes in R3, and if there are 3, do 1 this round.
So long as the sequencing of the cash works (eg you may need to downgrade in order to upgrade, so the downgrade has to be first/at the same time), and any DPP switching works, I usually just do the trade I’m most confident on, to reduce the risk of regretting it when you have more info.
That might even be something like Danger to Jordon, even if you don’t need a downgrade per se - if you’re most sure about Danger amongst your outs, and the Jordon amongst your ins, you could consider pairing those legs up even if it isn’t a trade you would consider in isolation.
Another option - probably not preferred, but viable if the extra info is worth more than the expected price changes - is to do two in R3 and save one for R4. Again, you’d need to check that the sequencing works, and the risk is that you have 2 other trades you want to do in R4, but it is an option. It’s probably one I’d consider if I was, say, trading out Gawn/Grundy but felt somewhat marginal about it, and thought a week or extra info would help maximize my chances of getting the decision right.
- Joined
- 15 Oct 2018
- Messages
- 3,912
- Likes
- 12,177
- AFL Club
- Essendon
Who should I leave leave on the bench out Campbell, Powell and Jordon?
Powell started to get some inside mid time in the second half and was 3rd on the ground for disposals per minute for the 2nd half. Had 65 in DT, as well as an incorrectly disallowed goal and you'd think he'd do better in the following game in a slightly easier match up. Jordon started well and faded but got a decent amount of CBA's in the first half.
Campbell has a great kick and good role for this year's scoring but lacks some experience versus the other two and scored poorly in DT (which was only a slight concern considering how good of a kick he is) in the AAMI game and now just scored under par.
Powell started to get some inside mid time in the second half and was 3rd on the ground for disposals per minute for the 2nd half. Had 65 in DT, as well as an incorrectly disallowed goal and you'd think he'd do better in the following game in a slightly easier match up. Jordon started well and faded but got a decent amount of CBA's in the first half.
Campbell has a great kick and good role for this year's scoring but lacks some experience versus the other two and scored poorly in DT (which was only a slight concern considering how good of a kick he is) in the AAMI game and now just scored under par.
It's too early to tell right now. If there are no changes at North or Melbourne then both had very strong roles, Jordon better, but if Viney, Cunnington, Anderson, Dumont and McDonald types are picked that hurts them.
Campbell has a slightly weaker but safer role, he was so good in the first that Brisbane put some work into him and, understandably, that nullified him very effectively, not helped by Brisbane being so bad that the expected supply wasn't there (see Lloyd, Dawson, Rampe and Cunningham also with super low scores, especially in DT), not that I'd say Adelaide are a "better" side but I'd expect they'll at least try harder.
Ultimately it's all roulette at this point, wouldn't surprise me at all if Gulden and Rowe fail this week and it's Campbell, Cahill, Bergman and Dow all delightfully warming our benches that put up the big scores because, well, that's SC for you
Campbell has a slightly weaker but safer role, he was so good in the first that Brisbane put some work into him and, understandably, that nullified him very effectively, not helped by Brisbane being so bad that the expected supply wasn't there (see Lloyd, Dawson, Rampe and Cunningham also with super low scores, especially in DT), not that I'd say Adelaide are a "better" side but I'd expect they'll at least try harder.
Ultimately it's all roulette at this point, wouldn't surprise me at all if Gulden and Rowe fail this week and it's Campbell, Cahill, Bergman and Dow all delightfully warming our benches that put up the big scores because, well, that's SC for you
- Joined
- 7 Sep 2020
- Messages
- 12,069
- Likes
- 42,462