Opinion Questions For Rowsus

[nath_99]

Hey Nath,
I'm not sure if it has changed in the past few season, but here is what I work on.

BE = Price x 3 / MN - last score - score before that.
eg Neale: 721,800 x 3 / 5,120 - 75 - 77 = 270.9

Projected price rises/falls are totally dependent on the players projected scores. I generally have no faith in projected scores, particularly Rookies, as they are just projected to score their average! I once saw a Projected Score on SC for Roughie to score 187, and he had never scored anything like that, to that stage of his career.

If a player has a BE of 100, and a projected score of 120, then his projected price rise (because his projected score is over his BE) is:
(120 - 100) x 440 = +$8,800

If a player has a BE of 140 and projected score of 90, then his projected price drop (because his projected score is under his BE) is:
(90 - 140) x 440 = -$22,000

A player is priced to score at his Price/MN. In Round 1 Neale is priced at basically his last years average, as is every player, except for rookies, or players that played less than 7 games. Players with less than 7 games get a discount on their price, depending on exactly how many games they played. Once the season is well underway, you can just use 5000 as a good approximate. Joe Bloggs is priced at $450,000, so he is priced to score at 450,000 / 5,000 = 90.

The MN changes quite dramatically after Round 3, when the first price rises hit. At this time it usually drops around 5%, but is largely dependent on how well the Rookies score. The higher the Rookies score, as a group, the more their prices rise, the more the MN drops. As the Rookies price rises become less dramatic, the MN drops less and less, until it gets to the stage it can actually fluctuate up and down a little. The MN started at 5,372 this season. A 5% drop would see it go to 5,103. I'm using 5,120 as an approximate, which happened to closely coincide with what SC are using.

I hope this has been helpful.

Hi Nath,
I'll have a go and I'm sure Rowsus will correct any shortcomings.
The formula for the prices in a normal season is NP = 0.75*OP + 0.25*(3 RD AVG)*MN

Where:
OP = Old Price (price going into the round you're looking at)
NP =New Price (price at the end of the round you're looking at
MN = Magic Number

MN is a number which varies between around $5,400/pt at the start of the year (Neale with an average of 134.4 is priced at $721,800, which would give you a starting MN of around $5,370/pt) and ends up around 4,900-ish.

It all depends on the year, the main thing is that it drops in season, the biggest drops coming in the early rds as the rookie prices rise (and the prices of the remaining players in the pool have to reduce to o***et and keep a constant Total Price Pool (TPP)
Looks like they are estimating a Magic Number around the $5,120/pt mark for next week, for example.

BE: The score at which the player's OP = NP

Using the formula above:

NP = OP = 0.75*OP + 0.25*(3 RD AVG)*MN

0.25*OP = 0.25*(3 RD AVG)*MN (cancel out the 0.25 on both sides)

OP = (3 RD AVG)*MN

OP/MN = 3 RD AVG

And the 3 RD AVG = (score of round n-2 + score of round n-1 + BE score of current round n)/3

OP/MN = (score of round n-2 + score of round n-1 + BE score of current round n)/3 (rearranging to isolate BE score of current rd)

3*OP/MN - (score of round n-2 + score of round n-1) = BE score of current round n

Using an example: Lachie Neale

OP = $721,800
MN = $5,120 (currently, roughly)
Score round n-2 =77
Score round n-1 = 75

3*721,800/5,120 - (77+75) = BE score of current rd 3 = 271

BE score of current rd = 271, which is what the SuperCoach site shows.

To figure out the expected MN in any one week, take a couple of players' BEs and work back the other way:

MN = (3*OP) / (score of round n-2 + score of round n-1 + BE score of current round n)

In terms of projected rise and fall, it's always about the difference between what you think they'll score and the BE.

If you think they'll go 30 higher than the BE of that week, for example:

NP(+30) = 0.75*OP + 0.25*(3 RD AVG B)*MN, where the 3 RD AVG B includes the +30 vs the BE and bumps the AVG up 10 pts.

NP(+30) - NP(BE) = 0.25 * MN * (Expected Score - BE score)/3 = 0.25 * MN * (30)/3

If you assume an MN of around $5,100/pt to make things simple, then you get (0.25 * 5,100/3) * (Expected Score - BE Score)

And (0.25*5,100/3) ends up at around $425/pt.

As a rough rule of thumb, take the differential between your expectation of their score minus the BE and multiply that by $425/pt to get a rough estimate of their increase / decrease. (You can make it more exact by calculating the actual current MN, but for a simple rule of thumb, the 425 will give you a good enough idea unless it's a really tight one. You can use 415 after about rd 6.

Lachie Neale:
BE: 271
Your expectation: Let's say 110
Expected Price Drop assuming $5,100/pt would be (110-271)pts * $425/pt = $-68,425 price change

(Expected Price Drop using the more accurate current MN would be (110-271)/3 * 0.25 * 5,120 = -68,694 price change)

Hope that helps and if I've buggered anything up, those smarter than me will correct it for you. Good luck

Hey Rowsus and Gutsroy!

Amazing! Thanks so much guys for your responses! Just shows how good a game it is for Maths. I am a school teacher and I think they’re could be some good lessons in these and SC in general for maths/data/stats.

Thanks again for the detailed answers.. I will have a good read through! I wish they still had the “Rep” button on SCS!

Cheers,

Nath

 

[Bermi]

Hi Rowsus,

I currently have Danial and Bontempelli and plan to trade in Dunkley later. IF I decide to trade out Neale, then I'm looking at Macrae.
My qusetions are:
Are 4 WBD players too many in a team?
If so, who do you recommend I trade in, Dunkley or Macrae (not many good Fwds to choose from).

 

[gutsroy]

Just wondering if 50pts / week is too ambitious.
For rookies with sufficient $$ generation I'm guessing you want them to average 60pts/wk, so you looking to get 10 premos @ 110pts/wk
Last season there were only 21 player who got an avg >110 (including Boak & Adams who are just under) and played more than 10 games.
This included 4 Rucks, 16 Mids, 1 Def and no Fwds.

Hi gutsroy,
I certainly do like the thought and effort you put into your questions.
The problem with your model above, is that you have that team reaching full Prem in Round 14. From my memory, that is pretty much unheard of. One of the problems with achieving that is, you need some of the Rookies you brought in as downgrade options to fatten up properly, before you can trade them out again. The "second Round" of rookies generally aren't as good as the first Round, and take a little longer to fatten. The really good teams might reach full Prem in Rounds in 16 or 17, but Rounds 18 or 19 are more common. That might drop your trade value down to around the 220 area, using your numbers. The other problem is the +50 benefit. It might average out a little less than that, too.

Thanks, guys, very helpful!
If I then drop back the point gain assumption to around 45 and reduce the weeks gained by around 10 (so -(4+3+2+1)), it works out at around 200 pts, which is ok enough for me for a rough heuristic.
It's all relative to time point in season in any case, but it was interesting to try to quantify it. 👍

 

[Rowsus]

Morning Row, hope you’re doing great. simple question, to trade Neale or not? To the eye he looks out of sorts. But his history says he can bounce back. Is trading him out to potentially get him back in later a stupid play?
Thanks mate, appreciate your insight as always!

Hi d1ck, I'm doing ok thanks, and I hope you are too.
You have probably stumbled across The Lachie Neale Conundrum, which I think was posted after your question. While that thread specifically talks of Neale, it can be used on any troublesome low scoring Prem, early in the season.
After the thread was posted, we received news, and a little Twitter clip, that Neale has a sore back, and even had trouble bending and getting a ball off the ground at training. This, and the possibility of Collingwood adding a another hard tag this week, add another element to the equation. While the thread gave examples of him continuing to have low scores, and bouncing back, the prospect of a potential missed game or two drastically alter the Trade or Hold equation!

I think he has said previously that if you think he can average 115 for the rest of the year then keep.

Thank you. I guess the question to the answer is ‘can he?’

My answer is Yes, he can, and will most likely, get back to averaging 115+ from some point in the season, through until the end. The $64,000 question is, when?
Neale's 2019 season is good to look at. Put 2020 aside, as one out of the box. In 2019 Neale went 22/121.3. Within that season there were scores of: 91, 79, 79, 98, 85 (not consecutively) and in the semi, a 17 Disp game that only yielded 47!!! Up until Rnd 16 he averaged 124. The next 6 games he went 6/104, and the last 3 of those 6 games he went 3/96, all before posting a Rnd 23 190, and getting his average back over 120 again. What happened in those 6 games, and the reason behind it all, I have no idea! It does show he can have a rough patch, and bounce back though. Also in that same season, from Rnds 10 to 14, he had a 4/95 (+ bye) run. His price peaked in Rnd 6 at $687k, and bottomed in Rnd 16 at $555k. That's only a drop of $132k, though it should be noted, his score in Rounds 15, leading into his season low price was 137, so it could potentially have been worse!
All of that just muddies the water, but it's good to have in the back of your mind. To behonest, I was a hold, until I saw that Twitter clip, and now I'm waivering a little. There's no definitive answer, unfortunately. I guess we wait and see what team selections bring us. They might help shed some light on the problem!
Good luck, I hope you jump the right way!

 

[Rowsus]

Hi @Rowsus. is this one of those “first signs of trouble” for Nat Fyfe?

Hi jaca,
I fear that it is, but I think you have to hold him ........... and give him ONE more chance!

 

[jaca]

Hi jaca,
I fear that it is, but I think you have to hold him ........... and give him ONE more chance!

Haha, I knew it!

 

[Rowsus]

Hi Rowsus,
Love your work, thank you for all your contributions. Had Danger at F1 and benched him for 3wks got to loophole Grundy VC and take Berry's score which i was quietly confident I would lose max of 150points for benching before including any VC opportunities. Loved the discussion with Gustroy on cost/benefit of trade.

More troubling is working out benefit/costs for Cripps and Phillips. Cripps was a potential m8/9 decision to run with him. Thinking he was 80-90% likely to be a 95 avg with potential upside back to 110. Seeing the performances and finding out he is getting injections to play has me sceptical it will be worthwhile and money can be spent elsewhere. Trading to Dunkley with my spare trade this week. I felt Dunkley risk was about sustaining a 100+ average in Dogs midfield rotation. At this time it appears this is definitely possible. So see trading up a 10-15pt per week advantage over Cripps for balance of season. 18*15 =180-270 point advantage over holding Cripps. Trade makes sense.

Phillips I saw as a F6/7 keeper who should do 85-95. At breakout age and experience, elite endurance and new team and rules capable of increasing his scoring history. Still think this is a possibility. After two rounds he scores 90-56 avg 73. So assuming eoy 90 avg he must score 92.3 for rest of year 97.8 to achieve 95 avg. Still a possibility but not as confident.

So my thinking this week the best trade is Cripps to Dunkley and keep Phillips. Phillips still has potential (20-25%) to reach 95 avg. If he fails it is smaller loss than Cripps to Prem Mid. With a lower injury and missing game risk as well.

Would appreciate feedback on my logic. Cheers

My biggest concern regarding Cripps is that the mail is accurate and they're playing him to keep their season alive. As soon as it looks like they're out of the running for finals they'll put him away for good or if they still in the running that he may need a midseason spell to freshen him up for a run at finals. His injury suggests he misses games each season and I'm not running the risk any longer.

Hi Crowls, thanks for the good words.
The logic seems solid to me. Trade Cripps, and if you have the funds, Dunkley is a fantastic option. Also giving Phillips another chance seems reasonable to me.
If I can, I'd like to touch on two things you said there.

Cripps was a potential m8/9 decision to run with him. Thinking he was 80-90% likely to be a 95 avg with potential upside back to 110.

Phillips I saw as a F6/7 keeper who should do 85-95.

Cripps $523,700 + Phillips $402,600 = $926,300
You also have Clark ($241,800) + Daniher ($233,300) + Ziebel $257,900

I really advocate strongly, that selecting players in your starting team, with the expectation of them filling a D6/M8/F6 role is a pretty big mistake. The problem is two fold.
They have nowhere to fall to if they fail. It's actually better if they fail badly and quickly, so you are likely to action them earlier. If they chug along at 5-10 under a decent D6/M8/F6 they become a problem that "I'll fix later". Of course, they might succeed, but boy they're a problem if they are going along just under what you wanted.
The second problem it causes, is it creates a potential crowd in that position. When you took Oliver, Laird, Ridley etc. it was with the aim that they would be filling M2/3, D2/3 type positions. The good thing about the players you have confidence in to pick for those high positions, is that if they "fail", it's likely that the fail is still good enough to fill those lower positions. That's their safety net, their back up position. If you are filling those positions from the start, where do your "failed" M3 or D2/3 fall to? One of the most disappointing seasons to have, is when you end up with a "complete team", but you have a M1, M2, M3 2 x M6's and 3 x M8's. The best way to avoid that problem, is don't start trying to fill those positions at the start of the season.
Cripps + Phillips + Clark + Daniher = $1,401,400
Using that to get hopefully 2 solid M3/D3/F3 types + 2 Rookies, is a much better way to avoid over filling those bottom spots.
I think the problem is well reflected in, that Cripps and Phillips are not that far off being on track to fill your expectations, yet you are sufficiently disappointed in them, to be potentially trading them after Round 2!

 

[Rowsus]

Is Tex worth a trade in would need to be able manage a big increase about 200k over a few weeks by close to the byes

If you can grab him without causing any disruption to your structure, why not?
But don't bend your structure to get him in!!!

 

[Rowsus]

Thanks Rows
With the possibility of Rowe and/or Bergman getting dropped . Is it worth turning one of them into a Tex or Impey with second trade ?
If so, which do you prefer?

I would think that Bergman's JS is riskier than Rowe's. If he get's dropped, turning him into Impey isn't the worst option.
I would much rather have Impey, than Tex, but that's just my personal preference. Tex has just done something he hasn't done for 5 years, and 102 games. I'm not sure he won't quickly revert to the more recent seasons Tex we are used to.

 

[Rowsus]

Hey Rowsus and Gutsroy!

Amazing! Thanks so much guys for your responses! Just shows how good a game it is for Maths. I am a school teacher and I think they’re could be some good lessons in these and SC in general for maths/data/stats.

Thanks again for the detailed answers.. I will have a good read through! I wish they still had the “Rep” button on SCS!

Cheers,

Nath

Happy to help.
@KLo30 used to be a Math's teacher, and he used SC as an exercise for his students too.
I'm sure you're aware, using something they already interested in, is a wonderful way to keep them involved in what they are learning!

 

[Rowsus]

Hi Rowsus,

I currently have Danial and Bontempelli and plan to trade in Dunkley later. IF I decide to trade out Neale, then I'm looking at Macrae.
My qusetions are:
Are 4 WBD players too many in a team?
If so, who do you recommend I trade in, Dunkley or Macrae (not many good Fwds to choose from).

Hi Bermie,
the easiest answer I can give is, my team is currently:
D: Daniels
M: Macrae, Bontempelli // Scott
R: Martin
F: Dunkley

Dunkley is looking a great pick at this stage!

 

[Rumbler]

Heya Rows!
Looks like this thread has been super active to start the season! Hope we're not taking up too much of your time with all these SC related questions!!!

My start to the season has been pretty average (overall rank is only around 17k). Haven't used any trades yet but definitely will this round. Unfortunately they're forced trades.
N.Cahill to J.Jordan is locked. I feel Jordan is someone I can't miss out on in terms of cash generation. The only reason I had Cahill over him was that I felt he would get dropped when Viney came back. Didn't expect Harmes to get injured. Also can't believe how poor Cahill has been. Doubt it's worth keeping him.

The second trade is what's causing me a dilemma. After doing the above trade, I'll have about 535k to spend on Rowell's replacement. I've narrowed down the players I'm thinking to bring in but just not sure which way to jump! In no particular order:

• J.Short - Looks pretty solid so far. Worried about Houli coming back. High ownership though.
• ZWilliams - Was in my pre-season team before his suspension. Wasn't convincing in the game last round but at a good price.
• Taranto - Great price but I'm worried about his return from injury and consistency, not sure if he can always score at least 90-95ish
• T.Kelly - Highly speculative pick here haha! But has looked pretty good so far! Would be a nice POD too
• A.Cerra - Risky pick. Don't know much about him and whether or not this is a breakout year. Back to back 120s are an anomaly?
• Z.Butters - Would he get even more midfield time once Rozee returns? Top 6 forward from here till the end of the season? Just don't know! I might be chasing points here.

Pretty sure I might have forgotten about a better option not listed above but looking forward to seeing what you think

Cheers!

 

[Rowsus]

Heya Rows!
Looks like this thread has been super active to start the season! Hope we're not taking up too much of your time with all these SC related questions!!!

My start to the season has been pretty average (overall rank is only around 17k). Haven't used any trades yet but definitely will this round. Unfortunately they're forced trades.
N.Cahill to J.Jordan is locked. I feel Jordan is someone I can't miss out on in terms of cash generation. The only reason I had Cahill over him was that I felt he would get dropped when Viney came back. Didn't expect Harmes to get injured. Also can't believe how poor Cahill has been. Doubt it's worth keeping him.

The second trade is what's causing me a dilemma. After doing the above trade, I'll have about 535k to spend on Rowell's replacement. I've narrowed down the players I'm thinking to bring in but just not sure which way to jump! In no particular order:

• J.Short - Looks pretty solid so far. Worried about Houli coming back. High ownership though.
• ZWilliams - Was in my pre-season team before his suspension. Wasn't convincing in the game last round but at a good price.
• Taranto - Great price but I'm worried about his return from injury and consistency, not sure if he can always score at least 90-95ish
• T.Kelly - Highly speculative pick here haha! But has looked pretty good so far! Would be a nice POD too
• A.Cerra - Risky pick. Don't know much about him and whether or not this is a breakout year. Back to back 120s are an anomaly?
• Z.Butters - Would he get even more midfield time once Rozee returns? Top 6 forward from here till the end of the season? Just don't know! I might be chasing points here.

Pretty sure I might have forgotten about a better option not listed above but looking forward to seeing what you think

Cheers!

Hey Rumbs,
yeah, the thread got a bit of a flooding!
I think my order, in that price range, would be: Heeney, Short, Butters, Kelly.
Not in love with any of them, to be honest, but I think you need to do something with that cash!
I share your concerns on Short, but who knows how long Houli will last? Seems taken forever to get over this injury, which can't be a good sign!

 

[Crowls]

Hi Crowls, thanks for the good words.
The logic seems solid to me. Trade Cripps, and if you have the funds, Dunkley is a fantastic option. Also giving Phillips another chance seems reasonable to me.
If I can, I'd like to touch on two things you said there.





Cripps $523,700 + Phillips $402,600 = $926,300
You also have Clark ($241,800) + Daniher ($233,300) + Ziebel $257,900

I really advocate strongly, that selecting players in your starting team, with the expectation of them filling a D6/M8/F6 role is a pretty big mistake. The problem is two fold.
They have nowhere to fall to if they fail. It's actually better if they fail badly and quickly, so you are likely to action them earlier. If they chug along at 5-10 under a decent D6/M8/F6 they become a problem that "I'll fix later". Of course, they might succeed, but boy they're a problem if they are going along just under what you wanted.
The second problem it causes, is it creates a potential crowd in that position. When you took Oliver, Laird, Ridley etc. it was with the aim that they would be filling M2/3, D2/3 type positions. The good thing about the players you have confidence in to pick for those high positions, is that if they "fail", it's likely that the fail is still good enough to fill those lower positions. That's their safety net, their back up position. If you are filling those positions from the start, where do your "failed" M3 or D2/3 fall to? One of the most disappointing seasons to have, is when you end up with a "complete team", but you have a M1, M2, M3 2 x M6's and 3 x M8's. The best way to avoid that problem, is don't start trying to fill those positions at the start of the season.
Cripps + Phillips + Clark + Daniher = $1,401,400
Using that to get hopefully 2 solid M3/D3/F3 types + 2 Rookies, is a much better way to avoid over filling those bottom spots.
I think the problem is well reflected in, that Cripps and Phillips are not that far off being on track to fill your expectations, yet you are sufficiently disappointed in them, to be potentially trading them after Round 2!

Hi Rowsus thanks for the reply and highlighting the weakness in initial team selection. Your point is very valid and may be a part of why I am around that 1500-3000 mark each year as I leak points from poor D6/M8/F6 selections in starting team instead of GnR options. That additional 400 points makes a huge difference at year end.

2021 is another year of sunk cost and now I will make the most of it. Hopefully JC, JD and JZ perform as higher priced cash cows and enable me to upgrade earlier than normal. Would be happier to have Dunkley $560,200 Brayshaw $544,200 and Bergman, Jordon and Meek/Treacy 123,900 x 3 = 1476,100 compared to PC, TP,JZ, JD, Sharp =$1,534,800 + $150K ITB. Hindsight is wonderful.

My first trades will be Jones/Sharp>Jordon and Cripps>Dunkley probably do Sharp as Jones still has the KPF ability to pump out a high score from nowhere similar to King last year. Though DPP flexibility looks better if I trade Jones. 28 trades left.

 

[TeeButOne]

Hi Rowsus,

Is there anywhere that produces a decent spreadsheet of basic Supercoach information (player details, weekly scores, etc.)? Best I can find is on FootyWire, but it only has 1 week scores at a time, and it's a massive pain to try to grab this data each week and attach it (vlookup-style) each week to an initial spreadsheet.

What I was hoping for was a summary of ALL players, with their respective scores from each week, that you could download into a speadsheet in separate columns (to work a bit of Excel magic)

Cheers

 

[Rowsus]

Hi Rowsus,

Is there anywhere that produces a decent spreadsheet of basic Supercoach information (player details, weekly scores, etc.)? Best I can find is on FootyWire, but it only has 1 week scores at a time, and it's a massive pain to try to grab this data each week and attach it (vlookup-style) each week to an initial spreadsheet.

What I was hoping for was a summary of ALL players, with their respective scores from each week, that you could download into a speadsheet in separate columns (to work a bit of Excel magic)

Cheers

Hi TBO,
unfortunately, not that I am aware of.

 

[Buddy Starmart]

I just want to know I not used a trade yet but will trades be like any other season like gold late if I do not trade Cripps but I playing for ranking.

 

[Peter56]

I just want to know I not used a trade yet but will trades be like any other season like gold late if I do not trade Cripps but I playing for ranking.

Yes, trades are like gold and a lot of people will start running out around round 18 or 19

 

[Professor]

Hi Rowsus,

Is there anywhere that produces a decent spreadsheet of basic Supercoach information (player details, weekly scores, etc.)? Best I can find is on FootyWire, but it only has 1 week scores at a time, and it's a massive pain to try to grab this data each week and attach it (vlookup-style) each week to an initial spreadsheet.

What I was hoping for was a summary of ALL players, with their respective scores from each week, that you could download into a speadsheet in separate columns (to work a bit of Excel magic)

Cheers

Why dont you use @nicohighscore data on https://supercoachdata.com/ believe he may be doing some updates.

 

[wogitalia]

Hey Slams,
while I agree Taranto and Phillips are potentially problems, I'd give them more time yet. Both have 1 reasonable score, and 1 poor score, so the jury is out on which one is the more correct one for each of them.
At the moment, I'd hold the 2nd trade.

Worth noting that both were pretty solid for DT purposes last week, they just got the hatchets they're so famous for out in fine fashion last week.

They're guys who can find the ball with consummate ease but we all know they're terrible kicks, the games where they don't find the opponents and get a bit lucky they'll score well but they're always going to be rollercoasters.

In Taranto's good season he still had 6 games under 80, almost always on putrid ratios. What is important is that he cancels those out with the 130+ scores on the days he hits targets, kicks goals and the like.

Phillips in his 90 season similarly had 8 games under 80, again on putrid ratios. The 6 games with 115+ are the key, if he keeps the two at a close to 1:1 ratio he should be fine.