Analysis 2021: The Lachie Neale Conundrum

[Zim^zuM]

I'm keeping him. It was easier to use the loose change pre round 1. Not so easy now.

 

[Bermi]

For me, it really boils down to how quickly Neale can overcome his current injuries. There's no doubt in my mind that he's a 115-120+ point scorer this year if fit, and ultimately a must have. I have him, and would expect to need him at the end of the year.

To trade or keep is clearly a big decision.

If you keep him he'll most likely underperform - quite a lot potentially if the first 2 rounds are anything to go by. My guess would be 2-4 weeks if his back/calf have a chance to get better while playing.

If you trade him, there's literally no garauntee you'll be able to get him back again. The reason being is that all this is happening at the start of the year. He might come good just before upgrade season which makes it tough to force a trade for him. Secondly, the only reason we'd know to trade him in would be on the back of some elite scoring again. Its always tough to have everything perfectly aligned to me that trade in happen. And by the time you can get him in will his price suddenly be out of reach? Its never a perfect science at the best of times.

For me its ultimately an educated guess on how long he'll be hampered for. If its relatively short then it'll be a painful hold for a few weeks. If its too long, then it'll be a nervous wait to try and get him back again.

Worst case his injuries just persist and he's a dud all year...

That's the problem, we haven't got the required information to make an informed decision, just another example of how luck plays a big role in SuperCoach.

I have other players that I know 100% need attention, so I'm leaning to fix them up and leave the unknown 50% alone.

If we had a poll up top, I think the 'Trade Neale Out' would be ahead?

 

[N29]

Have tossed and turned all week on this, 99% sure I'll keep. Committing to riding it out, at some point you know he's going to hit form and bust out some 130-140s+ and get back on track. I still see him as a 110-120ppg guy - so just accepting the fact some people will pick him up cheap and not burn trades getting him out and then back in.

Note: I have nothing against people trading him out - could well be the right move. If you think he is carrying something more serious right now, trading could certainly be the right move.

 

[Presto]

A great analysis Rowsus, as always.

But what if you trade Neale to a cheaper premium which you expect to perform as well as Oliver? says Andrew Brayshaw and what if you use the LC for a cash grab like Henry to Tex?

To answer your question that is exactly what I will do: Neale to Brayshaw and Henry to Walker.

Edit: the only drawback is that I will need to do both trades today.

 

[Socrates2]

I'll be having a very close look at Neale in the warm-up with one finger on the trigger.

 

[sven_inc]

Yeah, but what I want to know is, are you holding or trading?!
You are one of the Coaches on here that I really value your opinion!

Haha thanks mate! I'm not sure yet, but there are a few scenarios I'm contemplating. If Neale goes, I want literally the best player in comp (that I don't have) for him. That way even if Neale does well I won't have any regrets. That could be Lloyd (Def), it could be Dusty/Dunkley (Fwd) it could be a Mid obviously too.

If I keep him, I need to make sure the next few premos I bring in are garaunteed wins so that if/when Neale comes good he's a bonus.

I'm just struggling with the idea that he could be lame for a while which is a hard one to reconcile given we only have two weeks of info to consider who's good and who isn't this year.

Ultimately it wouldn't hurt to give him another week and reassess. Makes it a little harder that its the same week of initial price changes. There are a few other things I'd love to do this week instead!

 

[Blue Bloods]

That's the problem, we haven't got the required information to make an informed decision, just another example of how luck plays a big role in SuperCoach.

I have other players that I know 100% need attention, so I'm leaning to fix them up and leave the unknown 50% alone.

If we had a poll up top, I think the 'Trade Neale Out' would be ahead?

I think we will find that players who have all the main rookies and no other stressing problems will trade Neale out. Others with problems or used trade already won’t trade him.

 

[Blue Bloods]

Great stuff Rowsus. Although I disagree with one point (which I've also read other people make in similar situations), is that trading Neale out and then back in again costs you 2 trades. It really only costs you 1 trade, although it is a bit more complicated than that.

Take 2 teams with the exact same midfield:
Neale, X, X, X, X ....

Team A trades Neale to Oliver, while team B doesn't. In round 7, team A upgrades a rookie and gets Neale back into their team, while team B upgrades a rookie to Oliver. Both teams now have the exact same midfield again:
Neale, Oliver, X, X, X ....

Team A used 2 trades to get to this point, while team B used 1 trade. Now you could argue the point that team B was able to gather more data on whether or not Oliver was actually a good player to trade in, or the increased risk of having to make another trade if Oliver copped an injury/suspension. But the flip side of that is that team A was able to gather more data on whether Neale was a good player to trade back in, or having to trade Neale out anyway if HE copped an injury/suspension.

I don't have Neale, but I would probably only be trading him out if I was going to immediately use the money gained by downgrading to a cheaper premium to fix another problem in my team.

Very good post. And agree, really just one trade, but kind of an early luxury trade.

 

[Hawk41]

I think we will find that players who have all the main rookies and no other stressing problems will trade Neale out. Others with problems or used trade already won’t trade him.

Agree, think you should only look at trading Neale if you have a spare trade after doing any rookie corrections.
The money saved by trading out Neale could less than the money missed out on not having a top line rookie.

 

[doc ron]

I have been going to trade him all week, but have changed my mind. I know I'll want him back in at some stage so may as well save myself two trades and keep him. No guarantees that a replacement would do much better. If he can battle his way to 90-100 for a few weeks then not all that bad. I can use those trades saved to bring in two rookies I've missed out on and guaranteed to make cash. Also being the first game of the round just adds a lot more risk to trading him out.

 

[freowho]

There is an assumption by some that you have to spend the cash. This would be ideal but if you have 2 bad premos and 2 very good cash cows you've missed I would think they are 4 good decisions and would sit on the cash this week and upgrade next week. 50pts vs $200K. Yeah, nah?

 

[Rowsus]

There is an assumption by some that you have to spend the cash. This would be ideal but if you have 2 bad premos and 2 very good cash cows you've missed I would think they are 4 good decisions and would sit on the cash this week and upgrade next week. 50pts vs $200K. Yeah, nah?

Agreed, that is a viable option, as long as the cash is injected back into points producing players a.s.a.p. .

 

[Gruffles]

There is an assumption by some that you have to spend the cash. This would be ideal but if you have 2 bad premos and 2 very good cash cows you've missed I would think they are 4 good decisions and would sit on the cash this week and upgrade next week. 50pts vs $200K. Yeah, nah?

I have done this with Neale and Cripps. I was having trouble deciding on Lachie so I flipped a coin and Lachie's out.
Neale>Dunkley and VC him. Cripps>Jordon. I figured that Jordon might score similar to Cripps anyway so I don't mind sitting the cash in the bank this weekend and getting another look at the rookies before making an upgrade call.
Depending on the Premo target for next week, they might drop 25-50k anyway and the crap rookie might go up 25k.

 

[freowho]

I have done this with Neale and Cripps. I was having trouble deciding on Lachie so I flipped a coin and Lachie's out.
Neale>Dunkley and VC him. Cripps>Jordon. I figured that Jordon might score similar to Cripps anyway so I don't mind sitting the cash in the bank this weekend and getting another look at the rookies before making an upgrade call.
Depending on the Premo target for next week, they might drop 25-50k anyway and the crap rookie might go up 25k.

Plus it's a good week next week to have cash because there are some wantable premos dropping $20k-$30k with a slow start and the MN's biggest drop.

 

[Gruffles]

Plus it's a good week next week to have cash because there are some wantable premos dropping $20k-$30k with a slow start and the MN's biggest drop.

Now watch Neale pump out a 140 tonight and Cripps to miraculously get over his back problems by next week just to spit me

 

[Philzsay]

Just finished work. Now to spend the next 2.5 hours flipping my mind on what to do here!

🤷‍♂️

 

[Zim^zuM]

Just finished work. Now to spend the next 2.5 hours flipping my mind on what to do here!

🤷‍♂️

worst part is doing that while still not knowing the sat/sun/mon teams grrr

 

[Rowsus]

worst part is doing that while still not knowing the sat/sun/mon teams grrr

Absolutely the worst part.
Being first game is both a blessing and a curse.

 

[7/11]

I learned a very good early lesson a couple seasons ago when Josh Dunkley had a couple of sub 100 games in the first two rounds. A lot of chatter about him not producing and a good amount of people traded. I retained Dunkley. He then went on a pretty decent run of scores and people were clamouring to get him back in.

I’m going to trust in Neale to turn it around, hoping that I gain points on those that trade him out this week. If it bites me in the backside, so be it.

 

[Rowsus]

Poll added, 0, 1, or 2 answers allowed.