Opinion Questions For Rowsus

[yakka]

G'day Rowsus,
Just a few questions on team line up. I don't know if my structure will be competitive in the early rounds. I've looked at the thread flat track bullies and that was very helpful.My Starting 22 - round 1
--> <!--

<!-- BEGIN POSITION: --> [h=4]Defenders[/h]
1. McVeigh, J

2. Mitchell, S

3. Carlisle, J

4. Atley, S

5. Suckling, M

6. McDonald, L

23. Laidler, J

24. Fuller, M

<!-- /END POSITION: --> <!-- BEGIN POSITION: --> [h=4]Midfielders[/h]
7. Ablett, G

8. Jack, K

9. Beams, D

10. Thomas, D

11. Savage, S

12. Martin, J

13. Tyson, D

14. Aish, J

25. Beams, C

26. Dunstan, L

<!-- /END POSITION: --> <!-- BEGIN POSITION: --> [h=4]Rucks[/h]
15. Naitanui, N

16. Sandilands, A

27. Currie, D

28. Thurlow, F

<!-- /END POSITION: --> <!-- BEGIN POSITION: --> [h=4]Forwards[/h]
17. Dangerfield, P

18. Dixon, C

19. Franklin, L

20. Tippett, K

21. Daniher, J

22. Rohan, G

29. Taylor, L

30. Garlett, D

As you see my team is staked full of mid pricers. I not sure if I should go with 1 or 2 less and go a rookee and a premo. I think more money will be spent in the back and forward lines with limited rookees.
Your thoughts...

 

[Erich1036]

Hey Rowsus, loved the article on how the majority of players that breakout fail to repeat it the next year. I was just wondering, how well in general do these players bounce back? Looking at Todd Goldstein, he went from 113 to 93 and then back to 113. What does this mean for players like JPK, Cotchin and even Maric. Do you expect these players to bounce back to the heights of their previous year? What does history suggest? Thanks in advance and sorry if this was poorly worded!

 

[Drew]

Hey Rowsus, loved the article on how the majority of players that breakout fail to repeat it the next year. I was just wondering, how well in general do these players bounce back? Looking at Todd Goldstein, he went from 113 to 93 and then back to 113. What does this mean for players like JPK, Cotchin and even Maric. Do you expect these players to bounce back to the heights of their previous year? What does history suggest? Thanks in advance and sorry if this was poorly worded!

Big Sam Jacobs falls into this catagory, would defintely seem to be underpriced at an average of 85 given he is the Crows undisputed number 1 lead ruckman, big question is what's his real value and does it make him a keeper? Couldn't see myself starting him unless preseason form suggested at least a 105 ave.

 

[Aneil915]

Hey Rowsus, loved the article on how the majority of players that breakout fail to repeat it the next year. I was just wondering, how well in general do these players bounce back? Looking at Todd Goldstein, he went from 113 to 93 and then back to 113. What does this mean for players like JPK, Cotchin and even Maric. Do you expect these players to bounce back to the heights of their previous year? What does history suggest? Thanks in advance and sorry if this was poorly worded!

Great question Erich, can't wait for Rowsus's answer on this.

 

[WO FAT]

Gidday Rowsus..is there anyway I can find out my previous seasons in supercoach so I can update my profile?cheers

 

[Erich1036]

Big Sam Jacobs falls into this catagory, would defintely seem to be underpriced at an average of 85 given he is the Crows undisputed number 1 lead ruckman, big question is what's his real value and does it make him a keeper? Couldn't see myself starting him unless preseason form suggested at least a 105 ave.

Yes Sam Jacobs is another good one Drew. Another interesting one is Brett Deledio. Averaged 117 in 2012!

 

[Nk29]

Yes Sam Jacobs is another good one Drew. Another interesting one is Brett Deledio. Averaged 117 in 2012!

Don't think he is in the same category mate. His averages since '08:

2008. 102.2
2009. 103.4
2010. 101.9
2011. 104.9
2012. 116.6
2013. 103.6

As you can see, he is a solid 100-105 player. I think 2012 was a bit of an anomaly in that he averaged way above what he has historically, and he has since gone back to his traditional average. I'd expect him to continue to average in his historical 100-105 ppg range this year as well. This is the same reason why I am wary about picking McVeigh (a player who has consistently averaged in the 95-100 range) this year.

 

[Erich1036]

Don't think he is in the same category mate. His averages since '08:

2008. 102.2
2009. 103.4
2010. 101.9
2011. 104.9
2012. 116.6
2013. 103.6

As you can see, he is a solid 100-105 player. I think 2012 was a bit of an anomaly in that he averaged way above what he has historically, and he has since gone back to his traditional average. I'd expect him to continue to average in his historical 100-105 ppg range this year as well. This is the same reason why I am wary about picking McVeigh (a player who has consistently averaged in the 95-100 range) this year.

Very good point Nk. Keep in mind that was his first full year in the midfield though.

 

[Rowsus]

G'day Rowsus,
Just a few questions on team line up. I don't know if my structure will be competitive in the early rounds. I've looked at the thread flat track bullies and that was very helpful.
As you see my team is staked full of mid pricers. I not sure if I should go with 1 or 2 less and go a rookee and a premo. I think more money will be spent in the back and forward lines with limited rookees.
Your thoughts...

Hi yakka,
I think you've gone with way too many mid-pricers there. You are backing yourself to get far too many decisions right, and unless you are very good, or very lucky, it just won't work. Everyone picked in your side has a job to do. Premo's score points, Rookies make money. Midpricers have to do both, or improve enough to become Keepers. Higher priced Rookies, and the really lower priced players face a harder task to make money.
Looking at your team, you have:
Midpricers: Carlisle, Atley, Suckling, Thomas, Savage, Dixon, Tippett
"Bargains": Tyson, Laidler, Beams C, Sandilands, Daniher, Rohan
Rookies $150k+: McDonald, Martin, Aish,
That's over half your team picked from the "Danger Zone". To break even on decisions made on these sort of players, you need to get around 60-65% right..... to break even! So you need 10 of these 16 players to fire, and justify there selection, just to be on even playing field with someone playing a Prems and Rookies strategy, who did reasonably ok in their selections. It's a REALLY high risk option. If you get 11 or 12 right, you've got a jump on the pack, if you get 8 right, you will be fighting most of the season, just to right the ship, if you get 6 right, it is season over before you began. I think you need to add to your probably 8 Keeper/Premiums you have, by turning 10 to 12 of the above into Prem/Rookie combos.
Good luck.


Just as a side note to everyone - I am trying to avoid "Rate My Team" questions in this thread. We have a thread for that.

 

[Rowsus]

Gidday Rowsus..is there anyway I can find out my previous seasons in supercoach so I can update my profile?cheers

Hi WO FAT,
the best suggestion I have seen for finding previous results, is to look through old emails. apart from that, I'm not sure you can.

 

[Rowsus]

Hey Rowsus, loved the article on how the majority of players that breakout fail to repeat it the next year. I was just wondering, how well in general do these players bounce back? Looking at Todd Goldstein, he went from 113 to 93 and then back to 113. What does this mean for players like JPK, Cotchin and even Maric. Do you expect these players to bounce back to the heights of their previous year? What does history suggest? Thanks in advance and sorry if this was poorly worded!

Big Sam Jacobs falls into this catagory, would defintely seem to be underpriced at an average of 85 given he is the Crows undisputed number 1 lead ruckman, big question is what's his real value and does it make him a keeper? Couldn't see myself starting him unless preseason form suggested at least a 105 ave.

Great question Erich, can't wait for Rowsus's answer on this.

I actually tackled this on page 2 of 2014 Chasing Last Years Points at post #30.
Here is what it says:

So a general question that this thread raises is, how does the players break out season compare with the rest of his career?
In the chart below you can see all 30 players that scored a season average equal to or over 102/game, after having a season average at least 20/game lower the season before.
I have broken the the table into 3 sections.
The top section shows the only 4 players to have surpassed that break out season average in a subsequent season. Looking at the names you have Ablett, Goddard and Swan, all SC royalty, and Goldstein, who might turn out to be Royalty, but probably only qualifies as a Viscount right now. He only just qualified for this section by 0.3% anyway.
The 26 players below these 4 all failed to better their 20+ break out season averages in subsequent seasons. This was their career high point, from then until now!
Hodge actually managed a higher average than his 20+ jump season, but it was before he had the 20+ jump. These 26 players HIGHEST season average, after their 20+ jump, was on average 10% lower than their jump season.
The bottom 4 players have been seperated, because their history showed they were capable of having seasons within an acceptable "Premium" level. It was no complete surprise that they bounced back to, or just above, their old levels. some of you might argue Tuck was a surprise, and it was, but he'd flown that high before.

Legend
Green score is the score before their break out season
Blue score is the break out season
Purple score is the season after their break out season
Red square is where their break out season was their career high
Pink square is where the career high was not in their break out season.
The "best after" column shows the difference, percentage wise, between their break out season, and their BEST season AFTER their break out season.

So what do we take from this?
Basically, in my mind, unless you think a player is going to go on, and become SC Royalty, their 20+ jump season can be seen as their benchmark, or even 10% higher than their benchmark. Remember, history is history for a reason. When you are backing players to break new ground, or re-write history, you will be wrong a lot more than you are right. You want to have pretty good reasons to back them in, if that's the path you choose. Having said that, I'm not suggesting writing off all the players who are more recent entries to this list, just have realistic expectations. It's okay to back a Beams or Dangerfield, and select them in your team, but to expect they might set new levels might be too much. Still, if they can return just below their 2012 averages, you'd be pretty happy!

A little more on all this follows in the next answer, with the Deledio example.

 

[Rowsus]

Yes Sam Jacobs is another good one Drew. Another interesting one is Brett Deledio. Averaged 117 in 2012!

Don't think he is in the same category mate. His averages since '08:

2008. 102.2
2009. 103.4
2010. 101.9
2011. 104.9
2012. 116.6
2013. 103.6

As you can see, he is a solid 100-105 player. I think 2012 was a bit of an anomaly in that he averaged way above what he has historically, and he has since gone back to his traditional average. I'd expect him to continue to average in his historical 100-105 ppg range this year as well. This is the same reason why I am wary about picking McVeigh (a player who has consistently averaged in the 95-100 range) this year.

Very good point Nk. Keep in mind that was his first full year in the midfield though.

Great answer by Nk29, as usual.
Spikes in a players averages should be seens as just that, a spike. Deledio is a classic example. 5 out of 6 seasons say he is 105 at best, yet so many people keep remembering that 116, and hope he'll repeat it. Just like a player can have a bad/down season (Buddy 2013?), they can have an "up" season. The biggest mistake you can make, is to mistake this "up" season as their new level. If they are a young, and upcoming player, with an upwards trend, it might be their new level. If they are an older player, with a more established record and pattern, it's more likely to be an isolated spike.
The other thing to keep in mind is, and SO many Coaches get caught thinking the opposite, the higher someone flies one season, the harder it is to repeat it the next. So many Coaches just assumed and "accepted" that Beams was a 120+ player after 2012, but it's just so hard to maintain that sort of level. Only 3 players have ever done it consistently. THREE! Does that mean Beams won't do it in 2014, or after? No it doesn't. The 3 things to take from this is, look for consistency, don't mistake spikes for "new levels" and set your expectations too high, and remember, only the best can replicate or better a break out season.

 

[WO FAT]

Hi WO FAT,
the best suggestion I have seen for finding previous results, is to look through old emails. apart from that, I'm not sure you can.

Thanks mate...

 

[Erich1036]

Great answer by Nk29, as usual.
Spikes in a players averages should be seens as just that, a spike. Deledio is a classic example. 5 out of 6 seasons say he is 105 at best, yet so many people keep remembering that 116, and hope he'll repeat it. Just like a player can have a bad/down season (Buddy 2013?), they can have an "up" season. The biggest mistake you can make, is to mistake this "up" season as their new level. If they are a young, and upcoming player, with an upwards trend, it might be their new level. If they are an older player, with a more established record and pattern, it's more likely to be an isolated spike.
The other thing to keep in mind is, and SO many Coaches get caught thinking the opposite, the higher someone flies one season, the harder it is to repeat it the next. So many Coaches just assumed and "accepted" that Beams was a 120+ player after 2012, but it's just so hard to maintain that sort of level. Only 3 players have ever done it consistently. THREE! Does that mean Beams won't do it in 2014, or after? No it doesn't. The 3 things to take from this is, look for consistency, don't mistake spikes for "new levels" and set your expectations too high, and remember, only the best can replicate or better a break out season.

Thanks for all that Rowsus, very insightful. Lots to ponder now. Sorry to trouble you again, but I've got two more quick ones! Do you feel a DPP in the midfield is a must due to the added flexibility and what would you consider a pass score on your VC to utilize the loophole? Thanks again! In depth answers aren't necessary for these, but if you feel the need go right ahead

 

[Courtesans]

Great answer by Nk29, as usual.
Spikes in a players averages should be seens as just that, a spike. Deledio is a classic example. 5 out of 6 seasons say he is 105 at best, yet so many people keep remembering that 116, and hope he'll repeat it. Just like a player can have a bad/down season (Buddy 2013?), they can have an "up" season. The biggest mistake you can make, is to mistake this "up" season as their new level. If they are a young, and upcoming player, with an upwards trend, it might be their new level. If they are an older player, with a more established record and pattern, it's more likely to be an isolated spike.
The other thing to keep in mind is, and SO many Coaches get caught thinking the opposite, the higher someone flies one season, the harder it is to repeat it the next. So many Coaches just assumed and "accepted" that Beams was a 120+ player after 2012, but it's just so hard to maintain that sort of level. Only 3 players have ever done it consistently. THREE! Does that mean Beams won't do it in 2014, or after? No it doesn't. The 3 things to take from this is, look for consistency, don't mistake spikes for "new levels" and set your expectations too high, and remember, only the best can replicate or better a break out season.

This one is now a sticky note on the fridge.

 

[aj74]

One last point, don't get caught over estimating the money making ability of your Rookies, especially a D8 Rookie. Last year Goodes and Terlich made just over $300k, if you manged to keep them long enough, but there is no way you had them sitting at D8. D5 or D6 was much more likely. Laird eventually made $210k, and after him, it drops off a bit. The point is, your D8 will rarely make $200k, let alone $300k. It is more likely a long, slow $125-150k for your D8.

Luke Brown *twitch* Bloody *twitch twitch* Luke Brown

 

[Rowsus]

Thanks for all that Rowsus, very insightful. Lots to ponder now. Sorry to trouble you again, but I've got two more quick ones! Do you feel a DPP in the midfield is a must due to the added flexibility and what would you consider a pass score on your VC to utilize the loophole? Thanks again! In depth answers aren't necessary for these, but if you feel the need go right ahead

I think DPP's are very important, but it is not so important to start with completed links. ie one each position, ready for swapping.
Look at Dimma's starting team last season:
4 x D/M's all sitting in Def
Midfield were all purely Mids
5 x F/M's all sitting in the Fwd
Cox R/F and Blicavs R/M both sitting in the Ruck.
You don't/shouldn't need to use their DPP status early on, but as the season builds, and your team changes, you can complete the links, by getting a spare player onto your Mid bench. If it fits and suits your structure, start with one in your Mids, but don't see it as a fail, if they are all back on their other lines to begin with.
As to Captains, I used a very simple rule last season. If Ablett played first, and scored under 125, I went to my other choice (Pendles etc). If Ablett played second, and my VC scored under 130, I went to Ablett.

 

[Erich1036]

I think DPP's are very important, but it is not so important to start with completed links. ie one each position, ready for swapping.
Look at Dimma's starting team last season:
4 x D/M's all sitting in Def
Midfield were all purely Mids
5 x F/M's all sitting in the Fwd
Cox R/F and Blicavs R/M both sitting in the Ruck.
You don't/shouldn't need to use their DPP status early on, but as the season builds, and your team changes, you can complete the links, by getting a spare player onto your Mid bench. If it fits and suits your structure, start with one in your Mids, but don't see it as a fail, if they are all back on their other lines to begin with.
As to Captains, I used a very simple rule last season. If Ablett played first, and scored under 125, I went to my other choice (Pendles etc). If Ablett played second, and my VC scored under 130, I went to Ablett.

Thanks again mate! A great point you make regarding DPPs, I didn't even think of completely the links throughout the season. Silly me
And that's probably the best VC loophole rule I've come across, cheers.

 

[Manikato1]

Rowsus is there any stats anywhere that show the number of rookie priced players that actually increased by 200k in 2013 and or 2012? I know this figure seems to be used as the ideal amount rookies should make but I have always thought that is a bit high. In fact it would be good to see the breakdown in position as well as I assume a rookie mid is much more likely to go up quicker than a defender(or am I wrong?)

 

[Rowsus]

Rowsus is there any stats anywhere that show the number of rookie priced players that actually increased by 200k in 2013 and or 2012? I know this figure seems to be used as the ideal amount rookies should make but I have always thought that is a bit high. In fact it would be good to see the breakdown in position as well as I assume a rookie mid is much more likely to go up quicker than a defender(or am I wrong?)

I'm not sure any of the various sites have this info, which means a bit of a slog to work through them all. I can tell you that 20 players finished the 2013 season at a price $200k or more higher than their opening price. Among those 20 were Wingard, Simpson D and Neale, but the other 17 were Rookies. Of course, this doesn't take into account players that crossed the $200k increase mark, but fell back below it again. On top of those 20 players, there were another 26 players that finished the season $150-$200k higher than their opening price. 7 of them were non-Rookies, which brings the total count to 36 Rookies that increased by $150k or more last season.
In general a Mid Rookie will increase quicker than say a Def Rookie. This isn't a hard and fast rule, and it should be remembered that speed of price increases is relative to how much above their "priced to score" a player achieves.
I know this is not as thorough as you wanted, but I hope it helps.


edit - There were actually 16 Rookies last year, not 17. I counted L Brown as a Rookie, but he played 3 games at 25 in 2012.