Opinion Questions For Rowsus

[expl0it]

Hi Rowsus. Been following your gold analysis, especially the "can statistics determine the next breakout player". Love trying to find the next breakout player. Had Hannebery last year and helped me get that POD for most of my matches.

This year looking for that "next" player - my eyes have turned to Brodie Smith in the defence. What are your thoughts on him? Is there a possible move up the field for him due to Ricky Henderson's absence?

I've also got Ben Cunnington in my 3-1-4 (possible change to 4-1-5) midfield as that POD and hopefully steps it up again - chose him after looking at the stats and his upward trend.

 

[Rowsus]

Hi Rowsus. Been following your gold analysis, especially the "can statistics determine the next breakout player". Love trying to find the next breakout player. Had Hannebery last year and helped me get that POD for most of my matches.

This year looking for that "next" player - my eyes have turned to Brodie Smith in the defence. What are your thoughts on him? Is there a possible move up the field for him due to Ricky Henderson's absence?

I've also got Ben Cunnington in my 3-1-4 (possible change to 4-1-5) midfield as that POD and hopefully steps it up again - chose him after looking at the stats and his upward trend.

Hi expl0it, welcome aboard.
I'm glad you liked the series. Brodie Smith actually appears to be suffering from Henderson going down, not benefitting. He was going to be in the Mid rotations (apparantly), but now has to cover the hole left by Henderson in the backline. This might be one of the reasons Wright is shining so well in the pre-season. He might be filling the vacancy Smith was meant to. I would tread carefully with Smith, or at least, have realisitc expectations.
Cunnington will be a good POD. Just be patient with him. I expect him to really start to shine after the byes.

 

[freowho]

Rowsus,

I think I'm in agreement with you there. I'm seeing him as a bit of a "Karnezis", similar situation to last year where he was picked mainly to fill in for the lack of rookie options.

I'm considering Webster for this reason. The only players I am willing to lose money on are Ablett and Pendlebury because of the double points for captain. I would like to think that everyone else on the ground will improve their average and I can find underpriced premiums or cherry ripe breakout players in all areas except defence. I'm struggling to find a solid argument for growth from any of the top 10 defenders and David Swallow seems to be the only breakout candidate with reasonable grounds for improvement. Of the rookies Luke McDonald appears to be the only certainty for regular games. Getting a round 1 game can be a red herring for supercoach. Sometimes they are just filling in for an underdone player. Clurey, Tippet, Langford, Georgiou, Langdon, is anyone really bullish on these guys getting a regular gig? Even Georgiou in a bottom 4 team seems to have a fair bit of competition for his spot. I think Webster has a regular starting spot but I also understand Rowsus' explanation on the maths. Would appreciate any feedback on any of the above comments.

 

[Manikato1]

Hi Rowsus. Like many I am getting to grips with rucks. I have NicNat at the moment. I am not entirely sold on his fitness and the idea he may be “managed” during the season. Replacements are hard to find. So what about Dean Cox? (I originally wrote “Then I thought about big Cox” but that sounds wrong on so many levels I rewrote it immediately).

I can afford him. He is getting older but rarely misses games. He has always averaged over the ton in 5 of the last 6 years. My question is. If I take him and NicNat stays sound and plays, I would assume Cox plays forward and maybe does the forward ruck work or fills in. Can he take enough contested marks and kick enough goals if he camps in the goal square to compensate for any loss of time on the ball? He kicked 10 goals last year and 17 in 2012. What if he kicked 25 or 30?

On the other side of the coin if NicNat has extended time off the field, Cox would assume the main ruck role again and possibly score as freely as he has always done in the past.

Sex on the Beach. The old combo back in town. Just like the good old days.

 

[Manikato1]

I think Webster has a regular starting spot but I also understand Rowsus' explanation on the maths. Would appreciate any feedback on any of the above comments.

Freo I have also included Webster for the same reason- IMO he will get a regular starting spot as a defender. As my trading plan requires players to make cash as early as they can I more comfortable about Webster playing 6 or 7 games straight and making 140 or 150k than one of the other rookies that will eventually make 200k but are in and out and take until Rd 17 to do it.

Hoping he can ave around 80-82 for the first 6-7 rounds. If he only ave 75 the plan gets dodgey. No risk no reward

 

[Rowsus]

I'm considering Webster for this reason. The only players I am willing to lose money on are Ablett and Pendlebury because of the double points for captain. I would like to think that everyone else on the ground will improve their average and I can find underpriced premiums or cherry ripe breakout players in all areas except defence.

It's a noble sentiment, and a worthy goal, but unless you pick very well, it can lead to a team with a few misses, and not enough hits. Or at least that is what has happened to me in the past when I've tried it, you may handle it better! I think you've got to take risks somewhere, and most years that consists in part, on risking Rookies JS. It still feels like a 3 iron off the tee on a tight par 4 to me. You really put yourself under pressure to get it right, or you just think I should have just blazed away with my driver (gone a Rookie and upgraded someone with the difference). It feels like you are playing safer, but that's only the case in isolation. You have to look how it affects the overall picture. If you went to a Rookie, what could you do with the $100-$130k? If the answer honestly is nothing, stick with Webster, if the answer is something, then you need to consider your options strongly. This applies doubly/triply as it sounds like you might have 2 or 3 Websters in your team, if you are going to achieve 28 players going up in price. If you lump those 2 or 3 players together can you achieve something better is the more pertinent question. Remember, potentially for every Webster out of your team, you could be saving yourself a trade, as every Webster comes with the need for a trade, or two, to be used.

 

[Rowsus]

Hi Rowsus. Like many I am getting to grips with rucks. I have NicNat at the moment. I am not entirely sold on his fitness and the idea he may be “managed” during the season. Replacements are hard to find. So what about Dean Cox? (I originally wrote “Then I thought about big Cox” but that sounds wrong on so many levels I rewrote it immediately).

I can afford him. He is getting older but rarely misses games. He has always averaged over the ton in 5 of the last 6 years. My question is. If I take him and NicNat stays sound and plays, I would assume Cox plays forward and maybe does the forward ruck work or fills in. Can he take enough contested marks and kick enough goals if he camps in the goal square to compensate for any loss of time on the ball? He kicked 10 goals last year and 17 in 2012. What if he kicked 25 or 30?

On the other side of the coin if NicNat has extended time off the field, Cox would assume the main ruck role again and possibly score as freely as he has always done in the past.

Sex on the Beach. The old combo back in town. Just like the good old days.

I must admit, Cox seems to have been to readily dismissed as an option by most Coaches. I read a stat a few days ago in the Ruck forum, which I haven't checked, that Cox was 98/game with NicNat in the team last year, and 116/game without him. It's a little strange, because in 2012 they both did ok together. Still, I think you can do worse than Cox. He strikes me as being like Enright. They are consistent, and rarely let you down, they just figure in the list of the best of their positions aggregate points, year in, year out.

 

[expl0it]

Thanks for the clarification on Brodie Smith.

With Cunnington, I'm a bit concerned that he might get the no. 1 tag (although ziebell might get it?) - thinking of not starting him and have a look at Cunners after the bye to see where he's at.

I was also interested in Mitch Duncan but he's so hard to fit in the midfield with all the value available.

 

[Eagling]

Hi Rowsus.

Am I too top heavy in my mids?

Team structure as follows (Premiums-Midpricers-Rookies)

DEF: 3-1-4
MID: 5-1-4
RUC: 1-1-2
FWD: 5-0-3

I really don't want to bring in another DEF premium as it is hard to pick out the best ones at the beginning of the year. So should I trade a Mid Premium for a Rookie and pocket the change?

 

[Zim^zuM]

where does derickx play lol

 

[jmack5]

What are your thoughts on Ben Kennedy as an option in the forward line Rowsus?

 

[Pearcey47]

Hi Rowsus,
Loving your work on here, keep it up.
Just a quick question - how do you work out the 'Magic Number' during the season? Completely understand it prior to the season starting but lose track of how to calculate it once the price changes come in to affect.
Your assistance is appreciated.

 

[Rowsus]

Hi Rowsus.

Am I too top heavy in my mids?

Team structure as follows (Premiums-Midpricers-Rookies)

DEF: 3-1-4
MID: 5-1-4
RUC: 1-1-2
FWD: 5-0-3

I really don't want to bring in another DEF premium as it is hard to pick out the best ones at the beginning of the year. So should I trade a Mid Premium for a Rookie and pocket the change?

Hi Eagling,
From he information you've given me, I don't think you are too top heavy there, and I definitely wouldn't downgrade a Prem to a Rookie to pocket cash. If you are happy that the Rookies you have can give you a good, consistent supply of cash/points, then I would leave it as it is.

 

[Rowsus]

where does derickx play lol

Sydney, not Richmond.
I'm guessing something around 50-55% TOG, with a split of about 10-15% Fwd and 35-40% Ruck.

 

[Rowsus]

What are your thoughts on Ben Kennedy as an option in the forward line Rowsus?

I think he is a very viable option. I actually had him in my team until 2 days ago, when I swapped him and Guthrie out for Enright and Lloyd. There is still a chance I will switch back.

 

[Rowsus]

Hi Rowsus,
Loving your work on here, keep it up.
Just a quick question - how do you work out the 'Magic Number' during the season? Completely understand it prior to the season starting but lose track of how to calculate it once the price changes come in to affect.
Your assistance is appreciated.

Hi Pearcey,
Because prices are rounded to the nearest $100, and B/E are rounded to the nearest full number, when both are in reality calculated into decimal places, you have to do 3 or 4 calculations, and take the average.

The formula to use is : MN = 3 x Price / ( sc1 + sc2 + sc3 - (Price change/440))

where sc1, sc2, sc3 are the players 3 most recent scores.

Let's look at 3 scenarios, and see how it works.

Ablett scores 128, 122, 126 in the first 3 games, and drops $18,000
Pendlebury scores 121, 115, 115 in the first 3 games, and drops $26,100
Armitage D scores 129, 132, 91 in the first 3 games, and rises $24,100

Ablett gives us: MN = 3 x 695,000/(376 - (-18,000/440)) = 5,001.09
Pendlebury gives us: MN = 3 x 683,100/(351 - (-26,100/440)) = 4,994.42
Armitage D gives us: MN = 3 x 498,500/(352 - (24,100/440)) = 5,031.50

We then take an average (5,001.09 + 4,994.42 + 5,031.50)/3 = 5008.67

Remember, the variance in the calculations is there because of the rounding factor. Ablett's price is not $695,000, it could be $694,951.234 and has been rounded up to $695,000.
The more calculations you do to add into the calculation, the more accurate it will be. I usually do 6.

 

[Pearcey47]

Thanks for that Rowsus, greatly appreciated! I would never have been able to work it out without your help!

 

[sangkuriang]

I must admit, Cox seems to have been to readily dismissed as an option by most Coaches. I read a stat a few days ago in the Ruck forum, which I haven't checked, that Cox was 98/game with NicNat in the team last year, and 116/game without him. It's a little strange, because in 2012 they both did ok together. Still, I think you can do worse than Cox. He strikes me as being like Enright. They are consistent, and rarely let you down, they just figure in the list of the best of their positions aggregate points, year in, year out.

I wanted to pick Nic Nat too but I accept his fitness is too uncertain. Pyke is locked at R2. I've suddenly developed a liking for Kreuzer. Is it rational to think he has upside Rowsus? After all he is in the right age bracket. Might put C. Wood at R3 in case of injury as well.

 

[Rowsus]

I wanted to pick Nic Nat too but I accept his fitness is too uncertain. Pyke is locked at R2. I've suddenly developed a liking for Kreuzer. Is it rational to think he has upside Rowsus? After all he is in the right age bracket. Might put C. Wood at R3 in case of injury as well.

I'm not big on Kreuz. When looking at his scores it is easy to get tempted, but then I keep coming back to his game counts: 13, 12, 20, 16 in the last 4 seasons. If you do go down that road, then coupling with Wood seems like a good option. It mirrors the Goldy/Currie coupling of last season, and while Currie never played a game, you knew you had cover if Goldy was out.

 

[lakb24]

Hi Rowsus, after hearing the news of possible sanctions for Jobe Watson do you think it is better to keep him out of our sides? He didnt perform well in the NAB cup and i think rockliff or Fyfe could outperform him anyway
thanks