Discussion BBL|12: Planning Thread

Which of the more expensive players on a double do you have for round 1?

  • M Short

    Votes: 38 55.1%

  • R Khan

    Votes: 68 98.6%

  • Boult

    Votes: 23 33.3%

  • Sams

    Votes: 66 95.7%

  • J Sangha

    Votes: 16 23.2%

  • Thornton

    Votes: 1 1.4%

  • Clarke

    Votes: 24 34.8%

  • Siddle

    Votes: 36 52.2%

  • Sandhu

    Votes: 5 7.2%

  • Doggett

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    69
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

The Myth

#3,125
Joined
11 Dec 2019
Messages
2,192
Likes
10,274
AFL Club
Gold Coast
#3,125
Brendan12 said:
Still don’t know what to do about the Hurricanes. Wade and Shadab represent so much value and likely premium scoring, but it’s a rough schedule
Click to expand...
I’ve still got Shadab to play, probably my only single game player. Has the potential role to be highly undervalued. The assistant coach referring to him as a middle order bat has me suspecting he could come in over in guys like David, Ali, and even Neesham pending game scenario. If I’m wrong and he bats at 8, I get him playing one of the weakest batting lineups. I’d then sell round 2.
 
Brendan12

Brendan12

#3,126
Joined
28 Jan 2021
Messages
2,203
Likes
8,682
AFL Club
Richmond
#3,126
The Myth said:
I’ve still got Shadab to play, probably my only single game player. Has the potential role to be highly undervalued. The assistant coach referring to him as a middle order bat has me suspecting he could come in over in guys like David, Ali, and even Neesham pending game scenario. If I’m wrong and he bats at 8, I get him playing one of the weakest batting lineups. I’d then sell round 2.
Click to expand...
I still think he could highly effective as just a bowler though. Round 2 he plays Perth, the best bowling attack so even batting 8 he still gets a hit that gen imo. Round 3 at SCG, spin friendly. Round 4 Gades at Bellerive
 
R

realashley12

Draftee
#3,129
Joined
2 Dec 2017
Messages
32
Likes
40
#3,129
Rowsus said:
As someone who has been a punter for 45 years, and worked for a large Bookmaker for 13 years, I have to disagree with you, and agree with @KLo30.
Thunder are currently $1.72 fav, in a market set to 105.1%.
Sams is currently $2.10 fav to be Thunders leading wicket taker for the tournament.
Chris Green is currently $6.00 2nd fav to be Thunders leading wicket taker for the tournament.
If you think taking the 2 players expected to be their leading wicket takers out of their team, won't shift the betting line, you're crazy.
As to proposition betting, Sams is currently $3.75 fav to be the leading wicket taker for Thunder, for this match. The market is currently set to a poisonous 192.5% and Sams coming out would see all other players prices drop by roughly 20-25%, if they decide to keep the market that poisonous!
My guesstimate is, that if Sams is confirmed as not playing, Thunder could get out to $1.80. If Green was to be added as a confirmed out, that might be $1.82. There is a huge difference between $1.72 and $1.82. The biggest difference in those prices is reflected in the Stars price, which would shift from $2.13 into $1.98.
Punters are very re-active, and usually they over-react. I can't see Bookmakers have set their current prices with the expectation that Sams isn't playing. That could cause problems for them if/when he does. It is possible they have shaded the odds slightly, in case he is out, but only very marginally.
Click to expand...
Its a bit of a tangent but it comes down to what we believe is considered a "scandal" as per the original post. I don't view a market being slightly off to be the same as an AFL scandal such as a backline player lining up in the forward line for first goal scorer (which is where the information or lackthereof is far more relevant important.

Regarding the props, there is no way all players drop 25%. Literally none, as the replacement player is going to have some equity to take most wickets. If the non-vig weighted %s are something like

25% (Sams)
20%
19%
18%
18%

That replacement level player is coming in with at least 15% equity of taking most poles (there are replacing him with another pace bowler good enough to make a BBL list after all). So unless they massively increase the over-round (to an already massively poisonous market as you mentioned there isn't going to be that much change to the market or newly found positive EV for punters in a market with 92% overround. Unlike say, AFL most disposals markets where Tom Mitchell is out for the Hawks, and is replaced by a first gamer, where the first game has close to zero equity of most disposals.

I just don't think its considered a "scandal" in the same way as someone selling Brownlow votes, or an NFL QB hiding an injury pre game, or Nick Maxwell telling his mates he is starting in a forward pocket that week.

If there were to be scandals in the BBL, it would be live betting markets on runs per over, with the Power Surge usually moving the live run line up ~3-4ish runs per over if the batsman are set after 12ish overs. Knowing when those are coming (or when they are not) is far more valuable than the gap between knowing whether Daniel Sams and say, Ben Cutting playing or not playing.

Apologies for the derail.
 
T

The Myth

#3,134
Joined
11 Dec 2019
Messages
2,192
Likes
10,274
AFL Club
Gold Coast
#3,134
Shaunpro1 said:
People say this about every single guy that comes out here, find it a bit ridiculous really, especially when the guys 105K and can be looped in the first game of Round 2.
Click to expand...
I’m not saying it for every player that comes out here, I’m saying it for English Batsman. Typically, they’ve struggled early, or sometimes for the entire tournament. Even one of the regular top performers in Hales has often struggled early in the tournament. Of course there are exceptions.

He may be a quality player, but him getting 2 good scores in his first 3 games would be the exception, not the rule.

If you can loop him great, but with stars on the bye I don’t see many teams being stacked with looping opportunities.
 
Chumpion

Chumpion

#3,140
Joined
9 Dec 2020
Messages
2,370
Likes
12,058
AFL Club
Essendon
#3,140
I've been trying to solve the keeper issue with some old fashioned fixture analysis, and here is what I've come up with.

Firstly, couple of things:

1. A bit of this is inspired after reading @Diabolical's recap of last season, so credit there for any of the themes/concepts that pop up that sound familiar.
2. Full fixture is included but I'll mostly ignore the back end of the season as too much can change between now and then.
3. My goal is to spend as few trades as possible on keepers, as I feel there will be more benefit/need in having trades to manage the other 10 on field spots. Keepers are 1/11 spots on field so don't want to disproportionately allocate trades to that spot.
4. I've excluded Carey as not available early.

1670814717276.png

From what I can see, there are 3 clear zones across the season:

1. Rounds 1 to 3 - Condensed period of DGR/Byes, but that is o***et by this zone having the benefit of starting teams being tailored to best manage it. The goal at the end of this round is to be positioned to have the best keeper choice for the start of the next zone in round 4. using last years averages, this is how players would score over those rounds:

1670813802380.png

Based on that, it feels like the optimal keeper situation is to start Gilkes, and then in round 3 shift him to Billings. This provides 6 games of scoring from just 1 trade (or no trades if you start Billings), and Gilkes would have had the 2nd highest scoring at the end of round 2, and Billings has the highest scoring in round 3. Note: I've only done this least season average for this zone, as it was most useless for navigating the cluster of DGR/byes and showing the benefit of Gilkes x4 vs some other players x1 or x2. Also past performance is no indicator of future performance but it's useful in an indicative sense.

Round 1: Gilkes
Round 2: Gilkes
Round 3: Billings
Trades: 1
Score Involvements: 6 (max)

2. Rounds 4 to 8 - Key defining feature is 3 out of 5 SGRs, meaning the priority is to have the best players on field. Given there is 2x DGRs and no byes for SS, this is a really simple one - Billings to Philippe.

Round 4: Philippe
Round 5: Philippe:
Round 6: Philippe:
Round 7: Philippe
Round 8: Philippe
Trades: 1
Score Involvements: 7 (max)

3. Rounds 9 to 13 - Don't have a plan for here yet.. but there are a few options depending on player form/availability.

So in summary:

Round 1: Gilkes
Round 2: Gilkes
Round 3: Billings
Round 4: Philippe
Round 5: Philippe:
Round 6: Philippe:
Round 7: Philippe
Round 8: Philippe
Trades: 2
Score Involvements: 13 (max)

Means I can focus trades on bowl/bat lines as well as chasing B/E value, without neglecting the keeper position. Hopefully this helps people sort through some of the noise around this position - most will have different views but I found the season fixture view helpful in mapping out how to approach keeper strategy while minimising trades.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top