2023: SC Planning Thread
- Thread starter Gruffles
- Start date
Speculating is fun but can go spectacularly wrong when your hopefuls just don't do the business.
It's hard to strike the right balance of risk at the start...when it works out it can be a huge leg up though.
Eg: starting with Witts last season and not having to replace him the whole season. (did about 6 other ruck trades though!) LOL
It's hard to strike the right balance of risk at the start...when it works out it can be a huge leg up though.
Eg: starting with Witts last season and not having to replace him the whole season. (did about 6 other ruck trades though!) LOL
- Joined
- 27 Feb 2021
- Messages
- 171
- Likes
- 1,009
- AFL Club
- Carlton
The extra trades (is 35 confirmed?) suit the Speculators though.
With the old 20 trades, you pretty much had to nail 13 keepers and maybe 1 cheapie that succeeded. That left you needing to upgrade 8 spots - 16 one-up, one-down and 4 for injury cover.
If you pick 13 top-dollar players these days, you are kind of locking yourself in to having nearly 4 trades per upgrade position. I know it never works exactly the way we expect, but that really can't be the best way to go about it can it? If you use trades on any of the 13 guns, it is usually because they are failing and you incur a loss in dollar terms.
To my way of thinking, you need more than 9 on-field positions actually generating money to make the most of all the trades. If, for example, you have 8 more speculative picks like the ones above, it is pretty easy to fix the 2 or 3 that may not start as expected. Just sideways into similiar priced players who have got off to a flier, a missed must-have rookie, or maybe a premo that has had an injury affected score.
You used to have to wait until rookies were fattened before trading in an ideal world. I remember the bloke who won it whilst travelling around Europe in about 2010, only using 1 trade until round 8. You can't play that way now.
I'm not sure what the ideal balance is now compared to the 14 and 8 mentioned in the 2nd paragraph. You'd have to think it would be closer to breaking your team into 3rds. 7 or 8 premo keepers, 7 or 8 speculative picks that still make money, but are expendable at advantageous times (byes, grab fallen premos etc.), and 6 or 7 rookies (or equivalent, like McKenna, Bruce etc.). You can decrease the number of rookies on field, in proportion to selecting more of the "speculative" types.
If 20 trades was suited to 8 upgrades, then 35 trades has to be suited to 14/15 upgrades doesn't it? 5 or 6 for injury issues. I like the fact that there is more uncertainty in how best to go about it.
With the old 20 trades, you pretty much had to nail 13 keepers and maybe 1 cheapie that succeeded. That left you needing to upgrade 8 spots - 16 one-up, one-down and 4 for injury cover.
If you pick 13 top-dollar players these days, you are kind of locking yourself in to having nearly 4 trades per upgrade position. I know it never works exactly the way we expect, but that really can't be the best way to go about it can it? If you use trades on any of the 13 guns, it is usually because they are failing and you incur a loss in dollar terms.
To my way of thinking, you need more than 9 on-field positions actually generating money to make the most of all the trades. If, for example, you have 8 more speculative picks like the ones above, it is pretty easy to fix the 2 or 3 that may not start as expected. Just sideways into similiar priced players who have got off to a flier, a missed must-have rookie, or maybe a premo that has had an injury affected score.
You used to have to wait until rookies were fattened before trading in an ideal world. I remember the bloke who won it whilst travelling around Europe in about 2010, only using 1 trade until round 8. You can't play that way now.
I'm not sure what the ideal balance is now compared to the 14 and 8 mentioned in the 2nd paragraph. You'd have to think it would be closer to breaking your team into 3rds. 7 or 8 premo keepers, 7 or 8 speculative picks that still make money, but are expendable at advantageous times (byes, grab fallen premos etc.), and 6 or 7 rookies (or equivalent, like McKenna, Bruce etc.). You can decrease the number of rookies on field, in proportion to selecting more of the "speculative" types.
If 20 trades was suited to 8 upgrades, then 35 trades has to be suited to 14/15 upgrades doesn't it? 5 or 6 for injury issues. I like the fact that there is more uncertainty in how best to go about it.
Yep.
Even before COVID this was the case. The winner a few years ago had 7 on ground players stay for the whole year. For example you could go from a fattened Curnow to another undernourished KPF like Reiwoldt or Lynch without having a genuine keeper in that spot.
A different winner went from 4 failed starting mid priced picks to 4 successful mid priced picks within the first few weeks.
No need to think you have to have 12 or 13 keepers in your starting squad.
Even before COVID this was the case. The winner a few years ago had 7 on ground players stay for the whole year. For example you could go from a fattened Curnow to another undernourished KPF like Reiwoldt or Lynch without having a genuine keeper in that spot.
A different winner went from 4 failed starting mid priced picks to 4 successful mid priced picks within the first few weeks.
No need to think you have to have 12 or 13 keepers in your starting squad.
The extra trades last year really did change the dynamic of the game.
I had a mare of a season and still ended up with Rozee and Hewett (I had a trade in round 23 I could have used) as floating loopholes. Those who didn't use a third of their trades on rucks could have easily had a genuine premium covering every line.
I think it really changes how we pick our starting sides. In the past you needed to try and nail 13+ premiums to start with and while doing that will still be advantageous I think we can drop that number down to 10 or 11 and target the super premium level a lot more.
The DPP changes also play into this significantly, you almost don't want to have 5 or 6 premiums on the DEF/FWD lines by round 12 now because it only takes a Bont, Libba or Parker type getting FWD status from wrecking your 6!
Basically I think the new tactic is probably to try and nail the top 2 or 3 on each line (still not easy) as the starting choices and then use the extra trades aggressively to target breakout and value picks to fill it out. Also leaves more room for the midprice guys to generate cash. The last couple of years have been kind of ridiculous with Coniglio, Hewett, Brodie, Ziebell and a couple of others who went to high end premium levels but there will almost certainly be a couple of Curnow, Daniher, Gresham and Chapman types who make you 150k while being safer starting options than rookies.
Hopefully we get a lot of varied strategies as the starting point is really the main difference these days with so many trades. By season's end I had 4 players different to the #1 team and it's the same for basically the whole top 10 give or take, basically certain players are guaranteed to be in teams so really the only difference is how well you nail rookies, trade timing and, most importantly, starting teams.
I had a mare of a season and still ended up with Rozee and Hewett (I had a trade in round 23 I could have used) as floating loopholes. Those who didn't use a third of their trades on rucks could have easily had a genuine premium covering every line.
I think it really changes how we pick our starting sides. In the past you needed to try and nail 13+ premiums to start with and while doing that will still be advantageous I think we can drop that number down to 10 or 11 and target the super premium level a lot more.
The DPP changes also play into this significantly, you almost don't want to have 5 or 6 premiums on the DEF/FWD lines by round 12 now because it only takes a Bont, Libba or Parker type getting FWD status from wrecking your 6!
Basically I think the new tactic is probably to try and nail the top 2 or 3 on each line (still not easy) as the starting choices and then use the extra trades aggressively to target breakout and value picks to fill it out. Also leaves more room for the midprice guys to generate cash. The last couple of years have been kind of ridiculous with Coniglio, Hewett, Brodie, Ziebell and a couple of others who went to high end premium levels but there will almost certainly be a couple of Curnow, Daniher, Gresham and Chapman types who make you 150k while being safer starting options than rookies.
Hopefully we get a lot of varied strategies as the starting point is really the main difference these days with so many trades. By season's end I had 4 players different to the #1 team and it's the same for basically the whole top 10 give or take, basically certain players are guaranteed to be in teams so really the only difference is how well you nail rookies, trade timing and, most importantly, starting teams.
Some good strategy thoughts above. It got me thinking.
If we had zero trades, it would basically be a lock and load style competition. Initial value would be critical, because you could never get a full premium team, and JS/durability would also be very important. Cash gen would be irrelevant, albeit hopefully an outcome of identifying good value picks.
If we had 50+ trades, it would be more like AF (or aspects of BBL), where you can target players as pinch hitters for points and cash gen, but it’s less important that they’re at a discount to long term value. JS and durability are much less of an issue, because you can trade players out so easily. Ultimately it would be very important to get the best players in your side, because the quality of upgraded sides would be very high.
If we think of these as representing bookends for our strategy, and we increase trades from 30 to 35, to me it suggests: targeting the top end premiums more actively; slightly less focus on initial value; taking a fraction more durability or JS risk; and not focusing on eking every dollar out of cash cows.
If we had zero trades, it would basically be a lock and load style competition. Initial value would be critical, because you could never get a full premium team, and JS/durability would also be very important. Cash gen would be irrelevant, albeit hopefully an outcome of identifying good value picks.
If we had 50+ trades, it would be more like AF (or aspects of BBL), where you can target players as pinch hitters for points and cash gen, but it’s less important that they’re at a discount to long term value. JS and durability are much less of an issue, because you can trade players out so easily. Ultimately it would be very important to get the best players in your side, because the quality of upgraded sides would be very high.
If we think of these as representing bookends for our strategy, and we increase trades from 30 to 35, to me it suggests: targeting the top end premiums more actively; slightly less focus on initial value; taking a fraction more durability or JS risk; and not focusing on eking every dollar out of cash cows.
Looking at last year's top team:
6 of the top 7 defenders
The top 6 midfielders and then 9th (Cripps, huge starting discount) and 12th (Wines who averaged ~115 from when he got him at a huge discount).
#1 ruck and #7 (Darcy, again huge discount buy and was 3rd best from buy date) with English as cover, so basically he used English when he was #1 and then Darcy when he was #3 as his R2.
6 of the top 7 defenders.
Now obviously there's a bit of chicken and the egg here but I ranked terribly and I only had 4 players different to him so it's mostly just a symptom of getting them earlier and probably rookie/captain selections. (Also Sicily/Docherty against Rich/Lloyd).
Basically I think this year you're best off picking the 11 or so you're most certain on, probably a couple of value gambles (Fyfe/Yeo types stand out) and then cash generation. Previously trades were the limiting factor on upgrading, you just couldn't make 11 upgrades but now I think it's the cash generation that will be the limiting factor.
There's also always 3 or 4 in season bargains. Last year you could get Himmelberg, Cameron, Wines, Miller, Rozee, Bont, Darcy and Parker among others and get top 5 scoring at their positions, for absolute bargains and this happens every year. There's always a couple of injuries that re-define roles, a couple of position changes that are extremely lucrative or even just an in-game injury that tanks a price. I think with all the extra trades we've moved more towards in-season value hunting (which inherently has more exposed data) which means playing it a bit safer at the start.
I also think my biggest lesson from last year is to go with the crowd. Sicily effectively ended my season. I think the only reason to not go with the masses on a pick like that would need to be absolute certainty that it's a bad pick and I can't really see how you could have that
Worst result is a risky starting team that has you needing to fix things while everyone else is upgrading and getting value.
6 of the top 7 defenders
The top 6 midfielders and then 9th (Cripps, huge starting discount) and 12th (Wines who averaged ~115 from when he got him at a huge discount).
#1 ruck and #7 (Darcy, again huge discount buy and was 3rd best from buy date) with English as cover, so basically he used English when he was #1 and then Darcy when he was #3 as his R2.
6 of the top 7 defenders.
Now obviously there's a bit of chicken and the egg here but I ranked terribly and I only had 4 players different to him so it's mostly just a symptom of getting them earlier and probably rookie/captain selections. (Also Sicily/Docherty against Rich/Lloyd).
Basically I think this year you're best off picking the 11 or so you're most certain on, probably a couple of value gambles (Fyfe/Yeo types stand out) and then cash generation. Previously trades were the limiting factor on upgrading, you just couldn't make 11 upgrades but now I think it's the cash generation that will be the limiting factor.
There's also always 3 or 4 in season bargains. Last year you could get Himmelberg, Cameron, Wines, Miller, Rozee, Bont, Darcy and Parker among others and get top 5 scoring at their positions, for absolute bargains and this happens every year. There's always a couple of injuries that re-define roles, a couple of position changes that are extremely lucrative or even just an in-game injury that tanks a price. I think with all the extra trades we've moved more towards in-season value hunting (which inherently has more exposed data) which means playing it a bit safer at the start.
I also think my biggest lesson from last year is to go with the crowd. Sicily effectively ended my season. I think the only reason to not go with the masses on a pick like that would need to be absolute certainty that it's a bad pick and I can't really see how you could have that
Worst result is a risky starting team that has you needing to fix things while everyone else is upgrading and getting value.
- Joined
- 22 Nov 2021
- Messages
- 497
- Likes
- 1,860
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
He also had opportunity and did really well winning a B&F at 20 years old. Probably one of the more bizzare drop-o*** in recent times considering he should have only improved from his 20 year old self. If he is flying come rnd 1 and locked in as a permanent on-baller which i think he will be he could be an option. I guess you'd probably have to be going both Hopper and Worpel though, as i don't see many teams going worpel over hopper.
v2.0
The overall philosophy is still the same. Don't run short on trades. Another 'feel' about this team is that I'm picking players who I feel are underpriced as evidenced by every line bar the forward premos who are undoubtedly maxed out already. There's a saying in gambling that, "You can't eat value" which holds true here too as in the end, it's points on the board that wins SC and not 'value' picks that might pan out positively.
Backs: Have swapped out Dawson for Dale (saving 50k) and have gone one less speculative premo in getting rid of Cumming for a rookie. As a midpricer, Bowes makes way also. From the research I've completed the rookies look stronger along this line to my eye. Goater seems a lock, Tom Cole seems a forgotten pick down there, Ginbey is getting positive reviews & McKenna is in the mix. Weddle is also in the mix from what I've read about him & Wilmot in a similar vein. It shouldn't take too many moves between now and season start to address any issues in players I've missed from Rd 1 starting teams. Going lighter here allows me to have a look at the top-line premo defenders before needing to buy. The top forwards looks much easier to pinpoint right now than the top defenders.
Mids: The guts of my midfield stick fat. Miller, Anderson, Green, Titch & Hopper all hold their spot as I feel they're all obviously underpriced at present. Sheed makes his way into the midfield at the expense of Phillips heading to the bench, which may end up costing me points in the long run as a rookie-priced defender has replaced Phillips on field versus what Sheed produces against Cumming. Sheed looks to have a midfield spot sewn up and looks about 30 ppg underpriced at his current price point; I don't think Cumming is 30 ppg underpriced himself. Steele drops out of this line as his training reports haven't been glowing at all and is replaced with Andy Brayshaw who many have been predicting to break out for a few seasons now, is priced very similarly and also a bit of a POD looking at early teams. Brayshaw has a great loop with Miller early doors if using Madden (GWS rookie ruck) to loop. Ashcroft holds his spot despite not hearing many reports on him & taking him on trust as the hype is similar to Daicos last season, although Ashcroft will play a less SC friendly role.
Rucks: English & Grundy out. Marshall & Lycett in. I'm speculating that both Marshall & Lycett are underpriced for what they can produce and am speculating that they'll both primarily be #1 rucks at their club. Lycett's match history looks ordinary although last year he was the victim of bad luck with a shoulder infection derailing his season after scoring well early. If Lycett goes down early then I'm looking at a burned trade and Draper to save the day. Lord help me.
Forwards: This line has been bolstered from my first version. Dunks, Conigs, Rozee & Taranto should all be Top 6 mids by season's end and I feel the rookies on this line aren't brilliant. Unfortunately, I've had to cull Oscar Allen for $$$ who I think can average 65 and be a good pick at his price. Josh Bruce is probably an outside shot now at a Round 1 gig and will make way for the next-best rookie available.
All in all, my defense is even more compromised now although across the board I feel I've picked more players priced as value picks which I'm hoping helps me in the long run. I've shifted from a 13x premo setup to a 12x premo setup hoping that I'm dodging a few players starting the season under an injury cloud, thus holding firm to my philosophy of not running out of trades. Looking at the byes, my team is more biased with premos toward the Rd 15 bye which will be something to consider when upgrading early.
Last edited:
- Joined
- 3 Jul 2017
- Messages
- 38,963
- Likes
- 126,636
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
I don't find his drop-off surprising at all, he's hard as nails but he's very unskilled and utterly one dimensional as a player. He reminds me a lot of Mathieson at Brisbane or Blakely at Freo. In his only role he's a great fantasy player but he's not really helping his team very much and it's such an important role that having a guy who isn't making big contributions really hurts.
That said, there's definitely opportunity there with all their outs. Going to be very interesting to see what they do with the midfield come round one.
Looking at the Hawks you've got:
Newcombe - The clear #1 midfielder carrying over, I actually think he might be the Hawk target.
Ward - The best of their kids and probably the #2 on the list.
Amon - Interesting to see how they use him, given how many outside wing types they have it probably makes more sense that he plays genuine midfield which is also his best fantasy role. The other guy who could be a sneaky target, especially in DT formats. He's actually not dissimilar to Mitchell leaving Sydney for Hawthorn in having played out of position and still scored previously and now has a pathway to a star role.
Maginness - Was brilliant tagging last year, be interesting to see if they continue it, would take valuable midfield minutes if he does.
Worpel - Definitely in the mix, they got rid of basically 3 guys who played the same role better in Shiels, JOM and Mitchell. Still wasn't getting minutes last year even after they phased Mitchell out.
Nash - A very interesting one, as a pure mid he scores really well but I don't think he's worth picking. Same story as Worpel here.
Moore - Does he move through there? Looking at the names above there's a speed and burst issue. It makes a lot of sense to me.
Wingard - His best football has been clearly as a midfielder (fantasy wise especially) but is he done? Will be one to watch given FWD and price.
Stephens - Assume they recruited him for a reason, showed a few signs at the Cats.
The kids - Few of the draftees and young guys could be options.
Morrison/Impey/Day/Hardwick/Bramble - There's so many of these HB types, I wonder if any push through the middle, Bramble makes a lot of sense to me with his skills.
Either way there's definitely a chance for Worpel, especially as one of the harder bodies in the group, shame he didn't get FWD status though and he can definitely score.
That said, there's definitely opportunity there with all their outs. Going to be very interesting to see what they do with the midfield come round one.
Looking at the Hawks you've got:
Newcombe - The clear #1 midfielder carrying over, I actually think he might be the Hawk target.
Ward - The best of their kids and probably the #2 on the list.
Amon - Interesting to see how they use him, given how many outside wing types they have it probably makes more sense that he plays genuine midfield which is also his best fantasy role. The other guy who could be a sneaky target, especially in DT formats. He's actually not dissimilar to Mitchell leaving Sydney for Hawthorn in having played out of position and still scored previously and now has a pathway to a star role.
Maginness - Was brilliant tagging last year, be interesting to see if they continue it, would take valuable midfield minutes if he does.
Worpel - Definitely in the mix, they got rid of basically 3 guys who played the same role better in Shiels, JOM and Mitchell. Still wasn't getting minutes last year even after they phased Mitchell out.
Nash - A very interesting one, as a pure mid he scores really well but I don't think he's worth picking. Same story as Worpel here.
Moore - Does he move through there? Looking at the names above there's a speed and burst issue. It makes a lot of sense to me.
Wingard - His best football has been clearly as a midfielder (fantasy wise especially) but is he done? Will be one to watch given FWD and price.
Stephens - Assume they recruited him for a reason, showed a few signs at the Cats.
The kids - Few of the draftees and young guys could be options.
Morrison/Impey/Day/Hardwick/Bramble - There's so many of these HB types, I wonder if any push through the middle, Bramble makes a lot of sense to me with his skills.
Either way there's definitely a chance for Worpel, especially as one of the harder bodies in the group, shame he didn't get FWD status though and he can definitely score.
My predictions (which are usually way off the mark and have zero inside knowledge) are the 5 main mids if all fully fit will be Newcombe, Ward, Worpel, Amon and Day. There will be plenty of others rotating through there though, probably half the list you could make arguments for as being a midfield option. Even as a fan, I have no idea who they will run with!
- Joined
- 14 Dec 2018
- Messages
- 359
- Likes
- 1,838
- AFL Club
- Geelong
A little unconventional at this point with 5 genuine mid pricers (Hopper, Worple, Fyfe, Sheed and Yeo). Will go back to 3 (probably Sheed and Yeo/Worple out) as the genuine rookie options emerge.
Going for uber premos this year regardless of value - Grundy, Lloyd (partial bounce back) and Daicos (breakout) the exceptions.
Going for uber premos this year regardless of value - Grundy, Lloyd (partial bounce back) and Daicos (breakout) the exceptions.