Position 2023: Midfield Discussion

[wogitalia]

I don't actually care how much my premos drop over the course of a season, because the reason you start expensive premos in your side ...is for the points they score you. Macrae ended up dropping 150k last year but still averaged 115 so who cares how much they drop as long as they average well. You pick them for their scoring ability and reliability.

I actually disagree strongly with this sentiment, you were lucky that Macrae started like a house on fire and finished poorly as it had forced many to chase him but overall he wasn't a good pick. That he was a keeper still is the saving grace and you could never trade him out after the hot start without balls of absolute steel (would have been a glorious trade) but you still want your premium picks to at least maintain their average if not increase as often as possible.

The inverse is true with Touk Miller, who started terribly and then was a bargain for all those who didn't start him but got to ride him home. On pure numbers Touk looks like a good starting pick but he was actually a borderline disaster as you only got negative scores by starting him and then when he came good post byes everyone else had grabbed him.

Ultimately it's probably more luck than good management, although there are definitely players who consistently start well or badly, but a huge part of this game is picking the right group of premiums. Yes at the end of the season it's probably going to include the names we all think but if I pay 700k for Laird and you pay 700k for Oliver and then in 7 weeks I get Oliver for 550k and you get Laird for 700k, we've got to the same position but I'm 150k ahead and a lot of points and assuming they then average the same at season's end you're going to be hating Laird while I love Oliver!

I don't think there's any strong way to regularly pick slow starts (outside injuries) so, as I said, it's mostly luck but it's a huge factor.

Yes, starting premium being a premium at season's end is a job done but you still want your premiums to defend their starting price fiercely and put up as much resistance to other coaches getting them in as possible and that early season projection should definitely be considered if there is a strong suggestion of a slow or hot start.

 

[Feerits Elf]

These successful midpricer picks are way more important than paying top dollar for a premo.

Here’s a novel idea, do both

 

[Darkie]

Interesting convo above, at the moment I'm fading the expensive uber mid premos and looking for more value in my team.

Current M1-6: Bont, Macrae, Parish, Anderson, Hopper, Sheed.

I don't mind the idea of fading an Oliver type, and picking him up cheaper than the rest of the comp. Don't think it's a minimal saving either i.e. $50k bc with the extra cash i can pick a Sheed-type who could avg. 90+ make $150k and flick him to Oliver and it's now a $200k move.

Also, the points and captaincy arguments aren't standalone it's relative. I'll still have very good captain options in the first 6 weeks with Bont, Macrae & Parish.

I think the amount of trades and boosts we have allows us to be more aggressive and encourages us to seek more value in our teams. Adopting a new philosophy of 'seeking value that can be a top-liner in their position' which goes against the previous thinking of just selecting those that'll end up the highest in their lines.

Keen to hear others' thoughts on this! Just my 2 cents.

Nice post, I find this quite interesting.

A few things came to mind for me:

- If a Sheed type is someone you expect to make $150k, I would suggest you should pick him as a priority, whether you have Oliver or Parish. If he’s not the marginal pick, then the Oliver vs Parish assessment changes again, as Sheed’s upside is not incremental. Your general point is fair as I see it, but I think it’s a less appealing mid priced type that needs to be assessed (and the rookie that you take out to get the midpricer).

- Your description of your new strategy is very similar to the way I have picked starting sides in the past (with additional focus on players who are proven and durable, and tolerance for typically 2-3 mid pricers). Basically I look for discounted guys amongst the top tier or two.

- I am actually planning to do the reverse of what you’re doing, in that I’m switching to focus less on discounted premos, and more so on the absolute top liners! My theory is that completed teams get better as the number of available trades increases, so they should be materially better than when we had 30 (I don’t expect to use more than 1-2 for Covid reasons this year, so it’s a clear net upgrade as I see it). If completed teams are going to be better, I think the appeal of taking value options that are slightly lower quality is reduced … so I want more M1 types, and fewer cheap M6-8 types.

- The extra trades clearly do facilitate more trading for cash gen/sideways trades. Taking value premos is an option for using these, but I think it’s more likely that we’d get stuck holding a 110 player instead of trying to trade up to a 125 player, given that’s likely to seem like a real luxury, and often the difference between those two levels is actually hard to pick as the season progresses, because of week to week variation.

- I plan to use the extra trades to allow me to get more midpricers in/out of my team, and/or to cash in rookies quicker, perhaps before they’ve eked out as much cash I would previously wait for.

- On your specific plan regarding the midfield, I probably see the conditions as making this strategy a bit more challenging. If I was creating a list of players that I was confident on in terms of top line scoring and durability, and that had an upside case versus what they were priced at, guys like Oliver, Bont, Macrae, Miller and possibly Steele (subject to fitness) would be right at the top of the list. I see more downside risk to defender prices, and uncertainty about who the very top guys will be in the rucks and forwards. If I was trying to pursue a strategy like yours, I would say that R2, and the defence and perhaps forward lines may be more fruitfully ground (subject to rookies/attractive mid pricers not occupying those spots).

Good luck with it - I feel like the optimal strategy has almost certainly changed, it’s just a question of how, and by how much!

 

[Vicwood]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1619530925112705025

View: https://mobile.twitter.com/SCInsider100/status/1619530925112705025

Does any one else see JHF playing through the middle full time.? Will this effect Rozee and Butters potential 100+ average.

Surely JHF didnt leave the Roos to play as a pressure FWD.

Im Looking at his first month 2022. From RD1 to RD4 (75 98 67 93 Avg 83.25). Is it a pipe dream with a mid role only to see natural progression to 95+.If preseason show us JHF get full time MID does this make JHF a potential keeper. ?

 

[Athomas]

Does any one else see JHF playing through the middle full time.? Will this effect Rozee and Butters potential 100+ average.

I expect JHF will get some midfield time, possibly above Butters. It does sound like JHF has settled in well and impressed track watchers when he's in the midfield.

It sounds like Wines and Drew are both locked in as main mids (70%+), then Rozee and Boak (50%+), with JHF/Butters next (30% or so each)
(All just estimates from me )

I wouldn't go near JHF unless Drew is out of the 22, or Boak is a permanent forward. Even then, I'd be more encouraged to pick Butters if that scenario eventuated.

Port having 6 (!) decent midfielders definitely gives me some concern about going near Butters at this stage.

 

[Vicwood]

Last years champion, anyone have his starting side and his trades. ??

 

[wogitalia]

Nice post, I find this quite interesting.

A few things came to mind for me:

- If a Sheed type is someone you expect to make $150k, I would suggest you should pick him as a priority, whether you have Oliver or Parish. If he’s not the marginal pick, then the Oliver vs Parish assessment changes again, as Sheed’s upside is not incremental. Your general point is fair as I see it, but I think it’s a less appealing mid priced type that needs to be assessed (and the rookie that you take out to get the midpricer).

- Your description of your new strategy is very similar to the way I have picked starting sides in the past (with additional focus on players who are proven and durable, and tolerance for typically 2-3 mid pricers). Basically I look for discounted guys amongst the top tier or two.

- I am actually planning to do the reverse of what you’re doing, in that I’m switching to focus less on discounted premos, and more so on the absolute top liners! My theory is that completed teams get better as the number of available trades increases, so they should be materially better than when we had 30 (I don’t expect to use more than 1-2 for Covid reasons this year, so it’s a clear net upgrade as I see it). If completed teams are going to be better, I think the appeal of taking value options that are slightly lower quality is reduced … so I want more M1 types, and fewer cheap M6-8 types.

- The extra trades clearly do facilitate more trading for cash gen/sideways trades. Taking value premos is an option for using these, but I think it’s more likely that we’d get stuck holding a 110 player instead of trying to trade up to a 125 player, given that’s likely to seem like a real luxury, and often the difference between those two levels is actually hard to pick as the season progresses, because of week to week variation.

- I plan to use the extra trades to allow me to get more midpricers in/out of my team, and/or to cash in rookies quicker, perhaps before they’ve eked out as much cash I would previously wait for.

- On your specific plan regarding the midfield, I probably see the conditions as making this strategy a bit more challenging. If I was creating a list of players that I was confident on in terms of top line scoring and durability, and that had an upside case versus what they were priced at, guys like Oliver, Bont, Macrae, Miller and possibly Steele (subject to fitness) would be right at the top of the list. I see more downside risk to defender prices, and uncertainty about who the very top guys will be in the rucks and forwards. If I was trying to pursue a strategy like yours, I would say that R2, and the defence and perhaps forward lines may be more fruitfully ground (subject to rookies/attractive mid pricers not occupying those spots).

Good luck with it - I feel like the optimal strategy has almost certainly changed, it’s just a question of how, and by how much!

It's the same old mid-price/value issue and more trades haven't changed it. If they were easy to hit at high rates, everyone would do it. The reality is that going much above 50% on them is an excellent result.

So those teams hit two major problems.

1. Wasted trades - Every failed pick needs to be fixed, the simple fact is that premiums are just easier to pick, you're not having to project anything on role, fitness, improvement, etc. Every trade used sideways is one that's not improving your side, it's a step backwards.

2. Under-premiums - The extra trades have, imo, made this even more pronounced. Look at the top side of last year, I did the numbers but basically all his players were in the top 7 (10 for mids) of the position. He had a couple of guys outside it but they were ridiculous value plays in season. If you pick too many under-premiums it's very hard to match the top teams that nowadays will basically have the top 6(8) at each position.

So as good as Warner, LDU, Anderson, Guthrie, Titch, B. Smith and Green may look on paper, I'd only be picking them if you firmly believe they can score 115+ and be a top 6 midfielder this year. There's just no value to be gained picking your M8 now as there will be multiple options with revealed information in-season for that spot. I really think you need to be trying to pick M6+ starting picks, if you believe the value guys are in that class then absolutely pick them (I can buy the case on that whole group) but while we're basically unlimited on the 36 trades, we're still severely limited by the two a week which means getting the super premiums in remains difficult.

They're basically compounding risk with each one, if you pick two guys then you increase the requirements because now only one can fall to that M8 level or you're having to upgrade them as well and they're not making enough cash.

There's still a good case for the <350k guys though as genuine cash cows, they can be picked on those grounds, it's a harder path than the rookies but there's merit to the job security and role certainty, guys like Hopper, Fyfe or Yeo all stand out here, if they stay fit for long enough they should push the scoring ranges to make at least adequate cash. I think ultimately these guys get picked over rookies though so they're probably more in that argument, if we could pick 15 120k guys, we would. Obviously each pair of them also includes a premium sacrifice.

What I find is generally one of the hardest parts of picking midpricers is how they're funded. You generally either sacrifice one premium to get a couple or you have to chase value on multiple premiums to get one and as discussed above, each extra value pick you chase increases your starting risk. If you nail it, you're a long way to a top ranking but it will also scuttle your season rapidly.

Ultimately I do think more trades does enable a bit more randomness, the trade boosts make sideways trades just ever so slightly less punishing as you can still stay mostly on path, albeit you're still behind those not doing them, and the extra trades allow you to trade more aggressively earlier to fix problems, if you can fix the issues before upgrade season then you mostly avoid the sideways trade treadmill game and aren't giving up the ground to others, but using those trades correctionally means you need to be more precise with future trades as you've got less upgrade scope.

 

[donnybuang]

Last years champion, anyone have his starting side and his trades. ??

No, but I've got this year's 😎

 

[Beg2Differ]

Last years champion, anyone have his starting side and his trades. ??

https://supercoachscores.com/thread...eam-post-230-onwards.4408/page-12#post-904583

 

[Manikato1]

Whether you go hard high premiums early or go mid price value picks, the same scenario applies across both strategies. It is not who you have but when you have them that matters. And that requires good trading skills and often kahunas the size of the moon to make those sliding door decisions.

 

[The Saltshaker]

Worth keeping a watch on Oliver's thumb, I heard reports it was still bothering him a couple of weeks ago. No doubt it will be super come the start of the season.

I have flip flopped and now have Laird in my team over Oliver. Tried different structures that involved Miller at M1, but that looks wrong.

yep read that on Demonland forums Jan 20th

Grundy was also lagging in running drills, but does look pretty strong/fit. A few days later kicked a couple snags up fwd in match sims

 

[The Saltshaker]

Oliver is genuinely more likely to go 200 on Essendon at AO than 100, its beyond me how anyone has come to the conclusion a poor score awaits there, his favourite ground against an opponent he dropped 146 on in 2022, not sure a substantial price drop is happening, if it does big deal 50% of the comp also own him lol.

avg 115 from his last 26 games at the MCG

 

[Shaunpro1]

avg 115 from his last 26 games at the MCG

Not sure how you've got to those numbers unless you've somehow included 2019 where he wasn't an uber premium yet.

Think we can give him a spell for two bad games straight after lockdown in 2020. (119 and 96 on the eventual grand finallists)

2021 he averaged 119 from 11
2022 he averaged 133 from 12

126 from his last 23 with only 2 scores under 100 is pretty good.

 

[Ricky Bobby]

Worth keeping a watch on Oliver's thumb, I heard reports it was still bothering him a couple of weeks ago. No doubt it will be super come the start of the season.

I have flip flopped and now have Laird in my team over Oliver. Tried different structures that involved Miller at M1, but that looks wrong.

I watched the Dee’s play a social cricket game yesterday. Grundy played (although not a good cricketer), while Oliver was just an observer (as was Gawn). I presume it’s risk mgt with Oliver’s thumb as a cricket ball to the gloves or the hands while in the field could easily be an issue, but it may also indicate that it’s not 100% . Alternatively, it may just indicate that he isn’t any good at cricket or didn’t want to play 😋

 

[The Saltshaker]

Not sure how you've got to those numbers unless you've somehow included 2019 where he wasn't an uber premium yet.

Think we can give him a spell for two bad games straight after lockdown in 2020. (119 and 96 on the eventual grand finallists)

2021 he averaged 119 from 11
2022 he averaged 133 from 12

126 from his last 23 with only 2 scores under 100 is pretty good.

Was in a post on one of the sites, mighta been AFL Fantasy?

 

[The Saltshaker]

I expect JHF will get some midfield time, possibly above Butters. It does sound like JHF has settled in well and impressed track watchers when he's in the midfield.

It sounds like Wines and Drew are both locked in as main mids (70%+), then Rozee and Boak (50%+), with JHF/Butters next (30% or so each)
(All just estimates from me )

I wouldn't go near JHF unless Drew is out of the 22, or Boak is a permanent forward. Even then, I'd be more encouraged to pick Butters if that scenario eventuated.

Port having 6 (!) decent midfielders definitely gives me some concern about going near Butters at this stage.

Read Boak to drop out of mid rotations a bit. Butters and Rozee did USA trip to high performance running coaches, as looking to step up...

 

[freowho]

The sub rule makes the midpricers more appealing.

 

[donnybuang]

yep read that on Demonland forums Jan 20th

Grundy was also lagging in running drills, but does look pretty strong/fit. A few days later kicked a couple snags up fwd in match sims

IIRC Grundy was often lagging in running drills at the pies too.

 

[Locus Levy Lunacy]

https://supercoachscores.com/thread...eam-post-230-onwards.4408/page-12#post-904583

This supports the fact that you can stuff early picks up, including mid-pricers - as long as you correct them quickly.

He selected 8 players between $255K and $455K. You can argue whether they are fallen premos, potential breakouts, or just "great value almost rookie-priced" like Cogs. 3 of them - Gov, Rowell and Berry were gone by round 4. Imagine if this team had started with Sicily (very plausible pick) and Sinclair (much harder to see coming).

I can't see how correcting mid-pricers is any more problematic than correcting rookies, which everyone accepts is ok.

 

[freowho]

This supports the fact that you can stuff early picks up, including mid-pricers - as long as you correct them quickly.

He selected 8 players between $255K and $455K. You can argue whether they are fallen premos, potential breakouts, or just "great value almost rookie-priced" like Cogs. 3 of them - Gov, Rowell and Berry were gone by round 4. Imagine if this team had started with Sicily (very plausible pick) and Sinclair (much harder to see coming).

I can't see how correcting mid-pricers is any more problematic than correcting rookies, which everyone accepts is ok.

The winning team is almost a "how not to do it".
So many failed picks.
More trades means the chase for the perfect team or a solid team is less important.
Loopholing, stepping stones etc are more in play.
There is more value in season than at the start. Hoping a 110 player becomes a 120 player is fools gold.
And we can't ignore luck. You can't get lucky if you play safe.