Discussion 2023 Round 4: Teams & In Game Discussion

[Uncle Drew]

Not sure if this has been posted re Bont's score last week :-

Marcus Bontempelli received 10 votes from the coaches for his heroic performance in the Bulldogs’ win against Brisbane, but his 28 disposals didn’t get the same reward in KFC SuperCoach. Bontempelli finished with 89 points, well short of Tim English (139), Tom Liberatore (120) and Adam Treloar (116). The explanation is simple – giving away free kicks isn’t good for scoring. Bontempelli gave away six, and he lost a total of 43 points for the match from negative acts – of which 22 were for free kicks alone.

Plays the tigers this week, his favourite team historically. Career average of 125.1 v them

But...but... he has the golden ticket. He couldn't possibly play a good game and get a bad SC could he. It must be the coaches giving him the golden ticket now.

 

[frosty1]

Can you be 20,000th now and 1st in a month? Asking for a friend

I'm hoping you can be 21,000th now and first in a month

 

[Wheedus]

I still think the depth of analysis and contrasting views is awesome. I also think that how people perceive suggestions can be greatly coloured by how they are feeling about their team, and also by the tone in which it is presented. In the same way those offering suggestions perceive the responses through the lens of their own team and the tone in which the responses are presented.

As a trade suggestion, moving Bont to Oliver is no more or less reasonable than a million others. Oliver is a clear Top 6 mid that everyone wants, and Bont is potentially a borderline top 6 mid who will likely lose a little cash due to an underwhelming performance last week. Those who had rolled with Bont as captain last week and who are missing Oliver can legitimately consider the move. Whether that would be a good move is open to question, and depends greatly on the context of your team.

A similar move would be to move a (for instance) Marshall or even Darcy to English this week. Moving the borderline top group player to the one you think is clearly better at the cost of a trade and dollars. Plenty are looking to do that this week. Again, is it the right move? Really depends on a lot else in your team. Do you have the free cash? Can you do it with a downgrade of a close enough to maxed out rookie or a stagnant mid pricer, while also kickstarting cash gen at the other end? What are your other options? Even if it's a good move, is it the _best_ move?

And in many cases what might be objectively the best move turns out not to be, because of just dumb bad luck.

We can all make suggestions, and we can all make strong cases as to why our suggestions make sense, but everyone has to take responsibility for their own moves. Because when that dumb bad luck comes (and it will) you're the only one who has to deal with it.

Regarding "it's bad/it's not that bad", again that really depends. Everyone's experience is different. Everyone's expectations are different and everyone processes the emotions involved in SC differently.

What I would say is don't judge how bad or not it is by your ranking. Rankings are temporary. You can be 100,000 now and 1,000 in a month. You can be 1 now, and 50,000 in a month. Judge how it's going by how your team looks vs how you want it to look. If you've burned 4 trades on rucks to get to this point (and it's cost you 400 points), then that sucks. But 400 points is nothing in the grand scheme of a year. Everyone will cop bad luck at some point, it's how you manage it that matters. As long as you maintain your focus on the process, understand what you're trying to achieve, and work to achieve that, then that's all you can do. Bad luck sucks but by focusing on the process you will slowly climb the rankings while teams that have given up, or who have tried to blow up their team to "fix" a team that was actually already good, and had just copped some bad luck, fall by the wayside.

The seasons not over for anyone after 3 rounds, luck will turn.

Great post.

I think it's important to look back at past seasons and see what players scored in the first 2-3 rounds v what they ended up producing for the whole season. It's always tempting to want to put a bullet in someone who's given you two meh scores without looking at their role, team, history etc.

One of the key threads that brought me to this site was @Rowsus statistical analysis of scoring history v scoring projections. Unless there are any fundamental changes to a player's role, injury concerns or just general decline, two or three meh scores should be seen as a reason to hold a player. You've actually gotta tell yourself "Good, now he's got those scores out of his system!".

In my case, I've got Andrew Brayshaw and his start to the season has been underwhelming. While I have thought about sidewaysing him to LDU or finding the cash to get him to Oliver, I think you gotta back in your premo choices. You pick them for 23 rounds and unless there's a fundamental change impacting their scoring ability, you ride it out on the basis that statistically speaking, he should deliver a higher proportion of better scores from here (all things being equal). For me he ticked all the boxes in the preseason and still does. The fact that Oliver has scored 135 and 136, doesn't mean he'll continue to do that. He scored 113 in the first round and is going to have other scores like that or below. They'll just come at different times.

Tinker with the mid-pricers and rookies. That's the beauty of selecting those speculative picks. Let your premos do what you bought them to do.

 

[Feerits Elf]

I'm hoping you can be 21,000th now and first in a month

Thanks mate, that means a lot

 

[Nothing]

Great post.

I think it's important to look back at past seasons and see what players scored in the first 2-3 rounds v what they ended up producing for the whole season. It's always tempting to want to put a bullet in someone who's given you two meh scores without looking at their role, team, history etc.

One of the key threads that brought me to this site was @Rowsus statistical analysis of scoring history v scoring projections. Unless there are any fundamental changes to a player's role, injury concerns or just general decline, two or three meh scores should be seen as a reason to hold a player. You've actually gotta tell yourself "Good, now he's got those scores out of his system!".

In my case, I've got Andrew Brayshaw and his start to the season has been underwhelming. While I have thought about sidewaysing him to LDU or finding the cash to get him to Oliver, I think you gotta back in your premo choices. You pick them for 23 rounds and unless there's a fundamental change impacting their scoring ability, you ride it out on the basis that statistically speaking, he should deliver a higher proportion of better scores from here (all things being equal). For me he ticked all the boxes in the preseason and still does. The fact that Oliver has scored 135 and 136, doesn't mean he'll continue to do that. He scored 113 in the first round and is going to have other scores like that or below. They'll just come at different times.

Tinker with the mid-pricers and rookies. That's the beauty of selecting those speculative picks. Let your premos do what you bought them to do.

I agree but I think with the increase in trades there's a shift to making more sideways moves trying to get the edge.

I started Darcy on the back of his preseason and the way Freo looked to be planning for Jackson. 2 rounds in and Freo were putrid and Darcy looked lost. I traded this time but when we had 20 (or even 30) trades there's no way you'd be trading a fit premium.

It's getting that balance right between chasing points and moving under-performers.

On your Brayshaw, I have him in DT and will hold but I have concerns that he might be carrying something. He doesn't look as smooth as 2022.

 

[Feerits Elf]

On your Brayshaw, I have him in DT and will hold but I have concerns that he might be carrying something.

Is it Fremantle?

 

[Zimmer]

I got to knock off early today, so I'm feeling like - where are the teams already?! Oh, it's only 4.30.

 

[jel]

Can you be 20,000th now and 1st in a month? Asking for a friend

I'd actually be happy being 20,000th in a month.

 

[aj74]

Absolutely timely, I think. On top of the 6 FA's he had 7 other Clangers, bring his match total to 13 Clangers. That's only 2 behind the all time record of 15 (which coincidentally? Bont holds with 15 Clangers in a match). It is the =2nd most Clangers ever recorded in a match, with 5 other players having recorded 13 in a match. The point is, it is historically bad, so should be seen as an outlier, not a trend.
Bont's career average is 3.36 Clangers/Game. The near 10 above average took around 30-32 points off his score dropping it to 89.
When you view it in that light, it makes his score frustrating and disappointing, but shouldn't be cause for rage trading.

It was a little worse than 30 points as he also missed the points that an effective disposal would have given him. For kicks, that's 4 points each and for handballs it's 1.5.

 

[Wheedus]

I agree but I think with the increase in trades there's a shift to making more sideways moves trying to get the edge.

I started Darcy on the back of his preseason and the way Freo looked to be planning for Jackson. 2 rounds in and Freo were putrid and Darcy looked lost. I traded this time but when we had 20 (or even 30) trades there's no way you'd be trading a fit premium.

It's getting that balance right between chasing points and moving under-performers.

On your Brayshaw, I have him in DT and will hold but I have concerns that he might be carrying something. He doesn't look as smooth as 2022.

Ugh, that was my one concern. Haven't seen any reports but noticed last week that he just didn't seem to be as dynamic around the ball. Serong definitely had that gig covered in the Derby.

The Darcy example demonstrates exactly why having more trades can be detrimental. Obviously his round 2 game was as putrid as they come but those that held tight would have enjoyed the 132 last week. Maybe rounds 1 and 2 will be his two lowest scores for the year. Statistically, that is more likely than it being representative of how is going to go for the rest of the season. Sure there are so many factors at play and that's the painful beauty of SC but you gotta play the long game. You buy these guys to score you 2,400 point for the season. Let them do that job.

 

[jaca]

Some odd posts here over the last few days.

Over the last 3 days I’ve had 2 pieces of real life news which will change my life in a “negative” or sideways way that I just couldn’t imagine last week.

I am still playing these games and joining these chats because they are fun, and distract me in a positive way.

Keep it nice people, it’s only a game.

 

[Vicwood]

My bad lads. Should know better than to feed the trolls. Back to the footy.



Couple more weeks of 90/100s from him and I’d be more than happy. Fingers crossed he turns out to be the short term cash grab many had hoped for.

Setters has a good roll, he could surprise.

 

[mike89]

I got to knock off early today, so I'm feeling like - where are the teams already! Oh, it's only 4.30.

I'm already used to team drops being at 5:20 given no daylight savings in Brisbane... the last hour is going to feel a lot longer than the rest of the day

 

[Vicwood]

I'm certainly not suggesting trading him this week, and even short term he could be an I'll fix him later type problem, but Gulden must be under some scrutiny. Priced at $488,600 means he priced to be scoring around 97. His most recent game of 85 is less than his current BE of 88.
This is slightly different to previous post of "what if you reverse the order of the scores", because if you reverse the order of Gulden's scores he becomes: Gulden 85, 107, 115 BE 58, which implies growth should happen this week. However, a BE of 88, a 2 game average of 96, and being priced at 97, all implies he has actually gone close to topping out price wise, unless he can inject another 110+ score soon.

Yes, I jumping to LDU, cash and points on offer. Fingers crossed no more niggles.

 

[OnTopBar]

Some odd posts here over the last few days.

Over the last 3 days I’ve had 2 pieces of real life news which will change my life in a “negative” or sideways way that I just couldn’t imagine last week.

I am still playing these games and joining these chats because they are fun, and distract me in a positive way.

Keep it nice people, it’s only a game.

Oh, sorry to hear that but I fully concur.

Lost everything in the floods
Partner couldn't handle it and cleared off
Lost my job because it was too much work for 1 bloke after I'd put in 84hrs/week for the last 5 months for $650/week pay

Not saying any of this for a sympathy grab but the distraction of playing SC and being involved with this forum is a great escape, pity my SC team is another failure LOL

 

[Vicwood]

Totally agree. But, IF he was to become a 96-97 type player, you are losing around 8/game to those that finished their team with a 104-105 F6.
If your team was nicely squared away, and you had cash*, turning that point loss into a gain in another area, could be the difference between a top 1,000 finish, and a top 500 finish.
* Not many teams nicely squared away AND sitting on cash.
** I did start by saying I wasn't suggesting trading him now, just he should be watched. The signs are there he may not fill the job he was taken to do.

For me he was a place holder at F4 , sheezel had got a great role and it allow me now after seeing team structures to allow me to get a more G&R set up.

Doc Dawson #35
Laird Oliver Bont Green LDU
English Marshall
Dunkley Rozee Taranto
Just had to trade heavily. Fingers crossed next few weeks I can put the feet up and watch the cows graze.

 

[jaca]

Oh, sorry to hear that but I fully concur.

Lost everything in the floods
Partner couldn't handle it and cleared off
Lost my job because it was too much work for 1 bloke after I'd put in 84hrs/week for the last 5 months for $650/week pay

Not saying any of this for a sympathy grab but the distraction of playing SC and being involved with this forum is a great escape, pity my SC team is another failure LOL

Hope you’re doing ok brother, let me know if there is anything I can do to help.

 

[Vicwood]

No, his record v North & at Marvel isn't great.

But it explains his score last week despite getting 39 possessions.

I still think he is top 6 defender this year so holding btw.

Just hoping he has that extra half second this week to improve his DE. And no silly FA.

 

[Presto]

Yeah I am just not really seeing much of that in here lately.

For instance, someone suggested an aggressive leftfield move of trading Bont to Oliver in the trades thread and instead of generating any discussion about the merits of such a move, was just dismissed as a troll.

It's a shame because the depth of analysis and contrasting views in here was awesome a few years ago.

If this is what you think of our forum, one wonders why you waste time on it?

 

[Vicwood]

But...but... he has the golden ticket. He couldn't possibly play a good game and get a bad SC could he. It must be the coaches giving him the golden ticket now.

Bont Was absolutely brilliant to watch last week. Just didn't translate to SC score.