- Joined
- 29 Jan 2014
- Messages
- 996
- Likes
- 75
- AFL Club
- Essendon
I was inspired by Philzsays analysis of each teams draw and the effectiveness of players within teams to function as a loophole to a vice-captain. See here http://www.supercoachscores.com/threads/2015-Fixture-VC-and-emergency-Donut-Analysis
As a result I started analysing the effectiveness of specific RUC/FWD (Rookie/mid price) combinations and the ability for these pairs to cover a late out
AS you can see from this exert Mason Cox is a no go zone as far as a fwd/ruc is concerned as in most cases he would have played his match before an "Inpending" late out from premium ruck who plays later making swinging Bellchambers or Lycett ect. into the fwd for cover impossible.
In general you want your Premium rucks to play early (Great for Kreuze) and your rookies to Ruc/Fwd's to play late.
For this Analysis i picked the combination of;
Lycett and Bellchambers as the fwd/ruc scoring in the forward line.
Read (gee) & Obrien (adl) as the floating donuts.
Main Rucks; Goldstein, Luenberger, Nic Nat and Kreuzer who I have perceived to be the 4 most popular ruckman choices on the site.
Never the less even if i didn't do your combo i hope this serves to illustrate just how effective a ruck/fwd swingset is at covering that dreaded donut we all so very much fear.
While this looks complex its not too hard to get your head around.
For Example. In round 1 if Goldstein is a late out 15 minutes prior too his match a Lycett/Read combo will not be able to cover for his score as Lycett has already played however such a combo will cover if Nic Nat, Luenburger or Kreuzer is out late hence saving a donut.
- White areas are when main Ruckmen are out hence late out is not possible. (L IN) is to illustrate Lycett is in to cover a main ruck on a bye. (B Out) is to illustrate Bellchambers cannot cover as he has the bye and vice versa.
- % down the bottom illustrates (using colour) the percentage of games, the above Fwd/Ruc combinations can cover from a late out from a particular player.
- The to the right of the Fwd/Ruc combinations at the top is the average percentage of games the Fwd/Ruc combo can cover (for the 4 main rucks)
- Average % of games that could be covered in the case of a late out (With these combinations) is only 34.3%. Meaning in general 2 out of three times a late out will occur in the rucks you will cop a donut.
In Summary
Best combination for each of the four ruckmen:
Kreuzer - Lycett/Read (70%)
Nic Nat - Lycett/Obrien (48%)
Luenburger - Lycett/Read (40%)
Goldstein - Lycett/Read (33%)
Above illustrates the average % that each of the ruckmen will be covered.
Below is the number assigned by Philszay (as above) to each of the teams to illustrate using colour the correlation between sequencing of games and ability to be loopholed if a late out.
Note: Lycett is particularly good at covering Nic Nat as they always play in the same game so it only rely's on the rookie playing afterwards to allow Lycett to cover a late out from Nic Nat.
But What About Covering Injuries You Say??
No Problem....
Basic spreadsheet illustrating the injury occurrences for each of the ruckman and the length of the injury spell (1,2,3,4+ weeks).
Shows average number of injury spells of each duration (1,2,3,4+ weeks) and the % distribution. Ie.) 24% of ruckman injuries are 4+ weeks meaning a trade is required.
Therefore we can work out the average number of games that would need to be covered by a Ruc/Fwd Swingset depending on your "Trade threshold".
Trade threshold meaning if you a willing to park a player on the bench for a 2 or 3 week period with a rookie to cover. 4+ weeks injuries i have assumed require a trade.
2 week threshold = 1.06 average games to cover
3 weeks threshold = 1.33 average games to cover
Note* This assumes you cover late outs (35% chance) however late outs are relatively rare so this would have a minor impact.
So basically is it worth your while sacrificing points picking Bellchambers/Ryder/Lycett to cover approximately 1 match a year. Which could be as equally as easily solved through a trade unless its a late out in which case there is only a 35% of covering anyway with your swingset unless you choose wisely.
Hope this is a helpful and make sense.
As a result I started analysing the effectiveness of specific RUC/FWD (Rookie/mid price) combinations and the ability for these pairs to cover a late out
AS you can see from this exert Mason Cox is a no go zone as far as a fwd/ruc is concerned as in most cases he would have played his match before an "Inpending" late out from premium ruck who plays later making swinging Bellchambers or Lycett ect. into the fwd for cover impossible.
In general you want your Premium rucks to play early (Great for Kreuze) and your rookies to Ruc/Fwd's to play late.
For this Analysis i picked the combination of;
Lycett and Bellchambers as the fwd/ruc scoring in the forward line.
Read (gee) & Obrien (adl) as the floating donuts.
Main Rucks; Goldstein, Luenberger, Nic Nat and Kreuzer who I have perceived to be the 4 most popular ruckman choices on the site.
Never the less even if i didn't do your combo i hope this serves to illustrate just how effective a ruck/fwd swingset is at covering that dreaded donut we all so very much fear.
While this looks complex its not too hard to get your head around.
For Example. In round 1 if Goldstein is a late out 15 minutes prior too his match a Lycett/Read combo will not be able to cover for his score as Lycett has already played however such a combo will cover if Nic Nat, Luenburger or Kreuzer is out late hence saving a donut.
- White areas are when main Ruckmen are out hence late out is not possible. (L IN) is to illustrate Lycett is in to cover a main ruck on a bye. (B Out) is to illustrate Bellchambers cannot cover as he has the bye and vice versa.
- % down the bottom illustrates (using colour) the percentage of games, the above Fwd/Ruc combinations can cover from a late out from a particular player.
- The to the right of the Fwd/Ruc combinations at the top is the average percentage of games the Fwd/Ruc combo can cover (for the 4 main rucks)
- Average % of games that could be covered in the case of a late out (With these combinations) is only 34.3%. Meaning in general 2 out of three times a late out will occur in the rucks you will cop a donut.
In Summary
Best combination for each of the four ruckmen:
Kreuzer - Lycett/Read (70%)
Nic Nat - Lycett/Obrien (48%)
Luenburger - Lycett/Read (40%)
Goldstein - Lycett/Read (33%)
Above illustrates the average % that each of the ruckmen will be covered.
Below is the number assigned by Philszay (as above) to each of the teams to illustrate using colour the correlation between sequencing of games and ability to be loopholed if a late out.
Note: Lycett is particularly good at covering Nic Nat as they always play in the same game so it only rely's on the rookie playing afterwards to allow Lycett to cover a late out from Nic Nat.
But What About Covering Injuries You Say??
No Problem....
Basic spreadsheet illustrating the injury occurrences for each of the ruckman and the length of the injury spell (1,2,3,4+ weeks).
Shows average number of injury spells of each duration (1,2,3,4+ weeks) and the % distribution. Ie.) 24% of ruckman injuries are 4+ weeks meaning a trade is required.
Therefore we can work out the average number of games that would need to be covered by a Ruc/Fwd Swingset depending on your "Trade threshold".
Trade threshold meaning if you a willing to park a player on the bench for a 2 or 3 week period with a rookie to cover. 4+ weeks injuries i have assumed require a trade.
2 week threshold = 1.06 average games to cover
3 weeks threshold = 1.33 average games to cover
Note* This assumes you cover late outs (35% chance) however late outs are relatively rare so this would have a minor impact.
So basically is it worth your while sacrificing points picking Bellchambers/Ryder/Lycett to cover approximately 1 match a year. Which could be as equally as easily solved through a trade unless its a late out in which case there is only a 35% of covering anyway with your swingset unless you choose wisely.
Hope this is a helpful and make sense.
Last edited:
