Opinion Questions For Rowsus

[stephen]

hi Stephen

Would you be able to tell me what you really liked about Sinclair? It may make me feel like doing a Sheed to Sinclair type move this week instead? How is his ball usage, and do you rate him higher than a Lonie?

Hi whitetiga,

His ball usage looks good so far, and he seems comfortable at afl pace and makes good decisions. He's 20 so is a bit bigger and fitter than the younger rookies. He plays a relatively good supercoach role, off half forward with a couple of runs through the midfield.

Came on late in the third quarter in round 1 and did some very nice things when the game was tight - 27 SC points in a quarter. Got better as the game went on this week and was one of our best players in the last quarter when there were a couple of itchy moments when it looked like the Suns might come back. Don't think that quarter was heavily weighted because it wasn't really that close, so his score of 72 isn't overly flattering. I'd say 72 was fair and I could see him scoring around that fairly consistently.

I would take him over Lonie. Probably similar JS now (both pretty good, as far as you can say for first year players). He's probably in the middle rung of rookies this year. I wish I had him rather than Miller, or even Anderson, but I'm not sure if he's worth the trade.

 

[Rowsus]

Thanks Rowsus. I think the KK upgrade makes better use of a trade - he was always a risk but happy to admit it doesn't look like it will succeed. KK might have the odd good game but I can see a lot of sub-80's happening.

For the Ablett trade, who do you see as a "must have" mid premium? I already have Pendles, Jelwood, Fyfe and JPK. Sloane / Lewis / Heppell?????

Happy to help Bobbie,
I think you have the 4 key Mid Prems, though Jelwood has been a little underwhelming so far. I think below those 4 is a big pool of candidates, that probably won't be that far from each other. I think Sloane might possibly be at that front of that pack.

 

[Rowsus]

Hiya Row,

So i pulled the trigger last week and traded Rocky and Cripps to Shiel and Rich. We will see if this pays off...very happy with Shiel at present. It was the coaches votes that got Shiel over the line. I put Steven in my team over the bont at the start of the year and are now wondering if I should do the correction. What do you think? Personally I'm worried that Steven just won't make it, he has always been full of potential but not able to really deliver and I just don't think this will change.
If i do this I then have enough cash to go anderson to NVB, but unsure of this too?
I have 6 of the top 7 B/E players and the one I'm missing is hogan, is he a must have?
Thanks Row for all your time!

Hiya Kafka,
nice pick in Shiel, well done so far with that one. Certainly at this stage, it looks like the Bont is more likely to reach Fwd Keeper status, than Steven is to be a Mid Keeper, so in that regard it is a reasonable correction trade. I think Steven will look genuine enough in quite a few games, but will probably throw in enough low scores now and then, that will keep from possibly achieving what you picked him for.
It sounds like you have the same top 6 Rookies as me, as I'm missing Hogan too. I don't see him as a must have. I can't see him continuing to average 80 against his upcoming draw: Ade, Rich, Fre, Syd, Haw. Anderson appears to be at some sort of crossroad, he either improves from here, and becomes worthwhile, or disappoints and is regrettable. Unfortunately, Adelaide play before Hawthorn, so you don't get to see if he is vested or not. I don't see Anderson to NvB as either necessary, or a mistake. I think it is understandable, and something I might probably do myself, if my 2 trades weren't committed already this week. Obviously, you would be hoping NvB can average at least 75 from here, and Anderson gets rested or vested. It's quite easy to see both those things happening.

 

[Slammer]

Hey Rowsus,

As previously mentioned I still do not have Pendles. Do you think I really need him? Especially now he is under a slight injury cloud (although should still play)
I have Fyfe, Selwood and JPK as my other Premos with Ablett who I am keen to get rid of. (also have Wallis as you know as my stepping stone)
I have Goodes in backline and Lambert and Miller in mids who are struggling (meaning I only have Cripps as back up for mids atm)
I am torn between a few options:

1. Ablett -> Pendles, Goodes -> McDonald/Doherty
2. Ablett -> Bont Goodes -> McDonald/Doherty (pocket $280/$250K) - Use $ for upgrading stepping stone Wallis later to Pendles or other upgrades
3. Ablett-> Wines Goodes -> McDonald/Doherty (pocket $165/$133K)
4. Ablett -> Pendles Goodes-> Miller -> NVB (pocket $73K)

Looking at my backline in the last two weeks it looks ok even though there are no real stars. As we know the backline is more up and down than other areas so I cannot at the moment justify
going after a B.Smith or Simpson. Hence the reason I am looking at the cheaper option in McDonald/Doherty to replace the failed Goodes.
In regards to the Bont I am thinking he could be handy to bring in and shift to F5 once my rookies fatten up to enable me to improve the mids and grab fallen premos. However, still not convinced being
only in his second year. Could come crashing back to earth against the Hawks this week but now is the best time to get him.
Wines I nearly jumped on at the start as I have always liked his contested possessions like JPK. He never really gets a tag (goes to Boak or Gray) and he has a big tank picking up possessions down back as well as winning his own ball in the packs.
I currently trying to convince myself that the extra possible 10-15pts each week getting Pendles over a Wines is worth it. Especially as I expect Collingwood to struggle this year.
After all of this I am still worried about not having enough coverage on the mid bench as I expect Miller to be dropped and Lambert is out injured for a while.
Tough decisions all round for me to make.
Any suggestions as to which way to go would be appreciated.
Thankyou for all your replies and suggestions, its amazing the time and effort you put in.

 

[Rowsus]

Hi wT2k,
firstly on NvB. He's no must have, and as long as you've got say 6 of the Rookies with B/E's that are better than -60, and another 2 or 3 that are -30 or better, you can probably slide by without him. If you don't, you might need/want him, or some on that list i mentioned.

Interested in this. I assume you're saying that if you have that number of rookies going well then you should earn enough cash to make the necessary upgrades, and therefore don't need to prioritise getting in other cash cows?

I've been thinking I'd go Cripps > NvB and Miller > Sinclair this week, but based on this (and what you've said elsewhere about Cripps and NvB) I take it you'd advise to hold off? I really like Sinclair and don't think many others will have him but I'm aware it might be Saints bias and obviously it would be nice to save the trade.

Miller to Sinclair looks ok, but I'm still not convinced Cripps is a dud, and I'm not sold that trading him to NvB will give you the full value of a trade. I actually had Sinclair in my team in the last few weeks of the pre-season, and I'm not sure now, how I ended up picking Miller over him. It was probably because GC played the 2nd game, and it was bird-in-the-hand type theory.
As to the quantity of semi primed Rookies I was referring to, it's obviously not enough to complete all our upgrades. It's more based on how quickly our opinion of Rookies change, and the value of dragging in another to moo at about the same time as the others, if you already have enough of the best looking ones on the boil. Look at Oxley as an example. After Round 1 "everyone" was calling him a regrettable selection, after Round 2 "everyone" is saying he's a must have. It changes nearly week to week. So if you have 6 of the top 7, and a few to a handful of the ones below that, you probably have enough to work with for the time being. That's not to say, if you haven't had Ablett/Rocky type problems, and everything is else looking ok, that you should just sit on your hands for now. There is nothing wrong with moving to improve your Rookie situation, even if you have what I described. Everyone budgets 2 or 3 trades for Rookie corrections anyway, so nothing wrong with going ahead, and getting as many as the top 10 as you can. I just don't think it is a "must do" thing. This weeks great looking Cash Cow can quickly become an "Ohhh noooo!" with a vest. It happens every season. As does having Rookies peak in price, and start to decline, before you can milk them all. That happens every season too. I just think having at least 6 "good" looking rookies from the top 7 or 8, and a handful of others that started ok is enough to start with. More good looking Rookies will appear in the coming weeks, hopefully on the bubble when we need to cull some of our fat Cows. The message is, don't panic if you have what I described, and you need to use your correction trades elsewhere. You probably have enough to start the ball rolling. If you haven't needed your correction trades elsewhere, there is nothing wrong in getting a missed Hogan type, just to put the icing on your Rookie cake. If you are in the unfortunate position where you missed say 4 of the better Rookies, and had Ablett/Rocky type problems, then my suggestion is, fix your Rookies first, then see who can replace Ablett/Rocky. I know there are one or two here, that found themselves in that situation!

 

[Zoku Pops]

Hey Rowsus, do you think I should trade Ablett to a premium mid (Sloane or JPK) or Ablett to Goldstein by moving Gray and Bellchambers around and then getting Dusty or Buddy next week?

Essentially it's JPK and Bellchambers vs Goldstein and Dusty.

I like the second combo but my mids would be weakened for a time being (still have Fyfe, Pendles, Lewis and Parker). Furthermore, is two weeks too little of a sample size to know what the rucks will score like? The original plan was to wait for one to drop and as I said in another post, last week I was stoked I picked Bellchambers but this week I am cursing myself.

 

[Rowsus]

Hey Row,

Just wanted to get your insight on the points scoring system. Last week I traded Rocky out for Heppell (thanks for the advice of not bringing in Gaz) and I was watching the game but not following SC scores and I thought he would have been dominating. Then I was feeling flat after seeing he only got 107. Do you know how or why this wasnt any higher?

You said earlier that the average so far is 4.8pts per possession. Adams was down low at 3.2 because his efficiency was so low and his clangers high. But Heppell only scored 3.15pts / disp for that game. He won a lot of the ball. 34 disposals. Had 12 CPs, 4 tackles, 5 clearances and a couple of free kicks. His efficiency was just under 70% and had 3 clangers.

I know long kicks and short kicks have different grading but its not like he was getting cheap Cotchin like chip kicks.

Bit of a rant but i just dont understand how the game he played results in just over 100 pts. Almost feel like trading him back out if he can play that well yet score at that poor rate.

Hey Mike,
there certainly are a lot more vagaries to the scoring than just Marks, Kicks, H'balls etc. I know you're aware of this. State of the game, position and importance of possession etc are all factored in. Heppell's progression in the game, qtr by qtr was: 32, 60, 80, 102 - 107. His 2nd worst qtr was deemed the match "defining" qtr, which it was. If the 1st qtr was deemed the key qtr, he might have finished with 110 - 112. Every week there are some head scratching scores. A player can have 20 possessions at 60% DE, and not kick a bagful of goals, and outscore what Heppell managed on the weekend. We just accept it as a vagary of the game, and move on. Heppells AF score of 129 looks more "realistic", and I wouldn't expect his SC to be nearly 20% below his AF too often!

 

[Rowsus]

Hey Rowsus,

As previously mentioned I still do not have Pendles. Do you think I really need him? Especially now he is under a slight injury cloud (although should still play)
I have Fyfe, Selwood and JPK as my other Premos with Ablett who I am keen to get rid of. (also have Wallis as you know as my stepping stone)
I have Goodes in backline and Lambert and Miller in mids who are struggling (meaning I only have Cripps as back up for mids atm)
I am torn between a few options:

1. Ablett -> Pendles, Goodes -> McDonald/Doherty
2. Ablett -> Bont Goodes -> McDonald/Doherty (pocket $280/$250K) - Use $ for upgrading stepping stone Wallis later to Pendles or other upgrades
3. Ablett-> Wines Goodes -> McDonald/Doherty (pocket $165/$133K)
4. Ablett -> Pendles Goodes-> Miller -> NVB (pocket $73K)

Looking at my backline in the last two weeks it looks ok even though there are no real stars. As we know the backline is more up and down than other areas so I cannot at the moment justify
going after a B.Smith or Simpson. Hence the reason I am looking at the cheaper option in McDonald/Doherty to replace the failed Goodes.
In regards to the Bont I am thinking he could be handy to bring in and shift to F5 once my rookies fatten up to enable me to improve the mids and grab fallen premos. However, still not convinced being
only in his second year. Could come crashing back to earth against the Hawks this week but now is the best time to get him.
Wines I nearly jumped on at the start as I have always liked his contested possessions like JPK. He never really gets a tag (goes to Boak or Gray) and he has a big tank picking up possessions down back as well as winning his own ball in the packs.
I currently trying to convince myself that the extra possible 10-15pts each week getting Pendles over a Wines is worth it. Especially as I expect Collingwood to struggle this year.
After all of this I am still worried about not having enough coverage on the mid bench as I expect Miller to be dropped and Lambert is out injured for a while.
Tough decisions all round for me to make.
Any suggestions as to which way to go would be appreciated.
Thankyou for all your replies and suggestions, its amazing the time and effort you put in.

Hey Slammer,
first let me address McDonald. He is your very typical "Well done if you started him, but don't trade him now" type, that we see a handful of every season. He's a tall KPP Def, with an average scoring history, as most tall Defs have. His Round 1 score was because GC had all their tall Fwds missing, and were playing Smith and Gorringe at Full Forward. There is no easier player in the game to run off, than a resting Ruck, that is resting deep in the Fwd line. His Round 2 score is head scratcher. 16 possessions, 8 marks, a AF score of 78, and a SC of 122!!! He's not going to manage a 1.56:1 ratio too often! I wouldn't let him tempt you.
If you are having potential problems with your mid bench cover, and don't already have a completed DPP link, then options 2 or 4 look the best options, assuming you have one or more M/F in your Fwd line. It comes down to how desperately you want Bont, and how much you suspect Pendles might be compromised. He certainly has a history of this sort of thing, mixed in with his incredibly consistent scoring. Maybe given the question mark over him, option 2 is the better move this week.

 

[Rowsus]

Hey Rowsus, do you think I should trade Ablett to a premium mid (Sloane or JPK) or Ablett to Goldstein by moving Gray and Bellchambers around and then getting Dusty or Buddy next week?

Essentially it's JPK and Bellchambers vs Goldstein and Dusty.

I like the second combo but my mids would be weakened for a time being (still have Fyfe, Pendles, Lewis and Parker). Furthermore, is two weeks too little of a sample size to know what the rucks will score like? The original plan was to wait for one to drop and as I said in another post, last week I was stoked I picked Bellchambers but this week I am cursing myself.

Hey ZP,
I'm not a big fan of changing plans so early in the season, unless disaster hits. I can still see your idea of waiting on your desired Rucks to drop in price still being a viable plan. I'm assuming part of the plan was TBC to drop down for Ruck coverage was part of the plan, and that still may be something needed/wanted. I wouldn't worry about your Mid being too weak. The 4 you have are pretty strong, and at this time of the year you can only have so many strong players anyway. Given a choice of JPK/TBC or Goldy/Dusty I would choose the latter everytime, too. I'm just worried that changing plans this early without disaster hitting, might lead to things unravelling down the track.

 

[Slammer]

Thanks Rowsus,

Are u on the Bont bandwagon?
Or are u concerned like myself it may not last as good sides will start to tag him?

 

[Rowsus]

Thanks Rowsus,

Are u on the Bont bandwagon?
Or are u concerned like myself it may not last as good sides will start to tag him?

I booked my seat on the bandwagon this week. I would have preferred they played Hawthorn in Round 2, so we got a good look at him against a quality opposition, but it is what it is. If he was Mid only I would agonise over it, and probably say no, the risk is too great. But because we can sit him in our Fwd line, anything 95+ will be considered good enough. Given his B/E, there is less downside to taking him this week. As to him being tagged, I still think Macrae draws the main tag, and the otherside of the coin is, the Bont is averaging 10 tackles at the moment. A tag won't affect that too much, and it is SC gold.

 

[Tamuhawk]

Hi Rowsus

I have a little conundrum. My original plan was to do option 3. However atm I have some deadwood to get rid of with Goddard D8 & Lambert F8.

Option 1
Goddard to Oxley
Lambert to McGrath
After trade: $65,700

This option gets rid of donut players and allows me to have 29/30 players playing.

Option 2
Goodes to Oxley
Cockatoo to McGrath (via Lambert to M11)
After trade: $263,500

This option banks me the most possible cash for an early upgrade.

Option 3
Goodes to Oxley
Cockatoo to Van Berlo
After trade: $165,200

This option gives me greater scoring potential in my mids at M6 in Van Berlo.

Is it better to get rid of all players not playing or is it better to have a lot of cash? Also is it better to hold onto Goodes and Cockatoo even if they are losing me cash but may end up making cash in the long run as I don't intend to trade them out for awhile. Any thoughts on this is much appreciated.

Thanks in advance.

 

[Goodie's Guns]

Option 2
Goodes to Oxley
Cockatoo to McGrath (via Lambert to M11)
After trade: $263,500

This option banks me the most possible cash for an early upgrade.

Option 2 for me Tamuhawk, I like it quite a lot. Give you the ability to loophole I presume and also plenty of coin for upgrades and still good cash generation in McGrath. LIke it.

 

[Eagling]

Hi Rowsus,

I have both Ablett and Rockliff. Which one should I get rid of first?

 

[Rowsus]

Hi Rowsus

I have a little conundrum. My original plan was to do option 3. However atm I have some deadwood to get rid of with Goddard D8 & Lambert F8.

Option 1
Goddard to Oxley
Lambert to McGrath
After trade: $65,700

This option gets rid of donut players and allows me to have 29/30 players playing.

Option 2
Goodes to Oxley
Cockatoo to McGrath (via Lambert to M11)
After trade: $263,500

This option banks me the most possible cash for an early upgrade.

Option 3
Goodes to Oxley
Cockatoo to Van Berlo
After trade: $165,200

This option gives me greater scoring potential in my mids at M6 in Van Berlo.

Is it better to get rid of all players not playing or is it better to have a lot of cash? Also is it better to hold onto Goodes and Cockatoo even if they are losing me cash but may end up making cash in the long run as I don't intend to trade them out for awhile. Any thoughts on this is much appreciated.

Thanks in advance.

Option 2 for me Tamuhawk, I like it quite a lot. Give you the ability to loophole I presume and also plenty of coin for upgrades and still good cash generation in McGrath. LIke it.

Hi Tamu,
I agree with Goodies. Ditch the players that look like losing you money. It is quite possible they lose you money, then disappear for a number of weeks. It's not worth the risk. As to McGrath v NvB, that comes down to how strong your other Mid Rookies are, but I'd fancy McGrath's earning capacity and $98.3k over NvB.

 

[Rowsus]

Hi Rowsus,

I have both Ablett and Rockliff. Which one should I get rid of first?

I'd get rid of Ablett first, he already has a huge B/E, where Rocky gets a games grace before his B/E kicks in, if a miracle happens and he comes back earlier than expected. Why not dump both?

 

[Imcjb]

Rowsus, again love your work. Everytime I see your thread I think about the time I was in Roskilde in 2007. Good times, good times.

My question is this:

I have been lucky with my rookies so far, I seem to have picked fairly well. Goodes in the backline doesnt help me much however I have Oxley, KMac and Saad already...with no dpp link to the mids to get rid of him.

In the Mids I have Cripps and Miller.

My provisional trade idea is for Miller to Mcgrath via Swan.

I don't think that Cripps' gameplay is certain under Malthouse so regardless of his potential he might not be scoring suitably for SC. While Cripps to NVB is a speculative trade, the Crows' run until the byes is advantageous (both arent going to be keepers anyway so bye time is trade time) coupled with a player that is scoring well....it seems to me to be a a no brainer trade considering the BE of NVB if I get him this week.

I've experimented with various trades to get Rich or Bont in but the fact I dont have Ablett or Rockcliff and I have only 117k means I dont have much leeway.

Your opinion?

 

[Eagling]

I'd get rid of Ablett first, he already has a huge B/E, where Rocky gets a games grace before his B/E kicks in, if a miracle happens and he comes back earlier than expected. Why not dump both?

I probably can flick both; just weighing my options. I'll bring Lambert into the mids and trade Hogan in, and probably get another Super Premium in for the 2nd one - or maybe I'll get NVB instead. As I've got Miller and Nelson, they probably won't make much cash; but by keeping them for a week I might get a few K out of them; and I'll still have something like a million to a double upgrade. The downside is that I'll be relying on rookie scores for a week and I'll have to forego a higher priced player about to rocket in price.

I'm pretty sold on getting Hogan in; it's the 2nd option that's giving me pause for thought.

 

[Rowsus]

Rowsus, again love your work. Everytime I see your thread I think about the time I was in Roskilde in 2007. Good times, good times.

My question is this:

I have been lucky with my rookies so far, I seem to have picked fairly well. Goodes in the backline doesnt help me much however I have Oxley, KMac and Saad already...with no dpp link to the mids to get rid of him.

In the Mids I have Cripps and Miller.

My provisional trade idea is for Miller to Mcgrath via Swan.

I don't think that Cripps' gameplay is certain under Malthouse so regardless of his potential he might not be scoring suitably for SC. While Cripps to NVB is a speculative trade, the Crows' run until the byes is advantageous (both arent going to be keepers anyway so bye time is trade time) coupled with a player that is scoring well....it seems to me to be a a no brainer trade considering the BE of NVB if I get him this week.

I've experimented with various trades to get Rich or Bont in but the fact I dont have Ablett or Rockcliff and I have only 117k means I dont have much leeway.

Your opinion?

Thanks for that, Imcjb.
I'm guessing you were in Roskilde to see Red Hot Chilli Peppers and The Who play at the festival?
I like Miller to McGrath, and I can understand your reasoning on Cripps to NvB. I don't fully agree with it, but I can understand where the coaches that want to do it are coming from. The fact is, that NvB's B/E is largely irrelevent. It's more his average that will determine his price, by the time you trade him out. A good jump in his price now won't really affect his price later, if he averaging 70-75 by trade out time. My reckoning is, to use Cripps to get to NvB, you either need to believe Cripps has no JS whatsoever (possible), or that NvB will average a good 30/game more than him, otherwise the value just doesn't seem to be there. You don't need every single good looking Cash Cow at the start of the season, just enough that your trading isn't hampered later on.

 

[Rowsus]

I probably can flick both; just weighing my options. I'll bring Lambert into the mids and trade Hogan in, and probably get another Super Premium in for the 2nd one - or maybe I'll get NVB instead. As I've got Miller and Nelson, they probably won't make much cash; but by keeping them for a week I might get a few K out of them; and I'll still have something like a million to a double upgrade. The downside is that I'll be relying on rookie scores for a week and I'll have to forego a higher priced player about to rocket in price.

I'm pretty sold on getting Hogan in; it's the 2nd option that's giving me pause for thought.

Your thinking is sound, and there's not too many higher priced players "rocketing" up in price in just 1 week. They rise by roughly $440 for each point they beat the B/E by. One weeks Rookie score pain, might be better for long term gain.