Opinion Questions For Rowsus

Rowsus · 15 Feb 2016

Firstly, I think Ruck draws need to be looked at differently to team draws. The Rucking is a contest in a contest, and a game that might be hard for a team to win, might be "easier" for the Ruck to win his contest. I know you are aware of this, it is more for people that might think that Rucks might potentially struggle if the team are up against it that week. The two things can coincide, but don't have to.

freowho said:

If this was your course of action, it would be best to bring him in after Round 6, not after Round 4.
Firstly, you'd want the expected lowish score from the Fremantle game to cycle through his pricing. Giving you 4 price changes on both.
Secondly, he travels Interstate in Rnd 5 (GC), he averaged about 15% lower Interstate last season, than in Melbourne.
Lastly, he hits his dream run in Rnd 7 - Stk, Ess, Carl all at Etihad, there is potential for 2+ x 150's in that run.

freowho said:

This is no small thing, and should really be factored in. Injuries to any of the top 10 - 12 Rucks weakens the playing pool, and the expected opposition. The Rucks that can hold fitness really should be expected to average higher in the second half of the season. The only time this doesn't apply is if:
a) The Ruck himself is struggling/carrying a niggle, restricting his efforts.
b) The Ruck has had the bad luck to play all the injured Rucks, and most of his remaining games are against the top 10 - 12 that didn't get injured.

freowho said:

If you are paying $100k extra, I would think you would want more than 5 pts/week. Let's look at three different Coaches, and I'll see if we can work this out as we go along. Let's pretend Coaches A, B & C all have identical teams. In these teams they all have Goldy/Martin at R1/R2, Rosa at D4, and a $123,900 Rookie A at F8.
Coach A says, I'm not changing, so has Goldy, Rosa, Rookie A.
Coach B changes Goldy to Jacobs, and uses the Loose Change to upgrade Rosa to Rance.
Coach C changes Goldy to Nicholls, and upgrades Rosa to Mcveigh, and Rookie A to Wells.
So now our Coaches have identical teams except for:
Coach A: Goldy, Rosa, Rookie A
Coach B: Jacobs, Rance, Rookie A
Coach C: Nicholls, McVeigh, Wells
Coach A is hoping Rosa will fill D6, but realises he will probably fall just short of that, and will be Coach A's last upgrade.
Coach B says, "blow Goldy, I'm running the season without him".
Coach C is hoping to turn Nicholls/Wells into Goldy/Rookie B after Round 6, to Cash in on Goldy's easy stretch.
Coach B is hoping by upgrading Rosa now, he is saving himself a trade around about Round 16. There is probably (imo) an 80% chance he is right. Coach C doesn't save a trade by upgrading to McVeigh, as he is still comitted to a trade to upgrade Nicholls. They are both also hoping for a points advantage over Coach A, for the 14 Rounds they have a Rance/McVeigh over his Rosa. Let's assume they all play every game for the exercise, and Rance tops Rosa by 7/ Round, and McVeigh by 12/Round. Coach C is reasonably happy, when for the first 6 Rounds Nicholls and Wells score 90 each, every week. Come the end of Round 6, they are worth a combined $883k (+$200k on opening price), and Coach C upgrades Nicholls to Goldy, and Wells down to Rookie B.
Rookie A, who was sitting at F8 for Coaches A & B, has been a slowish maturer. Remembering he isn't your gun Fwd rookie, he was your "I hope he is ok" F8 Rookie. When Coaches A & B finally milk him, he has made them $140k.
So let's see how things stand at Round 16, when Coach A upgrades Rosa.
Coach A has Goldy x 15, Rosa at 88 x 15, and $140k from Rookie A = 1,320 + Goldy + $140k
Coach B has Jacobs x 15, Rance at 95 x 15, and $140k from Rookie A = 1,425 + Jacobs + $140k + 1 trade
Coach C has Goldy x 9, McVeigh at 100 x 15, and $???k from Wells/Nicholls = 1,500 + 9/15th's of Goldy + $759k - Goldy's Rnd 7 price + 1,080 from Nicholls/Wells - 6 x Coach A & B's F6 Rookie.
Coach C becomes slightly more complicated, as he has Wells scoring 90 for 6 Rounds, where Coaches A & B had their F6 Rookies scoring in those Rounds. For ease of calculation, let's call that F6 Rookie a 60 pointer.
Now that coach A has finally upgraded Rosa, he and Coach B only have Goldstein and Jacobs as different players in their team. If we assume that the Fwd Rookie that Coach A & B downgraded Rookie A to performs the same as the Rookie Fwd Rookie Coach C downgraded Wells to, we can just push them to one side, and forget them.
We get to the end of the season.

Coach A has Goldy's season score. He got to use $140k from downgrading Rookie A
Coach B has Jacobs season score + 105 (from the Rance upgrade). Used $140k from Rookie A, and has one more trade left than Coach A. The value of that trade is problematical. It could be big, or it could be small.
Coach C has 16/22nds of Goldy's score + 1080 - 360. He got to Use $759k - price he bought Goldy in at.

It's easy to use your opinion on who won out of Coach A and Coach B. If you have Jacobs getting within 5/Round of Goldy, then Coach B wins, if not Coach A wins, depending on the use/value of that extra trade. (There are obviously so many ifs and buts we are dealing with here!) If Coach A doesn't upgrade Rosa, then Goldy needs to beat Jacobs by more than Rance beats Rosa.

Comparing Coach A and Coach C, we might have taken liberties assuming Wells/Nicholls played every game, and scored 90 each, each week for 6 weeks, feel free to insert your own figures for calculation. They have given Coach C a 720 head start on Coach A, but Coach A gets to add in 6 x Goldy's weekly average. Obviously, in this scenario, you need to think Goldy will be 120+ for Coach A to win, otherwise Coach C wins. For the last piece of the puzzle, if Goldy scores 120 each week, then his buy in price for Coach C is $629k, this means Coach C only had $130k to spend, where Coaches A & B have $140k. Who knows how that $10k helped! If Goldy only scores 117 in each of those first 6 Rounds, then all 3 Coaches have $140k to spend, and Coach C wins by 18 points over Coach A. Did Coach B beat them both? That depends on your opinion of Jacobs, and that extra trade!

Okay, that last bit is a bit complicated, but it does show how close each of the 3 options are, and the type of things you need to weigh up, when deciding your course of action.

As to your final question, do you need 5 points more than the 3rd best ruck, or 10 points, if you are going to pay $100k extra to get Goldy? The Rance example shows, it really comes down to how well you use that $100k, if you go the 3rd best Ruck. Basically, the $100k that is used for improving your starting team only has effect until the teams you are comparing are finalised. After that, it should be assumed all things are equal, but you still lose the difference between Goldy and your other Ruck pick. So the equation looks something like this.

points gained from $100k x weeks until team is finalised - (Goldy's aggregate - Goldy's replacement's aggregate)

then factor in, if the $100k saved you a trade or not!

I hope that all made sense.

I think there may be a simpler way to look at it.
If you believe you are going to start without Goldy, but trade him in later, you need to be pretty sure you can do it with 2 to 2.5 trades. Nothing is messier, or more wasteful, than a 3 trade upgrade. If you believe it is going to be close to a 3 trade upgrade, remove the possibility, and start Goldstein.
If you are going to run the gauntlet, and go set and forget without Goldstein, I think you need to be in that 75-80% area, that when you used the $100k Loose Change, it saved you a trade. Yes, the $100k will get you extra points (hopefully), that go towards countering the expected difference between your R2 and Goldy, but without that saved trade, I'd just start Goldy.
All this assumes you think Goldy will be a top 2 Ruck in 2016, if you don't it is all moot.

I know I have made no allowance for when Goldy might be used as a Captain, but let's assume we all have 2 or 3 very good Captain candidates.

Manikato1 · 15 Feb 2016

Quote Originally Posted by GrainFedBeef View Post

I am doing some work on premiums and the best/worst teams they score against. Looking at whether some of these players could be good upgrades or good to avoid at different times of the year depending on who they play. As GFB says I have found it quite surprising how often the premiums have the weaker teams as there worst scoring averages. Take Fyfe. He plays his 4 worst teams in the space of 5 games this season so if the previous history holds up again maybe just after this is when he could be an upgrade target.

Courtesans · 15 Feb 2016

I can't think of a question to ask Rowsus as my team looks brilliant...as if!

Great reads what you do.

Rowsus · 16 Feb 2016

Manikato1 said:

There's quite a bit of history there, over a number of years, where you can see certain Prems, particularly Mid Prems, that score better against say the 5th to 14th best teams, than they do against some of the 15th to 18th best teams. There can be many reasons for this. Amongst them is the possibility that the Coach has assigned the Prem an "easy" week, and more time in the Forward line. I am sure we see that kind of thing with Sydney often, particularly with JPK.

Rowsus · 16 Feb 2016

Courtesans said:

Thanks Courtesans, I hope that Ruck answer at post #5281 made sense, and was a good read. I've read it 3 times, and I'm not sure myself.

THCLT · 16 Feb 2016

Rowsus said:

Rowsus you've exceeded and gone way beyond and above once again, I'm doing flow charts to map out your answer as I type!

Next time you're visiting Oz, you should hold a workshop on Supercoach Statistics 101.

Brettthejett · 16 Feb 2016

Where to go when you need some stats?

Hey Rowsus,

Been keeping an eye on this thread so far this year and once again far and beyond the best you can get. I have a dillema I'm torn between dusty and lids. Do you have stats when they play together or when one or the other plays? I'd be keen to see how dusty goes with lids in the team and visa versa. I would imagine there will be a lop sided report prob with dusty playing more without lids but I'd be keen to see how he fares when lids is back in.

Cheers in advance BTJ

Rowsus · 17 Feb 2016

THCLT said:

Thanks THCLT,
it might get a bit hazy in that workshop, as we all get into our 7th and 8th beers!

Rowsus · 17 Feb 2016

Brettthejett said:

Hey BTJ,
as you suggested, there isn't much information for Deledio playing without Martin. Just looking at the last 3 seasons we have:
Deledio plays without Martin: 1 game, Deledio/Martin play together 56 games, Martin plays without Deledio 9 games, neither plays 0 games.

Deledio
The game that Deledio played without Martin was Round 22, 2014. It was at the MCG, and Richmond beat St Kilda by 26 pts. Deledio had 26 possessions, kicked 2 goals, and scored 121 in SC.

Martin

Overall
In the last 3 seasons Martin has played 65 games at 102.3.
With Deledio 56 games at 102.4
Without Deledio 9 games at 101.9

Wins/Losses
Martin has averaged 101.1 in 41 wins, and 104.5 in 24 losses.
With Deledio 101.4 in 39 wins, and 104.7 in 17 losses
Without Deledio 95.0 in 2 wins, 103.9 in 7 losses

Victoria/Interstate
Martin has averaged 99.5 in 47 Victorian games, 109.7 in 18 Interstate games.
With Deledio 100.0 in 41 Victorian games, 108.9 in 15 Interstate games
Without Deledio 96.0 in 6 Victorian games, 113.7 in 3 Interstate games

Ground Size
Martin averaged 98.9 in 39 games on Large grounds, 110.6 in 11 games on Medium, 105.1 in 15 games on Small
With Deledio 99.0 in 34 games on Large, 114.1 in 9 games on Medium, and 103.2 in 13 games on Small
Without Deledio 98.4 in 5 games on Large, 95.0 in 2 games on Medium, and 117.5 in 2 games on Small

Conclusion
Even though we are dealing with a small sample size of 9 games out of 65, the figures above would tend to indicate Deledio being in, or out, of the team, has no effect on Martin's SC output. With only one game to look at, it is impossible to say if Martin has any effect on Deledio's output.

Prochard · 17 Feb 2016

Hi Rowsus,
I'm intrigued by your interest in Tippett. Tippett did make an impressive run late last year as he shouldered more ruck load. However, it was against weak teams with lacking Key position depth, and I don't believe taking more ruck responsibility is enough to make him a keeper. Sydney's early draw isn't that favourable either, nor does Tippett score well against these teams early on.

Is there another factor contributing to your liking of Tippett?

GoGeta · 17 Feb 2016

An article i read quoted him as playing about 50% ruck time & averaged 2 goals a game (44) last year.
Now assuming most of that 50% ruck time was in the back half of the year where he scored much better (albeit against weaker teams) if he plays the same role again there is scope for improvement without changing anything, but can anyone enlighten me on the % of time he rucked (if any) in the first half of the year? My thinking is if he rucked bugger all in the first half of the year and his role change continues he is a good bet to increase his average, less so if he rucked a bit early on. Simply put, 50% ruck time + 2 goals a game + 22 of 24 games makes it pretty hard to top this year and if he rucks more that goal count would go down.
I am not seeing much upside other than fwd/rck dpp or the hope he smashes a couple teams early and becomes a stepping stone to a fallen Goldy.

P.S Sydney has a great draw so i am assuming you mean the rucking opposition?

Rowsus · 17 Feb 2016

Prochard said:

Hi Pro,
I have a general rule with KPP Fwds, that they shouldn't be considered, unless they can kick 3 goals/game. What I believe we have in Tippett is a Fwd who might this season average 1.5-2.0 goals/game, but will also gather 20-25 Hitouts/game. I'm happy to be of the opinion, if he can stay fit, that even 1.5 goals and 20 Hitouts/game will be well within the Fwd Keeper level. With the DPP status, he fills 2 roles, and remember, each time you use a F/R for Ruck cover, you are effectively boosting the value of his season average by 2.5-3.0/game. This means if I use him twice for that purpose, he only needs to average low 90's to be a great pick. While this would admittedly be a career high, I think it has to be remembered, he has never played a true Ruck/Forward role since some of his early Adelaide games.
As to the quality of opposition, don't forget he scored 117 & 113 in his 2 finals against Fremantle and North.

GoGeta said:

He certainly played quite a bit in the Ruck in the first half of 2015, he just played more minutes there in the last 8 or so games. His hitouts/game for 2015 were:

22, 26, 12, 7, 12, 15, 5, 10, 16, 17, 8, bye, 16, dnp, 31, 23, dnp, 25, 32, 27, 20, 15, 15 / 12, 14

GoGeta · 17 Feb 2016

Interesting, thanks for the hit out counts as well, those scores vs Freo and North are very encouraging.

Brettthejett · 17 Feb 2016

Rowsus said:

Hey BTJ,
as you suggested, there isn't much information for Deledio playing without Martin. Just looking at the last 3 seasons we have:
Deledio plays without Martin: 1 game, Deledio/Martin play together 56 games, Martin plays without Deledio 9 games, neither plays 0 games.

Deledio
The game that Deledio played without Martin was Round 22, 2014. It was at the MCG, and Richmond beat St Kilda by 26 pts. Deledio had 26 possessions, kicked 2 goals, and scored 121 in SC.

Martin

Overall
In the last 3 seasons Martin has played 65 games at 102.3.
With Deledio 56 games at 102.4
Without Deledio 9 games at 101.9

Wins/Losses
Martin has averaged 101.1 in 41 wins, and 104.5 in 24 losses.
With Deledio 101.4 in 39 wins, and 104.7 in 17 losses
Without Deledio 95.0 in 2 wins, 103.9 in 7 losses

Victoria/Interstate
Martin has averaged 99.5 in 47 Victorian games, 109.7 in 18 Interstate games.
With Deledio 100.0 in 41 Victorian games, 108.9 in 15 Interstate games
Without Deledio 96.0 in 6 Victorian games, 113.7 in 3 Interstate games

Ground Size
Martin averaged 98.9 in 39 games on Large grounds, 110.6 in 11 games on Medium, 105.1 in 15 games on Small
With Deledio 99.0 in 34 games on Large, 114.1 in 9 games on Medium, and 103.2 in 13 games on Small
Without Deledio 98.4 in 5 games on Large, 95.0 in 2 games on Medium, and 117.5 in 2 games on Small

Conclusion
Even though we are dealing with a small sample size of 9 games out of 65, the figures above would tend to indicate Deledio being in, or out, of the team, has no effect on Martin's SC output. With only one game to look at, it is impossible to say if Martin has any effect on Deledio's output.

Unbelievable work mate. Although it still makes my decision hard.
May just have to run with the both of them from the start.
So a starting fwd line of lids,dusty,Barlow,buddy (may have to skip wells)
Thanks for the insight just proves they are both guns even when playing together.
Thanks for such an in depth response it's much appreciated.

Adrenaline · 17 Feb 2016

hi row

it has been noted that yarren will be out until round 6. i guess there was speculation if houli role would change. given yarren will be out until round 4-6 and his preseason training has been impacted, do you think houli will avg 90-95 or do you think he can average more than 95

footballer · 17 Feb 2016

hi Rowsus, new to this site but loving the conversation. Can you please explain how you get 2.5-3 points per game better off when you have Tippett in the ruck? So you are saying you would have Tipp in fwds with R3 as a R/F?

Rowsus · 17 Feb 2016

Adrenaline said:

hi ad,
I'll sit on the fence, and say 92-97.

But more likely below 95.

Prochard · 17 Feb 2016

Hi Rowsus, what are your thoughts on Daniel Wells?
I think Crouch in the midfield will score 10-15 points higher than Wells with 60k extra, but this is balanced by not being able to grab a quality MID rookie.

Which combination do you prefer?
Wells at F5+Mid Rookie+60k
Or
Crouch at M7+Forward Rookie

Rowsus · 17 Feb 2016

footballer said:

Hi footballer, welcome aboard!

The way it works is this:
Tippett sits at F4 until one of your Rucks goes missing. You swing Tippett up to R2, using your R3 F/R Rookie, and put your F7 onto the ground to replace Tippett in your Forward line. Because this wouldn't be possible if you didn't have Tippett (or another R/F in your Forward line), Tippett has facilitated the use of the F7 score replacing your missing Ruck score that week. Your F7 might only score 50 or 60 while sitting on your field, replacing Tippett in your Forward line. When you divide 50-60 by 22 you get 2.3-2.7. Those points can be credited to having Tippett (or some other R/F) in your forward line, and as such "belong" to Tippett. So if Tippett goes up and fills your missing Ruck 3 times during the season, you can see that Tippett's value to your team is actually his average, plus that 2.3-2.7 multiplied by 3 = 7-8 points/week. It effectively increases Tippett, if he say averaged 88 for the season, to a 95-96 average.
I hope that makes sense, if not just say so, and I will try again.

footballer · 17 Feb 2016

perfect! That is only if R3 doesnt play. Not a bad option!

Opinion Questions For Rowsus

Rowsus

Statistician

Manikato1

Courtesans

Rowsus

Statistician

Rowsus

Statistician

THCLT

BBL|05 Winner

Brettthejett

Rowsus

Statistician

Rowsus

Statistician

Prochard

GoGeta

Rowsus

Statistician

GoGeta

Brettthejett

Adrenaline

footballer

Draftee

Rowsus

Statistician

Prochard

Rowsus

Statistician

footballer

Draftee