Opinion Questions For Rowsus

[lavenderbandit]

Hey Rowsus, long time listener first time caller....

This kind of goes on from Darkies Q above and is more of a strategy question than a trade question. In a normal season getting a team to full premium early is usually the best way to a high end of season ranking, and avoiding sideways trades early can really mean you will avoiddonuts later in the year when you run out in round 16 and have to start the NTL thread. With the shorter season, Ive been really pondering this, as with only 17 rounds you can trade almost every week without worrying so much about running out.

I'm not really smart enough to understand where to begin an analytical approach to answering this, but how valueable is an early sideways trade if we/I am confident that you are sideways trading a premium who isnt hiting expectations to a mid-pricer who appears to have had a clear role change? In my case I'm thinking Houston/Freo Brayshaw (role appears unfavourable for SC points) to either Howe/simpkin/Bailey Smith, Or McRae down to Bennel and Jacobs up to Gawn, but there are a few iterations of trades.

My question isnt about the specifics of those trades, more towards should we be a bit more carefree with trades (but not reckless) including sideways? is an early sideways actually more valueable this year than conserving trades in any other year? Currently have a good early ranking so very interested in your thoughts as I am seriously pondering a sideways early trade or 2, cheers.

 

[Vicwood]

Expect magnets to move even more to manage them.

Let’s start a pool on how many changes to the Bulldogs team this week. I’ll take 5.

 

[jel]

Hi Rowsus, in another thread it was mentioned that a trade is worth approx $150k when trying to decide if it is worth doing.
I've seen this figure mentioned other times as well.

Is there somewhere that explains where this number comes from?
Is it just an accepted wisdom, or is there some maths behind it?

Does the current season change this value of a trade proposition?

 

[Juzzo]

Hi Row,

After we have traded in the "essential" rookies this week or next, and with a few extra trades this year, would it be a good idea to sideways trade premos out with high B/Es for premos with low B/Es (assuming matchups etc are favourable) to make some coin? Of course you would only do this if there is no glaring reason to use trades for that specific week, eg injuries, rookies not fat enough etc. Kind of treat it like RDT NBA where you are sidewaysing every week.

thanks mate.

 

[gutsroy]

Hi Rowsus, in another thread it was mentioned that a trade is worth approx $150k when trying to decide if it is worth doing.
I've seen this figure mentioned other times as well.

Is there somewhere that explains where this number comes from?
Is it just an accepted wisdom, or is there some maths behind it?

Does the current season change this value of a trade proposition?

Would leave it to Rowsus to answer in detail, always assumed it was based on the rough heuristic of:

Avg Team Value (end of year): 13.5m
Avg Team Value (start of year): 10m
Value generated during year: 3.5m
Trades: 30, thereof usually 20% used for injury- / sideways trades
3.5m / 24 = 145k / trade (broad brushstrokes)

Ignores other considerations (e.g. point generation, the goal we sometimes forget in the pursuit for cash), unequal distributions etc.

Things like this and how many points a trade should ideally generate depend on timepoint in season etc. - moves made earlier have a longer timeframe to generate cash / pts etc.

 

[Rowsus]

Hi Rowsus,

I somehow brought in Nic Nat.
Do I offload for Pittonet ? Have Grundy and Terri at R3.
By completing this trade I cannot with the cash (at this stage) use it to upgrade a rookie to a premo.

The other question was what to do with Toby Greene aswell as Houston. I am thinking hanging onto Greene but he will leak cash.
Houston though I think is a regrettable pick

Hi Slammer,
at the time you asked, we weren't aware of the question mark over Grundy. What happens with him will have a large bearing on your thinking. I will return to the question when we have more info.

As to Greene and Houston, I have them both. I've never considered moving Greene, last rounds score just comes with the territory. Houston will probably get one more Round with me, and a sub 80 will see him leave.

 

[Rowsus]

Thanks for the very excellent advice.

In my case, it will be two trades to get Pittonet, but two trades I'd be making anyway - Green and BZT out, so I really see it as rookie adjustment myself.

I wondered if it's better to double-up on the cheaper rookies but figured the chance of Pitto ripening faster was much better.

It sounds like the non-Pittonet trade holds up on it's own, so I don't see a problem with either.

 

[Rowsus]

Hi @Rowsus, I own Pittonet already (he's my R2). Should Darcy Cameron be a priority trade-in? to get him i'll need to sacrifice someone early (or cull an underperforming premo),

Hi @jaca,with a Ruck line of Grundy, Pittonet, Comben, it might become necessary to trade Comben to Cameron. North play before Collingwood, so it might even be prudent, even if Grundy is named, to guard against a late out.
Outside of Comben, it looks like your other best avenue might be Houston.
It all comes down to, is Grundy named? Do we have faith he plays, if he is?
Outside of the Grundy dilemma, I'm not sure Cameron is a priority, as his JS has to be considered a little shaky.

 

[Rowsus]

Hey Rowsus, long time listener first time caller....

This kind of goes on from Darkies Q above and is more of a strategy question than a trade question. In a normal season getting a team to full premium early is usually the best way to a high end of season ranking, and avoiding sideways trades early can really mean you will avoiddonuts later in the year when you run out in round 16 and have to start the NTL thread. With the shorter season, Ive been really pondering this, as with only 17 rounds you can trade almost every week without worrying so much about running out.

I'm not really smart enough to understand where to begin an analytical approach to answering this, but how valueable is an early sideways trade if we/I am confident that you are sideways trading a premium who isnt hiting expectations to a mid-pricer who appears to have had a clear role change? In my case I'm thinking Houston/Freo Brayshaw (role appears unfavourable for SC points) to either Howe/simpkin/Bailey Smith, Or McRae down to Bennel and Jacobs up to Gawn, but there are a few iterations of trades.

My question isnt about the specifics of those trades, more towards should we be a bit more carefree with trades (but not reckless) including sideways? is an early sideways actually more valueable this year than conserving trades in any other year? Currently have a good early ranking so very interested in your thoughts as I am seriously pondering a sideways early trade or 2, cheers.

Hey lavenderbandit,
it's a very good, and timely question.
I've been a bit bemused the past couple of days, reading through the trade thread. People suggesting that this season we can side trade an injured Prem, even if it looks like 1 week. I think people have lost the plot a little on this one.
Let's hark back to a normal 23 Round season. As we get to Rnds 15 - 18 people are either finishing their team, and have a trade or two left over. Finishing their team, and have 4 or 5 trades left over, but have compromised D6/F6/M7-8's, or are struggling to finish their team, before the trades run out. I think more fall into the last bracket, than the first 2. I understand people want to finish their team as quickly as possible, and hopefully a week or two earlier this season than normal, but the bottom line is, the process hasn't changed! Most will still run out of trades, and be looking for a value M8 or D6 to finish off their team. Side trading a 1 week injured Prem, just means another compromise at the end of the season!
Having said that, I'm open to one or two trades being used to correct regrettable choices, and hopefully jump onto the right breakout player. I see that entirely differently to side trading a 1 or 2 week injured Prem.
In your specific case, I can see an argument for correcting one or both of Houston/Brayshaw. I'd just make sure you have all the right Rookies first, as the Rookie price rise this week should outstrip what Houston/Brayshaw drop in price, so financially, get the Rookies, then correct the Midprice regret, or use the Midprice regret, to get the Rookie, then upgrade with the cash next Round.
An early sideways trade or correction can be more valuable than holding a trade, but only if you get it pretty much right. That's the hard bit.

 

[Rowsus]

Let’s start a pool on how many changes to the Bulldogs team this week. I’ll take 5.

I'll go 4.

 

[Rowsus]

Hi Rowsus, in another thread it was mentioned that a trade is worth approx $150k when trying to decide if it is worth doing.
I've seen this figure mentioned other times as well.

Is there somewhere that explains where this number comes from?
Is it just an accepted wisdom, or is there some maths behind it?

Does the current season change this value of a trade proposition?

Would leave it to Rowsus to answer in detail, always assumed it was based on the rough heuristic of:

Avg Team Value (end of year): 13.5m
Avg Team Value (start of year): 10m
Value generated during year: 3.5m
Trades: 30, thereof usually 20% used for injury- / sideways trades
3.5m / 24 = 145k / trade (broad brushstrokes)

Ignores other considerations (e.g. point generation, the goal we sometimes forget in the pursuit for cash), unequal distributions etc.

Things like this and how many points a trade should ideally generate depend on timepoint in season etc. - moves made earlier have a longer timeframe to generate cash / pts etc.

Hi jel,
the conversation surrounding the equivalency between trades, points and dollars is an old one, with no specific answer. Like most things SC, everyone has their own opinion, and unless that opinion is totally off the planet, nobody can say they are wrong.
First let me say, while a shortened season accelerates everything, I'm not sure it changes the value, or sensibilities, of trades. As mentioned in the previous post, people seem to think they can use them like water this season. I tend to think that will lead to weaker sides, with lots of compromised picks, unless they are very good, or very lucky with their trades!

The value of a trade varies with the stage of the season. Obviously a well used trade early in the season will realise more points, than a trade used later in the season.
@gutsroy has put up a nice demonstration, which is one way of looking at it.
Some people value trades as high as $200,000, which might be reasonable, if it is an early trade, and $100,000, if it is a late season trade.
Most people start the season requiring around 9 or 10 upgrades. The one up, one down theory is nice, but there are some upgrades that might cost you 1.5 down and 1 up, and even fewer that might cost you 0.5 down and 1 up. I tend to think that @gutsroy is right, and these 9 or 10 upgrades will in all likelihood cost between 22 and 24 trades.
People forget how much of a lottery finding the right Rookies can be. Looking at last season, and players that started under $200,000 here is how the better Rookies fared:
+$200-$350k: ROB, Stack, Duursma, Wilkie, Answerth, Rozee, Gibbons, Smith B, Miers, Constable, Lewis
These 11 players averaged +$250k, but only the first 2 made significantly more than $250k.
You did extremely well, if you had 7 of these 11, but even then, some of them made late charges, and their value growth was poorly timed for upgrading. There were another 15 Rookies that made between $150k-$200k. Once again, it was very tricky to spot a lot of them early enough, and some of them made their ground too late.
Let's say you are paying $525k for your Prem upgrades. Some will cost more, but some hopefully less.
You have 2 Rookies that started at $125k, and grew to $325k each. We've seen above how few do that. You go one up, one down, and turn them into a $525k Prem, and a $125k Rookie. You have used 2 trades, to effectively make $400k. So each trade was worth $200k. You might be lucky if you get to value your trades at $200k like that 4 times in a season. Later upgrades might go over a 2 week period. Something like: downgrade a $260k Rookie, and a $230k Rookie, to 2 Rookies valued at $125k, giving you $240k. You then use that $240k next Round to upgrade a $240k Rookie to a $480k Def Prem. You just used 3 to get an effective gain of around $355k, or around $118k per trade.
$200,000 might be too generous for a trade, but it might be close for an early trade. $150k might be just light, but it's a pretty close figure, across the stretch of a season, if you are looking for a round number.

 

[Rowsus]

Hi Row,

After we have traded in the "essential" rookies this week or next, and with a few extra trades this year, would it be a good idea to sideways trade premos out with high B/Es for premos with low B/Es (assuming matchups etc are favourable) to make some coin? Of course you would only do this if there is no glaring reason to use trades for that specific week, eg injuries, rookies not fat enough etc. Kind of treat it like RDT NBA where you are sidewaysing every week.

thanks mate.

Hi Juzz,
in short, no this is not ok. If you do this, you will end up with 5 or 6 compromised picks in your team, and nowhere near a complete team you are happy with. Just remember how hard it has been to reach a finished team you are happy with each season. If you start burning through trades on things like this, and one or two week injuries, you will likely have a very frustrating, and poor final team. You still need to concentrate on building, over maintaining. Every trade used on maintaining, is one less trade available for building!

 

[jaca]

Hi @jaca,with a Ruck line of Grundy, Pittonet, Comben, it might become necessary to trade Comben to Cameron. North play before Collingwood, so it might even be prudent, even if Grundy is named, to guard against a late out.
Outside of Comben, it looks like your other best avenue might be Houston.
It all comes down to, is Grundy named? Do we have faith he plays, if he is?
Outside of the Grundy dilemma, I'm not sure Cameron is a priority, as his JS has to be considered a little shaky.

Appreciate the response mate.

 

[Darkie]

Hello Darkie,
to my eye, the game is quicker, and generally there is more pressure this season, due to the shorter quarters, longer breaks, and fresher players. I also think the umpires are paying a few more free kicks than previously, which I like. Stoppages make for too much scrum play, and repeat stoppages.
With quarters 20% shorter, it would be a bit simplistic to say all the stats would also be down by 20%. Let's have a look at some, and see, comparing this season with last season.
Kicks down 22.4%
H'balls down 21.7%
Marks down 26.6% - players getting to more contest, spoiling more marks
Contested Marks down 26.6%
Goals down 17.2% - players in general less tired when shooting for goal
Behinds down 30.2%
Tackles down 26.1% - combination more frees, faster play
Frees down 15.3% - more being paid!
Bounces down 47.7% - players don't get as much freedom to run away from tired players!
Hitouts down 21.7%
I'm not sure any of this helps us from a SC point of view, unfortunately. In theory, everything is worth 25% more now, as there is 20% less happening. Theory, but not practice, as we can see.
Some will think that should read 20% higher, but reduce it to a very simple example. Say previously there were 5 scoring acts in a quarter, worth 1 point each. total given 5 points. There are now only 4 scoring acts (20% less), so each needs to be worth 1.25 points (25% more), to maintain the 5 points given.
To my eye, goals, particularly goals early in a quarter/game are getting well rewarded. I think it's even more important to find goal kicking Mids this season, rather accumulators. Contested Possession are down 21.2%, so in line with expectations. They also seem to be getting well rewarded. I still think i'd rather a Mid that kicked 1-2 goals each game, with a CP rate of say 40%, than a mid that averages 0.5 goals, with a CP rate of 55%.

Thanks very much Row. I am still reflecting on the implications of some of these stat changes, but it’s great to get some data to support/refute our suspicions, and to get your view on what it all means!

 

[jel]

Would leave it to Rowsus to answer in detail, always assumed it was based on the rough heuristic of:

Avg Team Value (end of year): 13.5m
Avg Team Value (start of year): 10m
Value generated during year: 3.5m
Trades: 30, thereof usually 20% used for injury- / sideways trades
3.5m / 24 = 145k / trade (broad brushstrokes)

Ignores other considerations (e.g. point generation, the goal we sometimes forget in the pursuit for cash), unequal distributions etc.

Things like this and how many points a trade should ideally generate depend on timepoint in season etc. - moves made earlier have a longer timeframe to generate cash / pts etc.

Hi jel,
the conversation surrounding the equivalency between trades, points and dollars is an old one, with no specific answer. Like most things SC, everyone has their own opinion, and unless that opinion is totally off the planet, nobody can say they are wrong.
First let me say, while a shortened season accelerates everything, I'm not sure it changes the value, or sensibilities, of trades. As mentioned in the previous post, people seem to think they can use them like water this season. I tend to think that will lead to weaker sides, with lots of compromised picks, unless they are very good, or very lucky with their trades!

The value of a trade varies with the stage of the season. Obviously a well used trade early in the season will realise more points, than a trade used later in the season.
@gutsroy has put up a nice demonstration, which is one way of looking at it.
Some people value trades as high as $200,000, which might be reasonable, if it is an early trade, and $100,000, if it is a late season trade.
Most people start the season requiring around 9 or 10 upgrades. The one up, one down theory is nice, but there are some upgrades that might cost you 1.5 down and 1 up, and even fewer that might cost you 0.5 down and 1 up. I tend to think that @gutsroy is right, and these 9 or 10 upgrades will in all likelihood cost between 22 and 24 trades.
People forget how much of a lottery finding the right Rookies can be. Looking at last season, and players that started under $200,000 here is how the better Rookies fared:
+$200-$350k: ROB, Stack, Duursma, Wilkie, Answerth, Rozee, Gibbons, Smith B, Miers, Constable, Lewis
These 11 players averaged +$250k, but only the first 2 made significantly more than $250k.
You did extremely well, if you had 7 of these 11, but even then, some of them made late charges, and their value growth was poorly timed for upgrading. There were another 15 Rookies that made between $150k-$200k. Once again, it was very tricky to spot a lot of them early enough, and some of them made their ground too late.
Let's say you are paying $525k for your Prem upgrades. Some will cost more, but some hopefully less.
You have 2 Rookies that started at $125k, and grew to $325k each. We've seen above how few do that. You go one up, one down, and turn them into a $525k Prem, and a $125k Rookie. You have used 2 trades, to effectively make $400k. So each trade was worth $200k. You might be lucky if you get to value your trades at $200k like that 4 times in a season. Later upgrades might go over a 2 week period. Something like: downgrade a $260k Rookie, and a $230k Rookie, to 2 Rookies valued at $125k, giving you $240k. You then use that $240k next Round to upgrade a $240k Rookie to a $480k Def Prem. You just used 3 to get an effective gain of around $355k, or around $118k per trade.
$200,000 might be too generous for a trade, but it might be close for an early trade. $150k might be just light, but it's a pretty close figure, across the stretch of a season, if you are looking for a round number.

Thanks Rowsus and gutsroy, very helpful to sort out the thought process.

 

[Rowsus]

Hi Rowsus,

I somehow brought in Nic Nat.
Do I offload for Pittonet ? Have Grundy and Terri at R3.
By completing this trade I cannot with the cash (at this stage) use it to upgrade a rookie to a premo.

The other question was what to do with Toby Greene aswell as Houston. I am thinking hanging onto Greene but he will leak cash.
Houston though I think is a regrettable pick

Hi Slammer,
at the time you asked, we weren't aware of the question mark over Grundy. What happens with him will have a large bearing on your thinking. I will return to the question when we have more info.

As to Greene and Houston, I have them both. I've never considered moving Greene, last rounds score just comes with the territory. Houston will probably get one more Round with me, and a sub 80 will see him leave.

Hi Slammer,
I just had a look at your team. It's amazing how similar your and my onfield 22 look!
I notice you have quite a few DTP's. That's a very risky move, as if those players start to get games, then they are the likely downgrade targets.
On to this week.
With Greene being injured, and having a high BE, I bit the bullet, and traded him to Petracca. I think you need to keep faith with NicNat, and maybe go Greene to Pittonet via Xerri. I know it's a chunk of change to sit at R3, but it should only be for around 3 weeks.
With the money you then I have, I would turn one of your 5 players yet to play into the best Cow you can find. 5 non-players is way too many.
Good luck.

 

[Slammer]

T

Hi Slammer,
I just had a look at your team. It's amazing how similar your and my onfield 22 look!
I notice you have quite a few DTP's. That's a very risky move, as if those players start to get games, then they are the likely downgrade targets.
On to this week.
With Greene being injured, and having a high BE, I bit the bullet, and traded him to Petracca. I think you need to keep faith with NicNat, and maybe go Greene to Pittonet via Xerri. I know it's a chunk of change to sit at R3, but it should only be for around 3 weeks.
With the money you then I have, I would turn one of your 5 players yet to play into the best Cow you can find. 5 non-players is way too many.
Good luck.

Thanks Rows
Yeah it is a tough call and I am in quite a predicament atm.
With a few more trades up our sleeve this year my plan was to sort the onfield players first.
Eg Greene, Houston Etc.
Although with many non playing rookies I am battling.

 

[Rowsus]

T


Thanks Rows
Yeah it is a tough call and I am in quite a predicament atm.
With a few more trades up our sleeve this year my plan was to sort the onfield players first.
Eg Greene, Houston Etc.
Although with many non playing rookies I am battling.

In the first 3 Rounds you always need to fix your Rookies first, then worry about any on field corrections. At the moment you will really struggle with cash generating, and that's the early goal.

 

[Slammer]

Hi Slammer,
I just had a look at your team. It's amazing how similar your and my onfield 22 look!
I notice you have quite a few DTP's. That's a very risky move, as if those players start to get games, then they are the likely downgrade targets.
On to this week.
With Greene being injured, and having a high BE, I bit the bullet, and traded him to Petracca. I think you need to keep faith with NicNat, and maybe go Greene to Pittonet via Xerri. I know it's a chunk of change to sit at R3, but it should only be for around 3 weeks.
With the money you then I have, I would turn one of your 5 players yet to play into the best Cow you can find. 5 non-players is way too many.
Good luck.

Thanks Rows
I owe you a beer
Took your advice and brought in Pittonet
The cash cow I then brought in was
Simpkin ?

 

[Ironhawk]

Thanks Rows
I owe you a beer
Took your advice and brought in Pittonet
The cash cow I then brought in was
Simpkin ?

Go Team 10!

Any thoughts on strategy changes due to the future double game for ESS/MEL players? I am assuming we should be using most/all trades on players from these clubs? Guess it depends a bit on when this match is rescheduled.