Opinion Questions For Rowsus

nath_99 · 29 Mar 2021

Hey Rowsus,

Long term reader, first time poster. I always like your articles from a stats point of view. (I'm involved at Community Football in the Coaching/Stats field).

I was wondering if you knew of or where I could locate some of the formulas to calculate:

BE;
Proj $ rise
Proj $ fall
How to work out how much a player is priced at, average wise. (Ie. "Neale is priced at 130")

I've really enjoyed your posts on "expectations" and this has helped me not to get sucked in by the "flash in the pan" players.

Thanks mate,

Nath

whiteTiga2k · 29 Mar 2021

Hi Rowsus,

Do you see any value in Tex as a money maker for future upgrades?

Considering trading Neale (he will go) for Titch, Boak, possibly Mills or Ridley... and even thought of making money in Tex.

gutsroy · 29 Mar 2021

Hi Rowsus,
Am almost certain this has already been covered.
Was trying to think of an approximate value of a trade in terms of points generated.
Does the below seem reasonable:

Assume 10 spots to upgrade on field.
Assume 2.25 trades per upgrade (one up, one down, some inefficiency)
So need about 23 trades for the core, rest for injuries, sidewaysing, whatever.
Assume on-field upgrade nets 50 pts/wk.
Assume you do the 10 upgrades end of rds 6-14

Rd 6 16 weeks of premo scores
Rd 7 15
Rd 8 14
Rd 9 13
Rd 10 12
Rd 11 11
Rd 12 (no upgrades)
Rd 13 9*2 (two upgrades)
Rd 14 8*2 (two upgrades)

115 wks of premo benefit * 50 pts
5750 pts / 23 trades

= 250 pts per core trade on avg

The other trades outside the core for injuries etc. are a little different etc., but is something like that a reasonable way to view it? Or flawed?

dicksilverman · 30 Mar 2021

Morning Row, hope you’re doing great. simple question, to trade Neale or not? To the eye he looks out of sorts. But his history says he can bounce back. Is trading him out to potentially get him back in later a stupid play?
Thanks mate, appreciate your insight as always!

jaca · 30 Mar 2021

Hi @Rowsus. is this one of those “first signs of trouble” for Nat Fyfe?

Socrates2 · 30 Mar 2021

dicksilverman said:

I think he has said previously that if you think he can average 115 for the rest of the year then keep.

Crowls · 30 Mar 2021

Hi Rowsus,
Love your work, thank you for all your contributions. Had Danger at F1 and benched him for 3wks got to loophole Grundy VC and take Berry's score which i was quietly confident I would lose max of 150points for benching before including any VC opportunities. Loved the discussion with Gustroy on cost/benefit of trade.

More troubling is working out benefit/costs for Cripps and Phillips. Cripps was a potential m8/9 decision to run with him. Thinking he was 80-90% likely to be a 95 avg with potential upside back to 110. Seeing the performances and finding out he is getting injections to play has me sceptical it will be worthwhile and money can be spent elsewhere. Trading to Dunkley with my spare trade this week. I felt Dunkley risk was about sustaining a 100+ average in Dogs midfield rotation. At this time it appears this is definitely possible. So see trading up a 10-15pt per week advantage over Cripps for balance of season. 18*15 =180-270 point advantage over holding Cripps. Trade makes sense.

Phillips I saw as a F6/7 keeper who should do 85-95. At breakout age and experience, elite endurance and new team and rules capable of increasing his scoring history. Still think this is a possibility. After two rounds he scores 90-56 avg 73. So assuming eoy 90 avg he must score 92.3 for rest of year 97.8 to achieve 95 avg. Still a possibility but not as confident.

So my thinking this week the best trade is Cripps to Dunkley and keep Phillips. Phillips still has potential (20-25%) to reach 95 avg. If he fails it is smaller loss than Cripps to Prem Mid. With a lower injury and missing game risk as well.

Would appreciate feedback on my logic. Cheers

Santoz · 30 Mar 2021

Crowls said:

Hi Rowsus,
Love your work, thank you for all your contributions. Had Danger at F1 and benched him for 3wks got to loophole Grundy VC and take Berry's score which i was quietly confident I would lose max of 150points for benching before including any VC opportunities. Loved the discussion with Gustroy on cost/benefit of trade.

More troubling is working out benefit/costs for Cripps and Phillips. Cripps was a potential m8/9 decision to run with him. Thinking he was 80-90% likely to be a 95 avg with potential upside back to 110. Seeing the performances and finding out he is getting injections to play has me sceptical it will be worthwhile and money can be spent elsewhere. Trading to Dunkley with my spare trade this week. I felt Dunkley risk was about sustaining a 100+ average in Dogs midfield rotation. At this time it appears this is definitely possible. So see trading up a 10-15pt per week advantage over Cripps for balance of season. 18*15 =180-270 point advantage over holding Cripps. Trade makes sense.

Phillips I saw as a F6/7 keeper who should do 85-95. At breakout age and experience, elite endurance and new team and rules capable of increasing his scoring history. Still think this is a possibility. After two rounds he scores 90-56 avg 73. So assuming eoy 90 avg he must score 92.3 for rest of year 97.8 to achieve 95 avg. Still a possibility but not as confident.

So my thinking this week the best trade is Cripps to Dunkley and keep Phillips. Phillips still has potential (20-25%) to reach 95 avg. If he fails it is smaller loss than Cripps to Prem Mid. With a lower injury and missing game risk as well.

Would appreciate feedback on my logic. Cheers

My biggest concern regarding Cripps is that the mail is accurate and they're playing him to keep their season alive. As soon as it looks like they're out of the running for finals they'll put him away for good or if they still in the running that he may need a midseason spell to freshen him up for a run at finals. His injury suggests he misses games each season and I'm not running the risk any longer.

dicksilverman · 30 Mar 2021

Socrates2 said:

Thank you. I guess the question to the answer is ‘can he?’

jel · 30 Mar 2021

gutsroy said:

Just wondering if 50pts / week is too ambitious.
For rookies with sufficient $$ generation I'm guessing you want them to average 60pts/wk, so you looking to get 10 premos @ 110pts/wk
Last season there were only 21 player who got an avg >110 (including Boak & Adams who are just under) and played more than 10 games.
This included 4 Rucks, 16 Mids, 1 Def and no Fwds.

gutsroy · 30 Mar 2021

nath_99 said:

Hi Nath,
I'll have a go and I'm sure Rowsus will correct any shortcomings.
The formula for the prices in a normal season is NP = 0.75*OP + 0.25*(3 RD AVG)*MN

Where:
OP = Old Price (price going into the round you're looking at)
NP =New Price (price at the end of the round you're looking at
MN = Magic Number

MN is a number which varies between around $5,400/pt at the start of the year (Neale with an average of 134.4 is priced at $721,800, which would give you a starting MN of around $5,370/pt) and ends up around 4,900-ish.

It all depends on the year, the main thing is that it drops in season, the biggest drops coming in the early rds as the rookie prices rise (and the prices of the remaining players in the pool have to reduce to o***et and keep a constant Total Price Pool (TPP)
Looks like they are estimating a Magic Number around the $5,120/pt mark for next week, for example.

BE: The score at which the player's OP = NP

Using the formula above:

NP = OP = 0.75*OP + 0.25*(3 RD AVG)*MN

0.25*OP = 0.25*(3 RD AVG)*MN (cancel out the 0.25 on both sides)

OP = (3 RD AVG)*MN

OP/MN = 3 RD AVG

And the 3 RD AVG = (score of round n-2 + score of round n-1 + BE score of current round n)/3

OP/MN = (score of round n-2 + score of round n-1 + BE score of current round n)/3 (rearranging to isolate BE score of current rd)

3*OP/MN - (score of round n-2 + score of round n-1) = BE score of current round n

Using an example: Lachie Neale

OP = $721,800
MN = $5,120 (currently, roughly)
Score round n-2 =77
Score round n-1 = 75

3*721,800/5,120 - (77+75) = BE score of current rd 3 = 271

BE score of current rd = 271, which is what the SuperCoach site shows.

To figure out the expected MN in any one week, take a couple of players' BEs and work back the other way:

MN = (3*OP) / (score of round n-2 + score of round n-1 + BE score of current round n)

In terms of projected rise and fall, it's always about the difference between what you think they'll score and the BE.

If you think they'll go 30 higher than the BE of that week, for example:

NP(+30) = 0.75*OP + 0.25*(3 RD AVG B)*MN, where the 3 RD AVG B includes the +30 vs the BE and bumps the AVG up 10 pts.

NP(+30) - NP(BE) = 0.25 * MN * (Expected Score - BE score)/3 = 0.25 * MN * (30)/3

If you assume an MN of around $5,100/pt to make things simple, then you get (0.25 * 5,100/3) * (Expected Score - BE Score)

And (0.25*5,100/3) ends up at around $425/pt.

As a rough rule of thumb, take the differential between your expectation of their score minus the BE and multiply that by $425/pt to get a rough estimate of their increase / decrease. (You can make it more exact by calculating the actual current MN, but for a simple rule of thumb, the 425 will give you a good enough idea unless it's a really tight one. You can use 415 after about rd 6.

Lachie Neale:
BE: 271
Your expectation: Let's say 110
Expected Price Drop assuming $5,100/pt would be (110-271)pts * $425/pt = $-68,425 price change

(Expected Price Drop using the more accurate current MN would be (110-271)/3 * 0.25 * 5,120 = -68,694 price change)

Hope that helps and if I've buggered anything up, those smarter than me will correct it for you. Good luck

Buddy Starmart · 30 Mar 2021

Is Tex worth a trade in would need to be able manage a big increase about 200k over a few weeks by close to the byes

Rowsus · 31 Mar 2021

TommyGobbler said:

Ironhawk said:

Hi TommyGobbler,
it's certainly something I take into consideration. The same principal from pre-season still applies for me. The higher the players ownership, the more convinced I need to be, that they'll be a good pick, before I trade them in. When someone has ownership as high as Dusty's, I'm more likely to sit back, and see what happens. Yes, I might miss the boat, but it's also possible I might make a gain on 65-70% of the Coaches, too. I'm not changing my mind on Dusty being a sub 110 player, on the back of 2 games information. I'm happy to see where it goes, while a great quantity of people trading Neale or Cripps out, are likely to push Dusty's ownership up to that 70% mark!!!
Mills having that one good score shouldn't put you off him. You have him pegged for 105 from here, and his low ownership means if you have him, and he exceeds your estimate, it is a really good win! Mills has more upside than Dusty, in my eyes. He's in the back end of the break out window, where as Dusty's scoring pattern seems pretty well set, outside of any potential spike season/s.

Rowsus · 31 Mar 2021

zeus123 said:

Hey zeus123, thanks for the good words.
Being a Melbourne supporter, I'm pretty happy to be 2-0. I think our Forward line is a bit fragile, and the good Defences will pick us apart. Weideman and Brown will make a difference, but I don't see us looking like a top 4 team, until we can get some better Forward system going. Hopefully Weid and Brown can work on that in the 2nd half of the season, and potentially give us a top 4 crack next season. Jackson and Pickett have both improved more than I expected to this stage. Both have a long way to go, but it's good to see them ahead of schedule!
T Mac is a good swing player, and important to our team, for sure. He drops more marks than I would like, but aside from that, I think he's pretty important to us. If T Mac's marking was a bit better, i'd happily have him in my SC team. 2015-2018 he averaged around 7 Marks/game. The last 3 seasons it has dropped to just over 4!

Rowsus · 31 Mar 2021

Pieman17 said:

Hey Pieman17, I'm well thanks, and I hope you are too.
You didn't want Cripps, he's not looking like the player you thought you were buying, and there seems to be underlying reasons why that will also continue in the near future. Sounds like a perfect excuse for a correction trade to me.
I'm not in love with the Tex option. If the $225,500 loose change it gives you can have an immediate, very meaningful effect, then that might change matters. Other than that, I'm not sure you're getting your full value from that option.
He's kicked 5 Goals and 6 Goals this season. He's played 205 games. Prior to this season he has 9 bags of 5 Goals, 2 bags of 6, and 1 bag of 7, in 203 games. His last bag of 6+ goals, before last Round was 102 games ago, Round 21 in 2015, against Brisbane.
Assuming the $225k won't get you to another decent Keeper, my preference order on your options is 2, 1 and 3.
Good luck, I hope you jump the right way.

Rowsus · 31 Mar 2021

Slammer said:

Hey Slams,
while I agree Taranto and Phillips are potentially problems, I'd give them more time yet. Both have 1 reasonable score, and 1 poor score, so the jury is out on which one is the more correct one for each of them.
At the moment, I'd hold the 2nd trade.

Rowsus · 31 Mar 2021

nath_99 said:

Hey Nath,
I'm not sure if it has changed in the past few season, but here is what I work on.

BE = Price x 3 / MN - last score - score before that.
eg Neale: 721,800 x 3 / 5,120 - 75 - 77 = 270.9

Projected price rises/falls are totally dependent on the players projected scores. I generally have no faith in projected scores, particularly Rookies, as they are just projected to score their average! I once saw a Projected Score on SC for Roughie to score 187, and he had never scored anything like that, to that stage of his career.

If a player has a BE of 100, and a projected score of 120, then his projected price rise (because his projected score is over his BE) is:
(120 - 100) x 440 = +$8,800

If a player has a BE of 140 and projected score of 90, then his projected price drop (because his projected score is under his BE) is:
(90 - 140) x 440 = -$22,000

A player is priced to score at his Price/MN. In Round 1 Neale is priced at basically his last years average, as is every player, except for rookies, or players that played less than 7 games. Players with less than 7 games get a discount on their price, depending on exactly how many games they played. Once the season is well underway, you can just use 5000 as a good approximate. Joe Bloggs is priced at $450,000, so he is priced to score at 450,000 / 5,000 = 90.

The MN changes quite dramatically after Round 3, when the first price rises hit. At this time it usually drops around 5%, but is largely dependent on how well the Rookies score. The higher the Rookies score, as a group, the more their prices rise, the more the MN drops. As the Rookies price rises become less dramatic, the MN drops less and less, until it gets to the stage it can actually fluctuate up and down a little. The MN started at 5,372 this season. A 5% drop would see it go to 5,103. I'm using 5,120 as an approximate, which happened to closely coincide with what SC are using.

I hope this has been helpful.

Rowsus · 31 Mar 2021

whiteTiga2k said:

Hi wT2k,
yes, but I wouldn't change structure to get him.
I couldn't say i'd like to see a Neale to Tex trade, unless the loose change was used to turn an underperforming Rookie/Stepping Stone, into a more reliable Keeper, and getting a Rookie off the field. In essence, you would be turning Neale into the Keeper, and the poor performing Rookie into Tex. You really need to be able to use that loose change quickly, and well, or it's not worth having Tex replace a Premium for a number of weeks.

Rowsus · 31 Mar 2021

gutsroy said:

jel said:

Hi gutsroy,
I certainly do like the thought and effort you put into your questions.
The problem with your model above, is that you have that team reaching full Prem in Round 14. From my memory, that is pretty much unheard of. One of the problems with achieving that is, you need some of the Rookies you brought in as downgrade options to fatten up properly, before you can trade them out again. The "second Round" of rookies generally aren't as good as the first Round, and take a little longer to fatten. The really good teams might reach full Prem in Rounds in 16 or 17, but Rounds 18 or 19 are more common. That might drop your trade value down to around the 220 area, using your numbers. The other problem is the +50 benefit. It might average out a little less than that, too.

Slammer · 31 Mar 2021

Rowsus said:

Thanks Rows
With the possibility of Rowe and/or Bergman getting dropped . Is it worth turning one of them into a Tex or Impey with second trade ?
If so, which do you prefer?

Opinion Questions For Rowsus

nath_99

whiteTiga2k

gutsroy

dicksilverman

jaca

Socrates2

Crowls

Santoz

dicksilverman

jel

gutsroy

Buddy Starmart

Rowsus

Statistician

Rowsus

Statistician

Rowsus

Statistician

Rowsus

Statistician

Rowsus

Statistician

Rowsus

Statistician

Rowsus

Statistician

Slammer