Opinion Questions For Rowsus

[Darkie]

Hi Rowsus,

Would you happen to have a list of successful rookies from 2014 and further back?

I'm interested in how important it is that they score well in round one (or their first game of the season, perhaps).

I've been through some of the successes I can remember from 2014 to check their round one scores, but would prefer to expand the sample to prior years, and/or be more comprehensive if possible.

I think this will be useful in assessing corrective trades.

Thanks in advance.

 

[dyii]

Rowsus, has Swan's first game changed your opinion of him? No sideways trades are one of the golden rules of SC, but an aggressive trade from say Griffen (most likely)/Ablett (considering)/Goddard (probably not) will let me easily upgrade Newnes/Lumumba to a Smith. is this a case of chasing points?

Cheers mate

 

[Rowsus]

Hi Rowsus,

I thought I was a genius including N Haynes in my backline. At QTR time he was the highest scoring Giant with a few intercept marks etc. Then did bugger all after that ending on 67.
Anyway I too have Rocky and was thinking to trade him and A Saad for R Gray and Garlett/Vandenberg/Heeney/Newton?

Thoughts appreciated Rowsus

Hi Juzzo,
keeping in mind that dollar production is (slightly) more important than points with your 2nd selection, I'd go in this order:
vandenBerg, Heeney, Newton, Garlett - I hope we both have better luck next week!

 

[Rowsus]

Rowsus, hope your round 1 has so far been ok.

I noticed that you have Lycett in your fwd line (like me) - considering the now seemingly apparent changes in the ruck scoring, is he still an efficient/useful addition to our teams? (Bont is not far away from him in price and looks like increasing in value very quickly comparatively!)

Cheers in advance.

Hi PC,
no my Rnd 1 has been sh!tful!
14 "Keepers" in my team, and I've only had 5 100+ scores so far, and one of those was from McIntosh! That's 4 out of 13 Keepers to play so far managing 100+, with Bartel to come. Crapola!
No, I'm not going to knee jerk (I'm not..... I'm not..... I'm not going to knee jerk....... no knee jerking).
I decided the Bont was too expensive given my view on his expected scoring, so I'm not calling him a 100+ player on the back of 1 game, particularly a winning game.

As to the Rucks - I will be posting a thread in about 10 hours about the "historical" signifigance of this round, in SC Ruck scoring.

 

[Rowsus]

Hi Rowsus,

Would you happen to have a list of successful rookies from 2014 and further back?

I'm interested in how important it is that they score well in round one (or their first game of the season, perhaps).

I've been through some of the successes I can remember from 2014 to check their round one scores, but would prefer to expand the sample to prior years, and/or be more comprehensive if possible.

I think this will be useful in assessing corrective trades.

Thanks in advance.

Hi Darkie,
I don't have that information readily at hand, but I will pm you later today about how you can fairly quickly put most of it together, with around 30 to minutes work, if your memory is ok, or 1.5 - 2 hours work, if it's stretching your memory.

My gut feel on it is, that while it is a good sign if they score well, there will probably just as many Rookies that scored poorly Round 1/first game, and went on to be good picks, as there are Rookies that poored poorly Round 1/first game, and turned it around and became good earners. There must have been a few good Rookies that had vests in Round 1/first game, and a few that flew, then dropped like a stone.

 

[Prochard]

Hey Rowsus, just realised that the last minute shuffling has ruined my bye structure. How many premiums and rookies should we run with in round 11,12,13, what are the ideal numbers?

 

[Rowsus]

Rowsus, has Swan's first game changed your opinion of him? No sideways trades are one of the golden rules of SC, but an aggressive trade from say Griffen (most likely)/Ablett (considering)/Goddard (probably not) will let me easily upgrade Newnes/Lumumba to a Smith. is this a case of chasing points?

Cheers mate

dyii,
I really think 1 game is not enough to change my opinion on any Premium/Keeper type player. Rookies, yes it can be enough, because we have to react quickly with them.
I expected Swans early season to be ok, and he would drop off as the season went on, so he hasn't surprised me there. Griffen is the type of player that get's his high-ish averages from his occassional monster score. Those type of players will have more sub 90's than the more consistent players, that average around the same. It would be quick to cut him on one game.
Newnes played terribly, but scored ok, for a terrible game. Lumumba might be a bigger worry than Newnes, as he has a history of playing pretty much how he did yesterday. Smith was playing in a white-wash. While I think he can/will be a top 8 Def, I wouldn't want to judge him on the back of that one "out of the box" for the team, game.
For the most part, it does sound like point chasing. I could vaguely support someone going Lumumba to Smith, but the others seem like point chasing/impatience.

 

[Rowsus]

Hey Rowsus, just realised that the last minute shuffling has ruined my bye structure. How many premiums and rookies should we run with in round 11,12,13, what are the ideal numbers?

Hey Pro,
I wouldn't be too concerned, there are a lot of trades between now and the byes. Your bye structure should change dramatically between now and then. I don't believe there are ideal numbers as such, just doing the best you can to avoid a donut, but keeping in mind, if that donut is basically a Rookie score, it is disappointing, but better than bending your previous selections just to have avoided that Rookie donut.

 

[Bobbie]

Hi PC,
no my Rnd 1 has been sh!tful!
14 "Keepers" in my team, and I've only had 5 100+ scores so far, and one of those was from McIntosh! That's 4 out of 13 Keepers to play so far managing 100+, with Bartel to come. Crapola!
No, I'm not going to knee jerk (I'm not..... I'm not..... I'm not going to knee jerk....... no knee jerking).
I decided the Bont was too expensive given my view on his expected scoring, so I'm not calling him a 100+ player on the back of 1 game, particularly a winning game.

As to the Rucks - I will be posting a thread in about 10 hours about the "historical" signifigance of this round, in SC Ruck scoring.

I'll be interested to read your thread! I have Goldy and McEvoy (the latter a forced choice) and I'm wondering if it's worth downgrading.

 

[anfa18]

Hi Rowsus, most of us here have the same opinion in regards to not sideways trading premiums. I'm wondering what your initial thoughts are on Ablett. It's the first time we've seen him this year and he's had doubts all pre-season. We know he'll get better as the weeks go on, but is it worth having a 734k player scoring between 100-120 for 3-6 games? I'm also interested in what his price would roughly drop to if he averages 115 for the first 6 games.

Thanks.

 

[Rowsus]

Hi Rowsus, most of us here have the same opinion in regards to not sideways trading premiums. I'm wondering what your initial thoughts are on Ablett. It's the first time we've seen him this year and he's had doubts all pre-season. We know he'll get better as the weeks go on, but is it worth having a 734k player scoring between 100-120 for 3-6 games? I'm also interested in what his price would roughly drop to if he averages 115 for the first 6 games.

Thanks.

Hi anfa18,
I think if you are of the opinion that Ablett can score 110-115/game, then take it back to his more historical level of scoring, he was a good pick up from Round 1. While his price will drop to around $620k by Round 6, if he is averaging 115 by then, people forget how few players score at that 115 and higher level each season. If his price stays at $600k+, and you try to reach him, using only fattened Rookies, it's likely to be a 3 trade job.
If you believe he will only average around 105 in that time, his price would drop to around $584K by Round 6.
I agree with people that say he looked restricted, and might have been Lucky to score his 119. Keep in mind, he did get 16 CP's in his 19 possessions! It mightn't have been that lucky. I think anyone who started him, would be making the wrong move in trading him out now.

 

[Darkie]

Hi Darkie,
I don't have that information readily at hand, but I will pm you later today about how you can fairly quickly put most of it together, with around 30 to minutes work, if your memory is ok, or 1.5 - 2 hours work, if it's stretching your memory.

My gut feel on it is, that while it is a good sign if they score well, there will probably just as many Rookies that scored poorly Round 1/first game, and went on to be good picks, as there are Rookies that poored poorly Round 1/first game, and turned it around and became good earners. There must have been a few good Rookies that had vests in Round 1/first game, and a few that flew, then dropped like a stone.

Thanks Row, that sounds good ... I guess we will see how good my memory is

 

[THCLT]

Hi Rowsus,

I won't beat around the bush this time...Is it worth persisting with the expensive Ruck Premiums?

This new ruck scoring system have really levelled out the playing field amongst the rucks division and the art and craft of a 'skilled' ruckman has been lost in this process as they are not being rewarded adequately. I expected the scoring of Rucks to be lower but seriously NOT this low, picking a Ruck score is like buying a lottery ticket. I just don't think the difference between a high scoring ruckman (say 100) and a low scoring ruckman (say 70) is worth the initial $ investment. In my opinion, they should have adjusted the pricing of ALL Rucks at the start of the season to reflect their TRUE value with the 'negative' effect that this new rule was going to have. Why implement a rule change that WILL negatively affect a player ability to score points and yet still priced them based on averages that was obtained under the OLD scoring system? If this measure was taken, I think that all Rucks should of been priced no more than 500K at the start of the season.

If I was to trade I could classed it as a 'correction trade' due to CD lack of clarity of the new ruck scoring rule

I need your calming influence and wisdom...

 

[Juzzo]

Hi Rowsus,

I have Adamson as FD.
I have to trade out Rocky and maybe A Saad (forwards).
As I have Adamson my cash generation could suffer, would it be a wise move to employ a stepping stone like Rich so I don't have to generate as much cash to upgrade to a full premium? Or just get a premium for Rocky? Or maybe get 2 rookies, ie Vandenberg and Heeney (my rookie selection was poor) and have cash for the week after?


Cheers, hope we crush them in round 2

 

[Slammer]

Hey Slammer,
I too have both Ablett and Rocky. I already have Pendles, and he does look the obvious choice for you.
I'm going Rocky to vandenBerg, as I think I'll need both trades next week, and even if vdB stinks it up with a 40, he'll have a pretty decent negative B/E. I then just decide if I "fix" Miller or Oxley this week, or sit on my cash, until I assess after Rnd 2.

Yeah Rowsus..I am thinking Pendles but have a average performing backline in Lumumba, Broadbent (POD that may be a failure), Newnes and MJ (should improve)
I have Fyfe and Selwood but should I stick with Pendles and only gain a little cash or trade to a JPK, Wines or Lewis to make more cash to improve backline.
Then I would look at trying to get Pendles in later. Without looking at it too closely I am just thinking a Rocky to a Wines/Lewis this week then I should have enough cash to upgrade two possible failures in the backline.
Apart from Miller and Cripps I seem to have chosen the right rookies.
Any thoughts appreciated

 

[Loboda1963]

Hey Rowsus

Hope Easter was great for you.
I got Ryan Griffen believing he was great value and that the likes of Treloar, Ward and Shiel would get the tag. On watching the match last Saturday he was tagged by Weller and it just seems like he cannot handle the tag. Reduces his output and scoring. Seemed to spend time in the forward line as well.
Is he still worthwhile holding onto long term??
Thanks
Lobo

 

[Bob Loblaw]

Hey Rowsus, I see you are overflowing with requests. Hope I'm not putting you under the pump but if you've got time these are my questions....

1.) Parker Vs Sloane
Parker
Ticks:Parker averaged 120 last 13 rounds or 127 (take out 2* Hawks matches). Playing more permenantly midfield.
Crosses: never been tagged. He won't be tagged a whole lot I don't think with a Kennedy and hennerbery before him. Is it too risky expecting a player to average 115+ without him ever being tagged before?

Sloane:
Ticks: Consitant and a ridiculously easy draw early. Is it worth picking him in hope he will go gangbusters early.
Crosses: average at handling a tag.

2.) Smith
- Playing a permanent wing possy by the looks
- Super talent, super damaging
- Last year copped a hocking hard tag and still scored 90.
- Super easy early draw

What was it that lead to his inconsistency last year?
- Natural inconstancy? (Will experience remove those lower scores?)
- Role change
- Tag

Is it worth trading Newnes (av 80-85) to Smith now Rocky is down.
Smith could easily do a Hanley and average 105-110 early I think. Or is this too unrealistic?

Lots of questions, if anyone else has an opinion I'd love to hear it.

 

[whiteTiga2k]

Hi Rowsus,

I have Rocky and need to trade him. Do you think trading down to Lewis is a big call? Do you rate Jordan? I haven't got the stats in my head but from my understanding, from the midway point of last year, he was a top 10 mid all the way till the last game. I can see him really continuing that this year and I really should of backed that and selected him for round 1.

Can I also get your honest opinion on Jack Newnes? I looked up his NAB numbers and they were really uncontested, do you see this improving at all? How about players like Geary? I remember a few years ago before injury plagued him, he was a very decent SC player.

Given a choice between Lewis and Wines, who would you choose?

 

[Monya Meow Meow]

Hi Row, need your opinion on this one.
I'm not intending to rage trade but I believe MJ was used as a lock-down defender against Port and thus his scores suffered. With Dawson out for quite some time, do you see this trend bucking?
Quite like the looks of Doc and Geary over the weekend. They seem to be playing a much more free flowing rebounding role?
If the same thing happens this round, would you trade out MJ for one of them and pocket some cash?
Thanks mate!

 

[THCLT]

Hi Rowsus,

I won't beat around the bush this time...Is it worth persisting with the expensive Ruck Premiums?

This new ruck scoring system have really levelled out the playing field amongst the rucks division and the art and craft of a 'skilled' ruckman has been lost in this process as they are not being rewarded adequately. I expected the scoring of Rucks to be lower but seriously NOT this low, picking a Ruck score is like buying a lottery ticket. I just don't think the difference between a high scoring ruckman (say 100) and a low scoring ruckman (say 70) is worth the initial $ investment. In my opinion, they should have adjusted the pricing of ALL Rucks at the start of the season to reflect their TRUE value with the 'negative' effect that this new rule was going to have. Why implement a rule change that WILL negatively affect a player ability to score points and yet still priced them based on averages that was obtained under the OLD scoring system? If this measure was taken, I think that all Rucks should of been priced no more than 500K at the start of the season.

If I was to trade I could classed it as a 'correction trade' due to CD lack of clarity of the new ruck scoring rule

I need your calming influence and wisdom...

After reading your 'Rucks - New Scoring' thread and a good night sleep, I've decided to adopt your approach of suck it up and wear the pain.

I still would like some clarity on how much a H2A is worth under the new system...is it 4 or 5 points