Opinion SC 2021: Rate My Team
- Thread starter KLo30
- Start date
- Joined
- 6 Jan 2013
- Messages
- 19,076
- Likes
- 80,346
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
I think the secret is to make a new team everyday 😀
Only today I have managed to get Seagull , Neale , Gawn & Danger all in.
Between this , MPM & Lock N Load comp I must have had 50% of the players in my team at one stage.
And all of it is still pretty pointless anyway until we see the Round 1 teams.
Only today I have managed to get Seagull , Neale , Gawn & Danger all in.
Between this , MPM & Lock N Load comp I must have had 50% of the players in my team at one stage.
And all of it is still pretty pointless anyway until we see the Round 1 teams.
My crack at an all ruck rookie team.
Probably unrealistic as I'd like to start Gawn which would be at Hunters expense (maybe) then Gaff > Ziebell and Dunkley > Daniher with Danger to the mids.
Feels like I have all my eggs in one basket. I'm not expecting the scores for rucks this year to be like last year but there's some opportunities there.
Probably unrealistic as I'd like to start Gawn which would be at Hunters expense (maybe) then Gaff > Ziebell and Dunkley > Daniher with Danger to the mids.
Feels like I have all my eggs in one basket. I'm not expecting the scores for rucks this year to be like last year but there's some opportunities there.
- Joined
- 21 Mar 2019
- Messages
- 2,295
- Likes
- 6,291
Thought I'd dabble in the dark side and have a look at what two rookie rucks + Gawn might look like:
Doesn't seem too bad at face value although there are only 11 premos and there is obviously some reliance on some players with shaky job security. Seems to be more of an exercise in fluffing up some low value rookie picks into the 200k+ range more than anything, although there is some cash spare which could potentially turn one of the mid pricers into premo #12.
Doesn't seem too bad at face value although there are only 11 premos and there is obviously some reliance on some players with shaky job security. Seems to be more of an exercise in fluffing up some low value rookie picks into the 200k+ range more than anything, although there is some cash spare which could potentially turn one of the mid pricers into premo #12.
See the problem here is that you've added a variable to move the goal posts. Adding Clark and giving him scoring beyond his starting price is essentially adding a 3rd player so the first group can close the gap.
I mean I can take the same group and change the assumption so that Ridley and Dusty are both 115 players and all of a sudden the margin becomes 35 points a week to group B. Need to be very careful of creating scenarios to reinforce what you want to be true and muddying the original actual comparison.
Obviously at the end of the day we make 30 choices that are all essentially related to each other but that makes any rationale comparison impossible.
Ultimately, if you take a rookie instead of Gawn you've got ~620k to apply to the rest of your team. If you get fair value with that money, be it upgrading 6 low end premiums to high end premiums, upgrading one rookie to a premium, getting a back rookie off the field, picking a couple of midpricers, none of that really matters as long as you get fair value, the rookie over Gawn is going to be a more productive allocation of that first 124k if he averages as well as most would agree a ruck rookie will than Gawn at 140.
Totally agree with you on the elevated risk, it's really the only reason (I'd pay captaincy also) that starting Gawn and, to a lesser degree, Grundy even makes any sense, the ruck position with 1 bench spot and its isolation from other positions makes it a very risky area of the team to take chances.
Upgrading is also an issue, though there is obviously the case of if I take Neale instead of Gawn that I'm in the same end position, again if you've got fair value from that 620k you should be in the same position on this side of the coin. For mine the bigger issue with the upgrading is that the risk of the rookies compounds the longer they're in your team so you end you end up being forced to target the ruck upgrades which, as you said, can take a lot of trades, especially if Gawn does come out smashing 140 every week and with only two spots their relative value is just greater than other positions!
My personal focus is having to pick as few rookie defenders as possible and to field even fewer! I'd also love to pick Grundy, Gawn, Meek, Flynn and Hunter and have them all on the field though, the ultimate conundrum!
I mean I can take the same group and change the assumption so that Ridley and Dusty are both 115 players and all of a sudden the margin becomes 35 points a week to group B. Need to be very careful of creating scenarios to reinforce what you want to be true and muddying the original actual comparison.
Obviously at the end of the day we make 30 choices that are all essentially related to each other but that makes any rationale comparison impossible.
Ultimately, if you take a rookie instead of Gawn you've got ~620k to apply to the rest of your team. If you get fair value with that money, be it upgrading 6 low end premiums to high end premiums, upgrading one rookie to a premium, getting a back rookie off the field, picking a couple of midpricers, none of that really matters as long as you get fair value, the rookie over Gawn is going to be a more productive allocation of that first 124k if he averages as well as most would agree a ruck rookie will than Gawn at 140.
Totally agree with you on the elevated risk, it's really the only reason (I'd pay captaincy also) that starting Gawn and, to a lesser degree, Grundy even makes any sense, the ruck position with 1 bench spot and its isolation from other positions makes it a very risky area of the team to take chances.
Upgrading is also an issue, though there is obviously the case of if I take Neale instead of Gawn that I'm in the same end position, again if you've got fair value from that 620k you should be in the same position on this side of the coin. For mine the bigger issue with the upgrading is that the risk of the rookies compounds the longer they're in your team so you end you end up being forced to target the ruck upgrades which, as you said, can take a lot of trades, especially if Gawn does come out smashing 140 every week and with only two spots their relative value is just greater than other positions!
My personal focus is having to pick as few rookie defenders as possible and to field even fewer! I'd also love to pick Grundy, Gawn, Meek, Flynn and Hunter and have them all on the field though, the ultimate conundrum!
- Joined
- 6 Jul 2012
- Messages
- 4,890
- Likes
- 11,150
- AFL Club
- West Coast
What is unknown in this calc is what value you make from the players as well. Jordan could make $150k, the rookie could make $150k.
Now does hunter make $225k-250k, needs 7 games at 70. The challenge is if Marshall does come back round 4, Hunter could be sharing ruck @ 50ppg or dropped and now you haven't made money much money, yet ahead on points for now. However you need two more trades to make $150k.
I wouldn't hesitate in going R2 rook if there was more confidence in 7 rounds performance. I wonder if Meek is better combined with Briggs. With Freo injuries, Darcy is going to play more forward, however, does Meek score 50 or 70. Better JS than Hunter although Hunter could be prime ruck if Marshall/Ryder returns are delayed.
Now does hunter make $225k-250k, needs 7 games at 70. The challenge is if Marshall does come back round 4, Hunter could be sharing ruck @ 50ppg or dropped and now you haven't made money much money, yet ahead on points for now. However you need two more trades to make $150k.
I wouldn't hesitate in going R2 rook if there was more confidence in 7 rounds performance. I wonder if Meek is better combined with Briggs. With Freo injuries, Darcy is going to play more forward, however, does Meek score 50 or 70. Better JS than Hunter although Hunter could be prime ruck if Marshall/Ryder returns are delayed.
One of the positives for Hunter is you can effectively handcuff him with Marshall, if Marshall comes back and is fine he's a strong upgrade target and he goes a long way to alleviating the risk involved with the rookie rucks. He might kill you cow but he does provide your cover from that point on if you go with him.
I still want to challenge this a little bit! 
I like the idea of using 'fair value for $$$' as a yardstick but I think we still get stuck. Say above if I didn't use Clark but just rookies instead.
I could redistribute 400k of my Gawn cash to turn a 50 average, 120k DEF rookie into a premium. But that premium is not averaging 130, which is what they would need for my redistribution to achieve fair value. If there was a DEF premium that I thought was so good in a value-for-money sense they'd be in the side already!
So to sum up, given I've already got 11 solid premiums, I don't know that it's actually possible to use that Gawn cash and get fair value for it by turning other rookies/mid-pricers into premiums.
I like the idea of using 'fair value for $$$' as a yardstick but I think we still get stuck. Say above if I didn't use Clark but just rookies instead.
I could redistribute 400k of my Gawn cash to turn a 50 average, 120k DEF rookie into a premium. But that premium is not averaging 130, which is what they would need for my redistribution to achieve fair value. If there was a DEF premium that I thought was so good in a value-for-money sense they'd be in the side already!
So to sum up, given I've already got 11 solid premiums, I don't know that it's actually possible to use that Gawn cash and get fair value for it by turning other rookies/mid-pricers into premiums.
Rookies will change when the teams are announced but most of my team is set, especially the midfield.
Laird - Daniel - Short - Young Cox - Koschitzke (Highmore - Murray)
Macrae - Merrett - Fyfe - Curnow - Taranto - Powell - Macrae - Gulden (Bruhn - Downie - Scott)
Gawn - Grundy (Hunter)
Dangerfield - Dunkley - Martin - Daniher - Campbell - Warner (Rowe - Brockman)
12k spare
Laird - Daniel - Short - Young Cox - Koschitzke (Highmore - Murray)
Macrae - Merrett - Fyfe - Curnow - Taranto - Powell - Macrae - Gulden (Bruhn - Downie - Scott)
Gawn - Grundy (Hunter)
Dangerfield - Dunkley - Martin - Daniher - Campbell - Warner (Rowe - Brockman)
12k spare
After a brief flurry of excitement with Ryder news yesterday I am back on a more vanilla version. Still comes down mostly to d6 for me I think. If highmore or Jones or someone playable gets named I will probably just go normal in rucks. If not, I will probably go Flynn at R2. Something like Highmore, gawn, dow versus short, meek (Flynn on field), de goey. If highmore plays and is a 60 it's close enough not to be worth the risk. But if that Highmore is a Kosi on field things get a bit more interesting.
With gawn's draw it does feel like there's more to be lost than gained by going against him.
With gawn's draw it does feel like there's more to be lost than gained by going against him.
