Game Day 2022 SC Round 15; if you never post but got a good score for the first time in 20 years let us know

[mochacinolatte]

1745/16 laird to go 200 against a local league team

 

[Jiska]

ill try again .. heres your clue one more time.

View attachment 1432789

good guess though.. it was parker

 

[kenneyswarriors]

I only had 2. Parker and Sinclair. To many other 80-90 scores though.

yeah don't know what to make of mine, 8 - 80/90 and 8 100 ?
Doesn't look too bad 1650, captain tomorrow.

Not going to use Green/HH, unless a late out either.

 

[TheRednWhite]

you realise every wog and their dog have these players? just worry when your pods spud it up.

no point sooking about players everyone has. makes no difference.

I have no Walsh, No Stew, no Brodie, no Jackson.

Brayshaw into Neale into Sinclair....3 tagged players in one week is actually incredibly hard to cop.

 

[Jiska]

No first crack Thurs, Fri or Sat? Instead FOX subject us to this best on ground s**t. Can’t wait for them to lose the rights.

 

[doug85]

This will be my worst week of the season. C on Mills, Parker, Cripps and heeney

 

[THECHIEFTON]

yeah don't know what to make of mine, 8 - 80/90 and 8 100 ?
Doesn't look too bad 1650, captain tomorrow.

About par. Depends how many pods you have left. Need Pendles to go big, Kent owes me it. Himmelberg going big would be great again. I am worried what Haynes and Davis do to his position/scoring though.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Your whinging never ends. Just delete your team and go outside and smoke a joint FFS.

TheRednWhite is still ranked inside the Top 1,000

 

[jdeezy]

15(C) for 1616. Given I've got 3 premos out, not bad, but man there's been a lot of underperformances today - only 3/9 tonning up. Shoutout to SDK for doing it when I had him on field though.

Tomorrow:
Nobody in the first (PS Roos will win this)
Cameron, Crisp, Green, Cogs, Himmelberg
Touktouk and new recruit Witts

Projected 2330, think I'll slide with that

 

[kenneyswarriors]

About par. Depends how many pods you have left. Need Pendles to go big, Kent owes me it. Himmelberg going big would be great again. I am worried what Haynes and Davis do to his position/scoring though.

Yeah, i've taken SDK's 100 and benched HH.

 

[balmainforever]

ill try again .. heres your clue one more time.

View attachment 1432789

good guess though.. it was parker

And I love you for picking him.

 

[hoddo]

17(c) / 1846
or
16 / 1672

First score takes Macrae's vc score and McCartin's 51
Second score makes Laird captain and puts Rosas on field

 

[Ingy]

1407/14.

Having a bad round.

Being without English and Preuss, choosing not to trade and putting Hobbs on the field hasn't helped, along with subpar performances from guys like Brayshaw, Docherty, Short, Parker.

The Lizard and Walsh my shining lights so far.

Jelly, Cogs, HH, DCameron, Crisp, Touk, Rozee and Witts C to come

 

[kananooks]

I have no Walsh, No Stew, no Brodie, no Jackson.

Brayshaw into Neale into Sinclair....3 tagged players in one week is actually incredibly hard to cop.

surely you wernt expecting a ton from paddy.

petracca you could see a sub 100 from a mile away.

parker was due for a low score..

walsh and stew arnt that popular. and not many have jacko yet

day after day. week after week. the carnage will come. we just gotta roll with the punches mate.

 

[THECHIEFTON]

Yeah, i've taken SDK's 100 and benched HH.

I benched Gresham for Jezzas 90. Was on 97 when I did it lol. Still it worked OK I guess...

 

[Scythe94]

This is by no means an attempt to gloat, but I feel like every year, I'm making the point that holding onto maxed out, expensive rookies purely for bench coverage, and at the expense of getting rolled gold uber premos on your field, is hardly ever worth it.

There would be plenty of coaches that held onto Paddy purely for weeks like this one, and as a result, are forced to run sub-SPs in their D6/M8/F6 position because they weren't able to cash in on one of the best cows. They then cop a 50ish score that any old sub-250k rookie could realistically churn out for their trouble.

IMO, you should only bother with >300k bench coverage if:

a. You've got a premo or fallen premo as coverage (someone who's almost certain to score at least 75-80+ when called upon for cover, and someone you can loop on a weekly basis)
b. You're so low on trades that you can't justify trading them out
c. You've absolutely nailed your onfield selections and have the luxury of keeping them without needing to upgrade anywhere on field.

I suppose the point I'm making is that you should really consider how many times you're likely to need to call upon bench cover (have a look at previous years for an indicator), and whether fielding a 65-ish maxed out rookie over a bargain basement one that can get you a 50 or so a handful of times in the back-end of the season is worth running with a 105 averaging mid vs a 120 averaging mid week-in, week-out for instance.

Anyway, sounding preachy so I'll leave it at that.

 

[kananooks]

And I love you for picking him.
View attachment 1432817

10 uniques in a gameweek this late in the season. cracker of a matchup.

 

[kenneyswarriors]

I benched Gresham for Jezzas 90. Was on 97 when I did it lol. Still it worked OK I guess...

Well bird in the hand and all that, 90 is ok

 

[DaTBird187]

17/2083 (c)

Green, Rozee, Coniglio, Touk and Crisp to come.

The predicted 2580 would be nice.

 

[THECHIEFTON]

This is by no means an attempt to gloat, but I feel like every year, I'm making the point that holding onto maxed out, expensive rookies purely for bench coverage, and at the expense of getting rolled gold uber premos on your field, is hardly ever worth it.

There would be plenty of coaches that held onto Paddy purely for weeks like this one, and as a result, are forced to run sub-SPs in their D6/M8/F6 position because they weren't able to cash in on one of the best cows. They then cop a 50ish score that any old sub-250k rookie could realistically churn out for their trouble.

IMO, you should only bother with >300k bench coverage if:

a. You've got a premo or fallen premo as coverage (someone who's almost certain to score at least 75-80+ when called upon for cover, and someone you can loop on a weekly basis)
b. You're so low on trades that you can't justify trading them out
c. You've absolutely nailed your onfield selections and have the luxury of keeping them without needing to upgrade anywhere on field.

I suppose the point I'm making is that you should really consider how many times you're likely to need to call upon bench cover (have a look at previous years for an indicator), and whether fielding a 65-ish maxed out rookie over a bargain basement one that can get you a 50 or so a handful of times in the back-end of the season is worth running with a 105 averaging mid vs a 120 averaging mid week-in, week-out for instance.

Anyway, sounding preachy so I'll leave it at that.

Problem is this year is different. Covid and other illness are more common. There's people low on trades now with big issues. Stewart just added to the list. These rookies scoring 50 are also likely to be dropped unlike the McCartin/De Konig types.

 

[THECHIEFTON]

Well bird in the hand and all that, 90 is ok

Had a feeling the saints would struggle.

 

[kananooks]

Problem is this year is different. Covid and other illness are more common. There's people low on trades now with big issues. Stewart just added to the list. These rookies scoring 50 are also likely to be dropped unlike the McCartin/De Konig types.

how many weeks are we expecting.. and how many is too many that requires a trade?

 

[THECHIEFTON]

how many weeks are we expecting.. and how many is too many that requires a trade?

3-4 for Stewart is my guess. Really depends on how many trades you have.

I'm lucky enough to have premos on the bench and don't have Stewart or English.

 

[kenneyswarriors]

This is by no means an attempt to gloat, but I feel like every year, I'm making the point that holding onto maxed out, expensive rookies purely for bench coverage, and at the expense of getting rolled gold uber premos on your field, is hardly ever worth it.

There would be plenty of coaches that held onto Paddy purely for weeks like this one, and as a result, are forced to run sub-SPs in their D6/M8/F6 position because they weren't able to cash in on one of the best cows. They then cop a 50ish score that any old sub-250k rookie could realistically churn out for their trouble.

IMO, you should only bother with >300k bench coverage if:

a. You've got a premo or fallen premo as coverage (someone who's almost certain to score at least 75-80+ when called upon for cover, and someone you can loop on a weekly basis)
b. You're so low on trades that you can't justify trading them out
c. You've absolutely nailed your onfield selections and have the luxury of keeping them without needing to upgrade anywhere on field.

I suppose the point I'm making is that you should really consider how many times you're likely to need to call upon bench cover (have a look at previous years for an indicator), and whether fielding a 65-ish maxed out rookie over a bargain basement one that can get you a 50 or so a handful of times in the back-end of the season is worth running with a 105 averaging mid vs a 120 averaging mid week-in, week-out for instance.

Anyway, sounding preachy so I'll leave it at that.

I still got SDK, but only cause I had 4 injuries to dump this week,he will be staying for a few more weeks now.

 

[TheRednWhite]

This is by no means an attempt to gloat, but I feel like every year, I'm making the point that holding onto maxed out, expensive rookies purely for bench coverage, and at the expense of getting rolled gold uber premos on your field, is hardly ever worth it.

There would be plenty of coaches that held onto Paddy purely for weeks like this one, and as a result, are forced to run sub-SPs in their D6/M8/F6 position because they weren't able to cash in on one of the best cows. They then cop a 50ish score that any old sub-250k rookie could realistically churn out for their trouble.

IMO, you should only bother with >300k bench coverage if:

a. You've got a premo or fallen premo as coverage (someone who's almost certain to score at least 75-80+ when called upon for cover, and someone you can loop on a weekly basis)
b. You're so low on trades that you can't justify trading them out
c. You've absolutely nailed your onfield selections and have the luxury of keeping them without needing to upgrade anywhere on field.

I suppose the point I'm making is that you should really consider how many times you're likely to need to call upon bench cover (have a look at previous years for an indicator), and whether fielding a 65-ish maxed out rookie over a bargain basement one that can get you a 50 or so a handful of times in the back-end of the season is worth running with a 105 averaging mid vs a 120 averaging mid week-in, week-out for instance.

Anyway, sounding preachy so I'll leave it at that.

held McCartin through the byes because I knew pretty early that I was screwed for round 14 bye. I had both SDK and PMac at that time, and of course I traded SDK who tonned up today. PMac had the edge in scoring but of course I got punished for that choice, can't win