Position 2017 Rucks

[Here2tellyouwhy]

You having him as the 4th overall forward?

Top 10.
No one's going to have all top 6 FWDs in their team.

 

[Moustachio]

Out of interest, plugged his 2014 / 2015 scores (70-75 avg - might have scope to go higher if clear no. 1 at GCS) and starting price into a price model.

Sounds pretty advanced, but surely you just go
profit = av * 5.1 - cost
(?)

 

[Fooler]

no, he is saying the winner will have him at F4... meaning the 4th best forward in THAT team...

The winner will have the 4th best overall forward @ f4. 110%

 

[toxic]

The winner will have the 4th best overall forward @ f4. 110%

No

Didnt happen last year and can categorically say no overall winner has finished with the best averaging player in each position. It simply hasnt happened.

And MOST importantly (i feel we have this and the capt/vc discussion every year)

Now all take note...

A PLAYERS AVERAGE IS ONLY RELEVANT FROM THE TIME YOU HAVE THEM,
EITHER WHEN YOU START WITH THEM OR WHEN YOU TRADE THEM IN. UNTIL YOU GET RID OR KEEP THEM.

The myth of 3rd best mid or 5th best defender or 2nd best fwd is just that

A MYTH

 

[gutsroy]

Sounds pretty advanced, but surely you just go
profit = av * 5.1 - cost
(?)

Doesn't factor in variability (e.g. impact of spikes/troughs on rolling avg - spikes more relevant off a low base). Would converge to an extent over a longer run.
Just personal preference. Horses for courses.
(in season multiplier closer to 5.0, I think)

 

[HumanMeatball]

Is going nankervis to risky? Also when is SuperCoach open to the public lads?

 

[Fooler]

No

Didnt happen last year and can categorically say no overall winner has finished with the best averaging player in each position. It simply hasnt happened.

And MOST importantly (i feel we have this and the capt/vc discussion every year)

Now all take note...

A PLAYERS AVERAGE IS ONLY RELEVANT FROM THE TIME YOU HAVE THEM,
EITHER WHEN YOU START WITH THEM OR WHEN YOU TRADE THEM IN. UNTIL YOU GET RID OR KEEP THEM.

The myth of 3rd best mid or 5th best defender or 2nd best fwd is just that

A MYTH

You speak the truth, but then pick Motlop haha.

Last years winner had the 4th overall forward

 

[toxic]

You speak the truth, but then pick Motlop haha.

Last years winner had the 4th overall forward

I pick a lot of "different " players.
Everyone on here knows that
I also manage to fluke a pretty high overall rank tho..
And yes. I'll be picking Motlop if he gets thru preseason uninjured.
Who do you believe will be the F4 for "average" at years end?

 

[Fooler]

Is going nankervis to risky? Also when is SuperCoach open to the public lads?

If he gets the number 1 ruck role at the tiges he will be in my team.

 

[HumanMeatball]

If he gets the number 1 ruck role at the tiges he will be in my team.

Foward or ruck?

 

[Fooler]

I pick a lot of "different " players.
Everyone on here knows that
I also manage to fluke a pretty high overall rank tho..
And yes. I'll be picking Motlop if he gets thru preseason uninjured.
Who do you believe will be the F4 for "average" at years end?

Lynch (GC). Think he's in for a massive year.

 

[Fooler]

Foward or ruck?

Fwd

 

[TheBeardAmigos]

You speak the truth, but then pick Motlop haha.

Last years winner had the 4th overall forward

if you read it, he said best averaging player, not 4th....

nothing wrong with Motlop, very good player

 

[Fooler]

if you read it, he said best averaging player, not 4th....

nothing wrong with Motlop, very good player

He actually finished with the top 4 averaging forwards..

 

[gutsroy]

Not going to get involved in arguments / have a crack at anyone, but fwiw toxic's logic on matters SC seems amongst the most internally consistent you'll find on here, and the results seem to be pretty fair, from what I've seen.

 

[gutsroy]

For those interested in quite a detailed Goldy analysis:
http://www.jockreynolds.com.au/2017/01/14/goldmember-rising/
Opinions will differ on some assumptions, but interesting data and premise.

 

[Fooler]

For those interested in quite a detailed Goldy analysis:
http://www.jockreynolds.com.au/2017/01/14/goldmember-rising/
Opinions will differ on some assumptions, but interesting data and premise.

Waiting patiently for my jock magazine copy! P.s. I'm not arguing with or having a shot at anyone. Just having an opinion and adding it to the discussion.

 

[toxic]

He actually finished with the top 4 averaging forwards..

So he finished with Daniel Wells? 4th highest average of the fwds.
Over his last 11 weeks he averaged 59 (this icludes 4 zeroes for being injured) if you take his last 7 playing games he averages 92ish.
Yet for the year has a 101 average, 4th best fwd for 2016.

Simply looking at "the season" average is not the waybto gauge the success of a player in your SC side

 

[KenTucker]

So he finished with Daniel Wells? 4th highest average of the fwds.
Over his last 11 weeks he averaged 59 (this icludes 4 zeroes for being injured) if you take his last 7 playing games he averages 92ish.
Yet for the year has a 101 average, 4th best fwd for 2016.

Simply looking at "the season" average is not the waybto gauge the success of a player in your SC side

Unless you start all six top averaging forwards. (Which no one does)

 

[Here2tellyouwhy]

nothing wrong with Motlop

 

[Fooler]

So he finished with Daniel Wells? 4th highest average of the fwds.
Over his last 11 weeks he averaged 59 (this icludes 4 zeroes for being injured) if you take his last 7 playing games he averages 92ish.
Yet for the year has a 101 average, 4th best fwd for 2016.

Simply looking at "the season" average is not the waybto gauge the success of a player in your SC side

Daniel Wells was 5th.

Zerret - 111.5
Zorko - 109
Dusty - 108.1
N.Roo - 101
Wells - 100.6

I think I remember reading he went Wells to N.Roo. You don't have to explain the "it's when you trade a player in from then the average counts", I completely get that. I was merely just pointing out that he did have the top 4.

 

[Moustachio]

Doesn't factor in variability (e.g. impact of spikes/troughs on rolling avg - spikes more relevant off a low base). Would converge to an extent over a longer run.
Just personal preference. Horses for courses.
(in season multiplier closer to 5.0, I think)

Interesting, interesting. So do you run some simulations based on players past av and std, and take an average? I would have thought it comes out the same if you assume equal chance of high/low scores. If you are using an asymmetric distribution on the other hand, we are into some next level shiz here =)

 

[Fooler]

For those interested in quite a detailed Goldy analysis:
http://www.jockreynolds.com.au/2017/01/14/goldmember-rising/
Opinions will differ on some assumptions, but interesting data and premise.

Don't know if you have seen the comments today but Jock giving Martin a massive wrap!

 

[HumanMeatball]

Been tempted to get the magazine. Worth it though?

 

[gutsroy]

Interesting, interesting. So do you run some simulations based on players past av and std, and take an average? I would have thought it comes out the same if you assume equal chance of high/low scores. If you are using an asymmetric distribution on the other hand, we are into some next level shiz here =)

Assume a normal distribution and enter expected average / SD (can be based on past performance or an expectation if you think they'll go higher), then generate the scores (nothing fancy, just with rand component and those avg and SD values for n iterations) and calculate prices off that. Edit: Hadn't thought of asymmetric distributions, interesting idea

Bit like the screenshot below (for price calc, using New Price = 0.75* Old Price + 5000 * 3-rd avg * 0.25, that was my impression):