2020 Planning thread - a.k.a pre-season misplaced confidence and collective insanity

[Thetrader15]

somewhere in the 80-90 range.

Mummy has averaged the following for GWS, 92.5, 94.3, 84.8, 84.4 and 65.6.
I would say Sauce is at least as good a tap ruckman as Mummy and better round the ground.

You've almost convinced me!

What about ROB?

 

[Thetrader15]

I see Knight is out for 3-4. Does that open up a spot?

Only for a top up player in the SANFL

 

[powerrrrrrrrrrrr]

Hows Matt Crouch tracking this pre season? Only in 2% of teams and looking a good POD. Has he been injured over pre season which I’ve missed or just flying under the radar? He’s always reliable for that 105-110+ per week which is invaluable to set and forget

 

[PAFC27]

Hows Matt Crouch tracking this pre season? Only in 2% of teams and looking a good POD. Has he been injured over pre season which I’ve missed or just flying under the radar? He’s always reliable for that 105-110+ per week which is invaluable to set and forget

Just flying under the radar. His brother with a higher ceiling is a great shout as well.

 

[VSTone]

Here's a question that doesn't get asked much, how much do we think two trades are worth?

Here's my side right now, after a bit of tinkering with the news over the past week (bench rooks subject to change):

View attachment 824934View attachment 824936

Now the reason I ask this, is because I keep chopping and changing Whitfield out and in, for Coniglio, Cripps, Treloar, Boak, Curnow etc. What becomes apparent though, is that Whitfield will be a guaranteed Top 6 forward (meaning I'll need him), versus the aforementioned, who are no guarantee to be Top 8 mids. So this means I'll have to waste two trades at some point, to get Whit in. Given last year with all the unprecedented injury, positional change, and selection issues, is say 75K saved and an extra 5-15 points from a mid, worth two trades?

Alongside this, having Whit as a 'link' in the midfield, allows me to have riskier players in Brayshaw, Roberton, Nic Nat, Wingard and Cerra (hell even Sic Dawg) starting. It also means I can use my links to throw Gould off the bench and downgrade Cerra to Starcevich or a 170K def, or Brayshaw down to a Anderson/Stephens/McGuiness type, which then allows me to upgrade someone like Nic Nat to ROB or Gawn if it doesn't work out/Cerra to Lloyd or Laird if both Brayshaw and Cerra don't work out etc.

It's actually been pretty interesting for me experimenting with all of this, as the whole reason we generally leave big players like Lloyd or Whit out, is because we don't think they'll be worth the cash we spend. The question we should be asking though, is whether these players are likely to be a guaranteed Top 6 Defender or Forward. I'm more dubious on Lloyd given all the uncertainty, but pretty confident on Whit, hence my decision to only have one of them right now. I could have both, but then do I risk missing out on the 'breakout' of someone like Cerra?

Food for thought for those (probably a lot of us here haha) that are grappling with these thought processes/decisions.

Let me know how you guys feel about this

When getting philosophical about it all my approach is searching for the Value Keepers first and foremost. Then the high ceiling Cash Cows.
From there its the Uber Premo's, Mid Value Breakout Uniques and then the risky business with left overs.

So Docherty, Titch & Houston were my first three picked.
Then in went the Cash Cows with Rowell, Anderson, Young, MPickett, McHenry.
Then the Uber Premos - Grundy, Macrae, Dunkley?
Mid Value Breakout Uniques - hardest to pick but the early leaders will nail them.
Risky Business at the moment is S Hill, Roberton, C Jones among others.
I'm fading Whitfield early and will call it a win if I can get him under his start price as an initial key upgrade target.

I have an eye on the team I'd like to assemble based around this and with a view to the bye structures.
My team is heavy on r14 players to begin with. I've noted the big dogs I want to have in the other 2 rounds for the byes and beyond.
Treloar, Merrett, Oliver types.
I haven't really bothered with the loop hole VC as yet, and am favoring cash generation early given the utility position this year.
In the past I've favored Ceiling over Role & Durabilty, this year I'll try to change that up. I am a sucker for a Rocky 160 though!
G/L all.

 

[Cotchy9]

Hows Matt Crouch tracking this pre season? Only in 2% of teams and looking a good POD. Has he been injured over pre season which I’ve missed or just flying under the radar? He’s always reliable for that 105-110+ per week which is invaluable to set and forget

Matt has pig like tendencies, just needs to raise his TOG

Seems at this time of year everyone just follows the crowd into the same 6-7 premos
Macrae, Dunkley, Cogs, Treloar, Danger, Cripps etc. you’ve got guys like Oliver, Gaff, Zerrett, Crouch x2 who barely rate a mention yet are as safe and consistent as anyone. Boggles the mind

The 6 popular guys I mentioned are all great choices, just saying that there should be more love for the aforementioned premos

As soon as you mention someone against the grain on a forum you seem to get shut down a little

 

[VSTone]

Hows Matt Crouch tracking this pre season? Only in 2% of teams and looking a good POD. Has he been injured over pre season which I’ve missed or just flying under the radar? He’s always reliable for that 105-110+ per week which is invaluable to set and forget

Recently added to the leadership group has great ppm in the past, also I read somewhere the most benched player for the Crows - the tank has to top up eventually doesn't it? He ****ed me as a Unique Captain last year on 53 grrr.... The thing that has me is how the crows game plan will change and what effect that will have on players, i think there is some gold fantasy picks in there somewhere but who is it going to be? i have NFI... I guess Smith, Gibbs, Jones, McHenry stick out to me.

 

[Thetrader15]

Just flying under the radar. His brother with a higher ceiling is a great shout as well.

Matt had a couple of 150s towards the end of last year

 

[mezaire]

You've almost convinced me!

What about ROB?

LOL!!

ROB is a tough one......
Such a small data set and a new coach.
Currently I see it as anywhere between 95 and 110 and that uncertainty is the reason I am not starting with him.
FOr some reason I see some regression in Gawn so I'm not sold on who will be R2 this year so currently my plan is...
- Start with Grundy and Jacobs with Naismith on the bench
- When Jacobs and Naismith top out (some where around the $650k and $450k respectively) or/and another rookie R3 presents, I will go Naismith down and Jacobs up to who is looking like the best R2 which could be Gawn, ROB, Lycett, Marshall or Witts.

 

[VSTone]

Matt has pig like tendencies, just needs to raise his TOG

Seems at this time of year everyone just follows the crowd into the same 6-7 premos
Macrae, Dunkley, Cogs, Treloar, Danger, Cripps etc. you’ve got guys like Oliver, Gaff, Zerrett, Crouch x2 who barely rate a mention yet are as safe and consistent as anyone. Boggles the mind

The 6 popular guys I mentioned are all great choices, just saying that there should be more love for the aforementioned premos

As soon as you mention someone against the grain on a forum you seem to get shut down a little

I think uniqueness can be both good and bad, a failing unique is much worse than a failing popular.

 

[powerrrrrrrrrrrr]

Matt has pig like tendencies, just needs to raise his TOG

Seems at this time of year everyone just follows the crowd into the same 6-7 premos
Macrae, Dunkley, Cogs, Treloar, Danger, Cripps etc. you’ve got guys like Oliver, Gaff, Zerrett, Crouch x2 who barely rate a mention yet are as safe and consistent as anyone. Boggles the mind

The 6 popular guys I mentioned are all great choices, just saying that there should be more love for the aforementioned premos

As soon as you mention someone against the grain on a forum you seem to get shut down a little

currently have Gaff and Matt Crouch sitting in my midfield and doing my best not to get caught in the trap of just swapping them for the sake of the “popular” premos. both the crows and wce have a good start to the year so I can see both going big to start the year. Just the toss up between the crouch brothers as whose the better fantasy option.

 

[Neale4brownlow]

Here's a question that doesn't get asked much, how much do we think two trades are worth?

Here's my side right now, after a bit of tinkering with the news over the past week (bench rooks subject to change):

View attachment 824934View attachment 824936

Now the reason I ask this, is because I keep chopping and changing Whitfield out and in, for Coniglio, Cripps, Treloar, Boak, Curnow etc. What becomes apparent though, is that Whitfield will be a guaranteed Top 6 forward (meaning I'll need him), versus the aforementioned, who are no guarantee to be Top 8 mids. So this means I'll have to waste two trades at some point, to get Whit in. Given last year with all the unprecedented injury, positional change, and selection issues, is say 75K saved and an extra 5-15 points from a mid, worth two trades?

Alongside this, having Whit as a 'link' in the midfield, allows me to have riskier players in Brayshaw, Roberton, Nic Nat, Wingard and Cerra (hell even Sic Dawg) starting. It also means I can use my links to throw Gould off the bench and downgrade Cerra to Starcevich or a 170K def, or Brayshaw down to a Anderson/Stephens/McGuiness type, which then allows me to upgrade someone like Nic Nat to ROB or Gawn if it doesn't work out/Cerra to Lloyd or Laird if both Brayshaw and Cerra don't work out etc.

It's actually been pretty interesting for me experimenting with all of this, as the whole reason we generally leave big players like Lloyd or Whit out, is because we don't think they'll be worth the cash we spend. The question we should be asking though, is whether these players are likely to be a guaranteed Top 6 Defender or Forward. I'm more dubious on Lloyd given all the uncertainty, but pretty confident on Whit, hence my decision to only have one of them right now. I could have both, but then do I risk missing out on the 'breakout' of someone like Cerra?

Food for thought for those (probably a lot of us here haha) that are grappling with these thought processes/decisions.

Let me know how you guys feel about this

Tough to put a $ value on trades. Their value has been diminished since we get 2x every week.

I wouldn't be concerned with getting Whitfield later. I tend to take the players names out of the equation and just look at them as numbers. More importantly $/points returned.

Whitfield comes at a massive price and needs to score massive to suit.

He's not really necessary in your team at any point in the year if you have those points covered elsewhere.

During the year guys like Whitfield aren't even of major interest to me (they're just so expensive it's too much of a leap to get there). Premiums that drop in value become hotter targets than guys like Whitfield. I can't see myself dropping $500k on a cash cow to upgrade to whitfield for example.

Not when I could potentially be doing 2x upgrades for the same total price to 2x premos at their low.

Eg last year Dusty, Dunkley at their lows were immensely more valuable picks than starting with Macrae.

It's always interesting during the year when I find myself considering some odd trades after considering only the raw numbers. Eg last year I almost brought in Darling for sub $400k as a stepping stone from a cash in cow. Overall cost was negligble but points per game output was still a tick.

I picked up Curnow/Dunkley/Martin all at their lows with that logic in mind last year. Of those 3 I would've only ever fathomed targeting 1 of those at the start of the year (Dunkley).

I find alot of interest in searching the "Most lost" category around a month into the comp as that's generally where I start planning who I'm targeting and when.

Like a good blue chip share they will always bounce back ;-)

 

[burge13]

Not going to flame someone for going unique like that. Seems justifiable if he's the main ruck.

I wouldn't go there personally but each to their own.

The standard teams are all looking really vanilla at the moment. It's refreshing to see some different picks. Gets the old brain juices flowing.

Old man is die hard hawthorn and he is adamant Ceglar has the #1 ruck spot. We will see in Marsh i guess

 

[Thetrader15]

Any thoughts on which >$700k mids have good value?
Cripps
Danger
Ross
Adams
Rocky
Danger

Who have I missed?

 

[Cotchy9]

Any thoughts on which >$700k mids have good value?
Cripps
Danger
Ross
Adams
Rocky
Danger

Who have I missed?

Cripps- will have his big weeks, but also his poor weeks (tagged) 102-106

Danger- surely plays mostly mid this year. 108-112

Ross- saints seem to have an abundance of mids which could limit scoring but Seb will go pretty well. 100-104

Adams- has gone 114 before, durability the only concern but I’m a big fan and he’s a likely starter for me. 106-110

Rocky- scoring not an issue, durability is. Wouldn’t touch. 100-104

 

[Cotchy9]

A couple more I’ll add who I’m keen on is

Steele- going to play as a pure ball winner this year and has scored well in that role before. Bullish 106-110

Lyons- three years in the 90’s, then busted out 115 post bye last year. Picks up where he left off imo. 106-110

Prestia- not a big ceiling but extremely consistent. 102-106

 

[FlowersByIrene]

Here's a question that doesn't get asked much, how much do we think two trades are worth?

Now the reason I ask this, is because I keep chopping and changing Whitfield out and in, for Coniglio, Cripps, Treloar, Boak, Curnow etc. What becomes apparent though, is that Whitfield will be a guaranteed Top 6 forward (meaning I'll need him), versus the aforementioned, who are no guarantee to be Top 8 mids. So this means I'll have to waste two trades at some point, to get Whit in. Given last year with all the unprecedented injury, positional change, and selection issues, is say 75K saved and an extra 5-15 points from a mid, worth two trades?

Alongside this, having Whit as a 'link' in the midfield, allows me to have riskier players in Brayshaw, Roberton, Nic Nat, Wingard and Cerra (hell even Sic Dawg) starting. It also means I can use my links to throw Gould off the bench and downgrade Cerra to Starcevich or a 170K def, or Brayshaw down to a Anderson/Stephens/McGuiness type, which then allows me to upgrade someone like Nic Nat to ROB or Gawn if it doesn't work out/Cerra to Lloyd or Laird if both Brayshaw and Cerra don't work out etc.

It's actually been pretty interesting for me experimenting with all of this, as the whole reason we generally leave big players like Lloyd or Whit out, is because we don't think they'll be worth the cash we spend. The question we should be asking though, is whether these players are likely to be a guaranteed Top 6 Defender or Forward. I'm more dubious on Lloyd given all the uncertainty, but pretty confident on Whit, hence my decision to only have one of them right now. I could have both, but then do I risk missing out on the 'breakout' of someone like Cerra?

Food for thought for those (probably a lot of us here haha) that are grappling with these thought processes/decisions.

Let me know how you guys feel about this

What is the value of a trade... well there is a couple of ways we can look at it.

Let's look at the top 5 from last year.

Team (Points) (Price)
Top Me Up Buttercup 51,937 $17,765k
Hirdy's Heroes 51,858 $18,078k
Abes8 51821 $17,778k
Vague Probability 51,790 $17,910k
tibor 51,739 $17,930k


Which is, on average a score of 51,829 and a price of $17,891k.

Now we have 47 trades for the year and last years salary cap was $12,800k. Meaning that a trade, in terms of dollars, should EARN you 108k in team value per trade. But that doesn't really mean a trade is "worth" 108k, just that if you're not making 108k in value out of it, it's probably not "worth" it. So should we look deeper? The magic number last year was about 7235 or so if I recall correctly. (For reference this year it is 7418). Which means that $7,235 is equivalent to 1 point. At the start of the season we therefore had around 1,769 points of value across the entire 30 man team. If you use the same magic number (although I realise it changes throughout the season), having 17million in salary cap should allow you to have around 2,472 points of value across your entire 30 man team. Does that means that a trade is worth 14.95 points? (being the difference between 2,472 and 1,769 divided across the 47 trades).

I dunno if any of that is useful, but they're jsut my thoughts. I think i've mentioned before that I've been trying to grapple with this issue, and haven't been able to get anythign concrete. The fact that the magic number changes really throws it up in the air as trades are worth more early and less later on...

 

[Thetrader15]

What is the value of a trade... well there is a couple of ways we can look at it.

Let's look at the top 5 from last year.

Team (Points) (Price)
Top Me Up Buttercup 51,937 $17,765k
Hirdy's Heroes 51,858 $18,078k
Abes8 51821 $17,778k
Vague Probability 51,790 $17,910k
tibor 51,739 $17,930k


Which is, on average a score of 51,829 and a price of $17,891k.

Now we have 47 trades for the year and last years salary cap was $12,800k. Meaning that a trade, in terms of dollars, should EARN you 108k in team value per trade. But that doesn't really mean a trade is "worth" 108k, just that if you're not making 108k in value out of it, it's probably not "worth" it. So should we look deeper? The magic number last year was about 7235 or so if I recall correctly. (For reference this year it is 7418). Which means that $7,235 is equivalent to 1 point. At the start of the season we therefore had around 1,769 points of value across the entire 30 man team. If you use the same magic number (although I realise it changes throughout the season), having 17million in salary cap should allow you to have around 2,472 points of value across your entire 30 man team. Does that means that a trade is worth 14.95 points? (being the difference between 2,472 and 1,769 divided across the 47 trades).

I dunno if any of that is useful, but they're jsut my thoughts. I think i've mentioned before that I've been trying to grapple with this issue, and haven't been able to get anythign concrete. The fact that the magic number changes really throws it up in the air as trades are worth more early and less later on...

Is there an executive summary?

 

[Slysh]

Old man is die hard hawthorn and he is adamant Ceglar has the #1 ruck spot. We will see in Marsh i guess

He is 100% right.

Big Boy has trained down back all pre season
Played down back in the intra club last week and barely participated in a ruck contest

Cegs will be given every opportunity to cement that number 1 ruck spot as his own. Still not sure i can do it though.

 

[VSTone]

Is there an executive summary?

Pick Grundy and put the big C on him!

 

[PAFC27]

He is 100% right.

Big Boy has trained down back all pre season
Played down back in the intra club last week and barely participated in a ruck contest

Cegs will be given every opportunity to cement that number 1 ruck spot as his own. Still not sure i can do it though.

All in on Cegs. Potentially Rowan Marshall V2

Were all sitting here looking for a bloke that'll be solo ruck and everything out of Hawthorn has suggested so. He's priced lower than Lycett who many have considered. Its become apparent Ladhams will be playing alongside him now but the reason we considered him were his scores while taking on the solo ruck duties.

Well what did Ceglar do? 81, 102, 103

 

[Thetrader15]

All in on Cegs. Potentially Rowan Marshall V2

Were all sitting here looking for a bloke that'll be solo ruck and everything out of Hawthorn has suggested so. He's priced lower than Lycett who many have considered. Its become apparent Ladhams will be playing alongside him now but the reason we considered him were his scores while taking on the solo ruck duties.

Well what did Ceglar do? 81, 102, 103

I'm officially off Lycett. His first 5 rounds are:

Witts
ROB
Goldy
NN
Grundy

I suspect after this Ladhams will give a helping hand

 

[Shadow89]

What is the value of a trade... well there is a couple of ways we can look at it.

Let's look at the top 5 from last year.

Team (Points) (Price)
Top Me Up Buttercup 51,937 $17,765k
Hirdy's Heroes 51,858 $18,078k
Abes8 51821 $17,778k
Vague Probability 51,790 $17,910k
tibor 51,739 $17,930k


Which is, on average a score of 51,829 and a price of $17,891k.

Now we have 47 trades for the year and last years salary cap was $12,800k. Meaning that a trade, in terms of dollars, should EARN you 108k in team value per trade. But that doesn't really mean a trade is "worth" 108k, just that if you're not making 108k in value out of it, it's probably not "worth" it. So should we look deeper? The magic number last year was about 7235 or so if I recall correctly. (For reference this year it is 7418). Which means that $7,235 is equivalent to 1 point. At the start of the season we therefore had around 1,769 points of value across the entire 30 man team. If you use the same magic number (although I realise it changes throughout the season), having 17million in salary cap should allow you to have around 2,472 points of value across your entire 30 man team. Does that means that a trade is worth 14.95 points? (being the difference between 2,472 and 1,769 divided across the 47 trades).

I dunno if any of that is useful, but they're jsut my thoughts. I think i've mentioned before that I've been trying to grapple with this issue, and haven't been able to get anythign concrete. The fact that the magic number changes really throws it up in the air as trades are worth more early and less later on...

This is actually extremely helpful!! Obviously a lot of it is relative, but the point value is really useful when it comes to calculating player worth. Will have a look at those numbers and see if I can't come up with anything else, but seriously great insight there and well reasoned

 

[Shadow89]

All in on Cegs. Potentially Rowan Marshall V2

Were all sitting here looking for a bloke that'll be solo ruck and everything out of Hawthorn has suggested so. He's priced lower than Lycett who many have considered. Its become apparent Ladhams will be playing alongside him now but the reason we considered him were his scores while taking on the solo ruck duties.

Well what did Ceglar do? 81, 102, 103

Agreed, but I'm more worried about the 'Clarko factor' than anything. Clarko has shown that he does not give one single f*ck about us poor fantasy players haha, and will shuffle the board at any moment - Sic being a prime example last season. I could see in game (seeing as Big Boy has played ruck for many seasons), Clarko just flipping the switch and throwing Ceglar forward, Gunston back and McEvoy in the ruck. He's shown no hesitation to do it in the past, and he always preaches about how positional versatility is something that he finds important. It'll be interesting to see it during Marsh, but I'm just hesitant given the aforementioned considerations.

 

[kozi]

Here's a question that doesn't get asked much, how much do we think two trades are worth?

Here's my side right now, after a bit of tinkering with the news over the past week (bench rooks subject to change):

View attachment 824934View attachment 824936

Now the reason I ask this, is because I keep chopping and changing Whitfield out and in, for Coniglio, Cripps, Treloar, Boak, Curnow etc. What becomes apparent though, is that Whitfield will be a guaranteed Top 6 forward (meaning I'll need him), versus the aforementioned, who are no guarantee to be Top 8 mids. So this means I'll have to waste two trades at some point, to get Whit in. Given last year with all the unprecedented injury, positional change, and selection issues, is say 75K saved and an extra 5-15 points from a mid, worth two trades?

Alongside this, having Whit as a 'link' in the midfield, allows me to have riskier players in Brayshaw, Roberton, Nic Nat, Wingard and Cerra (hell even Sic Dawg) starting. It also means I can use my links to throw Gould off the bench and downgrade Cerra to Starcevich or a 170K def, or Brayshaw down to a Anderson/Stephens/McGuiness type, which then allows me to upgrade someone like Nic Nat to ROB or Gawn if it doesn't work out/Cerra to Lloyd or Laird if both Brayshaw and Cerra don't work out etc.

It's actually been pretty interesting for me experimenting with all of this, as the whole reason we generally leave big players like Lloyd or Whit out, is because we don't think they'll be worth the cash we spend. The question we should be asking though, is whether these players are likely to be a guaranteed Top 6 Defender or Forward. I'm more dubious on Lloyd given all the uncertainty, but pretty confident on Whit, hence my decision to only have one of them right now. I could have both, but then do I risk missing out on the 'breakout' of someone like Cerra?

Food for thought for those (probably a lot of us here haha) that are grappling with these thought processes/decisions.

Let me know how you guys feel about this

The way I see it, the whole game boils down to getting the top players in each line quicker than everyone else. It might sound overly simplistic but locking away the ones you know are already guaranteed to be top of their position gets you there quicker more often than not.

Re not starting Whit, as you alluded to it’s basically starting with 2 forced trades pencilled in that 60% of the comp doesn’t have to worry about. Extra forced trades through injury along the way also compoud that downside. As you said the counter arguement comes down to the $ value of 2 trades as there’s a real possibility of picking him up for ~100k cheaper, but it’s hard to attach a value as it’s different for everyone. Savvy guys and gals that use their trades well will naturally have a higher value for their trades than the average mug. For an experienced dude like yourself, personally I’d say start Whit and back yourself to make those trades saved count for more than the potential $ savings getting him later.