Strategy 2024 Fantasy Planning Thread

[Coasters7]

The disappointing thing for me is the AFL's inability to think through their decisions and how they may have negative unintended consequences. Fantasy football is an excellent way to grow engagement in the sport and also a way get eyeballs on matches involving clubs with smaller supporter bases or whose seasons are likely to peter out to nothing. The fact that this was one of the incoming CEO's first 'captain's calls' since taking the job doesn't bode well for the state of the game under his leadership. It's a slap in the face to a loyal subsection of the game.

/rant

Fantasy and gambling is definitely carrying the record engagement over the past few years. I definitely only tune in to most neutral games (outside of the big games) for fantasy purposes

 

[Exambolor]

Bazlenka cooked. Was going to be one of my first picked next year. Was primed for a move back into the middle with a big preseason

However it does make Macrae more of a potential pickup then before. Bevo might be forced to put him in the middle and not HF.

Rookie wise, Ryley Sanders will probably play earlier now

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Bazlenka cooked. Was going to be one of my first picked next year. Was primed for a move back into the middle with a big preseason

What's happened to Bazza ??

 

[juddy_Like]

What's happened to Bazza ??

ACL

 

[WaynesWorld19]

ACL

 

[danster168]

at least it makes our teams more unique. that's one bad thing about this game. mid prices are overpriced so everyone has the same guns n rooks.

 

[powerrrrrrrrrrrr]

Forward line is certainly slim pickings this year

 

[Barrybran]

View attachment 1871089

You need this gif in reverse for 2025

 

[FlowersByIrene]

at least it makes our teams more unique. that's one bad thing about this game. mid prices are overpriced so everyone has the same guns n rooks.

This is utter nonsense. In fact it's the exact opposite. Cheaper mid pricers lead to the same mid pricers being selected because there is only a limited pool of them. You have a broad pool of 'guns' to pick from and people could pick any, for example this year there are three to four 'gun' rucks you could easily pick. There are plenty of things to criticise AFL Fantasy for, but teams being less unique than other games because of the pricing is absolutely not one of them.

 

[happy_eagle]

This is utter nonsense. In fact it's the exact opposite. Cheaper mid pricers lead to the same mid pricers being selected because there is only a limited pool of them. You have a broad pool of 'guns' to pick from and people could pick any, for example this year there are three to four 'gun' rucks you could easily pick. There are plenty of things to criticise AFL Fantasy for, but teams being less unique than other games because of the pricing is absolutely not one of them.

Agree
The AFL Fantasy model also avoids giving us the absolute steals that the other games have gotten which leads to 99% of serious teams having the same couple of players each year.

I think Coniglio in 2022 was priced at 60 in the other formats (90 or so in AFL Fantasy). Ziebell one year (the year he went into the backline) was almost rookie priced. That sort of model leads to everyone selecting the obvious bargain.

 

[danster168]

This is utter nonsense. In fact it's the exact opposite. Cheaper mid pricers lead to the same mid pricers being selected because there is only a limited pool of them. You have a broad pool of 'guns' to pick from and people could pick any, for example this year there are three to four 'gun' rucks you could easily pick. There are plenty of things to criticise AFL Fantasy for, but teams being less unique than other games because of the pricing is absolutely not one of them.

that's nonsense. you're telling me the players below aren't priced too high? no-one is going to be picking these sort of players

 

[powerrrrrrrrrrrr]

that's nonsense. you're telling me the players below aren't priced too high? no-one is going to be picking these sort of players

To get that screenshot, are you telling me that it’s opened!?

 

[tigs2010]

Is it worth starting premos who play R0 given they play one less game than those who don’t? Or better off bringing them in off their bye?

 

[Barrybran]

Is it worth starting premos who play R0 given they play one less game than those who don’t? Or better off bringing them in off their bye?

Better bringing them off their bye. Any R0 premo is either sitting on your bench for a round or getting traded out to use the cash.

 

[Tex Danger]

Better bringing them off their bye. Any R0 premo is either sitting on your bench for a round or getting traded out to use the cash.

I agree avoid any top priced players and grab an alternative

What’s the cut off though Before value makes it worth it?

eg thoughts on

Walsh @ 95 (rd2)
Miller @ 96 (rd3)
Gawn @ 92 (rd6)
Flanders @ 90 (rd3)
Newman @ 90 (re 2)

that’s where I can’t get my head around (plus numerous others more genuine mid priced like Grundy, Adams)
fir some rd0 score will dictate selection or not

 

[tigs2010]

I agree avoid any top priced players and grab an alternative

What’s the cut off though Before value makes it worth it?

eg thoughts on

Walsh @ 95 (rd2)
Miller @ 96 (rd3)
Gawn @ 92 (rd6)
Flanders @ 90 (rd3)
Newman @ 90 (re 2)

that’s where I can’t get my head around (plus numerous others more genuine mid priced like Grundy, Adams)
fir some rd0 score will dictate selection or not

Grundy & Gawn are so cheap. Touk too. Get to see a round first if they pump out a monster then we will probably need to grab

 

[TryAnHit]

Grundy & Gawn are so cheap. Touk too. Get to see a round first if they pump out a monster then we will probably need to grab

And this is where it makes it boring. Everyone will. Takes away from guys who would have gone early or vice versa

 

[Cm Perfect]

I agree avoid any top priced players and grab an alternative

What’s the cut off though Before value makes it worth it?

eg thoughts on

Walsh @ 95 (rd2)
Miller @ 96 (rd3)
Gawn @ 92 (rd6)
Flanders @ 90 (rd3)
Newman @ 90 (re 2)

that’s where I can’t get my head around (plus numerous others more genuine mid priced like Grundy, Adams)
fir some rd0 score will dictate selection or not

Grundy and Gawn are still worth it because rucks are a different beast and if picking one or both enables you to structure your team better, then copping the one round hit is worth it. The alternative around their price is e.g. a Darcy who is just as likely to miss a week with injury or e.g. a Witts, whom Gawn should outscore even factoring in one less game. If you avoid them by going all the way up to Marshall/English then you are spending significantly less elsewhere on your team just to avoid a one round hit.

For the mids there are so many other options that it's not really worth baking in that one round hit right from the start imo. Better to target them as upgrades after they've had their early bye.

 

[Corkintheocean]

Is it worth starting premos who play R0 given they play one less game than those who don’t? Or better off bringing them in off their bye?

Depending on R0 scores, I think a conceivable strategy could be to pickup those who have monster scores in R0 and then trade them out pre bye. Obviously you run the risk of being stuck with injured players (from trading out healthy bye round players instead), but that's offset by only needing best 18 in the early bye rounds (or was it best 20? can't remember exactly).

Example (prices are just estimates):

Oliver starting price $1m
Oliver drops a 160 in R0, pick him up for his starting price of $1m.
He avg 115 for the next 4 weeks (R2-5)
Sell prior to his R5 for $1.2m (last week his 165 is included in his price)
Bring in Merrett for $1m

You've made $200k + had Oliver scoring 115 for the weeks where scores count.
This could be preferably to making $200k off a mid pricer avg 85.

 

[Maurice Mitchell]

Bazlenka cooked. Was going to be one of my first picked next year. Was primed for a move back into the middle with a big preseason

Same here. Probably would have been a top 10 owned player. So fit and so cheap.

Must say, I really feel for the guy. It would drive you mad. Seems like the kind of dedicated fitness guy that could possibly get back before the finals.

Last season I had what I thought was a 50/50 decision: Smith vs Bont. I went the wrong way. 83 vs 117. One of my worst decisions; there were others. Plenty. A disastrous season. My worst, actually.

Couldn’t have been more wrong. Was hoping for him to redeem himself in my team this year. Not to be.

He is potentially the biggest bargain of all time in 2025.

 

[Zevon]

Last season I had what I thought was a 50/50 decision: Smith vs Bont. I went the wrong way. 83 vs 117. One of my worst decisions; there were others. Plenty. A disastrous season. My worst, actually.

 

[Coasters7]

Depending on R0 scores, I think a conceivable strategy could be to pickup those who have monster scores in R0 and then trade them out pre bye. Obviously you run the risk of being stuck with injured players (from trading out healthy bye round players instead), but that's offset by only needing best 18 in the early bye rounds (or was it best 20? can't remember exactly).

Example (prices are just estimates):

Oliver starting price $1m
Oliver drops a 160 in R0, pick him up for his starting price of $1m.
He avg 115 for the next 4 weeks (R2-5)
Sell prior to his R5 for $1.2m (last week his 165 is included in his price)
Bring in Merrett for $1m

You've made $200k + had Oliver scoring 115 for the weeks where scores count.
This could be preferably to making $200k off a mid pricer avg 85.

This just seems way to much for me to get my head around and plan for, and that’s on top of already having limited options in a couple of positions. F*ck you Dillon

 

[FlowersByIrene]

that's nonsense. you're telling me the players below aren't priced too high? no-one is going to be picking these sort of players

So? That doesn't make teams more diverse.

 

[FlowersByIrene]

Depending on R0 scores, I think a conceivable strategy could be to pickup those who have monster scores in R0 and then trade them out pre bye. Obviously you run the risk of being stuck with injured players (from trading out healthy bye round players instead), but that's offset by only needing best 18 in the early bye rounds (or was it best 20? can't remember exactly).

Example (prices are just estimates):

Oliver starting price $1m
Oliver drops a 160 in R0, pick him up for his starting price of $1m.
He avg 115 for the next 4 weeks (R2-5)
Sell prior to his R5 for $1.2m (last week his 165 is included in his price)
Bring in Merrett for $1m

You've made $200k + had Oliver scoring 115 for the weeks where scores count.
This could be preferably to making $200k off a mid pricer avg 85.

I think this works but you can probably only do it with one to three max and all from different byes. Otherwise you risk injuries and getting ****ed holding them. Someone had a great point that if Daicos averages 115 over 5 rounds till his bye. Someone only has to average 95 to score the same as him including Round 6 when he's on his bye. It's a pretty big swing.

 

[JDWCE]

I think this works but you can probably only do it with one to three max and all from different byes. Otherwise you risk injuries and getting ****ed holding them. Someone had a great point that if Daicos averages 115 over 5 rounds till his bye. Someone only has to average 95 to score the same as him including Round 6 when he's on his bye. It's a pretty big swing.

Farkkk. Thats actually pretty huge when you think about it