Complete Idiots Guide to Dream Team in 2011

[The Falcon Strike]

Just going to ask a question in here about this year's price adjustments.

We all know that prices were reduced to allow for the extra 3 players.

My question is - will the price changes after 3 games be in line with last year?

i.e - a player averaged 100 last year and costs say $400k this year. If said player averages 100 again (assume 100 every game) - will they stay the same price - or go up in value?

hope this makes sense!!

 

[Jolldo87]

Just going to ask a question in here about this year's price adjustments.

We all know that prices were reduced to allow for the extra 3 players.

My question is - will the price changes after 3 games be in line with last year?

i.e - a player averaged 100 last year and costs say $400k this year. If said player averages 100 again (assume 100 every game) - will they stay the same price - or go up in value?

hope this makes sense!!

Like previous years their price would drop a little if they maintained the same average.

 

[LemmingMaster]

Like previous years their price would drop a little if they maintained the same average.

I don't have the maths to support my theory, but I actually think the prices will drop slightly quicker if they maintain the same averages. This is due to Gold Coast have a number of players that are under-priced compared to their baseline average.

 

[IsBillyThere]

Tarquin,

This certainly makes sense to me.

In 2011 we have a higher percentage of players at rookie prices than in previous years, and there will be more rookie priced players to be playing early on - both caused simply due to the nature of the GCS list.

This means there will be relatively more players with large price rises, and large initial price rises than there have been in previous years.

This will make the adjustment required to maintain a fixed level of total salaries lager, and so a player maintaining their average from the previous year will fall in price more quickly.

 

[Kings Army]

Which 4 teams to not have a dream team bye? Bris and Syd are 2 - who are the other 2??

 

[Ammo_Lover]

Which 4 teams to not have a dream team bye? Bris and Syd are 2 - who are the other 2??

Freo and Melb i think

 

[Dunn - Well Done]

Tarquin,

This certainly makes sense to me.

In 2011 we have a higher percentage of players at rookie prices than in previous years, and there will be more rookie priced players to be playing early on - both caused simply due to the nature of the GCS list.

This means there will be relatively more players with large price rises, and large initial price rises than there have been in previous years.

This will make the adjustment required to maintain a fixed level of total salaries lager, and so a player maintaining their average from the previous year will fall in price more quickly.

I dont really agree with this.

The percentage of rookie priced DT players that play next year in comparison to the older players will be the same. Sure you have 8-10 more rookies playing for GC but you also have 10 or so more senior players playing for GC than another 10 filling there spots at the clubs they left. It could be argued that some will be rookies but most will be covered by senior campaigners. Its really a petty discussion that cant be predicted and wont be significantly different to last year.

It could also be argued that there is 2 less rookies playing full games with the new sub rule.

All in all i reckon there would be less rookies playing full games this year compared to last year in comparision to the rest of the comp (percentage terms).

 

[LemmingMaster]

Its really a petty discussion that cant be predicted and wont be significantly different to last year.

It could also be argued that there is 2 less rookies playing full games with the new sub rule.

He just expanded on a point I made, which I am almost certain to be true. The more under priced players that play, the quicker the reduction in the "magic number". Considering a vast majority of Gold Coast players are under priced, this would help speed up the reduction in the magic number.

Your second point is also valid, that the sub rule will partially negate this factor or maybe completely offset the extra reduction due to GC.

Still at the end of the day all the points were relating to this one question

i.e - a player averaged 100 last year and costs say $400k this year. If said player averages 100 again (assume 100 every game) - will they stay the same price - or go up in value?

The answer to this question was, no, they will go down in price.

 

[Jolldo87]

DWD said that the sub rule will result in lower scores for the substitutes. Fact is there will still be 18 players on the field at all times. Are we expecting that the sub rule will slow the game down and reduce the dream team scoring? If the scoring overall does come down then DWD's theory has merit, if not then it doesn't.

 

[Dunn - Well Done]

DWD said that the sub rule will result in lower scores for the substitutes. Fact is there will still be 18 players on the field at all times. Are we expecting that the sub rule will slow the game down and reduce the dream team scoring? If the scoring overall does come down then DWD's theory has merit, if not then it doesn't.

Im not saying it will decrease DT scoring as a whole just means more players than last year will get sub scores due to sub rule. two extra 50s this year being kind for those sub players which IMO will more than likley be younger players now or fringe players that avg about 50-70 points.

An example could be Tambling and S.Stevens for adelaide (example)

Last year they were capable of playing full games thus scoring there avg, now they play half there TOG and we assume half of what they scored last year. So on that basis we say Tambling scores 30 thus his price will plummett and S.Stevens scores 35 thus his price plummets aswell. Put together its 65 what they wouldve scores in a full game last year. But with this last year they wouldve stayed at a steady price this year they will drop in value and not help the magic number in our favour. This will happen not only for one club but also 17 clubs.

So you have 34 players affecting the magic number in a bad way for us DTers but the scoring as a whole between the players doesnt change compared to last season. Well it sort of does.

 

[LemmingMaster]

DWD said that the sub rule will result in lower scores for the substitutes. Fact is there will still be 18 players on the field at all times. Are we expecting that the sub rule will slow the game down and reduce the dream team scoring? If the scoring overall does come down then DWD's theory has merit, if not then it doesn't.

This is actually an interesting concept, I will look forward to seeing the affect of the total DT points.

Most reports seem to suggest that instead of player resting for 3-4 minutes before being rotated, they will rest for 1-2. This reduced resting time should maintain the same level of rotations, but it could actually increase the scoring output of certain players.

Hard to predict without knowing how the coaches will actually deal with the changes.

 

[Modra93]

Hey lads, how are you all? good to be back for another preseason, how's everyones teams looking?

 

[SJ]

Im not saying it will decrease DT scoring as a whole just means more players than last year will get sub scores due to sub rule. two extra 50s this year being kind for those sub players which IMO will more than likley be younger players now or fringe players that avg about 50-70 points.

An example could be Tambling and S.Stevens for adelaide (example)

Last year they were capable of playing full games thus scoring there avg, now they play half there TOG and we assume half of what they scored last year. So on that basis we say Tambling scores 30 thus his price will plummett and S.Stevens scores 35 thus his price plummets aswell. Put together its 65 what they wouldve scores in a full game last year. But with this last year they wouldve stayed at a steady price this year they will drop in value and not help the magic number in our favour. This will happen not only for one club but also 17 clubs.

So you have 34 players affecting the magic number in a bad way for us DTers but the scoring as a whole between the players doesnt change compared to last season. Well it sort of does.

Another factor that muddies the waters further is that now there are effectively 42 players rotated through 120 minutes of footy, rather than 44 - so will this slightly increase the average scores for those who are not substitutes?

 

[Walesy]

Considering a vast majority of Gold Coast players are under priced, this would help speed up the reduction in the magic number.

Not only speed up the reduction, but increase it as well.

 

[Jolldo87]

Im not saying it will decrease DT scoring as a whole just means more players than last year will get sub scores due to sub rule. two extra 50s this year being kind for those sub players which IMO will more than likley be younger players now or fringe players that avg about 50-70 points.

An example could be Tambling and S.Stevens for adelaide (example)

Last year they were capable of playing full games thus scoring there avg, now they play half there TOG and we assume half of what they scored last year. So on that basis we say Tambling scores 30 thus his price will plummett and S.Stevens scores 35 thus his price plummets aswell. Put together its 65 what they wouldve scores in a full game last year. But with this last year they wouldve stayed at a steady price this year they will drop in value and not help the magic number in our favour. This will happen not only for one club but also 17 clubs.

So you have 34 players affecting the magic number in a bad way for us DTers but the scoring as a whole between the players doesnt change compared to last season. Well it sort of does.

But there is still always 18 players on the field at once. So theoretically at least if Tambling and Stevens both drop off someone else that gets the extra TOG picks up the slack. Therefore the pricing isn't going to be dropping as whilst Stevens and Tambling drop others will increase their averages in picking up the extra TOG.

The only way the pricing will be affected is if the overall point scoring drops and we won't know wether or not it will until the season starts.

 

[Dunn - Well Done]

But there is still always 18 players on the field at once. So theoretically at least if Tambling and Stevens both drop off someone else that gets the extra TOG picks up the slack. Therefore the pricing isn't going to be dropping as whilst Stevens and Tambling drop others will increase their averages in picking up the extra TOG.

The only way the pricing will be affected is if the overall point scoring drops and we won't know wether or not it will until the season starts.

I guess your right.

Im going to look alot more into scoring for teams this year and comparing it to other years ect. So many new coaches there and so many coaches moved on, it means game plan will be important in determining some picks.

Yes we are unsure if the extra time players will play will actually result in extra points. So i guess what your saying is the potential 65 points lost due to the sub means that those points could be made up by the other 18 or 20 players who get increased time.

So maybe it could be expected that scoring will naturally increase for those premium, certain best 18/20 players by about 2-4 points.

Im looking closely at past TOGs from last year for this exact reason, especially rucks. Leuy only played 71% last year, the least of all the dominant rucks and avg over 77 a game. Next year as the only main ruck he will be forced to play close to 85% maybe, although when having a player like M.Clark that might not be that high.

 

[Wheedus]

This is actually an interesting concept, I will look forward to seeing the affect of the total DT points.

Most reports seem to suggest that instead of player resting for 3-4 minutes before being rotated, they will rest for 1-2. This reduced resting time should maintain the same level of rotations, but it could actually increase the scoring output of certain players.

Hard to predict without knowing how the coaches will actually deal with the changes.

Means players with big tickers will be gold. Boyd & Cross. Will be worth having a close look at TOG stats for the MIDs last year.

 

[Dunn - Well Done]

Means players with big tickers will be gold. Boyd & Cross. Will be worth having a close look at TOG stats for the MIDs last year.

Something ive already looked at, but its hard to determine a players game fitness. Id argue from watching last year Swan was the bets but he is like 10th in magpies fitness test from what i here. Also a player like Stanton who runs all day 16.2 beep test he also only had 82% TOG last year. Which is just about as low as it gets for premium mids.

I however question him as a player and wouldnt suprise me if he got dropped next year if he doesnt perform. Also cant handle a tag and how many players avg above 100 from an essenedon type side.

 

[Murray79]

This is my take on the 2011 AFL Dream Team.

http://t.co/djZV0ec

One thing I didn't mention that in hindsight will be very important is to be well aware of the bye. Also to not stack up on one team because then it will cost you when that team has its bye.

Anyway this isn't to be taken too seriously, just my views on who to pick and some tips along the way. Cheers!

 

[yogibbear]

Okay i am cracking up now.

Okay let's discuss...

Who wants to be unique and skip on Swan?

I think it could work:

Obvious advantages:
-Can take another Magpies midfielder with ease e.g. Pendles/Beams (both set to improve and dominate more than Swan).
-Any differences between your captain and Swan if successful put you ahead of the rest of the competition. Goddard/Boyd/Chapman being most likely candidates. (let's say 2-5ppg average over the season advantage).
-Sub rule impact on Swan's rotations could impact his TOG due to fitness levels etc. not getting enough rest when needed to be able to get to the right spots like usual.
-Tattoos slow you down: http://ezinearticles.com/?First-Tattoo---What-to-Get&id=4194485
-People like to attack Swan when he is in public (as he probably made them lose their DT match): http://www.afl.com.au/tabid/208/default.aspx?newsid=98558

So...

I think the obvious concensus is to AVOID Dane Swan for 2011.

His price will drop and then trade him in after their rnd 14 bye or whatever if he isn't injured already.

...

..




.




.




.




Err.... you're still reading?

Oh...


Well that's nice...









You can stop now!







No, I'm being serious... completely flattered but err... this is creeping me out!





....




..



.



Okay... Swan is a lock. I am only kidding... blah blah blah blah...

 

[IsBillyThere]

This is actually an interesting concept, I will look forward to seeing the affect of the total DT points.

Most reports seem to suggest that instead of player resting for 3-4 minutes before being rotated, they will rest for 1-2. This reduced resting time should maintain the same level of rotations, but it could actually increase the scoring output of certain players.

Hard to predict without knowing how the coaches will actually deal with the changes.

I reckon DWD's point about the subs is a really good one, and those people who are subbed on or off will obviously score less, but one thing I don't think any of us know is how coaches will use the substitute rule, and it's no certainty that it will be rookies who are used as the 21st or 22nd man.

There are lots of scenarios which will not involve rookies being used as the sub - injuries, veterans who are only good for half a game, some sort of rotation of two big men between the fwd line and ruck with the sub being a third big man coming in at some stage when one of them has blown up to allow there to be three mid fielders on the bench.

If a team names 22 players of which 2 rookies (less likely to be talls or KPP) are the 21st and 22nd players, does just swapping them at half time really achieve much? Sure it gets them both half a game and the one in the second half is a bit fresher, but I reckon it cuts down the flexibility in other areas.

I expect we'll see some pretty creative uses of the sub this year.

I also expect I'll guess completely wrong and it'll end up costing me lots of DT points, but they'll still be creative!

 

[yogibbear]

I just reckon the sub will be an unloved utility that can't make it into best 21, but does into best 24 or so. Therefore, regardless of what happens in the match, they can serve a useful purpose.

 

[motorkerf]

At the pace the game is played these days injuries are common place (they may be very short term) but the coaches will be required to make decisions during the game as to when to "sub".

We get to trade after each round as we see fit. The coaches will not have that luxury of a week to think about whether to sub or not.

Match reports are littered with such comments such as "he was injured in the second quarter but returned to play out the 4th quarter".

If for example Goddard gets a nasty cork to the leg half way through the 2nd quarter, will they sub him fairly quickly or will they be patient and see what the situation is at the end of the third quarter before he returns or is subbed?

The teams that can manage to use their subs to rest players during the late 3rd and the 4th quarters will be in the minority rather than the majority and will be finishing near the pointy end of the premiership table I would think.

The effect on DT scores we wil not know until the end of R24. We can only speculate.

 

[Dunn - Well Done]

We can only speculate about everything, nothing will be 100% known till after R24.

A player will know if they can continue to play on or not, but it is an okay point you make.

When reading the last few post something popped into my head. I guess this makes players like Grimes, Higgins ect maybe less worth taking. These players always seem to get an injury or a knock in games, will that mean these players like them are more vunerable to being subbed meaning they can be brought in at a very cheap price.

Probably better examples but just some off the top of my head.

 

[Cat for Life]

We can only speculate about everything, nothing will be 100% known till after R24.

A player will know if they can continue to play on or not, but it is an okay point you make.

When reading the last few post something popped into my head. I guess this makes players like Grimes, Higgins ect maybe less worth taking. These players always seem to get an injury or a knock in games, will that mean these players like them are more vunerable to being subbed meaning they can be brought in at a very cheap price.

Probably better examples but just some off the top of my head.

No difference from normal. If they're injured in a game then you're in trouble anyway.