Deeper / 'Strategy'-type questions....

[Jan Juc]

Sick of seeing the usual "this is my team, what do you guys think of it"-type posts, thought I'd try and stimulate some 'deeper' thoughts on a couple of points, would appreciate input from anybody.......

1. Is the 20m kick rule just a trial rule for the NAB Cup, or will it transfer into season proper this year?
I ask this specifically with Joel Bowden, and other runnning/linking backs in mind. Looking at starting prices, Bowden ($644k) is head and shoulders above the rest of the field (Goddard 2nd most expensive at $549k). If the 20m rule is enforced, will it make that much harder for these 'cheap' possession magnets to keep racking them up - they won't be able to chip-receive-chip-receive anymore. Having to kick at least 20m will bring their scores down.

2. Has the new 'hands-in-the-back' rule/interpretation made key position defenders obselete?
Whilst more a SC question than a DT question, the amount of free kicks paid against key backmen is a worry. Blokes that used to feel for contact, or blokes matched up against the monster forwards are now going to be pinged -3 points quite regularly. Your O'Hailpins, Thorntons, Bassetts, Michaels, Fletchers etc. come to mind. Whilst they (key backmen) were a dying breed in Fantasy Footy games, I feel they may now officially become extinct.

3. What do people view as the most important position on the Fantasy Footy field?
This year, with only having four positions to fill, I would say RUCK would prove to be most crucial. With less positions to fill equating to less room for error, you stuff up your RUCKS you're in a bit of trouble. Many teams posted have gone 'cheap' in the rucks, many have sub-$100k speculative picks on the bench, many have rucks with injury concerns. Unless your top two rucks are guns that will play every week, you may come up short. That said, even your 3rd (bench) ruck needs to play most weeks (and score) as a back-up. Am I the only person that thinks this way - or is starting Darcy on the ground, having Griffin/Meesen, or West/Renouf combinations on the bench really the way to go?

 

[lion_gooner]

i forgot about the new 20 metre rule i really dont know whether to stick with the bowdens now but there are'nt really any real possesion winning defenders are there?

 

[beaver fever]

1. It's just a trial
2. They have always been obsolete
3. Backs are the most critical in my opinion because there are not many genuine stars and high scorers. There are plenty of options in the other positions.

I agree that rucks are important, but now that there are only 2 positions to fill, I would argue it is easier to fill the ruck position. The rucks have the same problem as the backs (little star depth), but now you only need 2, it is easier to get it right. However ruck depth is now more important than before.

 

[Jan Juc]

2. They have always been obsolete

Don't know about that (SC, in particular) - an example being Dustin Fletcher who has averaged 102, 107 and 104 the last three seasons.

However ruck depth is now more important than before.

My point exactly. Having two nobodies on the bench means automatic trade when one of your playing rucks goes down. With only four to choose from, getting it nailed exactly becomes all the more important.

 

[The Made Guy]

My point exactly. Having two nobodies on the bench means automatic trade when one of your playing rucks goes down. With only four to choose from, getting it nailed exactly becomes all the more important.

I don't choose my team with an expectation that players are going to get injured. That is just screwy logic.

And how can you possibly know when a player will cop an injury? In R15 for example? So then you draw upon your gun substitute off the bench without having to do a trade. Meanwhile, 14 rounds have passed by where you've had $$ and Points sitting on the bench doing nothing.

 

[Jan Juc]

NOBODY chooses their team with the expectation of injuries.

My point was if you have two non-playing rookies on your ruck bench, the minute one of your playing rucks goes down it is a trade.

On the flipside, you may have two gun rucks on the ground, a back-up (Hudson, Cloke etc.) and a nobody. One of your guns cops a suspension or an injury, your 'Ben Hudson' can come on and still score, whilst you keep your gun for the week or two they're out at only a minor downgrade. No trades required.

I'm just trying to work out why people would have two $90k, non-playing rucks on their bench.

 

[shiva25]

Sick of seeing the usual "this is my team, what do you guys think of it"-type posts, thought I'd try and stimulate some 'deeper' thoughts on a couple of points, would appreciate input from anybody.......

1. Is the 20m kick rule just a trial rule for the NAB Cup, or will it transfer into season proper this year?
I ask this specifically with Joel Bowden, and other runnning/linking backs in mind. Looking at starting prices, Bowden ($644k) is head and shoulders above the rest of the field (Goddard 2nd most expensive at $549k). If the 20m rule is enforced, will it make that much harder for these 'cheap' possession magnets to keep racking them up - they won't be able to chip-receive-chip-receive anymore. Having to kick at least 20m will bring their scores down.

2. Has the new 'hands-in-the-back' rule/interpretation made key position defenders obselete?
Whilst more a SC question than a DT question, the amount of free kicks paid against key backmen is a worry. Blokes that used to feel for contact, or blokes matched up against the monster forwards are now going to be pinged -3 points quite regularly. Your O'Hailpins, Thorntons, Bassetts, Michaels, Fletchers etc. come to mind. Whilst they (key backmen) were a dying breed in Fantasy Footy games, I feel they may now officially become extinct.

3. What do people view as the most important position on the Fantasy Footy field?
This year, with only having four positions to fill, I would say RUCK would prove to be most crucial. With less positions to fill equating to less room for error, you stuff up your RUCKS you're in a bit of trouble. Many teams posted have gone 'cheap' in the rucks, many have sub-$100k speculative picks on the bench, many have rucks with injury concerns. Unless your top two rucks are guns that will play every week, you may come up short. That said, even your 3rd (bench) ruck needs to play most weeks (and score) as a back-up. Am I the only person that thinks this way - or is starting Darcy on the ground, having Griffin/Meesen, or West/Renouf combinations on the bench really the way to go?

Your dead right on the rucks being the most important position as they will usually score the most.Ive based my side on having Cox and Lade with the other 2 ruckman being 83k players who probably wont play at all.
Going cheap on the rucks will almost certainly cost you a good start and although they are both expensive they are worth the money.
The forwards are the next most important positions where there isnt a lot of quality pick ups for under 400k and you really need to have a couple of guns like Hall,Reiwoldt or Pavlich as they are likely to be big point scorers compared to the rest
The midfield has a plethora of players under the 450k mark you can pick up that will give you good scores and this is an area where i believe i have picked up some cheap players who will still score well to compensate for me having 2 gun rucks and 2 gun forwards
Backs dont really score that highly and are least important so ive gone cheap here with most of my backman being under 450k and there are some good buys under that price

 

[The Royal Sampler]

NOBODY chooses their team with the expectation of injuries.

On the contrary, I would think most people buying Koschitzke expect him to be injured for at least part of the season.

 

[writeoff]

I actually found the rucks the easiest position to pick this year. I think Hudson is an absolute bargin as he was most famous in 2005 for his second and third efforts - so that might be a hitout, tackle and handball in the one play. Of course there is a question mark over his knee as plenty of players have had multiple knee reconstructions but Hudson has had nearly 18 months to get over his, not the usual 9 months. If he stays injury free I think he will finish in the top 5-7 points scorers for rucks.

The other rucks that appear good value IMO are Sandilands, Campbell and Wood who will do most of the ruck duties for their respective clubs. They may not score as much as Lade, Cox etc but are $200k+ less.

In regards to the other positions I never pick any of the top five players as they are most likely to drop in value whereas players ranked 6-15 will probably score just as much (or near enough) and be considerably cheaper. This allows for a more balanced side overall.

I think there are 3 bargins in SC but all 3 players are returning from injury and are therefore a risk, but their upside is potentially big $$$$.

*Disclaimer 1: This is my 1st time playing SC so bear that in mind when pondering my opinion. Please feel free to correct my misguided views as that can only help me.

**Disclaimer 2: I have changed my 1st draft team a fair bit that I posted in the SC thread.

 

[shiva25]

On the contrary, I would think most people buying Koschitzke expect him to be injured for at least part of the season.

I cant understand why people would be picking Koschitzke up even though he is cheap because if your going to use him in your starting lineup you almost certainly need a reserve on the bench ready to step in which involves spending more money.I have chosen most of my reserves to be $83-90k players who i think may play at some stage of the year thus allowing more money for me to choose a higher priced player other than Koschitzke whos actually more guareenteed to play
I have therfore chosen 22 starting players and focused on spending the bulk of my money on them with the other 8 being $83-90k players.Obviously this is a bit of a risk as if a player you expect to play pulls out you may not have anyone to step in but if you take the right risk and get it right you will get off to a good start
Players values wont rise or decrease until after round 3 so if i find that Koschitzke has played and done well after 3 rounds and i can see that his price is going to rise then i will put him then and it wont cost me anymore but for the time being i would prefer to see how he goes over the 1st few weeks

 

[The Made Guy]

I'm just trying to work out why people would have two $90k, non-playing rucks on their bench.

Because taking risk, and having some luck, are 2 of the things that will win you this competition.

 

[pol06]

this is so deep

 

[rado]

Wat about Mooney as a ruckman??
i reckon thats a good price 4 just over $400,000

 

[The Royal Sampler]

Koschitzke is the reserve on my bench. No way would I be relying on him to score points for me at this stage. He is cheap as chips and a good player when right, plus if he misses games due to injury his price doesn't drop in that time.

I believe in putting undervalued players on the bench who are going to be automatic selections for their team, so that they either serve as a backup or a cash cow.

 

[sante]

Another 'deep' question:

Regarding the scoring system for SC - What do they mean by a 40m kick not going to a contest scores 0?

I'm quite confused on what an effective kick is too in this game and how they interpret an ineffective kick?

 

[LukeHodge15]

Sick of seeing the usual "this is my team, what do you guys think of it"-type posts, thought I'd try and stimulate some 'deeper' thoughts on a couple of points, would appreciate input from anybody.......

1. Is the 20m kick rule just a trial rule for the NAB Cup, or will it transfer into season proper this year?
I ask this specifically with Joel Bowden, and other runnning/linking backs in mind. Looking at starting prices, Bowden ($644k) is head and shoulders above the rest of the field (Goddard 2nd most expensive at $549k). If the 20m rule is enforced, will it make that much harder for these 'cheap' possession magnets to keep racking them up - they won't be able to chip-receive-chip-receive anymore. Having to kick at least 20m will bring their scores down.

2. Has the new 'hands-in-the-back' rule/interpretation made key position defenders obselete?
Whilst more a SC question than a DT question, the amount of free kicks paid against key backmen is a worry. Blokes that used to feel for contact, or blokes matched up against the monster forwards are now going to be pinged -3 points quite regularly. Your O'Hailpins, Thorntons, Bassetts, Michaels, Fletchers etc. come to mind. Whilst they (key backmen) were a dying breed in Fantasy Footy games, I feel they may now officially become extinct.

3. What do people view as the most important position on the Fantasy Footy field?
This year, with only having four positions to fill, I would say RUCK would prove to be most crucial. With less positions to fill equating to less room for error, you stuff up your RUCKS you're in a bit of trouble. Many teams posted have gone 'cheap' in the rucks, many have sub-$100k speculative picks on the bench, many have rucks with injury concerns. Unless your top two rucks are guns that will play every week, you may come up short. That said, even your 3rd (bench) ruck needs to play most weeks (and score) as a back-up. Am I the only person that thinks this way - or is starting Darcy on the ground, having Griffin/Meesen, or West/Renouf combinations on the bench really the way to go?

Great Thread

Push in the back rule will settle down as the season progresses. Just like every rule they bring in each year. Umpires go ballistic the 1st few games then it slowly relaxes and we get back to normal footy. Remember when they said they were going to be harder on the "Holding the Ball Rule" a few years back.

Ruck position is driving me crazy,

 

[Jan Juc]

Great Thread

Cheers mate.

A few people have taken the p1ss over the thread title ("deeper"), but I just got so sick of twelve year olds posting their teams time and time again - I would rather debate the nuts and bolts behind things and to and fro over strategies than tell some muppet "16 Richmond players is maybe a little too much for your Dream Team" or "do you really think having Hay, Hentschel and Bailey in your team is a good idea?"

 

[sante]

Cheers mate.

A few people have taken the p1ss over the thread title ("deeper"), but I just got so sick of twelve year olds posting their teams time and time again - I would rather debate the nuts and bolts behind things and to and fro over strategies than tell some muppet "16 Richmond players is maybe a little too much for your Dream Team" or "do you really think having Hay, Hentschel and Bailey in your team is a good idea?"

So true.

My post - I wasn't taking the piss out of ya by saying 'deep', I was actually serious.