DT 2011 Rookies Thread

[RolyPolyRioli]

Yes. There will always end up being players worth 86k that make just as much money as the highly heralded high draft picks who cost double the amount. Noone is disputing that. The key is that the very high draft picks are usually much safer picks. Every yr this argument is made. People wonder whether Scully/Trengove/Martin are worth paying more for, are Hill/Rich worth the extra coin, are Masten/Morton/Palmer worth it. They invariably are. Sure others who are cheaper may score just as well, but these high picks who play midfield and have good opportunity generally are safe picks.

GC is a bit of an anomaly. Will be a number of cheaper guys who have just as safe position in the team.

Gold Coast aside there are always cheap options who sneak under the radar. Not sure how long you have been doing DT for, so apologies if it's a while, but they never used to have different priced rookies, it's pretty recent.

Last year guys like Bastinac performed well from a cheap positions and saved a lot of money over a Scully/Trengove and was pretty serviceable despite a difference of @ 200 in points scored - at 50K cheaper you have to decide whether that is worth it, but I see the cheaper option as a bit lower risk.

I also think you are off the mark trying to relate price to performance, which is what you are doing in a way due to the pricing - even though the number one picks are higher priced, you still have to decide if they are worth it- therefore are they safe? Jack Watts wasn't very safe.

Anyway it's easy to pick exceptions that prove the rule, you are probably right but the extra money could be important.

 

[54Dogs]

Gold Coast aside there are always cheap options who sneak under the radar. Not sure how long you have been doing DT for, so apologies if it's a while,

Fair to say FL18 knows his way around the traps

 

[RolyPolyRioli]

Fair to say FL18 knows his way around the traps

Oh I thought it was footycool? Sorry.

 

[footylover18]

Gold Coast aside there are always cheap options who sneak under the radar. Not sure how long you have been doing DT for, so apologies if it's a while, but they never used to have different priced rookies, it's pretty recent.

Last year guys like Bastinac performed well from a cheap positions and saved a lot of money over a Scully/Trengove and was pretty serviceable despite a difference of @ 200 in points scored - at 50K cheaper you have to decide whether that is worth it, but I see the cheaper option as a bit lower risk.

I also think you are off the mark trying to relate price to performance, which is what you are doing in a way due to the pricing - even though the number one picks are higher priced, you still have to decide if they are worth it- therefore are they safe? Jack Watts wasn't very safe.

Anyway it's easy to pick exceptions that prove the rule, you are probably right but the extra money could be important.

I have been doing DT for a while. In all likelihood far longer than yourself, but i appreciate the history lesson nonetheless .

My post clearly stated that I was comparing midfield rookies who have playing opportunities. High draft pick midfielders with ready made AFL bodies have a good recent history of scoring well in their rookie years. The same does not apply to underage key position rookies. Comparing Scully to Watts is off the mark.

I had Basitnac in my side last yr so i'm well aware of his exploits. As i said, sure there will always be cheaper guys who perform as well as the expensive ones. I wasn't using PRICE to determine performance. I was using draft position. It just so happens that these days high draft positions means higher starting price. My point was that picking the higher draft picks tends to be easy. They generally get lots of games and often score very very well. Absolutely you can look under every nook and cranny to find a cheaper option and it very well may come off, but unless there is very very strong evidence that a cheaper guy is going to get v.good playing opportunities i tend to pay a bit extra and get the more heralded rookies.

 

[chadleverington]

based onthe afl website Daniel Harris will be under 120k and if so, he should be the most popular player in DT. averaged 106 in the suns vfl side last year, mature body, lock in 22. That is 50k less than david swallows expected price of 160k.

With the gold coast players this year, i think there will be more "cheap" rookies.

Harris,Iles,Jabocs,Atley,Mzungu,Callinan,Matera,Richardson,Pittard,Wallis,I Smith should all be 50k cheaper than swallow and gaff.

No matter how many good cheaper options there are, swallow and gaff still seem like value to me. Will see how many of the players above look like they will have job security. That is really what the 50k is for.

 

[LemmingMaster]

GC is a bit of an anomaly. Will be a number of cheaper guys who have just as safe position in the team.

This is what I was hinting at without spelling it out. I think there will be a number of cheap gold coast options that will be priced at a low starting point that I would prefer to obtain. There is also the potential Foley v Swallow option as well, not sure this year a player like Swallow will be worth the premium.

Then again, it really does depend on how many midfield rookies you plan to having in your starting lineup. Gold Coast and how their players are priced is really going to alter many teams. Lasts year I did start with Trengove and Martin, purely for their job security.

This year there may be 5+ bottom priced players with high job security, so is it really worth paying that extra $$ on a Swallow/Gaff option.

 

[RolyPolyRioli]

I have been doing DT for a while. In all likelihood far longer than yourself, but i appreciate the history lesson nonetheless .

My post clearly stated that I was comparing midfield rookies who have playing opportunities. High draft pick midfielders with ready made AFL bodies have a good recent history of scoring well in their rookie years. The same does not apply to underage key position rookies. Comparing Scully to Watts is off the mark.

I had Basitnac in my side last yr so i'm well aware of his exploits. As i said, sure there will always be cheaper guys who perform as well as the expensive ones. I wasn't using PRICE to determine performance. I was using draft position. It just so happens that these days high draft positions means higher starting price. My point was that picking the higher draft picks tends to be easy. They generally get lots of games and often score very very well. Absolutely you can look under every nook and cranny to find a cheaper option and it very well may come off, but unless there is very very strong evidence that a cheaper guy is going to get v.good playing opportunities i tend to pay a bit extra and get the more heralded rookies.

Yeah I've been going a while, too, just haven't posted here very much.

Because I didn't know your experience I was making generic comments as you seemed to focus in on the draft pick, but obviously you know about the slow development of a KPP.

I agree that if you have been doing this a while you can't compare Watts and Scully in terms of development time etc.

So that aside your point was that a Scully is safer than a Bastinac - I just don;t get that. Forget price and everything else, every year young players come through either from the beginning - Bastinac - or during the year - Ben Howlett from Essendon - who was a rookie.

At some point you have to say well Swallow is too bloody expensive, even if he is hyped up, and a cheaper option might cost me 400 points over the year but help my structure a lot more.

 

[Wheedus]

based onthe afl website Daniel Harris will be under 120k and if so, he should be the most popular player in DT. averaged 106 in the suns vfl side last year, mature body, lock in 22. That is 50k less than david swallows expected price of 160k.

With the gold coast players this year, i think there will be more "cheap" rookies.

Harris,Iles,Jabocs,Atley,Mzungu,Callinan,Matera,Richardson,Pittard,Wallis,I Smith should all be 50k cheaper than swallow and gaff.

No matter how many good cheaper options there are, swallow and gaff still seem like value to me. Will see how many of the players above look like they will have job security. That is really what the 50k is for.

Agree. If you're going to start a rookie on the field, you have to be fairly confident they're going to get a solid number of games.

 

[RolyPolyRioli]

Agree. If you're going to start a rookie on the field, you have to be fairly confident they're going to get a solid number of games.

Absolutely.

Maybe people need to be specific in their discussions of rookies about whether they are talking about for their starting squad, rd 2 team (after GC bye), dual position or simply depth/cash cow.

 

[54Dogs]

This year there may be 5+ bottom priced players with high job security, so is it really worth paying that extra $$ on a Swallow/Gaff option.

There's also 3 more holes to fill on the bench though plus 40 odd byes to cover you team for so JS will be paramount this year.

At some point you have to say well Swallow is too bloody expensive, even if he is hyped up, and a cheaper option might cost me 400 points over the year but help my structure a lot more.

You don't have to say he's too expensive, you just weigh up the pros and cons.

So Swallow is essentially priced at 45 ppm on fanplanner (maybe cheaper when DT opens next week). What do do believe he'll average. 75? 80? So he has say 30-35 points upside. Say Rookie Z is priced at 86K he is valued at 21 ppm. So if he averages say 50-55 he has the same value as Swallow.

But how much premium do you put on job security. For every Bastinac there are 10 Relton's waiting in the wings. You are missing 40 games before you get an injury or suspension, the last thing you want is players dropped as well.

The other factor is that there is so much cash this year that you can lock in a solid base of premiums and still afford the added security of a Swallow / Gaff without compromising the team.

 

[RolyPolyRioli]

There's also 3 more holes to fill on the bench though plus 40 odd byes to cover you team for so JS will be paramount this year.

You don't have to say he's too expensive, you just weigh up the pros and cons.

So Swallow is essentially priced at 45 ppm on fanplanner (maybe cheaper when DT opens next week). What do do believe he'll average. 75? 80? So he has say 30-35 points upside. Say Rookie Z is priced at 86K he is valued at 21 ppm. So if he averages say 50-55 he has the same value as Swallow.

But how much premium do you put on job security. For every Bastinac there are 10 Relton's waiting in the wings. You are missing 40 games before you get an injury or suspension, the last thing you want is players dropped as well.

The other factor is that there is so much cash this year that you can lock in a solid base of premiums and still afford the added security of a Swallow / Gaff without compromising the team.

I avoided Relton last year, even though he was named on the Thursday night, but those who picked him were a bit unlucky. I think you need to be wary around the team boards at BF a lot of clubs talk up their players and really any kid can be dropped after a few games and throw your team into disarray.

There is no magic formula really so that is what makes this year so interesting - the GC effect. Swallow will play no doubt, is he worth more than Harris...judgement call. Is there possibly a MUCH cheaper option - probably, I would say certainly.

Your point about the price of rookies is OK, I understand that line of thought, but I don't view it that way - I don't think you pay 86K for 21 points then need 45, it is more about the percentage increase over starting price - so 42 is a 100% return on starting price - for Swallow to do that he would need to average 100.

Now some maths guy come and prove me wrong

 

[54Dogs]

Your point about the price of rookies is OK, I understand that line of thought, but I don't view it that way - I don't think you pay 86K for 21 points then need 45, it is more about the percentage increase over starting price - so 42 is a 100% return on starting price - for Swallow to do that he would need to average 100.

Now some maths guy come and prove me wrong

In the simplest terms the reason you pay a premium for players is because they have less risk. That risk could be scoring related, injury related, suspension related or job security related.

If you pay 240K for Adcock you are not expecting a 100% increase on your investment but you know that with the extra coin you have outlayed he is in the best 22 and has the capacity to score at keeper level.

If you pay 510K for Swan you know you have almost certainly locked in the highest DT scorer for 2011 with very little injury risk who is a rock solid captain option. Premium paid, captain locked away.

If you pay 180K for Swallow you know you have a player who will get huge opportunities through the midfield, plenty of TOG, rock solid JS and is highly unlikely to be subbed off and have his scoring chopped in half.

If you pay 86K for a rookie who comes through in the Nab Cup you run the risk of the player being dropped after 1-2 poor games or having their scoring impacted by being subbed off, or even worse being the sub. The risk is greater but with that greater risk you would expect a greater return on your investment, otherwise nobody would take the risk.

The greater the risk the greater the return you require.


So if I was taking the risk on an 86K speculator over Swallow I would absolutely expect a better return for my outlay. With Swallow I can sit back and enjoy the ride, not worrying about Thursday night being axed, being named the sub before the game or being subbed off during the game. Similar to the ride enjoyed with Scully, Trengove and Martin last year.

How many rookies were the 21st or 22nd player picked last year? If so, the risk is far greater this year. Not saying to steer clear but just saying DT in 2011 is a different beast with byes and subs, the landscape has changed and the thought process also needs to evolve.

As for the maths, can't be bothered on Aus Day, maybe on the weekend but it's pretty simple. 1 point increase = $4K. So it's not about a % increase, it's about the increase in $ from your starting price.

 

[Artax]

Yeah a lot of people do get sucked in by picking a rookie just because they are named they assume they will get a handful of games. I got stiffed with Jesse Obrien last year when I downgraded to him to cover multiple injuries in my backline (Kennelly, Ladson, Goose). He played one game and wasn't seen again. Luckily he was DPP and I swapped him and benched him out for the season in the forwards. Won't be making the mistake this year!

 

[RolyPolyRioli]

Thanks for that 54Dogs.

I agree with all that (yes even the maths part) except the assumption that someone who is 86K will not have "Job Security" - which is what I presume JS means. There will be a few at GC who will, but that will come out in time.

I believe there is a psychological issue there - about which I am not qualified to comment

Back to cricket and some more VB, crap stuff. I will continue looking at this and the excellent Keeper Values thread on the weekend.

 

[54Dogs]

Thanks for that 54Dogs.

I agree with all that (yes even the maths part) except the assumption that someone who is 86K will not have "Job Security" - which is what I presume JS means. There will be a few at GC who will, but that will come out in time.

I believe there is a psychological issue there - about which I am not qualified to comment

Back to cricket and some more VB, crap stuff. I will continue looking at this and the excellent Keeper Values thread on the weekend.

Don't get me wrong, if they're 86K and have very little risk lock em in. You're right, the GC creates a whole new environment as well which has to be factored in. Will be a challenge to get it right for the fringe players for GC when they have the bye in round 1.

 

[footylover18]

One thing's for sure. If you're good enough to be able to nail 3 86-100k rookies on your midfield bench then that'll be a huge advantage. Potentially 200k+ saving right there than can go a long way to improving your starting side.

 

[Bifrost]

How many GC rookies is it pure madness to have on your team?

I have put together a pretty rough side (which is still missing a midfielder and two forwards...like I said: rough), but at this stage it has 2 GC rookies on every line except rucks which has 1.

It feels like madness, but with 3 bench players this year and the wealth of high-JS GC rookies, it just doesn't feel enough like madness to change it.

 

[Walesy]

How many GC rookies is it pure madness to have on your team?

I have put together a pretty rough side (which is still missing a midfielder and two forwards...like I said: rough), but at this stage it has 2 GC rookies on every line except rucks which has 1.

It feels like madness, but with 3 bench players this year and the wealth of high-JS GC rookies, it just doesn't feel enough like madness to change it.

It's a risk, no doubt- but this year is a year like no other, and perhaps it could be a risk that get's you a new car...

 

[54Dogs]

How many GC rookies is it pure madness to have on your team?

I have put together a pretty rough side (which is still missing a midfielder and two forwards...like I said: rough), but at this stage it has 2 GC rookies on every line except rucks which has 1.

It feels like madness, but with 3 bench players this year and the wealth of high-JS GC rookies, it just doesn't feel enough like madness to change it.

I don't think 8 GC rookies is unreasonable if you feel sure they'll play Rd 2 .

The big advantage is you can lock in a team with 22 starters Rd 1 excluding the GC players and know you won't cop a donut. Some of your GC players will be upgraded prior to Rd 9 so you may only have 3-4 left to cover the 2nd bye.

If GC had the bye in say Rd 5 I'd be treading a lot more carefully.

 

[Jars458]

Would like to know aswell.

.

On Smith, reports are that he has been training very well but I would stay away. Crows very rarely play 1st year players. All though Smith is ready I think that we have a lot of competition this year and he will be behind Symes Jaesnch Calinan Martyn Sloane etc who are competing for the last few spots.

 

[Tom12]

One thing's for sure. If you're good enough to be able to nail 3 86-100k rookies on your midfield bench then that'll be a huge advantage. Potentially 200k+ saving right there than can go a long way to improving your starting side.

Potentially is the key word, makes more sense to pick the rookies who are more assured of getting games early IMO. Obvisouly the cheaper guys are harder to pick.

 

[54Dogs]

On Smith, reports are that he has been training very well but I would stay away. Crows very rarely play 1st year players. All though Smith is ready I think that we have a lot of competition this year and he will be behind Symes Jaesnch Calinan Martyn Sloane etc who are competing for the last few spots.

ollie, please note


..

 

[Dunn - Well Done]

This is what I was hinting at without spelling it out. I think there will be a number of cheap gold coast options that will be priced at a low starting point that I would prefer to obtain. There is also the potential Foley v Swallow option as well, not sure this year a player like Swallow will be worth the premium.

Then again, it really does depend on how many midfield rookies you plan to having in your starting lineup. Gold Coast and how their players are priced is really going to alter many teams. Lasts year I did start with Trengove and Martin, purely for their job security.

This year there may be 5+ bottom priced players with high job security, so is it really worth paying that extra $$ on a Swallow/Gaff option.

Yeh good point Tarqs

If your going to be taken more rookies than the usual than your going to want to err on the side of caution and reduce risk. With that would mean players like Swallow and Gaff would be the better option if your taking 5 or 6 rookies at of the 9 in the midfield.

 

[Dunn - Well Done]

Great discussion from dogs and also RPR.

enjoyed reading it and the great feedback given by Dogs, very well said.

I think we need to really concentrate alot on the GC side. I will only be trying to pick those certain top 20 players. I like alot of the GC players, unsure where Lock sits as mentioned. He will have to be watched over preseason and determined why he was given the captaincy last year.

Suprised Swallow wasnt in that leaders group, maybe not a leader like his older brother or will come with time. But he is likely to be priced at ~ 160k and thats only a 38.5 avg. I can certainly see him avg around 80 but i would be happy with 70+ for him with the added job security he brings. But also guys like D.Stanley, Harris (lock if under 120k, wil probs start onball with GAZ and Richsa), Illes ect.

Im probably looking at starting 3 GC rookies in my mids and down back. I dont see enough i like upforward yet besides Matera, but im sure a few more like May will pop up.

How much easier would the game be if GC played round 1, bloody stupid fixture. Having said that it would mean everyone would take the GC players and everyone would have the same sides.

 

[Wheedus]

How much easier would the game be if GC played round 1, bloody stupid fixture. Having said that it would mean everyone would take the GC players and everyone would have the same sides.

I see it as a good thing. Will mean those who have done their homework will benefit.