n00b advice thread

[m8rix]

When upgrading a mid-priced player:
How much would you pay for an upgrade gaining 10pts average?
How much would you pay for an upgrade gaining 20pts average?
How much would you pay for an upgrade gaining 50pts average?

What is the minimum gain in average you want for:
Money in the bank trade?
Double trade (trade funded by downgrading a cash cow)?
Triple trades (cashing down twice/upgrading once)?
Triple trades (cashing down once/upgrading twice)?

When downgrading to a cash cow:
What is the minimum profit you want to make?
What is the maximum average you are willing to sacrifice?
What is the minimum 2 game average for the cash cow?

 

[FBDonkey]

When upgrading a mid-priced player:
How much would you pay for an upgrade gaining 10pts average?
How much would you pay for an upgrade gaining 20pts average?
How much would you pay for an upgrade gaining 50pts average?

What is the minimum gain in average you want for:
Money in the bank trade?
Double trade (trade funded by downgrading a cash cow)?
Triple trades (cashing down twice/upgrading once)?
Triple trades (cashing down once/upgrading twice)?

When downgrading to a cash cow:
What is the minimum profit you want to make?
What is the maximum average you are willing to sacrifice?
What is the minimum 2 game average for the cash cow?

Its difficult to give exact figures without examples.

My guess on the first part would be 100k for 10 points, 200k for 30 points and 300-400k for 50+ points.

Money in the bank trade - you would hopefully going from 1 rookie to another rookie of the same scoring potential.

Double trade - You would be hoping to go rookie to rookie of same scoring potential. Then getting an extra 30-40 points from your upgrade (eg Otten to Dal Santo) A lot of this depends on the value of the rookie you are downgrading. For instance, downgrading Beams at his max might give you 200k, while downgrading Petrenko may only give you 130k

Triple trades - to be avoided if possible (although this season presents dilemmas with low scoring rookies such as Walker). Ultimately if you are using 3 trades you would want to be getting some1 like Cox or Ablett. You would want DalSanto, Riewoldt, Hodge at a minimum.

Triple trades 2 - You would be hoping for a 25 point gain from each upgrade. Really if you are doing 3 trades you would want a minimum of 50 points gained per week.

Cash cows
Downgrade - anything less than 200k seems fairly wasteful, although, as i said, trades gaining only 120-150k may be necessary this season.
Avg - you would hope to be sacrificing 0-10 points on a downgrade to a cash cow. (not always possible)
Minimum avg - you would really want a minimum avg of 60-70. However this season the rookies are so low scoring that you may have to settle for as low as 50. Anything less than 50 really doesnt look like it will make you much money. A 50 avg will yield about 150k, while a 60 avg yields about 200k after 8/9 weeks.

These are my initial thoughts on the subject. They could certainly be revised and would be improved by further contribution from others.

 

[m8rix]

Thanks for your insight FBDonkey.

I was thinking along very similar lines. But I too had not run any decent analysis on the subject.

Seeing as you took the time to give me such good answers I thought I should also take the time to do some analysis.

Say for analysis sake your 20 trades are distributed this way:

2 sideways trades (we all make them )
9 DG
9 UG (including LTI)

And you hope to achieve an increase of 200pts average over the season (take you from say 2100 to 2300)

If we have 9 upgrades to make this will require a gain of 22.2pts average on each of these upgrades.

If we pay $100k for every 10pt increase this will incur a average cost of about $240k for each upgrade which means you would not really want to make any less that $240k each time you cash in a CC.

Obviously this is a very basic analysis that does not take into account the moving nature of player values. Take Hodge for example who is currently playing below his potential, and is set to return to good form.

I think on this basis it really highlights the need for coaches to be opportunists and not chasers. If you chase a player this will be your downfall.

It also highlights to me that coaches really need to suck every penny they can from their cash cows $100k is not enough unless that is where they peek.

Taking into account the moving player value example I think we could half the cost of a 10pt gain in average to $50k which means you will want to make an average of $120k when cashing in your money makers.

 

[FBDonkey]

i think this makes sense. especially based on your trade allocation. i do my allocations differently which will yield different results.

I think you highlighted something that i missed from including in my original post. That is the value changes of players and picking them up cheap. This can mean that if you are in the right place at the right time you can reap huge rewards from upgrades. For instance, i did the skippy to roo upgrade last week.

Imagine that circumstances had been slightly different:

If skippy had been allowed to mature fully (to maybe 380k) and i still got riewoldt at the same price (549k), then that upgrade would only cost me 169k. I would expect skippy to avg 80 and roo to avg 120, so that would be 40 points for 169k, or only 4k per point.

As it was i paid about 240k, or 6k per point. The reason i could not fully maximise value on this trade was that skippy had not fully matured and his trade was necessary because of LTI.

Having thought about it further, it appears that about 5k = 1 point. A player with an avg of 50 points has a 250k price tage. a player with a 100 avg has a 500k price tag.

Therfore, the figures in my original post need to be recalculated to reflect this.

ie. for a 10 point gain you need 50k. for every 10 points after that add another 50k.

Is this calculation right? and should we be looking at these figures when making trade decisions?

 

[yeah_nah_yeah]

Thanks FBDonkey and M8trix. Very good analysis. Food for thought.

I must admit as a noob supercoach player, I haven't yet been thinking as "in depth" as yourselves.

Good work, keep it up!

 

[m8rix]

What you say makes a lot of sense. in fact simplifies my over complicated way of looking at it all greatly.

If you look at how SC values players @ 5k/pt then in general we should be looking at spending 4-5k/pt when upgrading.

should we be looking at these figures when making trade decisions?

This I am yet to figure out, certainly food for thought though.

At this stage I think yes, looking at the figures as a guide will help keep you on track (if you have done the calculations and know what sort of increase you want to achieve). Awareness of real life factors is equally important though. e.g. we know Ottens scored a 3 in round two which will affect his average when the 175 in round 1 drops off the back. We can discount the 3 completely because we know it is not indicative of his value and jump on board a cheap upgrade! Likewise we know when players are filling injury gaps taking them away from their natural game. i.e. Hodge (negative impact) and Meesen (positive impact).

 

[FBDonkey]

If 5k = 1 point then trades where you are paying less than 5k per point in increase is profitable. Obv point scoring expectations are guesses based on factors that you think are important. Obv the less you pay per point the better.

Other things to consider: the value using 1 of your 20 trades and LTIs. Also players who are maxing out, or players likely to improve in form.

Im interested to hear further analysis of this stuff. what other factors should we consider? how much value do you place on each factor? maybe this could be illustrated better by some examples?

 

[hawker21]

Hi Guys,

Ok im going to put a different spin on things for yous.

Few mention that you gotta scrap as much money as you can out of your cash cows and I have thought like this in the past.

But now I dont really agree with this theory at all.


Eg there is no point waiting on someone to go up an extra 50k if its going to take them an extra 5-6 weeks to do it of there are obvious choices around.

By doing this sometimes you are leaving so many points on the board by waiting.

Eg lets assume a particular trade is going to net you an extra 40 points per week and you can make this in round 11 but you say to yourself no im going to wait to round 17 when this player peaks.

Ok your making an extra 50K but your losing an extra 40 points * 6 (240) total in the time you are waiting for your player to mature.

So Realistically when doing these trades you also need to consider how many rounds are left when doing this.

Something to pay alot of attention to as the season gos on and this is why holding on to the trades towards the end of the season can be so vital as realistically you are not getting as many points out of your upgrades as this time of the season

 

[hawker21]

So with that said if you guys are putting a $value per point make sure this adjusts the further we are into the season as the $ per point avg is worth alot more now then in Round 22.

 

[shavedham2kg]

I think there is too many variables to really go indepth on this issue. You have to factor in things such as Guns down on form who may have a worse average than a rookie but have the potential for a bigger upside

 

[m8rix]

Hi Guys,

Ok im going to put a different spin on things for yous.

Few mention that you gotta scrap as much money as you can out of your cash cows and I have thought like this in the past.

But now I dont really agree with this theory at all.


Eg there is no point waiting on someone to go up an extra 50k if its going to take them an extra 5-6 weeks to do it of there are obvious choices around.

By doing this sometimes you are leaving so many points on the board by waiting.

I think I am coming to the same realisation during this discussion. I think you need to get an average of $150k from each cash cow. the faster the better. The perfect cash cow I reckon is one who is about to play 4th game and has scored an upward trend in first three games (48, 74, 98)

Reasons I think this is because:
1. They are named for the fourth time which is promising.
2. The fact they are improving is good
3. The high score will be factored in the next 2 price rises.

One negative is you miss the first rise, but there is less risk and you have had the extra week to watch them.

Same applies for the third gamers you are bringing in. High score is better on the second game.

So you can then keep them for as short as 3 or 4 rounds if you get $120k that is absolutly fine. You really only need to drag out 2 or 3 of your cash cows to bring your average profit up to $150k/cash in.

That will buy you a team increase of least 180-200pts by the end of the season @ 5k/pt (depends on your trade dispersion) but if you are opportunistic and use your footy head you should be able to add to that, even double it. If you know nothing about footy and you stick to 5k/pt you should still come out on top though.

 

[FBDonkey]

At the beginning of the year with 8 normal priced rookies you have 800k on the bench. For the following calculations, the value of bench players have to be excluded, and only players on the park count.

This leaves 9.2 mil on the park. If you divide 9.2 mil by 5k (5k per point) you should be getting 1840 points per week. If your players improve (which they should), the value of your players on the park will increase.

My score of 2300 per week means my team should be valued at 11.5 million (without taking into consideration the value of bench players). For every million $ increase on that, I should be gaining 200 points.

The aim is to take some of the increase in bench prices (rookies) and transfer that money onto the field. If I trade a 300k rookie for a 100k rookie and move that 200k onto the field, I should be getting a 40 point increase. Hopefully I can invest that 200k wisely and I will get more than a 40 point increase. If I can get a player that is about to hit form then I would be hoping for a 50+ point increase for the 200k.

I guess that the next step is to workout how much money you will be able to move from the bench to the field throughout the year, and how you can invest that money most effectively to increase the value by more than 5k per point.

If you can move 1 million on to the park, then you should be hoping to get more than a 200 point benefit due to your diligent investments. It seems like if you can move 700k onto the park then i think you should be really aiming for a 200 point increase.