Random Question Thread (Part 3)

[RolyPolyRioli]

At this stage I just lose my thumbs to Joe the Bookie if I don't get the info, so yes I'll live.

The reason I'm interested is thinking about wasting an early trade or 2 in Round 4 changing rookies. If I plan to do this I will select less rookies from GC (ADL and NM too), knowing that I can get one or two of these guys in anyway.

EG: hold off on picking Swallow to see whether he is going to be scoring at the level required to increase significantly, then trade in at Round 4 when he is on the bubble. just trying to work out the cash likely to be needed to do this.

Just remember Swallow will not be rookie price - if your tactic is to hope a cheaper gets to his level so you can swap him in, that is highly risky.

I'll dig something up for price rises after rd 3, that will have to do. Will need an hour or two, but Tarquin is probably right.

 

[Nothing]

Cheers RPR.

 

[RolyPolyRioli]

The average rise for players with a price below 160K was @ 28K, but there were a few outliers there.

It is hard to get meaningful information - for example Ben Howlett started at 77800 and went up 52800, Jake Melksham started at 121500 went up 24500. Obviously they had different averages, but Melksham had to work harder to make money.

That's about all I can do at the moment, the variables are too great and I am not sure how much this will help - you just need to ensure the rookie you trade out has a good average, and then you have to ask yourself why am I trading him out.

Maybe consider starting with Swallow and having him on the bench? There's a thought!!!

 

[Wheedus]

Maybe consider starting with Swallow and having him on the bench? There's a thought!!!

Have been thinking about this but starts to limit your buying power for on-field players. If the hype surrounding him is justified he should get full games from the outset. Having said all that, if you're selecting him, he's gonna be on pine for Rd 1 regardless.

 

[54Dogs]

Does anyone know what the average FIRST price increase was for last year's rookies?

Don't know the average but some players individually were

Bastinac: 53K
Scully: 21K
Trengove: 38K
Martin: 30K
Pods: 73K
Barlow: 86K
Duncan: 40K
Howlett : 53K
Shuey: 49K

 

[Nothing]

Thanks RPR. In all likelihood I will be starting with Swallow, but if you are going to trade out an underperformer (someone who only made $20K) and is unlikely to get further games in the near future (2009 Beau Muston?) then it pays to think about what can be made by holding until after the bubble.

Just trying to look at different opportunities this year.

 

[RolyPolyRioli]

Don't know the average but some players individually were

Bastinac: 53K
Scully: 21K
Trengove: 38K
Martin: 30K
Pods: 73K
Barlow: 86K
Duncan: 40K
Howlett : 53K
Shuey: 49K

The interesting thing about the price rises is that the higher their starting value the less money they make - makes Swallow a risk as we were discussing the other night. He wont make money quickly, though over the year he will you would think, but in terms of quick money for upgrades he is no use. In fact he is a dilemma more than anything.

If he is 170-180K, I actually am not sure I will consider him - doesn't fit in with the structure probably needed which is quick upgrades to the guns.

 

[Dunn - Well Done]

The interesting thing about the price rises is that the higher their starting value the less money they make - makes Swallow a risk as we were discussing the other night. He wont make money quickly, though over the year he will you would think, but in terms of quick money for upgrades he is no use. In fact he is a dilemma more than anything.

If he is 170-180K, I actually am not sure I will consider him - doesn't fit in with the structure probably needed which is quick upgrades to the guns.

It goes without saying that the higher your price the harder it is to make money. But in Swallows case it wont be about him making quick money next year so you can quickly upgrade him. He is going to be a similar situation to Scully if you had him last year - in that he will be one of the last rookies you upgrade. So i think that will come around round 14 (depending on how the season plays out and how far behind you are, lots of variables). So when picking Swallow your mindset should be best 21 lock it in and priced at ~39 will increase his avg by ~31+, cant go wrong.

even for TAC cup last year he avg 65 (now people wouldnt think thats good looking purely at the number) but id still almost take that next year if hes priced at 39 and plays week in week out. But last year he was in a weak GC side, quite stronger this year, another preseason (so he has done 2 AFL preseason and a WAFL preseason), wouldve got tagged probably there best mid last year thus top 4 in liston trophy, moves to AFL where disposals are remarkably higher than TAC, gets to play in the sun in a free flowing AFL style game instead of a muddy horrid oval cold freezing awful melbourne ovals which dont suit young 17 year old bodies.

 

[54Dogs]

It goes without saying that the higher your price the harder it is to make money. But in Swallows case it wont be about him making quick money next year so you can quickly upgrade him. He is going to be a similar situation to Scully if you had him last year - in that he will be one of the last rookies you upgrade. So i think that will come around round 14 (depending on how the season plays out and how far behind you are, lots of variables). So when picking Swallow your mindset should be best 21 lock it in and priced at ~39 will increase his avg by ~31+, cant go wrong.

even for TAC cup last year he avg 65 (now people wouldnt think thats good looking purely at the number) but id still almost take that next year if hes priced at 39 and plays week in week out. But last year he was in a weak GC side, quite stronger this year, another preseason (so he has done 2 AFL preseason and a WAFL preseason), wouldve got tagged probably there best mid last year thus top 4 in liston trophy, moves to AFL where disposals are remarkably higher than TAC, gets to play in the sun in a free flowing AFL style game instead of a muddy horrid oval cold freezing awful melbourne ovals which dont suit young 17 year old bodies.

Rd 14 Swallow > Pendles

You know it makes sense

 

[Dunn - Well Done]

Rd 14 Swallow > Pendles

You know it makes sense

I get your idea

However ill likely start with Pendles, having said that there are 6-7 premium midfielders i really like ATM so he might just have to get the kick because i like so many others and bringing him in at round 14 could be sweet or after they play sydney in round 14.

Also is there such an idea as reducing the amount of byes? or am i thinking stupid

 

[54Dogs]

Also is there such an idea as reducing the amount of byes? or am i thinking stupid

No mate, absolutely a thought. Example would be Heppel > Gazza after Rd 9. Both GC byes done and Bombers 1st bye in Rd 10. Essentially 24 games from the 1 position.

It sounds OK in theory but it depends on prices at the time etc

 

[chadleverington]

and the number of trades u have

 

[yogibbear]

and the number of trades u have

So you're saying you'll be out of trades by rnd 9?

I would have thought most people might have used 5 or 6 tops. And all for upgrades.

 

[Wheedus]

Rd 14 Swallow > Pendles

You know it makes sense

+1 Let's hope he's ripe for the picking

 

[favourites]

I'd even go earlier, After the first bye would be ideal.

 

[Dunn - Well Done]

I'd even go earlier, After the first bye would be ideal.

Surely that would be another rookie, round 7 is very early on and much weaker players will be in your team other than Swallow. Although if money is a problem and Pendles is cheap at the time, than Swallow may be the man.

I still cant get over not starting Pendlebury but. He avg 115 over his last 16 games including finals which are known for poor scores.

 

[favourites]

Yeah last 16, but over the whole season he didn't.. So hoping for a similar start and a quick upgrade after the first bye. Not sure which rookie yet but that will be the ideal line of attack for me.

 

[Tom12]

If the option is there (form indicates the upgrade can be made early) and you can pikc up the player for a fast starting rookie, why wait? This season can reward those who play aggressive. Coaches who sit around allowing the fixture to mould their team too heavily will be caught out!

 

[yogibbear]

I would say that the bye structure and the dominance of Swan as a lock captain for most people makes Pendlebury a pretty unique person for your team over the first half of the season. If he performs he could set your team apart from the rest of the pack... (though you would need to be confident you can cover for the early collingwood bye).

 

[Wheedus]

I would say that the bye structure and the dominance of Swan as a lock captain for most people makes Pendlebury a pretty unique person for your team over the first half of the season. If he performs he could set your team apart from the rest of the pack... (though you would need to be confident you can cover for the early collingwood bye).

Couldn't get much better than Swan and Pendles on the 11 game run home

 

[Walesy]

No mate, absolutely a thought. Example would be Heppel > Gazza after Rd 9. Both GC byes done and Bombers 1st bye in Rd 10. Essentially 24 games from the 1 position.

It sounds OK in theory but it depends on prices at the time etc

Extend upon the idea- Stanton -> Gaz! The boy has been threatening to be a DT gun for years with his endurance, and hey- if it doesn't pay off, you've got a get-out-of-Stanton-free(ish) card considering he's guarenteed to miss two games from here out in.

 

[JMc#5]

Swan + Anthony

OR

Pendelbury + Bartel

Other 4 mids are Boyd and 190k, 180k and 100k

 

[Blues_FC]

STFU Walesy!

 

[Dunn - Well Done]

If the option is there (form indicates the upgrade can be made early) and you can pikc up the player for a fast starting rookie, why wait? This season can reward those who play aggressive. Coaches who sit around allowing the fixture to mould their team too heavily will be caught out!

Hmm this is an interesting post. I sort of agree with you but dont, im up in the air. I think the ones that will do the very best will work with the fixture like Favs is saying. If you can limit the amount of byes which is what Dogs and Favs are saying than you limit the need for cover and thus can take much riskier options in your starting side which can lead to more points if the risk are calcuated.

Reducing byes will be important dont get that wrong. Im unsure of the exact figure but a quick guesstimate is 36 byes are involved in the season. But you can have more than one player missing per bye, which can be sort of worked out with your starting side if you look at keepers and the earlier rounds for accuracy. Some people next year could have 36 byes (1 player each week) whilst others could have upto 150 (~4 byes per week). This will make an enormous difference on where you finish the year, i might even go as far to say that the person who has the less byes will be top 100 next year.

If you look at 36 verse 150 than but you have cover for all those byes than assuming you have a keeper who is avg 80 is replaced by a 50avg rookie for each of those byes than one team has already a 3420 advantage.

Couldn't get much better than Swan and Pendles on the 11 game run home

But they will probably be needed much earlier. If they arnt priced correctly and teams are likely to be in disarray by that time than you wont get the opportunity to upgrade to them. I like FAVS idea start with one star magpie and upgrade to one after the first bye when rookies start to hit there breakeven limit.

Ill pose the question what is Swans need if your taking Boyd and Goddard assuming they will avg within 3 points of Swan, do you need to start with Swan?? I say this because Pendlebury has the greater improvment/upside but with the fixture you get 2 good chances to upgrade to Swan who is fully priced and can only drop in value.

Extend upon the idea- Stanton -> Gaz! The boy has been threatening to be a DT gun for years with his endurance, and hey- if it doesn't pay off, you've got a get-out-of-Stanton-free(ish) card considering he's guarenteed to miss two games from here out in.

What the hell are you saying Walesy. I would recommend not starting with Stants in the first place.

Am i meant to disregard this post?

Swan + Anthony

OR

Pendelbury + Bartel

Other 4 mids are Boyd and 190k, 180k and 100k

Take it somewhere else player x vs player y is a start

 

[Wheedus]

But they will probably be needed much earlier. If they arnt priced correctly and teams are likely to be in disarray by that time than you wont get the opportunity to upgrade to them. I like FAVS idea start with one star magpie and upgrade to one after the first bye when rookies start to hit there breakeven limit.

That's what I'm saying. You gotta have Swan from the start. After round 13, you pick up Pendles. He might be the last MID upgrade you do. In any case, you've got both of them for 11 rounds staright from there (along with 4 other super premiums if you've played your cards right).

Gotta love the perfect world....