Random Question Thread (Part 4)

[HTFU]

Yeah they tried to stop it by making it automatically select a captain and vice captain when you saved your team. But the Aussie way of always trying to be a smart $%#% prevailed by using a non playing player to still utilise the loophole.

Australia! You fukcing beauty!

Simon Black for VC then. Wish I'd read this last week...

 

[Spider Klein]

Should I be playing 5 premiums in the midfield (Ablett,Selwood,Boyd,Fyfe,Dayne Beams and Magner) with devon smith and milera on the field in the forward line or should I have (Ablett,Selwood,Boyd,Dayne Beams, C Smith and Magner) with only milera on the field in the forward line alongside (Franklin, Fyfe, Sidebottom, Pavlich, Rioli and martin)?

Basically your question is to start Devon Smith or start Clay Smith.

Tough call. I am thinking Devon Smith if Griffen is back.

 

[Keystone agony]

Where can i find the total of DT point scored for round 1 2011. For some reason i think scoring has severely sky rocketed in just one year.

 

[Spider Klein]

Where can i find the total of DT point scored for round 1 2011. For some reason i think scoring has severely sky rocketed in just one year.

Would say you would have to look up the totals for each team and add the 18 scores up. That is all I can think of.

Maybe high scoring with lots of possessions and zoning means more tackle points but also a few common rookies (kennedy, Smith, Bugg, Magner) scored well and nearly all the premium mids (swan, pendles, boyd, ablett, rocky, selwood, thompson, murphy) got big scores meaning scores are high this round. Add to this Buddy, Birchall, Fyfe and bigs scores were always on the cards.

I remember thinking given the success of so many common choices I was surprised the winner wasn't higher.

 

[Keystone agony]

I have the scores for 2012 Spider, but i want the 2011 round 1 scores? anywhere you know i can get them?

 

[Keystone agony]

Just worked it out.

In 2011
The avergae for round 1 per team was 1407

In 2012
The average has risen for round 1 per team to be 1537

Thats a 130 point increase per team. 130/22 (per player) = 6 points extra scored per player in 2012 compared to 2011.

So it could be said that keeper numbers have risen againt by 6 in each position. eg: the 15th best player for each position last year avg this, remember this is if they played enough games to be considered a keeper.

Mids: 104
Forwards: 87
Backs: 75

This year with the way the stats are heading, with each player scoring 6 points higher than last year. Keeper numbers will be:

Mids 110
Backs 81
Forwards 93

 

[Spider Klein]

Just worked it out.

In 2011
The avergae for round 1 per team was 1407

In 2012
The average has risen for round 1 per team to be 1537

Thats a 130 point increase per team. 130/22 (per player) = 6 points extra scored per player in 2012 compared to 2011.

So it could be said that keeper numbers have risen againt by 6 in each position. eg: the 15th best player for each position last year avg this, remember this is if they played enough games to be considered a keeper.

Mids: 104
Forwards: 87
Backs: 75

This year with the way the stats are heading, with each player scoring 6 points higher than last year. Keeper numbers will be:

Mids 110
Backs 81
Forwards 93

Lol I found it too, 6 points per player

That means 22x6 = 132 extra points on average for each DT. That seems like a lot.

edit: Hadn't done the numbers yet though

 

[Spider Klein]

Keystone I put the average per team for round 1 last year at 1516.7

 

[Keystone agony]

Lol I found it too, 6 points per player

That means 22x6 = 132 extra points on average for each DT. That seems like a lot.

Yep scoring looks like it will be through the roof this year.

See Selwood scored 112 which is 3 points over his 2011 avg of 109, but looking at that now he is behind par as he should really be scoring 115 according to the analysis and stats.

 

[Keystone agony]

Keystone I put the average per team for round 1 last year at 1516.7

Hmm i have 1407?

Where did you get your scores from?

Thad be hard to get considering only 3 teams scored higher than 1516, one being essendon with 1799 however buldogs only scored 979 opposing them.

The buldogs scored the lowest in 2011 at 979, this year i think Richmond were the lowest at 1322 or something (not 100% on that one) just shows the difference.

I think im giving too much away and doing to much analysis for everyone else where as i should be keeping it to myself lol.

 

[Spider Klein]

Hmm i have 1407?

Where did you get your scores from?

http://www.afl.com.au/stats/tabid/73/default.aspx#page=team&roundid=1085

just did kicks x 3, HB x 2, marks x 3, etc and then divided by 16

 

[Keystone agony]

I got 1516 aswelll, i was looking at dream team scores for 2011 round 1.

http://www.afl.com.au/home/tabid/11432/default.aspx

 

[Spider Klein]

I got 1516 aswelll, i was looking at dream team scores for 2011 round 1.

http://www.afl.com.au/home/tabid/11432/default.aspx

Those don't seem so good.

For example I added each players score from the Western Bulldogs and got 1294. They say the total for the bulldogs was 979

Only tested this one as 979 seemed ridiculously low and when I added each player it seems I was right.

 

[Spider Klein]

Personally I put scoring up 23 points per team so about 1 point per player.

Hence probably only expect dream teams to score 22 points more.

However I stand by my claim of common rookies and every premium mid doing well so scores high

 

[Keystone agony]

Edit: Your right, i have it written down from last year. They scored 1294 and the average was 1514-1516 roughly

Ignore the last page, hahha. Maybe a 20 point increase per team and thus one point per player, but thats nit pickings.

Thanks

 

[James]

Edit: Your right, i have it written down from last year. They scored 1294 and the average was 1514-1516 roughly

Ignore the last page, hahha. Maybe a 20 point increase per team and thus one point per player, but thats nit pickings.

Thanks

Its called footy knowledge, research and basic maths. Another is luck which you will need to rely on heavily to do well unless you get someone else to help you because you don't have any of the other 3.

The fail is strong with you DWD

 

[MarkRobboPA1870]

Basically your question is to start Devon Smith or start Clay Smith.

Tough call. I am thinking Devon Smith if Griffen is back.

Yes Thankyou for simplifying that

And yeah i'm thinking dev aswell because he is playing against St Kilda who are down on form and Clay has adelaide so I think I will go for dev

 

[swanton]

Yes Thankyou for simplifying that

And yeah i'm thinking dev aswell because he is playing against St Kilda who are down on form and Clay has adelaide so I think I will go for dev

they are playing north

 

[MarkRobboPA1870]

they are playing north

Yeah sorry I was looking at gold coast but north are probably even worse

 

[James]

What was that you were saying about J.Selwood, thought he had only played 67% TOG or something.

As a 30-40 year old, i didn't listen because i couldn't care less all i took was your an adult and old and act like a loser on a forum that is 12 years old.

I dont understand what is wrong saying "i looked at stats that gave me incorrect scores" something stubborn people that fail hard cant do. Im not going to reply to you and im going to block you, if you wish to talk to me PM me, your useless and a pathetic adult.

LOL nice meltdown, duche.

 

[entourage]

At a price of 342,800 and a score last week of 68, any ideas as to how much Hale will need to score over the next 2 weeks to at least maintain his value?

 

[Keystone agony]

At a price of 342,800 and a score last week of 68, any ideas as to how much Hale will need to score over the next 2 weeks to at least maintain his value?

Who would you consider bring Hale in after a 68?

He would need to score 72 and 72 in his next 2 roughly to maintain roughly the same price.

 

[entourage]

Not looking to bring him in, he is already in my side

 

[entourage]

Oh and thanks for numbers!

 

[James]

Not looking to bring him in, he is already in my side

Hale > Kruezer FTW!