Strategy

[Kildonan]

Both Dream Team (DT) and Super Coach (SC) require using some strategy in order to be competitive. Whatever strategy you use it must, in essence, involve selecting players whose value will increase. The increase in value can be used directly or indirectly to better your squad. At the same time you want to be able to maintain a relatively high score.

These competitions have made it harder to find bargains by linking the price to the previous seasons performance with only occasional discounts for those who have only played very few matches.

My strategy has been to select as many players as possible into my squad who will increase in value. I don't include players in my squad if they will not increase greatly in value unless they are already amongst the very elite high scorers of the competition.

I see the ultimate goal for me is to eventually fill my squad with as many as I possibly can of these elite high scorers.

My mentality is to select those players who consistently produce high scores (> 100 pts) and include several of them in each position (Backs, Centre, Ruck and Forwards). I am happy to pay full price for many of these but I still look for bargains. If I can, I hang onto these players for the duration of the competition.

The other players in my squad are there to improve in value. This is so I can trade them to get more of the elite players. I aim to trade for one every second or third week. I try to get these players as cheaply as possible. Players yet to debut are able to give the biggest increase in value but they probably produce lower scores than second or third year players. The secret is finding a balance of players who will increase in value and score enough to keep you competitive.

Another concern is that you need to be sure that the players in your squad are fit to play from week 1. You must have nerves of steel if you hang on to players who are not. They may play week 2 or they might not play all season.

I'm not really fussed on the specific player selections, what I encourage is a systematic approach to player selection.

The "Types of players" I have selected are:

A) Elite Scorers at full or near full price

B) Players whom I consider very good players who are underpriced

C) Youthful players whom I believe are ready to go to the next level

D) Raw youth at minimum cost

How many players of each type do you have in your squad?

 

[Kildonan]

My strategy is to try and make my squad as good as possible so that it can exist for weeks without having to make any early changes - except in order to make money.
I minimise the number of trades I need to make by setting my rucks up as I intend them for the whole season.
I rarely use full price players in the Centres, but I do for Backs and Forwards.
My bench players are almost all minimum price, I use all the money on the main selections - my playing personnel.
I hang on to my elite players, even if they go bad.
I try and resist the temptation to trade a player if he has an injury, unless I can see straight away that it is a long term injury.
I plan my trades - I usually pick a medium priced player and a cash cow whose price has risen, I sell both to buy an elite player and a new cash cow at minimum price.
I use a fair number of trades between weeks 3 and 10 so that the player improvements I make have plenty of time to improve my scoreline. (The more weeks with improved scores - the higher the overall total).
I leave myself a few trades (say 6) for the second half of the competition (basically to cover for injuries).

These are my strategies, I'm not advocating that everyone has to do the same, I'm trying to show that I'm going in with a plan, and that I believe everyone in this league should also have a plan.

 

[D0nk]

Yeah, strategy sounds the same as mine.

Elite players - 9
Good players I believe are underpriced - 7
young players taking next step - 6
Raw Youth - 8 (all reserves)

 

[Philzsay]

Yes that pretty much sums up the basic strategy that I use, and I guess most (successful) people use. Use that strategy and you should end up in the top 1000 almost guaranteed. It is probably around the blurred edges that makes the difference between all the teams in the top 1000.

In relation to the make up:

A) Elite Scorers at full or near full price

I usually have several of these. My two requirements are a player is is going to average 100+ and secondly someone who will play close to 22 games.
eg Bowden practically never misses a match, he has always been part of my SC furniture.

B) Players whom I consider very good players who are underpriced

Most people will have Stevens I exect.
Last year I had Carrazzo and Foley who were priced (from memory) around 80 points and eneded up averaging around 100. A 20% improvement is essentially what i look for here. I must admit I am struggling to work out who this years equilivants will be.

C) Youthful players whom I believe are ready to go to the next level

This is the toughest to get right I reckon. You kinda know who will improve, but you have to almost guess what year they will break out and improve their score significantly.

D) Raw youth at minimum cost

I essentially look for those who will play early games. Players who wont make their debut till mid season you end up selecting mid year (cashing in cash cow) after they have played two games


The other point which I very rarely see mentioned is trying to avoid the dreaded ZEROs by not having enough depth.
I think some people use too many trades too early, then sell everyone off and end up getting caught short.

Last year I only had two 0's for the whole year, both were in the ruck, one becasue my player was a late withdrwael and had the fwds, back and mids as my three emergencies (so annoyed as i had a fit back up ruck who cored like 50 that weekend). The other was when Angus Graham had to fill in for just one week...he scored 0....actually at half time he was on -9 or somthing so was relived he at least got back to 0...

 

[Kildonan]

I can't help but continue to fine tune my squad so this may change, but I currently have:

Defence:
5 v goods (I'll call them elites)
Bradshaw - very good underpriced
3 kids

Centre:
2 elites
2 youthful players ready to step up
Stevens and Coughlan - very good underpriced
2 kids

Rucks:
1 elite
King and Gardiner - very good underpriced
1 kid

Forwards:
4 elites
1 youthful player ready to step up
B Hall and N Thompson - very good underpriced
2 kids

So in total thats:

12 elites - that I don't intend to trade
3 youthful players ready to step up
7 underpriced players
8 kids

Hopefully I won't have to waste a trade on any of my elites.
I haven't taken too many risks with players who might step up - this is where I'm fidgiting with my team
I know that the success rate of underpriced players is questionable, but the rewards are great.
Kids to make me money and drive the upgrading of my failures / injuries.

 

[Tigerrific]

I can't help but continue to fine tune my squad so this may change, but I currently have:

Defence:
5 v goods (I'll call them elites)
Bradshaw - very good underpriced
3 kids

Centre:
2 elites
2 youthful players ready to step up
Stevens and Coughlan - very good underpriced
2 kids

Rucks:
1 elite
King and Gardiner - very good underpriced
1 kid

Forwards:
4 elites
1 youthful player ready to step up
B Hall and N Thompson - very good underpriced
2 kids

So in total thats:

12 elites - that I don't intend to trade
3 youthful players ready to step up
7 underpriced players
8 kids

Hopefully I won't have to waste a trade on any of my elites.
I haven't taken too many risks with players who might step up - this is where I'm fidgiting with my team
I know that the success rate of underpriced players is questionable, but the rewards are great.
Kids to make me money and drive the upgrading of my failures / injuries.

Bradshaw, Coghlan and N Thompson are all big risks in my opinion, All are coming off long term injuries and are unlikely to perform at their best. If they were all at their best they would represent value but I don't expect too much from them this year. I would try Symes, Dyson and Vince instead.

The rest of your strategy is pretty sound.

 

[Philzsay]

Rucks:
1 elite
King and Gardiner - very good underpriced
1 kid

King and Gardiner interesting selections from a St Kilda man.

You are probably one of the few not to go with the Cox and Simmonds option.

The third ruckman is one of the poisitions I haven't decided on yet.

The rucks are funny, they are almost like a mini strategy game in itself...different to the rest of the team beacue there are only four of them and only two on the field.

 

[Kildonan]

The elite is Cox, he will score the most of all Rucks this season (~100), my thinking with taking both King and Gardiner is that I believe King will do quite well (ave 75+) which is all you can expect from any ruck bar Cox and he's at a pretty fair price too. If King is injured then Gardiner will probably be asked to take up the slack - thereby gaining a respectable score himself. This way I won't need to trade my Rucks all season except maybe to cash in on the increased value of Hampson to upgrade a mid.

Injury may ruin the best laid plans ...

 

[Kildonan]

Bradshaw, Coghlan and N Thompson are all big risks in my opinion, All are coming off long term injuries and are unlikely to perform at their best. If they were all at their best they would represent value but I don't expect too much from them this year. I would try Symes, Dyson and Vince instead.

The rest of your strategy is pretty sound.

These guys are underpriced for a reason. I understand that, there is a real risk, but none of these guys are likely to drop in value so the only risk really is that of unnecessarily using trades. I probably wont keep them if they are not listed to play in week 1.

My main concerns are: Mark Coughlan, Tadhg Kennelly, and Nathan Thompson.

I hear a few snippets re: Bradshaw and the word is he apparently is more advanced than they expected, and while no-one returns as good as they were before the ACL, he seems to be looking pretty impressive

 

[Philzsay]

The elite is Cox, he will score the most of all Rucks this season (~100), my thinking with taking both King and Gardiner is that I believe King will do quite well (ave 75+) which is all you can expect from any ruck bar Cox and he's at a pretty fair price too. If King is injured then Gardiner will probably be asked to take up the slack - thereby gaining a respectable score himself. This way I won't need to trade my Rucks all season except maybe to cash in on the increased value of Hampson to upgrade a mid.

Injury may ruin the best laid plans ...

Yep having a back up ruck from the same team as one of your playing rucks is a fairly good strategy.

(But I havent done that this year, but did so last year)

 

[Tigerrific]

These guys are underpriced for a reason. I understand that, there is a real risk, but none of these guys are likely to drop in value so the only risk really is that of unnecessarily using trades. I probably wont keep them if they are not listed to play in week 1.

My main concerns are: Mark Coughlan, Tadhg Kennelly, and Nathan Thompson.

I hear a few snippets re: Bradshaw and the word is he apparently is more advanced than they expected, and while no-one returns as good as they were before the ACL, he seems to be looking pretty impressive

None of the players mentioned have done anything of note during the preseason competition, Coghlan, Kennelly and Bradshaw only played 1 game and Nathan Thompson only played 2. Whilst they are likely to improve as the season goes on they are unlikely to do much over the first few weeks. If you are going to do well in this competition you need players who can play well from the start. I think your logic is flawed with these guys but good luck anyway (especially with Coghlan).

 

[Philzsay]

None of the players mentioned have done anything of note during the preseason competition, Coghlan, Kennelly and Bradshaw only played 1 game and Nathan Thompson only played 2. Whilst they are likely to improve as the season goes on they are unlikely to do much over the first few weeks. If you are going to do well in this competition you need players who can play well from the start. I think your logic is flawed with these guys but good luck anyway (especially with Coghlan).

Most people have dismissed these players for the similar reason to yourself.

Coughlan I am staying away from because its two knee injuries.
Kennelly and Bradshaw im staying away from becasue I have my own douhts.

But Nathan Thompson is the interesting one.

He is priced at a 46.3 average, but in his last 5 year playing working backwards his averages have been 80, 79, 81, 105 and 82.
Fairly consistant.

His first four week he plays Essendon, Richmond, Hawthorn, and Melbourne. Those 4 teams are probably as good a four teams you could ask for to start a year for a Full Forward. You would only need two goals a game to at keep the 46 average, and if he has one stand out game his average woukld go up.

Lets say he gets 46,46,96 and 46 in his first four matches, His new price after round 4 would be 286,700, a profit of 38,500.
Lets say he goes ok in 2 matches and gets 46,46,80 and 80. His new price would be 289, 400 for a profit of 41,500
If he were to get 80,80,80,80 his new price would go to 327,400 a profit of 78,900.

To me a profit of 40k odd after round 4 is not unrealistic.
But is it worth it though?

Well most people like the profits from new draftees, because sometime they can go from 94k to 250k. But this ussually takes 7 to 8 weeks to get the full improvement.

A possible tactic is to have a few draftees, and after round 4 trade out Thompson and one of the draftees both for profits. If Thompson is around 300k by then, plus take a profit of about 100k from a draftee, then you could perhaps afford an elite who has had one bad score and dropped to low 400's (eg like reiwoldt scored 8 in his third match last year) and suddenly you can convert to an extra elite after the fourth round and ready to play round 5.
The chances are that unless you have spare cash lying around trading out 2 draftees to make an elite you would have to wait a couple of extra rounds.

Anyway that just an alternate theory, not sure if I will even use it myself!!

Edit: In 2006 he scored: Ess: 147 Rich: 134 Haw: 170 & 34 Mel: 149 & 45

 

[Kildonan]

Lovely work Philzsay

 

[Tigerrific]

Most people have dismissed these players for the similar reason to yourself.

Coughlan I am staying away from because its two knee injuries.
Kennelly and Bradshaw im staying away from becasue I have my own douhts.

But Nathan Thompson is the interesting one.

He is priced at a 46.3 average, but in his last 5 year playing working backwards his averages have been 80, 79, 81, 105 and 82.
Fairly consistant.

His first four week he plays Essendon, Richmond, Hawthorn, and Melbourne. Those 4 teams are probably as good a four teams you could ask for to start a year for a Full Forward. You would only need two goals a game to at keep the 46 average, and if he has one stand out game his average woukld go up.

Lets say he gets 46,46,96 and 46 in his first four matches, His new price after round 4 would be 286,700, a profit of 38,500.
Lets say he goes ok in 2 matches and gets 46,46,80 and 80. His new price would be 289, 400 for a profit of 41,500
If he were to get 80,80,80,80 his new price would go to 327,400 a profit of 78,900.

To me a profit of 40k odd after round 4 is not unrealistic.
But is it worth it though?

Well most people like the profits from new draftees, because sometime they can go from 94k to 250k. But this ussually takes 7 to 8 weeks to get the full improvement.

A possible tactic is to have a few draftees, and after round 4 trade out Thompson and one of the draftees both for profits. If Thompson is around 300k by then, plus take a profit of about 100k from a draftee, then you could perhaps afford an elite who has had one bad score and dropped to low 400's (eg like reiwoldt scored 8 in his third match last year) and suddenly you can convert to an extra elite after the fourth round and ready to play round 5.
The chances are that unless you have spare cash lying around trading out 2 draftees to make an elite you would have to wait a couple of extra rounds.

Anyway that just an alternate theory, not sure if I will even use it myself!!

Edit: In 2006 he scored: Ess: 147 Rich: 134 Haw: 170 & 34 Mel: 149 & 45

Thompson's 2 preseaon games have only yielded scores of 12 & 45. He is a long way from his best.

Bernie Vince is $10,000 cheaper and has scored 86, 41, 56 & 61. It is not hard to work out who is the best alternative with more potential to generate cash in the short-term. You guys can have him.

 

[Philzsay]

Thompson's 2 preseaon games have only yielded scores of 12 & 45. He is a long way from his best.

Bernie Vince is $10,000 cheaper and has scored 86, 41, 56 & 61. It is not hard to work out who is the best alternative with more potential to generate cash in the short-term. You guys can have him.

So Thompson has got his bad scores out of the way

Vince: It will be interesting to see how many games and game time Craig will give him...

 

[xaviernut]

So Thompson has got his bad scores out of the way

Vince: It will be interesting to see how many games and game time Craig will give him...

just when i think i've finalised my team I read this. i should ban myself from bigfooty until thursday.

I am probably going to chuck Thompson in my team now. Would you think it's a good idea to trade him in for porplyzia and get the extra bucks??

 

[Philzsay]

just when i think i've finalised my team I read this. i should ban myself from bigfooty until thursday.

I am probably going to chuck Thompson in my team now. Would you think it's a good idea to trade him in for porplyzia and get the extra bucks??

lol...don't let me persuade you one way or the other...to be honest I havn't decided if I will have Thompson in my team or not yet. He is about one of 7 or 8 players trying to get into two undecided positions in my forward line.

Thompson will be a gamble. If he gets a huge score one week (like he did against these teams in 2006) he will make a handy profit. But he only needs one 0 or reinjured himself and its not only a wasted trade but also an opportunity cost of not having had a safer player to score in that time.