Hi guys, Work’s been quiet over the past few weeks (oh who am I kidding, months is more accurate), allowing me time to delve deeply into the most pressing issues of our time; Peace in the Middle East, universal healthcare and Supercoach. As such, I have some thoughts on the generally accepted wisdom of the GNR approach. Again, these are just musings, so happy to be shot down by the GNR crowd Generally the thinking with GNR goes as such: pick your guns, hope they stay guns, pick your rookies and hope they appreciate in value. Sell the rookie for another rookie, bank the cash and upgrade. Simple. The GNR strategy is deemed to be lower risk than, say, a mid price strategy as few mid-pricers move into the elite category than rookies moving to even a low-mid range. As I see it, the GNR has a few flaws. - To upgrade your Rookies, you are hoping most if not all will appreciate to at least mid-priced players. I don't think this is feasible this year, especially with the byes and new subs rule limiting playing and appreciation time. - Based on the spread of Rookies I have researched (again happy to be corrected) there are fewer likely Rookie to Mid candidates this year, meaning selection is critical. - However, there is a wide spread of mid-priced players who should at the very least maintain their current price, if not appreciate slightly. This is an important point. As an example, two midfields are below, one, using the GNR approach, the other Guns Mid-range Rookies (GMR). The midfield has a value of $2.9 million. Again, I appreciate midfield make ups and expenditure therein will vary depending on where you spend your cash, but this is purely an example: GNR: 4x500k+ and 5x110-170k GMR: 3x500k+, 2x300k+, 4x110-170k - Let's do the math; let's assume you have two rookies valued at $110,200. The goal in GNR would be to convert one into a high-priced player. Conservatively, you are looking at turning two players with a combined value of $220,400 into two players with a combined value of $610,200 (an estimate) so you can downgrade one and upgrade the other. - Both Rookies would need to increase their value by $194,900, or an average of around 63SP points per game - an impressive return for a first year player. Here is what I propose as an alternative: The important point here is to lower your expectations for mid-priced players. Instead of selecting mid-pricers who you hope to move 100/150g upwards, let's expect they will do little more than remain at their current price. Now as an example: - You have a mid-pricer worth $311,110 and a rookie at $110,200 - The Rookie needs to increase by $189,000 to upgrade the mid-pricer to at least the $500K level. The same output as required in the GNR strategy. The important point here is you are now only placing faith in one player to upgrade, rather than two; the mid-pricer doesn’t have to do anything while the Rookie raises his game. GNR places faith in two players, rather than one, increasing the risk (in my opinion). Now nothing is perfect, and this approach does have some flaws: - Selection of your Rookies becomes critical. You can’t just choose a spread of Rookies hoping at least half will appreciate. The ones you have must improve. - Scores in the initial rounds may be lower. But it does have some major upsides: - No pressure on the mid-pricers to raise their game. Bonus if they do. - Assuming you select the right Rookies, the mid-pricers are essentially guns in waiting, meaning you can outfit your team with elites at a quicker pace. - The mid pricers are likely to score more in the opening rounds than the Rookies The debate around GNR versus GMR will rage on I’m sure. My point here is that while anyone can put together a decent GNR team, GMR requires a bit more finesse and cunning. In words of Billy Crystal: “Gays in the military? Your thoughts…â€
While I would bow to the verdict of other (and better) judges on here, must confess you have put rather eloquently the strategy I have adopted. I have tried to "pair" a mid-pricer with a rookie, bundling them both for my planned upgrades. Find it also gives you more flexibility in having a good spread of players from different teams. I think Karakouer is the crack in the GnR strategy - who is really prepared to go without him? Also feel the lines are a bit blurred this year with many rookies having a high enough price to be considered almost mid-price (e.g. Swallow). We did not have 200k rookies last year, so it seems GnR is more flexible this season. You make a good point about appreciation time which will catch a few out. What is not entirely clear is what do you sacrifice to get your mid-pricers in, a gun or a rookie?
Terry it is fairly clear to me. You can choose 1 rookie & 1 premium or 2 midrange. Most GNR would probably consider Otten and Krakouer just within their bounds. It's avoiding the 300-450 range which is their general strategy. So with this you have to find decent midrange options, the absolute cream of the rookie options and I think you have to spend more on very high quality mids at the top end, so you may have to sacrifice a "Sex on the Beach" ruck combo to maybe a Sandi-Fraser.
And what's going on with peace in the middle east? Doesn't seem too much progress there woosha, though your Eagles might need more attention I'd think. Maybe stop doing SC in the pharmacy and get back to developing a premiership combination.
Good point Terry, but I don't think there is a universal answer to which one you sacrifice. Essentially you are sacrificing both - if you are spending more on a mid-pricer over a rookie, it means less cash for a gun. You are turning, say, 2 guns, and 2 rookies (for example), into one gun, 2 mids and 1 rookie. Some might call this robbing Peter to pay pay, but, well researched, I think it can pay dividends. Plus the midfield, forward and back lines present different challenges. Guns and Rookies may work in the midfield, but I don't think there are enough valueable guns in the forward line to warrant using the same strategy. Then again, GMR can work beautifully in the midfield, if, for example you "pair" Foley/Anthony with Hibberd/Gaff or Palmer/Shuey/ with Pittard/Conca or...the list goes on.
Ha! You'll keep Lucas! Don't worry, WC has plenty of up and comers ready to take our team to the next level! Take Chris Mas...errm I mean Tom Sw...ohh I mean, errm, how about Brad Shep...ahhhhhh, well, there is always Luke Shu... ahh crap.
WCE will do better this year, a more even spread of contributors. But man Masten is looking like a real stinker of a pick 3. Appeared it was an ordinary draft but there was Rioli slipping through to Pick 12.
@Lucas Yep, that is what I have done, prepared to cop any hurt in the ruck. It has been more of trial and error and left over cash that has seen the likes of Krakouer+rookie, Rohan+rookie, Duncan+rookie, Knights+rookie (don't have them all). Looked hard at some dubious rooks + cash and upgraded a couple to "mid-pricers" to enhance MPP as well as the pairing strategy outlined above. This also serves to remove some of the doubt hanging over the bench. The weak point is that this strategy has also been combined with the Magnificent Seven (thanks a lot chief!) so I have only 2 blue chippers left in the MID. But I have enormous faith that the Anthonys and Boaks can do it. Did not think that Rommel would have a great deal of interest in peace in the middle east, but prepared to accept that he would run over me in the initial onslaught, but by the time he reaches Tobruk I've got him.
Ah all depends on when the season ends. Rommel did end up taking Tobruk, we must remember. It was not held for long, but that was hardly the Desert Fox's fault. If he had entered the battle with equal resources, as we enter Supercoach, then I'm sure his full-on assault would have been better rewarded. I guess he was stifled by the lack of Prussian/Germanic interest in colonisation during the 1700s.
I think you make a good point originally with regard to having midpriced players in your team but not necessarily as a strategy. I mean in some ways the guys you mentioned (Palmer/Shuey/Foley/Anthony) seem like absolute gold in the terms of their price and potential to score big. But the problem is every single one of them could flop and three of them have injury concerns. Therein lies the problem as if you pick outright guns whith solid history who are also durable you can relax and barring a disaster not have to trade them out all season. For me it's about balance and personal preference. If you truly believe Palmer is going to have a great season then put him in your team and use the extra cash you didn't pay for a premium elsewhere. But really those guys aren't even midpricers but rather discounted players and we all know why they are. Look, if you had Waters and Malceski last year you lucked out, and Palmer and Anthony look most likely (to me) to be those guys this year. If so, they're bargains and pick them but not as an overall strategy but rather as calculated risks. Outside of those few though I think a midpricer strategy is too tough to succeed with as most players that are midpriced stay midpriced and you'll be counting on rookies to make a lot more. There's more rookies around this year than ever before... And more trades if you get a couple wrong..
Last year there were plenty of good backs. Waters-Maguire-Malceski would have been in most teams. I'm not sold on Palmer, but I am very bullish on Ward. Anthony-Ward will be a solid combination for the coin. But you have to be prepared to upgrade each of them, so it's gotta be part of your trading strategy. I guess GNR gives you certainty in your great players, and more stabs in the dark at the fresh rookie meat. You can always sideways trade if you miss out early.
I agree that early with GnR you must be brutal with your rookies and purists say never trade sideways but last year after a rough start I went sideways Relton > Pods and Banner > Lobster. As it turned out they were upgrades in the long run anyway imo.
Reckin this year, the value is in the fwds - Petrie, Davis, Vez, Yaz, Knights, Krak, Higgins,Danger (again). All come with their own risk, but potential rewards as well.