Hi all, first post here. I wanted to run this by some of the more seasoned campaigners. I am wondering if they could mount any argument as to having 8 (Yes, 8) Premium forwards, as an example. Or 7 Premium mids, It doesn't matter where you go, I chose fwd as I identified it as the place most likely not to have any Suns premiums, and also because forwards have generally been good at capitalizing on the 'GC bonus'. Now hear me out on the numbers: I would imagine it would cost you 1 more trade, and ~250k, or 2 trades. Those are the negatives. The upside is that you have the best bye cover there is, I would imagine that at the least your premium would average 30 more than if you were forced to play a rookie. I am almost certain that you will face 7 byes during which this rookie would otherwise take the field. 7*30 = 210. I then added another 20 points, to bring the total to 230. This is because I feel that you would certainly field this forward and not another premium forward when they play the Gold Coast, and while it is difficult to measure I would argue that is for a benefit of 20 points. This is the most basic bonus that I could find. There are other similar bonuses, such as taking a premium off of the field when they play a strangler of a team, for example Collingwood. I have demonstrated that this will run you down 230 points, with near certainty. I feel these numbers are conservative, as the majority of Forward rookies have hung around the 60 mark. The way I then look at this is as: How many points do you think you could come out ahead by picking the best 7 of your 8 premiums to put on the field? At face value, I would back myself in to come at least 50 points ahead..
This does not account for the contingency of players being rested later or becoming injured, in which case this strategy becomes more viable..
Not at all insane, but the issue is at what cost? Having an MPP Premium (and by premium let's be clear we are talking a player who will average 100+ for the rest of the year) who can swap forward or back like Pav, Chappy, ROK, Harvey, Goodes or Fyfe as an extra mid / fwd makes sense. Except to do this you need to use at least 2 more trades, and potentially reduce the amount you spend elsewhere unless you have plenty of $$$ to go around. No point having an extra mid to cover the bye, but not have at least 5 of the handfull of Elite mids available (Selwood, Judd, Pendles, Boyd, Ablett, Mundy). If you are going with 2 or 3 of this group and then using next rung down mids like Bartel, Griffin and co you are probably on average costing yourself 30 or 40 ppg anyway. If of course you can arrange a side with the 8 top backs, 7 top mids, 2 gun rucks and 8 top forwards, then kudos to you. You must have done some extraordinary recruiting and trading through the year, and I hope I don't run into you come finals.
Nice post on your first Mulsyy, so getting a premium 8th forward would be a good idea, but instead of getting a premium 8 forward 350k+ i'll probably be getting someone who has dropped in price over the year that has started to hit the straps in the past few weeks, for example Didak, good post, Definitely a good idea if you have premium Geelong, Carlton, Essendon, North Melbourne forwards like Betts, Waite, Chappy, StevieJ, Petrie so on...
I think if you look at a lot of the highest ranked teams from last year by the end of the season they did have some guns on the bench so yeh if your team is good enough i think that you should give it a go. And i have also considered the byes and i think that teams by years end to keep with the pace will definately have to be applying this strategy. Also agree with corks that if you could get someone who has MPP then this will mean you could just go for one in the DEF and one in the FWD who could both move between MID and therefore not use an extra trade As i doubt i will be pushing the leaders i can tell you that after the next two weeks i will hold my trades for some time and i think my bench for the rest of the year may be Darling FWD swallow MID and Heppell DEF. hope that helps... and nice post btw
Did is really on possible option and with mpp could become handy M7/F8 that would include 1 trade the other premium options would include 2. It sounds great in theory but think I'll b leaving myself very thin if I took this approach with trades
That is very true actually, this approach will be cut down to being worth around 140 points (20x7) if you would otherwise have had the likes of Darling or Krakouer covering you, even less were it Heppell. However, that point about the MPP might up it to being able to cover 8 or more byes. It should be noted that you wouldn't need to pick a MPP player. Applying scenario analysis: - You have Darling or Krakouer in your FWDs, and an MPP switch, with players from 8 different teams (if you have more then you are even better off) in your forwards and midfield: 8 x 22 = 176 My 'Gold Coast' bonus: 20 = 196 points + Injury contingencies + What you back yourself to make up by putting the 'right' player on field. I would say this is probably going to be about 250 points. - You don't really have any particularly strong cover (Your cover is likely to average about 70 a game, I would group I. Smith and Tendai into here): 8 x 30 = 240 My 'Gold Coast' bonus: 20 Applying the same probabilities as above, I would back it in to reach the generally accepted 300 point threshold. Further to be noted: Most teams should have Dane Swan, applying this strategy this round will lead to one more round of extra premium goodness due to his two week break. Furthermore, I wouldn't feel that this leaves me overly thin on trades purely because, well, I have a premium on the bench raring to go. Having said all of this - Didak is starting to show something and is moving around in the midfield a little more from what I've seen. Perhaps the cheapest but riskiest application of this strategy would simply to be to trade a rookie such as Kraks or Darling to Diddles, and watch him go. Finally, as a side note: I am 7th overall and am mainly looking at ways to capitalize on the way I have played thus far - Cheaply. If anyone watches the top 10 intently, while I might simply be insecure, I feel like the odd one out. I have ignored the elite mids largely, I backed in Hodge, and Bartel because..well, when it comes down to it, I'd much rather bet on Hodge than against him.
hahah, ok disregard all my advice MULS or shoulkd i say 'get rekt kids' i didn't know i wasn't aware of the expertese of who we were dealing with, haha. good effort mate. i would love to be sitting 7th atm. But yeh it looks like you have put a lot of thought into this and i would say it is worth a punt,could be the difference that makes you 50 grand richer you only live once...how many trades have you got left? are you getting sandi back in when he is back?
Haha, thanks! I'm sitting on 10 trades, with plans to get Sandi back, but if Mumford is looking at all threatening, that could go out the window. Mumford is hot and cold, but when he's hot he could well beat out Sandi. If i'm still in contention then but in need of a risk, that'll probably be the default one. I think I might sit tight but with 'overqualified' subs, perhaps the likes of Petrie sitting at F8, Heppell covering mids and defence, maybe Puopolo who looks to be running around a little in the midfield of late also. Thanks for your help fellas, if anyone does try this ploy, please let me know how it goes!