Has anybody run any stats/predictions on the effects of all the additional rookies (ie Gold Coast) entering the competition this year on the magic number and the onflow to prices of existing senior players? Without knowing too much about the price adjustment calculation, I would speculate that the almost doubling of the rookie count in the first 6-8 rounds this year from last will result in an exagerrated drop in price for experienced players who have a bad few rounds to balance out the increase in rookie values. Unless VS have anticipated this already and compensated by setting players' prices to sit below what they would have been worth last year should they maintain their average...? Reason being, I am going for a league win only and am thinking about starting an extra rookie or two and keeping a fat bank balance ready for a slew of upgrades coming out of the early multi-bye period with the hope of picking up guns for a lot less than they started at.
I've been musing over this one- some background- The magic number degradation is a myth- what actually happens is that there is a total player payment amount that is set at the start of the year. After each round, everyone has their salary adjusted based on the magic number- afterward, the total player salaries, across the board of everyone who played that round are lowered (or later on, possibly raised) in order to bring that total salary back to the league total. historically, the biggest deduction has been in round 3 when the most rookies are first spiking, but this year, with the GC, Adelaide and Roos breaking in round 4- round 4 and even round 5 will have some decent bite in the MN. What this means- premiums that have their byes in rounds 3, 4 and 5 (and maybe even 6), will suffer less as an effect of the degradation of the magic number and be more expensive to trade in. Of course, this price change works out as roughly a $10k-$20k difference, so it's not overly worth basing a whole strategy around.
I would think that the 'increased rookie number' effect should also be somewhat counterbalanced by the smaller magic number, such that they appreciate at a slower rate compared to previous years.
It has the other effect. A small MN, combined with a greater increase in rookies scoring mean that premiums will fall harder, and rookies will climb slower.
Hey walesy, so the magic number last year was ~3300-3400. What has it dropped to this year or are we assuming it has dropped. And is this due to a larger sample size(one more team in the league = 40 more players in the sample). I've been mulling over this too and I've got a hunch that the mega-premiums may still be over inflated. As you mention above there are more rookie priced players than any year before so as they increase others will drop hard.
It was 5400 I believe, has dropped to something like 5150, but the ol brain is a little hazy at the minute. The MN was dropped as a response to having more players in your team.
<blockquote>Quote from walesy on March 19, 2011, 10:04 It has the other effect. A small MN, combined with a greater increase in rookies scoring mean that premiums will fall harder, and rookies will climb slower.</blockquote> How does that work out Walesy? I would have thought if rookies appreciate comparatively slower(we're in agreement with that, smaller number to multiply by) then there is comparatively less of an effect on the total player salary for the round and less of an adjustment would be needed to bring prices back into line? Can certainly see how more rookies appreciating would cause a bigger adjustment, as there will be more players than usual increasing in price after 3 games, but a smaller magic number should have less of an effect on the total player salaries as opposed to a larger number shouldn't it? Edit: Have a feeling I wasn't getting my point across well enough now that i re-read my OP. I can see how under performing premiums will suffer more, because they also are being multiplied by a smaller number. What I was trying to get at was simply the total salary payments effect on premiums prices as a result of rookie price increases. With a higher MN, the rookies would chew up a bigger chunk of the salary(appreciate faster) and force a revision of prices downwards to bring the total payments into line again. But as you pointed out, it would also has the opposite effect of slowing an under-performing premium from falling as his score is being multiplied by a higher number.
I just re-read what you wrote- I think we were said the same thing. In short, premiums should fall faster and rookies should increase slower due to more rookies eating up a greater share of the TPP
Interesting, so are we saying someone like Chappy is a bigger risk to take if selected Rd1 because if he is solid with 90-105 (getting in tune) for a few weeks we can get him a lot cheaper? ($80K maybe)
Hmm yea I didn't figure the flipside of this - that rookies would be appreciating slower. I'm still gonna run with it as a strategy though - I think the potential of faster drops (particularly for super-pricey players like Swan and Chapman), and the new sub rule (whoever gets subbed off is gonna get a low score and price-drop to match) means there will be many more bargains this year to pick up.