SC Team Checklist

Discussion in 'AFL' started by boydshow, Jan 31, 2011.

  1. boydshow

    boydshow Guest

    Hi everyone :)

    When rating an SC team, what do you check? Other than individual player selection, is there a structure you look for? Things like breakdown of player types, number of players from each club, ability to cope with byes, MPP use, premium/midprice/rookie breakdown, cash in hand etc.

    What are the actual rules that you would apply?

    In my side:

    Pricing
    DEF: 4 premium, 2 midprice, 4 rookies
    MID: 4 premium, 1 midprice, 4 rookies
    RUC: 1 premium, 1 midprice, 2 rookies
    FWD: 4 premium, 2 midprice, 4 rookies
    Tot: 13 premium, 6 midprice, 14 rookies

    Midprice classification
    3 injury discounted
    2 GC recruits
    1 breakout year

    Clubs - Lines
    2 STK in defense
    2 GC in midfield
    3 GC in rucks
    2 STK in forwardline
    2 Coll in forwardline

    Clubs - overall
    7 GC
    4 STK
    4 WB
    4 Freo
    3 Coll
    2 Haw
    2 Syd
    1 Adel
    1 BL
    1 Carl
    1 Ess
    1 Geel
    1 NM
    1 Melb
    0 Port
    0 Rich
    0 WCE

    Premiums from last year's bottom 4
    0

    Cash in hand
    $8,000

    MPP
    D/M: 1 def premium, 1 def bench rookie, 1 mid premium
    D/R: nil
    D/F: 1 def premium
    M/R: nil
    M/F: 1 mid bench rookie, 3 fwd premiums, 1 fwd starting rookie
    R/F: 1 ruc bench rookie, 2 fwd midprice

    Byes
    Round 4
    DEF: 3 premiums, 1 midpricer
    MID: 1 premium, 1 bench rookie
    RUC: nil
    FWD: 2 premiums, 1 bench rookie

    Round 5
    DEF: 1 premium
    MID: nil
    RUC: nil
    FWD: 1 premium, 1 bench rookie

    Round 6
    DEF: 1 starting rookie, 1 bench rookie
    MID: 1 premium, 2 bench rookies
    RUC: 1 premium
    FWD: 1 premium

    Round 16
    DEF: 1 midpricer, 1 starting rookie
    MID: 1 bench rookie
    RUC: 1 premium
    FWD: 1 premium, 1 bench rookie

    Round 19
    DEF: 1 premium, 1 midpricer
    MID: nil
    RUC: nil
    FWD: 1 premium

    Round 21
    DEF: nil
    MID: nil
    RUC: nil
    FWD: 1 midpricer

    Round 22
    DEF: nil
    MID: 1 bench rookie
    RUC: nil
    FWD: nil

    Round 23
    DEF: nil
    MID: 1 premium
    RUC: nil
    FWD: nil

    Round 24
    DEF: 1 bench rookie
    MID: nil
    RUC: nil
    FWD: nil
     
  2. boydshow

    boydshow Guest

    Looking through that, I've got a problem in round 4, but the rest seems OK. Thoughts?
     
  3. Lucas

    Lucas Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    1,974
    Likes Received:
    121
    Good thinking. Worth having structures to assess yourself on.

    I don't have formal ones written up, but that's an interesting mix.

    My thoughts initially was to go 13-7-13 but I'm also thinking of swinging to 15-18 and taking a few more risks this year.

    Depends on how solid I see the 7 rookie starters being, really.

    On your team Griff, maybe one too many Saints early given they have the earliest 2nd bye maybe they can be drafted in, similar to Collingwood.
    So try to maximise your premiums in the team by getting ones who won't be sitting a week on the sidelines later.
     
  4. spud

    spud New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    481
    Likes Received:
    0
    I like the way you have worked through that logically and systematically, Griff!

    Looking through a team and identifying potential pitfalls/difficulties, whether it be too many players from the team, too many premiums missing the same week in multi-bye rounds, or too many players from the one line missing in multi-bye rounds, is the first step as it then allows you to go back and try to improve/correct those said deficiencies.

    Without looking at it too deeply, I tend to agree with Lucas' remarks regarding too many Saints. The GC are the earliest team to have their second bye, in 9, Collingwood have theirs in round 13 and StKilda the following week in round 14. Assuming for example you are starting with 2 premiums from each of StKilda and Collingwood:
    Goddard+Roo from StKilda, and Swan+say, Didak from Collingwood, i would suggest waiting until after the second bye before bringing in another premium from either side (perhaps a NDS/Montagna/Hayes in the midfield or a Pendlebury/Shaw etc)

    I'm sure some people will be of the view of bring in the best regardless of the new circumstances and deal with any issues as they arise, while others will be wanting to do their best to plan for them in advance.

    We probably won't know until the conclusion of the year whether structuring our teams in an attempt to minimise the damage done by the multi-bye rounds will provide enough compensation (higher scores in multi-bye rounds, perhaps saved trades etc) for having not started with the perceived 'optimal mix' of premiums at the start of the year.

    I think we'll see a lot of teams who have taken a "bugger the new rules, i'll deal with them as they arrise" approach jump out of the gates early, but I'm very interested to see how quickly the more carefully planned teams can catch them, if at all.

    Bring on 2011 SC!
     
  5. Lucas

    Lucas Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    1,974
    Likes Received:
    121
    Best regardless is an interesting no thought strategy, I guess is it worth losing 60 pts for the bye from your premiums for the sake of possibly $30k for getting someone when they are at the price sweet spot.

    Still wanting to see some juicy Richmond/Port/Essendon rookies and very confident there will be at least a few from these teams that I can bank on early in the season.
     
  6. Jason

    Jason Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    3,810
    Likes Received:
    1,418
    Good ideas to read griff, I like.

    What is your initial plan in terms of upgrades? How many of your starting lineup do you consider to be keepers for the year? How many trades do you think need to be reserved for injuries, given the (slightly) extra bench coverage this year?
     
  7. spud

    spud New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    481
    Likes Received:
    0
    All in good time, Lucas.
    I'm sure the NAB cup will identify a few surprises from each team, hopefully from the 3 you mentioned as they should peak before their first bye :)
     
  8. boydshow

    boydshow Guest

    @Jason - 13 starters will be keepers. 9 double trades to complete the 22, 6 for injuries and errors. I'll look to do 3 double trades over 3 brackets of 4 weeks - rounds 7-10, rounds 12-15, rounds 17-20. I found last year I had trouble fitting in injury trades with upgrades, and that my team was completed too early, so I didn't have the opportunity to bring in the fast finishers.
     
  9. Jason

    Jason Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    3,810
    Likes Received:
    1,418
    What's the thinking with 3x GC in the Ruck line? Does that somehow guarantee at least one will play each week or am I missing something here?
     
  10. Ruddy

    Ruddy New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    253
    Likes Received:
    0
    You will be in trouble for the two byes. Also, it seems likely that Fraser will play, as their best mature ruckman.
     
  11. spud

    spud New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    481
    Likes Received:
    0
    That seems one too many, Jason.
    Z.Smith and tippett(for mpp if using Petrie) will be common, but throwing in i imagine Fraser in your case in R2 could be asking for a bit of trouble. That said, if R1 is Sandi, then when Freo have their bye, you swap Petrie with tippett and run Petrie/Fraser, and when GC have their bye you swap in Petrie with tippett and have Sandi/Petrie. I guess the danger there is that you're relying on Petrie not to get injured in this case, or your R1.
     
  12. boydshow

    boydshow Guest

    <blockquote>Quote from Jason on January 31, 2011, 23:12
    What's the thinking with 3x GC in the Ruck line? Does that somehow guarantee at least one will play each week or am I missing something here?</blockquote>

    Fraser & Smith will be the number 1 & 2 ruckmen at GC, and are at bargain prices. Which other number 1 rucks are ~250k, or number 2 rucks at rookie pricing?

    Tippett is a dummy for MPP to Petrie and Stanley, who could cover GC or Freo byes.
     
  13. spud

    spud New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    481
    Likes Received:
    0
    <blockquote>Quote from griff on February 1, 2011, 01:40
    <blockquote>Quote from Jason on January 31, 2011, 23:12
    What's the thinking with 3x GC in the Ruck line? Does that somehow guarantee at least one will play each week or am I missing something here?</blockquote>

    Fraser & Smith will be the number 1 & 2 ruckmen at GC, and are at bargain prices. Which other number 1 rucks are ~250k, or number 2 rucks at rookie pricing?

    Tippett is a dummy for MPP to Petrie and Stanley, who could cover GC or Freo byes.</blockquote>

    Max Bailey says hello :D
     
  14. Ruddy

    Ruddy New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    253
    Likes Received:
    0
    I don't think Bailey is a great pick tbh. Apart from the potential injury factor, i also don't think he will start round 1. Our first game is over in Adelaide, and given he has basically been out of footy for 3+ years, having hardly played, he surely won't be better at our game style than Renouf. I am presuming that Hawthorn will play Hale up forward as a second ruck.

    Bailey is also a dangerous player to play for Hawthorn. If he goes down after five minutes, like the last time he did his knee, we only have Hale to ruck the entire game, with help from the Likes of Roughead and Franklin. At least last time we had Renouf playing.
     
  15. Lucas

    Lucas Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    1,974
    Likes Received:
    121
    Robbie Campbell on the other hand...
     
  16. walesy

    walesy Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2015
    Messages:
    3,872
    Likes Received:
    2,565
    Plenty of options for an R4.

    Cordy should be getting games this year
    Redden has been tearing it up so keep an eye on him.

    With the extra price on JT, I reckon it makes the DPP with Petrie position from the start a little... untenable.
     
  17. Lucas

    Lucas Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    1,974
    Likes Received:
    121
    Agreed and given last year's Tippett troubles, best to be rid of them from the start this year.
     
  18. spud

    spud New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    481
    Likes Received:
    0
    <blockquote>Quote from Lucas on February 1, 2011, 15:19
    Robbie Campbell on the other hand...</blockquote>

    I wouldn't touch him as he's had an interrupted preseason as a result of an injury. Furthermore, while it was great to see the bloke during vfl matches last year, I didn't think he looked half the player he was before he retired, and lets be honest he was no Sandilands/Cox then either.

    I hope for his sake he gets a gig as he's a great bloke, but those knees scare the living daylights out of me (as to Baileys, but for different reasons)
     
  19. Ruddy

    Ruddy New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    253
    Likes Received:
    0
    Agree with Spud. Even if Campbell did get into the team for an extended period, i honestly don't think that his knees could hold up against AFL footy. VFL is one thing, but it would be more stressful on his knees in the AFL.
     
  20. bonesy

    bonesy Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    89
    Likes Received:
    0
    with the caveat that campbell won't be in my team. he has the potential to be a cash cow at his dirt cheap price.

    his knees fell apart when he was forced to play full back at hawthorn in our injury riddled '09 season.
    They won't do that to him again, he'll either play ruck or he won't play. if he play's he could easily avg 70-80 and make same money.
     

Share This Page