As people start to settle on their structure, I thought it might be worth getting an idea of the general GnR makeup people intend to run with. My current is: 2 x Elite (perma-captains) 11 x Prem (incl Rioli) 3 x Mid-Price (2x Fwd + Fraser) 13 x Rookie (sub $200) The two Mid-Pricers exist because I cant settle on a Prem at F4 - unless of course Goodes plays through the middle. Am otherwise reluctant on the fossil, so looking for an idea of how hard people are going on GnR.
There seems to be a bit of debate about how to define a prem, mid or rook. Maybe you could give us your criteria for each category so when people post their structures we are comparing apples with apples?
Am using Lucas' guide for prems/elites Elite = 120+ pts Prem = 100+ pts in mid & fwd // 90+ Def // 80+ Ruck
well currently I have: going by your criteria, but roughly, as i couldnt be bothered looking up exact averages. 2 x Elite (120+) 10 x Prem (100+mid&fwd/90+Def/80+Ru) 4 x Mid-Price (inc ROK and Fraser) 17(6 starting) x Rookie (sub $200) maybe one too many midpricers, one or 2 might be culled before R1, but thats where im at atm
From what I've read, the GnR strategy has people aiming for roughly 14 premiums - some are sneaking a 15th in. This suggests another 8 prems need to be brought in to have 22 starting premiums, and with an average of 2* trades per prem to bring in, it allows 8 trades to cover for injuries/misc. reasons. *GnR strat, if not a prem, classified as a rookie. Two rookies, both appreciate to 300k, cash one in to a 100k rookie, use the 200k to upgrade the other to a 500k fallen prem. (only rough figures as the magic number this year will likely see the 300k and 500k figures lower)
People are changing the definition of premium to suit their own needs, which I don't agree with. 15-16 Keepers, not premiums. Optimistically, keepers will become premium, but the fact is that some of them (including Rioli) haven't been premium in their careers to date. Rioli isn't a fallen premium, his price is $460k because he averaged less than 100ppg last year. If you can convince yourself that you have a premium when you actually don't, all power to you. But what you actually have is a keeper, that you do not intend to trade out during the year, who may or may not rise to become premium in 2011. Premium = 100 ppg, whatever line. Elite = 120ppg, whatever line. Rookie = sub-$200k start price.
Fair call Jason on the terminology, and we must get this right. I think we all want 22 premiums but that's impossible unless Jolly/Cox/Ryder get their act together, unless defences start to chip the ball around again (tempo footy) and unless the power forwards come back with a vengeance. That's right, totally impossible. That said, we all want a list of players in our teams that will average top 10 per position (top 5 for rucks), call them keepers call them what you will. I would be wanting to start my year with 15 of these in my team.
Agree Lucas. I just cringe when people start bending definitions. Premium status allows for comparison across lines. Keeper status should only be used for comparison within a line. Premium ruck = Sandilands. A keeper ruck = Top 4 rucks for the year. There may only be around 4 DEFs who are premium in 2011. But there will certainly be 10 DEFs who are in the top 10 for the year!
Having read Blue Thunder's history of trades for last year (posted on YSCC) that led to him winning the $50k prize, what I found most revealing was that he got close to the 6x best midfield for the year very quickly (R9). The only midfield trade after R9 was to replace Barlow with Montagna in R16, which was bascially just an injury trade. Given this, it would seem to me that the key to strategy when going for overall would involve upgrading your MID line as early as possible, because the elite SC scores are heavily dominated by MIDs. The best way to get maximum MID line upgrades by around R9 is a GnR strategy, as this strategy provides the best and fastest avenue for cash generation to allow MID upgrades to all of the elite players (assuming that no-one can afford to start with all of the elite MID players).
And on that, let's give YSCC a link http://yscc.com.au/blog/miscellaneous/featured/the-year-of-blue-thunder/ The starting structure that won last year was... Def 5-0-4 Mid 2-1-5 Ruc 2-0-2 Fwd 5-2-2
Didnt he have Hille at R2 from the start? Wouldnt that make it a 1-1-2 structure in the rucks? Interesting read and it's good to see he employed the same trading strategy as me last year, which got me into the top 100 also. That strategy being upgrading the mids as early as possible and aiming to have a complete team of premiums by round 14. This season I believe round 16 to be an achievable goal.
Ah yeah, forgot Hille started underpriced. On looking back at Buster and Blue I'm trying to look at their structure. Interestingly enough it revolved around very strong teams, but by R13 they had a full strength team. That is if you consider 2009 full strength included Drummond, Rich and Broughton, and 2010 included Malceski, Barlow and Podsiadly. I won't steal the thunder of another article I'm going to write on this too much, but both did it different ways. Buster went the value list to start Blue went fairly close to a GNR Neither went full GNR like is the general consensus Buster's starting structure would be heavily criticised today but on balance there is still evidence it can work, provided you bank the points early and you cut and run. It also helped him that there were no real standout alternatives that year in the positions to some mid pricers he held until R12 (in some ways similar to our defense issues currently) I'm not suggesting value should be back in vogue, but I am suggesting if you do use it, you need to know how. I'm also saying that there is a chance to win with any structure provided you hold to certain fundamentals. This will hopefully be the thesis of the article.
Jason, great points. Has me completely re-thinking my current structure, specifically my midfield... where i only have one true premium (Monty).
I was going for the mid-pricers this year but after being shown the light and suffering a major re-haul I've gone with 5-0-5 3-0-6 2-0-2 3-3-4 Still couldnt bring myself to get rid of a few of them but I'm sure I'll still make changes through NAB form
Yes blue thunder did trade hard early. So much that he had no trades for the last 4 rounds highlighting a big difference between league versus overall tactics. The other thing that is food for thought is our dependence on GC players this year. Two early byes versus a need for early upgrades is a bitch. Will the winner find the right mix of rookies from other clubs? I'm also backing that the winner will not be in their 2nd year doing supercoach. You never know though with great sites like this crunching out sides from quality poster's and out come the cookie cutters.
The biggest thing I take from reading Blue Thunder's experience is that it's all in the trades. Nothing special about his starting side at all, pretty standard 2010 thinking. The timing of the Swan, Judd and Cox trades was superb.
It's all in the trades if you know your strategy Key thing is get your team upgraded as soon as possible to full premium then keep it there. That's what was common about both strategies, and the real issue with most of us in the trading scene. We love our players who have done well for us, and rather than upgrading, we keep settling for the 70s when we could get 100s. I'm saying we only because I nailed my trades in 2008, but last few years I've basically white flag by Rd 2. Unless you get your team right from the beginning you can kiss the whole box and dice goodbye.
Re. boxes and dices. Someone said (I think on here) last year that 80% of SC is in the pre-season, i.e., doing your homework and getting your team right. After that it is essentially auto-pilot with the odd tweak here and there. Man, wish I could do that.