Another article from our most awesome community here, this time its by Ruddy who takes a closer look at the effects that the sub has had on the 3300 rule.

Hey guys, Ruddy here.

For those of you who werent on TS much over the pre-season, there was a debate in the forum about whether the introduction of the sub would mean that the 3300 rule needs to be altered.

First, i will go through the theoretical side of this article.
Before the sub rule, in each game there were 44 players scoring an average of 75, for a total of 3300. However, now that there are subs, 4 of those 44 players only play (on average) half a game. Using simple logic, we can see that these four players, having played only half a game each, will average half of what they would if they played a full game. So they will average somewhere around 37.5.
<!--more-->

Under the 3300 rule, these four players are expected to average 75 for a total of 300 points between them. However, since they only average 37.5 between them, they will only have a total of 150 points. This results in an extra 150 points per match for the non-subs to pick up. This means about an extra 3 to 4 points for each non-sub player, on average.

This, of course, is all theoretical. Now i will go through what actually happened in round 1. And before anyone says it, i know it is a small sample size, but it is all the data available, and the statistics are pretty convincing.

In round 1, there were 32 players involved with the sub rule, whether they were subbed on, or subbed off. Together, these 32 players managed to score 1242 points, for an average of 38.8. Pretty close to the theoretical average of 37.5.

So where did the extra points go? Since there were still 3300 points allocated per game, the extra 145 (approx) points went to the other players in the game at an average of 3.6 points per player.

Over round 1, there were 26409 points scored total. By subtracting the points scored by subs, we can see how many points non-subs scored, and by dividing the total number of points by the number of players we can see how the average for non-subs has risen.

26409 - 1242 = 25167
25167/320 = 78.6

This also shows that the average is up by 3.6 points per player.

Now to the important part. What does all of this mumbo jumbo mean for you?
Basically, since the average player will get an extra 3 to 4 points per game, an absolute gun like a Goddard or a Swan, could well find themselves with an extra 6 or 7 points per game. Picking the non-sub players is a bigger advantage than just the fact that the sub player scored for only half a game.

Without factoring in the likelihood of TSers picking the premiums who probably got more than the average players 3.6 points, as well as the chance that you picked the sub player on your field. With 22 players on the field, and 3.6 extra points per player, we can see that a teams score should be up approximately 80 points on last year, even with the same players.

Unfortunately, the extra points also has consequences that we must keep in mind in the future. Since there will be more points on offer, the average players scoring this year will be slightly inflated on last year. This makes it difficult to compare previous years scoring to this year (and future years with the sub rule). 100 points last year is not equal to 100 points this year. 100 points last year is closer to 104 points this year.

I know all these numbers can be confusing, and that the extra points available seems stupid, so i figured this would be a great topic for debate.

Oh and if anyone wants the scores of the subs or any of my working out etc., just let me know and id be happy to pass it on.

*pans back to walesy*

So there you have it, Im sure that this sub rule will throw a few spanners in our collective works, but if we take a closer look at it, perhaps we can take some kind of advantage out of it. My first thought when reading this is- a 7% increase to premiums, thats could cut awfully close to balancing out the MN degradation caused by having so many rookies increasing early days, thus making those who have gone with a GnR strategy even stronger- and it will definitely be something to consider if the AFL ever do go to a 2bench 2sub system.

*star wipe*

*dancing bears*

*fade to black*