With the higher amount of trades on offer this season, I would like to see what others think about starting with a premium from Essendon, Richmond or Port, and changing them to a GC player (hopefully premium) between round 9 and 12 (depending on what club the first player was from). That is because GC have both their byes before ess, ric or port have their first. With most peoples starting premiums having 2 byes each almost guaranteed. this would allow for that one premium spot to go the whole season without a bye – at the cost of a trade, so not sure if its worth it yet? I am considering starting with Watson, and planning to trade him to GAJ between R9 and R10, so that I dont have to have a bye from either of them... but is Watson worth it? Currently, in my draft team, i have only 3 prem mids - Judd, Joey and Jack (triple J). thinking may replace Joey with Watson as he has an early bye anyway, and may be a good upgrade target down the track. so what do people think about this strategy? Could be good with rookies as well obviously - Conca, Heppell etc.
interesting. could be an edge in going for overall. but would it be better instead with extra cash cows and trades to try and get a genuine premium or two floating on the bench for cover?
I like the idea, Anthak, but with the exception of Delidio from the tigers, I can't myself considering any premiums from any of those three teams. And Lids is probably one I'd want to hang onto as well. If you were considering Watson, a Watson-Gaz Jr could work for example. Although I'd suggest upgrading any non-premiums to premiums would be first priority however, rather than sideways trading.
Chadwick will go down in value, there is talk of him being a permenant substitute, so he will average half a game each week. So Chad to Bock wouldn't be possible, sorry
True, but if that is just a fluff piece and he actually goes out there and regains some of his form... then possibly?
<blockquote>Quote from spud on February 4, 2011, 13:48 I like the idea, Anthak, but with the exception of Delidio from the tigers, I can't myself considering any premiums from any of those three teams. And Lids is probably one I'd want to hang onto as well. If you were considering Watson, a Watson-Gaz Jr could work for example. Although I'd suggest upgrading any non-premiums to premiums would be first priority however, rather than sideways trading.</blockquote> this was exactly my thinking, but wanted to see what others thought. the one trade could gain up to about 500 points though, which is heaps in the grand scheme of things. thats a very rough calculation of 200 points for games instead of byes + 300 points for having a premium instead of a rookie in first 9 rounds. I know the formula is flawed, but that would be close to the max points gain one would get for doing this strategy. another possibility could be Ryder or Brogan to Fraser as well. but that wouldnt be as beneficial. I am thinking Watson to GAJ would be best option. or maybe not doing it at all is better option, but im tempted.
I think it ultimately depends on who the alternative is. For example, if you went Watson instead of Swan, then Swan would outscore Watson over the first stretch, even with his two byes. But if it were Ryder instead of Jolly, you would probably come out in front. I suppose you do run the risk of having the player you're going to upgrade to suddenly increase in price, costing you money or an extra trade. But i reckon with extra trades, you could do alright. Definitely have to put this into my calculations with my team.
I like the concept but even with the extra trades it seems excessive to plan on sideways trades of premiums. I guess if you are taking Watson as a premium, Ablett might still be considered an upgrade if he maintains super premium status. My concern would be a lot can happen in 10 weeks. If you compromise your squad to bring in a player you wouldn't otherwise have selected you could pay a high price. You're almost committed to suffering a form slump if it occurs as you are losing your advantage if you trade before teams have had two byes. And you limit the flexibility of your squad. You may find Watson is scoring so well you want to keep him. Or you desperately need another premium at the time you planned on trading. It pays to plan ahead but I'd look at this proposal as being an added benefit if you were planning on taking premiums from these teams anyway, but not reason in itself to give them the nod. I'm definitely onboard with the idea of taking guys like Conca and Heppell who can be traded to premiums with no byes left mid-season. Conca to Ablett makes much more sense to me than Swallow to Ablett. Even Jacobs for Port. I know he has glandular fever and his progress needs to be monitored, but if he looks like playing in the first few weeks he could be worth keeping in. Port's late byes mean you could still cash him in at the same time as GC boys even if he doesn't play until Rd 3. Obviously risky given the nature of the illness but he could be worth the punt. Ideally, these scenarios would be perfect for a mid-price improver. Someone who will give you a good output as a starter each week, and will improve enough to offset the cost of bringing in the premium. Zaharakis, Morton, Houli, Davenport, Gray, Jetta, Grigg. If you can pick a player like that who can improve 10-15ppg it should be easy to transition to a premium. Assuming that when the time comes you don't have more pressing problems....
This is very interesting Wal! First I must say that I reckon I overcalculated the points advantage from doing this. prob wont be much at all, and you could actually go backwards if things dont work out ideally. I now think its prob not a good risk to take with a prem... and prob not even with a mid pricer. And I have only just come to this decission. since your comment Wal, I had started to think that i shgould try Gray or someone similar in this role. but not now. I still think its a great idea with a Conca type rookie which is obvious. I will be watching rookies from these 3 clubs in NAB cub very closely now. A rookie may score just as well as a midpricer, and gain a lot more in $. hopefully being ready for an upgrade before their first bye. a very interesting point that AJ (and i think Herbie was involved too) made in the blog thread, not intentionally related to this topic, but same principles: If you go for a prem with a late bye, it allows you enough time to upgrade a rookie to a prem in time to cover their bye week. whereas having prems with early byes forces you to use rookies to cover tem... very interesting and logical take on all this. A good way of going about it. but i think the prob is finding players from clubs with late byes. haha. will have to look at clubs next wrung down from the 3 we have talked about in this thread.
<blockquote>Quote from wal on February 4, 2011, 20:38 Ideally, these scenarios would be perfect for a mid-price improver. Someone who will give you a good output as a starter each week, and will improve enough to offset the cost of bringing in the premium. Zaharakis, Morton, Houli, Davenport, Gray, Jetta, Grigg. If you can pick a player like that who can improve 10-15ppg it should be easy to transition to a premium. Assuming that when the time comes you don't have more pressing problems....</blockquote> been thinking about this a bit, and im still wondering whether its a good idea... Mainly for an upgrade to GAJ. Ive noticed others are talking about it too, around the place. so i thought id look into it in a bit more detail and open up this discussion again. So if we get a mid pricer/rookie from Port, Ess or Rich, with the aim of upgrading them to GAJ after his second bye - who is a good candidate? And is it a good idea? One idea is that the midpricer will give a good points output (better than a rookie) and hopefully rise in $$ a little (not as much as a rookie), but the kicker is that we should be able to upgrade them to GAJ with 1 less trade than if we were using a rookie. I want to give a few scenarios and ave them out to see what happens: For GAJ, I have used his averages against his opposition to calc price rises and points scored. So GAJ over first 9 rounds = 937 points, ave 133, rise -$22,198, base $631,900, R9 price $609,702 1) midpricer to GAJ after R9 Now with these three midpricers I have added 20 points to their starting ave (as we would all hope they would improve at least that much) to calc their price rises and points total. A) popular choice - Foley - would score 855 points at ave of 95, rise $54,745 from a base of 364000, R9 price $418745 B) Houli - 783 points, ave 87, rise $58,022, base $324,700, R9 price $382,722 C) McVeigh - 819 points, ave 91, rise $57,797, base $342,800, R9 price $400,597 AVE= 819 points, ave 91, rise $56,845, base $343,833, R9 price $400,688 2) Rookie to GAJ after R9 As there were 17 rookies last season who increased their ave by 50+, I have added 50 to the players starting ave to calc price rise and points scored. A) Conca - 756 points, ave 84, rise $192,755, base $163,600, R9 price $356,355 B) Heppell - 738 points, ave 82, rise $193,734, base $153,600, R9 price $347,334 AVE = 747 points, ave 83, rise $193,245, base $158,600, R9 price $351,845 So looking at this data, GAJ would be available after his 2nd bye for $609,702. with a mid pricer: you would need to find an extra $209,014 (possibly only one other trade, but based on this data of the rookie rising 193k, would need 2 extra) with a rookie: $257,857 (again - possibly only 1 extra trade required, but most probably 2). and the points scored for either is MidPricer: 819 Rookie: 747 diff: 72 points (not a great deal really) Probably the biggest factor that also needs to be factored in is the points you would gain/lose from other players depending on how much $ you spend on this spot... if going with a rookie, one would assume that you are spending the left over cash on improving a premium or 2 - so looking at the diff in starting costs, one would have an extra $185k to play with when setting up the R1 team. according to this years MN, $185k gets you roughly 38 ppg extra, and then if we times that by 8 (9 minus 1 bye), we will gain an extra 304 points over first 9 rounds. - Which makes the rookie option look a whole heap better!!! So I reckon, even if it seems that it may be easier to trade a Foley or Houli up to GAJ, it prob isnt - as you would probably need to throw a Conca et al into the trade as well (downgrade to another rookie), which would be presumed anyway; but even if you were trading Heppell to GAJ, you may get away with just the one other (Conca et al) trade as well. So on ease (trades used) - its pretty much the same... and on points gained - based on this data - you would actually gain 232 points from going the rookie option! But obviously this data used is very vague as there are sooo many variables that could affect the figures used! For instance, if the midpricer increased their ave by 30 in stead of 20, which is unlikely - but maybe just as possible (if that makes sense), then you would gain only 132 points from using the rookie strategy, but more importantly - you would guarantee being able to use only 1 extra trade (instead of a possible 2). or, the rookie may spud it up and only increase their ave by 20, which is quite possible (maybe almost probable), and then you would actually lose about 70 points compared to if you went with a midpricer, and you would (almost) certainly need to use at least 3 trades to get GAJ. and thirdly, the midpricer may drop their ave... and i dont need to go into what that would mean. So what do people think? First of all, have i missed anything critical in this analysis? And secondly, what do you all think would be the safer/riskier/better option? Both options have risks associated with them, and Im still not sure what way will be the way to go. Like everything else at this time of year, a lot will depend on NAB form to be able to predict how the players will go in the season proper. But for arguments sake - what do you all think?
Went to bed and was thinking about this some more. had to get up and add a bit to it. Im thinking the 17 players that increased their ave by 50 last year were probably mainly cheaper rookies. so looking at the data above - another scenario could be that the rookies increased by 40ppg (28 players last season did this). which would see them score 657 points up to R9; and increase by approx $135k based on this and the other data from my last post, it would mean that you would still be 142 points better off for going the rookie option, but you would almost certainly need to use 3 trades (and maybe even 4... but unlikely), instead of maybe just 2. anyway, back to bed for me!!
First Anthak... GAJ averaging 110 is more likely than any of the above. Get him at 550, two trade rookie as per usual. The thing to note also is that it's 3 game average that's important. Essendon-Brisbane-Adelaide. Not that tough an opposition, but I'd be predicting Ablett to have a tough initiation against Carlton (Joseph etc) and Doggies (Picken) so his price will be nicely disintegrating by then. On the best bye avoidance trade, surprised no one has mentioned Alfred-Choi
Anthak: Great analysis there buddy. If only the website displayed spaces to make the posts easier to read. Given there are now legitimately 3 or 4 approaches to your team that you can make, picking one will be the difference between mid-tier result and top 1000 result. I really think that estimating scores of players you plan to pick, there price increases as a result and outlining your trade plans to avoid byes and your starting 22 for each round will be the only way to pick a winning formula. Most people will probably end up with a hybrid strategy and "play each round as it lies". The top SC will plan and be able to execute their plan effectively whilst having a little bit of luck on top.
As I have said elsewhere......it is a plan. Probably not worth losing sleep over, but a plan nonetheless. Apart from Watson (& Stanton), there is Foley with high risk but huge upside (Lids a keeper) and there is Cassisi who is reliable and may inch up a bit (K. Cornes unlikely to move $ much. Boak is a consideration). Whatever the choice, for maximum advantage you want them firing from R1. Think most folks plan to have GAJ and Swan at some time. If you start with them, you will likely have to ride a price drop and take the risk that they are slow starters. It is this potential underscoring in the early rounds that is difficult to factor into anthak's calculations. The advantages of targeting your trade (with some flexibility) allow for buying at the right price and taking advantage of the byes. It also allows time to stash away some of those leftover $ from regular trades so you can top-up the necessary when you make the trade. I am going to give it a shot, in fact a double shot, targeting GAJ and Swan. This is on the basis of GAJ now being an unknown (although will be clarified quickly) and Swan noted for slow starts. The potential trade baits for these I expect to perform at least to their average (so hopefully nothing lost) and it puts extra pressure on my cows to perform as well. Where it could all go out the window is if the season throws up a 'must have' like Barlow who is not in your starting squad.
And it took a Port fan to bring up the Dom Been seriously considering Cassisi. Nice price. Proven consistency. Every year, I'm *this* close to trading him in and never quiet get there. The late bye definitely brings him into contention, but there are two things holding me back this year. 1) I'm starting at the moment with 2 mid premiums. THere's just too much rookie potential in the midfield. I don't even have Swallow in there at the moment becaue I think I might get good enough value out of others, especially with the round 1 bye thing. If I'm starting with 2 prems, they have to be 110 pointers. I've currently talked myself into starting with Jack, but I'm very iffy on it and likely to switch back to Pendles 2) In all these years, I've never had a midfield full of 110 ppg players. Nasty old case of midfield envy down at the Ghost. This year I can see round 24's (hell even round 15's) midfield looking like: Gaz, Swan, Judd, Hodge, Joey, Pendles. The names may change depending on who's 'having a year' but you get the idea. That kind of midfield would consistently score 700-750ppg without any captain's bonus. Now with point 2, having someone like Dom on the bench would be awesome for when the byes strike. For mine though I'd rather use an MPP. Say I bring Joey in after his 2nd bye, I only have Judd's and Hodgey's to cover. The other 9 rounds, barring injury, he's wasted, even if I go for a Cross over someone like Gaz. An MPP could help me cover all three other lines and I'd have my cash (and a fair chunk of it too) working for me a lot better. But if you're happy with his points/dollar and let's face it - he's bloody reliable and should play the 22, then you could do a lot worse than Cassisi imv.
<blockquote>Quote from soups on February 17, 2011, 12:33 Anthak: Great analysis there buddy. If only the website displayed spaces to make the posts easier to read. </blockquote> I was thinking to maybe send it to Walesy, but didnt think it was worthy of its own thread. <blockquote>Quote from Lucas on February 17, 2011, 10:03 First Anthak... GAJ averaging 110 is more likely than any of the above. Get him at 550, two trade rookie as per usual. </blockquote> That would be ideal Lucas! and thats what I, and many others, will be hoping for.