Teams 2020 Rate My Pre-Season Team

[WaynesWorld19]

Spoiler: 2020 Official AFL Fixture

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Open to any and all suggestions! This forum is such a great resource year after year. Thanks guys
View attachment 831523View attachment 831524View attachment 831525

You have two DEF / FWD players in DEF .....put one up fwd, so you have interchangeability

Good mid depth ....but not a fan of 3 x premo Rookies

Sam Jacobs ....HUGE HUGE risk .... 62 points last night from 70% gametime .....puts you 60 points behind Gawndry every week ....the guy has had injuries the last two seasons (back)

Not a fan of 2nd year players .....surely there are better options than Rozee at F3 ....even Petracca v Rozee ?

 

[ArdentEagle]

You have two DEF / FWD players in DEF .....put one up fwd, so you have interchangeability

Good mid depth ....but not a fan of 3 x premo Rookies

Sam Jacobs ....HUGE HUGE risk .... 62 points last night from 70% gametime .....puts you 60 points behind Gawndry every week ....the guy has had injuries the last two seasons (back)

Not a fan of 2nd year players .....surely there are better options than Rozee at F3 ....even Petracca v Rozee ?

I agree with everything bar Rozee. I think this kid will be the exception to a rule that's normally right.
Something very special about him. I look forward to beating you in our league with him on board

 

[buttox]

Open to any and all suggestions! This forum is such a great resource year after year. Thanks guys
View attachment 831523View attachment 831524View attachment 831525

nice team.
If i was taking a cheap second ruck it would be Naismith or Ceglar.
Jacobs always had a decent midfield to hit it too.
He has been crap since the HTA rule came in.
doubt he changes that this year.
Naismith gives you more cash/ a higher growth rate if he scores decent.
Ceglar has dpp and a different bye to gawndy.
both will be number 1 ruck at the respective teams.
hope this helps

 

[WaynesWorld19]

I agree with everything bar Rozee. I think this kid will be the exception to a rule that's normally right.
Something very special about him. I look forward to beating you in our league with him on board

Looks up ArdentEagle 's 2019 ranking .......

 

[ArdentEagle]

Looks up ArdentEagle 's 2019 ranking .......

View attachment 831538

Yep - It was a shit year. I've had very good rankings too.

It coincided with me getting rid of foxtel (watching less games to get a feel of the games) and kids taking up more time. Not being able to access SC while I'm at work is hard too, especially with last minute team changes and WST.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Yep - It was a shit year. I've had very good rankings too.

It coincided with me getting rid of foxtel (watching less games to get a feel of the games) and kids taking up more time. Not being able to access SC while I'm at work is hard too, especially with last minute team changes and WST.

 

[vanders]

Lack of decent rookies has made me think Rowell at M5 may be the way to go

 

[madbomber8]

First time back in supercoach for 6 years. Any advice would be appreciated.

- still have $70k to switch around rookies and make changes after marsh week 2.
- was thinking of trying to squeeze in macpherson in fwds as i think he averages 95+ this year.
- bit worried bout having both gold coast high priced rookies :/
- lots of DPP, specially in fwds + rucks.

 

[Deliverance]

This will just leave me in a world of pain, won't it?

 

[FAILTOSUCCEED]

This will just leave me in a world of pain, won't it?
View attachment 831586

Yes. Wouldn’t surprise to see Ladhams overtake Lycett either.

 

[Deliverance]

Yes. Wouldn’t surprise to see Ladhams overtake Lycett either.

Lycett killed the 2nd half of 2019 and Ladhans only seemed to play when he was injured is my theory there.

 

[vanders]

First time back in supercoach for 6 years. Any advice would be appreciated.

- still have $70k to switch around rookies and make changes after marsh week 2.
- was thinking of trying to squeeze in macpherson in fwds as i think he averages 95+ this year.
- bit worried bout having both gold coast high priced rookies :/
- lots of DPP, specially in fwds + rucks.

View attachment 831571

Use the extra $ to get a better M5 than Heeney.

 

[PoopingHindi]

Lack of decent rookies has made me think Rowell at M5 may be the way to go

View attachment 831569

it still looks like you're about 5 rookies short in midfield.

 

[PoopingHindi]

First time back in supercoach for 6 years. Any advice would be appreciated.

- still have $70k to switch around rookies and make changes after marsh week 2.
- was thinking of trying to squeeze in macpherson in fwds as i think he averages 95+ this year.
- bit worried bout having both gold coast high priced rookies :/
- lots of DPP, specially in fwds + rucks.

View attachment 831571

look fine. i'm assuming that Heeney won't be in the mids long term.
there's a few picks in there that i don't like but its personal preference.

 

[SELFCONFESDAFLNERD]

I've come around to the idea of starting a MID/FWD mid-pricer in my midfield given there are so many mid-priced forwards that i rate and not that many pure midfield rookies beyond Rowell, Serong, Pickett & Stephens

 

[SELFCONFESDAFLNERD]

This will just leave me in a world of pain, won't it?
View attachment 831586

Love it. Ive gone a similar strategy in the forwards but with a few different selections

 

[A Bit Dusty]

Lycett killed the 2nd half of 2019 and Ladhans only seemed to play when he was injured is my theory there.

Ladhams is taking Ryders spot

 

[Souup]

You have two DEF / FWD players in DEF .....put one up fwd, so you have interchangeability

Good mid depth ....but not a fan of 3 x premo Rookies

Sam Jacobs ....HUGE HUGE risk .... 62 points last night from 70% gametime .....puts you 60 points behind Gawndry every week ....the guy has had injuries the last two seasons (back)

Not a fan of 2nd year players .....surely there are better options than Rozee at F3 ....even Petracca v Rozee ?

I'm not a proponent of the Jacobs pick but this is not at all true and is used around here all the time to suggest anything but Grundy and Gawn is a bad selection

Hypothetically - Gawn + Cerra = $1,035,000 or Jacobs + Lloyd = $935,000

Lets say everyone scores their priced average (I know, it won't happen.)
Gawn = 130
Cerra = 63
= 193

Jacobs = 80
Lloyd = 109
= 189
(With 100K left over)

Literally 3 points difference with 100K left in the bank. It's just a hypothetical but my point is the money you save on Gawn you'll use elsewhere. It's not like you throw away the 350K difference between Jacobs and Gawn. Literally the only way you're going to be down 60 points over someone that chooses Gawn is if you go into the season with the 350K you saved sitting in the bank. You're using that in another position to go from Roberton -> Laird/Sicily, Speculative forward -> Whitfield or often getting in another premium midfielder.

The best case you can make for going Grundy + Gawn is the easy captain's choices every week. However, if you don't go Gawn but use the money to go someone like Macrae or Neale in the midfield you're still getting a very good captaincy choice and save ~30-40K to use elsewhere.

Anyway - I'm going Grundy + Gawn from the easy captaincy perspective. But to suggest that not going that combo sets you back 60 points a week is blatantly false.

 

[Mt Isa Mustang]

First time back in supercoach for 6 years. Any advice would be appreciated.

- still have $70k to switch around rookies and make changes after marsh week 2.
- was thinking of trying to squeeze in macpherson in fwds as i think he averages 95+ this year.
- bit worried bout having both gold coast high priced rookies :/
- lots of DPP, specially in fwds + rucks.

View attachment 831571

Macpherson needs midfield time to score 95+
He will probably get some but in between Swallow, Fiorini, Miller, Brodie, Rowell, Greenwood, Weller (has been playing on ball) who will all get CBA's that time is pretty limited.
Jack Bowes who has played in defence a bit before has gone to the backline because of the midfield time squeeze.

Think Macpherson attended 1 or 0 CBA's on the weekend so be very surprised if he can get. enough midfield time to reach 95.

Anderson dubious for round 1 debut. Wouldn't pick him personally.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

I'm not a proponent of the Jacobs pick but this is not at all true and is used around here all the time to suggest anything but Grundy and Gawn is a bad selection

Hypothetically - Gawn + Cerra = $1,035,000 or Jacobs + Lloyd = $935,000

Lets say everyone scores their priced average (I know, it won't happen.)
Gawn = 130
Cerra = 63
= 193

Jacobs = 80
Lloyd = 109
= 189
(With 100K left over)

Literally 3 points difference with 100K left in the bank. It's just a hypothetical but my point is the money you save on Gawn you'll use elsewhere. It's not like you throw away the 350K difference between Jacobs and Gawn. Literally the only way you're going to be down 60 points over someone that chooses Gawn is if you go into the season with the 350K you saved sitting in the bank. You're using that in another position to go from Roberton -> Laird/Sicily, Speculative forward -> Whitfield or often getting in another premium midfielder.

The best case you can make for going Grundy + Gawn is the easy captain's choices every week. However, if you don't go Gawn but use the money to go someone like Macrae or Neale in the midfield you're still getting a very good captaincy choice and save ~30-40K to use elsewhere.

Anyway - I'm going Grundy + Gawn from the easy captaincy perspective. But to suggest that not going that combo sets you back 60 points a week is blatantly false.

loved your logic ....up until the last sentence

Reality is ...with the money you save on Gawn ...will that player you choose to buy, outscore who you possibly would have chosen ....by 60 points

Lets say a Rookie @ $123K was your original choice ....then the $350K you save by going Jacobs, means you can now get a player at $470K+

Rookie could average 60 ....will the $470K player average 120?
And as you say, that's not factoring in the (C) consideration

 

[PoopingHindi]

I'm not a proponent of the Jacobs pick but this is not at all true and is used around here all the time to suggest anything but Grundy and Gawn is a bad selection

Hypothetically - Gawn + Cerra = $1,035,000 or Jacobs + Lloyd = $935,000

Lets say everyone scores their priced average (I know, it won't happen.)
Gawn = 130
Cerra = 63
= 193

Jacobs = 80
Lloyd = 109
= 189
(With 100K left over)

Literally 3 points difference with 100K left in the bank. It's just a hypothetical but my point is the money you save on Gawn you'll use elsewhere. It's not like you throw away the 350K difference between Jacobs and Gawn. Literally the only way you're going to be down 60 points over someone that chooses Gawn is if you go into the season with the 350K you saved sitting in the bank. You're using that in another position to go from Roberton -> Laird/Sicily, Speculative forward -> Whitfield or often getting in another premium midfielder.

The best case you can make for going Grundy + Gawn is the easy captain's choices every week. However, if you don't go Gawn but use the money to go someone like Macrae or Neale in the midfield you're still getting a very good captaincy choice and save ~30-40K to use elsewhere.

Anyway - I'm going Grundy + Gawn from the easy captaincy perspective. But to suggest that not going that combo sets you back 60 points a week is blatantly false.

hypothetical does not make sense. i mean in a strict maths sense it works but thats not the only thing to consider.
who in their right mind is going to pick a $330k defender with a 63 average that won't even get close to being one of the top scores on their line?
nobody, thats who.

just like noone should pick a $340k ruckman who wont even get close to being one of the top scorers in their line.

 

[Souup]

loved your logic ....up until the last sentence

Reality is ...with the money you save on Gawn ...will that player you choose to buy, outscore who you possibly would have chosen ....by 60 points

Lets say a Rookie @ $123K was your original choice ....then the $350K you save by going Jacobs, means you can now get a player at $470K+

Rookie could average 60 ....will the $470K player average 120?
And as you say, that's not factoring in the (C) consideration

You're limiting the option of spending the 350K to 123K rookie vs 470K which is a tad convenient to your argument. There's several different ways you can use it which I listed- all of which are ways that could result in your team being better off than it was with Gawn. I'd also love to know which 123K rookies you think are averaging 60 with good job security apart from Pickett and potentially Gould and Budarick.

There have been mids that have averaged ~130 in the past and if you managed to pick one that did that this season instead of going with Gawn your choice would be justified from a captaincy perspective.

In the end the 60 point difference statement is just not true. The only way it's true is if you choose to do nothing with the money you save and have it sitting in the bank - which no one picking Jacobs is doing.

 

[LuvtheKangas]

Lack of decent rookies has made me think Rowell at M5 may be the way to go

View attachment 831569

Umm, doesn't that mean you have to take another MID rookie?

 

[Souup]

hypothetical does not make sense. i mean in a strict maths sense it works but thats not the only thing to consider.
who in their right mind is going to pick a $330k defender with a 63 average that won't even get close to being one of the top scores on their line?
nobody, thats who.

just like noone should pick a $340k ruckman who wont even get close to being one of the top scorers in their line.

It actually makes perfect sense mathematically. I simply made a hypothetical point of what you can do with 350K - I suggested alternatives such as going another premium mid and saving 30-40K minimum instead of picking Gawn. You could also use the 350K to upgrade someone like Steven/Smith in the forward line to Whitfield and still have 100K+ left in the bank to pick some more expensive (but potentially more reliable) rookies. There are heaps of ways you could go about using the money saved.

Again - You're not throwing the 350K you save away into thin air - it's being used elsewhere to make up the 50-60 points you lose weekly going Jacobs instead of Gawn.

 

[SELFCONFESDAFLNERD]

I'm not a proponent of the Jacobs pick but this is not at all true and is used around here all the time to suggest anything but Grundy and Gawn is a bad selection

Hypothetically - Gawn + Cerra = $1,035,000 or Jacobs + Lloyd = $935,000

Lets say everyone scores their priced average (I know, it won't happen.)
Gawn = 130
Cerra = 63
= 193

Jacobs = 80
Lloyd = 109
= 189
(With 100K left over)

Literally 3 points difference with 100K left in the bank. It's just a hypothetical but my point is the money you save on Gawn you'll use elsewhere. It's not like you throw away the 350K difference between Jacobs and Gawn. Literally the only way you're going to be down 60 points over someone that chooses Gawn is if you go into the season with the 350K you saved sitting in the bank. You're using that in another position to go from Roberton -> Laird/Sicily, Speculative forward -> Whitfield or often getting in another premium midfielder.

The best case you can make for going Grundy + Gawn is the easy captain's choices every week. However, if you don't go Gawn but use the money to go someone like Macrae or Neale in the midfield you're still getting a very good captaincy choice and save ~30-40K to use elsewhere.

Anyway - I'm going Grundy + Gawn from the easy captaincy perspective. But to suggest that not going that combo sets you back 60 points a week is blatantly false.

I think you make a good point in that the money you use elsewhere is valuable when selecting someone over Gawn. However, it is not an easy equation at all as for some players you want a greater points per price ratio, while when you select a gun the points to price ratio doesnt really matter as they are there to lock in points and stay in your team.

You can definitely simplify it by suggesting everyone has the same points per price meaning everyone will average the same as their pricing point but we all know that is unrealistic. I guess my point with this post is to dispell the theory that if you do a simple player A + B vs player C + D you can work out which combination is better for your side. i.e Jacobs + Lloyd vs Gawn + Cerra. Yes, doing that simple exercise helps but when you factor in points per dollar and the fact that there are billions of combinations it breaks down i.e you can actually get all of Gawn, Lloyd, Jacobs & Cerra if you so desire.

Essentially, what im saying is that for some picks like Gawn you do not need value per dollar because you 'lock in' their points and barring LTIs they stay in your team and then you make up the value elsewhere. True, you can go with a different combination of players and potentially get better results so im really not against looking for value in the rucks but because Gawn and Grundy are streets ahead of the rest i think its safer to lock in their points and look for value elsewhere.

So yeah, because you get Gawn it doesnt mean you have to start someone else or whatever, the amount of combinations might as well be infinite and if you think it comes down to player A + B vs C + D its not. Its really players 1-30 (plus cash) vs players 1-30 (plus cash). Ill end this post by saying that i really dont think there is a right or wrong answer here. If you can find value in the rucks or think Gawn will decline significantly then by all means go for something different. Myself, i cant see many rucks that are value so i will try to get my value elsewhere and will be happy with Gawn and Grundy even if Gawn comes back to the pack a bit.