Teams 2023 Fantasy - Rate My Preseason Team

Remove this Banner Ad

Starting Simpkin as a "Mid-Range Breakout" last year burnt me hard.. def. making me less risk averse this year, although no doubt similar moves will work out for all who go that way
 

Log in to remove this ad.

First Cut at my team this year, hoping to go 5 spots better and make top 100!

Seems there is a quite a few in the below that I've seen floating though the teams on this board, means we are all at the same starting point. GL this season all!

View attachment 1585117
Can you sell me on Sicily? Very highly priced. I get the whole "they'll get smashed, the ball will be back there a lot" - is that all its based on?
 
Can you sell me on Sicily? Very highly priced. I get the whole "they'll get smashed, the ball will be back there a lot" - is that all its based on?
His role back end of last year is why I have selected him now. He was pretty much left to do what he wanted with so many others back there.. day, CJ, scrimshaw, DGB and Blanck. Can see him floating more as a +1 (obviously prone to a tag). But in my team until I see otherwise
 
I really don't understand this whole 'every player needs to be under priced by 5-10 points logic. I feel like its flawed thinking. Can someone explain it to me?

Obviously, the better a player is the less upside he is likely to have. Let's look at some players for instance: Docherty, Sinclair, Jordan Dawson, Angus Brayshaw, Laird, Mills, Andrew Brayshaw, Oliver, Sicily and Taranto. That's 10 players who are basically top price. That's also 10 players that are odds on favourites to be top 8 in their position. So if you want a complete team by the end of the year that's 10 trades you'd need to burn to bring these guys in. Factoring in that trades are often 1 down, 1 up, that's 20 trades burnt to get these 10 guns in for instance.
 
I really don't understand this whole 'every player needs to be under priced by 5-10 points logic. I feel like its flawed thinking. Can someone explain it to me?

Obviously, the better a player is the less upside he is likely to have. Let's look at some players for instance: Docherty, Sinclair, Jordan Dawson, Angus Brayshaw, Laird, Mills, Andrew Brayshaw, Oliver, Sicily and Taranto. That's 10 players who are basically top price. That's also 10 players that are odds on favourites to be top 8 in their position. So if you want a complete team by the end of the year that's 10 trades you'd need to burn to bring these guys in. Factoring in that trades are often 1 down, 1 up, that's 20 trades burnt to get these 10 guns in for instance.
The thinking is 2-fold:

1. Spread your cash further to have less rookies on-field
2. Find players under priced / under average ....due to an injury affected score last season / or returning from injury / or a change in role, such as Jack Sinclair last season

Dawson may not take the kickouts this year ....that'll have a big impact on his scoring

I understand what your POV is ....but nearly all the SP's will drop in price anyway ....we'll all bring Laird in, but not at his starting price

That said, you still need 2-3 reliable Captain options
 
The thinking is 2-fold:

1. Spread your cash further to have less rookies on-field
2. Find players under priced / under average ....due to an injury affected score last season / or returning from injury / or a change in role, such as Jack Sinclair last season

Dawson may not take the kickouts this year ....that'll have a big impact on his scoring

I understand what your POV is ....but nearly all the SP's will drop in price anyway ....we'll all bring Laird in, but not at his starting price

That said, you still need 2-3 reliable Captain options
I feel slow. what is SP?
But what are your thoughts on the 10 players I listed. most people will want them/need them at the end of the season so not having them is worth 2 trades.
 
I really don't understand this whole 'every player needs to be under priced by 5-10 points logic. I feel like its flawed thinking. Can someone explain it to me?

Obviously, the better a player is the less upside he is likely to have. Let's look at some players for instance: Docherty, Sinclair, Jordan Dawson, Angus Brayshaw, Laird, Mills, Andrew Brayshaw, Oliver, Sicily and Taranto. That's 10 players who are basically top price. That's also 10 players that are odds on favourites to be top 8 in their position. So if you want a complete team by the end of the year that's 10 trades you'd need to burn to bring these guys in. Factoring in that trades are often 1 down, 1 up, that's 20 trades burnt to get these 10 guns in for instance.
Pretty simple, if you can get 10+ players who are 5-10 points underpriced you have an extra 50-100 points available to allocate on field which can be the difference between playing a rookie and a premium from round 1. The other people who chose 10 guys who are scoring at about their price point, they have one less premium to start with and are outscored.

The theory is you should only have one to two absolute top priced guys for captaincy purposes or because of their unique position in their field (i.e Dunkley this season or Gawn/Grundy in past years) they will be a negative point of difference if you don't have them.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

I really don't understand this whole 'every player needs to be under priced by 5-10 points logic. I feel like its flawed thinking. Can someone explain it to me?

Obviously, the better a player is the less upside he is likely to have. Let's look at some players for instance: Docherty, Sinclair, Jordan Dawson, Angus Brayshaw, Laird, Mills, Andrew Brayshaw, Oliver, Sicily and Taranto. That's 10 players who are basically top price. That's also 10 players that are odds on favourites to be top 8 in their position. So if you want a complete team by the end of the year that's 10 trades you'd need to burn to bring these guys in. Factoring in that trades are often 1 down, 1 up, that's 20 trades burnt to get these 10 guns in for instance.
No guarantee that Sinclair, Gus Brayshaw, Sicily or Taranto are top players in their field at the end of the season. Also it is almost guaranteed they'll be cheaper than they are right now at some point in the season. I'd rather take players with upside who i think will be top in their line.
 
No guarantee that Sinclair, Gus Brayshaw, Sicily or Taranto are top players in their field at the end of the season. Also it is almost guaranteed they'll be cheaper than they are right now at some point in the season. I'd rather take players with upside who i think will be top in their line.
there's obviously no guarantees in sport but which players do you think have a) upside and b) will be the top of their line? They don't really exist. Even if people pick guys like Bontempelli, Tom Mitchell etc. its highly unlikely they're going to surpass guys like Laird, Oliver, Touk, Andrew Brayshaw etc. so you're just going to end up with a team without the best in each line.
 
Pretty simple, if you can get 10+ players who are 5-10 points underpriced you have an extra 50-100 points available to allocate on field which can be the difference between playing a rookie and a premium from round 1. The other people who chose 10 guys who are scoring at about their price point, they have one less premium to start with and are outscored.

The theory is you should only have one to two absolute top priced guys for captaincy purposes or because of their unique position in their field (i.e Dunkley this season or Gawn/Grundy in past years) they will be a negative point of difference if you don't have them.
correct, but you're also having to burn many many trades to get the super premiums into your team. So if you don't start the 10 players I listed that's 10-20 trades you have to burn to have a complete team, is it not?
 
there's obviously no guarantees in sport but which players do you think have a) upside and b) will be the top of their line? They don't really exist. Even if people pick guys like Bontempelli, Tom Mitchell etc. its highly unlikely they're going to surpass guys like Laird, Oliver, Touk, Andrew Brayshaw etc. so you're just going to end up with a team without the best in each line.
The seeking of upside is one aspect ....you still need to select 3-4 players you think will be top of their line ....for Captaincy options

Do many think the highest price player, Laird ...will be #1 Mid at years end ....or does the under-priced Macrae reclaim his throne .....or does Steele rebound under the stewardship of Ross Lyon ?.....110 last year, was 120 ave the year B4 ?

With players having upsides ...there will be players with a downside, coming off a successful 2022
 
correct, but you're also having to burn many many trades to get the super premiums into your team. So if you don't start the 10 players I listed that's 10-20 trades you have to burn to have a complete team, is it not?
Also, some players start seasons with a burst .....whilst others work into a season, and thus lose initial value

Cripps is one player, that starts with a bang .....English, another

I'm an advocate for getting off to a strong start ....I think history of strong ranked players support that POV
 
correct, but you're also having to burn many many trades to get the super premiums into your team. So if you don't start the 10 players I listed that's 10-20 trades you have to burn to have a complete team, is it not?
You have 50 odd trades throughout the year, use them or lose them.

This isn't super coach.
 
there's obviously no guarantees in sport but which players do you think have a) upside and b) will be the top of their line? They don't really exist. Even if people pick guys like Bontempelli, Tom Mitchell etc. its highly unlikely they're going to surpass guys like Laird, Oliver, Touk, Andrew Brayshaw etc. so you're just going to end up with a team without the best in each line.
You get the best in line by upgrading throughout the season, using the 50+ trades you have available to you and when you have real time data from a current season and current form other than relying on data from previous years.

Also Laird wasn't the top guy at the start of last year. Who should someone have selected last year to start the season, Laird or Steele or Miller. By your logic they're better off going with Steele or Miller because they were the "top in the line" and Laird was "unlikely to surpass them" even though he smashed the door down in the back end of the previous year.
 
You get the best in line by upgrading throughout the season, using the 50+ trades you have available to you and when you have real time data from a current season and current form other than relying on data from previous years.

Also Laird wasn't the top guy at the start of last year. Who should someone have selected last year to start the season, Laird or Steele or Miller. By your logic they're better off going with Steele or Miller because they were the "top in the line" and Laird was "unlikely to surpass them" even though he smashed the door down in the back end of the previous year.
In your example, Laird or steele or Miller were all top 8 mids so it doesn't really matter. But I don't understand the logic in bringing in a guy say like Bont or LDU who has little chance of being a top 8 mid just because he may take his avg from 100-105? Just so you can then trade them and bring in a top 8 mid who probably hasn't lost that much in price because otherwise he wouldn't be a top 8 mid (unless getting an injured score).
 
In your example, Laird or steele or Miller were all top 8 mids so it doesn't really matter. But I don't understand the logic in bringing in a guy say like Bont or LDU who has little chance of being a top 8 mid just because he may take his avg from 100-105? Just so you can then trade them and bring in a top 8 mid who probably hasn't lost that much in price because otherwise he wouldn't be a top 8 mid (unless getting an injured score).
Another approach might be to post your side ....then we have more of a basis to discuss

Trouble is, it's hard to determine the breakout premium ....you say Bont unlikely, but in the last couple of seasons he's qualified as a FWD / MID, such is the amount of time he's spent fwd

This season, it's speculated he'll be a FT Mid ....hence why many see upside in his price / ave
Will he be in the top 8 Mids .....every chance, as there's quite a pack around similar averages
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Teams 2023 Fantasy - Rate My Preseason Team

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top