DT 2011 Fixture Strategy

[Wheedus]

Re: 2011 Fixture Strategy

I guy like Heppel could prove very valuable and possibly one you don't treat as a cash cow but rather a bench keeper (apologies if I'm re-hashing something that's just been said or otherwise stating the bleeding obvious).

If he gets games with Essendon from Round 1 (and there's plenty of reasons to suggest he will), I'd be looking at locking him as the sixth MID. Once you upgrade to 6 premium MIDs (assuming all goes to plan), Heppel then sits as a permanent MID bench covering both the MIDs and the BACKS (where I suspect many people will have three DPP keepers Goodard, Gibbs and Lids). Effectively you have four options to cover them. I wouldn't look at starting any of them in the MIDs.

The obviously downside is it's one less possie for a cash cow in your MIDS where you get most of your cows. Moooooo.

 

[favourites]

Re: 2011 Fixture Strategy

Not really a downside as in other years you wouldn't have that third bench spot. I expect the when my side is finished I will have a bac/mid and a fwd/mid link.

 

[Narkee]

Re: 2011 Fixture Strategy

Not really a downside as in other years you wouldn't have that third bench spot. I expect the when my side is finished I will have a bac/mid and a fwd/mid link.

Do you think then that starting a premium MID/BAC and MID/FWD in the midfield has merit? This will gurantee you maintain the DP link (providing no LTI's).

Alternatively, if you have your side finished by round 16-17 and in the process of making ur upgrades you lost your links you can trade into a DP link to a McNeil?

You could even keep ur initial DP rookies for the whole season. As much as you would like all your benchies to generate cash, it would be a good scenario if the DP rookies averaged around 50-60 so they don't generate too much cash and tempt you into realising the cash

 

[favourites]

Re: 2011 Fixture Strategy

I think providing that you are going to swap a Goddard/Chapman back into the fwds/bacs by the end of the season I have no dramas with it.

As with all things you are attempting to get the "perfect" side by seasons end. The perfect side would require the top 7 backs playing in the backline and so on.

The DP rookie option works best imo. It allows you pick which rookies you play and gives you enough flexibility to stop any 0's/cover byes.

We have extra trades this season which may allow for more downgrades allowing you to keep the DP rookies as just season long cover.

No doubt plenty to think about this year which will make it much more enjoyable... I can see there being a fair difference between the top 3,000 coaches this year.

 

[Narkee]

Re: 2011 Fixture Strategy

I can see there being a fair difference between the top 3,000 coaches this year.

Yeh, you will probably find (well I am probably more hoping) that many coaches will can the effort and just play for league wins this year. :fingerscrossed:

 

[Walesy]

Re: 2011 Fixture Strategy

Do you think then that starting a premium MID/BAC and MID/FWD in the midfield has merit? This will gurantee you maintain the DP link (providing no LTI's).

Alternatively, if you have your side finished by round 16-17 and in the process of making ur upgrades you lost your links you can trade into a DP link to a McNeil?

You could even keep ur initial DP rookies for the whole season. As much as you would like all your benchies to generate cash, it would be a good scenario if the DP rookies averaged around 50-60 so they don't generate too much cash and tempt you into realising the cash

I think it definitely has merit when you look at rounds 4-6. Those rounds could decimate a lineup (Goddard-Lake-Adcock, Boyd-Montagna-Hayes-NDS-Polec, Chapman-Franklin-Pav-Smith-Mzungu) and having the ability to switch a hitter around could save the day.

 

[Wheedus]

Re: 2011 Fixture Strategy

I think it definitely has merit when you look at rounds 4-6. Those rounds could decimate a lineup (Goddard-Lake-Adcock, Boyd-Montagna-Hayes-NDS-Polec, Chapman-Franklin-Pav-Smith-Mzungu) and having the ability to switch a hitter around could save the day.

Agree.

Also, looking at the second half of the season and the final structure you're trying to achieve, having one DPP (MID/BACK) and one DPP (MID/FWD) sitting on the MID bench would give great flexibility.

If a guy like Mzungu (assuming he's MID/FWD) gets regular games from the outset you could employ the same strategy as for Heppel above. you might even do both (ie Heppel as 5th MID and Mzungu as 6th with three cash cows on the pine). You'd have to be very confident of them getting regular games and your early scoring ability is more limited.

Ultimately, it'll be driven by when the rookie DPPs get their start.

 

[Tidus]

Re: 2011 Fixture Strategy

Agree.

Also, looking at the second half of the season and the final structure you're trying to achieve, having one DPP (MID/BACK) and one DPP (MID/FWD) sitting on the MID bench would give great flexibility.

If a guy like Mzungu (assuming he's MID/FWD) gets regular games from the outset you could employ the same strategy as for Heppel above. you might even do both (ie Heppel as 5th MID and Mzungu as 6th with three cash cows on the pine). You'd have to be very confident of them getting regular games and your early scoring ability is more limited.

Ultimately, it'll be driven by when the rookie DPPs get their start.

Great point Wheedus. Whilst it's good to explore the pros/cons of different strategies for dual positioning, it will largely depend upon when the DP rookies (that you believe will be relevant in 2011) get their start. What if Heppell or Mzungu/Callinan weren't named for round 1? Would you still select them in your team for DP purposes, knowing that a debut can't be too far away, or do you go with playing rookies and wait to trade in the DP rookies?

 

[Walesy]

Re: 2011 Fixture Strategy

Great point Wheedus. Whilst it's good to explore the pros/cons of different strategies for dual positioning, it will largely depend upon when the DP rookies (that you believe will be relevant in 2011) get their start. What if Heppell or Mzungu/Callinan weren't named for round 1? Would you still select them in your team for DP purposes, knowing that a debut can't be too far away, or do you go with playing rookies and wait to trade in the DP rookies?

If there is one lesson I've learnt over the journey. Trust your gut. You don't spend half of summer and autumn researching rookie only to trade out an un-named Palmer in round one for Relton Roberts (Yes- I mixed years AND positions.)

You don't *need* all of your rookies playing round 1- You just need enough to cover zeros and generate cash in a timely-timeframe. Remember, you can only cash in 2 per week and with 11 on the bench, I've seen 5 or 6 on the field- that's a period of 8 weeks worth of upgrading *only* rookies there. The rookies you trade into could be maxing out before you have a chance to cash in the rookies you're started with!

 

[54Dogs]

Re: 2011 Fixture Strategy

If there is one lesson I've learnt over the journey. Trust your gut. You don't spend half of summer and autumn researching rookie only to trade out an un-named Palmer in round one for Relton Roberts (Yes- I mixed years AND positions.)

Plenty of trust there Walesy

 

[borrat]

Re: 2011 Fixture Strategy

I guy like Heppel could prove very valuable and possibly one you don't treat as a cash cow but rather a bench keeper (apologies if I'm re-hashing something that's just been said or otherwise stating the bleeding obvious).

If he gets games with Essendon from Round 1 (and there's plenty of reasons to suggest he will), I'd be looking at locking him as the sixth MID. Once you upgrade to 6 premium MIDs (assuming all goes to plan), Heppel then sits as a permanent MID bench covering both the MIDs and the BACKS (where I suspect many people will have three DPP keepers Goodard, Gibbs and Lids). Effectively you have four options to cover them. I wouldn't look at starting any of them in the MIDs.

The obviously downside is it's one less possie for a cash cow in your MIDS where you get most of your cows. Moooooo.

i agree about heppell but unfortunetly price will discount him from my side more than likely

 

[Wheedus]

Re: 2011 Fixture Strategy

If there is one lesson I've learnt over the journey. Trust your gut. You don't spend half of summer and autumn researching rookie only to trade out an un-named Palmer in round one for Relton Roberts (Yes- I mixed years AND positions.)

You don't *need* all of your rookies playing round 1- You just need enough to cover zeros and generate cash in a timely-timeframe. Remember, you can only cash in 2 per week and with 11 on the bench, I've seen 5 or 6 on the field- that's a period of 8 weeks worth of upgrading *only* rookies there. The rookies you trade into could be maxing out before you have a chance to cash in the rookies you're started with!

Try - Pods out / Relton in - 20 mins before Lockout Rd 1. How stupid do you think I felt?

 

[Wheedus]

Re: 2011 Fixture Strategy

Great point Wheedus. Whilst it's good to explore the pros/cons of different strategies for dual positioning, it will largely depend upon when the DP rookies (that you believe will be relevant in 2011) get their start. What if Heppell or Mzungu/Callinan weren't named for round 1? Would you still select them in your team for DP purposes, knowing that a debut can't be too far away, or do you go with playing rookies and wait to trade in the DP rookies?

There are a few DPP prospects on the MID/FWD side so you'd have to think that if you chose to wait, one will pop up at an opportune time

 

[Dunn - Well Done]

Re: 2011 Fixture Strategy

im confused

 

[mezaire]

Something I have been looking at is picking rookies with their byes NOT in the multi-bye rounds.

Although I would like to win my league, the above strategy will mean that when WB and St. Kilda have their byes in rd.4 or Freo and Geelong in rd.6, I will have all of rookies to choose from, assuming they are playing of course.

For me that means rookies like Cam Richardson, Jacobs and all the GC rookies are even more valuable.

Another thing that I have discussed previously is NOT picking Swallow (GC). It's a bit of a risk and may change of he has a Barlow type NAB but I have been trying to only have only 1 GC rookie in each position (due to late rookie changes in rd.1) and currently I have Mav Weller in my mids.
I think Weller could easliy avg. 75 and to make up the extra $100k Swallow will need to avg. close to 100.
Weller is also alot less likely to attract a tag and also Swallow may be treated with care by the GC staff, eg subbed off.

Thoughts??

 

[bombermick]

Interesting strategy there. Swallow seems like the best draftee to enter the league in the past few years, but I guess having only the one GC rookie means you'll be able to cover byes more easily. You won't need to cover anybody in Rd 1, so it's only Rd 9 you need to be concerned about.

With Ablett and Rischa in the midfield I doubt Swallow will be tagged, but you're right in that Weller could easily outperform him.

 

[Dunn - Well Done]

No rookie will outperform Swallow next year.

But i like the idea of buying a cheaper GC player instead of Swallow or with Swallow.

The more i think about next year, the more variables i come to realising.

 

[NinjaHamster]

Dunn, I am pretty sure that when bombermick stated Weller could easily outperform Swallow, he was referring to the previous poster's theory ... ie. that Weller could outperform Swallow when it comes to cash generation NOT that he will outperform him in terms of scores. This theory seems entirely plausible, so I wouldn't be so confident that it cannot occur.

 

[Dunn - Well Done]

Dunn, I am pretty sure that when bombermick stated Weller could easily outperform Swallow, he was referring to the previous poster's theory ... ie. that Weller could outperform Swallow when it comes to cash generation NOT that he will outperform him in terms of scores. This theory seems entirely plausible, so I wouldn't be so confident that it cannot occur.

Yeh well i understood wrong.

Cash generation yes, he could. But Weller is borderline best 22.

 

[favourites]

I think you might need to buy a prospectus before making that call. Swallows average is not as pretty as you would think playing in a lesser league.

 

[Dunn - Well Done]

I think you might need to buy a prospectus before making that call. Swallows average is not as pretty as you would think playing in a lesser league.

Or you could just tell me what he avg in TAC cup last year

Im predicting Swallow to avg between 80-85 in AFL

Most young players improve there scoring than what they got in the state carnival or year before they were drafted.

 

[favourites]

Not bad with the guess of his average in the VFL...

I can't see him averaging 80-85, remembering he is still a rookie (18yr old). Has a 18yo ever averaged that.

I'm tipping that Jacobs will average more than him.

 

[NinjaHamster]

Not bad with the guess of his average in the VFL...

I can't see him averaging 80-85, remembering he is still a rookie (18yr old). Has a 18yo ever averaged that.

I'm tipping that Jacobs will average more than him.

Actually, there've been a few 18 year olds who have averaged that (or very close to) in their first year, even whilst playing the majority of games ... recent examples would be Rhys Palmer (88), Joel Selwood (86), and Daniel Rich (77) ... Jack Grimes got 89 (though admittedly that was in his second year and he may have turned 19 during the year, he had only played one game the previous year).

In fact, even if you JUST look at 2010, there was Tom Scully (79), Jack Trengove (76), Dustin Martin (72) and quite possibly others I can't recall.

David Swallow is better than all of the above-mentioned players (with the exception of Selwood - at least at this stage) and has the HUGE advantage of having played in VFL seniors for a year AND having already been training in the AFL system for over a year to help him along.

 

[mezaire]

Actually, there've been a few 18 year olds who have averaged that (or very close to) in their first year, even whilst playing the majority of games ... recent examples would be Rhys Palmer (88), Joel Selwood (86), and Daniel Rich (77) ... Jack Grimes got 89 (though admittedly that was in his second year and he may have turned 19 during the year, he had only played one game the previous year).

In fact, even if you JUST look at 2010, there was Tom Scully (79), Jack Trengove (76), Dustin Martin (72) and quite possibly others I can't recall.

David Swallow is better than all of the above-mentioned players (with the exception of Selwood - at least at this stage) and has the HUGE advantage of having played in VFL seniors for a year AND having already been training in the AFL system for over a year to help him along.

Fair point but you are also forgetting that all of them except maybe Martin in early 2010 were playing in a better and much more experienced team.

My origional point was not argueing that Swallow will score badly, simply that he is unlikely to make up the $100k difference between him and a $86,000 player, which is about 25 points.

If we go back to Mav Weller and use you numbers from the last few years, I beleive Weller is pretty close to as good a player as Trengove, Martin and Scully, meaning he could avg 70 easily.
Do you really think Swallow is going to avg 95 and make the difference up???
As good as he is that's a BIG ask in his 1st year.

Also that money could make you closer to the MJ of 20-25 points per $100k else where, eg have Sandi and Jolly in the rucks.

Mez

 

[54Dogs]

Fair point but you are also forgetting that all of them except maybe Martin in early 2010 were playing in a better and much more experienced team.

My origional point was not argueing that Swallow will score badly, simply that he is unlikely to make up the $100k difference between him and a $86,000 player, which is about 25 points.

If we go back to Mav Weller and use you numbers from the last few years, I beleive Weller is pretty close to as good a player as Trengove, Martin and Scully, meaning he could avg 70 easily.
Do you really think Swallow is going to avg 95 and make the difference up???
As good as he is that's a BIG ask in his 1st year.

Also that money could make you closer to the MJ of 20-25 points per $100k else where, eg have Sandi and Jolly in the rucks.

Mez

It's a valid discussion point TBH.

Purely from a value perspective for scoring potential the base priced rookie may well be better value. But what Swallow brings is the same this Trengove and Scully did last year, job security. Plus the added bonus he will not be 22nd man.