Noobz0r
Tom Jonas Fan Club Junior VP
- Aug 18, 2009
- 30,325
- 40,078
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 10 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
DT Midfielders 2010
- Thread starter 54Dogs
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Status
Noobz0r
Tom Jonas Fan Club Junior VP
- Aug 18, 2009
- 30,325
- 40,078
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
2 starting, 2 on the bench
depends on cash. if the MN is slightly lower than what fanfooty has used, then we may get an extra 100kish which means a rookie goes to a mid pricer.
It was more directed at Scotty who thought it was tooo big of a risk starting 2 midfield rookies. I think Trengrove and Cunnington are likely to be mids so this scenario could actually occur.
my midfield currently looks this way.
Swan, Gibbs, Green, Swift, Martin, Moribato...
i used the two rook mid option last year with otten and rich and it payed off...
hopefully it will this year too.
Starting with cunnington and trengrove in the forwards too.
allows me then to have 15 keepers
Swan, Gibbs, Green, Swift, Martin, Moribato...
i used the two rook mid option last year with otten and rich and it payed off...
hopefully it will this year too.
Starting with cunnington and trengrove in the forwards too.
allows me then to have 15 keepers
They are the three players I have down at the moment also. Just got to pick the right rookie to start also
Scottydude
Senior List
there is so much value in the mid pricers, what happens if the rookies arent ready for AFL, i just think 2 on the field in one posi could slaughter you. Mind you if they turn into D rich it is one step closer to winning, i have planned on using the mid priced theory but if the rookies fire in the NAB i might have to change
- Mar 20, 2007
- 29,785
- 27,881
- AFL Club
- West Coast
Every year there are always a few rookies that average over 70
Same thing every year, its up to you to find them
Same thing every year, its up to you to find them
I disagree - everyone had anthony last year, and many had others (beams, robinson, etc) who were problematic at times, yet they still managed.
Whilst yes it may cost you a trade, you have to expect to use a trade or two fixing errors you made with your starting squad.
If I was going to start two rookies, Id do it in the midfield - Id probably also lean towards starting 2 rookies in the midfield before I started them anywhere else due to the superior depth that generally lies there IMO.
The key is to look for value - try and pick as many players as possible that you see improving on their 2009 average. This can either be to more opportunity (ie more time in the midfield, or more game time), natural development (ie another year in the system, big preseason in the gym, etc), a year coming back from injury (think hasleby, etc) or various other reasons. There isn’t really a “set” structure you should follow:
The concept of cash cows is simply this - picking players (either rookies or cheaper mid pricers around the 200-250k mark) to improve and increase their price, before downgrading them to another rookie and using the cash to upgrade players to guns. Pretty simple.
The concept of a keeper is interesting - I made a post on it here:
http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showpost.php?p=16512142&postcount=9
To help understand keepers/structures/etc, lets break down and explore a standard structure - let me have a go at the current bigfooty hype team (quick go):
Carrazzo - Keeper
Fisher - Keeper
Hodge - Keeper
Ellis - Keeper
Buckley
Ladson
Kennelly
Maguire
Sheppard
Bartel - Keeper
Vince - Keeper
Pendlebury - Keeper
Palmer – Potential Keeper
Scully
Martin
Morabito
Shuey
Kreuzer - Keeper/Potential Keeper
Tippett – Keeper/Potential Keeper
Lobbe
Trengove (PA)
Deledio - Keeper
Pavlich - Keeper
Franklin - Keeper
Rioli - Keeper
Ziebell
Dangerfield
Trengove (Mel)
TDL
Tapscott
21k left over
This team seems pretty generic to me – 11 certain keepers in my books, plus another 3 who are probable of becoming keepers. Most people pick a side with 13 keepers in their starting line up.
So, there is 11-14 keepers, 3 rookies and 5 mid pricers in the starting 22. Whilst occasionally, these mid pricers can become keepers (or close to) like Higgins (and arguably houlihan) managed in 2009, often due to injury concerns or lack of job security the end up getting traded out anyway. It is possible that ziebell, Dangerfield, buckley, ladson and Kennelly could jump up into keepers – it wouldn’t be that surprising IMO, however you cannot expect this.
See the link to the post on keeper values (listed above) – If you see a player averaging more than this, then they can be classed as a potential keeper/keeper. For example, though ellis is priced at 68, he would only need to average 75 to be a keeper, thus I have pencilled him in. Same goes for palmer – whilst a lot cheaper (only 290k from memory) he definitely has the potential to average 95.
Furthermore, if you have Ablett, Bartel, Swan and Montagna in your midfield, you don’t need your final 2 players to be averaging 95 necessarily as any “below average” average is made up for by these premier midfielders (if that makes sense).
Hope that clears things up a little and gives you an idea of a standard stucture – if you want to keep improving and learn more about DT, then keep posting and reading. 18 months ago I was very much like you!
Oh, and by the way, Ive always liked your contribution to the Swans board - always been top notch.
I disagree - everyone had anthony last year, and many had others (beams, robinson, etc) who were problematic at times, yet they still managed.
Whilst yes it may cost you a trade, you have to expect to use a trade or two fixing errors you made with your starting squad.
If I was going to start two rookies, Id do it in the midfield - Id probably also lean towards starting 2 rookies in the midfield before I started them anywhere else due to the superior depth that generally lies there IMO.
The key is to look for value - try and pick as many players as possible that you see improving on their 2009 average. This can either be to more opportunity (ie more time in the midfield, or more game time), natural development (ie another year in the system, big preseason in the gym, etc), a year coming back from injury (think hasleby, etc) or various other reasons. There isn’t really a “set” structure you should follow:
The concept of cash cows is simply this - picking players (either rookies or cheaper mid pricers around the 200-250k mark) to improve and increase their price, before downgrading them to another rookie and using the cash to upgrade players to guns. Pretty simple.
The concept of a keeper is interesting - I made a post on it here:
http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showpost.php?p=16512142&postcount=9
To help understand keepers/structures/etc, lets break down and explore a standard structure - let me have a go at the current bigfooty hype team (quick go):
Carrazzo - Keeper
Fisher - Keeper
Hodge - Keeper
Ellis - Keeper
Buckley
Ladson
Kennelly
Maguire
Sheppard
Bartel - Keeper
Vince - Keeper
Pendlebury - Keeper
Palmer – Potential Keeper
Scully
Martin
Morabito
Shuey
Kreuzer - Keeper/Potential Keeper
Tippett – Keeper/Potential Keeper
Lobbe
Trengove (PA)
Deledio - Keeper
Pavlich - Keeper
Franklin - Keeper
Rioli - Keeper
Ziebell
Dangerfield
Trengove (Mel)
TDL
Tapscott
21k left over
This team seems pretty generic to me – 11 certain keepers in my books, plus another 3 who are probable of becoming keepers. Most people pick a side with 13 keepers in their starting line up.
So, there is 11-14 keepers, 3 rookies and 5 mid pricers in the starting 22. Whilst occasionally, these mid pricers can become keepers (or close to) like Higgins (and arguably houlihan) managed in 2009, often due to injury concerns or lack of job security the end up getting traded out anyway. It is possible that ziebell, Dangerfield, buckley, ladson and Kennelly could jump up into keepers – it wouldn’t be that surprising IMO, however you cannot expect this.
See the link to the post on keeper values (listed above) – If you see a player averaging more than this, then they can be classed as a potential keeper/keeper. For example, though ellis is priced at 68, he would only need to average 75 to be a keeper, thus I have pencilled him in. Same goes for palmer – whilst a lot cheaper (only 290k from memory) he definitely has the potential to average 95.
Furthermore, if you have Ablett, Bartel, Swan and Montagna in your midfield, you don’t need your final 2 players to be averaging 95 necessarily as any “below average” average is made up for by these premier midfielders (if that makes sense).
Hope that clears things up a little and gives you an idea of a standard stucture – if you want to keep improving and learn more about DT, then keep posting and reading. 18 months ago I was very much like you!
Oh, and by the way, Ive always liked your contribution to the Swans board - always been top notch.
very well played Lakey
Scottydude
Senior List
Top post lakey, I agree with everything you said i was just highlighting the risk of too many rookies, it is often big gain or loss!. Im not even counting the keepers in my side this year, im only looking for value (apart from 2 cap choices) im not sure how it will go i most probably will bomb out but im going to leave 150-300k in the bank and play a few players like hawkings, gray, mumford, suban, armitage (if named) and selwood and if they totally bomb i can either upgrade them early or downgrade htem to rooks dominating...pretty much mid priced i know but a little more risky
FredNerk69
Senior List
I cannot understand why Ball is not being discussed more. He has averaged 90 or better 3 times over the past 5 years and never lower than 84. For a starting price of 387K he is a no risk proposal.
Even if you do not rate him he will almost definitely get more minutes this year at a club where he is rated instead of St.Kilda.
One other point you have got to love players that have something to prove. The way he is training I think he does. Could be his best year.
Even if you do not rate him he will almost definitely get more minutes this year at a club where he is rated instead of St.Kilda.
One other point you have got to love players that have something to prove. The way he is training I think he does. Could be his best year.
Scottydude
Senior List
Shhhhhhhhh!, dont tell everyone!. hes a gun that does it all, tackles gets his own ball and marks! not really injury prone and will get more game time at at the pies than he did at the saints.
Lakey in your analysis of keeper averages you have in effect taken out the highest scorers "winning" differential. E.G. to arrive at the average of 75.7 you've deducted Goddards margin he achieved over the rest of the backs. However , simplistically, those five leading Dters averaged 89.7 not 75.7. Can you explain your reasoning? Are you in effect calculating what you see as an acceptable average for your lowest averaging keeper in each position?
Yep ;just re-read it. That's what you are doing. Very good logic as to what average you need to aim for as a minimum for a keeper---if and only if you also had the leading scorer in that position?
Yep ;just re-read it. That's what you are doing. Very good logic as to what average you need to aim for as a minimum for a keeper---if and only if you also had the leading scorer in that position?
You may well be right however Ball hasn't played a full season for 5 years and presents as having a durability question mark over him. A change of clubs might work for him but his highest average has been 94 back in 2005 so I'd be seeing that as tops for Luke and would prefer to look for someone who might get to 100. If I was happy with a 90 average I'd prefer Kirk over Ball. Last 3 years averaged 90,91 and 87.5 and hasn't missed a game in 7 years.
Yep - you got it in the second half of the post.
As I said at the start, the average of all the top 5s backs was in fact 89.7 as I stated at the start of that post.
The point was that if you had goddard (ave 103 from memory), you could have a player average 76 and still keep in line with this average. Hence, the minimum average you could have in the backline was 76 - this was the lowest value of a keeper possible to remain competitive with the top 5 in 2009. So I went through and did the same thing for each position to arrive at some minimums that can be used as some guidelines. I think it is a fantastic framework to use in regards to keeper values.
Of course, we have to remember that bringing in players earlier (ie settling your final 22 earlier) gives you an advantage too. Its better to have 15 rounds of a player averaging 90 then it is to have 9 rounds of a player averaging 100 (and the other 6 with a rookie averaging 60 playing).
Yep - you got it in the second half of the post.
As I said at the start, the average of all the top 5s backs was in fact 89.7 as I stated at the start of that post.
The point was that if you had goddard (ave 103 from memory), you could have a player average 76 and still keep in line with this average. Hence, the minimum average you could have in the backline was 76 - this was the lowest value of a keeper possible to remain competitive with the top 5 in 2009. So I went through and did the same thing for each position to arrive at some minimums that can be used as some guidelines. I think it is a fantastic framework to use in regards to keeper values.
Of course, we have to remember that bringing in players earlier (ie settling your final 22 earlier) gives you an advantage too. Its better to have 15 rounds of a player averaging 90 then it is to have 9 rounds of a player averaging 100 (and the other 4 with a rookie averaging 60 playing).[/quote]
Logic 10/10---- maths 3/10
I pulled numbers out without checking (its holidays! cut me some slack!) - evidently have to have same number of rounds. What I meant was:
15x90 = 1350 points
9x100 + 6x60 = 900 + 360 = 1260 points
Difference = 90 points
Hence upgrading earlier to a lower averaging player can be beneficial - especially if you save cash in the process.
Edited post now...
15x90 = 1350 points
9x100 + 6x60 = 900 + 360 = 1260 points
Difference = 90 points
Hence upgrading earlier to a lower averaging player can be beneficial - especially if you save cash in the process.
Edited post now...
Yeah sorry, couldn't resist a little stir. By the way with regard to your excellent work on minimum averages needed for keepers have you tried to do any work on total points accumulated from each position? Not sure where you would get the data though.
I was just thinking that those top 5 will have traded several of their final keepers at varying times through the season which would make for interesting analysis. So depending on who you had in say 7th back for earlier rounds you and depending on when you traded your final 7th in, the average you needed from that 7th back (and each of the other slots as well) could vary significantly.
True - the value needed for the starting squad would be different. For example: Whilst they ended up with a final midfield averaging 96ish between them, this wouldnt of been the average for the position.
If we could figure out how much each of their positions scored we could get another keeper value of note.
Problem is, to get that figure, we need their starting squad, their trades (plus when they made them) plus which rookies filled in for them at times (for injuries). All too much data this isnt accessible. Heck, itd be a fair bit of work even figuring it out for my own team!
Nice thought though.
If we could figure out how much each of their positions scored we could get another keeper value of note.
Problem is, to get that figure, we need their starting squad, their trades (plus when they made them) plus which rookies filled in for them at times (for injuries). All too much data this isnt accessible. Heck, itd be a fair bit of work even figuring it out for my own team!
Nice thought though.
Yes; I was thinking that we could conceivably have two teams which ended up with the exact same backline but one may have derived 100s more points from their backline than the other due to the order/timing of trading invloving backs and other positions. I still think your initial analysis is valuable but if trying to use it as a forward planning tool one needs to be aware of the variables.
Of course there will always be variables though - the point still stands, that for your final squad, these will be (close to) the averages that you need to be competitive.
So if you base your starting squad on this, then you will be fine.
Whilst edges can be gained through trading, timing and such, and there would be a different value for initial squad (which is virtually impossible to calculate), its still valid IMO.
So if you base your starting squad on this, then you will be fine.
Whilst edges can be gained through trading, timing and such, and there would be a different value for initial squad (which is virtually impossible to calculate), its still valid IMO.
- May 30, 2009
- 4,657
- 3
- AFL Club
- Essendon
- Other Teams
- Melbourne Victory, Newcastle United
- Banned
- #625
Bryce Gibbs
Joel Selwood
Tom Swift
Rhys Palmer
Tom Scully
Dustin Martin
Im going with a Strategy of 2 Premiums, 2 Lower prices and 2 Gun Rookies
Does anyone think im going to soft in the Mids, becuase i believe there is plenty of value here
Joel Selwood
Tom Swift
Rhys Palmer
Tom Scully
Dustin Martin
Im going with a Strategy of 2 Premiums, 2 Lower prices and 2 Gun Rookies
Does anyone think im going to soft in the Mids, becuase i believe there is plenty of value here
- Status
