I agree Dogs. A 77k ruckman at this stage looks like 77k that will be wasted. Spending a little extra on a player who should play or a player that provides a dual-position link is worth the extra money IMO. At least that way you're putting the money you've spent on that position to some use.
-
LIVE: Geelong v Brisbane Lions - 7:30PM Sat
Squiggle tips Cats at 54% chance -- What's your tip? -- Teams on Thurs »
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 4 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
DT Rucks 2010
- Thread starter Frozenwaste
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Status
I agree Dogs. A 77k ruckman at this stage looks like 77k that will be wasted. Spending a little extra on a player who should play or a player that provides a dual-position link is worth the extra money IMO. At least that way you're putting the money you've spent on that position to some use.
The Falcon Strike
Hall of Famer
I made a comment earlier on this strategy - it's not just the 3ppw you sacrifice - but rather the fact that I think there is greater value in the forwards than Tippett.
As such, IMO you would also be sacrificing the extra points a better forward alternative could be scoring.
As it stands - i'm going both warnock and skipper - but not sure the DP angle works any wonders in this case
Papa Juggs
Hall of Famer
- Banned
- #1,003
I think that a rediculous think to say.
Seaby > White.
In what universe???
Seaby is suddenly not a spud with a quick jumper change?
Seaby > White.
In what universe???
Seaby is suddenly not a spud with a quick jumper change?
Don't think so hard.
Hard to know.
Point taken but the difficult thing to factor in is the hidden value of Tippett through DP coverage. The ability to play a higher scoring rookie = hidden value. The ability to have coverage all year = hidden value. Skipper will be fine through the first half but with Taylor back and Warnock made of tissue paper (plus JS risks) the back half of the year does not look strong. Not out of the question you would be left with no bench coverage whatsoever for the extra coin paid.
So on face value Tippett does not pay his way but the ability to play a fwd emerg for say 4 weeks could be 80 points, plus in the back half of the year if Tippett cover 2 donuts there's another 140 points (assuming fwd bench 70). 220 points extra. 220/22 = 10 ppg. Tippett improves to say 80 average + the 10 ppg saving you through DP and he's worth 90 ppg to your team, more than paying his way. Also can cover a mid range injury in the rucks (say 4 weeks) without being tempted to trade.
The hidden value makes it a lot closer call than the obvious "Tippett won't pay his way" but it's highly subjective dependant on your assessment of what's a reasonable expectation in terms of how many games rucks will miss.
Based on my projections it's a very close call, mainly due to the almost inevitable carnage in the back half of every season.
- Jun 4, 2007
- 951
- 77
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
. Without intending to do so I actually ended up with starting lineup with no DP player at all. Kinda ruled myself out from using it now.
Don't want to derail too much here but IMO selecting for DP is a bit like selecting for durability, the value is hidden because it's not an obvious increase in the players average. Firstly you need to understand what the hidden value is and then it takes a lot of discipline to select the relevant players when others who are almost certain to increase in average exist as well, but bring different risks such as injury or JS with them.
But that's a debate for another thread, another time
But that's a debate for another thread, another time
Very good point. Just ensure you don't over value DP.
Very true.
And it's so hard to put an exact value on because it's year one and you're not just focussed on one player, it's a whole position group.
Anyway, reports are Skipper went OK in the half he played today which is promising.
- Status
