Linear
Senior List
Hey magpies great analysis could I request you extend the analysis to 4 rookies on the field in the midfield?
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 10 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
MidField Structure
- Thread starter magpies03
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Linear
Senior List
Scully looked to be more robust than trengove. They both look very slight.
Linear
Senior List
Banner left the field this week with hamstring soreness, not sure if there is much in that
- Thread starter
- #29
Cheers Linear! this is a shame seeings he was looking so good in th NAB. Hopefully nothing serious!
Starting 4 rookies would leave you between 100-200 points behind the other 2 structures assuming the other two mid fielders are premiums. However you minimise risk in other areas of the ground alot! Would be a very risky move but could definately pay off.....BUT VERY RISKY!
Linear
Senior List
cheers mate, I have considered it but may go for three in the midfield. This means I have to run a rookie (rockliff) in the forward line but it might be easier to cover 1 rookie in the forward line spreading the backup in terms of reserves between mids and forwards.
With three rookies in the mid able to squeeze in selwood in place of higgins who was on the forward line who is now dropped to a bench rookie.
With three rookies in the mid able to squeeze in selwood in place of higgins who was on the forward line who is now dropped to a bench rookie.
I've got Bartel, Selwood, Watson, Martin, Barlow and Shuey with Bastinac and Moles on the pine. I'm taking the gamble on Moles as I believe he is this year's Liam Picken. Port came out and said that the starting 22 for their NAB game last week would be their round 1 team. Banner did not feature initially in this... he came on at half time. As Moles is unique I feel that it is better to take a gamble with him and if by the end of round 2, Moles is dropped and Banner is pumping out the big scores then I am prepared to use a trade for this.
There is some talk of picking guys like Scully/Trengove/Connors because they are going to be closer in price to premiums so upgrades will be easier.
I did some quick analysis on the dreamteamtalk price calculator to see the difference in picking the 95k guys vs picking 155k guys. Assumptions are that scoring is identical (75 average).
A 95k rookie will be worth ~263k after 6 rounds (earliest realistic upgrade point), while the 150k rookie will be worth ~273k, a difference of only 10k.
In summary, by the time that these guys will be upgradeable, the difference in price will be negligible if they score identically, meaning the 60k spent at the start is effectively wasted. If you pick Scully/Trengove/Connors on the field, you have to be confident that they will score more (at least 5ppg) than the 95k guys in order to justify selection. If you are thinking of starting Scully/Trengove/Connors in the reserves, this will not be a financially smart move given the wealth of cheaper rookies who will make more money for you.
I did some quick analysis on the dreamteamtalk price calculator to see the difference in picking the 95k guys vs picking 155k guys. Assumptions are that scoring is identical (75 average).
A 95k rookie will be worth ~263k after 6 rounds (earliest realistic upgrade point), while the 150k rookie will be worth ~273k, a difference of only 10k.
In summary, by the time that these guys will be upgradeable, the difference in price will be negligible if they score identically, meaning the 60k spent at the start is effectively wasted. If you pick Scully/Trengove/Connors on the field, you have to be confident that they will score more (at least 5ppg) than the 95k guys in order to justify selection. If you are thinking of starting Scully/Trengove/Connors in the reserves, this will not be a financially smart move given the wealth of cheaper rookies who will make more money for you.
You wouldn't take a player at 150K because he'll rise quicker, if he scores the same as a 94K player he'll make you 50K less in 8 rounds.
You take a 150K player because
1) You think he'll score more than the base price player
2) You think he has better job security than the base price player or
3) both 1 and 2
i am thinking of 4 rookies, who would u recommend as 4th midfielder?
trengove,barlow,martin and ???
Very risky but I don't hate it.
Copping zeroes is not your biggest worry.
You have to find 2-3 strong mid rookies between rounds 6-12 for downgrade targets. To get the real premiums (Bartel, Ablett etc.) it will cost you a double trade (480k + 100k = 290k + 290k, being optimistic). That will cost you 2 of your better rookies. Upgrading 5 guys will probably cost 9 trades, and leave you with some dubious rookies in your backs/forwards due to the fact that you only have 2 rookies in the mid reserves to use as cash cows.
That being said, if two rookies become keepers (or near enough) then you're laughing. Barlow? Martin?
It will cost you more than 9 trades to upgrade from 5 rookie mids to 5 premiums, even at the optimum time.
Say they get to 260K on average and you trade 3 down to 100K mid year rookies. 160K made on each is 480K.
This leaves you with 2 other rookies at 260K, assume your premium is 460K. Costs you 2x200K=400K to upgrade 2 of them leaving 80K in the Bank. You have so far only upgraded 2 rookies, and used 5 trades. 3 upgrades to go.
Problem is you then need to start the cash generation process all over again as you are starting with new rookies. Would probably cost 11-12 trades and take until Rd 16 to finalise as you need to do it in 2 phases.
I don't like it. Essentially you're boxing in all your trades for your rookie upgrades, whilst placing a whole heap of faith in the notion that you've selected the correct premiums. Not to mention the associated level of risk wrt having 7 out of 8 of your midfielders as rookies.
I'm going for the 3 rookie mids starting structure and I have Trengove starting. I've chosen to start him over a Bastinac, Shuey or Banner because I believe he has much better job security and the Demons will look to play him as much as possible.
I'd be pretty sure, barring injury that Trengove will play very game up until I trade him out, whereas the cheaper options may be in and out of their sides or spend long stints in the reserves.
If you're going for the rookie structure, I think you need to be sure that, at the very least, your 3 starting rookies will be playing.
- Banned
- #42
Im defnitily going with the 3 premium/3 rookie strategy here. The rookies in this position is 4 x better than any other position, if not more. There is a plethora of players that will play games and score well. As we know midfielders score better than any other position any way. Also probably havnt had the confidence before in 2 or 3 real gun rookies like this year. Im confident they will all avg 70/75+ and play 20+ games barring injury. Last year we had Otten and Rich but we didnt quite have a 3rd, maybe Anthony but last year i guess we didnt have good players we could count upon on our bench aswell.
I think the 4 premium/2 rookies could be a winning strategy aswell. However it causes me to downgrade my 2nd ruck, premium forward or premium back. Which im not confident in doing.
I think the 4 premium/2 rookies could be a winning strategy aswell. However it causes me to downgrade my 2nd ruck, premium forward or premium back. Which im not confident in doing.
54Dogs, I think your approach is while correct I think 6 trades could do 3 uprades and argue 10 could do all 5.
I think you will find fallen premiums (who have had a bad game or two) may be found as low as $400k as the magic number decreases. However if you want Abletts / Bartels then your more than likely on the mark.
I also disagree with the stacking the mids strategy. Say in the backs you dont hav Goddard(or any of the top 10), he puts up 3 scores below 30 in a shrotspan and tanks in price. You cant jump on it with a team of keepers without a sideways trade. Same for forwards, if there is a massive bargain. You effectively miss out if you have set keepers.
By going for a midranger (kennelly, malceski,dangerfield,hunt,waters et all) you may allow a single sideways trade for a peaked midrange player to a fallen premium to get an extra 10ppg with no downgrades required.
I think you will find fallen premiums (who have had a bad game or two) may be found as low as $400k as the magic number decreases. However if you want Abletts / Bartels then your more than likely on the mark.
I also disagree with the stacking the mids strategy. Say in the backs you dont hav Goddard(or any of the top 10), he puts up 3 scores below 30 in a shrotspan and tanks in price. You cant jump on it with a team of keepers without a sideways trade. Same for forwards, if there is a massive bargain. You effectively miss out if you have set keepers.
By going for a midranger (kennelly, malceski,dangerfield,hunt,waters et all) you may allow a single sideways trade for a peaked midrange player to a fallen premium to get an extra 10ppg with no downgrades required.
- Banned
- #46
Agree with you decipher
BM, are you starting a forward rookie by having 2 midfield rookies or starting a rookie anywhere else?
Yellow Feathers
Norm Smith Medallist
Team Directors squad last year started 4 rookies on the field (1 def, 2 mid, 1 frd) and it worked wonders.
This year im not starting any rookies in my defence or forward line. So having 3 rookies in the midfield is pretty safe- safer than the 4 rookies TD started with. When you factor in the higher averages likely to be achieved by mid rookies, it's definately the way to go, IMO. There is a plethora of mid rookies this year- they might not all play Rd. 1 but i have 23 mid rookies in my player watchlist that i'll keep an eye on. That means i have up to 18 downgrade targets!
As for the other guy who wanted to start 5 rookies in the midfield- good idea, it might just work. After all, that's where your rookies shine, and the rest of your team is set for the year. But like the replies said, it'll be hard to finance the upgrades.
I think having a balance in every line in my team is the key. It allows me to be flexible with the DT market. Not everything is set in concrete and there will be surprises this year. For example- I've gone with 1 premium ruck instead of 2. Why? Because if there is a new Mitch Clark this year, or Cox returns to his best, i won't be forced to sideways trade. Same with my Defence, Forward, and Midfield.
The other advantage of having 3 mid rookies- compared to 1 or 2, is that you can select 3 absolute guns that should score 105+ and still have the flexibility to get 3 of this years versions of Montagna, Swan etc.
This year im not starting any rookies in my defence or forward line. So having 3 rookies in the midfield is pretty safe- safer than the 4 rookies TD started with. When you factor in the higher averages likely to be achieved by mid rookies, it's definately the way to go, IMO. There is a plethora of mid rookies this year- they might not all play Rd. 1 but i have 23 mid rookies in my player watchlist that i'll keep an eye on. That means i have up to 18 downgrade targets!
As for the other guy who wanted to start 5 rookies in the midfield- good idea, it might just work. After all, that's where your rookies shine, and the rest of your team is set for the year. But like the replies said, it'll be hard to finance the upgrades.
I think having a balance in every line in my team is the key. It allows me to be flexible with the DT market. Not everything is set in concrete and there will be surprises this year. For example- I've gone with 1 premium ruck instead of 2. Why? Because if there is a new Mitch Clark this year, or Cox returns to his best, i won't be forced to sideways trade. Same with my Defence, Forward, and Midfield.
The other advantage of having 3 mid rookies- compared to 1 or 2, is that you can select 3 absolute guns that should score 105+ and still have the flexibility to get 3 of this years versions of Montagna, Swan etc.
Fair point mate, it really depends how much traction you want from your trades. If you are only going to players who will average 100 ish you could obviously do it with less trades. If you're going to the top 5-10 mids you'll need more cash, hence more trades to generate the cash.
I guess my biggest concern with starting 4 (or 5
) mid rookies on the park is the time it will take to upgrade them. Because you'll need to generate cash through a 2nd phase of rookies to set your team, it won't be finalised until Rd 16 or so. Hence only getting the full benefit of your upgrades for 6-7 rds rather than 14 or so. For 2 players this could be 60-80 ppg which is plenty over 8 extra rounds.If a decent cow comes through in the fwds or backs this gives the chance to make money in other positions quicker and finish upgrades.
I have seen the argument a few times that having three starting rookies means you only need 3 of 5 playing each week. This is not true as you wont be generating enough money quickly enough. You need all of your rookies making money if you are going to have a few on the field.
Absolutely agree Bondy.
Prob the 2 most important positions in the team are the 7 and 8 mid. Without cash generation you have no upgrades. They must be on the park.
