Round 3 Discussion

[domskiezzzzzz]

How often does Roughead have 10 CPs in a game? That would account for 65% of his possessions every week.

In short, 'falling' into Roughie as my final premo due to the uncertainty of roles/inconsistency surrounding other guys 440k+. Plus cash to trade Michie to Thomas. Had I (and many others) have known Zorko would have been deployed in this manner by Leppa, this debate would be non-existent!

Point is this. You didn't know Zorko was going to start off the season the way he has. Either did I. This doesn't mean you sideways trade a proven premium in Roughead who isn't even scoring badly (2/3 games 115+), to a player who was dismal last year and has shown nothing but two really good rounds of football. Definition of a knee jerk reaction/sideways trade. Supercoach sin.

 

[Peter Bosustow]

Point is this. You didn't know Zorko was going to start off the season the way he has. Either did I. This doesn't mean you sideways trade a proven premium in Roughead who isn't even scoring badly (2/3 games 115+), to a player who was dismal last year and has shown nothing but two really good rounds of football. Definition of a knee jerk reaction/sideways trade. Supercoach sin.

It's not really a knee jerk reaction. I have been very fortunate with respect to structure and picking rookies (for once), meaning it gave me the freedom to trade two guys I wasn't really 'all in' on to begin with. Hanley et al have had stinkers and I haven't traded them.

Yes, trades are finite. But in this SC landscape bereft of rookies, cash is king.

 

[timtamWB]

For ****'s sake this is going round in circles.

Roughead is a gun, he is a good choice, but will usually go big, or go bad. This has been proven so far this year.

Zorko is a gun, those picking him are hoping for 2012 Zorko where he was VERY good, and very consistent, excluding his sub game he had only 4 scores under 90 in 15 games, and 3 of them were 80's. His exposed form this year is suggesting he will go back to 2012 Zorko, except have that natural improvement to average 105+.

Both are good choices, and people have their reasoning for picking one over the other, and they could very well be right. But we won't know until the end of the season. I mean Roughead could suddenly average 70 from now on, how the hell would we know?

Can we PLEASE ****ing move on?????

 

[timtamWB]

I think it's fair to say that some people are trying to bring some rational thinking to the debate. Others lather their points with crystal balling and hindsight, but the rules of the game say that we are running a marathon, not a sprint. It's all well and good to knee jerk trade, but don't parade around bigfooty like we care about your master plan, ie. telling us that X scored well because Y was shit tonight. Maybe X is just that good and you're autistic..go waste more trades etc.

In other words, stop justifying your shit trades with toothless arguments because you cannot think for yourself.

And likewise, don't just shut them down and not listen to their reasoning because you think they've made a stupid decision. It's all well and good to just attack or shut out others because they've made what you did is a bad decision, but you know what? It could end up being a good decision. Some people like to trade aggressively, others like to space out their trades and ration them. The beauty of Supercoach is that THERE IS NO WRONG WAY TO GO ABOUT IT (apart from the extremely obvious ones, like trading Ablett right now to Jack Martin). If you can justify it well enough, and you want to take the risk, then go for it. Using this example, while everyone may make fun of Judd_Magic for his trading strategy, he more often than not does VERY well by the end of the year, including finishing in the top 1000 for the past few years unless I'm mistaken? And he's done this before, where he sideways trades a premium. And I'd bet $50 that he'll come out at the end of the season with a higher rank than you, because he's willing to back himself and take these calculated risks, because while they might seem spur of the moment, they are actually calculated and serve a reason.

For this example, he thinks Zorko will average more than Roughead, if we're being conservative then they'll average roughly the same. Add to this, he can now get Swallow for Webster, and Swallow will definitely average more than Webster. It's a two week plan, and it's not a waste of trades because all works towards the master plan. Like you said, we're running a marathon, not a sprint. Well if you don't set yourself up well at the start of the marathon, you're no chance by the end of it. It's the pacing of yourself in the middle that really seperates the pack.

And as for what was said, it had some merit. For God's sake we could've stuck Liam Jones in that Hawthorn team and he would've cracked the ton, which is why you shouldn't measure the Hawks or Freo SC scores by the game tonight, because it was so lopsided and everyone in the Hawks team starred while nearly everyone in the Freo team flopped big time. So for the main forward target in Roughead to score 116 in such a dominant display is a bit lacklustre, you would be hoping for a 140+ score in such a shellacking. If anything, this showed that Hawthorn are more intent on sharing the ball around, and you know what that means for guys like Roughead? Their SC score drops, not a good thing. Now compare to Zorko, who has scored 120 and 160 in two losses, and looks to be playing in the midfield a lot more under the new coach. I think I know who I would back to average more.

Essentially, consider other people's opinions and it will help broaden your mind and help you think of new options that you might not have thought of before that might actually help your team. Actually, that's good advice for life in general for everyone. Consider and listen to other people's opinions and thoughts and people will like and respect you more. Just attacking a person or attacking a person's opinion does nothing for anyone except to cause pain or make you look stupid, and the world doesn't need more pain or more stupid people.

 

[timtamWB]

Can I buy another noun and another verb, please?

You can buy a letter.

The letter is Q

 

[Judd_Magic]

And likewise, don't just shut them down and not listen to their reasoning because you think they've made a stupid decision. It's all well and good to just attack or shut out others because they've made what you did is a bad decision, but you know what? It could end up being a good decision. Some people like to trade aggressively, others like to space out their trades and ration them. The beauty of Supercoach is that THERE IS NO WRONG WAY TO GO ABOUT IT (apart from the extremely obvious ones, like trading Ablett right now to Jack Martin). If you can justify it well enough, and you want to take the risk, then go for it. Using this example, while everyone may make fun of Judd_Magic for his trading strategy, he more often than not does VERY well by the end of the year, including finishing in the top 1000 for the past few years unless I'm mistaken? And he's done this before, where he sideways trades a premium. And I'd bet $50 that he'll come out at the end of the season with a higher rank than you, because he's willing to back himself and take these calculated risks, because while they might seem spur of the moment, they are actually calculated and serve a reason.

For this example, he thinks Zorko will average more than Roughead, if we're being conservative then they'll average roughly the same. Add to this, he can now get Swallow for Webster, and Swallow will definitely average more than Webster. It's a two week plan, and it's not a waste of trades because all works towards the master plan. Like you said, we're running a marathon, not a sprint. Well if you don't set yourself up well at the start of the marathon, you're no chance by the end of it. It's the pacing of yourself in the middle that really seperates the pack.

And as for what was said, it had some merit. For God's sake we could've stuck Liam Jones in that Hawthorn team and he would've cracked the ton, which is why you shouldn't measure the Hawks or Freo SC scores by the game tonight, because it was so lopsided and everyone in the Hawks team starred while nearly everyone in the Freo team flopped big time. So for the main forward target in Roughead to score 116 in such a dominant display is a bit lacklustre, you would be hoping for a 140+ score in such a shellacking. If anything, this showed that Hawthorn are more intent on sharing the ball around, and you know what that means for guys like Roughead? Their SC score drops, not a good thing. Now compare to Zorko, who has scored 120 and 160 in two losses, and looks to be playing in the midfield a lot more under the new coach. I think I know who I would back to average more.

Essentially, consider other people's opinions and it will help broaden your mind and help you think of new options that you might not have thought of before that might actually help your team. Actually, that's good advice for life in general for everyone. Consider and listen to other people's opinions and thoughts and people will like and respect you more. Just attacking a person or attacking a person's opinion does nothing for anyone except to cause pain or make you look stupid, and the world doesn't need more pain or more stupid people.

Couldn't have said it any better myself mate, well done.

Not even going to bother replying to J Squad or Dom what's his names comments as I can't be bothered.

Like you said they don't see the part of the Roughead > Zorko trade that I did which enables me to go Webster > Swallow next week.

Fair enough if I was just doing a straight Roughead > Zorko trade, there might not be a heap of benefit from that and you might see it as a bit of a knee jerk reaction, etc.

I however see it as a) getting a far more consistent scorer into my team with Zorko and b) enabling me to get a keeper in Swallow into my team next week. This wouldn't have been possible without doing the Roughead > Zorko trade.

Not saying Rougheads a spud or bad player or anything like that. I just found 2 benefits out of doing the Roughead > Zorko trade which suits my team and overall structure better.

Looking at my backline it looks a bit weak with only 3 premos up there in Mitchell, McVeigh, Enright.

I now get to rectify that problem by adding Swallow to my backline which will look alot better on paper for me and also make my team score alot better.

 

[hoddo]

And likewise, don't just shut them down and not listen to their reasoning because you think they've made a stupid decision. It's all well and good to just attack or shut out others because they've made what you did is a bad decision, but you know what? It could end up being a good decision. Some people like to trade aggressively, others like to space out their trades and ration them. The beauty of Supercoach is that THERE IS NO WRONG WAY TO GO ABOUT IT (apart from the extremely obvious ones, like trading Ablett right now to Jack Martin). If you can justify it well enough, and you want to take the risk, then go for it. Using this example, while everyone may make fun of Judd_Magic for his trading strategy, he more often than not does VERY well by the end of the year, including finishing in the top 1000 for the past few years unless I'm mistaken? And he's done this before, where he sideways trades a premium. And I'd bet $50 that he'll come out at the end of the season with a higher rank than you, because he's willing to back himself and take these calculated risks, because while they might seem spur of the moment, they are actually calculated and serve a reason.

For this example, he thinks Zorko will average more than Roughead, if we're being conservative then they'll average roughly the same. Add to this, he can now get Swallow for Webster, and Swallow will definitely average more than Webster. It's a two week plan, and it's not a waste of trades because all works towards the master plan. Like you said, we're running a marathon, not a sprint. Well if you don't set yourself up well at the start of the marathon, you're no chance by the end of it. It's the pacing of yourself in the middle that really seperates the pack.

And as for what was said, it had some merit. For God's sake we could've stuck Liam Jones in that Hawthorn team and he would've cracked the ton, which is why you shouldn't measure the Hawks or Freo SC scores by the game tonight, because it was so lopsided and everyone in the Hawks team starred while nearly everyone in the Freo team flopped big time. So for the main forward target in Roughead to score 116 in such a dominant display is a bit lacklustre, you would be hoping for a 140+ score in such a shellacking. If anything, this showed that Hawthorn are more intent on sharing the ball around, and you know what that means for guys like Roughead? Their SC score drops, not a good thing. Now compare to Zorko, who has scored 120 and 160 in two losses, and looks to be playing in the midfield a lot more under the new coach. I think I know who I would back to average more.

Essentially, consider other people's opinions and it will help broaden your mind and help you think of new options that you might not have thought of before that might actually help your team. Actually, that's good advice for life in general for everyone. Consider and listen to other people's opinions and thoughts and people will like and respect you more. Just attacking a person or attacking a person's opinion does nothing for anyone except to cause pain or make you look stupid, and the world doesn't need more pain or more stupid people.

Excellent post as always timtam. The only thing I would add is that it's fine to disagree with another player's tactics and mount a sensible argument against them. But that should always be done with respect and civility. Two things that have been sadly missing from several posts tonight.

 

[PACatter]

I can understand what J Squad is getting at, though.

I appreciate everyone's inputs, it's great to hear different ideas and everyone bouncing opinions around. It's helped me improve on my strategy and some of the players picked. However, the 150 "Judd_Magic waffling on Roughead > Zorko trade" posts over the course of the week does get a bit repetitious, and it got well overdone this week. 75 would've been enough. I think that's what J Squad is getting at, but it certainly could've been addressed much more politely.

That being said, I took Zorko over Roughy before teams locked in Round 1, so I agree with J_M's move and reasoning, as that was my thinking. I just didn't spend pages of posts justifying it.

Now, to the main point of the post- 3/320 Sandi, Mitchell, Gunston (glad I didn't sideways him)

 

[timtamWB]

Excellent post as always timtam. The only thing I would add is that it's fine to disagree with another player's tactics and mount a sensible argument against them. But that should always be done with respect and civility. Two things that have been sadly missing from several posts tonight.

That's what I was getting at with the last paragraph about considering other people's opinions, and if you disagree don't just attack. I personally make sure I never actually attack someone, unless they're being absolutely idiotic, or if I do "attack" them it's obvious that I'm just joking. You can tell when people are actually attacking each other and not being civil, as opposed to people "attacking" each other but being civil because they're just joking, something a few of the regulars do around here a lot. I usually have strong opinions as well, and will tell people not to jump on someone but always say why, and I'll toot my own horn if I'm right about something But if I'm wrong then I admit it, nothing wrong with being wrong once in a while.

And one more thing, it's ok to agree to disagree sometimes instead of just going around and around and around and around and around in circles, because it gets tiresome. I've seen a few times where the interaction pretty much just boils down to "I'm right!" "No I'm right!" "NO I'M RIGHT!!" and it just comes off as petty and childish. If you're going to argue for your point, then actually argue for your point and back it up, don't just point out the faults in the other person's argument, because then people automatically assume you can't defend your own point so it's not valid.

Or maybe I just think too much and expect civility from society when as humans we're naturally inclined to defend ourselves through physical means and if that's not an option, by lashing out verbally or in this case through the medium of text. Civility goes against our natural instinct which is to survive and to put ourselves on top and do what we think is right, because naturally what we expect from ourselves we expect from others, and whichever morals we hold above all others are the same ones we expect all other people to hold in the same esteem. People are different and we all have different personal battles on that cause us pain and take up our time and our thoughts and sometimes we want to interact in the places we feel comfortable, and then these other people will come along and start assaulting your opinions that you hold, and it just makes you feel worse about yourself for no reason. That's what the attacking does, it will just cause negative emotions in mostly anger, in some cases sorrow, but overall just negative emotions. And for most people it's their instinct to attack someone when they disagree as it's how we are hardwired, we defend ourselves and we defend our own thoughts, this isn't speaking about anyone in particular this is just all talking about humankind generally. Because when our beliefs and our thoughts and our emotions get questioned, we naturally retaliate when we're faced with an anonymous medium such as a forum, or we will retreat into ourselves sometimes, but either way neither of them are constructive. If people were just more accepting of others, more caring, more helpful, more understanding, less judgmental, less violent, and less confrontational then the world would prosper and society as we know it would be a better place.

I think I need some sleep

 

[Judd_Magic]

I can understand what J Squad is getting at, though.

I appreciate everyone's inputs, it's great to hear different ideas and everyone bouncing opinions around. It's helped me improve on my strategy and some of the players picked. However, the 150 "Judd_Magic waffling on Roughead > Zorko trade" posts over the course of the week does get a bit repetitious, and it got well overdone this week. 75 would've been enough. I think that's what J Squad is getting at, but it certainly could've been addressed much more politely.

That being said, I took Zorko over Roughy before teams locked in Round 1, so I agree with J_M's move and reasoning, as that was my thinking. I just didn't spend pages of posts justifying it.

Now, to the main point of the post- 3/320 Sandi, Mitchell, Gunston (glad I didn't sideways him)

Think your exaggerating there a bit mate.

Mentioned the Roughead > Zorko trade during the week about a handful of times at the most.

The posts I mainly posted last night were all in reply to everyone asking me if I did the Roughead > Zorko trade and I gave them my reasonings why.

 

[bergerson33]

Wow!!
Came to bigfooty this morning to see how everyone else is tracking and thought I clicked on to the X vs Y thread for a minute.

Anyway 433/4

Sandi, Pav, Michell, Roughead.

1st time this season I've had a decent start!
Got a combined total of around 150 last week from Pav, Rough and Mitchell (taking Lanfords bench score in place of Mitchell). 327 from those 3 this week makes me feel a little better about them.
Dangerfield and Kade Simpson. You're turn to lift from your pultry efforts last week.

 

[5 GB USB]

And likewise, don't just shut them down and not listen to their reasoning because you think they've made a stupid decision. It's all well and good to just attack or shut out others because they've made what you did is a bad decision, but you know what? It could end up being a good decision. Some people like to trade aggressively, others like to space out their trades and ration them. The beauty of Supercoach is that THERE IS NO WRONG WAY TO GO ABOUT IT (apart from the extremely obvious ones, like trading Ablett right now to Jack Martin). If you can justify it well enough, and you want to take the risk, then go for it. Using this example, while everyone may make fun of Judd_Magic for his trading strategy, he more often than not does VERY well by the end of the year, including finishing in the top 1000 for the past few years unless I'm mistaken? And he's done this before, where he sideways trades a premium. And I'd bet $50 that he'll come out at the end of the season with a higher rank than you, because he's willing to back himself and take these calculated risks, because while they might seem spur of the moment, they are actually calculated and serve a reason.

For this example, he thinks Zorko will average more than Roughead, if we're being conservative then they'll average roughly the same. Add to this, he can now get Swallow for Webster, and Swallow will definitely average more than Webster. It's a two week plan, and it's not a waste of trades because all works towards the master plan. Like you said, we're running a marathon, not a sprint. Well if you don't set yourself up well at the start of the marathon, you're no chance by the end of it. It's the pacing of yourself in the middle that really seperates the pack.

And as for what was said, it had some merit. For God's sake we could've stuck Liam Jones in that Hawthorn team and he would've cracked the ton, which is why you shouldn't measure the Hawks or Freo SC scores by the game tonight, because it was so lopsided and everyone in the Hawks team starred while nearly everyone in the Freo team flopped big time. So for the main forward target in Roughead to score 116 in such a dominant display is a bit lacklustre, you would be hoping for a 140+ score in such a shellacking. If anything, this showed that Hawthorn are more intent on sharing the ball around, and you know what that means for guys like Roughead? Their SC score drops, not a good thing. Now compare to Zorko, who has scored 120 and 160 in two losses, and looks to be playing in the midfield a lot more under the new coach. I think I know who I would back to average more.

Essentially, consider other people's opinions and it will help broaden your mind and help you think of new options that you might not have thought of before that might actually help your team. Actually, that's good advice for life in general for everyone. Consider and listen to other people's opinions and thoughts and people will like and respect you more. Just attacking a person or attacking a person's opinion does nothing for anyone except to cause pain or make you look stupid, and the world doesn't need more pain or more stupid people.

top post mate.

 

[Krujan]

Just putting an explanation out there in regards to my Roughead > Zorko trade mate.

Everyone seems to be asking about it so just wanted to put down an explanation for them.

It sounds more like 'justification' rather than an explanation of why you did that trade. Talk yourself into it as much as you like, but you're just talking rubbish about Zorko going to be more consistent than Roughy. You do not know that. Honestly, I hope Zorko scores a 60 this week just to knock some sense into you.

 

[kangaroos3]

I don't have Roughead or Zorko.

Can't work out if I'm a good or bad supercoacher/person?

 

[PACatter]

I don't have Roughead or Zorko.

Can't work out if I'm a good or bad supercoacher/person?

Both.

You'll have to trade one of the two in. Preferably a sideways trade, because you're not allowed to sideways trade apparently.

DO IT. DO IT NOW!

 

[kangaroos3]

Both.

You'll have to trade one of the two in. Preferably a sideways trade, because you're not allowed to sideways trade apparently.

DO IT. DO IT NOW!

Ablett and Pendles OUT and Zorko and Roughy IN!!

Don't even need DPP

 

[Double the Fist]

It sounds more like 'justification' rather than an explanation of why you did that trade. Talk yourself into it as much as you like, but you're just talking rubbish about Zorko going to be more consistent than Roughy. You do not know that. Honestly, I hope Zorko scores a 60 this week just to knock some sense into you.

If Zorko plays midfield, I think he may very well be more consistant score wise. Roughy, being a tall forward will be a roller coaster like many big KP forwards.
They MAY end up averaging the same, but maybe JM just wants stability in his life?

 

[Double the Fist]

Both.

You'll have to trade one of the two in. Preferably a sideways trade, because you're not allowed to sideways trade apparently.

DO IT. DO IT NOW!

 

[Double the Fist]

As others have said, Roughy is pretty inconsistent in regards to SC. I had him last year also and he is a real roller coaster ride. He was very frustrating to have in my side tbh (more than most) due to this fluctuation in scoring, but he has averaged near on 100 for the last 3 years and I think is very capable of doing that again. Buddy gone gives him the best defender yes, but the flip side to that is that someone has to fill the void that buddy left and it may as well be Roughead afaic (or at least he should be able to grab a share of it).
I've stayed on the roller coaster for the ride, but I can understand if others wanted to get off. Last week's score wasn't very pleasant and the bottom line is that we are all trying to improve our sides. How we go about it is the interesting part.

Good post mate.
I just hope Roughy posts some 150 plus scores against the weaker teams to make up for his 49s against decent opposition defenders a la Hooker

 

[kreglze]

Only Suckling and Sandi for me. But am happy with that for a start.

 

[Sir Skid]

Wow, the Roughy / Zorko trade option has certainly created some discussion.
I considered this myself but decided in the end that Roughy is a premo and my strategy should remain not to trade one out so kept him.
I believe both will be similar in output and both will be premo's throughout the year.

Comes down to individual strategy to me but loving the banter on here about it.

 

[timtamWB]

I don't have Roughead or Zorko.

Can't work out if I'm a good or bad supercoacher/person?

Bad supercoach we, good person

 

[Kozivan]

I love Walters... I also thought it would be a good idea to start Langford again.
Lucky Mitchell and Suckling went alright.
5/403, Here we bloody go again.

 

[Faz 2000]

So hang on wait.... We're trying to get GOOD players in our side?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[toxic]

FWIW Judd_Magic I understand your trades.

Sound team balance trades. I wouldn't have been ballsy enuff and I hope zorko smashes out a 110 for you