SC 2021 Pre Season Chat

RichardC89

Aspiring Coach
Patron '18
Patron '19
Patron '20
May 4, 2015
51
32
18
With Williams being out for Round 1, are people still considering him for starting teams?

To me, I think it comes down to whether you're playing for overall or league. I usually just play for league, where the first round isn't a competitive matchup, and so it makes complete sense to still start with Williams as it will have no impact to your W-L record.

If you're playing for overall, it's a tough one week proposition to start him on the bench as the defensive rookie stocks are looking quite weak this season. If it goes badly, you could be starting off at a 60-70 point disadvantage right off the bat.

That's my two cents anyway...
 

Orallus_Maximus

Development Coach
Patron '19
Patron '20
Patron '21
May 11, 2015
218
132
43
Also just heard that Paddy Ryder will be absent for a period of time due to personal leave. Also seen that Flynn from GWS has an ankle injury - subject to fitness.

This possibly brings into play the Paul Hunter ($102k RUC). Cheap R3...
 

Dunny29

Member
Mar 11, 2016
41
41
18
Anyone thinking of doing something really, really radical with rucks?

*pending selection Rd1
I just had a thought of trying to start with 2, 3 or even 4 of Treacy(R/F), Flynn, Hunter, Meek, Fullarton and hoping for the best. If they could score say 65-75 ave for 5-7 games which I don't think is beyond ridiculous for a player with the main ruck role, at these prices that could be a massive advantage.
All are sub $130k, if rucks scores are generally lower this year than 2 years ago which most people probably assume it will return to, on top of the higher scoring from last year inflating prices significantly there could be a large net gain here that those going set and forget may lose significantly more than anticipated.

I was considering Martin/Hickey as R1&2, but may as well go balls deep with the strategy haha?

I'm really starting to convince myself that ruck scoring will be dramatically lower this year, especially early on. If the season starts more free flowing that is going to result in less stoppages (ball ups and perhaps also throw ins), so less points for hit outs and clearances/disposals from/around these. Perhaps rucks with different attributes will be able to largely close the gap to the usual suspects?

Obviously for me to run with this strategy, I'd want to be confident they were both fit and had job security for 5 weeks minimum (ie number 1/2 ruck injured/absent for this time at least), no guarantees this will be a viable strategy come this time next week, but I think this isn't as risky as it seems (with a potential massive payoff) due to a few unique circumstances in play this year.


Likely I'd probably go with 2, but going with 3 is probably worth the risk of the 5% chance it comes off perfect, because that could easily put you in overall contention.
 

RichardC89

Aspiring Coach
Patron '18
Patron '19
Patron '20
May 4, 2015
51
32
18
Anyone thinking of doing something really, really radical with rucks?

*pending selection Rd1
I just had a thought of trying to start with 2, 3 or even 4 of Treacy(R/F), Flynn, Hunter, Meek, Fullarton and hoping for the best. If they could score say 65-75 ave for 5-7 games which I don't think is beyond ridiculous for a player with the main ruck role, at these prices that could be a massive advantage.
All are sub $130k, if rucks scores are generally lower this year than 2 years ago which most people probably assume it will return to, on top of the higher scoring from last year inflating prices significantly there could be a large net gain here that those going set and forget may lose significantly more than anticipated.

I was considering Martin/Hickey as R1&2, but may as well go balls deep with the strategy haha?

I'm really starting to convince myself that ruck scoring will be dramatically lower this year, especially early on. If the season starts more free flowing that is going to result in less stoppages (ball ups and perhaps also throw ins), so less points for hit outs and clearances/disposals from/around these. Perhaps rucks with different attributes will be able to largely close the gap to the usual suspects?

Obviously for me to run with this strategy, I'd want to be confident they were both fit and had job security for 5 weeks minimum (ie number 1/2 ruck injured/absent for this time at least), no guarantees this will be a viable strategy come this time next week, but I think this isn't as risky as it seems (with a potential massive payoff) due to a few unique circumstances in play this year.


Likely I'd probably go with 2, but going with 3 is probably worth the risk of the 5% chance it comes off perfect, because that could easily put you in overall contention.

I’ve been running with Gawn and Flynn the entire preseason, with Hunter recently becoming my R3. Not sure I’d be comfortable enough to go deeper than that.

There’s a few reasons for that;

1. Gawn has an INSANELY easy start to the season, he faces Meeks, Hunter, Flynn, R.Stanley, Ben McEvoy and Nank in the first 6 rounds. Big Boy and Nank aren’t slouches, but there’s no Grundy, Nic Nat, ROB, Goldstein, Witts either. He could legit go 140 in the first 6 rounds.

2. Meeks and Fullarton have shaky job security. Meeks is simply pending the Darcy injury and Fullarton I’m not sure will play as Brisbane will likely solo ruck with Daniher giving a chop out.

3. Treacy should play, but his role (rookie tall forward) isn’t a good one. I could see him averaging as low as 45-50. Ok bench option, I suppose. Not ideal when you’re a Fullarton/Meek out away from Treacy being on field.

4. Hunter should be an ok option, but I wish we had a little more concrete info on the return dates of Marshall and Ryder. Will Hunter play 2 games or 8 games? Absolutely no idea. It will only take one of those guys returning to bump him out.


Not totally against it, but I wouldn’t have the testicular fortitude to go with 3 rookie priced rucks and without Max Gawn personally.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Seppo

Seppo

Development Coach
Patron '17
Patron '18
Patron '19
Patron '20
Patron '21
Feb 16, 2016
126
133
43
36
I’ve been running with Gawn and Flynn the entire preseason, with Hunter recently becoming my R3. Not sure I’d be comfortable enough to go deeper than that.

There’s a few reasons for that;

1. Gawn has an INSANELY easy start to the season, he faces Meeks, Hunter, Flynn, R.Stanley, Ben McEvoy and Nank in the first 6 rounds. Big Boy and Nank aren’t slouches, but there’s no Grundy, Nic Nat, ROB, Goldstein, Witts either. He could legit go 140 in the first 6 rounds.

2. Meeks and Fullarton have shaky job security. Meeks is simply pending the Darcy injury and Fullarton I’m not sure will play as Brisbane will likely solo ruck with Daniher giving a chop out.

3. Treacy should play, but his role (rookie tall forward) isn’t a good one. I could see him averaging as low as 45-50. Ok bench option, I suppose. Not ideal when you’re a Fullarton/Meek out away from Treacy being on field.

4. Hunter should be an ok option, but I wish we had a little more concrete info on the return dates of Marshall and Ryder. Will Hunter play 2 games or 8 games? Absolutely no idea. It will only take one of those guys returning to bump him out.


Not totally against it, but I wouldn’t have the testicular fortitude to go with 3 rookie priced rucks and without Max Gawn personally.
If we had an R3 to pair with Flynn who was actually guaranteed to play for awhile I might consider going 1 of the Gawn/Grundy with 2 ruck rookies. Even then, the best case scenario is using 3 trades to get to Gawn/Grundy. So, you've stuffed your upgrade cadence up and missed out on probably the best VC/C combo you can get. If the ruck you're missing doesn't bottom out at the right time, you're probably looking at 4 trades to get to him. If you select rookies at R2/3 with Flynn on field and he either gets hurt or replaced by Briggs because he just isn't that great (a pretty good possibility)...then you won't get Gawn/Grundy in and you'll probably finish outside the top 20k.

For efficiency's sake, I am normally super keen to get every $123k player who is going to average 70+ on ground. However, I just don't think the solid R3 backup we need to pull it off is there this year. If there were two Flynn's I would try it. IMO, there just aren't, so I've got to set and forget again.
 

Dunny29

Member
Mar 11, 2016
41
41
18
Does anyone have a reliable price calc/projector they can point me in the direction of?
(would love to run some hypotheticals on a few players related to the above post of mine)

I have used the one on tooserious in the past/last year, but found if was off by a bit, perhaps because of 2nd game price change last year and maybe being back to normal now it is fine, but comparing it to some players/rookies last year and putting in the 'priced at' score for what was effectively game 1 in the price cycle still made it out significantly (10%+ on price changes).

Also, does anyone know if pricing changes are dependent only on what a player scores themselves (eg if a player priced at 100 points average scores 100 every week, price will stay the same no matter what), or does the price total of every player combined have to stay at a set total value like points do in each match (eg each match scaled to ~3300 points in total), which may slightly hurt premos a bit more early on as rookies increase would take up some of the total price etc? eg the 100 ave priced player scoring 100 may drop a little
 

Rupert

6-Time Premiership Coach
Patron '16
Patron '17
Patron '18
Patron '19
Patron '20
Patron '21
Veterans
May 2, 2015
6,407
6,954
113
Brisbane
Also, does anyone know if pricing changes are dependent only on what a player scores themselves (eg if a player priced at 100 points average scores 100 every week, price will stay the same no matter what), or does the price total of every player combined have to stay at a set total value like points do in each match (eg each match scaled to ~3300 points in total), which may slightly hurt premos a bit more early on as rookies increase would take up some of the total price etc? eg the 100 ave priced player scoring 100 may drop a little
As far as I know the total value of all players remains constant through the season.
So, as you suggest, the more rookies that start and increase in price the more likely it is that premiums reduce in price. This is evident in their prices as the season progresses.
E.G. Grundy: 2018 - averaged 130.5; 2019 - averaged 130.0. 2019 starting price - $708,200; finishing price - $616,200.

This is probably a more than usually important factor this year - if you think that the spike in premium scoring from last year won't be repeated.
 

Dunny29

Member
Mar 11, 2016
41
41
18
As far as I know the total value of all players remains constant through the season.
So, as you suggest, the more rookies that start and increase in price the more likely it is that premiums reduce in price. This is evident in their prices as the season progresses.
E.G. Grundy: 2018 - averaged 130.5; 2019 - averaged 130.0. 2019 starting price - $708,200; finishing price - $616,200.

This is probably a more than usually important factor this year - if you think that the spike in premium scoring from last year won't be repeated.
Thanks, really appreciate the response and gave me the chance to go all conspiracy theorist...

TLDR at the bottom fyi all

Based on this and my other theories I think Gawn will really struggle to average more than 125 this year, Honestly I think he may average 120, (2019 and 2018 he averaged 128 and feel rule changes will reduce impact ruckman can have (less ruck contests and less bombing it to ruckmen in decent position etc), combined with more game time will result in primary ruckman spending less % of time on the field, or at least being in the play. Surely with these we see a significant drop to the number 1 rucks?

I'm happy to not start Gawn and aim to pick him up from round 6 onwards, perhaps $100k+ cheaper, and hope where I spend the extra cash I save doesn't depreciate as much lol, even if I keep $300k in the bank to make the Gawn upgrade easier if I want to do around rd 5-8 (when the rookie ruckman may not be getting a game and Gawn's price should have 'normalised', or another ruck option appears.

If you think Gawn will average 130+, it's obviously not a bad plan to take the say $50-75k hit, knowing you effectively recoup this as he is the obvious C/VC each week. Even if he does score like this, I'm not exactly being burned unless he scores 140+ ave, but even then his price could still drop slightly, at this starting price I hope for a average/bad game and have 2 weeks to prep to swoop. If I reallocate the money elsewhere I can still gain their, it's just the effort required to get him in.

I'd rather start with an extra premo and some of the $200-280k options who have greater job security and likely to make nearly as much cash (if not as much cash) as rookies anyway. The extra trade that may be required to get Gawn in I think is mitigated by starting with an extra premo anyway.

Conveniently, we can see from Gawn's 2019 season, that for arguments sake, he started off priced at 128 ave, got his average to 126 by round 20 (19/22 games) his last 3 scores are irrelevant for my point. 126 ave at 19 games is close to the 128 starting priced at and his price only moved by +$8.8k that week, so stable. He was down $66.5k from his starting price at this point. So what happens if he is averaging a little under this, this season, but instead of starting at 128 ave, he starts from 140?


2019, Having started at a 128 ave,
At Rd 6 Gawn ave 119 (down $47k) (all from start price)
At Rd 9 Gawn ave 121 (down $45k)
Went on to ave 151 for the next 5 games (includes a bye) before the injury in Rd 15
At R 14 Gawn ave 131 (up $33k, now $726k, B/E was ~140 here, so not much room to go up)
At R 15 Gawn is injured and scores 46
At R 19 Gawn ave 125 (down $79k)
At R 20 Gawn ave 126 (yet still down $67k despite averaging 133 in the prior 3 games).

So, starting at 140 ave, pick your own average and you can see what is gonna happen...
An average of 120 and he may drop below $600k. a $150k price drop
An average of 125 and probably drops below $650k, $100k drop
1 bad game (even an 80-100 because he gets rested in the 4th qtr for example which could easily happen, and those without him, and have a plan to get him, will be very happy.

----------

TLDR
So my point is, If ruckman scoring is reduced due to more free flowing game/less stoppages, on top of Gawns ridiculous scoring from last year being the basis for his start price this year, combined with rookies increases dragging down those at the top as rounds progress, plus the %game time being reduced that the stars play due to 20 min qtrs (needing to rest a higher % of game time), I think he could drop ~$100k by round 6, if he averaged 120 in the first 6 rounds which I am willing to gamble on it could be closer to $150k (to me this is a great gamble, even if wrong I'm not exactly going to get burned unless he averages 140+, which IMO is near 0% chance of happening).

Whilst I think this may also happen to some mids, I don't think the impact will be as large, eg Neale and others can get plenty of ball in general play, he doesn't rely on stoppages like ruckmen do. In saying that, Neale is still very much at a price point that I'm happy to wait/hope for an average couple of games or a bad one before planning to pounce (same with the others who averaged 121+ last year). I realise a few people think like this every year, but not often we have people starting at a price average of 140, 134 and 5 at 122/121 inflated by very unique circumstances, although mostly mids I would expect all to drop just due to longer quarters now, but not as much.

Loading up on these players is every chance of costing you too much IMO, but beginning to think if Grundy gets back to 2019 form, my gut says the rule changes wont impact him as much as Gawn (could be wrong but I think Grundy is a little better getting around the ground and likely to find space during play to lead up and take a mark), and he is coming off a significantly lower cost base (121 ave). Perhaps he isn't such bad value, but I'm happy to wait to see what happens at this stage. If Ruck rookie situation isn't great, I'd try to fit Grundy perhaps, if I was confident of getting 6 games out of 2 rookies (and at this stage Stef Martin), I want to see how it plays out.
 

Rupert

6-Time Premiership Coach
Patron '16
Patron '17
Patron '18
Patron '19
Patron '20
Patron '21
Veterans
May 2, 2015
6,407
6,954
113
Brisbane
@Dunny29
I wasn't going to start with Gawn for much the same reasons: unlikely to average the same so over-priced; one poor score (<100) and his price will drop dramatically.
But over the last few days I've changed my mind and Gawn is back in my starting line-up.
Why?
His pre-bye fixture is very friendly and he's unlikely to drop too much in priced.
Even if he drops to $600k that's still a lot of money needed to trade him in and likely to need three trades (unless your alternate ruck goes bonkers").
 

m4ttdog

Aspiring Coach
Patron '21
Jun 9, 2016
57
19
8
34
Thanks, really appreciate the response and gave me the chance to go all conspiracy theorist...

TLDR at the bottom fyi all

Based on this and my other theories I think Gawn will really struggle to average more than 125 this year, Honestly I think he may average 120, (2019 and 2018 he averaged 128 and feel rule changes will reduce impact ruckman can have (less ruck contests and less bombing it to ruckmen in decent position etc), combined with more game time will result in primary ruckman spending less % of time on the field, or at least being in the play. Surely with these we see a significant drop to the number 1 rucks?

I'm happy to not start Gawn and aim to pick him up from round 6 onwards, perhaps $100k+ cheaper, and hope where I spend the extra cash I save doesn't depreciate as much lol, even if I keep $300k in the bank to make the Gawn upgrade easier if I want to do around rd 5-8 (when the rookie ruckman may not be getting a game and Gawn's price should have 'normalised', or another ruck option appears.

If you think Gawn will average 130+, it's obviously not a bad plan to take the say $50-75k hit, knowing you effectively recoup this as he is the obvious C/VC each week. Even if he does score like this, I'm not exactly being burned unless he scores 140+ ave, but even then his price could still drop slightly, at this starting price I hope for a average/bad game and have 2 weeks to prep to swoop. If I reallocate the money elsewhere I can still gain their, it's just the effort required to get him in.

I'd rather start with an extra premo and some of the $200-280k options who have greater job security and likely to make nearly as much cash (if not as much cash) as rookies anyway. The extra trade that may be required to get Gawn in I think is mitigated by starting with an extra premo anyway.

Conveniently, we can see from Gawn's 2019 season, that for arguments sake, he started off priced at 128 ave, got his average to 126 by round 20 (19/22 games) his last 3 scores are irrelevant for my point. 126 ave at 19 games is close to the 128 starting priced at and his price only moved by +$8.8k that week, so stable. He was down $66.5k from his starting price at this point. So what happens if he is averaging a little under this, this season, but instead of starting at 128 ave, he starts from 140?


2019, Having started at a 128 ave,
At Rd 6 Gawn ave 119 (down $47k) (all from start price)
At Rd 9 Gawn ave 121 (down $45k)
Went on to ave 151 for the next 5 games (includes a bye) before the injury in Rd 15
At R 14 Gawn ave 131 (up $33k, now $726k, B/E was ~140 here, so not much room to go up)
At R 15 Gawn is injured and scores 46
At R 19 Gawn ave 125 (down $79k)
At R 20 Gawn ave 126 (yet still down $67k despite averaging 133 in the prior 3 games).

So, starting at 140 ave, pick your own average and you can see what is gonna happen...
An average of 120 and he may drop below $600k. a $150k price drop
An average of 125 and probably drops below $650k, $100k drop
1 bad game (even an 80-100 because he gets rested in the 4th qtr for example which could easily happen, and those without him, and have a plan to get him, will be very happy.

----------

TLDR
So my point is, If ruckman scoring is reduced due to more free flowing game/less stoppages, on top of Gawns ridiculous scoring from last year being the basis for his start price this year, combined with rookies increases dragging down those at the top as rounds progress, plus the %game time being reduced that the stars play due to 20 min qtrs (needing to rest a higher % of game time), I think he could drop ~$100k by round 6, if he averaged 120 in the first 6 rounds which I am willing to gamble on it could be closer to $150k (to me this is a great gamble, even if wrong I'm not exactly going to get burned unless he averages 140+, which IMO is near 0% chance of happening).

Whilst I think this may also happen to some mids, I don't think the impact will be as large, eg Neale and others can get plenty of ball in general play, he doesn't rely on stoppages like ruckmen do. In saying that, Neale is still very much at a price point that I'm happy to wait/hope for an average couple of games or a bad one before planning to pounce (same with the others who averaged 121+ last year). I realise a few people think like this every year, but not often we have people starting at a price average of 140, 134 and 5 at 122/121 inflated by very unique circumstances, although mostly mids I would expect all to drop just due to longer quarters now, but not as much.

Loading up on these players is every chance of costing you too much IMO, but beginning to think if Grundy gets back to 2019 form, my gut says the rule changes wont impact him as much as Gawn (could be wrong but I think Grundy is a little better getting around the ground and likely to find space during play to lead up and take a mark), and he is coming off a significantly lower cost base (121 ave). Perhaps he isn't such bad value, but I'm happy to wait to see what happens at this stage. If Ruck rookie situation isn't great, I'd try to fit Grundy perhaps, if I was confident of getting 6 games out of 2 rookies (and at this stage Stef Martin), I want to see how it plays out.
This is the longest TLDR I have ever seen haha
 
  • Like
Reactions: Prospector

Seppo

Development Coach
Patron '17
Patron '18
Patron '19
Patron '20
Patron '21
Feb 16, 2016
126
133
43
36
Thanks, really appreciate the response and gave me the chance to go all conspiracy theorist...

TLDR at the bottom fyi all

Based on this and my other theories I think Gawn will really struggle to average more than 125 this year, Honestly I think he may average 120, (2019 and 2018 he averaged 128 and feel rule changes will reduce impact ruckman can have (less ruck contests and less bombing it to ruckmen in decent position etc), combined with more game time will result in primary ruckman spending less % of time on the field, or at least being in the play. Surely with these we see a significant drop to the number 1 rucks?

I'm happy to not start Gawn and aim to pick him up from round 6 onwards, perhaps $100k+ cheaper, and hope where I spend the extra cash I save doesn't depreciate as much lol, even if I keep $300k in the bank to make the Gawn upgrade easier if I want to do around rd 5-8 (when the rookie ruckman may not be getting a game and Gawn's price should have 'normalised', or another ruck option appears.

If you think Gawn will average 130+, it's obviously not a bad plan to take the say $50-75k hit, knowing you effectively recoup this as he is the obvious C/VC each week. Even if he does score like this, I'm not exactly being burned unless he scores 140+ ave, but even then his price could still drop slightly, at this starting price I hope for a average/bad game and have 2 weeks to prep to swoop. If I reallocate the money elsewhere I can still gain their, it's just the effort required to get him in.

I'd rather start with an extra premo and some of the $200-280k options who have greater job security and likely to make nearly as much cash (if not as much cash) as rookies anyway. The extra trade that may be required to get Gawn in I think is mitigated by starting with an extra premo anyway.

Conveniently, we can see from Gawn's 2019 season, that for arguments sake, he started off priced at 128 ave, got his average to 126 by round 20 (19/22 games) his last 3 scores are irrelevant for my point. 126 ave at 19 games is close to the 128 starting priced at and his price only moved by +$8.8k that week, so stable. He was down $66.5k from his starting price at this point. So what happens if he is averaging a little under this, this season, but instead of starting at 128 ave, he starts from 140?


2019, Having started at a 128 ave,
At Rd 6 Gawn ave 119 (down $47k) (all from start price)
At Rd 9 Gawn ave 121 (down $45k)
Went on to ave 151 for the next 5 games (includes a bye) before the injury in Rd 15
At R 14 Gawn ave 131 (up $33k, now $726k, B/E was ~140 here, so not much room to go up)
At R 15 Gawn is injured and scores 46
At R 19 Gawn ave 125 (down $79k)
At R 20 Gawn ave 126 (yet still down $67k despite averaging 133 in the prior 3 games).

So, starting at 140 ave, pick your own average and you can see what is gonna happen...
An average of 120 and he may drop below $600k. a $150k price drop
An average of 125 and probably drops below $650k, $100k drop
1 bad game (even an 80-100 because he gets rested in the 4th qtr for example which could easily happen, and those without him, and have a plan to get him, will be very happy.

----------

TLDR
So my point is, If ruckman scoring is reduced due to more free flowing game/less stoppages, on top of Gawns ridiculous scoring from last year being the basis for his start price this year, combined with rookies increases dragging down those at the top as rounds progress, plus the %game time being reduced that the stars play due to 20 min qtrs (needing to rest a higher % of game time), I think he could drop ~$100k by round 6, if he averaged 120 in the first 6 rounds which I am willing to gamble on it could be closer to $150k (to me this is a great gamble, even if wrong I'm not exactly going to get burned unless he averages 140+, which IMO is near 0% chance of happening).

Whilst I think this may also happen to some mids, I don't think the impact will be as large, eg Neale and others can get plenty of ball in general play, he doesn't rely on stoppages like ruckmen do. In saying that, Neale is still very much at a price point that I'm happy to wait/hope for an average couple of games or a bad one before planning to pounce (same with the others who averaged 121+ last year). I realise a few people think like this every year, but not often we have people starting at a price average of 140, 134 and 5 at 122/121 inflated by very unique circumstances, although mostly mids I would expect all to drop just due to longer quarters now, but not as much.

Loading up on these players is every chance of costing you too much IMO, but beginning to think if Grundy gets back to 2019 form, my gut says the rule changes wont impact him as much as Gawn (could be wrong but I think Grundy is a little better getting around the ground and likely to find space during play to lead up and take a mark), and he is coming off a significantly lower cost base (121 ave). Perhaps he isn't such bad value, but I'm happy to wait to see what happens at this stage. If Ruck rookie situation isn't great, I'd try to fit Grundy perhaps, if I was confident of getting 6 games out of 2 rookies (and at this stage Stef Martin), I want to see how it plays out.
I completely get the thinking, and if it works out it probably puts you in contention. So, I see why you're going to do it, but I keep being a wet blanket lol

Anyway, 3 thoughts below: (now that I have typed the post, the 3rd might be the most important...oops)

1- Are you really confident 2 of these rookies will get 6 games? I am not confident 1 of these rookies will get 6 games right off the bat with Briggs/Mummy/Darcy/Marshall/Ryder in the picture. Even if one of them does happen to string 6 games together I'm not confident they'll have the price appreciation needed to 3-trade up to Gawn at above $600k. I think all of Flynn/Meek/Hunter will struggle to score consistently.

2- Even if you do get the price appreciation needed to trade up to Gawn, you have to get it at the right time. Gawn will have to drop exactly when a rookie ruck is peaking...AND you'll need to not be burdened with in-season premo injuries at that time to pull off that 3-trade up to him without a boatload of pain and a long halt in your upgrade cadence.

3- Piggybacking on Rupert's post, Gawn starts the season with a bunch of games in which he should score his highest scores of the year. I mean, he starts the year against Meeks-Hunter-Flynn (also maybe he dominates them and they don't have quick price appreciation). I feel very strongly that planning to miss out on those scores and then trade him in is a clear loss proposition. IMO, if you're doing this you need to be looking for a ruckman with an incredible post-bye draw, and then planning to run him against Gawn in the 2nd half of the year. I wouldn't be planning on picking up a fallen premium if he falls during his easiest run of games.

That said, if we all pick Gawn at $751k and he gets injured, you look like a genius. There are so many variables I can see why you'd want to go against the grain here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Steve and m4ttdog

Lowrider

Dual Premiership Coach
Patron '16
Patron '17
Patron '18
Patron '19
Patron '20
Patron '21
Veterans
May 7, 2015
2,737
2,642
113
I completely get the thinking, and if it works out it probably puts you in contention. So, I see why you're going to do it, but I keep being a wet blanket lol

Anyway, 3 thoughts below: (now that I have typed the post, the 3rd might be the most important...oops)

1- Are you really confident 2 of these rookies will get 6 games? I am not confident 1 of these rookies will get 6 games right off the bat with Briggs/Mummy/Darcy/Marshall/Ryder in the picture. Even if one of them does happen to string 6 games together I'm not confident they'll have the price appreciation needed to 3-trade up to Gawn at above $600k. I think all of Flynn/Meek/Hunter will struggle to score consistently.

2- Even if you do get the price appreciation needed to trade up to Gawn, you have to get it at the right time. Gawn will have to drop exactly when a rookie ruck is peaking...AND you'll need to not be burdened with in-season premo injuries at that time to pull off that 3-trade up to him without a boatload of pain and a long halt in your upgrade cadence.

3- Piggybacking on Rupert's post, Gawn starts the season with a bunch of games in which he should score his highest scores of the year. I mean, he starts the year against Meeks-Hunter-Flynn (also maybe he dominates them and they don't have quick price appreciation). I feel very strongly that planning to miss out on those scores and then trade him in is a clear loss proposition. IMO, if you're doing this you need to be looking for a ruckman with an incredible post-bye draw, and then planning to run him against Gawn in the 2nd half of the year. I wouldn't be planning on picking up a fallen premium if he falls during his easiest run of games.

That said, if we all pick Gawn at $751k and he gets injured, you look like a genius. There are so many variables I can see why you'd want to go against the grain here.
Agree with this.

Given his draw... I'm a believer if you're not starting him you shouldn't be trading him in either. With his draw, there could potentially be a 20-point swing between the pre-bye and post-bye period. So if he's going at 130, you don't want to buy him for the time when he does 110.

I'm tempted by the rookie R2, but I need 2 of them to be playing and only Flynn has some decent JS at this stage (assuming he's actually named for round 1 that is!!!). So unless Darcy gets injured again or Meek is declared #1 ruck, I'm sticking with the top 2 and putting Flynn at R3.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dunny29 and Seppo

Lowrider

Dual Premiership Coach
Patron '16
Patron '17
Patron '18
Patron '19
Patron '20
Patron '21
Veterans
May 7, 2015
2,737
2,642
113
Does anyone have a reliable price calc/projector they can point me in the direction of?
(would love to run some hypotheticals on a few players related to the above post of mine)

I have used the one on tooserious in the past/last year, but found if was off by a bit, perhaps because of 2nd game price change last year and maybe being back to normal now it is fine, but comparing it to some players/rookies last year and putting in the 'priced at' score for what was effectively game 1 in the price cycle still made it out significantly (10%+ on price changes).

Also, does anyone know if pricing changes are dependent only on what a player scores themselves (eg if a player priced at 100 points average scores 100 every week, price will stay the same no matter what), or does the price total of every player combined have to stay at a set total value like points do in each match (eg each match scaled to ~3300 points in total), which may slightly hurt premos a bit more early on as rookies increase would take up some of the total price etc? eg the 100 ave priced player scoring 100 may drop a little
Not specifically, but if you have some spreadsheet skills you can easily make you own.

The starting price = average * magic number (~5,370 to start this year)
This gives a total value for the entire competition (from memory $250million or something like that)
Magic number changes each week to keep the overall value the same - so as rookies out-score their starting price, the magic number tends to drop over the course of a season.
Usually the magic number ends up around 5,000, sometimes below. Last year it didn't, and from memory the previous year it only dropped to around 5,100 as the rookie pool was thinner - which is seems like it will be this year also.

So, Gawn is priced at an average of 139.9. If the magic number drops to 5,000 it means he needs to average 150 just to maintain his price - but that won't happen until later in the year. More likely it might go to say 5,250 and he'll only need 143 to maintain his price.

Price movements are based off average from last 3 games. New price = 0.75 * current price + 0.25 * (3-game average * magic number)

So if Gawn is averaging 120 for the first 8 rounds and the magic number sits around 5,250... this is what his score projections would look like:
R1 - $751,000
R2 - $751,000
R3 - $720,750
R4 - $698,063
R5 - $681,047
R6 - $668,285
R7 - $658,714
R8 - $651,535
 

Orallus_Maximus

Development Coach
Patron '19
Patron '20
Patron '21
May 11, 2015
218
132
43
Looks like Treacy is suspended??? Worth keeping him as loop hole player or should we look to get playing rookie in FWD?
 

Bombers56

Premiership Coach
Patron '17
Patron '18
Patron '19
Patron '20
Patron '21
Veterans
Jun 11, 2015
1,033
743
113
Looks like Treacy is suspended??? Worth keeping him as loop hole player or should we look to get playing rookie in FWD?
I think the problem with him is that it looks like he has to serve the suspension in the league that he committed the offence and that does not start for another 3 weeks.
 

Dunny29

Member
Mar 11, 2016
41
41
18
Not specifically, but if you have some spreadsheet skills you can easily make you own.

The starting price = average * magic number (~5,370 to start this year)
This gives a total value for the entire competition (from memory $250million or something like that)
Magic number changes each week to keep the overall value the same - so as rookies out-score their starting price, the magic number tends to drop over the course of a season.
Usually the magic number ends up around 5,000, sometimes below. Last year it didn't, and from memory the previous year it only dropped to around 5,100 as the rookie pool was thinner - which is seems like it will be this year also.

So, Gawn is priced at an average of 139.9. If the magic number drops to 5,000 it means he needs to average 150 just to maintain his price - but that won't happen until later in the year. More likely it might go to say 5,250 and he'll only need 143 to maintain his price.

Price movements are based off average from last 3 games. New price = 0.75 * current price + 0.25 * (3-game average * magic number)

So if Gawn is averaging 120 for the first 8 rounds and the magic number sits around 5,250... this is what his score projections would look like:
R1 - $751,000
R2 - $751,000
R3 - $720,750
R4 - $698,063
R5 - $681,047
R6 - $668,285
R7 - $658,714
R8 - $651,535
Massive thanks for the input (and to the others above)

I'm still gonna try this strategy for shits and gigs if it is at all feasible, allows me to start a bunch of $200k players that I think have better job security and as a result cash gen anyway.

Simply put I'm still thinking rucks in general won't be nearly as supercoach relevant with rule changes, perhaps I'm right and still lose from it, could easily be wrong but still benefit from it lol. Or simply maybe I'll just be wrong and look like a complete fool.

Pending selection/job security my other cheapo plan is Martin/Hickey/Flynn as rucks for not too much more to see how that plays out, if hickey could get a run at it, the draw looks soft and cheap due to being behind NicNat previously and has averaged 80 and 90 in recent years when given opportunity. Martin has proved himself, but may be sharing with English too much and is rather old now. Otherwise I do what I can to go with Grundy at R1 who I think won't be impacted by the change in rules/gamestyle as Gawn imo.


With the price increases, although there may not be as many rookies playing, I think overall that will be more than filled by those players toward the fringe who got games last year, but literally didn't get the minutes either on field or in higher scoring roles for those extra few minutes each quarter. Most of these players won't be supercoach relevant as such, but it's going to add up on the price increases from the lower to mid end of the range that will hurt the higher ups.
 
May 17, 2015
8
3
3
I think the problem with him is that it looks like he has to serve the suspension in the league that he committed the offence and that does not start for another 3 weeks.
Which could be a real boon for us. Should be right to get a gig around rnd 7-8 which is prime downgrade time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Prospector