Community team 2020

Kick start some discussion here.

We were pretty successful last year, so I am not sure if we want to make any major changes to the way the team is run. but if you do have ideas shout out.

Might be advantageous to have a couple of people with team logons from the starft to make sure we can cater for late team changes as best as possible. Spreading out over timezones would help as well - so if you want to volunteer do so here

For initial team selection

Last year people sent in votes for their preferred 21 with weights towards the players they were most keen on.
Happy to go with that again, but if people have ideas, then speak up.


One other possibility I have thought about
We could come up with a shortlist of 50 players or so - and then everyone who wants to can plug in their estimated average for each of those players, and we can compile an average of everyone's predictions to work out the team we collectively think will average the most
This would involve a bit more work, but I'm happy to compile all the guesses.

Any other suggestions welcome

Has anyone confirmed with the organiser of the celeb teams Comp that we plan to enter again this season?

Yes, there will be a celeb league.

(But even if there wasn't we could still enter and run a team jointly run by members)

I like the shortlist of 50 players idea. There are a number of players that are in most people's teams.
We can pick from the top 10 options in each position.

Milchcow wrote:
For initial team selection

Last year people sent in votes for their preferred 21 with weights towards the players they were most keen on.
Happy to go with that again, but if people have ideas, then speak up.


One other possibility I have thought about
We could come up with a shortlist of 50 players or so - and then everyone who wants to can plug in their estimated average for each of those players, and we can compile an average of everyone's predictions to work out the team we collectively think will average the most
This would involve a bit more work, but I'm happy to compile all the guesses.

Any other suggestions welcome

The 2nd approach could be easily gamed to stop the selection of some players even if the majority wanted them. A ranking of 1 through 50 with 50 being most wanted player may work better.

mattnz wrote:

The 2nd approach could be easily gamed to stop the selection of some players even if the majority wanted them. A ranking of 1 through 50 with 50 being most wanted player may work better.

Other than yourself, nobody really games the selection process.

And if people put suggestions in that Bradman Best will average 80 points a week, or Damien Cook will average 10, then it will be very easy to just ignore those votes.

Last year, enough people voted on our starting team that it was basically impossible for any one person to influence votes. There may be a couple of fringe players on the cusp of selection, but it is not anything I would be concerned with

Milchcow wrote:

Might be advantageous to have a couple of people with team logons from the starft to make sure we can cater for late team changes as best as possible. Spreading out over timezones would help as well - so if you want to volunteer do so here

You can put me on the list if you don't get enough takers. Magical Mudgee means E.S.Time. I generally am around and watching for late team changes.

Thanks for getting this rolling again and happy to help out in any way.

Won’t ranking a top 50 based on averages just end up with a team that smashes the salary cap? Even if you include popular cheapies. Or am I missing something?

jelejasof wrote:Thanks for getting this rolling again and happy to help out in any way.

Won’t ranking a top 50 based on averages just end up with a team that smashes the salary cap? Even if you include popular cheapies. Or am I missing something?

It would be a top 50 of players based on popularity on this forum.
I reckon we should start with a Captaincy poll.
Then maybe do a poll to pick how many guns we want in the team, and then build around that. I've managed to fit 3 guns in my draft atm (not including Friend and Papenhuyzen)

I personally like the 21 picks with weighted selections as it was just easier and allowed us to submit post TLT so we dont stress about selections.

jelejasof wrote:Thanks for getting this rolling again and happy to help out in any way.

Won’t ranking a top 50 based on averages just end up with a team that smashes the salary cap? Even if you include popular cheapies. Or am I missing something?

Obviously we will pick a team that fits within the salary cap

But that applies whether we pick the team on assumed averages, weighted rankings or poll or whatever. We will just pick the cap compliant team that maximises whatever system we use to rank players

One of the reasons I wouldn't mind averaging out estimated averages, is that I think the resultant info would be useful for. Its the sort of situation where wisdom of crowds can produce useful results (assuming everyone comes up with their estimates independently) I'd publish the full results so people can use them to help with their own teams

Fair enough - it does sound like a useful data set, although last year’s system worked well in the end I thought. Why not both? Get the top 50 done before TLT to inform the weighted 21 picks between TLT and the first match of the season.

Just start running a bunch of positional polls with a structure?

E.g.
WFB in 3 sets;
Gun
Mid range
Cash cow

CTR
Mid range
Cash cow

Half
Gun
Mid range

Etc etc

Milchcow wrote:
For initial team selection

Last year people sent in votes for their preferred 21 with weights towards the players they were most keen on.
Happy to go with that again, but if people have ideas, then speak up.


One other possibility I have thought about
We could come up with a shortlist of 50 players or so - and then everyone who wants to can plug in their estimated average for each of those players, and we can compile an average of everyone's predictions to work out the team we collectively think will average the most
This would involve a bit more work, but I'm happy to compile all the guesses.

Any other suggestions welcome

I think I prefer the 21 approach. It'll deliver a cookie cutter as we know.

I'm not sure how the shortlist would work tbh. How many rookies or centres will be on there- not many I expect (for example). I do like this idea for a broader forum resource though.

Last year worked, I reckon just do the same again. Need to get a core group together though to manage it. Might even pay to try and get 4 people, so that committing to the whole season isnt necessary?? We had three last year, but it was basically Captain Ranta in the first half, then Milch and Me second half....

I like the idea of putting all of our predicted averages for 50 players and working out the best team from there!

Ben Marlin wrote:I like the idea of putting all of our predicted averages for 50 players and working out the best team from there!

Trouble with that is I'd say only about 20% of people on here (maybe less) do that level of analysis. Im actually struggling this year to find the time to do my analysis. I think I've only looked at about 30 players so far.

Team has been created

I just spent 5 minutes populating it with some cookie cutter picks, but we'll sort out a proper structure later.

Looking at comments, I think the best solution for team selection will be same as last year - everyone send in a preferred 21 with weighting from 1-5 per player, and we'll grab the best squad from there.

Last year we had a rule that only players in the starting 13 would be considered - this meant we didn't start with Blake Lawrie, but otherwise worked OK.
Do we want to stick with that rule or open it up? There are a few popular players that are likely benched round 1 (Magoulis for one, and Billy Walters potentially could be another)

Milchcow wrote:
Team has been created

I just spent 5 minutes populating it with some cookie cutter picks, but we'll sort out a proper structure later.

Looking at comments, I think the best solution for team selection will be same as last year - everyone send in a preferred 21 with weighting from 1-5 per player, and we'll grab the best squad from there.

Last year we had a rule that only players in the starting 13 would be considered - this meant we didn't start with Blake Lawrie, but otherwise worked OK.
Do we want to stick with that rule or open it up? There are a few popular players that are likely benched round 1 (Magoulis for one, and Billy Walters potentially could be another)

Thanks Milchy

Looks good!
I think we should open up the rule so we can select bench players as well