NRL Fantasy 2020 Part 9

mattnz wrote:Trying to explain by example how positional difference is important. Lets assume that all these players perform well and score 10 points more than they are priced at, for simplicity (all numbers taken from MTBs site for consistency):

Team A (all players that I am deliberately avoiding):
Sua $412k priced at 28, scores 38
Stimson $390k priced at 27, scores 37
Brailey $400k priced at 28, scores 38
Lowe $430k priced at 30, scores 40
All 4 need to be in starting 17 to start the season, total cost $1,632k

Team B:
Burns $500k priced at 34, scores 44
Kikau $642k priced at 44, scores 54
Luai $249k priced at 17, scores 27
Amone $246k priced at 17, scores 27
All 4 need to be in starting 17 to start the season, total cost $1,637

So the assumption is that both groups of 4 players that may be the only differences in our 17s score on average 40 points per week better than their cost.

The difference is that in a few weeks time Team A has all these 2RF and HOK players that haven't peaked yet, and need to be upgraded, as they aren't scoring enough to justify a starting spot in their positions, or even in 14-17. If you wait for them to max out at the full 10 point difference, they need to sit in NPRs, which wastes team value, that isn't converted into points in your scoring 17.

This is much less of an issue for team B, where you can easily drop the players averaging 27 to the NPRs until they max out in value, then trade them. The 2 players performing well in their positions at CTR averaging 44 and 2RF averaging 54 don't need any attention at all until at least the byes.

That is why position matters and the expected scores in each position equally matter as the season progresses.

What you are forgetting as well is it's much easier to go 10+ points over your average and sustain it in positions like 2RF. Tough sledding trying to find a centre who can go 10+ points over his priced average. minus rookies

I’m trying to keep Lolo but it so hard with all those mid 2RF (Lucy, Williams, Hess, Cartwright (I can’t believe he’s even an option) Tapine and Stimson and Su’A to a lesser extent). So Lolo and a 246k is roughly the same as Lucy + Friend! It seems logical that Lolo must go! Doesn’t it?

Welshy wrote:

What you are forgetting as well is it's much easier to go 10+ points over your average and sustain it in positions like 2RF. Tough sledding trying to find a centre who can go 10+ points over his priced average. minus rookies

Just consider the argument to be "all other things being equal" position does matter. If you can find the same value at sub gun level, going up to gun level for that position, it is far better than the same difference in value at $400k for a HOK or 2RF position.

In fantasy Tapine has always struck me as a mid to late season purchase. It takes him a while to get match fit.
Say he plays round 1 on the edge & say Bateman is fit to play round 2 does that mean Tapine to lock.

How are you gonna drop two players from your 17 (luai and amone) without trading in better players to use in their place.. it still requires trades.

White Lightning wrote:In fantasy Tapine has always struck me as a mid to late season purchase. It takes him a while to get match fit.
Say he plays round 1 on the edge & say Bateman is fit to play round 2 does that mean Tapine to lock.

Apparently he is playing Lock!

my tv broke wrote:How are you gonna drop two players from your 17 (luai and amone) without trading in better players to use in their place.. it still requires trades.

Thank you

my tv broke wrote:How are you gonna drop two players from your 17 (luai and amone) without trading in better players to use in their place..

Players appear that need to be traded at different times for reasons such as injury or change in role that mean they need to be traded earlier than others. You take the value they have increased by and add another player that is now available and about to increase in value (eg: Tevaga when fit and undervalued at lock) and play them instead. This results in far more points in team B than in team A.

White Lightning wrote:In fantasy Tapine has always struck me as a mid to late season purchase. It takes him a while to get match fit.
Say he plays round 1 on the edge & say Bateman is fit to play round 2 does that mean Tapine to lock.

Word is Tapine wants the lock position back. Can see him getting a good shout at it as well.

mattnz wrote:

Players appear that need to be traded at different times for reasons such as injury or change in role that mean they need to be traded earlier than others. You take the value they have increased by and add another player that is now available and about to increase in value (eg: Tevaga when fit and undervalued at lock) and play them instead. This results in far more points in team B than in team A.

what you going to do with Burns if he only averages 40 instead of 44?

mattnz wrote:

Players appear that need to be traded at different times for reasons such as injury or change in role that mean they need to be traded earlier than others. You take the value they have increased by and add another player that is now available and about to increase in value (eg: Tevaga when fit and undervalued at lock) and play them instead. This results in far more points in team B than in team A.

I can see what youre getting at, and I agree to a point, but trying to plan out your season as if everything will go perfectly to spreadsheet doesnt really work.

Its kind of like planning for byes in pre season.

Im not sure the example really works that well because people are buying guys like stimson and sua because rhey believe they can score in the 40s and, best case, average 45 ish early on.

Luai could jag some big scores and do similar, but less likely, plus eveeyone will have him anyway. Amone etc, yeah nah

The Pascoe Fiasco wrote:
Apparently he is playing Lock!

You have my attention

Is Billy Walters a trap? Or genuine cash cow?

WT2K wrote:

You have my attention

Usually scores better on the edge doe Tapine

Welshy wrote:

what you going to do with Burns if he only averages 40 instead of 44?

Likely leave him until first bye. Doesnt need an urgent upgrade. What do you do with Stimson even if he averages 35 (8 over his pricing), can you hold him to the byes as an NPR, or does he need to be upgraded earlier? You are losing team value to hold him as an NPR for weeks.

mattnz wrote:Trying to explain by example how positional difference is important. Lets assume that all these players perform well and score 10 points more than they are priced at, for simplicity (all numbers taken from MTBs site for consistency):

Team A (all players that I am deliberately avoiding):
Sua $412k priced at 28, scores 38
Stimson $390k priced at 27, scores 37
Brailey $400k priced at 28, scores 38
Lowe $430k priced at 30, scores 40
All 4 need to be in starting 17 to start the season, total cost $1,632k

Team B:
Burns $500k priced at 34, scores 44
Kikau $642k priced at 44, scores 54
Luai $249k priced at 17, scores 27
Amone $246k priced at 17, scores 27
All 4 need to be in starting 17 to start the season, total cost $1,637

So the assumption is that both groups of 4 players that may be the only differences in our 17s score on average 40 points per week better than their cost.

The difference is that in a few weeks time Team A has all these 2RF and HOK players that haven't peaked yet, and need to be upgraded, as they aren't scoring enough to justify a starting spot in their positions, or even in 14-17. If you wait for them to max out at the full 10 point difference, they need to sit in NPRs, which wastes team value, that isn't converted into points in your scoring 17.

This is much less of an issue for team B, where you can easily drop the players averaging 27 to the NPRs until they max out in value, then trade them. The 2 players performing well in their positions at CTR averaging 44 and 2RF averaging 54 don't need any attention at all until at least the byes.

That is why position matters and the expected scores in each position equally matter as the season progresses.

If you drop those B team to the NPR who are you replacing them with? Bottom priced guys outscoring them? Team A most likely has them too if thats the case. If you havent traded these cows how are you affording to replace them?

Dolamite wrote:Is Billy Walters a trap? Or genuine cash cow?

TRAP

Playing well in trials, may start round 1, but MBYE has to play somewhere and with outside backs only 1-2 weeks away from full fitness before season start, he loses his spot to MBye as soon as their fit.

my tv broke wrote:

I can see what youre getting at, and I agree to a point, but trying to plan out your season as if everything will go perfectly to spreadsheet doesnt really work.

Its kind of like planning for byes in pre season.

Im not sure the example really works that well because people are buying guys like stimson and sua because rhey believe they can score in the 40s and, best case,  average 45 ish early on.

Luai could jag some big scores and do similar, but less likely, plus eveeyone will have him anyway. Amone etc, yeah nah

Its not the only thing guiding me, just all other things being equal, that is my plan. If it looks like Stimson gets kicking duties and play 80 mins, then I would have him, but generally managing my team to allow positional max value to heavily guide team selections. 2RF and HOK looking to spend $500-700k, rather than $400k if they are expected to score the same number of extra points compared with their starting value.

Also by spending a bit more at $500k in CTR you can get likely season keepers, which isnt too much higher cost than the $300k ish options. I like spending $200k more for a quality center, and playing a rookie on the bench, vs a $430k 2RF or HOK that may get 10 more than they are priced at and need to be replaced earlier than you would like, paired with a $300k center.

It looks like teams are going to be really similar for most serious players this season, even me, and I do try to differentiate where possible.

I expect the key differentiation will be in team structure, particularly which positions teams spend their money in and how those players max out and when they need to be replaced to keep both scores up, and cash generation continuing.

All going to plan, my team will be differentiated by having (in addition to Haas):
2 gun halves (Moses and Cleary)
2 near-gun centers (likely Aubbs and Burns)
All 2RF $500k+
Weaker bench with a couple of <$250k players

Most teams I have seen here have:
1 gun half
1 gun center
1 or 2 2RF $400k ish
Middling bench with $400k 2RF and HOK players

Getting a gun with upside potential in the halves (Moses/Cleary) is also cheaper than getting a gun with upside potential in 2RF (Lolo). That extra $100k is how I can get 2 near-gun centers into the team as well.

Roosters FRF. Lindsay “good for one dropped ball at least” Collins. How many minutes will he play? How did he go in WCC?

mattnz wrote:

Likely leave him until first bye. Doesnt need an urgent upgrade. What do you do with Stimson even if he averages 35 (8 over his pricing), can you hold him to the byes as an NPR, or does he need to be upgraded earlier? You are losing team value to hold him as an NPR for weeks.

Far easier replacing a 2RF with another one rising in value/points. and reality is if Stimson is playing 80 he's going to score a lot more than 35. Risk is minutes for 2RF.

Pure CTRs always going to be tough going over 40 regardless