Community Team 2022

just checking in. Anyone want to step up this year?  happy to keep doing it best I can, but i've moved and won't be able to easily manage late team list changes, Friday night captaincy polls etc.

here's the link to last year's set up thread - https://www.nrlfantasyfanatics.com/t1533-community-team-starting-squad - to get the discussion rolling...

I don’t think I have the capacity to run this over the next week or so, unless there’s a much simpler/cutdown way to pick the starting squad? but definitely happy to contribute and even take the lead some weeks during the season

We can do starting squad the same we always do

Everyone nominates 25 players with a weighting of 1-5 on how much they want that player in the team. We'll come up with the most popular cap compliant squad and go from there

Thanks Robelgordo. starting squad is manageable, but a hand during the season - especially from someone in the right timezone - would be great.

Jele wrote:Thanks Robelgordo. starting squad is manageable, but a hand during the season - especially from someone in the right timezone - would be great.

Yeah can definitely help with that.

Last couple of years we have created the team with everyone sending in their preferred squad of 21 players, rating everyone from 1 to 5 on desirability.
Then we plug those votes into excel and it gives us the most popular cap compliant team.

Default is that we will select team again that way, but open for considerations on otyher ways to go about it.

One thing I have thought about is - coming up with a shortlist of players and get people to estimate an average fantasy score for those players.
Then come up with an average of averages to work out which team we think will score highest this year. If you believe in the wisdom of crowds then we can't fail.
It has a high barrier to entry as coming up with estimated averages for a heap of players will put people off contributing
For reference last year 48 players got votes from at least 2 people so that is about the size of the shortlist we'd be working with - and you wouldn't need to vote for all players on the shortlist, just as many as you could be bothered
If that is too much work we'll just stick with what we have used in the past

Another question - in the past we have limited our team selections to people playing round 1.

That impacts a lot of potentially popular picks this year - Grant, Papenhuyzen, McInnes, maybe Cleary too.

Are we happy with a hard and fast "must be playing" rule, or is there leeway to have a round 1 red dot?

Personally I definitely won't be picking anyway missing round 1 due to injury, as no guarantee they will be back round 2. Missing through suspension is a more justifiable claim, but its potentially a fair bit of cash on the sidelines from the start

I agree - can’t pick injured players R1. Suspended could make an argument, but rather not.

Also think the wisdom of crowds approach might be too much effort for people of you want a high number of responses/max community involvement. I already find the points system a bit tricky, especially if not at a desktop.

I did come up with a  quick and dirty alternative wisdom of crowds approach when I thought (a) Jele/yourself weren’t able to manage the initial selection and (b) there was only 1 week between trials and R1.

But with the involvement and time I don’t think it’s a better approach.

I think sticking to the old 21 squad rated 1-5 is the best this late in the game.
Also, I would vote for no red dots for round 1, that's what I'm hoping to go with.
One red dot and a few late outs could spell for a disastrous start.

I expect first round will need a lot of chopping and changing through the round and although I'd be happy to help during the season, I've got a golf tourney on the weekend of round 1 and I'm worried I'll barely have time to make changes to my own team.

Round 1 is the tough one to sort out. But I really have enjoyed this concept over the years!

Do we start with a list of ‘musts’? Stand outs who we all think should be in any serious team eg Randall?

I’m not opposed to having a round 1 red dot pooper if we must….

Can't remember what we did last year, but do we want to enforce backup in every position

Current draft has Randall as the only hooker (everywhere else has at least 1 backup)

I think we decided on cover for all positions after a bad experience with centres in 2020. In the end the team that the algorithm spat out gave us full cover so we didn’t have to make any adjustments.

For what it’s worth, I’d vote for a second hooker…

The 2nd hooker will probably be someone like Clark, Paix or Hetherington. Unless we get a good option on TLT. But they'd still be better than nothing

Its a conundrum I am facing for my own personal team.
Don't really want Randall to be my only good hooker, so tossing up getting in a Cook/Grant/someome
If grant played round 1 he'd be an easier sell, might have to find the money for another premium

Milchcow wrote:
The 2nd hooker will probably be someone like Clark, Paix or Hetherington. Unless we get a good option on TLT.  But they'd still be better than nothing

Its a conundrum I am facing for my own personal team.
Don't really want Randall to be my only good hooker, so tossing up getting in a Cook/Grant/someome
If grant played round 1 he'd be an easier sell, might have to find the money for another premium

Ive got Cheese.