NRLFF community managed fantasy team

Milchy wrote:
Once I get enough votes, I was just going to plug the results into my solver to get the best cap compliant team.

I'm not sure what 'gaming' you think will go on, other than people giving high votes to the people they want in the team, which is the point of the exercise.

If this team is going to compete as a celebrity team, then we should try and get a competitive team. Not all the risky PODs we don't have the guts to put in our own team.
It's going to look similar to teams that get posted because
A) we want good players in this team
B) we presumably want good players in our own team.

We shouldn't have to worry about voting intentions, just a way of assembling a team in a cap compliant way. I'm just offering a way to do that.

Gaming will cause us to go way over cap, people will use their 5 points on the premium and value players, not on the <$250k cows, which will be significantly under-represented in the points system.

We need some kind of transferrable vote system lol pity we don't have time really for full on "elections" with several run-offs by position. I'd rather have 2 or 3 guys/mods having some kind of final say when it comes to the money issues.

Or we start with the rookies and vote on our favourite 4 or 5 then make the rest fit

Hows this for a way of working it;

- People submit their 1-21 squads and the compiler ignores the actual names, just records the price of each player.
- Compiler then adds together and averages the squads by position, ie 2RF sucks in 37% of the salary cap.
- Through polls, get the community to vote on (say) 4 stud players and 4 cash cows we need to have. Those 8 players get auto inclusion.
- Remainder of positions get an allocated budget based on the initial breakdown %age and the remaining cap
- Community vote on players that fit in the remaining budget, pos by pos.

I havnt done any maths on how a team like that would look but at a first think, that might be a way to get it reflective of an actual team and also the feelings of the community.

Random wrote:I'm interested in trying out Milchs Idea. Do you want it laid out as a team or just like 1-21 with the players as long as it would fit an actual team.

if you want to send me votes I just want 21 names with a number next to each of them.
Position/order is not important

Something like this?

3. Andrew McCullough
5. Andrew Fifita
2. Aiden Tolman
5. Jai Arrow
5. Cameron Murray
1. Joe Stimson
3. Michael Morgan
2. Dylan Brown
2. Kerrod Holland
1. Jack Bird
3. Dylan Edwards
3. James Tedesco
1. Charnze Nicoll Klokstad
1. Matt Gillett
3. Adam Keighran
3. Reed Mahoney
3. Zac Lomax
1. Corey Allan
1. Lachlan Burr
1. Mikaele Ravalawa
1. Bronson Xerri

200 ITB

Chewie yes like that

But as stated before its easier for me if you use full player names and not nicknames

Once we get a team selected and the season starts what trades to make and how to choose them trades will become the next issue to decide.
This is where a kind of exec committee might be useful. We elect 4-6 members to toss around some trade ideas in the background and then they post a poll with 3 or 4 options for us all to vote on.
Obviously filth is a showing for this committee.

code delta wrote:Once we get a team selected and the season starts what trades to make and how to choose them trades will become the next issue to decide.
This is where a kind of exec committee might be useful. We elect 4-6 members to toss around some trade ideas in the background and then they post a poll with 3 or 4 options for us all to vote on.
Obviously filth is a showing for this committee.

Same with Captaincy choice I say

Milchy wrote:
Chewie yes like that

But as stated before its easier for me if you use full player names and not nicknames

fixed

I'd back the small committee suggestion. This could go around in circles otherwise without any decisons being made. Someone needs to cut through it

People and doubters massively overthinking this.

If I vote Smith and Macca and it ends up being Macca and Mahoney, I don’t mind. Fine with it. Had my say and if votes or exec committee trump it, crack on! It’s a bit of fun guys with some contribution.

For the sake of initial draft, let’s try what Milch wants then...

5 Cameron Smith
3 Aiden Tolman
1 Sam Burgess
1 Victor Radley
5 Cameron Murray
1 Joe Stimson
4 Cameron Munster
2 Jake Clifford
2 Kerron Holland
1 Jack Bird
5 Connor Watson
3 Dylan Edwards
1 Brett Morris
5 Andrew McCulloch
4 Reed Mahoney
1 Wayde Egan
2 Lachlan Burr
1 Adam Keighran
1 Dylan Brown
1 Zac Lomax
1 Payne Haas

@Milchy - thanks for this. Great idea to get a team started. I'm not cap compliant but feel its worth spending big upfront (FRF especially).

2 - Cameron Smith
2 - Reed Mahoney

4 - Andrew Fifita
4 - Aiden Tolman
4 - Tevita Pangai Junior

5 - Cameron Murray
5 - Joe Stimson
4- Jai Arrow
4 - Matt Gillett
2 - Victor Radley

4 - Michael Morgan
3 - Dylan Brown
3 - Adam Keighran

1 - Jack Bird
3 - Kurt Capewell
3 - Zac Lomax

2 - Dylan Edwards
1 - Brett Morris
1 - Charnze Nicoll-Klokstad
1 - Jordan Kahu
1 - Corey Allan

3. Damien Cook
3. Andrew Fifita
1. Aiden Tolman
5. Jai Arrow
5. Cameron Murray
1. Elliott Whitehead
5. Michael Morgan
2. Aiden Sezer
3. Jack Bird
1. Kurt Capewell
3. Josh Mansour
3. Dylan Edwards
1. Zac Lomax

3. Wayde Egan
2. Dylan Brown
3. Reed Mahoney
2. Lachlan Burr

1. Payne Haas
1. Martin Taupau
1. Kerrod Holland
1. Adam Keighran

Also Cap I have set up the email and the team already I will PM you the details.

After 6 people's votes, this is the current team

McCullough
Fifita Tolman
Arrow Murray Stimson
Morgan Brown
Capewell Holland
Edwards Watson Morris

Mahoney
Egan
Burr
Lomax
Charnze Nicoll-Klokstad
Keighran
Bird
Aubusson

So talking of Gaming votes, Filth gave Aubusson 5 points, and that was enough to sneak him in.
That sort of thing would probably be subject to veto

I put in my own criteria that there has to be at least 1 backup for each position, but I can get rid of that if we want to live on the edge

Cameron Smith was the most popular player to miss out (not popular enough for his cap value)
Brett Morris and Wayde Egan were the least popular players to get in (4 votes total each across 6 teams)

There's 2 votes missing (someone probably spelt a name wrong and I haven't spotted who it is yet)

If you don't like the team, give me your suggestions and see if it changes things.

Took Aubusson out.
Also noticed I had Arrow listed as DPP FRF for some reason.

New team

Cameron Murray

Jai Arrow

Joe Stimson

Kurt Capewell

Lachlan Burr

Matt Gillett

Zac Lomax

Jack Bird

Kerrod Holland

Andrew Fifita

Aiden Tolman

Payne Haas

Adam Keighran

Michael Morgan

Dylan Brown

Connor Watson

Reed Mahoney

Andrew McCullough

Wayde Egan

Dylan Edwards

Charnze Nicoll-Klokstad

The assistant coach team (most popular players out of 20 posted teams) looks like this:

McCullough (11 times selected)
Fifita (13) Tolman(11)
Murray(20) Stimson(16) Arrow(14)
Morgan(13) Munster(7)
Capewell(13) Bird(11)
Edwards(14) CNK(9) Drinkwater(7)

Mahoney(12)
Egan(12)
Burr(13)
Lomax(17)
Brown(20)
Keighran(20)
Haas(10)
Nikora(12)

217 ITB

very similar

Milchy wrote:After 6 people's votes, this is the current team

McCullough
Fifita Tolman
Arrow Murray Stimson
Morgan Brown
Capewell Holland
Edwards Watson Morris

Mahoney
Egan
Burr
Lomax
Charnze Nicoll-Klokstad
Keighran
Bird
Aubusson

So talking of Gaming votes, Filth gave Aubusson 5 points, and that was enough to sneak him in.
That sort of thing would probably be subject to veto

I put in my own criteria that there has to be at least 1 backup for each position, but I can get rid of that if we want to live on the edge

Cameron Smith was the most popular player to miss out (not popular enough for his cap value)
Brett Morris and Wayde Egan were the least popular players to get in (4 votes total each across 6 teams)

There's 2 votes missing (someone probably spelt a name wrong and I haven't spotted who it is yet)

If you don't like the team, give me your suggestions and see if it changes things.

Its shaping up better than I thought it might. Missing a FRF on the bench, and surprised Haas isnt there.

Looks a good starting point to me fellas and the system “gaming” doesn’t phase me that much. Will come out in the wash and future trade proposals!

I like the rule of one backup at least on the bench.

I really like both teams outcomes. Very much common selections but some guys I wouldn't expect.