NRLFF community managed fantasy team

Brooks to ARey would be the other option and my vote could land there after some more pondering

Brooks only averaging 40 last year and his form dropping while Tigers also regressing to where most expect them to be is a bit of a concern.

Starting to lean ARey over DCE taking goalkicking into consideration now. Just that I've owned DCE many times in the past and served me well and ARey only once, for one game of 90 odd and injured if memory serves me correct, so I just normally favour DCE.

Average wise I expect something in the neighbourhood of:

SST 45-50
Brooks 40-50
Staggs 30-35

Burns averaging close to 48.5 from 7 games taking inj. out and counting 2 from last year. I generally expect 38-42 from CTRs.. but maybe he can hit 40-45, maintain 48 somehow? Not a tradeout candidate anyway, so doesn't matter too much.

If we had 3 trades left I'd really have no problem double gunning it for ARey/DCE/Munster + Jake.. but 7 weeks is a long time to go injury free or be forced to play Burns or Staggs permanently.

If not getting Jake right away, then I think Brooks does give us a lot better chance at jagging a Jake-like score than Staggs. Brooks plays earlier than SST for all but the last 2 rounds, so should give us a few free looks.

Im just wary of splitting the votes unevenly between the two strategies. With Arey included in the Brooks option there'd be three ways for people to vote, compared to only two for the Staggs option. We've had this happen several times this season and you end up with most voted option arguably not actually being the preffered one.... (if you know what I mean).

Sop perhpas the first poll should be for the preferred half (I'll put this up now).

Once we have that, we could then just present 2 options for the actual trade, in effect the strategy.

Basically all of the options have merit, so I'm cool with whatever the community votes.

More trying to figure out for myself what I'm voting for all things considered now.

And yeah good point about the vote splitting and good idea on deciding which half first. That's why I was a bit bummed we were short on Staggs to Munster as a poll option to make things more even.

Hey guys, DCE is running away with the half vote and he can be afforded regardless of who gets traded out. So, for the poll for this week Im wondering about the wording so that its fair and the reporcussions are clear.

As a first crack how about the following.

DCE was the clear half preferred by the forum. This poll is to vote on:

(1) trade or no trade (i.e. DCE in or not)
(2) who to trade out (Brooks or Staggs)

Should we vote to trade there are implications for our last remaining trade and our 17th man / loop options.

A Staggs to DCE trade would leave $13k in the bank, SST as 17th man (based on averages) and Brooks and Burns as potential loop options. The $13k would mean we could not upgrade to arguably the obvious target of JTrbo and therefore effectively means that trade would be held for injury.

A Brooks to DCE trade would leave $189k in the bank, SST as 17th man (based on averages) and Staggs and Burns as potential loop options. The $189k would mean we could upgrade SST to JTrbo anytime, or hold the trade for injury cover with more flexibility on how it could be used.


How is that looking?

voting poll would look like:

(1) Trade in DCE?

• Yes
  

• No
  

(2) Who to trade out?

• Brooks (weaker EMG and looping depth but ability to upgrade SST to JTrbo)
  

• Staggs (better EMG and looping depth but no way to upgrade SST to JTrbo - remaining trade for injury cover)
  

That is my first crack at this, please contribute if you feel it could be better worded.

That sounds pretty well worded to me and maybe re-post the team image in the poll thread to give people a clearer idea of what we're working with if they're coming in fresh and want to crunch the numbers themselves.

Looks good to me!

WT Winfield wrote:That sounds pretty well worded to me and maybe re-post the team image in the poll thread to give people a clearer idea of what we're working with if they're coming in fresh and want to crunch the numbers themselves.

Good idea mate. I'll see if I can figure out how to do that!

Krump wrote:Looks good to me!

Cheers mate - I'll see if anyone else has feedback and then post that poll up later tonight after TLT.

For looping this week

I'd rather see Staggs play before making a decision on him, rather than having him as a backup in case a better player fails.

So Staggs/SST in the loop for me.

As Walters locks out straight after Staggs plays, we don't have a lot of time to make the decision - so I'd put SST in the lineup. If we want to loop we can always sub him out - but just in case we don't have time, I'd rather have SST as the default option

Cheers Mate, Im with you. Basically banking on Burns going well.

WT leans the other way though.

In the absence of any further input it'll be 2 : 1 though so we'll roll with what you've said.

All good, I just have a very low opinion of true CTRs. Burns averaging 48 in a limited sample is a bit of an anomaly when a lot of premium CTRs usually have goalkicking and still don't achieve that.

SST averaging 48 with an injury is fairly common for a number of forwards.

If I was playing straight up I'd just lock SST in at 16, Burns at 17, but being able to loop I'd take the free look at Burns and book a 40+.

35 I'd take the shot on Staggs just because of opposition, but 38 with a try vs. Titans last time, so I'm not expecting much.

Just feels like we're saying Burns is better than SST by putting SST in the loop and I don't believe that's the case longterm.

Its more the case that if Burns scores 30, what decision do you make?

You could put Staggs in instead, but every chance he'd score less. Burns would have to really stink before you could put Staggs in and be confident of improving on his score.

I'm happy to not loop SST, I just think that Staggs is the player that we want to look at first before making a decision, so need to loop out someone that plays after him if he somehow gets a 60 again, and SST is the best option to sub out if that is the case.

Yeah I'm starting to see the other side a little better. I guess my worry is Burns scoring 30-40, Staggs hitting 40+, so we book those and miss out on SST.

Chances of Staggs hitting a 40+ is kinda low though imo, so probably not gonna be an issue.

Every chance SST just gets a 40 odd anyway, especially if the bench is reshuffled.

Yeah I can see both sides of the argument and would be ok with either option to be honest.

I guess I just favour the option with the biggest upside.

I think Burns could go pretty well vs the Dragons. I also think that there is every chance Staggs goes 50+ v the Titans.

If we did have Burns in the loop, would you keep or drop his 33?
Its higher than Staggs's average, would be a tough call.

I'd play Staggs. Averaging 32.8 from his 11 full games at CTR, so I'd back him to go above vs. Titans.

No point worrying about that though, the 33 is locked in now. Staggs' score could be the tough decision now.

For me Staggs needs to go 45+ to keep over Sst

I'm out tonight, can someone loop SST out of the team to grab staggs

@Rippin and Tearin

Just did it myself on my phone. 

Assume we want Staggs score
54 with 24 minutes left

Thanks mate