HomeThe sharks winger who got broken jaw katao or somethingMulvy wrote:
I was thinking there was more than one! He wasn't that bad, but like all my cows last year got injured. Sorensen too. There's someone else I'm forgetting.
2019 NRL.com Fantasy thread part 5
manlybeaver- Posts : 1601
Reputation : 427
Join date : 2015-11-06
Rippin and Tearin- Posts : 5031
Reputation : 1478
Join date : 2016-03-09
Mulvy wrote:On POD's, if you have a bunch of POD's and they don't fire, you're fucked. If your POD's do fire, they won't be POD's for very long.
Also there could be 30 guns with over 10% ownership but no one can have all of them, you'll only have a handful to start the year. It doesn't factor into my thinking at all really. Once I've selected them on merit, I'll take a peak at ownership and if it's low it's a bonus but has zero influence on my selection.
And you have to ask yourself, if no one else is picking a guy, maybe it's for a reason. It's pretty arrogant to assume you are just smarter than everyone else.
Steve Nicholls summed it up better:
"A good team trumps PODs
My final side included three players with less than 10% ownership: Adam Reynolds (5.6%), Cam McInnes (7.4%) and Tristan Sailor (1.4%). You certainly wouldn’t call any of those three game changers down the tail end of the season. Despite that absence of PODs I went from 200th in round 19 to 10th in round 25. How did I make up that sort of ground without PODs? I had basically everybody that was good. Of the best 17 fantasy players available in round 25 I had 15 of them. I was only missing Blake Ferguson (I had Marsters) and Ryan James (I was loopholing with Arrow, Reynolds or Sam Burgess). Of the best 17 players from round 18 onwards I had 10 but the list of players I didn’t have includes players like Hopoate, Hayne and Tevaga who weren’t on many fantasy teams during this period. Coming out of Origin there were really only two players I felt could hurt me, Martin Taupau and James Tedesco and I added upgraded to Taupau and added Tedesco for an injured Ponga. Just get the best players and you’ll improve ranks, don’t worry about PODs."
Im a bit late on this, I liked @mattnz 's post, but as someone else mentioned, I don't agree with all of it.
In particular the POD part. I largely think this can be disregarded and is only a real consideration at the tail end of the season if you truely do need a point of difference. Outside of that, I think the sole consideration is getting the best possible team together, regardless of what ever anyone esle has.
The irony of the POD thing is that from memory that is what sidetracked Matt from I think as early as round 3 last season - wondering if you have made adjustments from that mate as I recall a number of people pointing out flaws in that strategy last year.
Otherwise really good post mate - some useful stuff in there.
The thing I would add to it, which your post perhaps indirectly refers to is confidence (intervals) around predictions. What I mean by that is when I have slowly been putting a ranked list in place for my forwards I generate a point estimate of what I think they will score, and therefore their 'value'. However, as we all know, these point estimates will seldom be correct. Hence I also attempted to generate a level of confidence around those estimates. Hypothetical example. TPJ I might say is 5 points undervalued but due to a mired of factors I might decide his reality could well be + or - 10 points either side of that. In contrast, someone like Ofa I might say is 7 points undervalued but with more confidence (+ or -) 5 points. Risk tolerance then comes into play then and I'll make a call based on which one to choose based on what ever strategy Im going with. My point here is there is more uncertainty with some players than others and I think that needs to be taken into account too, quantitatively.
Rippin and Tearin- Posts : 5031
Reputation : 1478
Join date : 2016-03-09
mattnz wrote:Ok, POD theory.....
Lets say you have 2 possible teams. One is cookie cutter, basically take all the most owned players and assume conventional wisdom that the masses are choosing the right players generally and that is why they are popular. You have a team of 21 players that all have high ownership.
By contrast I am hoping to have lets say 10 PODs, with 11 players in common with the other team (not just choosing PODs for the sake of it, but if I have 2 equal choices, I would go with the POD). Lets assume each team performs just as well as the other and of the 10 players that are different in each team, 8 do great and 2 not so great in round 1. I don't feel a compulsion to suddenly add lots of non-PODs. Those that dont have my PODs may start getting a couple of them in, but they arent going to get all my 8 PODs in, especially while they are increasing in value over the first few rounds. At most they could only get 2 per round and they are still less likely to be selected than the equally well performing non PODs in the other team.
I am only looking to win the comp, not just get top 1000, top 100 or whatever. Having differentiation assists this goal. If it was entirely random like a lottery, you don't want to have the same numbers (players) as everyone else.
This article discusses this phenomenon, where if you chose the numbers 1,2,3,4,5,6 that there are 10,000 others that choose this same sequence every week. https://www.lottoland.co.uk/magazine/why-you-should-avoid-the-most-popular-lottery-numbers.html
If you won first prize, you would win very little money because you would be sharing first prize so many ways. Instead of 5 million pounds on your own, you get 500 pounds each.
It isnt that the chances of hitting these numbers is any more or less likely than any other sequence, but that their popularity reduces what you win.
Applying this game theory to Fantasy, selecting PODs doesn't make them any more likely to score higher, but means if I hit the jackpot and all my player numbers come up as winners, the rarity of my player pool amongst all other players makes it far more valuable.
Lets say that the chances of my first round players all killing it in round 1 and getting 1,000 points is equal in both the 10 POD scenario as in the 0 POD scenario. If I get it with the 0 POD team, everyone goes wow what a huge round, everyone scored amazingly well. There are likely 50 other teams over 1000 that same round and yeah I have done well, but there are others around me.
In the alternative scenario, my 10 PODs absolutely kill it and I get 1,000 points. My unique lottery numbers that no one else has picked all came up at once and I have 100 point lead in first place.
Same likelihood of happening, different outcome if it does happen.
Thats the POD theory.
What this means though is that basically you think its possible to find value in 10 guys that almost no-one else has managed to find. I find this incredibly unlikely, to the extent that what will inevitably happen is that a decent number of those 10 will fail and then your season is buggered from the get go. Check out the starting teams of the guys that have done well the first few years, I haven't but my hunch is that they will basically have a 'cookie cutter' team. And certainly won't have 10 PODS from the start. I truly think you are screwing your self if one of the constraints you are putting on yourself is a team half filled with PODs. And as pre my previous post, this is what people were warning you pf last year too...
You seem like you do a bunch or research, why not back your numbers and go solely with the team that maximises value (with 4 bottom dollar guys in the NPR). Just keep it simple. If you do that, and you have faith in your analysis, I dont see why that wouldn't be the best strategy....
Rippin and Tearin- Posts : 5031
Reputation : 1478
Join date : 2016-03-09
mattnz wrote:
Happy to lose in the first 3 rounds (and get my life back), for the chance to have a commanding lead after 3 rounds if my lucky numbers come up.
There is one flaw with this line of thought and IMO it is that being good at fantasy takes practice and experiencing making mistakes and making the right call. If you effectively bail out of the game after 3 weeks - from memory this is basically what happened to you last year, then you forgo the opportunity to get better at the game. My finishing positions (from memory) were ~5000th, ~1500th, and 36th in the three years I've played.
I can tell you now that if I had mentally tapped out in either of those first two years there is no way I finish top 50 last year.
I can see a number of people are trying to help you mate, but it does seem like you have a method that you will go with regardless. I look forward to seeing how it plays out mate, all the best.
Rapture_NRL- Posts : 3293
Reputation : 1193
Join date : 2017-02-28
Location : Earth
On POD, I think it's about picking underrated, under the radar types. Talking Papali'i, Tevaga and Vaughan (2017). Because on here we tend to gravitate to similar players, sometimes going gut instinct is good. Getting on that underrated player can help you get the jump on the pack. But there's very few POD players that will make a difference.
POD I'd argue only truly benefits H2H. I know this because I destroyed my whole comp in overall but bowed out in round 1 of finals after losing the last 2 rounds of the season. I had the best team value too.
POD I'd argue only truly benefits H2H. I know this because I destroyed my whole comp in overall but bowed out in round 1 of finals after losing the last 2 rounds of the season. I had the best team value too.
Guest- Guest
Tbh, I disagree with the pod approach - especially with the start team. You/we/I only need to win by 1 point. It'll come down to good decision making through the season maybe a risk or two later on. Cookie cutter plus good decisons = a chance. Throw in some luck and its a great chance.
I've used the same approach for NFL and NBA this season. Lower amount of participants but a bit more specialised vs US players (perhaps). I hadn't watched any NFL or NBA for years. Finished 13th in NFL and sitting 40th in NBA.
I need to back this up in NRL this season obviously. I'll have a good crack!
I really hope the pod strategy works out. It'll be great to follow through the season. Good luck!
Edit, I could assume that the people playing NFL and NBA fantasy are just shit at it
I've used the same approach for NFL and NBA this season. Lower amount of participants but a bit more specialised vs US players (perhaps). I hadn't watched any NFL or NBA for years. Finished 13th in NFL and sitting 40th in NBA.
I need to back this up in NRL this season obviously. I'll have a good crack!
I really hope the pod strategy works out. It'll be great to follow through the season. Good luck!
Edit, I could assume that the people playing NFL and NBA fantasy are just shit at it
Last edited by Verbal Kint on Mon Feb 11, 2019 7:06 am; edited 2 times in total
Guest- Guest
Some great discussion gents. I've really enjoyed catching up the last few pages and the end of the last thread
Liverpool_Bulldog- Fanatic
- Posts : 19477
Reputation : 6801
Join date : 2016-02-14
Location : New Zealand
Great chat here lads. Definitely beats politics.
Rapture_NRL- Posts : 3293
Reputation : 1193
Join date : 2017-02-28
Location : Earth
@Verbal Kint what do you mean back it up in NRL Fantasy? Lol didn't you end up 4th?
Rippin and Tearin- Posts : 5031
Reputation : 1478
Join date : 2016-03-09
Verbal Kint wrote:Tbh, I disagree with the pod approach - especially with the start team. You/we/I only need to win by 1 point. It'll come down to good decision making through the season maybe a risk or two later on. Cookie cutter plus good decisons = a chance. Throw in some luck and its a great chance.
I've used the same approach for NFL and NBA this season. Lower amount of participants but a bit more specialised vs US players (perhaps). I hadn't watched any NFL or NBA for years. Finished 13th in NFL and sitting 40th in NBA.
I need to back this up in NRL this season obviously. I'll have a good crack!
I really hope the pod strategy works out. It'll be great to follow through the season. Good luck!
Edit, I could assume that the people playing NFL and NBA fantasy are just shit at it
Yeah mate, you impressed me a great deal in our NFL league (verbal came 2nd in our cash league and beat a ton of people that had been playing fantasy NFL for years in his first ever season at it) - so for anyone that hasn't picked up on this yet, Verbal is a gun at fantasy regardless at the sport and it goes to show that you actually dont necessarily need a huge amount of content knowledge to do well (although of course it helps). Worth listening when this guy posts
I have a lot of respect for the way he goes about things - Isaako aside 0:Re NFL mate, I do think that on the VSDT site the people playing aren't great at it. Cam 2nd overall in my first ever year and if I'd known about looping etc I would have won for sure ( got top 10 again this year too I think). That being said, as you can see from a bunch of seasoned players its not a walk in the park either.
I tried NBA once, was 2nd after round one and then my ranking exponentially blew out until I gave up
There some people that do know what they are doing there!!NRLF is 100x tougher I think... I reckon last year may have been a touch easier than most as some people might have taken a while to get to grips with the new rules and others adapted faster.
While we are talking guns, @Trajan needs to get some respect for the way he is travelling in the big bash league too on SC. top 10 and in for a decent prize by the looks! I sucked woefully in that comp although I didnt do any research and kept putting guys in my side that didnt play - doesn't help
Last edited by Rippin and Tearin on Mon Feb 11, 2019 7:48 am; edited 1 time in total
Guest- Guest
Rapture_NRL wrote:@Verbal Kint what do you mean back it up in NRL Fantasy? Lol didn't you end up 4th?
Haha, yep. Fair point
Fortitude- Posts : 4623
Reputation : 2686
Join date : 2016-02-25
Location : National Capital
Another reason why ownership percentages mean bugger all. There are so many teams playing head to head, also, plenty of shit teams out there. Like way more than good ones.
If you could get percent ownership of segments of the ladder. That’d be awrsome
If you could get percent ownership of segments of the ladder. That’d be awrsome
Last edited by Fortitude on Mon Feb 11, 2019 7:56 am; edited 1 time in total
mattnz- Fanatic
- Posts : 19887
Reputation : 7191
Join date : 2018-03-11
Location : Your pool
Thanks everyone for your input. I think you may be surprised just how many undervalued pods there will be this season. There will be some that when named to start will suddenly become higher ownership, but there will be others that are talked about at length by the 100 regulars here that look like no Brainers following great research that the rest of the comp totally miss and still end up at 4% ownership.
My number 1 ranked player overall using my rating system has 2.7% ownership despite being a sub gun with huge upside and low risk. Being a pod only gets him 1 extra point in the rating system out of 26 points. it really only differentiates POD from non POD that are equal in every other respect. Other popular players that I have taken the time to review received 12 to 16 rating points in my system so missed out.
for those that may be interested, my formula I am using is taking half the points differential of expected score vs the score they are priced at, then adding or taking away 1 or 2 points for each of the factors identified in the list I posted recently of what should be considerations. I find it is really handy to have an objective way to compare players and it just happens to have identified lots of high ranking pods.
My number 1 ranked player overall using my rating system has 2.7% ownership despite being a sub gun with huge upside and low risk. Being a pod only gets him 1 extra point in the rating system out of 26 points. it really only differentiates POD from non POD that are equal in every other respect. Other popular players that I have taken the time to review received 12 to 16 rating points in my system so missed out.
for those that may be interested, my formula I am using is taking half the points differential of expected score vs the score they are priced at, then adding or taking away 1 or 2 points for each of the factors identified in the list I posted recently of what should be considerations. I find it is really handy to have an objective way to compare players and it just happens to have identified lots of high ranking pods.
rhinoceroo- Fanatic
- Posts : 14020
Reputation : 9265
Join date : 2015-09-30
Ownership percentages are pretty difficult to read. Less so at the start of the season, but in, say, Round 20 and maybe 10-15% of teams are active your 8% new POD might not be as PODdy as you think, or a guy on 15% ownership might be in as many active teams as one with 50%
tl:dr who cares about ownership percentages of 100k teams?
tl:dr who cares about ownership percentages of 100k teams?
rhinoceroo- Fanatic
- Posts : 14020
Reputation : 9265
Join date : 2015-09-30
mattnz wrote:Thanks everyone for your input. I think you may be surprised just how many undervalued pods there will be this season. There will be some that when named to start will suddenly become higher ownership, but there will be others that are talked about at length by the 100 regulars here that look like no Brainers following great research that the rest of the comp totally miss and still end up at 4% ownership.
My number 1 ranked player overall using my rating system has 2.7% ownership despite being a sub gun with huge upside and low risk. Being a pod only gets him 1 extra point in the rating system out of 26 points. it really only differentiates POD from non POD that are equal in every other respect. Other popular players that I have taken the time to review received 12 to 16 rating points in my system so missed out.
for those that may be interested, my formula I am using is taking half the points differential of expected score vs the score they are priced at, then adding or taking away 1 or 2 points for each of the factors identified in the list I posted recently of what should be considerations. I find it is really handy to have an objective way to compare players and it just happens to have identified lots of high ranking pods.
Sezer? Good luck. High risk, high reward. Doubt I'll be touching him myself but fits in with your strategy.
my tv broke
my tv broke- Fanatics Immortal
- Posts : 28416
Reputation : 21075
Join date : 2016-01-08
rhinoceroo wrote:
Sezer? Good luck. High risk, high reward. Doubt I'll be touching him myself but fits in with your strategy.
Rounding up he's 2.7.
There are only two players in the system at the moment with 2.7X ownership and one is already talked about quite heavily. The other may not get a start. If he does, alot of people will pick him up anyway.
bluetige- Posts : 2235
Reputation : 749
Join date : 2015-12-13
Some Raiders news going about this morning on NRL.com and Foxsports
Papali says "I’ve been training on the left and the right [edges] and at lock as well. You never know with Sticky [coach Ricky Stuart] – I might end up on the wing.
and in a different article
Jack Wighton has confirmed he’ll be partnering Aidan Sezer in the halves for the Green Machine in 2019.
The Raiders long-term fullback will switch to five-eighth, with Ricky Stuart hoping his dangerous running game will complement Sezer’s game management.
Papali says "I’ve been training on the left and the right [edges] and at lock as well. You never know with Sticky [coach Ricky Stuart] – I might end up on the wing.
and in a different article
Jack Wighton has confirmed he’ll be partnering Aidan Sezer in the halves for the Green Machine in 2019.
The Raiders long-term fullback will switch to five-eighth, with Ricky Stuart hoping his dangerous running game will complement Sezer’s game management.
mattnz- Fanatic
- Posts : 19887
Reputation : 7191
Join date : 2018-03-11
Location : Your pool
rhinoceroo wrote:
Sezer? Good luck. High risk, high reward. Doubt I'll be touching him myself but fits in with your strategy.
Sezer wouldnt get close to a look in my team. Criteria that he fails in:
Increased minutes
Relying on form improvement
Don't expect him to score better than last season
He is exactly the kind of player that my ranking system avoids.
Fortitude- Posts : 4623
Reputation : 2686
Join date : 2016-02-25
Location : National Capital
rhinoceroo wrote:
Sezer? Good luck. High risk, high reward. Doubt I'll be touching him myself but fits in with your strategy.
Wouldn’t even suggest he is high reward. Played with Williams (an organiser) last year, sucked. Played with Austin (a ball runner) sucked. No rapana, no recognised fullback, a recognised fullback playing as other half. Horrible pick.
Guest- Guest
Holland, right? I have room for him or Hampton. One of the H's will be there