Highs and ******* lows!!

[fish]

DT will beat that clown Dr. Dreamteam

I am playing him in DT this round too. Had a look at our respective teams last week and concluded that he had around 200 points on me so I decided not to trade for a win.

Now thinking I should've at least sideways traded out Scotland to give myself a chance.

Currently Dr. DT: Clarke + Sidebottom

Me: 176 points + nobody unless Seedsman is a late inclusion

[Squids]

DT will beat that clown Dr. Dreamteam

I am playing him in DT this round too. Had a look at our respective teams last week and concluded that he had around 200 points on me so I decided not to trade for a win.

Now thinking I should've at least sideways traded out Scotland to give myself a chance.

Currently Dr. DT: Clarke + Sidebottom

Me: 176 points + nobody unless Seedsman is a late inclusion

I am 275 in front with Swan (c) and Elliot to come.

Had a fairly good week so far with my unique premiums smashing it while his have stunk it up.


Next week I'm **** though.

[JK]

Chris Newman .. Been good for me most seasons but **** knows why Ive held onto him so long this year!!

[Squids]

This whole week has been a low, I've won 7 in a row so I guess I am due for a loss.

[Groover]

Cracking the top 1000 in the weekly rank this week (in both SC and DT)
DT - 873rd with 2,331
SC - 774th with 2,462

[MatteeG]

Kurt **** Tippett

STILL! Gone this week.

[Rik E Boy]

HIGHS - Avoiding relegation in Hogg Premier
LOWS - My initial squad was terrible

Shaw
Yarran
Thomas
Kerridge
Tynan
Parker
Hargrave
Wilson

Need to do a lot better next year so I don't have to use my trades to avoid bloody relegation.

regards,

REB

[Hondo]

I am the same REB. A flawed starting side and then too many trades used to sort it out.

- no Dangerfield
- no Sidebottom
- Cloke!
- Mumford
- Broughton
- dodgy rookies in Boumann and Paine

I went with a guns and rookies approach for the first time and so had to pick more rookies than normal. I think this would have been a good way to go with all the GWS rookies however I intentionally avoided too many of them in my starting side leading to Boumann and Paine coming in because I had so few options left.

[Ecky]

At the start of the year I took notice of who were the most commonly picked players. If you had
picked these players (with some minor tweaks to fit the salary cap)
made all the most common trades (traded out rookies who had stopped rising in price to the best value premiums at the time, and traded in the most commonly picked rookies - Treloar in R5, Horsley in R7, Spurr R8, Zorko R9, S Shaw R12, Gibson R14 etc...,

Then you would probably be in the top 10K now with a completed team and enough trades left for finals, regardless of the luck you have had with injuries.

Too many coaches fall for the trap of trying to pick unique players when this is almost certainly not the best strategy. You can almost pick a team's finishing position at the end of a season by the number of unique picks at the start of the season! The game is actually much simpler than many people make it to be.

Things might be different next year though without any new expansion clubs and probably more bye rounds which (as mentioned on DT Talk etc) could mean that mid-prices become a more sensible strategy and teams become a bit more varied.

[Ecky]

PS I think the most boring, common starting team was something like

Def: Goddard, Deledio, Scotland, Lake, Hargrave, Clarke, Bugg, Morris, Ellis
Mid: Ablett, J Selwood, Pendlebury, Coniglio, Shiel, McDonald, Magner, A Kennedy
Ruck: Cox, Giles, Redden, Stephenson
Fwd: Franklin, Fyfe, Goodes, Dangerfield, Martin, Porplyzia, D Smith, Dickson, Smedts

I suspect almost everyone would say they would have done better with this team than with whatever they started with. (I know I would have - although mine was close to this. Lake instead of Duffield and Coniglio instead of Ledger being the main ones)

[Lightning McQueen]

PS I think the most boring, common starting team was something like

Def: Goddard, Deledio, Waters, Lake, Hargrave, Clarke, Bugg, Morris, Ellis
Mid: Ablett, J Selwood, Pendlebury, Coniglio, Shiel, McDonald, Magner, A Kennedy
Ruck: Cox, Giles, Redden, Stephenson
Fwd: Franklin, Fyfe, Goodes, Dangerfield, Martin, Porplyzia, D Smith, Dickson, Smedts

Guilty your honour with a few twists.

[Media Park]

PS I think the most boring, common starting team was something like

Def: Goddard, Deledio, Scotland, Lake, Hargrave, Clarke, Bugg, Morris, Ellis
Mid: Ablett, J Selwood, Pendlebury, Coniglio, Shiel, McDonald, Magner, A Kennedy
Ruck: Cox, Giles, Redden, Stephenson
Fwd: Franklin, Fyfe, Goodes, Dangerfield, Martin, Porplyzia, D Smith, Dickson, Smedts

I suspect almost everyone would say they would have done better with this team than with whatever they started with. (I know I would have - although mine was close to this. Lake instead of Duffield and Coniglio instead of Ledger being the main ones)

I either have all of the one's I emboldened, or have had at some stage of the year...

[Groover]

PS I think the most boring, common starting team was something like

Def: Goddard, Deledio, Scotland, Lake, Hargrave, Clarke, Bugg, Morris, Ellis
Mid: Ablett, J Selwood, Pendlebury, Coniglio, Shiel, McDonald, Magner, A Kennedy
Ruck: Cox, Giles, Redden, Stephenson
Fwd: Franklin, Fyfe, Goodes, Dangerfield, Martin, Porplyzia, D Smith, Dickson, Smedts

I suspect almost everyone would say they would have done better with this team than with whatever they started with. (I know I would have - although mine was close to this. Lake instead of Duffield and Coniglio instead of Ledger being the main ones)

I either have all of the one's I emboldened, or have had at some stage of the year...

Hargrave, Morris, Selwood, Cox, Stephenson and Goodes are the only ones that haven't been in my side

[OnSong]

Def: Goddard, Deledio, Scotland, Lake, Hargrave, Clarke, Bugg, Morris, Ellis
Mid: Ablett, J Selwood, Pendlebury, Coniglio, Shiel, McDonald, Magner, A Kennedy
Ruck: Cox, Giles, Redden, Stephenson
Fwd: Franklin, Fyfe, Goodes, Dangerfield, Martin, Porplyzia, D Smith, Dickson, Smedts

Not too far away from mine! Lol

[Dogmatic]

Add Crameri to the list.

[MatteeG]

At the start of the year I took notice of who were the most commonly picked players. If you had
picked these players (with some minor tweaks to fit the salary cap)
made all the most common trades (traded out rookies who had stopped rising in price to the best value premiums at the time, and traded in the most commonly picked rookies - Treloar in R5, Horsley in R7, Spurr R8, Zorko R9, S Shaw R12, Gibson R14 etc...,

Then you would probably be in the top 10K now with a completed team and enough trades left for finals, regardless of the luck you have had with injuries.

Too many coaches fall for the trap of trying to pick unique players when this is almost certainly not the best strategy. You can almost pick a team's finishing position at the end of a season by the number of unique picks at the start of the season! The game is actually much simpler than many people make it to be.

This is why it has become much less fun then it used to be. Follow what the experts say and you too can be mid table mediocrity. IMO it was better when there was no analysis, 'gold class' and all the other rubbish. Really warming to the draft type games eg Ultimate Footy where only 1 person in your league can have any 1 given player.

[Hondo]

Ecjy I think your comments are very wise advice. I have already been thinking about just going with the flow of the common players next year. I got stubborn about not getting Lake and Dangerfield like most did and now I look back and wish I hadnt tried to second guess the masses. Cloke over Danger in my side had cost me 500 points just on that one decision.

[Rik E Boy]

Ecjy I think your comments are very wise advice. I have already been thinking about just going with the flow of the common players next year. I got stubborn about not getting Lake and Dangerfield like most did and now I look back and wish I hadnt tried to second guess the masses. Cloke over Danger in my side had cost me 500 points just on that one decision.

Remember that there are two ways to play this game. One way is to try and rack up points and the other way is to win matches and leagues. Only one person is ever going to win the 50k and every week someone can bag the weekly 1k as the sharks did. However, the POD is a valuable ally in winning league matches. Not many of my opponents have Trent Cotchin and he's been invaluable for me in the midfield.

If everyone followed Ecky's advice you wouldn't win league matches or get the 50k becuase it would be the coach with the one Barlow-like bolter who snaffles the dough. That's the beauty of SC. More than one way to play means there is no one strategy..how well is Impromptu going this year? The year he won the whole shebang he went with an all rookie midfield. That's hardly going along with the sheep or using Gold or the Prospectus. I reckon by second guessing the masses is the only way you can win. No risk = no reward. It's just hard to jag that's all so some people will follow the herd and pat themselves on the back for being rated in the top 10k.

regards,

REB

[Rik E Boy]

At the start of the year I took notice of who were the most commonly picked players. If you had
picked these players (with some minor tweaks to fit the salary cap)
made all the most common trades (traded out rookies who had stopped rising in price to the best value premiums at the time, and traded in the most commonly picked rookies - Treloar in R5, Horsley in R7, Spurr R8, Zorko R9, S Shaw R12, Gibson R14 etc...,

Then you would probably be in the top 10K now with a completed team and enough trades left for finals, regardless of the luck you have had with injuries.

Too many coaches fall for the trap of trying to pick unique players when this is almost certainly not the best strategy. You can almost pick a team's finishing position at the end of a season by the number of unique picks at the start of the season! The game is actually much simpler than many people make it to be.

This is why it has become much less fun then it used to be. Follow what the experts say and you too can be mid table mediocrity. IMO it was better when there was no analysis, 'gold class' and all the other rubbish. Really warming to the draft type games eg Ultimate Footy where only 1 person in your league can have any 1 given player.

Are you getting worse by rankings or winning less matches? That league you are in is pretty tough.

regards,

REB

[Ecky]

If everyone followed Ecky's advice you wouldn't win league matches or get the 50k becuase it would be the coach with the one Barlow-like bolter who snaffles the dough. That's the beauty of SC. More than one way to play means there is no one strategy..how well is Impromptu going this year? The year he won the whole shebang he went with an all rookie midfield. That's hardly going along with the sheep or using Gold or the Prospectus. I reckon by second guessing the masses is the only way you can win. No risk = no reward. It's just hard to jag that's all so some people will follow the herd and pat themselves on the back for being rated in the top 10k.

I don't think this is necessarily true at all.

Talking SC, suppose you had a "boring" starting team of

Goddard, Deledio, Scotland, Waters, Lake, Clarke, Bugg, Morris, Ellis
Ablett, Watson, Boyd, Greene, Shiel, McDonald, Magner, A Kennedy
Cox, Giles, Redden, Stephenson
Franklin, Sidebottom, Beams, Dangerfield, Pavlich, N Riewoldt, D Smith, Milera, Dickson

and you made all the normal but correct trade decisions (bringing in Swan after R12, J Kennedy, Birchall as first upgrades, holding off on Pendlebury, not traded out Ablett, Scotland, Waters, upgrading Giles after the byes etc. etc. and getting all the decent later rookies I mentioned in the earlier post)
then I'm fairly sure you would be in first place now. I know some other winners in other years have had fairly boring teams. The key factors with this team are the avoidance of common players who got injured and dropped in value - Fyfe, Goodes, Murphy, Pendlebury, H Shaw, Broughton being the main ones I think, plus no Martin as well. This is basically luck. You don't have to pick anyone that unusual, although semi-unusual picks like Brad Ebert or Maric would have improved this team even further.