Comments on: Article #3 – The New Rule http://www.footytragic.com/blog/tuneys-tuition/article-3-the-new-rule/ Tragically obsessed with AFL Dream Team & SuperCoach Fri, 10 Feb 2012 04:53:11 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.1 By: Dan http://www.footytragic.com/blog/tuneys-tuition/article-3-the-new-rule/comment-page-1/#comment-716 Dan Thu, 11 Feb 2010 12:16:21 +0000 http://www.footytragic.com/?p=1138#comment-716 Oops, the increased cap is more of a SC comment. Regardless, it's a lot easier to fit more guns in from the start this year... Oops, the increased cap is more of a SC comment. Regardless, it’s a lot easier to fit more guns in from the start this year…

]]> By: Dan http://www.footytragic.com/blog/tuneys-tuition/article-3-the-new-rule/comment-page-1/#comment-715 Dan Thu, 11 Feb 2010 12:14:25 +0000 http://www.footytragic.com/?p=1138#comment-715 There's so much value this year and the increased cap makes it so easy to load up on premiums, but I prefer having more room to move early in the season. I couldn't see myself committing to four premiums from Round 1 because I want to have more control how I shape my midfield. To some extent a starting line-up is a bit more of a crap shoot. There’s so much value this year and the increased cap makes it so easy to load up on premiums, but I prefer having more room to move early in the season. I couldn’t see myself committing to four premiums from Round 1 because I want to have more control how I shape my midfield. To some extent a starting line-up is a bit more of a crap shoot.

]]> By: Toby http://www.footytragic.com/blog/tuneys-tuition/article-3-the-new-rule/comment-page-1/#comment-714 Toby Thu, 11 Feb 2010 12:03:34 +0000 http://www.footytragic.com/?p=1138#comment-714 I've gone the four elites at this stage... My thought process is that the elite mids are always going to score me the highest points... Plus, im finding it impossible to drop one of them! Doing so would free up stacks of cash though! So many decisions - it will be good to study the NAB cup and see who is really worth it and which rookies will be worth starting on the field... I’ve gone the four elites at this stage… My thought process is that the elite mids are always going to score me the highest points… Plus, im finding it impossible to drop one of them! Doing so would free up stacks of cash though! So many decisions – it will be good to study the NAB cup and see who is really worth it and which rookies will be worth starting on the field…

]]> By: Dan http://www.footytragic.com/blog/tuneys-tuition/article-3-the-new-rule/comment-page-1/#comment-713 Dan Thu, 11 Feb 2010 11:36:33 +0000 http://www.footytragic.com/?p=1138#comment-713 The only thing that scares me with McLean is his body. That said, my structure doesn't really dictate that I take someone in his price range at this stage. I have three elites, McVeigh and two rookies. I'm kinda glad that I don't have to be tempted by him, because I recognise that he could go bang in a big way, but I'm shit scared he could be only good for 15 games. Ben, I can still end up with Danger in my forward line. Just because I start him in my mids (hypothetically), doesn't mean he ends up there. With so many quality fwd/mid players that are injury risks it's not unreasonable to expect one of them to go down. I would just have cover for that. Instead of sideways trading to another forward, I can use their price tag to get a gun mid if I've got someone to sub them for. The only thing that scares me with McLean is his body. That said, my structure doesn’t really dictate that I take someone in his price range at this stage. I have three elites, McVeigh and two rookies. I’m kinda glad that I don’t have to be tempted by him, because I recognise that he could go bang in a big way, but I’m shit scared he could be only good for 15 games.

Ben, I can still end up with Danger in my forward line. Just because I start him in my mids (hypothetically), doesn’t mean he ends up there. With so many quality fwd/mid players that are injury risks it’s not unreasonable to expect one of them to go down. I would just have cover for that. Instead of sideways trading to another forward, I can use their price tag to get a gun mid if I’ve got someone to sub them for.

]]> By: Toby http://www.footytragic.com/blog/tuneys-tuition/article-3-the-new-rule/comment-page-1/#comment-711 Toby Thu, 11 Feb 2010 08:42:54 +0000 http://www.footytragic.com/?p=1138#comment-711 I have played a bit with this rule today around my rookies - the main time i can see it worthwhile for me this year. Looking at rookies such as Davis, Trengrove, Farmer, Moore, Lobbe, Rohan, Talia, etc... all of whom can be switched between a couple of positions. They are the types of players who wont play 22 games and therefore it is more likely you may need to replace them using the new rule (the switcheroo) for a week or two! Swapping premium players (As tuney described above with his Didak example) is not as likely to be needed I have played a bit with this rule today around my rookies – the main time i can see it worthwhile for me this year. Looking at rookies such as Davis, Trengrove, Farmer, Moore, Lobbe, Rohan, Talia, etc… all of whom can be switched between a couple of positions. They are the types of players who wont play 22 games and therefore it is more likely you may need to replace them using the new rule (the switcheroo) for a week or two! Swapping premium players (As tuney described above with his Didak example) is not as likely to be needed

]]> By: Ben http://www.footytragic.com/blog/tuneys-tuition/article-3-the-new-rule/comment-page-1/#comment-709 Ben Thu, 11 Feb 2010 06:37:29 +0000 http://www.footytragic.com/?p=1138#comment-709 Dan, As much as I love Dangerfield, I'd still prefer him in my forward line rather than as my 5th midfielder. If I choose Dangerfield in the midfield, I'm still costing myself a quality midfielder either around the same price or even one at a cheaper price (Scully, Trengove, Martin etc). It's the same story with Luke Hodge, I'd prefer him in defence. What I do like about this rule is the way it divides opinion and creates robust discussion. Dan,

As much as I love Dangerfield, I’d still prefer him in my forward line rather than as my 5th midfielder.

If I choose Dangerfield in the midfield, I’m still costing myself a quality midfielder either around the same price or even one at a cheaper price (Scully, Trengove, Martin etc). It’s the same story with Luke Hodge, I’d prefer him in defence.

What I do like about this rule is the way it divides opinion and creates robust discussion.

]]> By: Chad http://www.footytragic.com/blog/tuneys-tuition/article-3-the-new-rule/comment-page-1/#comment-706 Chad Thu, 11 Feb 2010 03:24:15 +0000 http://www.footytragic.com/?p=1138#comment-706 palmer 277 mcveigh 268 redden 265 hill 255 frontbum 254 crowley 242 young 230 sloane 175 think there is potential in each to be value (and an easy upgrade). Picking which 1-2 of these though is the challenge. McVeigh being suspended doesn't help either. palmer 277
mcveigh 268
redden 265
hill 255
frontbum 254
crowley 242
young 230
sloane 175

think there is potential in each to be value (and an easy upgrade). Picking which 1-2 of these though is the challenge. McVeigh being suspended doesn’t help either.

]]> By: Toby http://www.footytragic.com/blog/tuneys-tuition/article-3-the-new-rule/comment-page-1/#comment-704 Toby Wed, 10 Feb 2010 11:33:05 +0000 http://www.footytragic.com/?p=1138#comment-704 Dan, skipping past your comments on the new rule, i noticed in your comment that you are looking at McLean and McVeigh - not massive news, but both just seem so much like players you wouldnt normally consider... I've got Spike in my team at the moment and am toying with McLean (scared he will be used purely as an inside mid to free up Judd ala Hadley), can i ask you your thoughts on those two? Farmer im very tempted by too... We need to have our Footy Tragic dinner to blow out all the off-season cobwebs! haha Dan, skipping past your comments on the new rule, i noticed in your comment that you are looking at McLean and McVeigh – not massive news, but both just seem so much like players you wouldnt normally consider… I’ve got Spike in my team at the moment and am toying with McLean (scared he will be used purely as an inside mid to free up Judd ala Hadley), can i ask you your thoughts on those two? Farmer im very tempted by too… We need to have our Footy Tragic dinner to blow out all the off-season cobwebs! haha

]]> By: Dan http://www.footytragic.com/blog/tuneys-tuition/article-3-the-new-rule/comment-page-1/#comment-703 Dan Wed, 10 Feb 2010 11:22:49 +0000 http://www.footytragic.com/?p=1138#comment-703 No doubt based on my previous comments you know that I'll completely disagree. I'm not going to litter my starting squad with dual position players for the sake of it, because to be honest without even considering this rule I had already picked nine dual position players. That's seriously without even considering the rule. Admittedly none were picked in my midfield, but there are plenty of reasons to give myself this flexibility. Just say I put Hodge in as my fourth mid, instead of my third back. Currently I have Mark McVeigh as my fourth mid. Yeah, Hodgey is worth more, but he would actually score more. Later in the year if Mitch Farmer starts getting a game for Richmond (likely IMO) I can trade Farmer into my back line and then sub him for Hodgey. All of a sudden Hodgey is a mainstay in my back line. Just because I start him in the mids doesn't mean he ends that way and early in the season you naturally accept lower averages anyway. Besides, I anticipate Hodgey will actually outscore most $367K midfield options anyway, apart from maybe McLean. I can start him there and move him back later. I love that this rule gives us the flexibility in trading more than anything. I feel this allows me to pick up guys with bigger injury risks. Not that I'd start him at his starting price, but Chappy becomes an option to trade in and I have never had him in DT. If his price dips and I trade him into my forward line if I've got a MID/FWD player in my midfield then if Chappy goes down then I can use his $400K+ price tag to bring in an elite midfielder. Not that you'd want to waste two trades on one player, but it's a risk/reward game you can play with a stud like Chappy, while having a bit more peace of mind. You guys are playing down the likelihood of all of these events happening, but they're more likely than I reckon you are saying. There's heaps of attractive dual position prospects that are bigger risks to miss games. Sylvia, Hodge, Didak, Chappy, Pav, Higgins, Boomer. You don't even need to put an elite dual position player into your midfield to give yourself flexibility. Starting someone like Dangerfield as a 4th of 5th mid opens up a world of flexibility without necessarily compromising points with whoever else you were going to have in that spot. No doubt based on my previous comments you know that I’ll completely disagree. I’m not going to litter my starting squad with dual position players for the sake of it, because to be honest without even considering this rule I had already picked nine dual position players. That’s seriously without even considering the rule.

Admittedly none were picked in my midfield, but there are plenty of reasons to give myself this flexibility. Just say I put Hodge in as my fourth mid, instead of my third back. Currently I have Mark McVeigh as my fourth mid. Yeah, Hodgey is worth more, but he would actually score more.

Later in the year if Mitch Farmer starts getting a game for Richmond (likely IMO) I can trade Farmer into my back line and then sub him for Hodgey. All of a sudden Hodgey is a mainstay in my back line. Just because I start him in the mids doesn’t mean he ends that way and early in the season you naturally accept lower averages anyway. Besides, I anticipate Hodgey will actually outscore most $367K midfield options anyway, apart from maybe McLean. I can start him there and move him back later.

I love that this rule gives us the flexibility in trading more than anything. I feel this allows me to pick up guys with bigger injury risks. Not that I’d start him at his starting price, but Chappy becomes an option to trade in and I have never had him in DT. If his price dips and I trade him into my forward line if I’ve got a MID/FWD player in my midfield then if Chappy goes down then I can use his $400K+ price tag to bring in an elite midfielder. Not that you’d want to waste two trades on one player, but it’s a risk/reward game you can play with a stud like Chappy, while having a bit more peace of mind.

You guys are playing down the likelihood of all of these events happening, but they’re more likely than I reckon you are saying. There’s heaps of attractive dual position prospects that are bigger risks to miss games. Sylvia, Hodge, Didak, Chappy, Pav, Higgins, Boomer. You don’t even need to put an elite dual position player into your midfield to give yourself flexibility. Starting someone like Dangerfield as a 4th of 5th mid opens up a world of flexibility without necessarily compromising points with whoever else you were going to have in that spot.

]]> By: DAZZLER http://www.footytragic.com/blog/tuneys-tuition/article-3-the-new-rule/comment-page-1/#comment-702 DAZZLER Wed, 10 Feb 2010 10:12:33 +0000 http://www.footytragic.com/?p=1138#comment-702 I for one have have formed my team 100% on merit and not by this rule, as I feel it will persuade you to pick shyte players you "REALLY" don't want just to cover trades.. If you have done your homework correctly at the start of the year and use your trades wisely during the year, you should not need this rule.. I have never had a O, nor have I ever run out of trades.. By the way, I finished 298th last year, so my comment would hopefully carry merit.. I am only saying this as a piece of advice to hopefully help others realize, pick the best team AVAILABLE !!! The way I manage my team is: *Save 6 trades for your finals,(to upgrade or cover injuries)... *NEVER trade after round 1(you have studied form all pre season, do not judge on one bad round *Doing this leaves you with 14 trades to do 17 rounds,you just need to be wise... Hope this helps people in my way of thinking... GOOD LUCK TO ALL !!!! I for one have have formed my team 100% on merit and not by this rule, as I feel it will persuade you to pick shyte players you “REALLY” don’t want just to cover trades..
If you have done your homework correctly at the start of the year and use your trades wisely during the year, you should not need this rule..
I have never had a O, nor have I ever run out of trades..
By the way, I finished 298th last year, so my comment would hopefully carry merit..
I am only saying this as a piece of advice to hopefully help others realize, pick the best team AVAILABLE !!!
The way I manage my team is:

*Save 6 trades for your finals,(to upgrade or cover injuries)…

*NEVER trade after round 1(you have studied form all pre season, do not judge on one bad round

*Doing this leaves you with 14 trades to do 17 rounds,you just need to be wise…
Hope this helps people in my way of thinking…
GOOD LUCK TO ALL !!!!

]]>