Dunkley was a great get for you.
Jake Stringer and Jordan Roughead now premiership players.
Commiserations to Cal Mills. His time will likely come around again.
I have worked through the thread and I think the main issues raised are as follows:
-determining positions / ruck position / combating zeros
-number of keepers and starting line up
To keep it simple and cleaner I will do a separate post for these issues.
If there is something else that you would really like changed please raise it ASAP
I have worked through the thread and I think the main issues raised are as follows:-determining positions / ruck position / combating zeros
-number of keepers and starting line upTo keep it simple and cleaner I will do a separate post for these issues.
If there is something else that you would really like changed please raise it ASAP
- Smooth's self indulgent reports and choking in GFs.
- Lack of Seedsman times.
Player Positions
I have taken this quote from The Melkman and used this as a starting point because I think it makes sense.
“I think using UF positions by and large is the answer, but if we had a list of rucks which were approved by the majority that could work”
Number of 0s scored
Overall for the season there were 125 0s across the 19 rounds compared with 174 last year (I have excluded finals). I also checked 2014 and 2013 where we had 140 and 125 0s respectively during the first 19 rounds. Please remember that we used our own player positions in 2013. Based on this I think it is safe to say no matter which method of player position allocation we use there are always going to be issues in relation to 0s. However I think you have to assume that the ruck relief rule did lead to some improvement this year, but I think we can still improve this.
Ruck Position Eligiblity
You might be surprised, but I have been giving this a lot of thought. As I have mentioned a number of times we are caught in somewhat of a perfect storm in that having an 18 team fantasy competition makes it hard for all teams to have a ruckman given a number AFL teams are tending to run with only 1 recognised ruckman. I think we all agree that the ‘ruck replacement rule’ had a number of issues. Also last year I determined that there is no statistical way of working out who should be included as a number of mids have higher hit out numbers. So really the only way to fix this issue is to look at the way AFL footy is played and increase allocations accordingly.
Therefore I propose that we pre-designate a number of players who in reality ‘pinch hit’ for their AFL teams. This allocation would be decided in coming weeks and who is included is open for discussion, although I don’t think we should be arguing the merits of every player. Also for greater continuity I think all players currently eligible as a R should remain so even if UF reclassify them for 2017.
I have listed the pros can cons of this proposal below, as well as initial suggestions for inclusion.
Advantages are:
-more rucks available to the pool
-adopting it now before trades kick off means all coaches have time to shape their lists accordingly
-decreases potential 0s
-it is transparent and leaves no room for debate
-replace the contentious ruck replacement rule meaning if a coach doesn’t have a ruck they get a 0
Disadvantages
-decreases the value of actual ruckman
-selection is not necessary based on a statistical finding more just a perception of who fills the second ruck void for their AFL club
On this basis I have come up with 24 additional players who I think should be classsed as ruckman for BBFFL#2 purposes in 2017. These 24 are as follows:
Jeremy McGovern
Sam Rowe
Alex Pearce
Harris Andrews
Zaine Cordy
Nick Riewoldt
Justin Westhoff
Jesse White
Ben Griffiths
Charlie Dixon
Josh Jenkins
Cameron Pedersen
Josh Walker
Josh Bruce
Fraser McInnes
Joe Daniher
Matt Taberner
Tom Boyd
Ben Brown
Dougal Howard
Peter Wright
Jack Fitzpatrick (current BF but should have R allocation)
Drew Petrie
Ty Vickery
Note Jack Watts was not considered given he is already dual position.
In summary I think UF positions with a slight amount of tinkering for the ruck position is the best outcome possible at this stage.
Ruckman by BBFFL#2 Team
Based on the above proposals the number of ruck eligible players for each coach are as follows:
I dont mind that, although I’m not sure about Nick Reiwoldt getting a R.
Happy with the list in general.
I’d be hesitant to add Nick Riewoldt in particular, given how high profile/scoring he is and given he’s clearly predominantly a fwd or mid.
I feel like in general there are enough ruck listed players. Just some teams make them a priority and others don’t. If a modification was made in this regard I’d only approve of players basically being pre-approved for ruck relief prior to draft and only if you have a realistic ruck option that is injured or something.
I’d also prefer we moved back to having 1 less midfield position in favour of a utility position even if we did something like say the utility can’t be a ruck to avoid ruck hoarding.
Lets be honest, 3/4 of that list aint ruckman
Infact, the only ones imo who would have half decent claims, are tom boyd, fitzpatrick, and Joe. Maybe vickery too
I think rucks should just go on dream team or supercoach positions tbh. Just my opinion
completely against any change at all and we are getting ahead of ourselves here.
Before any change should be able to be made or even debated, a vote should be held. Only then if it is carried should the discussion go any further.
I will elaborate further later but this competition is and has always been based off the majority and this issue (there actually is no issue) is no different.
Number of Keepers
I firmly believe that 20 keepers from a squad of 30 provides the best balance for all coaches in the competition. It provides those coaches up the top an opportunity to keep the majority of their players whilst also seeing them delist 10 players that go back into the draft pool, which should act as an ‘equalisation measure’. Those coaches down the bottom are also given the opportunity to keep a number of developing players in order to help propel them back up the ladder.
Personally I don’t believe the concept of cutting players was meant to be easy – it is a challenge which is one of the great things about this comp. As I was trawling back to find something today I stumbled on a comment from Birch who regretting cutting Aaron Hall at the start of 2015 and I am sure we all have made similar choices which we regret in hindsight.
Other considerations
We have already have a number of coaches trade away picks for this upcoming season so it would be impractical to implement any change for 2017. Otherwise it could be seen to compromise the draft. For example WOB won the flag by aggressive trading in the mid season period but currently only holds 7 draft picks. Therefore it is conceivable that he would be advantaged by holding onto more players and using few draft picks.
Also I would argue that coaches would be less willing to trade players given they can just hold their squads for as long as they want. The value of draft picks could also be seen to decrease given we will basically be fighting over first year players and a few scraps meaning teams will be less willing to trade for picks.
Other than the trade periods the most interactive time for the league is the draft. Increasing the number of keepers would mean fewer draft picks are taken meaning less interaction, which is a negative for the league.
Some have raised the possibility of having a variance to how many keepers everyone gets. However I think this just further complicates things and creates problems with trading and drafting.
Therefore my strong recommendation is that the keepers remain at 20 and if any change is to be made it could not be done until next season.
Potential for Rookie Keeper Place
I don’t mind the compromise of allowing coaches to keep an additional player outside of their 20 keepers on the basis they are a first year player. I haven’t got the perfect answer for how this would work, but my thinking is that we could allow one first year player to be kept in addition to the 20 keepers and the primary list of 30. The compromise to this would be that you would only be allowed to carry one LTI. Happy to hear what the thoughts are on this one or other suggestions.
Player Positions
To me this is a no brainer - no change at this stage. We have only just moved to the current configuration and to change again would be premature. Teams have traded and drafted accordingly and therefore we just let it play out. The original reason for changing the setup was to match the UF positions and I think we have achieved this bar the ruck issue which I am hoping we can overcome. A move away from the 5-7-5-1 would arguably lead to more zeros as we are in effect replenishing the C pool while draining the B and particularly F pool.
Ruck Issue
Riewoldt was clearly an outlier. I have a feeling he will be a FC next year under UF positioning anyway.
Ok to make this completely democratic lets run a vote with the following options:
- Only use UF positions - therefore coaches trade and draft accordingly
- Modify players with R eligibilty based on votes
- Continue to use ruck relief rules
- Another option - please explain…
Happy to accept votes as a PM or a post on the board.
Other rules of the vote is that the option with the most votes is accepted by the league as the final decision for 2016. In the event of a tie all coaches will be given the option of changing their intial vote before the final decision is made. In the event of a tie the higher number option will provail.
Personally my vote is for 1
1
1
Number of KeepersSorry Redbull, but I disagree with your reasoning completely. I was accused (in a roundabout way) of cheating on here, some time ago, for not being able to field a full team for one whole week (1st round of that year). The teams down the bottom cannot afford to hang onto their young players as players on their lists don't get games as consistently as others. 20 keepers only leaves little scope for building a competitive list as every season is like a mini re-build. Forcing teams to discard 10 players does nothing to help the bottom sides as the top sides are only cutting average to poor players anyway. As far as waiting another year, some of us have been asking for this for quite some time, and the numbers are increasing. Instead of standing toe to toe, arguing about this, we should just have a vote. I assume majority still rules in this comp?I firmly believe that 20 keepers from a squad of 30 provides the best balance for all coaches in the competition. It provides those coaches up the top an opportunity to keep the majority of their players whilst also seeing them delist 10 players that go back into the draft pool, which should act as an ‘equalisation measure’. Those coaches down the bottom are also given the opportunity to keep a number of developing players in order to help propel them back up the ladder.
Personally I don’t believe the concept of cutting players was meant to be easy – it is a challenge which is one of the great things about this comp. As I was trawling back to find something today I stumbled on a comment from Birch who regretting cutting Aaron Hall at the start of 2015 and I am sure we all have made similar choices which we regret in hindsight.
Other considerations
We have already have a number of coaches trade away picks for this upcoming season so it would be impractical to implement any change for 2017. Otherwise it could be seen to compromise the draft. For example WOB won the flag by aggressive trading in the mid season period but currently only holds 7 draft picks. Therefore it is conceivable that he would be advantaged by holding onto more players and using few draft picks.Also I would argue that coaches would be less willing to trade players given they can just hold their squads for as long as they want. The value of draft picks could also be seen to decrease given we will basically be fighting over first year players and a few scraps meaning teams will be less willing to trade for picks.
Other than the trade periods the most interactive time for the league is the draft. Increasing the number of keepers would mean fewer draft picks are taken meaning less interaction, which is a negative for the league.
Some have raised the possibility of having a variance to how many keepers everyone gets. However I think this just further complicates things and creates problems with trading and drafting.
Therefore my strong recommendation is that the keepers remain at 20 and if any change is to be made it could not be done until next season.
Potential for Rookie Keeper Place
I don’t mind the compromise of allowing coaches to keep an additional player outside of their 20 keepers on the basis they are a first year player. I haven’t got the perfect answer for how this would work, but my thinking is that we could allow one first year player to be kept in addition to the 20 keepers and the primary list of 30. The compromise to this would be that you would only be allowed to carry one LTI. Happy to hear what the thoughts are on this one or other suggestions.
Didn’t like the ruck relief rule and never used it, when Tippett went down, I struggled a little, but I accept that as my back ups were either fringe, injured or ■■■■, just bad luck.
I’m also with Bewick based on the numbers issue as I am trying to build a youngish competitive side for the future and getting rid of ten does hurt. Didn’t want to lose Jarryd Lyons last season and that hasn’t hurt me at all!
Im not sure that those of us pursuing the young gun rebuild pathway (and i’m one) can get too antsy that the comp structure makes such a strategy hard. Rather, we probably need to mollify the full kids build a bit to suit the reality that one year often isnt enough time. Sometimes two or three isnt enough.
Not sure how the ‘1st year player’ lti spot would work. It’d have to be a "starting his second year player " to begin with. And is the comp happy for me to list Francis, Hopper or Mills outside the 20 keepers? Tbh, i think if i pick these kids i need to evaluate how long i give them but expect to carry them for a few years just like every coach needs to do with 3rd,4th,5th year players etc. I kept Corey Ellis last year. He bombed out. Now my job is to work out why and the likelihood he bounces back. I chose this strategy and this is part and parcel of it.
At the other end, WOB didnt steal his 85point average geriatrics. We collectively traded them to him. Hes done it beautifully. But whilst im pondering on Ellis, he needs to look at how many of his are about to go over the cliff and which ones they may be. Unless we all trade him another batch of ever so slightly younger guns for another tilt.
I havent figured out the balancing act of becoming good for multiple years just yet. But i think it needs to be done under a 20 keeper framework for the overall benefit of the League.