Welcome Guest
[Log In]
[Register]

AFFL ROUND SEVENTEEN LOCKOUT:
| Welcome to AFFL. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Sign-up now and you could be the next AFFL coach! |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| Geelong + Fremantle ## | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Feb 19 2014, 10:13 PM (343 Views) | |
| Terry Bull | Feb 19 2014, 10:13 PM Post #1 |
|
Jason Laycock
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Melbourne 1st + GWS 2nd + Dom Barry + Tom Derickx -------> Geelong Matt Crouch --------> Fremantle |
![]() |
|
| Lummas | Feb 19 2014, 10:15 PM Post #2 |
|
Beau Dowler
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Confirmed |
| Dockers are loading....... | |
![]() |
|
| Spud Farmer | Feb 19 2014, 10:23 PM Post #3 |
![]()
Gavin Wanganeen's Sidekick
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
actually quite like this for freo. imo Couch will be the best scorer for the first couple of years from this years crop. (given he gets games) |
![]() |
|
| Terry Bull | Feb 19 2014, 10:40 PM Post #4 |
|
Jason Laycock
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I think Crouch has the potential to score well if he plays and is not the sub. Got a few touches in the first NAB game. Happy with my compensation. I got Crouch for pick 15 in the draft. I see Melbourne 1st being 15-18. Then get GWS 2nd and a couple of project players Edited by Terry Bull, Feb 19 2014, 10:41 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Colby | Feb 19 2014, 10:49 PM Post #5 |
|
Tom Jonas Appreciation Society
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
If Terry and Lummas can work out a deal together, I now have hope for the Middle East. Think it's an even deal though, Crouch I suspect will (at least for the early part of his career ) be the type to average 95 in DT but 85 in SC. Good player nonetheless, not sure why Terry is trading in draft picks though. |
| |
![]() |
|
| Terry Bull | Feb 19 2014, 10:56 PM Post #6 |
|
Jason Laycock
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Well now I have 3 first rounders. At this stage I don't plan on using these. Hopefully I can combine them for something decent. |
![]() |
|
| Colby | Feb 19 2014, 11:20 PM Post #7 |
|
Tom Jonas Appreciation Society
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
You mean like last year when you failed to capitalise on the picks you had?
|
| |
![]() |
|
| Terry Bull | Feb 19 2014, 11:23 PM Post #8 |
|
Jason Laycock
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I didn't feel I could get anything decent. Maybe this year I can. Who knows |
![]() |
|
| Stife | Feb 20 2014, 02:29 AM Post #9 |
|
John Meesen
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
or maybe you just overvalue picks. The market is rarely wrong. Individuals breaking from the groupthink are rarely right. |
![]() |
|
| Stoney | Feb 20 2014, 09:48 AM Post #10 |
|
David Spriggs
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
If you just follow what the crowd does, you'll get lost in the crowd. |
- 18/8/2017 | |
![]() |
|
| Colby | Feb 20 2014, 12:21 PM Post #11 |
|
Tom Jonas Appreciation Society
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I agree with the first half of your post, the second half is retarded. |
| |
![]() |
|
| Stife | Feb 20 2014, 01:04 PM Post #12 |
|
John Meesen
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I didn't mean that lol. I'm kind of saying if you try and break from the market and what it's decided is fair (as the market is essentially a collective value) you're very unlikely to win or have the market follow you. |
![]() |
|
| Colby | Feb 20 2014, 01:25 PM Post #13 |
|
Tom Jonas Appreciation Society
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
This last couple months more than ever I've become disillusioned by the term 'value' on this site and started replacing it with 'desirability' which I think more accurately reflects the market. The way some people rate their players is totally nonsensical, I've been trying to get a handle on an objective way to measure value from player to player but there just isn't. Often time 'value' on here is based on subjective factors that have little relevance to either actual or potential output of the player, like how cool a players name sounds or something as equally ridiculous. I agree that the market does usually decide the value of its commodity (the players) but in this case I've started letting other factors contribute to my valuation of a player than what would be consider the norm around here. |
| |
![]() |
|
| Lliam | Feb 21 2014, 07:28 AM Post #14 |
|
Matthew Richardson
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
"The one who follows the crowd will usuall go no further than the crowd. The one who walks alone is likely to find himself in places no one has ever been before." I think you'll appreciate that quote Stife. Bonus points if you can tell me who said it without googling it haha |
![]() |
|
| Lliam | Feb 21 2014, 07:30 AM Post #15 |
|
Matthew Richardson
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
This is the post of the year so far, and will be hard to top for me. Great stuff Colby. Since going younger with WBD I've encountered this more than ever. The word 'value' gets thrown around a hell of a lot, but as Colby says it's really 'desirability' that pumps up what some players are worth. I think it was D2C who said it a few years back, some players have the 'sexy' factor which I think it fairly similar to 'desirability'. The 'desirable' players do the flashy things and make the highlights reel, whereas other players just go about their business and get the job done. Even if those two players are very similar score wise and average wise, the more 'desirable' player will always attract a higher price. |
![]() |
|
| Stoney | Feb 21 2014, 08:18 AM Post #16 |
|
David Spriggs
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
To me, value is the flow-on effect of desireability. The more people who desire your player, the more value or net worth that player has when you're negotiating. There's a time and place for both terms. |
- 18/8/2017 | |
![]() |
|
| Stife | Feb 21 2014, 11:52 AM Post #17 |
|
John Meesen
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Stoney nails it for mine. Value is the sum of all the factors that indicate a players true worth. As well, I'm about to finish a degree in economics I see the whole process of value as merely an economic process here. It's how I've approached it and, well, given that I'm probably one of the bottom 2-3 coaches here in actual negotiating skill, it's probably why I've generally had reasonable results - well outside the bottom 2-3. Performance is one factor in value. Positioning another, age another. Desirability is like a primary factor in value while the others are all secondary factors though. Desirability is a product of every of the above factors (and other stupid ones like 'how high someone can jump, their name, their skin colour, hairstyle, style of play, look etc.'), and yeah, there are some situations where there's low desirability so the secondary factors kind of form the players market worth (priddis and boyd are good examples I'd say) in most situations desirability is a conclusion drawn from plenty of different factors that serves to increase value. Consider it like bonus points, I guess. The players with none of it have 'base' market value, while the same player with a lot of it has an inflated one. I'd probably say Tom Nicholls is a pretty desirable player for many here. Matt Priddis isn't. But there's probably very little chance I wouldn't take Priddis over Nicholls. I'm not sure if any of that makes sense and it's probably waffle as per usual but that's how I see it. As for why people always pick the more desirable player - at the end of the day, at least for me, this is still a fantasy game so I like to fill my team with players I actually like and watch them grow with a more vested interest. I much prefer rooting for players I like than those I don't like. |
![]() |
|
| Lummas | Feb 21 2014, 11:54 AM Post #18 |
|
Beau Dowler
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Good deal terry easy talks thanks pal hope you use the picks or trade them either way easy deal. |
| Dockers are loading....... | |
![]() |
|
| Colby | Feb 21 2014, 03:28 PM Post #19 |
|
Tom Jonas Appreciation Society
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Agree with this actually, my post was probably a little bit too black and white for what's an incredibly subjective topic. I'm sort of basing my opinion on recentish trade talks where coaches have told me my offer was shit because their players had more 'value' than mine when if judging my the objective factors that SHOULD go into player 'value' that's clearly not the case. I think now more than ever a lot of emphasis has been placed in subjective 'value' over the objective factors that in my opinion should be the most important when determining player worth. It's fine for people to think that way, if we all thought the exact same of every player we'd all only want like 20% of the total player pool, there's just a few coaches in particular who I think need to reign back a bit when it comes to this. |
| |
![]() |
|
| Colby | Feb 21 2014, 03:32 PM Post #20 |
|
Tom Jonas Appreciation Society
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I mean, remember when Lummas talked up Shaun Edwards because he "moves across the ground quietly" ?? I get that everyone was the right to determine the worth of their own commodities, but sometimes that valuation is completely nonsensical. |
| |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Official Trades · Next Topic » |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
6:20 PM Jul 11
|




![]](http://z1.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)





6:20 PM Jul 11