Small or Far Away, Father Dougal on Cows
Hi Everybody!
This week, we are all interested in the future, for that is where you and I are going to spend the rest of our lives.
Was that you and I?
Or You and I?
I think he meant me!
No, me!
Technically, only the Hamster and I are alive.
What! You, that, you….pout, sulk.
Yay It was me!
Already off topic, well done guys. So, the future….
I made a meme!
About the future?
Yes, about Supercoach and the future even!
Wow, ok, let’s see it.
My First Meme:
Harsh.
But, write down the date, The Hamster is correct.
Yay!
We can’t get past points. That might be good, or might be bad, but all previous scores are only useful as clues to future scores.
Yeah, don’t we all know that?
Sort of. A very common thing people talk about when trading in is “Top 8 defender/Forward” or “Top 10 Mid” or “Top 3 Ruck”. Like, will the guy you want to bring in be a Top 8 Midfielder?
Yeah, so?
Wrong question.
Really, it sounds like a good question. Pray tell why it is the wrong question.
Because the top 10 ranking mids at the end of the year include the points that have already been scored and we will not get.
Oh…
The real question is, “Will they be a top 10 midfielder from now on?”
Or top whatever for the other positions.
Right. That question alone is not enough, there is also the matter of price. Floating premiums are going to cost more per point, while fallen premiums are going to cost less per point. There are probably a half dozen or more guys who will score about 115 a week from here on out, but some will be priced over 115 and some under.
Which is obvious?
Probably yeah. But at the start of the season when we talk about a players season average and start them, we will get all the points if you buy and hold. Right now, if, say McCluggage has a final average of 122 a match that means he has gone for 120.4 from here on out.
Not bad at all!
Indeed, hard to complain, and costs $286.4 per point.
Lets say Josh DUnkley also ends the season at 122 per match. That means he will be going for 122.7 the rest of the season.
Better, but not a “Hugh” amount better
(Pained squeak)
And those points cost you $262.5 each.
So, assuming they both end the season at a 122 average, McCluggage cost you $620,700 for 2,167 points, and Dunkley would cost you $579,900 for 2,209 points. Which means Dunkley costs less for more points.
Which is nice, but again sort of obvious?
We have all known about fallen premiums for years, and now we all know about floating premiums, so, this is a nice reminder but really, a whole column on this?
Uh…..
No, of course not. There is something else I was planning to talk about….
Does it live in Canada?
Anyways, that example is secretly flawed.
And you used it!
Yeah, so I could go on to this part! The flaw is me picking a number that worked for my example which looks ok given their current averages, but may not be really. Five games is still a small data sample.
How do we know how reasonable such a guess is?
First we look at their age. To sum up, players over 27 are past the point of natural progression. Players over 30 are likely to start regressing. Players over 21 are much more likely to be getting better. Peak first uber-premo scoring age is 23-25 with 22 and 26 not out of the question, and 27 rare.
Second we look at how they are doing compared to their previous year and their previous best.
Then we look at them both together. McCluggage is 27 and averaging 122 for the season would be an 18 point jump from his previous best. His five season average is about 100. So, that’s not encouraging. But, then we have to ask, has something changed that could explain that big of a jump being real?
Like if one of his teammates was no longer hoovering up the midfield points?
Could be. Of Course there are some Ashcrofts scoring well and taking points now too.
Why’d you have to go and make things so complicated?
I didn’t make them that way, they just are. So, would I get McCluggage in now for his price? No, too big a risk for me. Has to be better value out there both cost and cost per point.
How about Dunkley?
He is 28 with a career high of 115. So, not insane that he could end up on 122, but still, I feel he has a range of around 112 to 122, so he is at the higher end. Not as many better buys as from McCluggage, for one thing Dunkley looks a better buy compared to McCluggage, but yeah, not thrilled about him at his current price.
Staying with that midfield, Will Ashcroft?
Well, he is 20, and a 111 average at 20 is rare, but Oliver had a 114 average at 20. So, would I buy him, no, but I sure would not rush to sell him.
A conclusion?
Try to be sane and realistic about the whole “average from here on out thing.” There are far fewer obviously floating premiums, but there are still some to avoid just as there are fallen premiums to target.
Defenders
Wow. Play on field and enjoy the price rises
Z Reid | ||||
Week | Score | Price | Proj. Change | Total Proj |
0 | 119,900 | |||
1 | 45 | 119,900 | ||
2 | 36 | 119,900 | ||
3 | 88 | 119,900 | ||
4 | 163,100 | |||
5 | 104 | 163,100 | ||
6 | 68.3 | 220,700 | ||
7 | 68.3 | 278,520 | 57,820 | 57,820 |
8 | 68.3 | 312,610 | 34,091 | 91,910 |
9 | 68.3 | 322,053 | 9,442 | 101,353 |
10 | 68.3 | 329,046 | 6,993 | 108,346 |
11 | 68.3 | 334,225 | 5,179 | 113,525 |
12 | 68.3 | 338,061 | 3,836 | 117,361 |
Wow. Play on field and enjoy the price rises 2, Richmond Boogaloo.
Trainor | ||||
Week | Score | Price | Proj. Change | Total Proj |
0 | 133,500 | |||
1 | 50 | 133,500 | ||
2 | 24 | 133,500 | ||
3 | 90 | 133,500 | ||
4 | 82 | 156,200 | ||
5 | 80 | 201,400 | ||
6 | 65.2 | 259,500 | ||
7 | 65.2 | 292,644 | 33,144 | 33,144 |
8 | 65.2 | 309,763 | 17,119 | 50,263 |
9 | 65.2 | 315,898 | 6,135 | 56,398 |
10 | 65.2 | 320,442 | 4,544 | 60,942 |
11 | 65.2 | 323,808 | 3,365 | 64,308 |
12 | 65.2 | 326,300 | 2,493 | 66,800 |
Very blah scoring. If he blahs up again, could go next week.
Prior | ||||
Week | Score | Price | Proj. Change | Total Proj |
0 | 169,200 | |||
1 | 50 | 169,200 | ||
2 | 57 | 169,200 | ||
3 | 78 | 169,200 | ||
4 | 163,100 | |||
5 | 54 | 163,100 | ||
6 | 59.8 | 235,500 | ||
7 | 59.8 | 259,195 | 23,695 | 23,695 |
8 | 59.8 | 268,676 | 9,480 | 33,176 |
9 | 59.8 | 278,239 | 9,564 | 42,739 |
10 | 59.8 | 285,322 | 7,083 | 49,822 |
11 | 59.8 | 290,568 | 5,246 | 55,068 |
12 | 59.8 | 294,453 | 3,885 | 58,953 |
What is there to say. Own him, play him on field, going to make so much money and score so many points. (Knock on wood)
Bice | ||||
Week | Score | Price | Proj. Change | Total Proj |
0 | 113,500 | |||
1 | 52 | 113,500 | ||
2 | 96 | 113,500 | ||
3 | 113,500 | |||
4 | 124 | 113,500 | ||
5 | 89 | 203,400 | ||
6 | 90.3 | 286,100 | ||
7 | 90.3 | 345,968 | 59,868 | 59,868 |
8 | 90.3 | 375,386 | 29,418 | 89,286 |
9 | 90.3 | 397,726 | 22,340 | 111,626 |
10 | 90.3 | 414,272 | 16,546 | 128,172 |
11 | 90.3 | 426,526 | 12,254 | 140,426 |
12 | 90.3 | 435,602 | 9,076 | 149,502 |
Owch. Still had money to make, and might spike gain.
Connor O’Sullivan | ||||
Week | Score | Price | Proj. Change | Total Proj |
0 | 148,700 | |||
1 | 48 | 148,700 | ||
2 | 88 | 148,700 | ||
3 | 77 | 148,700 | ||
4 | 103 | 203,900 | ||
5 | 42 | 268,200 | ||
6 | 71.6 | 296,788 | 28,588 | 28,588 |
7 | 71.6 | 315,573 | 18,785 | 47,373 |
8 | 71.6 | 315,604 | 30 | 47,404 |
9 | 71.6 | 328,713 | 13,109 | 60,513 |
10 | 71.6 | 338,422 | 9,709 | 70,222 |
11 | 71.6 | 345,613 | 7,191 | 77,413 |
12 | 71.6 | 350,939 | 5,326 | 82,739 |
Does have a job.
Finn O’Sullivan | ||||
Week | Score | Price | Proj. Change | Total Proj |
0 | 199,000 | |||
1 | 51 | 199,000 | ||
2 | 42 | 199,000 | ||
3 | 44 | 199,000 | ||
4 | 207,400 | |||
5 | 69 | 207,400 | ||
6 | 51.5 | 221,200 | ||
7 | 51.5 | 236,556 | 15,356 | 15,356 |
8 | 51.5 | 251,245 | 14,689 | 30,045 |
9 | 51.5 | 254,387 | 3,142 | 33,187 |
10 | 51.5 | 256,714 | 2,327 | 35,514 |
11 | 51.5 | 258,438 | 1,723 | 37,238 |
12 | 51.5 | 259,714 | 1,276 | 38,514 |
Midfielders
Hate Cats cows. No bleeping idea what to suggest.
Knevitt | ||||
Week | Score | Price | Proj. Change | Total Proj |
0 | 145,800 | |||
1 | 82 | 145,800 | ||
2 | 58 | 145,800 | ||
3 | 20 | 145,800 | ||
4 | 181,200 | |||
5 | 50 | 181,200 | ||
6 | 52.5 | 189,900 | ||
7 | 52.5 | 194,805 | 4,905 | 4,905 |
8 | 52.5 | 212,807 | 18,002 | 22,907 |
9 | 52.5 | 227,246 | 14,438 | 37,346 |
10 | 52.5 | 237,939 | 10,693 | 48,039 |
11 | 52.5 | 245,859 | 7,920 | 55,959 |
12 | 52.5 | 251,724 | 5,866 | 61,824 |
Well. Huh. I’d hold and hope for another spike score. Not sure why the drop in scoring.
M Reid | ||||
Week | Score | Price | Proj. Change | Total Proj |
0 | 131,500 | |||
1 | 50 | 131,500 | ||
2 | 75 | 131,500 | ||
3 | 106 | 131,500 | ||
4 | 73 | 199,100 | ||
5 | 58 | 258,500 | ||
6 | 72.4 | 294,900 | ||
7 | 72.4 | 308,339 | 13,439 | 13,439 |
8 | 72.4 | 318,027 | 9,688 | 23,127 |
9 | 72.4 | 331,569 | 13,542 | 36,669 |
10 | 72.4 | 341,598 | 10,029 | 46,698 |
11 | 72.4 | 349,026 | 7,428 | 54,126 |
12 | 72.4 | 354,528 | 5,501 | 59,628 |
Sadly, I did not mess up his off week, he has a 64 BE.
Lindsay | ||||
Week | Score | Price | Proj. Change | Total Proj |
0 | 158,500 | |||
1 | 86 | 158,500 | ||
2 | 78 | 158,500 | ||
3 | 9 | 158,500 | ||
4 | 193,400 | |||
5 | 48 | 193,400 | ||
6 | 55.3 | 202,000 | ||
7 | 55.3 | 199,235 | -2,765 | -2,765 |
8 | 55.3 | 217,636 | 18,401 | 15,636 |
9 | 55.3 | 234,469 | 16,833 | 32,469 |
10 | 55.3 | 246,936 | 12,467 | 44,936 |
11 | 55.3 | 256,170 | 9,234 | 54,170 |
12 | 55.3 | 263,008 | 6,839 | 61,008 |
I made a “Lowest score so far” meme for him but feel his owner have been punished enough and am not posting it here.
Henderson | ||||
Week | Score | Price | Proj. Change | Total Proj |
0 | 99,100 | |||
1 | 55 | 99,100 | ||
2 | 72 | 99,100 | ||
3 | 43 | 99,100 | ||
4 | 32 | 148,300 | ||
5 | 13 | 173,500 | ||
6 | 43.0 | 166,900 | ||
7 | 43.0 | 162,518 | -4,382 | -4,382 |
8 | 43.0 | 164,135 | 1,618 | -2,765 |
9 | 43.0 | 178,597 | 14,462 | 11,697 |
10 | 43.0 | 189,308 | 10,711 | 22,408 |
11 | 43.0 | 197,241 | 7,933 | 30,341 |
12 | 43.0 | 203,116 | 5,875 | 36,216 |
Please keep your job
Moraes | ||||
Week | Score | Price | Proj. Change | Total Proj |
0 | 113,500 | |||
1 | 113,500 | |||
2 | 52 | 113,500 | ||
3 | 94 | 113,500 | ||
4 | 43 | 113,500 | ||
5 | 42 | 166,800 | ||
6 | 57.8 | 201,800 | ||
7 | 57.8 | 212,572 | 10,772 | 10,772 |
8 | 57.8 | 227,071 | 14,499 | 25,271 |
9 | 57.8 | 244,773 | 17,702 | 42,973 |
10 | 57.8 | 257,884 | 13,111 | 56,084 |
11 | 57.8 | 267,594 | 9,710 | 65,794 |
12 | 57.8 | 274,785 | 7,191 | 72,985 |
Please keep your job.
C Hall | ||||
Week | Score | Price | Proj. Change | Total Proj |
0 | 129,500 | |||
1 | 129,500 | |||
2 | 88 | 129,500 | ||
3 | 129,500 | |||
4 | 58 | 129,500 | ||
5 | 62 | 129,500 | ||
6 | 69.3 | 187,100 | ||
7 | 69.3 | 222,280 | 35,180 | 35,180 |
8 | 69.3 | 253,347 | 31,066 | 66,247 |
9 | 69.3 | 279,597 | 26,251 | 92,497 |
10 | 69.3 | 299,039 | 19,442 | 111,939 |
11 | 69.3 | 313,439 | 14,399 | 126,339 |
12 | 69.3 | 324,103 | 10,664 | 137,003 |
Had to include him. Talk to a Collingwood expert about his job security; feels high risk and high reward.
Long | ||||
Week | Score | Price | Proj. Change | Total Proj |
0 | 200,900 | |||
1 | 30 | 200,900 | ||
2 | 113 | 200,900 | ||
3 | 57 | 200,900 | ||
4 | 240,000 | |||
5 | 26 | 240,000 | ||
6 | 114 | 263,000 | ||
7 | 68.0 | 280,600 | ||
8 | 68.0 | 299,782 | 19,182 | 19,182 |
9 | 68.0 | 332,558 | 32,776 | 51,958 |
10 | 68.0 | 336,495 | 3,937 | 55,895 |
11 | 68.0 | 339,410 | 2,916 | 58,810 |
12 | 68.0 | 341,570 | 2,159 | 60,970 |
Rucks
—
Forwards
He’s actually looking kinda good. Easy BE of 43. Love to see him ton up again.
Hugo Garcia | ||||
Week | Score | Price | Proj. Change | Total Proj |
0 | 245,800 | |||
1 | 54 | 245,800 | ||
2 | 25 | 245,800 | ||
3 | 99 | 245,800 | ||
4 | 54 | 260,000 | ||
5 | 84 | 269,800 | ||
6 | 63.2 | 303,300 | ||
7 | 63.2 | 313,588 | 10,288 | 10,288 |
8 | 63.2 | 325,274 | 11,687 | 21,974 |
9 | 63.2 | 324,734 | -541 | 21,434 |
10 | 63.2 | 324,333 | -400 | 21,033 |
11 | 63.2 | 324,037 | -297 | 20,737 |
12 | 63.2 | 323,817 | -220 | 20,517 |
Now a forward. Nice. Lots of very good scores, hoping there is a great one coming soon.
Levi Ashcroft | ||||
Week | Score | Price | Proj. Change | Total Proj |
0 | 185,500 | |||
1 | 84 | 185,500 | ||
2 | 72 | 185,500 | ||
3 | 36 | 185,500 | ||
4 | 87 | 221,700 | ||
5 | 90 | 249,100 | ||
6 | 73.8 | 227,400 | ||
7 | 73.8 | 279,304 | 51,904 | 51,904 |
8 | 73.8 | 311,909 | 32,605 | 84,509 |
9 | 73.8 | 328,895 | 16,986 | 101,495 |
10 | 73.8 | 341,475 | 12,580 | 114,075 |
11 | 73.8 | 350,792 | 9,317 | 123,392 |
12 | 73.8 | 357,692 | 6,900 | 130,292 |
I plan to hold and hope for another spike score. He could punish those who sell this week.
Davidson | ||||
Week | Score | Price | Proj. Change | Total Proj |
0 | 113,500 | |||
1 | 39 | 113,500 | ||
2 | 72 | 113,500 | ||
3 | 129 | 113,500 | ||
4 | 54 | 189,800 | ||
5 | 61 | 252,100 | ||
6 | 71.0 | 293,200 | ||
7 | 71.0 | 299,387 | 6,187 | 6,187 |
8 | 71.0 | 311,485 | 12,098 | 18,285 |
9 | 71.0 | 324,867 | 13,382 | 31,667 |
10 | 71.0 | 334,778 | 9,911 | 41,578 |
11 | 71.0 | 342,118 | 7,340 | 48,918 |
12 | 71.0 | 347,554 | 5,436 | 54,354 |
Getting harder to hold, but may have a spike score in him this week.
Kako | ||||
Week | Score | Price | Proj. Change | Total Proj |
0 | 149,500 | |||
1 | 62 | 149,500 | ||
2 | 34 | 149,500 | ||
3 | 62 | 149,500 | ||
4 | 163,100 | |||
5 | 38 | 163,100 | ||
6 | 49.0 | 191,700 | ||
7 | 49.0 | 207,855 | 16,155 | 16,155 |
8 | 49.0 | 214,072 | 6,217 | 22,372 |
9 | 49.0 | 223,540 | 9,468 | 31,840 |
10 | 49.0 | 230,552 | 7,012 | 38,852 |
11 | 49.0 | 235,745 | 5,193 | 44,045 |
12 | 49.0 | 239,592 | 3,846 | 47,892 |
His last week here. Booted to Moo-ron Mountain, home of exiled cows.
Lynch | ||||
Week | Score | Price | Proj. Change | Total Proj |
0 | 183,200 | |||
1 | 61 | 183,200 | ||
2 | 183,200 | |||
3 | 42 | 183,200 | ||
4 | 37 | 183,200 | ||
5 | 34 | 196,600 | ||
6 | 43.5 | 194,600 | ||
7 | 43.5 | 194,749 | 149 | 149 |
8 | 43.5 | 197,734 | 2,984 | 3,134 |
9 | 43.5 | 204,144 | 6,411 | 9,544 |
10 | 43.5 | 208,892 | 4,748 | 14,292 |
11 | 43.5 | 212,408 | 3,516 | 17,808 |
12 | 43.5 | 215,012 | 2,604 | 20,412 |
Voted most likely to be sold after two more rounds. Unless he tons up again.
Sam PP | ||||
Week | Score | Price | Proj. Change | Total Proj |
0 | 180,500 | |||
1 | 18 | 180,500 | ||
2 | 83 | 180,500 | ||
3 | 48 | 180,500 | ||
4 | 74 | 199,000 | ||
5 | 101 | 236,800 | ||
6 | 64.8 | 272,700 | ||
7 | 64.8 | 307,991 | 35,291 | 35,291 |
8 | 64.8 | 330,060 | 22,070 | 57,360 |
9 | 64.8 | 330,400 | 340 | 57,700 |
10 | 64.8 | 330,652 | 252 | 57,952 |
11 | 64.8 | 330,839 | 187 | 58,139 |
12 | 64.8 | 330,977 | 138 | 58,277 |
Dodgy Advice: Fix rookies who are not making money and get dodgy rookies off the field before making sideways trades. Sideways trading messes up your upgrade cadence. Be careful going early on cows. There are rarely any true must have players. Don’t Panic.
Remember the Cow Talk guarantee: “All predictions wrong or triple your money back!” (Offer not valid if money is actually involved.)
I am time zonally challenged. When Cow Talk goes live, I’m probably asleep, so replies from me may take a while.
Thanks for reading!
Max hall to Ned long and Henderson to gross thoughts on these trades
Dylan Moore is 25, most people think he is older than that
Have you the projections for Stone?
Sure. He’s already on Moo-ron Mountain but for this week.
Stone
Week Score Price Proj. Change Total Proj
0 64 199,900
1 42 199,900
2 199,900
3 46 199,900
4 29 155,600
5 39 166,000
6 44.0 176,600
7 44.0 180,464 3,864 3,864
8 44.0 189,966 9,502 13,366
9 44.0 199,222 9,256 22,622
10 44.0 206,083 6,861 29,483
11 44.0 211,168 5,086 34,568
12 44.0 214,938 3,770 38,338
Great work, as usual from the triumvirate. I’m concerned that FD isn’t the one at the wheel though – still, Seňor Hamster gives just as valid squeaks as anyone.
I am interested in Dan Curtain – I don’t think I can hold him this week, the GWS defensive line is just too good to see him scoring, though I’d be interested to see his projections, if you have the time Father.
You are only now concerned about that? 🙂
Sigh, now he’s gonna want to be Seňor Hamster for at least a week…..
Curtain
Week Score Price Proj. Change Total Proj
0 158,600
1 26 158,600
2 82 158,600
3 90 158,600
4 65 204,500
5 42 254,900
6 61.0 274,600
7 61.0 277,886 3,286 3,286
8 61.0 278,552 666 3,952
9 61.0 287,454 8,901 12,854
10 61.0 294,052 6,598 19,452
11 61.0 298,942 4,891 24,342
12 61.0 302,568 3,625 27,968