AXVs: Official Discussion Thread

[Hawka]

Im happy with what Nas has proposed in the thread
Keen to get rolling

[fanTCfool]

Share the belief of many that nas' proposal has been well developed and justified, and should heighten interest for all parties going forward. Keen to get this done and dusted to allow for trading before the draft period.

[JBs-Hawks]

Happy to go with nas solution.

Good post and analysis Nige!

[BB67th]

Well, I must say the activity on here over the last couple of days is certainly encouraging!

Thanks to Nige in his efforts putting together that post, it looks like it changed the opinions of a clear majority of our coaching group over how to proceed with the drafts. While it would have been better to have it decided through the vote that was made, seeing as we have a clear majority that want to go along with nas' draft proposal (and it has admin support), we have decided we will move to that system.
It looks like most people are happy with what has been suggested, so I suggest you have a look at the 2018 Re Draft thread nas has kindly set up to see how the exact picks would work. If you have any serious qualms please feel free to send me a message to air things out.

Before the draft begins, I feel there are a couple more pressing needs that require a quick vote, as they have a material bearing on drafting strategy.

These are:
#1 - Team List Sizes
- Obviously with our drafting coming up, which looks like it will add 5 players to each list (along with our regular National draft in 6 weeks or so time), we are getting bigger list sizes. We need to decide if we will be increasing list sizes, or keeping with our current limit of 46, requiring some serious de-listings after this draft period.
- Off the top of my head there are a few main options:
      - Keep list sizes at the current 46, requiring de-listings to be put in before the National draft period (this would be after a trade
        period)
      - Increase list sizes to 50 (makes a nice round number)
      - Increase list sizes to 51 (means we keep the current 46 and add the 5 from the re-draft)


#2 - Extra Points for Defenders
- I did raise this one for discussion a little while ago after there were some voices calling for extra points for defenders to make them more relevant. There hasn't been a whole lot of suggestions here, so my thoughts were:
- Spoil = +2 points
- Rebound 50 = +1 or +2 points

- I think the points for spoils would make a nice unique point for the comp. I'm not so sure on the Rebound 50 one, and it is more just a suggestion, so feel free to shoot it down.



Feel free to discuss, or raise any additional options for the above rules. What I might do (and think might be the quickest/easiest way to do things) is leave the discussion open for 24 hours around these, and see if we have come to a clear consensus by this stage, like we did around the draft proposal. If not, I'll send things out for a more formal vote.

[fanTCfool]

I like the idea of having list sizes at the aesthetically pleasing and easily remembered number of 50 players per side.

I decided to take a closer look at the effect on defenders that the proposed changes would make.

I chose,

Rory Laird, a fantasy premium who scores primarily through his disposals
Alex Rance, a typical key defender who currently has little to no fantasy relevance
Tom Langdon, who to me is a bit of a hybrid between disposals and defending, and...
Jack Macrae, who is not a defender!

	Laird	Rance	Langdon	Macrae
2018 AVG	135.1	76.8	94.7	157.4
+2 for a Spoil	137.1	91.8	103.5	158.4
+2 for a R50	145.1	83.8	100.7	162.2
Combined	147.1 (+12)	98.8 (+22)	109.5 (+14.8)	163.2 (+5.8)

Not too shabby! Though I felt the gap between a 'hybrid' defender such as Langdon and midfielder such as Macrae didn't close quite as much as it perhaps should have. Below is my suggestion...

	Laird	Rance	Langdon	Macrae
2018 AVG	135.1	76.8	94.7	157.4
+3 Spoil, +1 R50	143.1 (+8)	102.8 (+26)	110.9 (+16.2)	161.3 (+3.9)

Personally, this feels more balanced if the aim is to make defenders a little more attractive, however, it is completely open to interpretation as to where the averages should lie in order to genuinely reflect the value of a defender in fantasy terms. I'm keen to hear what others believe the system should be, but my suggestion would be +3 for a spoil and +1 for a R50.

[Hawka]

I like the idea of having list sizes at the aesthetically pleasing and easily remembered number of 50 players per side.

I decided to take a closer look at the effect on defenders that the proposed changes would make.

I chose,

Rory Laird, a fantasy premium who scores primarily through his disposals
Alex Rance, a typical key defender who currently has little to no fantasy relevance
Tom Langdon, who to me is a bit of a hybrid between disposals and defending, and...
Jack Macrae, who is not a defender!

	Laird	Rance	Langdon	Macrae
2018 AVG	135.1	76.8	94.7	157.4
+2 for a Spoil	137.1	91.8	103.5	158.4
+2 for a R50	145.1	83.8	100.7	162.2
Combined	147.1 (+12)	98.8 (+22)	109.5 (+14.8)	163.2 (+5.8)

Not too shabby! Though I felt the gap between a 'hybrid' defender such as Langdon and midfielder such as Macrae didn't close quite as much as it perhaps should have. Below is my suggestion...

	Laird	Rance	Langdon	Macrae
2018 AVG	135.1	76.8	94.7	157.4
+3 Spoil, +1 R50	143.1 (+8)	102.8 (+26)	110.9 (+16.2)	161.3 (+3.9)

Personally, this feels more balanced if the aim is to make defenders a little more attractive, however, it is completely open to interpretation as to where the averages should lie in order to genuinely reflect the value of a defender in fantasy terms. I'm keen to hear what others believe the system should be, but my suggestion would be +3 for a spoil and +1 for a R50.

Whatever we do will make premo defenders such as Laird even more valuable but what it did to Rance for example makes it the better option i feel, so many mids get consisntent R50s even if its only 3 or so a game

[Nige]

Yep, list size of 50 plus the latter of the two options FTC presented.

[Football Factory]

Yeah i like squad size at 50 but i don't mind either way.

Additions to defenders scoring sounds good. Thanks to FTCF for providing some stats on how players scores/averages could look after implementing the changes.

[JBs-Hawks]

Yep option 2 of FTC is preferred

[Rusty00]

Yep, list size of 50 plus the latter of the two options FTC presented.

My thoughts as well.

If you add too much for R50 then you're just adding value to the only defenders that hold any value at the moment (such as Laird, Docherty, etc.), which kind of defeats the purpose.

[Rids]

50 and option 2 here

[nas]

Yep, list size of 50 plus the latter of the two options FTC presented.

[SydneyRox]

50 and option 2 here

Yup

[BB67th]

Well that was fairly easy!

With a majority support, we will be moving to a list size of 50 players, with spoils now being worth +3 points, and rebound 50s being worth +1 point.

Bear in mind current list sizes are 46, and we will each be drafting an additional 5 players through our re-draft coming up. The regular national and rookie drafts will follow as normal later in November as well.

[Nige]

Time to fire up this draft.