General NRL General Manager Final Results Voting and Discussion

wrighty

Guest
As soon as u mentioned the 1.4m I thought it was a bit high- doing the maths in my head it seemed there would be money money than talent and big overs would be required which is why I had no hesitation forking out a million for bromwhich.
In the end I don’t think it was too far off the Mark- maybe 1M would be the sweet spot.
These type of mental arithmetic strategies and calculations you did put you in good stead throughout the game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

wrighty

Guest
I am ok with Cam Smith going for $2M in our game as that is what it would take in real life to get him out of Melbourne.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Weno

Weno

Here are my thoughts on the other teams:

Warriors
This is unquestionably a vastly improved side from what wrighty started with. CNK had a massive 2019 and, while perhaps not in the top tier of elite fullbacks, he can hold his own against any side. Curtis Scott is a quality centre while the Warriors have gone from the slowest half in the comp in Green to one of the best running halves in Cody Walker. Townsend is an upgrade however I thought he was disappointing last season and is the antithesis of a clutch play specialist. I’m actually not sold on the forward pack. McLean hasn’t been overly dominant since departing the Storm while I expect Ben Murdoch-Masila to be a disappointment when he rejoins the NRL. Granville has been shit for two seasons (sorry wrighty I sold you the dummy on that trade) and I don’t rate Ese’ese at lock. The bench is also a bit blah, with a rookie and three fringe first graders.

Sea Eagles
With Turbo, Jurbo, DCE and the two tanks at prop, I’ve thought for a couple of seasons that the Sea Eagles are very close to being serious contenders. With signings like Benji and Brett Morris, warriors55 has gone some way towards making Manly even more potent, however I’m not convinced by the combo of Coen Hess & Sironen in the second row and whileTurpin shows a lot of promise he isn’t in that top tier of hookers. Manly’s biggest problem has been their lack of depth across their squad and I think that this probably limited warriors55 a bit in his ability to trade in more guns across the course of the week.

Raiders
Well what can I say - wizards rage got off to a shocker, regrouped, and then devised the most unique recruitment strategy in history. I knew something was up when I managed to grab Whitehead & Papalii (JJJosh no less) off him for McGuire. Mansour & Asiata - someone with such obvious insight in normal circumstances would never have suggested such a trade. However, beyond a lockdown induced breakdown, I couldn’t work out what his game plan was. The reality is that this team of J’s would make the 8 and potentially still be a contender.

Dragons
I love the forward pack that PullinTeeth has assembled here. The hard nosed nucleus of the existing Dragons pack is taken to another level by the addition of the brilliant Cam Murray, while Cooper also brings some pace despite ageing legs. One thing I’d suggest however is that Murray is a much better lock than edge forward and Cooper much better suited to an edge. Unfortunately I can’t get that positive on the backline. Williams is untested at NRL level and Foran has stunk it up for half a decade. Whare is a strong defender however lacks flair, this version of the Morris twins is well past his best and Dugan tried his best to be medically retired during the off season - that either points to his body being fucked, his attitude being fucked, or most likely a combination of both. The positive is out wide where there is some blistering pace.

Sharks
I commented early in the week that I thought the Sharks were possibly favourites and following a lot of trading, nothing has really changed my view. Shaun Johnson and Hunt‘s skill sets are hugely complimentary and this is the best halves combo across the teams. There is pace across the centres and wings while a fit Moylan (a rare thing) presents danger to opposing sides. For mine the forward pack is all about Graham and Kikau, brilliant players. Perhaps controversially, I don’t rate Bromwich in the top tier of props in the game, while Blair and Passi are weak points within the side. However the bench is awesome and far stronger than the other sides.

Panthers
Nathan Cleary is perhaps the only true star of this team, however that doesn’t mean it isn’t a strong one. Simonson and To’o are future stars and while Norman and Roberts can both run cold, they can also run very hot as well. The front row is strong and Weno wisely held on to his hugely underrated back rowers Yeo and JFH... but why why why did you trade out Kikau to the devious Defence ? The bench has grunt although I’m not entirely sold on Luai or Sipley.

Knights
This side has great balance with the brilliant Ponga at the back, a strong and complimentary halves combo of Pearce and Milford, Fitzgibbon running great lines in the second row, grunt up front in Klemmer and Fifita and the experienced Jake Friend controlling the ruck. I also think Horsburgh has a high ceiling of potential. There are however pockets of weakness - wings and centres are no better than average while Guerra and the bench are either getting on in age or just a bit underwhelming. Still I think the pluses easily outweigh the negatives and this team has top 8 written all over it.

Rabbits
Wow! Latrell in the halves!! I’m not sure what to make of that however if it works then this team could win the comp. the backline is dynamite with one of the best organising halves in the comp in Reynolds, Latrell, the very underrated but excellent Burns, possibly the most exciting rookie back in the comp in Crichton and of course the one and only (and 3rd best fullback In the NRL) Roger Tuivasa-Sheck. In the forwards you have the best running hooker in the NRL, Cook, and one of the hardest working, Arrow, combining with a strong second row of Sims and Nikora. What’s not to like!

My verdict (excl. my Cowboys)
Grand final between Sharks and Rabbits with Shaun Johnson combining with Xerri for the win on the final play.

Most improved team - Knights

Most innovative team - Raiders

Most astute trader - Defence
That was a good write up Mr Brownstone.

Tyrone May would of been my lock if he wasn't suspended.
Was my missing backrow ingredient, a ball player/ball running back rower.
Tetevano would of solidified my bench.

Put Sipley on the bench purely because Warriors know him and before injury he was making yards look easy and was highly spoken of in the Manly rotation.

Martin is established but not a household name.

Then I forgot about Blake Lawrie.

There are should of would of's but no regrets.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
PullinTeeth

PullinTeeth

That was a good write up Mr Brownstone.

Tyrone May would of been my lock if he wasn't suspended.
Was my missing backrow ingredient, a ball player/ball running back rower.
Tetevano would of solidified my bench.

Put Sipley on the bench purely because Warriors know him and before injury he was making yards look easy and was highly spoken of in the Manly rotation.

Martin is established but not a household name.

Then I forgot about Blake Lawrie.

There are should of would of's but no regrets.
Was going to trade for Martin to put him as my 13 at the end, but thought the same as you and him not being a real known name.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Weno

Weno

Was going to trade for Martin to put him as my 13 at the end, but thought the same as you and him not being a real known name.
Yeah bro,I like Martin.
He a hard hitting no nonsense forward every team enjoys having in there side.
Modeled his defence off Nigel Plum and Adam Docker so theres no surprises why he can bang.
He comes in Josh Jackson,Wade Graham mould.
Be good to see him push on and see if he can reach there heights.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users

wrighty

Guest
I would recommend starting with a very basic rundown, get people signed up then announce the full rules in blocks - ie how to purchase; how to trade, etc. Easier to take in.


I think the money allocation was good, but what got me was the market didn’t reflect reality. The price of Smith and Bromwich was astronomical. I had plans of getting a $800k star and 2x 3decent mid level players and the pricing killed that as there wasn’t enough quality players to choose - I ended up with a bench prop and a few fill ins.

On reflection I would consider allowing buying anyone in the non GM teams to create a bigger pool and put all players in the game. The more you can purchase and the more top level players in the game the better.

The other inter related issue was the loss of players - it is a random event that can kill a squad and I would still consider the team losing the player gets compensated by the same amount as it frees up cap to sign a replacement - again I lost 2 top starting team players and got a bench player.

I think the war chest should be to increase your squad size, create an abundance of first grade players and to allow plentiful trades to happen.

I will do a round up later, still catching up up stuff after overcommitting to this game 😆


I have been thinking about your feedback

1) ""On reflection I would consider allowing buying anyone in the non GM teams to create a bigger pool and put all players in the game. The more you can purchase and the more top level players in the game the better."
Opposed to this suggestion. The general manager simulation game is supposed to be a simulation. We used real injury reports. We used real life free agency lists that were up to date. Buying "anyone" including dudes happily signed up to roosters through to 2023 isn't like real life enough. Secondly, it would have been too simple to great team and taken away the need to trade with each other as much . Third, there was plenty of free agents available partly because 2021 is a bumper year for people being off contract in real life. There were a bunch of good free agents not signed by anyone.

2) "I think the war chest should be to increase your squad size, create an abundance of first grade players and to allow plentiful trades to happen."
A think a shit load of trades happened. So I don't think we need to change the rules to encourage more. If you blokes were to play the game again next year even more trades would happen as you blokes get the concept now.

3) Lastly have specific feedback for you Wizards in particular which you can take or leave as you see fit.

Once you picked Canberra, an elite team, should have focused on winning the "best team prize" rather than trying for both prizes. Detected with my intuition and the nature of your trade proposals you were after both 'best team" AND "most improved".
I was Warriors and I only focused on the most improved prize which meant accepting upgrades like replacing Egan with Granville. If I wanted the best team prize no way do I make that trade.
Manly GM accepted immediately they would target the "best team prize" and did conservative maintenance and a few strategic acquisitions.
The GMs with elite teams really only have a hope of winning "best team". The low ranked teams can only win most improved and the teams in the middle can have a bob each way.
I felt Raiders were playing the bob each way strategy in the first three days and that was unhelpful to Raiders. If you want to play bob each way then pick a middle team ranked 6 to 12 to have a much bigger acquisition budget.

With $1.5M had I been Raiders - would have set aside $500K for countering approaches on my star players. Warriors had to spend $425K of their budget warding off an approach on Hiku. Had that money set aside for such a purpose. As an aside, thought someone might come after Blake Green not because he is a valuable player but just a strategic torpedo at the warriors as my team would have beyond fucked if made it to the end with Chanel Harris-Tavita as my starting half. Someone got your key prop for $300K and that scuttled you a bit but if you have had $500K set aside to counter you would have kept him.

$500K for counters and $1M for acquisitions. Would have gone after two cu**s with my $1M.

Take or leave this advice as you see fit, just my thoughts having played this simulation a number of times now and having created the rules.

The last thing I want to say to you wizards rage from the bottom of my heart is a big thank you for two things

1) When I proposed a mysterious Rugby league drafting game two months ago you volunteered when everyone else was skeptical. Had you not volunteered that draft wouldn't have happened and there wouldn't have been the momentum for this game.
2) After everything and I mean everything came unglued last Sunday one option could have been to throw in the towel, and that would have been a debbie downer for all of us. Instead you came up with a fabulous idea and won the most innovative team, and kept up the banter with us throughout.

Much kudos to you for both of things - and thanks for supporting these games during lockdown.

KiaKaha Wizards Rage

Wrighty
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
wizards rage

wizards rage

I have been thinking about your feedback

1) ""On reflection I would consider allowing buying anyone in the non GM teams to create a bigger pool and put all players in the game. The more you can purchase and the more top level players in the game the better."
Opposed to this suggestion. The general manager simulation game is supposed to be a simulation. We used real injury reports. We used real life free agency lists that were up to date. Buying "anyone" including dudes happily signed up to roosters through to 2023 isn't like real life enough. Secondly, it would have been too simple to great team and taken away the need to trade with each other as much . Third, there was plenty of free agents available partly because 2021 is a bumper year for people being off contract in real life. There were a bunch of good free agents not signed by anyone.

2) "I think the war chest should be to increase your squad size, create an abundance of first grade players and to allow plentiful trades to happen."
A think a shit load of trades happened. So I don't think we need to change the rules to encourage more. If you blokes were to play the game again next year even more trades would happen as you blokes get the concept now.

3) Lastly have specific feedback for you Wizards in particular which you can take or leave as you see fit.

Once you picked Canberra, an elite team, should have focused on winning the "best team prize" rather than trying for both prizes. Detected with my intuition and the nature of your trade proposals you were after both 'best team" AND "most improved".
I was Warriors and I only focused on the most improved prize which meant accepting upgrades like replacing Egan with Granville. If I wanted the best team prize no way do I make that trade.
Manly GM accepted immediately they would target the "best team prize" and did conservative maintenance and a few strategic acquisitions.
The GMs with elite teams really only have a hope of winning "best team". The low ranked teams can only win most improved and the teams in the middle can have a bob each way.
I felt Raiders were playing the bob each way strategy in the first three days and that was unhelpful to Raiders. If you want to play bob each way then pick a middle team ranked 6 to 12 to have a much bigger acquisition budget.

With $1.5M had I been Raiders - would have set aside $500K for countering approaches on my star players. Warriors had to spend $425K of their budget warding off an approach on Hiku. Had that money set aside for such a purpose. As an aside, thought someone might come after Blake Green not because he is a valuable player but just a strategic torpedo at the warriors as my team would have beyond fucked if made it to the end with Chanel Harris-Tavita as my starting half. Someone got your key prop for $300K and that scuttled you a bit but if you have had $500K set aside to counter you would have kept him.

$500K for counters and $1M for acquisitions. Would have gone after two cu**s with my $1M.

Take or leave this advice as you see fit, just my thoughts having played this simulation a number of times now and having created the rules.

The last thing I want to say to you wizards rage from the bottom of my heart is a big thank you for two things

1) When I proposed a mysterious Rugby league drafting game two months ago you volunteered when everyone else was skeptical. Had you not volunteered that draft wouldn't have happened and there wouldn't have been the momentum for this game.
2) After everything and I mean everything came unglued last Sunday one option could have been to throw in the towel, and that would have been a debbie downer for all of us. Instead you came up with a fabulous idea and won the most innovative team, and kept up the banter with us throughout.

Much kudos to you for both of things - and thanks for supporting these games during lockdown.

KiaKaha Wizards Rage

Wrighty
Thanks for the feedback and some very valid points. I don’t disagree with any of them but provide different options for consideration. A bit about my game:

I was not so much focused on the most improved or best team. Before all that, I wanted to be amungst the most active with a high player turnover. The success and enjoyment of the overall game was more important than the individual result. The ability for players to make trades makes the game. Hence my initial choice of The Storm. I had no intention of keeping the stars but it would have allowed an active game with lots of epic trades of elite layers. When I worked out Smith, Bromwich, Welch etc would be gone I looked elsewhere.

Canberra was an impulse choice as another top side where I presumed I could trade actively. When the game started it became obvious that the Raiders had a lot of 8/10 players that were not appreciated by others and the Raiders were appreciated as a team more than individuals. To many English and non Australian/ Kiwi/SOO players that were not going to be hot property.

In regards to trades I appreciate your reasoning. You outlined ‘There was plenty of free agents available’. But I made 21 expressions of interests/ bids on players before I got my first signing and went after 17 players in total for little reward. It was a frustrating experience. I agree to keeping it realistic but it personally felt to close to home and like the Warriors team recruitment! The trades and Raiders make up left me with low marketable player trade options. I had to choose between a boring game where I tried to win or come up with different priorities.

So I was left with last years GF team, with only about 3-4 positions that I felt needed improving if I was going for top team. I never considered most improved as an option. Similar to Manly, I saw a path where I could sit and try to tweak my side. My enjoyment and the game overall would have been poorer for this.

It became evident that most people were happy to sit on there stars and trade their fringe players - except Wrighty who was active trader. I decided to play my own game and set my own challenge which would give me a goal while offering trades that didn’t make sense in regards to my team but enhanced the game for other players. Everyone was focused on their A team while I focused on my J team and for the game overall this was beneficial. I feel it opened the game up.

It could have gone wrong... if I didn’t end up with 17 J players, while cannibalising last years GF team, it would have been a disaster! The trade with Brownstone where I swapped Whitehead and Papalii for 4 of my strategic players was the point I knew I could pull it off. Many trades like this wouldn’t have happened if I was aiming for top team.

I also became unemotional about players. Some GM’s had half (or most) of their squads off limits because they liked players, everyone in my squad was up for grabs.

I will post my thoughts on other teams soon.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: 2 users
wizards rage

wizards rage

Some feedback to your feedback:
Opposed to this suggestion. The general manager simulation game is supposed to be a simulation. We used real injury reports. We used real life free agency lists that were up to date.
Just some feedback to take or leave - If we are really simulating real life, if a player eg Smith at the storm, whom we had the cap allocated to re-sign, decides to sign elsewhere, then we would have that allocated cap space become available to reassign for other players. This was not a reflection of real life and allowed a randomness to teams progress.

The rules combined to hit top teams harder who faced the double whammy of more players to be defended while also with the lowest cap. A low team that didn’t lose any top side players but had the additional cap to bring in 4-5 could have a better prospect of being top team than a higher team that signed a bench player and lost 2 starting players.

With $1.5M had I been Raiders - would have set aside $500K for countering approaches on my star players.
To give some context, this is pretty much what I did plan but the trades worked out against me. $500k for 2 players- as discussed I went after 17 players before I got Welch, who was a bench player for 600k so the way bidding went I was unable to find starting upgrades on my existing players at $500k value. I did have $525K available until the deadline to defend players but then Soliola was announced after the bid deadline so I was unable to counter and he was signed away below value. I don’t think my bid strategy was off, it’s just a lot went against me as it all played out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

wrighty

Guest
Some feedback to your feedback:

Just some feedback to take or leave - If we are really simulating real life, if a player eg Smith at the storm, whom we had the cap allocated to re-sign, decides to sign elsewhere, then we would have that allocated cap space become available to reassign for other players. This was not a reflection of real life and allowed a randomness to teams progress.

The rules combined to hit top teams harder who faced the double whammy of more players to be defended while also with the lowest cap. A low team that didn’t lose any top side players but had the additional cap to bring in 4-5 could have a better prospect of being top team than a higher team that signed a bench player and lost 2 starting players.


To give some context, this is pretty much what I did plan but the trades worked out against me. $500k for 2 players- as discussed I went after 17 players before I got Welch, who was a bench player for 600k so the way bidding went I was unable to find starting upgrades on my existing players at $500k value. I did have $525K available until the deadline to defend players but then Soliola was announced after the bid deadline so I was unable to counter and he was signed away below value. I don’t think my bid strategy was off, it’s just a lot went against me as it all played out.

Have a lot of agreement or head nodding in your first point.
Was always unsure about what to do about compensation for losing a Pool A player from an incumbent team. Consulted with everyone before the game, group consensus decided that Pool C candidates would be compensated but that Pool A would be not compensation. You didn't really weigh in on those discussions as think you were still feeling your way with the rules.

The logic was that teams like St George who started with a war chest of $3M - would then get compensated for losing two players and end up with $4M and have money coming out of their ears and be what is known in the gaming world as "over powered".

Am very open to changing it for next time but then the starting war chests would need to be decreased.
Thinking about that now...A team like St George and Warriors should only start with about $2M if they are going to end up being compensated as well.

I think the formula would end up
$1M for the top ranked team plus $100K thereafter
Warriors would get $2.2M plus any revenues from losing a Pool A or Pool C player

In this game had $2.9M war chest and spent on
Mclean $820K
Ben Murdoch-Masila $650K
Hiku Retention $425K
Esse'esee $550K
Josh Kerr $450K

Warriors would have had to have given up $550K purchase on Esse'sse and chiseled Isaac of a few $'s off the other deals.

Warriors would have been ok without esee'sse

Raiders would've had $1.1M plus would have got compensation back for losing two players in the game and had about $2.2M themselves all together.

The finnicky part about it would have been counter bids to keep a star player.

Lets say you are Melbourne GM and there is a bid on Smith for $1.5M from Cowboys. You know if you let him go you will be compensated his 2020 salary of $1M

Your entire War chest as Melbourne is $1.2M you would need to bid all of this to have a hope of keeping Smith. Two issues with this:
a) the total cost of keeping Smith is $1.2M counter bid plus opportunity cost of loss of potential compensation of $1M = $2.2M to keep Smith
b) Some people will argue this is unfair - and think forgoing the compensation is enough

The only solution I can see is recommending to GMs not to counterbid and just accept if you are Melbourne you will lose Smith but get compensated financially for it. How does that land?

*********

With regards to the second point about keeping $500K set aside for retention and the 9pm deadline.
9pm was the initial bid deadline - no new bids after that.
Teams were always going to "receive news" from the trade commissioner after 9pm and even on Monday that an offer had been placed on their player, and then asked how were they going to react to it. Ideally teams should have kept their "$500K" in reserve all through out Monday until the "horns of Jericho sounded."
Perhaps it was bad for not painting that picture better. During the game got more directive to leave nothing to chance such as telling people overtly do not end up with more than 30 guys or you will lose a top signing etc.
Should have done more of this direct advice earlier eg published hints on what to be aware of and tips. Lessons for next time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
wizards rage

wizards rage

Have a lot of agreement or head nodding in your first point.
Was always unsure about what to do about compensation for losing a Pool A player from an incumbent team. Consulted with everyone before the game, group consensus decided that Pool C candidates would be compensated but that Pool A would be not compensation. You didn't really weigh in on those discussions as think you were still feeling your way with the rules.

The logic was that teams like St George who started with a war chest of $3M - would then get compensated for losing two players and end up with $4M and have money coming out of their ears and be what is known in the gaming world as "over powered".

Am very open to changing it for next time but then the starting war chests would need to be decreased.
Thinking about that now...A team like St George and Warriors should only start with about $2M if they are going to end up being compensated as well.

I think the formula would end up
$1M for the top ranked team plus $100K thereafter
Warriors would get $2.2M plus any revenues from losing a Pool A or Pool C player

In this game had $2.9M war chest and spent on
Mclean $820K
Ben Murdoch-Masila $650K
Hiku Retention $425K
Esse'esee $550K
Josh Kerr $450K

Warriors would have had to have given up $550K purchase on Esse'sse and chiseled Isaac of a few $'s off the other deals.

Warriors would have been ok without esee'sse

Raiders would've had $1.1M plus would have got compensation back for losing two players in the game and had about $2.2M themselves all together.

The finnicky part about it would have been counter bids to keep a star player.

Lets say you are Melbourne GM and there is a bid on Smith for $1.5M from Cowboys. You know if you let him go you will be compensated his 2020 salary of $1M

Your entire War chest as Melbourne is $1.2M you would need to bid all of this to have a hope of keeping Smith. Two issues with this:
a) the total cost of keeping Smith is $1.2M counter bid plus opportunity cost of loss of potential compensation of $1M = $2.2M to keep Smith
b) Some people will argue this is unfair - and think forgoing the compensation is enough

The only solution I can see is recommending to GMs not to counterbid and just accept if you are Melbourne you will lose Smith but get compensated financially for it. How does that land?

*********

With regards to the second point about keeping $500K set aside for retention and the 9pm deadline.
9pm was the initial bid deadline - no new bids after that.
Teams were always going to "receive news" from the trade commissioner after 9pm and even on Monday that an offer had been placed on their player, and then asked how were they going to react to it. Ideally teams should have kept their "$500K" in reserve all through out Monday until the "horns of Jericho sounded."
Perhaps it was bad for not painting that picture better. During the game got more directive to leave nothing to chance such as telling people overtly do not end up with more than 30 guys or you will lose a top signing etc.
Should have done more of this direct advice earlier eg published hints on what to be aware of and tips. Lessons for next time.
End of the day the rules are the rules and you win some and lose some... you shouldn’t change rules because it suits some players or other players came out worse.

But interesting to debate to grow the game for next time👍

Appreciated the need for the rules and overall it worked out well
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

wrighty

Guest
Here's another idea

$1.4M plus $125K compensation

Pool C gets full compensation
Pool A gets 50% compensation of the bidded amount and to "retain" a player costs 50% of the top bid price

Peta Hiku was bid on for $400K by St George from Warriors

If Warriors decline to counter they get $200K added to war chest
If they want to counter it costs them $200K

The total cost of Peta Hiku is now $400K (opportunity cost + counter bid)

The scratchy part of this is that if I can pay just $200K to keep Hiku then won't all incumbent teams match the offer.

I feel this is closer to the answer but not quite there, Will think further.

The other problem with is that it makes the wall of rules more impenetrable.
 
warriors55

warriors55

I will do a bigger write up when I have time but here are my preliminary votes.

The best final team - Manly. Just.... 2 other clubs are right up there though.
The most improved team - This really close between the Warriors and Panthers. I am going to give it the The Warriors.... just.
The most innovative final team - Raiders

Most enthusiastic trader - Raiders
Most astute trader - We all had a pretty good idea of the game and had different strategies so hard to judge this category. We were all pretty astute traders. Was interesting to see everyone's different tactics.
Funniest moment - Wrighty's newspaper article about the cricket balls! 😂
Most entertaining person - Wizards. Loved his rumour news articles. Especially trying to create a rift between the Trbojevic brothers by spreading a rumour that they both slept with the same girl! 🤣
Also Wizards firing Ricky Stuart based on my rumour news article was the most shocking and enjoyable post of the game!

Thanks to Wrighty for organizing this game. Would have taken a lot of time to set up and decide on the rules.

Was a blast to play and look forward to another one in the future as it would be interesting to try a new team and new strategy.
Hopefully we can get a couple more teams next time too - although it would be pretty difficult to keep track of all the teams and trades and updates so maybe we actually had a good number.

Manly may now be my second favorite team to support in the real NRL. Feel like I have a connection to the team now.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: 4 users

wrighty

Guest
Thanks warriors55

Will wait for wizards rage to vote then do a tally.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
wizards rage

wizards rage

Also Wizards firing Ricky Stuart based on my rumour news article was the most shocking and enjoyable post of the game!
Glad you found it enjoyable... you didn’t have to have the sit down with Ricky 😉
 
  • Haha
Reactions: 1 users

wrighty

Guest
Here's another idea

$1.4M plus $125K compensation

Pool C gets full compensation
Pool A gets 50% compensation of the bidded amount and to "retain" a player costs 50% of the top bid price

Peta Hiku was bid on for $400K by St George from Warriors

If Warriors decline to counter they get $200K added to war chest
If they want to counter it costs them $200K

The total cost of Peta Hiku is now $400K (opportunity cost + counter bid)

The scratchy part of this is that if I can pay just $200K to keep Hiku then won't all incumbent teams match the offer.

I feel this is closer to the answer but not quite there, Will think further.

The other problem with is that it makes the wall of rules more impenetrable.
Thought even more about it

It would work perhaps if the war chests were $1M plus 100k

If warriors have $2.2M then deciding whether to pay $200K to keep Hiku is a harder decision than if Warriors have $2.9M

Imagine storm

War chest $1.1M

An offer of $1.2M for Smith comes in. The choice of whether to counter $600K or let their war chest go up to $1.7M is a 50 50 call.

So that idea could work...

Only remaining issue is how hard it is to explain to a new player,
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
wizards rage

wizards rage

I ranked the teams each starting player out of 10 and each reserve out of 5 for a final team score out of 150. There were some players that there are hard to value - current form vs peak form. Future form, after returning from injury or how they will play with other team mate. So this is just my opinion:

Cowboys 109/150

I would give Brownstone the most astute purchaser. This man knows his players! Real mix of elite players with up and comers and in reality I think this team could be the best by year end. I back his judgement on the lesser players coming through. Smith was a master stroke. Key players in all right places would make this team stronger than my individual player rankings. Valuing up and comers and the strength of the halves probably cost him top team overall but my choice for most improved. My only concern is the Cows underperformed last year and started with a better squad than their table position, so in a way had a advantage - or the coach sucks and this team may yet underperform 😆

Warriors 104/150

Solid all round. Improvement in all the right areas. Backs are good. McLean was the right move. Halves are a big improvement and solid enough but ld have invested more. Lots of changes which are needed at the Warriors and solid bench. Had a slight advantage in trades being the home team in that that we knew players well - ie Katoa was in demand where as a similar player in another squad was an unknown. Great effort and great improvement.

The Mighty Manly Warringah Sea Eagles 111/150

Started with a great squad and just built on it. Well rounded with good players in all the right positions. My top team but only just. Great halves, great spine, great forwards, meh backs. My only criticism is you sat on your stars and they won it for you rather than bringing in new stars. Benji was your best add on. So top team but probably one of the lower improved.

Canberra Raiders 108/150

Hard to comment on my own team. Lots of solid players, not the best in any area but very well rounded side. Individually good players but it would probably be a little disjointed as a team. Real lack of fullbacks and props on the market.

St George 100/150

Started from the lowest point and made great progress but missing a couple of real superstars. Contender for my most improved. A few players like Foran, Graham, Dugan, Cooper, etc I marked low due to recent form but if we are judging in their peak or if the coach got the most out of them, you would be right up there. Strong bench.

Sharks 110/150

Another strong team that started with a good squad and was a real contender for top team. Strongest bench and halves. In all honest if Blair wasn’t tainted by his Warriors career you would have come top.

Penrith 100/150

Good recruitment in key positions. Lots of really good players but didn’t quite have the star power of some other teams. I feel this is a younger team than many others and would be a contender in 2-3 years

New Castle 110/150

In my running for both top team and most improved but just misses out in both. Ponga, Milford, Pearce, Klemmer, Friend, Fafita are stars and your bench is stacked! Only thing that cost is probably the backs but great all round effort

Rabbitohs 103/150

Good mix of talent in there. Can’t fault the starting lineup and would be in most games. The only think that let you don’t on my ranking was the bench which Isn’t as experienced as other teams and Mitchell which I rated down due to the question mark of how it would work. This is a team that in reality could really fire if that spine hits form.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: 3 users
Defence

Defence

I ranked the teams each starting player out of 10 and each reserve out of 5 for a final team score out of 150.
[/QUOTE]

Well that criteria certainly hurts the sharks more than anyone else as we had the strongest bench- seems a bit of a strange way to do it as bench players often end up spending more time on the field than starters in the modern game.
Fair enough tho- each man is free to choose his own criteria and manly do have some gun players.
In all honesty I think all these sides would be capable of beating each other on their day.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
wizards rage

wizards rage

Well that criteria certainly hurts the sharks more than anyone else as we had the strongest bench- seems a bit of a strange way to do it as bench players often end up spending more time on the field than starters in the modern game.
Fair enough tho- each man is free to choose his own criteria and manly do have some gun players.
In all honesty I think all these sides would be capable of beating each other on their day.
My decision, my rules 😆. Others will favour yours, I’m one of many.

In reality your right it’s all guess work and subjective assessments - I could have instead give Shaun Johnson a 0 for inconsistency and you would have come last 😂.

And that’s how close it all is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

wrighty

Guest
I ranked the teams each starting player out of 10 and each reserve out of 5 for a final team score out of 150. There were some players that there are hard to value - current form vs peak form. Future form, after returning from injury or how they will play with other team mate. So this is just my opinion:

Cowboys 109/150

I would give Brownstone the most astute purchaser. This man knows his players! Real mix of elite players with up and comers and in reality I think this team could be the best by year end. I back his judgement on the lesser players coming through. Smith was a master stroke. Key players in all right places would make this team stronger than my individual player rankings. Valuing up and comers and the strength of the halves probably cost him top team overall but my choice for most improved. My only concern is the Cows underperformed last year and started with a better squad than their table position, so in a way had a advantage - or the coach sucks and this team may yet underperform 😆

Warriors 104/150

Solid all round. Improvement in all the right areas. Backs are good. McLean was the right move. Halves are a big improvement and solid enough but ld have invested more. Lots of changes which are needed at the Warriors and solid bench. Had a slight advantage in trades being the home team in that that we knew players well - ie Katoa was in demand where as a similar player in another squad was an unknown. Great effort and great improvement.

The Mighty Manly Warringah Sea Eagles 111/150

Started with a great squad and just built on it. Well rounded with good players in all the right positions. My top team but only just. Great halves, great spine, great forwards, meh backs. My only criticism is you sat on your stars and they won it for you rather than bringing in new stars. Benji was your best add on. So top team but probably one of the lower improved.

Canberra Raiders 108/150

Hard to comment on my own team. Lots of solid players, not the best in any area but very well rounded side. Individually good players but it would probably be a little disjointed as a team. Real lack of fullbacks and props on the market.

St George 100/150

Started from the lowest point and made great progress but missing a couple of real superstars. Contender for my most improved. A few players like Foran, Graham, Dugan, Cooper, etc I marked low due to recent form but if we are judging in their peak or if the coach got the most out of them, you would be right up there. Strong bench.

Sharks 110/150

Another strong team that started with a good squad and was a real contender for top team. Strongest bench and halves. In all honest if Blair wasn’t tainted by his Warriors career you would have come top.

Penrith 100/150

Good recruitment in key positions. Lots of really good players but didn’t quite have the star power of some other teams. I feel this is a younger team than many others and would be a contender in 2-3 years

New Castle 110/150

In my running for both top team and most improved but just misses out in both. Ponga, Milford, Pearce, Klemmer, Friend, Fafita are stars and your bench is stacked! Only thing that cost is probably the backs but great all round effort

Rabbitohs 103/150

Good mix of talent in there. Can’t fault the starting lineup and would be in most games. The only think that let you don’t on my ranking was the bench which Isn’t as experienced as other teams and Mitchell which I rated down due to the question mark of how it would work. This is a team that in reality could really fire if that spine hits form.

Who is your Most improved and best team and runner up in each based on this terrific analysis?

I can kind of tell by the scores but good to hear the conclusion..On further look Manly are best followed by Sharks....
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Mr Brownstone

I ranked the teams each starting player out of 10 and each reserve out of 5 for a final team score out of 150. There were some players that there are hard to value - current form vs peak form. Future form, after returning from injury or how they will play with other team mate. So this is just my opinion:

Cowboys 109/150

I would give Brownstone the most astute purchaser. This man knows his players! Real mix of elite players with up and comers and in reality I think this team could be the best by year end. I back his judgement on the lesser players coming through. Smith was a master stroke. Key players in all right places would make this team stronger than my individual player rankings. Valuing up and comers and the strength of the halves probably cost him top team overall but my choice for most improved. My only concern is the Cows underperformed last year and started with a better squad than their table position, so in a way had a advantage - or the coach sucks and this team may yet underperform 😆

Warriors 104/150

Solid all round. Improvement in all the right areas. Backs are good. McLean was the right move. Halves are a big improvement and solid enough but ld have invested more. Lots of changes which are needed at the Warriors and solid bench. Had a slight advantage in trades being the home team in that that we knew players well - ie Katoa was in demand where as a similar player in another squad was an unknown. Great effort and great improvement.

The Mighty Manly Warringah Sea Eagles 111/150

Started with a great squad and just built on it. Well rounded with good players in all the right positions. My top team but only just. Great halves, great spine, great forwards, meh backs. My only criticism is you sat on your stars and they won it for you rather than bringing in new stars. Benji was your best add on. So top team but probably one of the lower improved.

Canberra Raiders 108/150

Hard to comment on my own team. Lots of solid players, not the best in any area but very well rounded side. Individually good players but it would probably be a little disjointed as a team. Real lack of fullbacks and props on the market.

St George 100/150

Started from the lowest point and made great progress but missing a couple of real superstars. Contender for my most improved. A few players like Foran, Graham, Dugan, Cooper, etc I marked low due to recent form but if we are judging in their peak or if the coach got the most out of them, you would be right up there. Strong bench.

Sharks 110/150

Another strong team that started with a good squad and was a real contender for top team. Strongest bench and halves. In all honest if Blair wasn’t tainted by his Warriors career you would have come top.

Penrith 100/150

Good recruitment in key positions. Lots of really good players but didn’t quite have the star power of some other teams. I feel this is a younger team than many others and would be a contender in 2-3 years

New Castle 110/150

In my running for both top team and most improved but just misses out in both. Ponga, Milford, Pearce, Klemmer, Friend, Fafita are stars and your bench is stacked! Only thing that cost is probably the backs but great all round effort

Rabbitohs 103/150

Good mix of talent in there. Can’t fault the starting lineup and would be in most games. The only think that let you don’t on my ranking was the bench which Isn’t as experienced as other teams and Mitchell which I rated down due to the question mark of how it would work. This is a team that in reality could really fire if that spine hits form.
Really good write up wizards rage , I’d be interested in seeing which players you have ratings of 10 to?
 

Similar threads

Wrighty
Replies
26
Views
767
wizards rage
wizards rage
Replies
2K
Views
32K
warriors55
warriors55
Wigan Warrior
Replies
14
Views
2K
HD
HD
tajhay
Replies
11
Views
2K
ShaunJohnson7
ShaunJohnson7
Replies
4
Views
1K
scottyb_old