E
easy_tiger
Guest
tigerman said:
one of my non-neg tiger punting rules is that I dont back us with more than 3 VFL players. (cant remember if ive detailed this rule or not, apologies and disregard if im repeating myself)
my current list of VFL players (excludes young promisings. its the blokes who I reckon are AFL tested and their limitations are evident)
Lennon, batchelor, townsend, lambert, miles, lloyd, hunt, broad, morris, drummond, elton.
so If Miles and Lloyd come in, Batch and Lambo would both have to go. I actually dont think WHO makes up the VFL contingent makes much difference. Its a numbers thing.
last 2 weeks, weve been on VFL=3, which is sailing close to the wind, but leaves us winnable (I didnt back us either week). This kind of calibrated my model. we were on VFL = 3 and we were seconds/a kick away. If VFL had been restricted to 2, Ithink
we'd have won both games. four of the first five we won, VFL =2 and against WC VFL=3
VFL>3, I rule a line through us, even if we are playing Brisbane on The G. Ideally VFL = 2.
so at selection this week, I'd want
Out: Elton and one of lambert or batchelor
In: Prestia and one of Soldo or Chol
that would actually leave VFL = 1 (lambert or batchelor, id prefer batchelor for structure), which would be a very good sign and pave the way for a crack for me.
a couple of notes. #1 - if the side includes Elton, I wont back us. #2 Bellis and Houli are on my watch list, potentially to be included as VFL ceiling players in 2018, #3 ruckman are excluded, although I'd be very reluctant to back us if VFL=3 and hammer was in the side. #4 The rule flags when NOT to back us, not when TO back us (i.e. VFL > 3, cant back, non-neg; VFL < 3, consider other factors and have the option to back)
