NRL Fantasy 2020 Part 88 - Finals Fantasy brought to you by the letters M T V & B

Z-Lo added to the NSW squad as Turbo replacement, and D Saifiti. No Pearce, W Graham or Klemmer. Really don’t get the last one.

745 points for 16th overall.
About 60 points off first, but also about 60 points off 50th, so I'd think most teams are still in it realistically.

I probably could've gone defensive after a good points/player start and swapped Ponga to the more highly owned Papenhuyzen.
It would've netted me an extra 46 points, which would've put me at 3rd overall, but I think everyone has at least a few of those "if only" stories - it also shows how open the competition is even with a short format of 4 weeks.

If the cap is at a similar rate (13 players = 7.5 mil), then 8 players is probably 4.6 mil.
I'm interested to see if MTB shifts player values based on this weeks scores - although wouldn't blame him if it's not worth the extra work involved!

robelgordo wrote:Z-Lo added to the NSW squad as Turbo replacement, and D Saifiti. No Pearce, W Graham or Klemmer. Really don’t get the last one.

Yeah, Klemmer is out there. In saying that we all thought Fittler had lost it last year after Game 1.

My 2c worth,Klemmer numbers might still stack up ok but I reckon his game has dropped off a decent amount this season and his lack of effort for Tatolas first try yesterday was disgraceful,he literally just watched him stretch his arm out to get to the line. Show some heart you big lug

I think the early leaders have an incredible advantage from here in finals fantasy.

Less players per week from here on out means that even if you average more per player than last week, the total points gap is harder to catch up

Chucky averaged 57.3 points per player this week (counting captain as 14th player)

Averaging 67.3 points this week will give 605.7 points (counting captain as 9th player)

If Chucky repeats his incredible first round average that would only gain you 90 points this week

EDIT: Not saying I would change anything because the rules were well set out from the start and we aren't playing for sheep stations, just that the early leaders are in the drivers seat

(41st) 702 for the week, cant complain with that! Su'A was my only real let down in my eyes, but cant win em all!
Looking forward to attempting to chip away at the gap between myself and 1st over the next couple weeks

Good first week with 779. Would’ve got 812 and leading week 1 if I chose Papenhuyzen over Hughes.. was a coin flip but thought Hughes would get more among the points. Oh well

Team rundown:

Lussick: good score for his price. Try helps a lot given he got limited minutes
Papalii: pretty much par, likely to pick again this week
JFH: ended up with a decent score after a bad first stint. A lot of missed tackles though
Matterson: same as Papalii, what you’d expect. Safe and solid
Murray: try helps given he started in the second row before moving to lock
Yeo: thought he’d get big minutes given the occasion and that’s what happened
Cleary (c):
Reynolds: chose him assuming large kick meters and goals with Souths beating Knights. Hovered over G Williams as well who got a double and the same score at a lower price
Croker: goal kicker in a team that was widely tipped to thrash Cronulla. Makes sense to pick
Lee: good base stats for a CTR and tipped him to score against the Eels
Hughes: has a quiet game, thought he’d be more involved. Hindsight should’ve chose Papenhuyzen
Rapana: good scores in CTR previously. Score wasn’t great but wasn’t bad either
Vunivalu: same logic pick as Brenko Lee, thought he’d carve against Parra and he ended up scoring

I believe this was the perfect team to fit under the 7.5m cap

Cook(c)
Tatola Liu
Tapine Yeo Cordner
Cleary Williams
Croker JMoz
Papenhuyzen Hunt Allan

966 points and 27k remaining 

Edit: Optimised more after dropping Collins

To be honest it’s not that outrageous of a team

Camo123 wrote:I believe this was the perfect team to fit under the 7.5m cap

Cook(c)
Tatola Liu
Tapine Yeo Cordner
Cleary Williams
Croker JMoz
Papenhuyzen Hunt Allan

966 points and 27k remaining 

Edit: Optimised more after dropping Collins

To be honest it’s not that outrageous of a team

I think everyone of those players would've come into consideration for everyone except Cordner which would've been a brave pick.
Hunt was just the "6" on the dice of wingers.

I would say they are going to go down the RCG Paulo line which as a Qlder worries me more then Klemmer plodding up to the defensive line.

Camo123 wrote:I believe this was the perfect team to fit under the 7.5m cap

Cook(c)
Tatola Liu
Tapine Yeo Cordner
Cleary Williams
Croker JMoz
Papenhuyzen Hunt Allan

966 points and 27k remaining 

Edit: Optimised more after dropping Collins

To be honest it’s not that outrageous of a team

I only had 5 of those.
Yeo, Cleary, Croker, Pappy and Allan.

Camo123 wrote:I believe this was the perfect team to fit under the 7.5m cap

Cook(c)
Tatola Liu
Tapine Yeo Cordner
Cleary Williams
Croker JMoz
Papenhuyzen Hunt Allan

966 points and 27k remaining 

Edit: Optimised more after dropping Collins

To be honest it’s not that outrageous of a team

I missed a good opportunity to have Allan back in my team.

multiple.scoregasms wrote:I think the early leaders have an incredible advantage from here in finals fantasy.

Less players per week from here on out means that even if you average more per player than last week, the total points gap is harder to catch up

Chucky averaged 57.3 points per player this week (counting captain as 14th player)

Averaging 67.3 points this week will give 605.7 points (counting captain as 9th player)

If Chucky repeats his incredible first round average that would only gain you 90 points this week

EDIT: Not saying I would change anything because the rules were well set out from the start and we aren't playing for sheep stations, just that the early leaders are in the drivers seat

I agree in that it's clearly advantageous to play from in front rather than behind, that being said;

The ceiling for this week seems to be about 960, the floor about 600 (looking at players that completed a team - being with a Captain, and 13 playing etc) - that's a 360 point spread.

Going from 14 down to 9 players would equate to about a 230 point spread - which gives an opportunity to be in contention even if you didn't have a great first week (albeit you'd very much want a good second week).

I don't know if the intention is to have 8 players for the GF, but assuming it is, then we've had 14 so far, and would still have 27 to go.

Any squad is a few parts good management and a few parts good/bad luck - no-one knew Papenhuyzen/Wighton/Williams/Hunt would score doubles or Cleary a hat trick, and with each week being a reset, your previous good selections only really count for the points they've already credited you. So there's really no reason Chucky or anyone else would maintain their week one average.

If the top go more conservative (and a conservative selection fails) then there's still plenty of possibilities.

Why can't we just keep the same format right through with 13 players or maybe just for the final reduce player numbers. I think this is fairer & allows those chasing a better chance to catch up.

White Lightning wrote:Why can't we just keep the same format right through with 13 players or maybe just for the final reduce player numbers. I think this is fairer & allows those chasing a better chance to catch up.

That's what I thought we were looking at.

Sitting at rank 64, if it gets cut to 8 players this week, there's not much point me really having a crack because there's no chance to try and gain any ground. I'm not worried about being so low but would definitely like more of a chance to try and at least gain some ground to crack top 50 or 40.

I am 29th but only 2 bad choices was the difference;
Chucky's Croker(51) v my Blake(1) = 50
Chuckey's Pappy(66) v my Guth(36) = 30

That 80 would have me at 802 and right in it.

Yeah keeping it at 13 players sounds good to me. Blake’s 1 really screwed me this week. Sitting at rank 40 which I’m happy with and at least my Captain Walker choice wasn’t a complete balls up

quicksand wrote:I am 29th but only 2 bad choices was the difference;
Chucky's Croker(51) v my Blake(1) = 50
Chuckey's Pappy(66) v my Guth(36) = 30

That 80 would have me at 802 and right in it.

But depending on your leftover cash that’s an extra 180k which would have affected other picks

As said by others, everyone would have had ‘what if’ picks

I personally like the 8 with multiple position interchange picks as suggested by Robelgordo

I think 13 players would see similar squads across the board with only 2 games

Camo123 wrote:I personally like the 8 with multiple position interchange picks as suggested by Robelgordo

I think 13 players would see similar squads across the board with only 2 games

When Draft Stars offers 9 players over 2 games you get massive variety in teams. I don't see that being an issue at 13 players either.