NRL Fantasy 2021 Part 4 - Praying that nobody gets hurt

rhinoceroo wrote:Hypothetical. If he was playing Round One would anybody be considering Doueihi for third WFB? Should score well as goalkicking half. First bye. Defensively sound. Brooks not going to be as dominant with the KMs as people think.

Normally wouldn't consider a red dot in round one but it's suspension not injury, so it's guaranteed only one week out. Weirdly he's not DPP yet but that would be another plus.

I’m not so sure Doueihi will kick much in general play. When he was at Souths his kicking game was never his strong point in the games he played whilst Reyno was injured I think Cody took most of the kick metres.

wolfking wrote:

I would have thought that point 3 is one of the main aspects of fantasy.  Especially in point 2 where you mention he's 13 points underpriced.

Other than coming back from injury, I am also struggling to find the negative in a high minute hooker priced 13 points under his average....is it because his name is Jayden? cause I could understand that

Rabbits21 wrote:

I’m not so sure Doueihi will kick much in general play. When he was at Souths his kicking game was never his strong point in the games he played whilst Reyno was injured I think Cody took most of the kick metres.

Looking at mtvb's stats, Douehi took 2/3 of the KMs in games he played at half with Cody.

wolfking wrote:

I would have thought that point 3 is one of the main aspects of fantasy.  Especially in point 2 where you mention he's 13 points underpriced.

The difference is that an underpriced keeper doesn't need to be traded out. Short of a miracle, he won't be a keeper this season.

rhinoceroo wrote:Not having JBrailey or TTurbo to start is being contrary for the sake of it. Amass points and cash, don't worry that other people are amassing points and cash with the same players.

There are very viable alternatives to them that also make points and cash. No one is holding a gun to your head saying they must be in your team.

Aardvark wrote:

Other than coming back from injury, I am also struggling to find the negative in a high minute hooker priced 13 points under his average....is it because his name is Jayden? cause I could understand that

I had him in my team, then was looking at team balance and thought, I don't need 4 hookers, 3 is more than enough to cover 1 slot in your team. Compare that with a guy like Ford, lets say for argument's sake that they both score the same average points differential from what they are priced through the season.

Ford covers 5 guys in case of injury/suspension/covid scare etc, vs 1 for Brailey. That additional flexibility is huge, especially since the 1 that Brailey covers is irrelevant, because 3 other guys also play hooker in your team.

There is 5 times the chance that a dual FRF/EDG bench player will need to be played in your team purely based on the number of slots he is covering. Note that hooker being 1 position is not the same as MID or WFB being 1 position. Because there are 3 slots for each, you need much more cover across the season in that position. There is 3 times the chance that 1 of the players in these positions doesn't play. Hooker is the only position that you need significantly less cover for than any other position, but everyone's teams are stacked the other way with typically 3 or 4 of them.

Each to their own but Brailey is probably the safest money maker in the whole of fantasy. Pretty much nailed on 45 average for someone priced at 30. Free 200K and quality early season scoring. Dumb imo not starting with him

Welshy wrote:Each to their own but Brailey is probably the safest money maker in the whole of fantasy. Pretty much nailed on 45 average for someone priced at 30. Free 200K and quality early season scoring. Dumb imo not starting with him

Do I sense an avatar bet coming

Welshy wrote:Each to their own but Brailey is probably the safest money maker in the whole of fantasy. Pretty much nailed on 45 average for someone priced at 30. Free 200K and quality early season scoring. Dumb imo not starting with him

It is all comparative. In his position he is far from the best. Both Watson and Liddle are well ahead of him for likely points differential, should score at least as well for a much lower price point.

Lots of other players also have at least a 14 point differential as well. Assuming LAM averages 44 as a starting prop, which his scoring history indicates is realistic, he is getting the same scoring for $50k less and has far better positional coverage, covering 3 slots in your team. If your team has 4 hookers including Brailey and you don't have LAM and he is starting in round 1, and you only have 1 MID on your bench, it is really foolish.

In terms of team balance and slot coverage, at a minimum you need to ensure that you have 5 MID and 5 WFB. HOK should probably be 2, possibly 3 at most. The rest of the positions, each should have probably 4 in your team.

With cover of 2, 5, 4, 4, 4, 5 = 24 minimum required positions covered. If you have 3 DPPs you just reach those minimal positional requirements across your 21. 4 hookers is a luxury in a team. If Brailey is your 4th best hooker option, and you can see another under-represented position with a player that can also get you 14 points differential, Brailey is likely surplus to requirements in your team.

I plan to run with Watson, Liddle and at least 1 underpriced keeper at hooker, so Brailey is definitely not needed in my team. Instead by adding LAM I reach 5 MIDs in my team for balance and coverage, without losing anything, and I save $50k at the same time, that can be used to gain points elsewhere.

Id rather start with an extra 80 min hooker like Brailey who is going to out score a 40min prop and also make cash quicker. I can upgrade Brailey to a MID for better team balance later down the track.

mattnz wrote:
It is all comparative. In his position he is far from the best. Both Watson and Liddle are well ahead of him for likely points differential, should score at least as well for a much lower price point.

Lots of other players also have at least a 14 point differential as well. Assuming LAM averages 44 as a starting prop, which his scoring history indicates is realistic, he is getting the same scoring for $50k less and has far better positional coverage, covering 3 slots in your team. If your team has 4 hookers including Brailey and you don't have LAM and he is starting in round 1, and you only have 1 MID on your bench, it is really foolish.

In terms of team balance and slot coverage, at a minimum you need to ensure that you have 5 MID and 5 WFB. HOK should probably be 2, possibly 3 at most. The rest of the positions, each should have probably 4 in your team.

With cover of 2, 5, 4, 4, 4, 5 = 24 minimum required positions covered. If you have 3 DPPs you just reach those minimal positional requirements across your 21. 4 hookers is a luxury in a team. If Brailey is your 4th best hooker option, and you can see another under-represented position with a player that can also get you 14 points differential, Brailey is likely surplus to requirements in your team.

I plan to run with Watson, Liddle and at least 1 underpriced keeper at hooker, so Brailey is definitely not needed in my team. Instead by adding LAM I reach 5 MIDs in my team for balance and coverage, without losing anything, and I save $50k at the same time, that can be used to gain points elsewhere.

avatar bet Brailey out scores his current average by more than LAM.

Honey Badger wrote:Id rather start with an extra 80 min hooker like Brailey who is going to out score a 40min prop and also make cash quicker. I can upgrade Brailey to a MID for better team balance later down the track.

Agree. Positional coverage not as important at start of season either with all the trades available either. Brailey is a free 200k minus early injury

Welshy wrote:
avatar bet Brailey out scores his current average by more than LAM.

Would need to wait for TLT to see if LAM gets starting prop first. If not LAM there will be another that will outscore his points differential.

mattnz wrote:

1. Coming off an ACL, normally takes time to get back to your best and decent chance of re-injury

2. Underpriced by 13 on his 44 average with > 70 minutes at Hooker, which on that list isn't that impressive, all of Watson, Blore, Davey, Ah Mau, Liddle and Laurie should outperform that differential

3. If he hits the 44 average target, it isn't close to being a keeper in his position, so will need to be upgraded, either when maxed out, or after round 13

4. Most teams have 4ish hookers, so he doesn't add any positional coverage

5. Is in a position where much better options exist. 2 that are cheaper and likely to score at least as well in Watson and Liddle and some that are more expensive but have the potential to be keepers, depending on their roles.

Also note that Turbo is in almost everyone's team, but is only 8 points underpriced on his average in 80 minute games last season (places him very low on this list on its own), and is coming back from 2 major injuries, one of which is recurring.

Both aren't in my team.

Re the point about ACL, NRL Physio has mentioned Brailey is at low risk of re-injury simply because of the extra time. The same will apply for McInnes next year.

He's had 12 months since his ACL injury, whereas the average return date is 7.5 months

NRL Physio: In a previous interview Radley indicated the Roosters medical staff would by quite staunch with a 9 month return to play time (Rd4), though he would be pushing to return earlier (R1 likely return). There is evidence risk of reinjury decreases by 50% between an 8-9 month return

mattnz wrote:

Would need to wait for TLT to see if LAM gets starting prop first. If not LAM there will be another that will outscore his points differential.

Would he not get 40 minutes off bench anyway?

Camo123 wrote:

Re the point about ACL, NRL Physio has mentioned Brailey is at low risk of re-injury simply because of the extra time. The same will apply for McInnes next year.

He's had 12 months since his ACL injury, whereas the average return date is 7.5 months

NRL Physio: In a previous interview Radley indicated the Roosters medical staff would by quite staunch with a 9 month return to play time (Rd4), though he would be pushing to return earlier (R1 likely return). There is evidence risk of reinjury decreases by 50% between an 8-9 month return

Plus backing Liddell over Brailey who has a worse and more common injury history.

Welshy wrote:
Would he not get 40 minutes off bench anyway?

Would likely go for another option if starting off the bench. Warriors have some big minute middles, Harris, AFB, Tevaga, off the bench could see less than 40 easily.

Probably not super fantasy relevant but Billy Smith has suffered shoulder injury (3 months)

Poor bastard has done 2 ACLs and now needs a shoulder reconstruction

mattnz wrote:
Would likely go for another option if starting off the bench. Warriors have some big minute middles, Harris, AFB, Tevaga, off the bench could see less than 40 easily.

Would you pick Brailey in that scenario or pivot elsewhere

Welshy wrote:
Would you pick Brailey in that scenario or pivot elsewhere

Elsewhere. Need MID coverage, would only have 4 without him.