MPP Theory

[Junktimer]

Ive been thinking about it, and I think that MPP is a big deal this year.

My reasons are due mostly to the bye, if some of your players have a bye, and your bench cover isn't playing, the MPP can cover them.

Example:

MID: Gary Ablett, Dane Swan, Andrew Swallow, Leigh Montagna, Lenny Hayes, Chris Judd.
EMG: Shaun Atley, Andrew Krakouer, Dylan McNeil (F)

FWD: Jonathan Brown, Cyril Rioli, Lance Franklin, Nick Riewoldt, Brad Green (M), Chris Knights, Brendan Fevola
EMG: Jack Darling, Brandon Matera, Dion Prestia

If you look at the two teams, just imagine that none of the midfield emergencies are playing, and neither is leigh montagna.  On the other hand Jack Darling is playing.  If you were to swap McNeil to Green, whilst subbing on Darling for Green, eureka! You have just saved a 0.

But you all know that.

If you were to have multiple MPPs, you can cover multiple casualties, provided you have cover on the coverer's bench, still with me?

Which is why, in my eyes, the more MPP, the better.  It is also good to have various MPP opportunites (F/M) (B/M) (B/F) even (F/R).

If you have MPPs on all these lines, you will get the best out of your team.

There is one more thing I want to address, I think it is not useful at all to have an MPP pair of two rookies.

For example two rookies MPP would be like this:

MID: Gary Ablett, Dane Swan, Andrew Swallow, Leigh Montagna, Lenny Hayes, Chris Judd.
EMG: Shaun Atley, Andrew Krakouer, Dylan McNeil (F)

FWD: Jonathan Brown, Cyril Rioli, Lance Franklin, Nick Riewoldt, Eddie Betts, Chris Knights, Brendan Fevola
EMG: Jack Darling, Brandon Matera, Nicholas Winmar (M)

NOTE: By the way forget who the guys are, they are just examples, imagine they are "normal" rookies, likely to play, but no shoe-in.

Rookies are a lot less likely to play than starters, obviously.  Which is why during the year, when the young bodies need a rest, a lot of rookies don't play, which makes this MPP pointless if they don't play.

If there was a starter, it would alleviate this problem as there is stable MPP who can play.

So in summary, I think go for MPP.  And make that MPP a starter-bench rotation.  What im saying here is justifying the selection of Jarrad Waite, Heath Grundy, Drew Petrie and co. 

[Justin Bieber]

I'll go for MPP if I like the players and they will play.

More than likely F/C and B/C will be there. But not many good to choose for F/R (Although Day or Lycett would be ideal with Petrie). Not many B/F so might just leave that out.

But Like your point about don't trust MPP rookies.

[Junktimer]

yeah some will go the petrie-daw combo

[Justin Bieber]

I don't really like Daw's potential to play. If Lycett or Day are R/F, they would be much better options hands down.

Also, Nice to see you got your old account back 8).

[Junktimer]

I don't really like Daw's potential to play. If Lycett or Day are R/F, they would be much better options hands down.

Also, Nice to see you got your old account back 8).

thanks hp.

and yeah i think lycett is a chance to be r/f

i think day will only be forward!

[Justin Bieber]

We can always hope!!! Just like Heppell a B/C ;).

[bomberboy0618]

We can always hope!!! Just like Heppell a B/C ;).

exactly :)

[saborn]

By the same token, I think that MPP's from teams that have no byes ie Goodes, Pavlich, Sylvia, Brad Green suddenly go up in value quite a bit, since you know that they'll always be available to cover anyone with a bye.

[bomberboy0618]

By the same token, I think that MPP's from teams that have no byes ie Goodes, Pavlich, Sylvia, Brad Green suddenly go up in value quite a bit, since you know that they'll always be available to cover anyone with a bye.

they shouldnt actually go up in value, and they do have byes for overall.

[MajorLazer]

By the same token, I think that MPP's from teams that have no byes ie Goodes, Pavlich, Sylvia, Brad Green suddenly go up in value quite a bit, since you know that they'll always be available to cover anyone with a bye.

they shouldnt actually go up in value, and they do have byes for overall.

That's right BB, but assuming you are going for a league win, you would have 2-3 of those players in your team. Going for overall, it is who will score the most points.

[BGK]

they shouldnt actually go up in value, and they do have byes for overall.

I dont think he was talking in a sense of player value, but as in value to you in a head to head.

Most players IMO are head to head. Personally i couldnt give a toss where i finish overall, especially this year. It makes it a little harder to play for both overall and head to head this year. It is possible but harder.

[bomberboy0618]

By the same token, I think that MPP's from teams that have no byes ie Goodes, Pavlich, Sylvia, Brad Green suddenly go up in value quite a bit, since you know that they'll always be available to cover anyone with a bye.

they shouldnt actually go up in value, and they do have byes for overall.

That's right BB, but assuming you are going for a league win, you would have 2-3 of those players in your team. Going for overall, it is who will score the most points.

thanks ml :D
what about this.
If player a has good byes, but scores 10-20 less ppg than player b, who has bad byes who do u go for?

[MajorLazer]

For league I would say Player A, but it depends when the byes for Player B are. Sometimes the extra 10-20 ppg aren't worth a potential donut.

I play for the league win so not too sure on the strategy for overall, but assume you would take player B.

[Junktimer]

stock up on MPPs and the bye wont be too bad
a forward line with a ruck, centre and back switch to fall back on just gives me jitters

[MajorLazer]

You can stock up on MPP, but I don't think you should if you are sacrificing points.