Swan's B/E

[Yoshi]

I know Swan is not playing this week but with a B/E of 192 he won't stay priced at $481400 for long. Could Swan drop down to around the $440000 mark say round 9/10 with scores of 104 & 96 past 2 games.

The reason I'm asking is I am short in the FWD's this week with Higgins out. Am very tempted to trade Swan for Chappy then sub Higgins with Chappy. This then keeps Higgins which I can sub with Krak later on. All this time Swan should drop in price which I could get back in a few weeks when some of my mids have maxed out. I have a spare $274000 in the bank.

This may sound crazy but it could just pay off.

[Nails]

Stupid idea, muppet research done...

His BE is 169 and he might get it. ;)

[Slap]

Don't they play GC when they get back.. Big score for Swanny.

Even if they don't, the fact you don't have swan means you miss out on 20+ odd points a match, and double that if you select him captain.  Over three weeks thats 150 odd points you miss out on, which is detrimental to your overall ranking and league chances.

If your gonna get swan out, i'd be planning on bring him back in after his bye.

[Yoshi]

Stupid idea, muppet research done...

His BE is 169 and he might get it. ;)

OK Nails enlighten me why it is a stupid idea. According to champion data this week his BE 192 & FF is 181 so somewhere some info isn't correct. Having 21 trades remaining with 15/16 keepers (Swan included) this could actually work.

So I'm interested to hear your thoughts why this is a stupid idea. I'm not having a go at you I am really interested in your thoughts.

[Slap]

Stupid idea, muppet research done...

His BE is 169 and he might get it. ;)

OK Nails enlighten me why it is a stupid idea. According to champion data this week his BE 192 & FF is 181 so somewhere some info isn't correct. Having 21 trades remaining with 15/16 keepers (Swan included) this could actually work.

So I'm interested to hear your thoughts why this is a stupid idea. I'm not having a go at you I am really interested in your thoughts.

Its not stupid, its just against mainstream thought here.
I'd just be concern about the points I'd be losing inthe weeks you do not have him, esp against GC!  As i typed above.

[Yoshi]

Don't they play GC when they get back.. Big score for Swanny.

Even if they don't, the fact you don't have swan means you miss out on 20+ odd points a match, and double that if you select him captain.  Over three weeks thats 150 odd points you miss out on, which is detrimental to your overall ranking and league chances.

If your gonna get swan out, i'd be planning on bring him back in after his bye.

If I do decide to trade Swan it would be short term only. Would be looking about 2 weeks without while his price drops, but I would have Chappy instead who can score the same. Would be looking at trading back in about round 10.

Yes this would cost an extra trade but I still have 21 & am sitting well.

Pies next oponents RD 8 Geelong away, RD 9 Adeliade Home, RD 10 WCE Home.

Just after thoughts from people. Not saying I am doing this.

[Memphistopheles]

Don't they play GC when they get back.. Big score for Swanny.

Even if they don't, the fact you don't have swan means you miss out on 20+ odd points a match, and double that if you select him captain.  Over three weeks thats 150 odd points you miss out on, which is detrimental to your overall ranking and league chances.

If your gonna get swan out, i'd be planning on bring him back in after his bye.

If I do decide to trade Swan it would be short term only. Would be looking about 2 weeks without while his price drops, but I would have Chappy instead who can score the same. Would be looking at trading back in about round 10.

Yes this would cost an extra trade but I still have 21 & am sitting well.

Pies next oponents RD 8 Geelong away, RD 9 Adeliade Home, RD 10 WCE Home.

Just after thoughts from people. Not saying I am doing this.

Already made a topic about doing just this.

Pretty emphatic no from most people but i'm stll thinking about it.

http://www.fanfooty.com.au/forum/index.php/topic,34044.0.html

[Slap]

I always said, I reckon the person that wins DT this year, will be someone that trades out some guns to cover their averages each week.  But whether that means trading out the gun of all guns, who knows.  Thats why there isn't a correct answer.  Just decisions that carry a certain amount of risk - risk that could bite you in the ass or allow you to rise to the top.

[Nails]

Stupid idea, muppet research done...

His BE is 169 and he might get it. ;)

OK Nails enlighten me why it is a stupid idea. According to champion data this week his BE 192 & FF is 181 so somewhere some info isn't correct. Having 21 trades remaining with 15/16 keepers (Swan included) this could actually work.

So I'm interested to hear your thoughts why this is a stupid idea. I'm not having a go at you I am really interested in your thoughts.

Assistant Coach, i.e. the thing that runs everything provided by VS says his BE is 169. Therefore officially it is 169, although obviously you can't be 100% on BEs until everyone has played for that round, but it is roughly 169 not 192. Therefore he's probably not going to drop the entire 40k you need him to drop.

You're basically going Swan > Chappy and then Rookie > Swan. Basically using two trades to just get Chapman... I don't see the point of spending 2 trades to trade someone out then back in. If Swan being out 1 round is an issue, then why not Higgins out for 1 round? You have cash in the bank why not just go Higgins > Chapman straight off.

One trade for Chapman not two. Stupid idea IMO. Also I wouldn't be surprised to Higgins drop in price with 1-2 injury effected games.

[Nails]

I suppose what I really mean to say is... You're just doing this to get Swan well 40k cheaper... You're saving 40k on getting him back in... Saving 40k that you don't have to spend in the first place, just doesn't make much sense the more I think about it.

[Slap]

I suppose what I really mean to say is... You're just doing this to get Swan well 40k cheaper... You're saving 40k on getting him back in... Saving 40k that you don't have to spend in the first place, just doesn't make much sense the more I think about it.

Thats the risk, i usually use trades for injury, upgrades, or a min 100k cash-in from the rookie i downgraded.

[Nails]

I looked at assistant coach with their projections seemingly accurate...

Projected to score 121 against Geelong and 112 against Adelaide... This would result in him only losing ~24K over those two weeks.

Definitely not worth it.

Risking 1 trade for 24k... I don't get it. I honestly don't. You're going to get him IN for 24k less, but you could just not use a trade and keep him. You don't really gain ANYTHING?

If he was going to drop 100k sure you'd save 100k if getting another premium in, then maybe that'd be worth it...

But he's not dropping THAT much.

No thanks.

[Yoshi]

I suppose what I really mean to say is... You're just doing this to get Swan well 40k cheaper... You're saving 40k on getting him back in... Saving 40k that you don't have to spend in the first place, just doesn't make much sense the more I think about it.

Yeah thanks fellas. I just wanted to throw it out their to see what others thought.

I don't have assistance coach so I could only go by what BE data was available.

Thanks for all the feed back.

[Slap]

I suppose what I really mean to say is... You're just doing this to get Swan well 40k cheaper... You're saving 40k on getting him back in... Saving 40k that you don't have to spend in the first place, just doesn't make much sense the more I think about it.

Yeah thanks fellas. I just wanted to throw it out their to see what others thought.

I don't have assistance coach so I could only go by what BE data was available.

Thanks for all the feed back.

Nothing wrong with encouraging questions and confirming thoughts.  This is the place for it.  8)