Prices in relation to the Magic Number

[Football Factory]

Just wanted to clarify how the Magic Number works in relation to the players prices during the year.

A quote from Warnie at DT TALK "You need to remember all is relative when thinking about the magic number and it’s relation to the salary cap"

So as an example - Goodes last year at his cheapest was 60k below his starting price (393.200 - 331.800) this means that if he was to have the exact same year this year at his cheapest his price would be 60k less than his starting price (491.000 - 431.000) give or take 10-20k due to rooks (all players) increasing - decreasing in value.

[Lions01]

Very hard thing to explain the magic number, having a basic understanding does help.

In your example the magic number is a lot higher this year than previous year (I’m semi convinced that this has something to do with the squad sizes being reduced, but not 100% sure on that.) best to look at it as a percentage 331,800 / 393,200 = 84.38% of his original. So therefore 84.34% of 491.200 is  $ 414,496

I'm presuming the main reason you used Goodes as he'll be an upgrade target and not for the sole purpose of understanding the magic number. To get a better under of how the decreasing nature of Premiums (all non rookies really) you really need to look at a more consistent scorer such as Pendlebury as Goodes is a roller coaster the highs and lows are more exaggerated.

[Football Factory]

Thank's for the feedback...Yes Goodes was used in the example as he is an upgrade target imo. Just wanted to see how much these guys will possibly drop before jumping on. It seems their prices wont fall too much as the magic number will naturally keep players prices higher than previous years.

[Lions01]

Yep mate its all kept in perspective, even if the Premium are higher in value the Rookie should equally make enough money on top to cover it.

[Football Factory]

I think alot of people assume because players prices are high (about 100k more than last year excluding rooks) they are going to drop 100k early, so they dont want to put in the more expensive players because they think they can pick them up for 150-160k cheaper down the track

all is relative when thinking about the magic number and it’s relation to the salary cap

So as an example - Goodes last year at his cheapest was 60k below his starting price (393.200 - 331.800) this means that if he was to have the exact same year this year at his cheapest he would be 60k less than his starting price (491.000 - 431.000) give or take 10-20k due to rooks (all players) increasing - decreasing in value.

[Grannyboy]

It seems it may be a little more sc like with bigger swings in both directions. Didn't they hold back last year with the cap/number and the 17th team? Maybe the number as now be changed slightly to accommodate 18 teams now whereas last year they still ran it on a 16 team model.? Does this make sense or am I rambling nonsense?

[Colliwobblers]

I think you have a pretty good understanding of it FF, the bottom line is the way it effects remiums accross the season is "inflationairy". To blance inflation as rooks and low priced players increas the balance is struck through dearer (premium) players decreasing.

There is a lot of write ups on this google SC scoring system ect you will fins heaps of pretty precise articles on it.

The truth is whatever premiums you have or don't have are effected in exactly the same way, so to NOT HAVE a certain premium is ONLY  A GOOD DECISION if you suspect he will finish the year stronger than he starts it (Goodes).

As other posters said, with a player like pendles who scores consistantly there will be no sudden or great drop and the price you pick him up at later (cheaper) will be offset against the points you have lost by not having him from the start, so no real benefit.

[Football Factory]

It seems it may be a little more sc like with bigger swings in both directions. Didn't they hold back last year with the cap/number and the 17th team? Maybe the number as now be changed slightly to accommodate 18 teams now whereas last year they still ran it on a 16 team model.? Does this make sense or am I rambling nonsense?

I think the higher prices are to put people off the best players.. with the byes in 11,12,and 13 i think they were a little worried about how generic teams were going to become ? ... and i think it has worked because i dont see the likes of Cox, Johnson, Scotland in many teams .. any other year i dont think people would have hesitated putting these guys in, now all of a sudden their too old or are going to play like crap and drop in price dramatically.

[Lions01]

It seems it may be a little more sc like with bigger swings in both directions. Didn't they hold back last year with the cap/number and the 17th team? Maybe the number as now be changed slightly to accommodate 18 teams now whereas last year they still ran it on a 16 team model.? Does this make sense or am I rambling nonsense?

I think the higher prices are to put people off the best players.. with the byes in 11,12,and 13 i think they were a little worried about how generic teams were going to become ? ... and i think it has worked because i dont see the likes of Cox, Johnson, Scotland in many teams .. any other year i dont think people would have hesitated putting these guys in, now all of a sudden their too old or are going to play like crap and drop in price dramatically.

Still think the higher values have to do with the squad sizes being dropped from 33 to 30. The Salary Cap last year was the same as this year (close enough from memory) but we had to select an extra 3 players to cover byes, hence the reason players were slightly cheaper.

With players like Cox, Johnson and Scotland seeming to be expensive from last years price, its still relative to his year, they only need to maintain there average and they wont drop that much (some people are over looking this fact.)

Warnies statement about being "relative" is that Swan may drop 60k but so will all the other premium (including the ones people have selected instead of Swanny).

[Football Factory]

I agree Lions ... but with the player pricing if you have a look at 2010 (squad of 30) for example Swan/Ablett starting price was $523,500/$522,000 .. so im not sure if it is to do with the squad size.

[Scotch]

They increased the Salary Cap last year with the increase of squad size didn't they?  Perhaps they didn't decrease the salary cap this year (perhaps even increased it a little more) and thus had to increase the costs of players proportionately otherwise we'd all be able to afford an extra 1 or 2 premiums.

[Grannyboy]

Ah that's right, they held back player price rises last year so we could afford the extra 3 subs.

[Football Factory]

They increased the Salary Cap last year with the increase of squad size didn't they?  Perhaps they didn't decrease the salary cap this year (perhaps even increased it a little more) and thus had to increase the costs of players proportionately otherwise we'd all be able to afford an extra 1 or 2 premiums.

Alot more