sideways Trading rooks playing - non playing

[Colliwobblers]

Ok to explain a little.

You took Shiel we all did he looked the goods tore up nab cup, but for whatever reason its the end of round 2 and the coach is still saying he isn't far away from a debut, he isn't injured.

Meanwhile, Clifton (lets just say) YOU DON'T HAVE, is averaging 71 on the bubble about to go up a fortune and looks great.

DO YOU - trade out Shiel for now, and get in Clifton before his first price rise?

If no would you if a higher average, what average would entice you?

If Yes at what average would you not make the trade, for example 46 (which could still be a good price rise.

[Ziplock]

I would say no

for instance last year, I had hibberd

hibberd-->curnow

curnow= injured

curnow--> hibberd

you just feel stupid.

[Colliwobblers]

thanks Zip thats exactly what i was talking about, i did it a bit but then stopped as i learnt the lesson, but not sure if you experienced guys do it to "not miss a great rook" or not so you don't burn trades.

I burnt trades early and in the end i had to keep coad injured but no benefit in trading him to a playing rook, becasue the trade "by then" was worth more than the potential profit off the playing rook.

Plus we had the luxury of the extra bench spot last season and a lot more dpp. especially in defence/mid.


Anyway you answered my question thanks its hard to watch a cow fatten in your neighbors paddock  ;D

But maybe harder to not have the trades later in the season when you need them most.  :-\

[Presto]

I dont agree, although I realize that trading early can be deleterious. but proper trading for round 3 could make a huge difference.
Which coach hasn't felt the terrible feeling that that premium we were going to count on has suffered a LTI or that cash cow does not seem to be getting a game.

Last year my round 3 trades were O'Keefe for J. Brown and Curnow for Hibberd (I regret other trades I did later on, but these two were inspirational), whoever bought Curnow for round 3 at $96,400 would have sold him for 280k after his injury. It could never have been a bad deal (in my case I used him to get Boyd).

What I am trying to say is That round 3 trades are such an opportunity that one should always be prepared to do them.
Last Year Curnow stats for the first 2 games were 107 91 at that rate his value could improve greatly with any reasonable game. As a matter of fact he scored 100 and gain 80K (Hibberd did not play until round 7)

And to answer your question, it depends on the circumstances if it looks like that a rookie debut will not happen for a long time I would dump him for one that has averaged 50 in the first 2 rounds, If instead a rookie (that I do not have is average 90 or more like Curnow I would happily trade any other rookie.

[Colliwobblers]

OK PRESTO !!!!

I'm going to give you a cheer first of of and then two +1 's also...

The first +1 is for deleterious - I'm a well spoken university educated chap and i am sure that maybe I should know the word, was confident i had the general idea of the meaning, but still went for my dictionary. Now that's a first time ever I've had to go to a dictionary on a footy forum so +1.

The second +1 is for your actual comment

[Presto]

OK PRESTO !!!!

I'm going to give you a cheer first of of and then two +1 's also...

The first +1 is for deleterious - I'm a well spoken university educated chap and i am sure that maybe I should know the word, was confident i had the general idea of the meaning, but still went for my dictionary. Now that's a first time ever I've had to go to a dictionary on a footy forum so +1.

The second +1 is for your actual comment

It is a problem that we "New Australians" have, now and then we use a word that in our language is common (deleterio in Italian) without realizing that we could have used a much more common word. Now that you pointed it out I am asking myself why I did not use harmful?

[Holz]

I would say no

for instance last year, I had hibberd

hibberd-->curnow

curnow= injured

curnow--> hibberd

you just feel stupid.

what if curnow didnt get injured and he kept pumping out big scores and you didnt do the trade. I had atley and i went to curnow and im very happy with that trade.

[Ziplock]

I know, but he did get injured, and I did need to trade him again :P

[Holz]

I know, but he did get injured, and I did need to trade him again :P

so dont sideways trade rookies, because they will always get injured if you do :)

to answer the question if a player comes out and kills it the first 2 rounds and you have a spud rookie pull the trigger.

[Ziplock]

yep.

curnow...  barlow...

who needs any more sample size?

[Kuruki]

With the need to have enough cash to upgrade during those bye rounds, having a non playing rook is out of the question. Even if i have a rook who is just scoring poorly i will trade on the round 3 bubble for the must have rookie of 2012.

[Off Tap]

I give myself 3 trades at the start of the year to get my side back on track and to pick up any players, either rookies or guns, that I misssed out on and are tearing it up.

Last year I had Polec and gave him the flick after Round 3.

It's a big difference havng a rookie sitting on the bench for the majority of the year doing squat or cutting that player loose to pick up another that's going to earn you $150k in 8 - 10 rounds.

[maanco]

I know, but he did get injured, and I did need to trade him again :P

but chances are you would have downgraded/upgraded Curnow latter on anyway. you just had to trade him out earlier.

you made about 200k out of curnow, at the cost of 1 trade, the other trade you used im guessing you had planned to use it unless you had planned that curnow would become a keeper.

[Lions01]

I know, but he did get injured, and I did need to trade him again :P

Hindsight aye zip, would have hurt if he went on and continued his average. Barlow could have hurt the year before too(if you weren't on him)

I'm all for trading round 3, it can really improve your side very quickly with only 2 trades. As stated only having two emergency this year you really need to nail the Rookies to allow upgrading cant really afford to be carrying dead weight

[nostradamus]

"I dont agree, although I realize that trading early can be deleterious"........Hey Presto!! there's no need for that sort of language mate  :P

And yes Colli, l think a couple of early "on the bubble" trades can be very beneficial to team structure, profitability and long term upgrade strategies