WXV Discussion

[Levi434]

Like it, but complexity creeps into it :)

The story of WXV rules ^

[ossie85]

So this is just a more complex way of trading?

The end result is the same as if we were to just trade, but with more complexity and less control to retain?

I think I would prefer us to refine and improve the current rules for WXV first before we start bringing in more features

Issues like trade voting, total points scored vs % etc are thing I'd like us to be discussing and trying to improve before we started looking at more new things to introduce

not really.

For example if someone ends up taking a Treloar off me and i get a first round pick. Even if that is #1 its robbery. in the AFL it works as the #1 picks are valuable.

But i wouldn't take #1, #2 #5  etc... for Treloar.

Which is why you'd keep Treloar.

[Holz]

So this is just a more complex way of trading?

The end result is the same as if we were to just trade, but with more complexity and less control to retain?

I think I would prefer us to refine and improve the current rules for WXV first before we start bringing in more features

Issues like trade voting, total points scored vs % etc are thing I'd like us to be discussing and trying to improve before we started looking at more new things to introduce

not really.

For example if someone ends up taking a Treloar off me and i get a first round pick. Even if that is #1 its robbery. in the AFL it works as the #1 picks are valuable.

But i wouldn't take #1, #2 #5  etc... for Treloar.

Which is why you'd keep Treloar.

ok so i give an example.

someone bids big on Goldy i match it
someone bids big on Sloane i match it
someone bids big on Dmart i match it
someone bids big on rance i match it
then others bid on selwood, , etc..

im out of money and then 3 bids come in for Gunston, Jroo, Buddy.

now my forward line is gone and i have a bunch of stars that i have paid big for and i struggle to make the 8. I cant go and out poach anyone as people protect them and i used all my cap on other players.

so in compensation best case scenario I get pick 1,2,3 worse case 19,20,21.

thats my team gone.

[ossie85]

Yes, that could happen Holz. You'd be able keep your best players

[Levi434]

So this is just a more complex way of trading?

The end result is the same as if we were to just trade, but with more complexity and less control to retain?

I think I would prefer us to refine and improve the current rules for WXV first before we start bringing in more features

Issues like trade voting, total points scored vs % etc are thing I'd like us to be discussing and trying to improve before we started looking at more new things to introduce

not really.

For example if someone ends up taking a Treloar off me and i get a first round pick. Even if that is #1 its robbery. in the AFL it works as the #1 picks are valuable.

But i wouldn't take #1, #2 #5  etc... for Treloar.

Which is why you'd keep Treloar.

ok so i give an example.

someone bids big on Goldy i match it
someone bids big on Sloane i match it
someone bids big on Dmart i match it
someone bids big on rance i match it
then others bid on selwood, , etc..

im out of money and then 3 bids come in for Gunston, Jroo, Buddy.

now my forward line is gone and i have a bunch of stars that i have paid big for and i struggle to make the 8. I cant go and out poach anyone as people protect them and i used all my cap on other players.

so in compensation best case scenario I get pick 1,2,3 worse case 19,20,21.

thats my team gone.

See this is where my Bird year rule can come into it.

It would matter too much if that did happen to Dublin as they would be able to match bid on newer guys such as Treloar. Whilst you could go over the cap to sign Goldy, Selwood, Rance It wouldn't be such a stretch to sign the others.


Another idea is that since everyone is going to have a contract under this salary cap, how about only people who are out of contract can be poached?

[Torpedo10]

That's where strategy comes into it.

Would it be better to let Rance go, considering he isn't of supreme average and try to save a forward?

Also, where did you get 19/20/21 from? Worst case 16/17/18 and considering you'll be top 3 there goes a pick.

Also keep in mind it's unlikely the higher ranked teams will be able to bid high, as they have to cover their own players. It's more likely they'll bid on younger guns.

[Holz]

That's where strategy comes into it.

Would it be better to let Rance go, considering he isn't of supreme average and try to save a forward?

Also, where did you get 19/20/21 from? Worst case 16/17/18 and considering you'll be top 3 there goes a pick.

Also keep in mind it's unlikely the higher ranked teams will be able to bid high, as they have to cover their own players. It's more likely they'll bid on younger guns.

because 18 teams. so if its a pick after my pick then im assuming i win (worse case) then i get 19,20,21.

but thats exactly another floor. established players have huge base salaries.

the system is too complex. so if we use 3 year average.

first up mids become overpriced. a 100 defender is worth twice as much as a 100 mid.

secondly age works against players.

Joel Selwood has a 3 year average of 113.
marcus Bontempelli has a 3 year average of 96
how do you value Jaeger Omera.
Jacob Weiteiring is valued at 65

[Purple 77]

Tagging, Salary, Gameplans, training, weather, early season trades.

I REALLY want Tagging, Confidence, Weather and Gameplans introduced to Worlds. Heck, I could even get behind the salary cap.

We have a great comp... adding strategy is only a good thing, and I'm for it.

But I think the obstacle that none of these ideas will overcome, is that 1) on the whole, people are resistant to change, and 2) WXVs would start to look like something entirely different than to what everyone signed up for. Whether that's for the better or worse doesn't matter, it's borderlining on a new game, when everyone wanted to play Worlds as it is.

But I can't stress enough, I'd love to see some, if not all, of these ideas implemented. I'm just pessimistic about whether they'll voted to come in  :-\

[My Chumps]

I think that's sort of the point Holz; pretty sure a salary cap is supposed to promote evenness. You would lose a lot of good players, but you have a significantly better team than most.

I'm totally open to a cap, but it would drastically change the competition. It's a moral/ethical debate tbh. It decides the future of this competition; do we want to be more like the NBA, where players are bounced around all the time, where new teams are able to rapidly improve resulting in more frequent cycles of premiership contention (in theory), where complex management is essential to success; or should we stick with what we've got, where trading is the only real movement (which to be fair already promotes a hefty chunk of movement in the offseason), where teams are able to have incomparable sustained long term success - more like the AFL with Hawthorn, Sydney, Geelong's recent dominance and no real "bottoming out" - in WXV, because the best teams have the best assets, they can maintain success as the only way they currently lose players is by choice, and that lost is replaced by something that is deemed as equal value.

If it was there for the comps inception, player lists like Dublin + Mexico wouldn't exist, so there'd be no debate from the people that are drastically disadvantaged (i.e. Holz) but to bring it in at this stage is going to come under a lot of scrutiny - and does seem kinda cruel to the guys that have worked hard to build their list.

If we're all for it though then flower holz you can quit if you want tbh :P

[Torpedo10]

Tagging, Salary, Gameplans, training, weather, early season trades.

I REALLY want Tagging, Confidence, Weather and Gameplans introduced to Worlds. Heck, I could even get behind the salary cap.

We have a great comp... adding strategy is only a good thing, and I'm for it.

But I think the obstacle that none of these ideas will overcome, is that 1) on the whole, people are resistant to change, and 2) WXVs would start to look like something entirely different than to what everyone signed up for. Whether that's for the better or worse doesn't matter, it's borderlining on a new game, when everyone wanted to play Worlds as it is.

But I can't stress enough, I'd love to see some, if not all, of these ideas implemented. I'm just pessimistic about whether they'll voted to come in  :-\

Taggng and Confidence are two things I think could be done very well, Weather's randomness is unnecessary I think and Game Plans are a bit too out there for the moment. If anything, just make it able to Flood/Attack at any point during the season.

[My Chumps]

That's where strategy comes into it.

Would it be better to let Rance go, considering he isn't of supreme average and try to save a forward?

Also, where did you get 19/20/21 from? Worst case 16/17/18 and considering you'll be top 3 there goes a pick.

Also keep in mind it's unlikely the higher ranked teams will be able to bid high, as they have to cover their own players. It's more likely they'll bid on younger guns.

because 18 teams. so if its a pick after my pick then im assuming i win (worse case) then i get 19,20,21.

but thats exactly another floor. established players have huge base salaries.

the system is too complex. so if we use 3 year average.

first up mids become overpriced. a 100 defender is worth twice as much as a 100 mid.

secondly age works against players.

Joel Selwood has a 3 year average of 113.
marcus Bontempelli has a 3 year average of 96
how do you value Jaeger Omera.
Jacob Weiteiring is valued at 65

The three year average thing is a difficult issue and one of the many intricacies that would have to be ironed out. Unfortunately I'm not sure there's a formulaic solution, but I would suggest that with the forwards/defenders a players ranking on average amongst other players in their position should determine their price. OR (and I just thought of this while writing) you SHOULD have to pay more for your midfielders (higher averages) because chances are you're playing 6 of them.

Your argument about Jeager is essentially pointless though because the underlying theme is about how the coaches value him - if he's given the price tag for a 94 average then people have to decide whether they average him 50% more than that, and likewise if he's given a reduced salary because of his injury.

It would only matter for teams cap room/overall salary, which I suppose I have ignored, but isn't the essential debate to bringing in a cap imo.

[Holz]

I think that's sort of the point Holz; pretty sure a salary cap is supposed to promote evenness. You would lose a lot of good players, but you have a significantly better team than most.

I'm totally open to a cap, but it would drastically change the competition. It's a moral/ethical debate tbh. It decides the future of this competition; do we want to be more like the NBA, where players are bounced around all the time, where new teams are able to rapidly improve resulting in more frequent cycles of premiership contention (in theory), where complex management is essential to success; or should we stick with what we've got, where trading is the only real movement (which to be fair already promotes a hefty chunk of movement in the offseason), where teams are able to have incomparable sustained long term success - more like the AFL with Hawthorn, Sydney, Geelong's recent dominance and no real "bottoming out" - in WXV, because the best teams have the best assets, they can maintain success as the only way they currently lose players is by choice, and that lost is replaced by something that is deemed as equal value.

If it was there for the comps inception, player lists like Dublin + Mexico wouldn't exist, so there'd be no debate from the people that are drastically disadvantaged (i.e. Holz) but to bring it in at this stage is going to come under a lot of scrutiny - and does seem kinda cruel to the guys that have worked hard to build their list.

If we're all for it though then flower holz you can quit if you want tbh :P

I wouldnt quit, i care about Dublin too much :P

by the way Mexico will be gone at some point. look at the list it will be shot in a few years. If you really want to equalize the comp teams should stop trading youth to the top teams for players over 27.

Unless you can continually find talent that others miss e.g. Robbie Gray then you cant possibly stay on top.

Dublin personally plans on trading away its youth for players in the late 20s. if people let that happen then its only a matter of time before they fall. Thats what happend with the dillos. Its what happens in the real comps too look at hawks they have been top for years but at some point they fall.

90s North, early 2000 Brisbane, The Gellong Dynasty nobody can last.

others will rise, Pacific is my tip as one of the next powerhouse teams if Jay plays it right.

Dublin has been dominant yes but we have sliped from last year already. Remember it was only 2012 that I was the wooden spooner and 2013 that i didnt make finals,  Seems a long time as that the length of this comp but its not really.

check out Mexico in a few years.

Def: M Broadbent (Port), M Baguley (Ess), J Laidler (Syd), D Buckley (Carl), J Gwilt (Ess), J Marsh (Coll), N Newman (Syd), B White (StK), T Leonardis (Syd)

Mid: T Rockliff (Bris), T Cotchin (Rich), B Ebert (Port), C Ellis-Yolmen (Adel), M Whiley (Carl), J Townsend (Rich), D Robinson (Syd), G Hewett (Syd), J Cunico (Geel), R Davis (GC)

Ruck: S Hampson (Rich), S Michael (Ess)

Fwd:  H Bennell (Freo), S Gray (Port), , J Sicily (Haw), J Saunders (StK), L McBean (Rich), J Rose (Syd), R McKenzie (Rich), T Papley (Syd)

Rookie List: J Palmer (Port), N Coughlan (StK), S Shaw (Adel), M Korcheck (Carl), L Melican (Syd)


Looks pretty bad when you factor in they wont be getting any picks.


now look at say Moscow and remember they are getting a top 5 pick to add to the team.

Def: S Docherty (Carl), C Hooker (Ess), P Seedsman (Adel), N Vlastuin (Rich), M Scharenberg (Coll), C Pearce (Freo),], J Hombsch (Port), J Frawley (Haw), E Hipwood (Bris), S May (GC), A Pearce (Freo), T Barrass (WC)

Mid: D Heppell (Ess), J O’Meara (GC), L Greenwood (Coll), R Bastinac (Bris), J Polkinghorne (Ess), B Newton (Melb), J Pickett (GWS), R Clarke (NM), S Menegola (Geel)

Ruck: N Naitanui (WC), M Pittonet (Haw)

Fwd: R Gray (Port), T Bell (Bris), J Hogan (Melb), T Vickery (Rich), D Sheed (WC), J Simpkin (Ess), J Daniher (Ess), , H Ballantyne (Freo), D Moore (Coll), W Milera (Adel), R Burton (Haw), J Sinclair (StK), F McInnes (WC), S Weideman (Melb), C Gault (Coll), T Lee (StK)

Rookie List: B Payne (StK), K Ramsey (Adel), D Terlich (Melb), A Keath (Adel), C Delaney (NM)

[ossie85]

That's where strategy comes into it.

Would it be better to let Rance go, considering he isn't of supreme average and try to save a forward?

Also, where did you get 19/20/21 from? Worst case 16/17/18 and considering you'll be top 3 there goes a pick.

Also keep in mind it's unlikely the higher ranked teams will be able to bid high, as they have to cover their own players. It's more likely they'll bid on younger guns.

because 18 teams. so if its a pick after my pick then im assuming i win (worse case) then i get 19,20,21.

but thats exactly another floor. established players have huge base salaries.

the system is too complex. so if we use 3 year average.

first up mids become overpriced. a 100 defender is worth twice as much as a 100 mid.

secondly age works against players.

Joel Selwood has a 3 year average of 113.
marcus Bontempelli has a 3 year average of 96
how do you value Jaeger Omera.
Jacob Weiteiring is valued at 65

I still don't know where you got picks 19-21 from. It would be first round picks.

3 year average takes away injury prone years which i think is nore accurate

[Holz]

That's where strategy comes into it.

Would it be better to let Rance go, considering he isn't of supreme average and try to save a forward?

Also, where did you get 19/20/21 from? Worst case 16/17/18 and considering you'll be top 3 there goes a pick.

Also keep in mind it's unlikely the higher ranked teams will be able to bid high, as they have to cover their own players. It's more likely they'll bid on younger guns.

because 18 teams. so if its a pick after my pick then im assuming i win (worse case) then i get 19,20,21.

but thats exactly another floor. established players have huge base salaries.

the system is too complex. so if we use 3 year average.

first up mids become overpriced. a 100 defender is worth twice as much as a 100 mid.

secondly age works against players.

Joel Selwood has a 3 year average of 113.
marcus Bontempelli has a 3 year average of 96
how do you value Jaeger Omera.
Jacob Weiteiring is valued at 65

I still don't know where you got picks 19-21 from. It would be first round picks.

3 year average takes away injury prone years which i think is nore accurate

18 teams in the comp. If Hawks get a first round compo and they win they get the pick after 18 dont they?

[ossie85]

That's where strategy comes into it.

Would it be better to let Rance go, considering he isn't of supreme average and try to save a forward?

Also, where did you get 19/20/21 from? Worst case 16/17/18 and considering you'll be top 3 there goes a pick.

Also keep in mind it's unlikely the higher ranked teams will be able to bid high, as they have to cover their own players. It's more likely they'll bid on younger guns.

because 18 teams. so if its a pick after my pick then im assuming i win (worse case) then i get 19,20,21.

but thats exactly another floor. established players have huge base salaries.

the system is too complex. so if we use 3 year average.

first up mids become overpriced. a 100 defender is worth twice as much as a 100 mid.

secondly age works against players.

Joel Selwood has a 3 year average of 113.
marcus Bontempelli has a 3 year average of 96
how do you value Jaeger Omera.
Jacob Weiteiring is valued at 65

I still don't know where you got picks 19-21 from. It would be first round picks.

3 year average takes away injury prone years which i think is nore accurate

18 teams in the comp. If Hawks get a first round compo and they win they get the pick after 18 dont they?

If you read what was said holz, the team who poached the player would have to give you its first round pick. So it will be somewhere between 1 and 18 (barring priority)