Goldy Vs Mummy

[GCSkiwi]

It is a really good discussion. There are many examples each year of trading player A over B for irrational, illogical reasons!

Not sure how we can justify taking out 3 rounds for no particular reason, just to improve an average though!

And yes, we are addicted, I have heard it a million times from my clinical psychologist wife!

I feel like the reason is really not that hard. They both scored essentially the same scores. So NicNat was not stealing Cox's points, they wer both hammered. NEITHER player could perform. It's the same as people saying "if you take out sub/injury games this person averaged x" - again it comes back to my point that if your argument is that NicNat takes points off Cox then just looking at an average doesn't cut it, you have to compare how well they go in the same games not over the entirety of a season.

The nature of how supercoach works is that players take points off each other. Anyone scoring 120+ is taking points off others. So there are definitely times when NicNat will go 150 odd and Cox's score takes a hit because of it. But there's also times when Cox goes 150+ and NicNat takes a hit because of it. All I'm saying is that on balance they even out, It's not one-way traffic in NicNat's favour. and there's plenty of game where they have both had scores of 110+ - If NicNat is taking Cox's points then surely any game where NicNat goes 110+ Cox should struggle to hit a ton? Anyhow I've said my bit in those threads, people get to make their own decisions. And I don't wish to derail this thread from the original topic.

SO, Goldy vs Mummy:

Take home messages: Goldy is unlikely to do as well as he did last year, and while things seem bad so far he could come good and still prove to be a keeper. Or he could be the 2014 Sauce Jacobs. Mummy has started like a house on fire and is a dominant force when hes uninjured and on form. But he has a history of getting injured or losing form. He's started well but don't fall into the trap of chasing scores he already got. Just ask people who brought in Zorko last week. If you want to swap Goldy out, you're best to do it now before his value tumbles to the point where if he doesn't lift he's worthless. And the only ruckman with a proven history is the one and only Dean Cox.

Logical choices:
1) the loyalty option: Keep Goldy.
2) the safe option: trade Goldy to Cox.
3) the no guts, no glory option: trade Goldy to Mummy.

[Ricochet]

It is a really good discussion. There are many examples each year of trading player A over B for irrational, illogical reasons!

Not sure how we can justify taking out 3 rounds for no particular reason, just to improve an average though!

And yes, we are addicted, I have heard it a million times from my clinical psychologist wife!

I feel like the reason is really not that hard. They both scored essentially the same scores. So NicNat was not stealing Cox's points, they wer both hammered. NEITHER player could perform. It's the same as people saying "if you take out sub/injury games this person averaged x" - again it comes back to my point that if your argument is that NicNat takes points off Cox then just looking at an average doesn't cut it, you have to compare how well they go in the same games not over the entirety of a season.

This is where our views differ :P
My view is it wasn't NicNat "stealing points" but just NicNat attending centre bounces and spending time on the ball that decreased Cox's time around the ball.

[GCSkiwi]

This is where our views differ :P
My view is it wasn't NicNat "stealing points" but just NicNat attending centre bounces and spending time on the ball that decreased Cox's time around the ball.

Pretty semantic difference though isn't it? NicNat takes time on ball of Cox, which takes away Cox's points and should also by default increase NicNat's? I guess my issue is this being given as a reason not to pick Cox, sure it would be better if NicNat wasn't there but that doesn't mean Cox can't go well with him there. Anyway, let's not hash this out again, we're not going to agree, and as I said before there isn't anything wrong with your argument. I just disagree with the interpretation :)

[Samm79]

I think we'll have to agree to disagree GCS  ;)

I think holding Goldy is the best option of the bunch as it's now a straight swap to Mummy, and it don't think it's worth a trade. I think he and Cox will average similar from here on in and while Cox had one big injury his reliability is very very good, but not good enough to spend a trade on.

[SydneyRox]

Think holding is the smart thing to do.
They will avg about the same by season end, wasting the trade chasing last weeks points is always dangerous IMO.