i think you are greatly over rating didak -- SUPER-LEAGUE BOARD

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

6/05/26 7:35:39pm [ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, [8], 9 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 7/12/05 7:42:18pm
Author: gothedons
Subject: i think you are greatly over rating didak
In reply to: SL 's message, "Forget supporters, they do have bias........" on 7/12/05 7:02:32pm

agree that i can see a winner and loser in this trade, but i mean common, didak is no where near superstar status... he is a good player that has shown potential but a superstar is a naive claim... he only had 1 game last season where he had more then 15 disposals, and only 3 games where he kicked more thne 3 goals, definately has potential to be a good player, but is definately not a superstar and dont think he will be... as for trotter sidey is a north fan so he may over rate him, but i see him as a good prospect also, and well i know nothing about tuck but obviously is being rated by wat sidey has seen of him and the name... i dont think there is anything wrong with this trade at all, and i think other trades have gone through which have been more one sided then this...

in the end it all comes down to how the individual rates a player, and thats what makes the comp so unique, u trade and draft who u want, not who other people think are good or not.. From me josh carr is a prime example of this, gun player but i really disliked him thats y i got rid of him...

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

[> [> [> [> Would be very difficult to "police" trades -- RB, 7/12/05 7:56:20pm [1]

Besides a case of obvious collusion (never seen anything remotely close) between 2 teams that gets the majority of coaches Questioning a trade (ie Judd for B.Shaw) it should be accepted that 1 coaches trash is anothers treasure & therefore some trades will seem "mad" to each of us as individuals but be seen as a win/win for the actual coaches involved in the trade.

Some points:

Different coaches will rate many players on a wide scale.From gun to dud.

Coaches will rate players who play for the team they support at above market value.

It is assumed all coaches are in the game for long term but the reality is some turnover will occur.

The "fairness" of a trade cannot really be determined until a few years have passed by.The past performance of players means zip when it comes down to it.Only future "points" matter.

Some coaches are going for the prize next year while others are building a team for a sustained tilt at the prize down the track.This can greatly affect the deemed value of a player (young gun or established player ?) depending upon an individual coaches stratetgy.

While its true some teams may be stripped of perceived value by a series of trades by a short term coach, the reality of AFL football is that it evolves constantly so any team decimated in the short term can be rebuilt by a new coach who is dedicated & willing to remain in the comp for a few years.

No answers here but just personal opinions on why it may be difficult to moniter trades regarding value.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> Understand D9's perspective and perhaps -- Howie, 8/12/05 7:28:34am [1]

A safeguard can be put in where if a certain percentage of mods - let's say 60 per cent - vote the trade should be vetoed then so be it.

Both teams can get their chance to explain their positions about the trade and then the mods can vote.

It will come up. I know my earlier Lance Whitnall/Pick 22 for Jordan Russell/Pick 14 made Josh think "WTF", because on the surface it's a rated tall and an unproven type. However, I was well off for talls, needed mids and am pushing for youth over experience. Additionally, Whitnall had very little market value, as I had regularly floated him without a nibble.
So with an explanation, the trade can make a bit more sense than it may do on face value.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]