The value of value (Is there too much focus on team value?)
-
- Grumpy Old Man
- Posts: 1094
- Joined: 28 Aug 2015, 19:59
Re: The value of value (Is there too much focus on team value?)
Isn't it a shame there's no Futures market in FPL.
- Stemania
- FISO Jedi Knight
- Posts: 20448
- Joined: 27 Aug 2006, 11:54
- Location: On the Iron Throne of xG, the seat of The Crown Prince of the Stat Perverts. Or if not, in the STC!
- FS Record: Best: TFF 321st. FPL 129th. FFS Career HoF Peak 2nd (Live 1st). Ability since lost.
- FPL:
Re: The value of value (Is there too much focus on team value?)
That's fine, but labeling a group of un-named posters as 'anti' something just because they don't quite value it as highly as you is not particularly helpful or going to lead to a reasonable conversation about it.Finisher1 wrote: Yes and I think there are some members who clearly underestimate that importance.
- Mav3rick
- FISO Jedi Knight
- Posts: 20858
- Joined: 20 Jul 2009, 20:35
- FS Record: FPL: 1082, 1201, 1800, 10203
The stats are dark and full of errors.
Re: The value of value (Is there too much focus on team value?)
Here is a graph from FPL discovery showing the average team value of the top 10k teams last season.
I think we're probably ahead of that curve this year, but anything around 105 was an effective team value last year.
After around GW20, the team value was relatively stable - 5.0 was gained in the first 20GWs but only another 0.8 in the latter 18, and the value actually dropped a bit at the end as circumstances dictated selling players like Hazard.
I think we're probably ahead of that curve this year, but anything around 105 was an effective team value last year.
After around GW20, the team value was relatively stable - 5.0 was gained in the first 20GWs but only another 0.8 in the latter 18, and the value actually dropped a bit at the end as circumstances dictated selling players like Hazard.
- CupidStunt000
- FISOhead
- Posts: 812
- Joined: 27 Sep 2013, 20:09
- FPL:
Re: The value of value (Is there too much focus on team value?)
Lol. Reading through, it looks like the problem occurred when Finisher mistook "value" for "profit".
If Martial goes from 8.0 to 8.4 in one week and you still have him you haven't made a "profit" until the point at which you sell him. You've made a potential profit of 0.2m and the value of your team has raised 0.4m, that 0.4m is not a profit until you sell him. It's just an increase in team value which is still important none the less but is still not "profit".
One thing I noticed about the above graph is how much the top teams keep in the bank. I seem to remember that my cash in the bank tended to average lower than 1m-2m which seems to be the average for the top teams. That could be showing me a flaw in my tactics where I'm probably too keen to spend the spare cash I have. This extends far beyond FPL too.
If Martial goes from 8.0 to 8.4 in one week and you still have him you haven't made a "profit" until the point at which you sell him. You've made a potential profit of 0.2m and the value of your team has raised 0.4m, that 0.4m is not a profit until you sell him. It's just an increase in team value which is still important none the less but is still not "profit".
One thing I noticed about the above graph is how much the top teams keep in the bank. I seem to remember that my cash in the bank tended to average lower than 1m-2m which seems to be the average for the top teams. That could be showing me a flaw in my tactics where I'm probably too keen to spend the spare cash I have. This extends far beyond FPL too.
-
- Grumpy Old Man
- Posts: 1094
- Joined: 28 Aug 2015, 19:59
Re: The value of value (Is there too much focus on team value?)
Outside FPL I have a wife and two kids who prevent this excess funds problem from existing.CupidStunt000 wrote:This extends far beyond FPL too.
- Moist von Lipwig
- FISO Knight
- Posts: 18227
- Joined: 08 Jun 2011, 16:08
- Location: The Eyrie
- FS Record: FPL Spring 16 Winner 2010-11. Murfs F1 Predictions 2012 Winner. Pick Quick 2012-13 Winner. SP4s Predictions League A & Champions League
- FPL:
Re: RE: Re: The value of value (Is there too much focus on team value?)
This.Curmudgeon wrote:Outside FPL I have a wife and two kids who prevent this excess funds problem from existing.CupidStunt000 wrote:This extends far beyond FPL too.
-
- Grumpy Old Man
- Posts: 1640
- Joined: 19 Jul 2015, 00:29
- FS Record: Reasonable
Re: RE: Re: The value of value (Is there too much focus on team value?)
Very very muchMoist von Lipwig wrote:This.Curmudgeon wrote:Outside FPL I have a wife and two kids who prevent this excess funds problem from existing.CupidStunt000 wrote:This extends far beyond FPL too.
-
- Grumpy Old Man
- Posts: 1094
- Joined: 28 Aug 2015, 19:59
Re: The value of value (Is there too much focus on team value?)
I am really looking forward to transferring out my two kids and releasing all the profit I have locked up in them over the last couple of decades, when they have done not much more than sit on the bench and fail to contribute.
[Unfortunately all of my wife's value is locked in, as my low amount ITB prevents me from swapping her for an option which might allow me to score more.]
[Unfortunately all of my wife's value is locked in, as my low amount ITB prevents me from swapping her for an option which might allow me to score more.]
- Arseshavin
- Grumpy Old Man
- Posts: 1002
- Joined: 31 Aug 2009, 08:30
- FPL:
Re: RE: Re: The value of value (Is there too much focus on team value?)
This is true, however if you didn't own Martial until he reaches 8.4, then the difference between picking him up at 8.0 might not be profit, but you have 0.4 more to play around with than the person that picks him at 8.4.CupidStunt000 wrote:Lol. Reading through, it looks like the problem occurred when Finisher mistook "value" for "profit".
If Martial goes from 8.0 to 8.4 in one week and you still have him you haven't made a "profit" until the point at which you sell him. You've made a potential profit of 0.2m and the value of your team has raised 0.4m, that 0.4m is not a profit until you sell him. It's just an increase in team value which is still important none the less but is still not "profit".
One thing I noticed about the above graph is how much the top teams keep in the bank. I seem to remember that my cash in the bank tended to average lower than 1m-2m which seems to be the average for the top teams. That could be showing me a flaw in my tactics where I'm probably too keen to spend the spare cash I have. This extends far beyond FPL too.
Profit is 0.2 but the opportunity cost of early pick up is 0.4 greater than rivals that join late.
- loosecannon85
- Grumpy Old Man
- Posts: 1000
- Joined: 14 Aug 2008, 12:56
- FPL:
Re: The value of value (Is there too much focus on team value?)
Curmudgeon wrote: [Unfortunately all of my wife's value is locked in, as my low amount ITB prevents me from swapping her for an option which might allow me to score more.]
I hope your wife doesn't read these forums.
- Carlos Kickaball
- Dumbledore
- Posts: 7801
- Joined: 04 Sep 2013, 18:02
Re: The value of value (Is there too much focus on team value?)
I read that she has huge Bps.
-
- Dumbledore
- Posts: 7159
- Joined: 05 Mar 2013, 10:10
Re: The value of value (Is there too much focus on team value?)
No, it's just how you define "profit". I understand what you are saying, but in my books it is indeed profit to have paid 8.0 for Martial points, while others are paying 8.4 for his points.CupidStunt000 wrote:Lol. Reading through, it looks like the problem occurred when Finisher mistook "value" for "profit".
If Martial goes from 8.0 to 8.4 in one week and you still have him you haven't made a "profit" until the point at which you sell him. You've made a potential profit of 0.2m and the value of your team has raised 0.4m, that 0.4m is not a profit until you sell him. It's just an increase in team value which is still important none the less but is still not "profit".
- scarletjim
- Dumbledore
- Posts: 6908
- Joined: 13 Oct 2005, 18:32
- FPL:
Re: The value of value (Is there too much focus on team value?)
You would get a much more meaningful discussion if you accepted that your definition of the word 'profit' is different to that of pretty much everyone else in the world, and is therefore pretty much meaningless in terms of language (which after all is first and foremost a method of communication by which we understand what each other mean). You can't just redefine words to mean something completely different to what they actually mean in common usage, and expect people to accept that in debate. Anyone with any dignity would by now have accepted that they have simply used the wrong word, called it a 'saving' instead, and moved on to useful discussion about the original topic.
-
- Dumbledore
- Posts: 7159
- Joined: 05 Mar 2013, 10:10
Re: The value of value (Is there too much focus on team value?)
I have accepted and said it many times in this thread, but then someone always comes up and starts that discussion all over again, like CupidStunt most recently.scarletjim wrote:You would get a much more meaningful discussion if you accepted that your definition of the word 'profit' is different to that of pretty much everyone else in the world
I think CupidStunt's message was actually completely pointless, since that debate had ended yesterday already
- scarletjim
- Dumbledore
- Posts: 6908
- Joined: 13 Oct 2005, 18:32
- FPL:
Re: The value of value (Is there too much focus on team value?)
But you respond to him saying that "it's just how you define profit" - well yes, if you define it as something completely different to what it means then you will have a different view... So it still doesn't seem as though you really understand / accept the flaw in your view as you've expressed it. But as I've said before, despite flawed terminology you've actually raised some points that have made me think, so thanks for that.
-
- Dumbledore
- Posts: 7159
- Joined: 05 Mar 2013, 10:10
Re: The value of value (Is there too much focus on team value?)
I just hate it when team value debates always end up with someone saying "hey guys, making profit is slow because you can keep only half of the money, so therefore maximising team value is not so important".scarletjim wrote:But you respond to him saying that "it's just how you define profit" - well yes, if you define it as something completely different to what it means then you will have a different view... So it still doesn't seem as though you really understand / accept the flaw in your view as you've expressed it. But as I've said before, despite flawed terminology you've actually raised some points that have made me think, so thanks for that.
Making profit (the way you guys understand it) is only one minor, very minor advantage of maximising team value. The major advantage is paying less money for must-have players' points.
- scarletjim
- Dumbledore
- Posts: 6908
- Joined: 13 Oct 2005, 18:32
- FPL:
Re: The value of value (Is there too much focus on team value?)
That's better. lolFinisher1 wrote:I just hate it when team value debates always end up with someone saying "hey guys, making profit is slow because you can keep only half of the money, so therefore maximising team value is not so important".
The thing is, I'm not convinced that anyone says that. People sometimes say it's not wise to make decisions purely to gain (or not lose, in case of drops) £0.1m, but I don't think anyone says team value doesn't matter, everyone knows that a good team value indicates that you have bought players before rises, and therefore before high-scoring periods, so that must be good for the past, then for the future it obviously means you have got those players cheaper than others, so will have more money to spend elsewhere, and more profit ( ) when you sell them, giving more money to spend than your competitors if said players get injured (for example). Who has ever doubted any of that?
-
- Dumbledore
- Posts: 7159
- Joined: 05 Mar 2013, 10:10
Re: The value of value (Is there too much focus on team value?)
I think many members here underestimate the importance of team value, because they always only want to talk about selling values and disregard the significance of current value.scarletjim wrote:Who has ever doubted any of that?
That is where all of this started yesterday, when mikkeelee was enjoying his Martial bandwagon rise to 8.4, so Mav3rick was very busy pointing out that mmikkeelee only gains 0.2 if he sells him.
- scarletjim
- Dumbledore
- Posts: 6908
- Joined: 13 Oct 2005, 18:32
- FPL:
Re: The value of value (Is there too much focus on team value?)
I'm not certain, but are you sure Mav wasn't just pointing out that the £0.4m was a saving rather than a profit?
- Carlos Kickaball
- Dumbledore
- Posts: 7801
- Joined: 04 Sep 2013, 18:02
Re: The value of value (Is there too much focus on team value?)
I think it's often the managers who will be quite reactive that get high TVs early on, but they are also the very same managers who will end up selling the players that have profits on as soon as they stop delivering.
Sigurðsson was a good example last season, be interesting to see what Mahrez owners do if he blanks 3 weeks in a row.
Sigurðsson was a good example last season, be interesting to see what Mahrez owners do if he blanks 3 weeks in a row.
- scarletjim
- Dumbledore
- Posts: 6908
- Joined: 13 Oct 2005, 18:32
- FPL:
Re: The value of value (Is there too much focus on team value?)
...so I'd be interested to know the relationship between early TVs and early points hits taken... For example, if someone had the top TV in GW6, but had taken 5 hits, would that probably be a desirable position to be in or not? Probably not, given the 20 point cost... Interesting...
- Sutter Kane
- Dumbledore
- Posts: 7522
- Joined: 05 Aug 2010, 12:13
- FS Record: Unknown.
- FPL:
Re: The value of value (Is there too much focus on team value?)
This.Carlos Kickaball wrote:I think it's often the managers who will be quite reactive that get high TVs early on, but they are also the very same managers who will end up selling the players that have profits on as soon as they stop delivering.
Sigurðsson was a good example last season, be interesting to see what Mahrez owners do if he blanks 3 weeks in a row.
If you think a player's a must have after such a short time then fair enough but you are tied to keep him for most/all of the season now, otherwise the claim that 'one got him earlier so others are paying more for his points' won't count for much at all as you sold him anyway, releasing only half the profit. If one is on about must have 'in the moment' (ie form) then again, fair enough but also again, his price therefore means little to nothing.
-
- Dumbledore
- Posts: 7159
- Joined: 05 Mar 2013, 10:10
Re: The value of value (Is there too much focus on team value?)
It's not just must-haves, it's about paying less money per points on average.Sutter Kane wrote:This.Carlos Kickaball wrote:I think it's often the managers who will be quite reactive that get high TVs early on, but they are also the very same managers who will end up selling the players that have profits on as soon as they stop delivering.
Sigurðsson was a good example last season, be interesting to see what Mahrez owners do if he blanks 3 weeks in a row.
If you think a player's a must have after such a short time then fair enough but you are tied to keep him for most/all of the season now, otherwise the claim that 'one got him earlier so others are paying more for his points' won't count for much at all as you sold him anyway, releasing only half the profit. If one is on about must have 'in the moment' (ie form) then again, fair enough but also again, his price therefore means little to nothing.
- Red Eye
- Grumpy Old Man
- Posts: 4413
- Joined: 07 May 2006, 07:12
- Location: Republic of Mancunia
- FPL:
Re: The value of value (Is there too much focus on team value?)
If you're thinking of an individual player then generally I think you're right but every 0.2 increase/0.1 profit has to be seen as a marginal gain and the point is they add up. If you consider examples like Mahrez then it may not be so marginal and Finisher's point (and I agree) is basically that your money then goes that much farther than someone who has paid more for the same player(s).Sutter Kane wrote:If you think a player's a must have after such a short time then fair enough but you are tied to keep him for most/all of the season now, otherwise the claim that 'one got him earlier so others are paying more for his points' won't count for much at all as you sold him anyway, releasing only half the profit. If one is on about must have 'in the moment' (ie form) then again, fair enough but also again, his price therefore means little to nothing.
I don't agree with the view that being tied/locked in to a player that has risen is value is a problem - psychology will tell you people are less likely to sell players who have dropped in value due to loss-aversion. I had no problem selling Gomis for a profit to get Martial and I don't think I'll be arsed if I never buy him back and a lot of players are like that. It may become a barrier if a must-have player is out for a short period of time but still, the idea its better to pay top price so that you don't have to worry about that is, to me, nonsensical.
- gallus
- Grumpy Old Man
- Posts: 3921
- Joined: 06 Sep 2014, 11:55
- FPL:
Re: The value of value (Is there too much focus on team value?)
High team value is good if you have it for the right reasons. If you can identify potential bandwagons and bargains before they explode and increase team value as a result that's great, but if you chase last week's points and bring in every double riser you'll spend to many points on transfers and your final rank won't be that good.
- CupidStunt000
- FISOhead
- Posts: 812
- Joined: 27 Sep 2013, 20:09
- FPL:
Re: The value of value (Is there too much focus on team value?)
Sorry but the definition of profit isn't going to change just to make you right.Finisher1 wrote: No, it's just how you define "profit". I understand what you are saying, but in my books it is indeed profit to have paid 8.0 for Martial points, while others are paying 8.4 for his points.
I realise that this is a late reply.
-
- Dumbledore
- Posts: 7159
- Joined: 05 Mar 2013, 10:10
Re: The value of value (Is there too much focus on team value?)
It is a late reply indeed, I don't know why you even posted it and I think mods are going to delete it.CupidStunt000 wrote:Sorry but the definition of profit isn't going to change just to make you right.Finisher1 wrote: No, it's just how you define "profit". I understand what you are saying, but in my books it is indeed profit to have paid 8.0 for Martial points, while others are paying 8.4 for his points.
I realise that this is a late reply.
- Stemania
- FISO Jedi Knight
- Posts: 20448
- Joined: 27 Aug 2006, 11:54
- Location: On the Iron Throne of xG, the seat of The Crown Prince of the Stat Perverts. Or if not, in the STC!
- FS Record: Best: TFF 321st. FPL 129th. FFS Career HoF Peak 2nd (Live 1st). Ability since lost.
- FPL:
- RomynPG
- Dumbledore
- Posts: 9639
- Joined: 13 Oct 2005, 18:32
- FS Record: FPL 134 overall 06/07 ... never close since
- FPL:
Re: The value of value (Is there too much focus on team value?)
Stemania wrote:It is fine.
- From4corners
- FISO Jedi Knight
- Posts: 20107
- Joined: 24 Aug 2009, 22:32
- Location: London
- FPL:
Re: The value of value (Is there too much focus on team value?)
Mine is even later: I just read through it.CupidStunt000 wrote:Sorry but the definition of profit isn't going to change just to make you right.Finisher1 wrote: No, it's just how you define "profit". I understand what you are saying, but in my books it is indeed profit to have paid 8.0 for Martial points, while others are paying 8.4 for his points.
I realise that this is a late reply.
This was funnier though.Carlos Kickaball wrote:
I read that she has huge Bps.
View Latest: 1 Day View Your posts