Paulista wrote:I don't think Ville has intentionally been patient with Costa, I just think he's a set and a forget option.
I don't know about VR (and I don't accept him as any definitive benchmark to be honest) but I think this is a very good comment. The 'set and forget' player is invaluable in FPL because of the reduced need for FTs and especially hits. Essentially that means getting a player for their points over, say, 10 games rather than their points over, say, 3 games.
To do that you have to be confident in a player and their team. So patience isn't the word really; it's more about using a longer-term perspective rather than a shorter-term (knee-jerky) one. Hazard has been brilliant all season and I have essentially had the view that the points will come when he's playing like that, they always have done before. But I'd have been ill-advised to exercise the same "patience" with Hazard last season because neither he nor his team were playing well at all, in fact Chelsea spent half a season at least in some kind of meltdown and Hazard was no exception. PB told me I was a
"Hazard fanboy" and he's absolutely right; I am when Hazard is playing so well. But if I don't nevertheless exercise some objectivity about him then I'll never be a good FPL manager.
Sanchez is a similar case. He was pretty essential when playing OOP #9; removing him in GW13 when I thought he may be injured was my biggest single mistake of the season, I had to take 2 hits to get him back 2 weeks later having missed 37 points (I think it was) in the 2 weeks I was without him. But removing him in GW26 (when he had a blank) and not getting him back ever since has been a good call; this time Arsenal have been in meltdown (it may be turning now) and he has less threat at #11 anyway.
So, I don't think a rule or formula can be extracted here. You have to assess circumstances; it is important not to assume that Hazard is Hazard or Aguero is Aguero because that's misleading; players are affected by their teams, by positional changes, by psychological and physiological factors and you have to try to read those. That's why knowing a team well can really help; I generally do very well with Chelsea players because I watch them a fair bit live and can read subtle changes, trends, body language and so on that most others (and often stats tables too) will miss. I also factor psychology into my decision-making and I believe that helps me (although I know some others consider that to be subjective nonsense). But I make a lot of mistakes with Kane; I don't have the records but I have a long, long history of captaining him when he fails, not captaining him when he hauls, taking him out of my team just before he gets lots of points and bringing him in just before he doesn't.
Perhaps it's just that I don't know Spurs as well.
Aldershot Rejects wrote:It would be interesting to know if anyone has done any research on this, but I suspect that the premium players fallow periods tend, on average, to be shorter than the lesser players.
Well, they are premium players for a reason (well, mostly; there's always Sturridge to confound any generalisation!). But "fallow" runs isn't the measure really, is it? You are talking about total points over a run of games (PPG) while in your team and whether (captaincy aside) that represents value. Last season Aguero scored once in his first 7 PL games (including 5 consecutive blanks); he then scored 5 in his 8th PL game against Newcastle. Could you have predicted that? Actually maybe you could (not the huge haul but the return to form) because the haul came on 3rd October after Aguero had scored in the C1C (22/9) and CL (30/9). The signs of a return to goalscoring form were there, they just hadn't arrived yet in the PL.
If we can get beyond the "who's right, who's wrong" mindset (
see, look, Costa just scored twice, that proves VR was clever to keep him) then this is a very important subject within FPL. The key premiums are hugely influential in the game and anything that can provide an edge about when to get them, when to hold them and when to lose them can help enormously. I started on this in my RMT when I was making notes about "what makes a player essential" but I never completed that survey. Maybe it's something I should return to at some stage. But it's an important development area (and discussion point) in any case.
Stemania wrote:Perhaps it's to be expected because some of our transfers will be made after the new information of (perhaps a run of) stellar performances by big guns, when we've by definition missed a big haul. Although for sure many other transfers will be made more pre-emptively.
On some occasions I find that the aggressive price change system makes it tough to be patient. If two players don't feel that far apart, one is rising (and scoring) and one is dropping like a stone (and isn't scoring), it's incredibly difficult not to make the switch. Otherwise, add together a few 0.5m swings of that kind and your TV/buying power in both the short term and towards the end of the season could be very different.
If any impending price changes will scupper that I often feel obliged to throw patience out the window to make sure my plans are still viable. It's a bit of a balancing act between judgement and pragmatism.
Also all very true. So now we have to work on our own psychology as well as reading the runes about a player. The price change mechanism is a big one in that regard. One top 200 player I know of got Zlatan in early last week to catch the impending price rise (which didn't happen). He had a TV over 108m so surely didn't need to worry about that but it can become almost a reflex if you aren't careful. And then, of course, Zlatan got injured and had to be removed for a hit. I see 3 questionable decisions in succession there; (1) getting Zlatan at all; (2) getting him early when the Anderlecht game could easily be 120 minutes (and was) and materially affected the chance of Zlatan playing against Burnley; (3) replacing him with Rashford (which seems akin to the frying pan to the fire to me; doubtless Rashford will now do well on Thursday to make me wrong). Although the Rashford switch could perhaps be seen as a high-risk, high-upside punt for someone who'll wildcard the following week.
I know it's not the done thing to suggest that highly ranked managers are influenced by the FFS herd mechanism but I truly think that many of them are. There's a lot of fear of making an unique mistake or missing out on the smart move that goes on. That's a different subject, perhaps, but the part about our self-control in the face of price movements or popular bandwagons does factor into this discussion I think.