Connect with us

The Game

LAWS OF DT: Never Sideways Trade

Glen from WA asks how the classic Dream Team Laws have held up in 2011. He begins with the law that most of us follow – never sideways trade and never trade a premium. This is the first of a series of articles looking at the ‘traditional’ laws of DT.

FIRST LAW: Never Sideways Trade and Never Trade a Premium (excluding injury)

We’ll have a look at a couple of popular trades that people made and see whether this law has held up.

Nick to Jack: This was a popular trade after round 6 with Jack coming off scores of 105 and 91 with Nick struggling with 80 and 43. Although this trade would have made someone about 65k, since then Nick has averaged 104 and Jack has averaged only 75. Nick is now on a steep incline upwards, while Jack’s price is falling slowly but painfully. Most people value a trade at over 100k, so for 65k and a loss of 30 points a round this was a long way short of a good return.

Good Trade Bad Trade: Riewoldtingly bad trade.

The TKOL special: Don’t ask me why but tkol decided to trade Montagna to Mitchell after the Hawks bye in round 6. Monty had averaged 96  up to round 6 and Mitchell had averaged 119. Monty also had a bye coming up. Alright, maybe there was some logic to it, but seriously, this  was a horrible trade. The trade would have cost him 20k and since then Mitchell has played three games for an average 83.3 while Monty has played two with a 130 point average. Even with the bye Monty has outscored Mitchell by 10 points (260 vs 250). Add a rookie’s 70 or 80 to that and you looking at wasting a trade, 20k and 90 odd points.

Good Trade Bad Trade: Lose-all-respect-as-a-dreamteamer bad trade.

Bewick, Irons etc to Curnow: Picking up Curnow after two rounds definitely paid off. Although he had an unfortunate shoulder injury stalling his progress, he still made you a rapid 180k and gave you 97 points a week to play with. Once he comes back he may still be a keeper for some teams with weaker midfields. Bewick and Irons on the other hand, have hardly played and produced disappointing 30’s and 40’s when they have.

Good Trade Bad Trade: Good trade.

Broughton to Adcock: This would certainly have been a good trade, especially when Radcock was still cheaper than Broughton. It would have made you points, and although Broughton finally tonned up in Round 9, Adcock is looking like one of the top couple of defenders for
2011. There is a side point though; if you had have brought-in (pardon the pun) Enright or someone else instead of Adcock this would have been a waste, gaining only a couple of points a week.

Good Trade Bad Trade: Good trade, but only if you picked Adcock to bring in.

Heath Shaw to Enright: This would have been very tempting after round 2 with Shaw managing only 140 points in the first two games while Enright scored a whooping 230. This trade would have cost you about 40k. Since then however, Enright has averaged 79 while Shaw has averaged a touch over 100. To add insult to injury, Shaw is also worth 65 grand more that Enright now, taking the total cost to over 100k.

Good Trade Bad Trade: Delete-you-team bad trade.

My Verdict: Never sideways trade a premium. Although a few may have paid off, the majority of the examples were just a waste of a trade. The best trades, like getting in Curnow after round two, show that grabbing a rookie you may have missed can be worthwhile but trading premiums after round two is too much of a risk. While Broughton out may have worked, a trade like Heath Shaw to Enright has proved terrible. Of course, with hindsight, it may be possible to find a few sideways trades that would have definitely worked, aka bringing in Fyfe for an underperforming forward, but in most cases you will just waste a trade.

What is your verdict on the first law of DT?

– sent in by Glen from WA

DT Talk - covering AFL Fantasy and other games since 2007.

More in The Game