Robin Van Persie - Is it time to sell?

FutureGuy wrote: »

Rory's gone maaaaaddddd!!!!!!!! MAAAAADDDDDDD!!!

I'm such a bad influence!

It would be either that or play with 8 players! I need to get rid of Demel, Pog and Fellaini anyway. Even with an 8 point hit I'll only field 10! I think a lot of people will take 4 or 8 point hits.

Could really do with City or Chelsea's game being played.

roryc wrote: »

Could really do with City or Chelsea's game being played.

I've only got one player from each of those two so am sort of ambivalent about whether they go ahead or not, although the way I'm sitting in most of my leagues the opportunity to stick with the status quo without having to sell people like Mata and take a chance on who to get in instead would probably be for the best.

I've been toying with the idea of shipping RVP for the last few days and using the last of my money in the bank to bring him back in a couple of weeks, but the more I think about it the more I'm tempted to just play my strong midfield five along with Lambert and Sturridge.

The argument for selling only makes sense if you're bringing in a striker to play instead of him for a couple of weeks, or selling him for good and using the money to beef up. As I'm happy with my RVP-less front seven I'm not convinced it's worth wasting a transfer to bring in a playing striker, and as I will definitely want to bring him back in later I don't have the option of spending the money elsewhere.

For me the arguments for selling him are looking thinner and thinner the more thought I put into it.

The sneaking suspicion I have that he will play against Norwich didn't play much if any part in my thinking but would be a nice sweetener.

FutureGuy wrote: »

Suarez.

Right now, with no injury news and no news on GW29 fictue, I'm keeping Van Persie. However with Chelsea in the Cup, a rest vs Norwich and a potential blank in GW29, selling for 3-4 weeks isn't as unappealing as it was 2 weeks ago.

us 8 that sold 2 weeks ago felt rvp wouldnt start against everton( we will never know but the city result it seems altered fergies selection) and had no plans on captaining him. Most got in suarez for rvp and captained him which was a good move. We sold at 14.1 his maximum price and a price I dont think he will reach again all season. This week is a great week to sell also, us GW 26 innovators certainly didnt get it wrong either though.

keane2097 wrote: »

The lack of really compelling alternatives for people with Sturridge is a key point, especially if like me you're probably going to be forced to sell Mata for GW29 with only Gerrard as a standout replacement.

Cisse at home to stoke maybe but I do agree there arent many options. Just thinking there rvp hasnt actually missed a game yet and if gw 29 went ahead and he starts against norwich some of us will be choking on humble pie.

FutureGuy wrote: »

Not guaranteed just yet.

Hence the "I expect"

I think its odds on that he doesn't start 3 of the next 4 games IF United beat Real

My plan is to bring in those three as it gives me the option to upgrade Suarez to RVP and have the front three of RVP, Sturridge and Lambert, along with Sissoko in MF and Samba replacing Demel.

I actually hope most of the games are off, would just be nice to have City playing as I could field 11. Not taking a 12 point hit!

Benimar wrote: »

I'm not saying selling is the incorrect decision, but it could seriously come back to haunt you.

Certainly. getting rid of the best FF player in year's would always need sufficient reasoning. There's a good chance I'll get him back in a few weeks but it seems crazy to leave a £14m player benched, especially looking at GW29. Nothing is guaranteed, but the indicators point in favour of RVP not starting in 50-75% of the next 4 games.

I'm using the extra cash from RVP to fix the rest of my team, and simulataneously (and indirectly) downgrade Suarez to Sturridge to give me the cash to get RVP back in. I'll happily take an 8 point hit to be in a great position for GW29 onwards.

FYI I don't think this is a close EV call, I think it's considerably in favour of +EV, probably ~60%.

As for why I've done it early, I don't think RVP plays this weekend either way, and Lambert was going up £0.1.

Benimar if chelsea draw the replay is mon or tues next wk even tho chelsea play thurs. That means utd will defo have a cup game the weekend of gw29

roryc wrote: »

For an opinion?

For an opinion to be that it's not even close I'd expect some logic alright.

keane2097 wrote: »

For an opinion to be that it's not even close I'd expect some logic alright.

No thanks. If I was stating it as fact you could expect it.

dahat wrote: »

Most important thing is for those selling or have sold RVP is to have the funds or means availible to get him back if Madrid put Utd out next week.Using the extra money straight away could be very costly.....

Yeah I'm planning on upgrading the rest of my team, but in a roundabout way downgrading Suarez to Sturridge in order to get RVP back in. Worst case scenario for me is United getting knocked out of CL and also being able to play GW29.

Whats an ev call

Iused2likebusts wrote: »

Whats an ev call

I was afraid to ask, if it was the real world I'd have been nodding along stroking my chin:o:pac:

keane2097 wrote: »

lol, ok. Nice sharing, good discussion, wp.

Expecting logic on an opinion is hardly the right setting to open a discussion on the matter now is it!

For anyone not used to gambling/chance statistical analysis, EV stands for Expected Value. It deals with variance. So if you were in this exact situation with RVP 1000 times, how often do you think it would be the right decision. Anything above 500 is +EV, anything below is -EV.

Generally in mathematical concepts like this the edge is minute, like in the situation with taking a points hit for Wilson last week. I think it was a very close call but fractionally +EV. As it turned out it would have been a bad move as he only scored 1 point and players like Demel somehow got 2, but with all factors taken into account beforehand I think it was slightly +EV.

In this situation I think it is a bit higher, probably 55-60%. But there are so many variables to take into account that trying to work out an exact figure would be close to impossible, hence why I think it's a bit silly for people asking me to prove it. I generally do rough calculations when there are a lot of variables, the Wilson one was a lot easier to calculate.

roryc wrote: »

Expecting logic on an opinion is hardly the right setting to open a discussion on the matter now is it!

For anyone not used to gambling/chance statistical analysis, EV stands for Expected Value. It deals with variance. So if you were in this exact situation with RVP 1000 times, how often do you think it would be the right decision. Anything above 500 is +EV, anything below is -EV.

Generally in mathematical concepts like this the edge is minute, like in the situation with taking a points hit for Wilson last week. I think it was a very close call but fractionally +EV. As it turned out it would have been a bad move as he only scored 1 point and players like Demel somehow got 2, but with all factors taken into account beforehand I think it was slightly +EV.

In this situation I think it is a bit higher, probably 55-60%. But there are so many variables to take into account that trying to work out an exact figure would be close to impossible, hence why I think it's a bit silly for people asking me to prove it. I generally do rough calculations when there are a lot of variables, the Wilson one was a lot easier to calculate.

Oh Fúck, that sounds suspiciously like the black balls/ white balls analogy we had a while back:P:pac

Lemlin wrote: »

As I said, I have Suarez and Lambert and would see them as the default two with the five in midfield. Who's your third striker if you have Suarez and Lambert?

+1

I am the same position and cannot provide a satisfactory answer to this question