nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

FPL Team Value 2015/2016

Invincible

Its not the be all and end all, but it facilitates getting the more expensive players into your team later when they're on form. At the moment workmate has a team value of £101M & .1 itb, but he's on wildcard. My team value is £99.7 & .5 itb, with free transfers only.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

CSF

podge018 wrote: »

How have you actually done that? Without knowing your history, all you've proved is that it's possible to have a very high team value. How were you placed points-wise? And if you hadn't chased team value and took points hits to do this where might you have been placed instead?

Bizarre that you think you've silenced the nay-sayers with absolutely no facts other than how good you are at increasing value.

I think his post was fairly detailed but even still, I don't think it takes much explaining. A guy who has 106 million to pick his team in January has a decided advantage over he who has 103.5.

This isn't advocating a 'make all your transfers based on value approach'. The pros absolutely have to be weighed up against the cons. If Aguero was bizarrely on a .3 drop this week I would stay with him. But even making your transfers on the right day can have a positive impact of a million or 2 by January.

The argument isn't that the team with the highest value wins, rather that one should try and maximise their team value to the most without negatively impacting your points score.

To say the team with the highest value should win would be foolish, but to discount value as something you don't need to pay attention to is equally so. Success in this game is generally about obsessing over the minor details, despite what the guy who had a great season while logging into his team weekly on a Friday will tell you.

iroced

podge018 wrote: »

How have you actually done that? Without knowing your history, all you've proved is that it's possible to have a very high team value. How were you placed points-wise? And if you hadn't chased team value and took points hits to do this where might you have been placed instead?

Bizarre that you think you've silenced the nay-sayers with absolutely no facts other than how good you are at increasing value.

I think you missed his points.

He said it's possible to increase your resale team value by £2-3m (actually it's possible to raise it a lot more even with the current system e.g. up to £5-6m by January

) without damaging your points total.
Of course, playing that way, you can't know how you'd scored playing a different way (unless you deliberately monitor it with a second team, which is officially forbidden) but what you do know is how well you're doing. FHFC reached the top 100 OR last year so it's pretty safe to say his team-value approach is not affecting his points total

.

Anyway, what is a "nay-sayers"? I mean nay to what?

podge018

iroced wrote: »

Anyway, what is a "nay-sayers"? I mean nay to what?

People writing off, or making out its somehow silly to look after your value

All I'm saying is I read his post and it came across as 1. Of course team value matters. 2. I play the game to increase team value. 3. So you're wrong.

There was nothing in it alone to show this was the correct way to prioritise things.

Ziegler1988

podge018 wrote: »

All I'm saying is I read his post and it came across as 1. Of course team value matters. 2. I play the game to increase team value. 3. So you're wrong.

There was nothing in it alone to show this was the correct way to prioritise things.

There's no correct way to play the game. 3-4-3 is the most common yet I'm sure people with 4 or even 5 defenders are beating me. Likewise, building team value is nice and gives you more options. How you choose to use that extra money is the key part. I keep an eye on price changes and will make early transfers, but I would never wildcard or take hits mostly to protect/increase team value

CSF

Ziegler1988 wrote: »

There's no correct way to play the game. 3-4-3 is the most common yet I'm sure people with 4 or even 5 defenders are beating me. Likewise, building team value is nice and gives you more options. How you choose to use that extra money is the key part. I keep an eye on price changes and will make early transfers, but I would never wildcard or take hits mostly to protect/increase team value

I would argue there is a correct way. To meticulously obsess over all the data available so that even when you decide to stick with your player who is dropping ahead of the guy with a .2 rise, you knew exactly the opportunity cost of making either decision.

podge018

fwiw, I agree with almost all FHFC says, I just don't think he backed up his assertions well.

I had no idea he finished top 100, that speaks for itself.

iroced

podge018 wrote: »

All I'm saying is I read his post and it came across as 1. Of course team value matters. 2. I play the game to increase team value. 3. So you're wrong.

There was nothing in it alone to show this was the correct way to prioritise things.

Right. I guess it's a misunderstanding then

.
Think his point was I increased my resale value by £6-7m by January (FHFC was being very modest with £2-3m) and still managed a comfy top 5k OR, then, you guys who claim it's silly to look after your team value are wrong. It doesn't mean it's the only way to perform though.

podge018 wrote: »

I had no idea he finished top 100, that speaks for itself.

He didn't. Just reached it. The loser couldn't handle the pressure :pac:...

podge018 wrote: »

fwiw, I agree with almost all FHFC says, I just don't think he backed up his assertions well.

I can give a few of mines

. I played my Jan WC during GW23 last year. My resale value was around £105m then. I notably cashed in importantly on Diego Costa & Austin (both players I didn't get back though I should for the latter for his DGW...). A little less on Hart & Wisdom (both were out for definite too). Silva was a different story. He's been in and out several times.
My OR was about 20-30k. So it is indeed possible to get a decent OR while increasing your tV with reason :cool:.

I finished the season at ~9k.

FHFC

podge018 wrote: »

How have you actually done that? Without knowing your history, all you've proved is that it's possible to have a very high team value. How were you placed points-wise? And if you hadn't chased team value and took points hits to do this where might you have been placed instead?

Bizarre that you think you've silenced the nay-sayers with absolutely no facts other than how good you are at increasing value.

I didnt want to seem to boast about ranking but I take the point re its relevance to the topic. In the pre christmas '14 period when I was building up my TV below are my OR from GW10-20 for illustration that it dint adversely affect my rank.

GW Total TV OR
Gameweek 10 £105.2m 4,066
Gameweek 11 £105.5m 2,841
Gameweek 12 £106.2m 2,463
Gameweek 13 £106.2m 4,306
Gameweek 14 £106.3m 5,243
Gameweek 15 £106.4m 2,018
Gameweek 16 £106.6m 343
Gameweek 17 £107.4m 609
Gameweek 18 £107.5m 1,028
Gameweek 19 £107.6m 749
Gameweek 20 £108.0m 745

I then screwed up my Jan wildcard, fell 20k before clawing back to a 5k finish. The year before I finished 8k overall in my first ever year playing.

I took 17 hits last year (-68) points but very few of them primarily motivated by value. I believe in taking points hits where needed and most paid off over the medium term IMO. Took some stupids ones - on one ocasion I brought Ballotelli in for -4 and captained him!!

iroced wrote: »

Not sure this is "real". Don't forget we only have 2 price changes GWs data so far (we're starting the third), one of them being a HUGE WC week. So of course £0.2m rises were very hard to reach.

But there seems to be less active WCs this week (maybe with the international break approaching some people are holding on 'till then, I know I am ) and Mahrez already rose twice.

I was thinking about that part of my post afterwards and I think you are spot on. The high amount of wildcards in play due to the low scoring start to the season may be why the second rises are slower coming.

iroced wrote: »

The tied up value in premium players is always a problem though. Not only there is the value alone that may impede you to get the player back but there's the potentially wasted 2 (or more if you can't do the straight swap because of the lost tied up value) transfers (and the more the season goes the more precious tranfers become).

So, late in the season, we are sometimes reluctant to get rid of premium players in which we have £0.5m or more resale value tied in.

This is always going to happen when a player not highly owned early on, like Sanchez last year, becomes a long term keeper and rises steadily. Its not really anything to do with whether you chase value or not. In fact, as I alluded to in my OP the fact that my resale value was high allowed me to sell Sanchez around the time you did, in confidence that I could afford to buy him back even for 0.3 or 0.4 more.

podge018 wrote: »

All I'm saying is I read his post and it came across as 1. Of course team value matters. 2. I play the game to increase team value. 3. So you're wrong.

There was nothing in it alone to show this was the correct way to prioritise things.

Maybe read this part again then.. "not everyone will want to or agree that its worth playing with a significant eye on value up till Xmas, and thats fine. This is how I play the game, how I like to play it, not everyones cup of tea." I am genuinely not preaching to anyone how to play the game, focusing on value as well as points is time consuming and tedious in many ways.

What I am saying is that people who say (a) its not possible to build up a much higher team value than others due to the recent price change trends and (b) its pointless to do so any way as there no major advantage in it - are wrong and I do stand over that. The figures I posted I think demonstrate that factually. Various throw away comments that come into every discussion about team value or price changes to this effect have bugged me kately and I want to put it out there and back it up that I disagree with this (ie, the statements at (a) and (b), not whether somebody decides to chase value or not)

FHFC

iroced wrote: »

Right. I guess it's a misunderstanding then .
Think his point was I increased my resale value by £6-7m by January (FHFC was being very modest with £2-3m)

I was talking about having 2-3m more than competitors.

Top 1,000 average was 105, I had 108, you were maybe 107.

FHFC

Current average squad values:

Top 1000: 100.4m
Overall: 99.8m

http://t.co/jlEfZXrBST http://t.co/oe7bRUz1zK

Iused2likebusts

FHFC wrote: »

Current average squad values:

Top 1000: 100.4m
Overall: 99.8m

http://t.co/jlEfZXrBST http://t.co/oe7bRUz1zK

Who did u sign this week

Benimar

Current TV - 101.4m
Re-sale value - 100.5m

Swiper the fox

FHFC wrote: »

Current average squad values:

Top 1000: 100.4m
Overall: 99.8m

http://t.co/jlEfZXrBST http://t.co/oe7bRUz1zK

Assuming that's overall rather than resale then I'm currently above average with a team value of 99.9:P

Resale 99.5:o

I would have thought the current top 1000 would all have had Mahrez, Darmian etc, surprising to see quite a low value for players who have had all the top dogs.

FHFC

Iused2likebusts wrote: »

Who did u sign this week

Yaya for Payet.

Probably leave it at that as Chelsea play Sat do can get Pedro Sat pm if i want him.

gazump123

Resale: 100.3
Total: 101.4
0.1 in the bank.

Could someone explain how resale value works please?

Swiper the fox

gazump123 wrote: »

Resale: 100.3
Total: 101.4
0.1 in the bank.

Could someone explain how resale value works please?

The overall value is the price it would cost to buy all your players from scratch, resale is what you get if you sell them all.
For every .2 your player rises you only gain .1 in resale, if your player rises .3 you still only get .1 profit on sale, if he goes to .4 you get .2 etc.

Every time your player falls you lose that, the same rules don't apply.
In reality resale is all that matters.
I hope that explains it but you could probably get all that on the site.

gazump123

Swiper the fox wrote: »

The overall value is the price it would cost to buy all your players from scratch, resale is what you get if you sell them all.
For every .2 your player rises you only gain .1 in resale, if your player rises .3 you still only get .1 profit on sale, if he goes to .4 you get .2 etc.

Every time your player falls you lose that, the same rules don't apply.
In reality resale is all that matters.
I hope that explains it but you could probably get all that on the site.

Cheers. So a rise of 0.1 is of no use really unless he rises again?

Neoulous

Swiper the fox wrote: »

I would have thought the current top 1000 would all have had Mahrez, Darmian etc, surprising to see quite a low value for players who have had all the top dogs.

I'm not top 1000 but had a decent start, had a couple of early risers (Mahrez, Gomis, Richards, Payet) but many fallers too who I didn't take enough care of. Hence my value did not rise that much.
TV: £100.9m
RV: £100.0m

As many of you said, it's more important to watch out for fallers than jump early on risers.

[Deleted User]

gazump123 wrote: »

Cheers. So a rise of 0.1 is of no use really unless he rises again?

I suppose the use is that it's hopefully pricing others out. I'm hoping Aguero rises a few more times as my rival doesn't have him.

gormdubhgorm

TV 101.5m
Resale 100.5

The previous gameweek I wildcarded because of the volatile price rises and falls.

PARlance

Dónal wrote: »

I suppose the use is that it's hopefully pricing others out. I'm hoping Aguero rises a few more times as my rival doesn't have him.

It also gives you the comfort/cushion of allowing one fall.

menoscemo

How is the Value of GW3 Wildcarders coming on?

I'm now up to 101.6 TV with 100.7 Resale.

I am pretty happy with that as it definitely gives me a good edge. My only regret is going with Chadli over Ayew in the end.

Colking

menoscemo wrote: »

How is the Value of GW3 Wildcarders coming on?

I'm now up to 101.6 TV with 100.7 Resale.

I am pretty happy with that as it definitely gives me a good edge. My only regret is going with Chadli over Ayew in the end.

WC currently underway 102.2 TV with a 100.7 Resale. Hopefully this continues to grow nicely over the next 2 weeks.

spock.

menoscemo wrote:

How is the Value of GW3 Wildcarders coming on?

I'm now up to 101.6 TV with 100.7 Resale.

I am pretty happy with that as it definitely gives me a good edge. My only regret is going with Chadli over Ayew in the end.

101.7 TV with 100.7 resale
It could be a bit higher if I went with Gomis over Ayew and Yaya over Silva but points > value

iroced

I haven't WCed yet. Still don't know if I will during this international break.

I'm on £101.4 TV & £100.5M resale. Happy to see I'm not that far back GW3 WCers so far

. Though Coates will eventually drag me down £0.1m unless...

ElTel

TV 99.3 1.7 itb. Resale value 100.2
WC still intact and won't be using it this week.

FHFC

iroced wrote: »

I haven't WCed yet. Still don't know if I will during this international break.

I'm on £101.4 TV & £100.5M resale. Happy to see I'm not that far back GW3 WCers so far . Though Coates will eventually drag me down £0.1m unless... .

Just to try to piss you off a little like i used to do last year...

102.4 TV
100.9 Resale

GW3 wildcards rule!!

F1ngers

TV - 100.6 + 1.7 itb.
RV - 100.9.

GW3 wc too.

greedygoblin

97.0 TV + 5.0 ITB.
100.8 resale value.

GW3 wildcarder also.

Benimar

Another GW3 wild carder.

TV 102.0m
Resale 100.7m

Delighted with the lack of big transfers over the last few days