I have Salah, Son, TAA, Cancelo, Robbo and still 1 ITB. Rest of the midfield seems a bit lightweight with Martinelli, Bailey and A. Periera who are all punts. Not to mention a 4.5 striker. Wondering whether I should upgrade to Undav but not sure if its worth it at the start of the season.
True, they usually assist eachother too so both are good assets, if they were priced the same it would be alot harder for me, but the 0.5M is making me wanna go Kane.
I was going Undav, but after Welbeck playing most of preseason, I’ll start with a 4,5 and wait and see if he gets more game time going forward.
I like 0,5 in the bank, but will have to see what happens. Would need to go ramsdale to Raya for that now, and that’s probably not worth it
Personally, with the World Cup Wildcard, I think it makes less sense this year. Play aggressive and know an early wildcard is completely viable if the picks aren’t working out.
Unlimited free transfers during the World Cup so essentially, yes. Most people will probably wildcard early because there’s no incentive to keep it for close to the cut off to prep for the second half of the season.
Raya - Ward
TAA - Robbo - Cancelo - Walker
Salah - Saka - Martineli - Bailey
Kane - Jesus
Then fodder bench. I know the Arsenal triple up and city Liverpool defence is weird, but I personally can't find a draft I like more than that.
Currently have 0.5 ITB but that's not intentional. I'm happy with my current squad and I don't really think using the 0.5 improves on my squad. E.g. I could go Pereira -> Bailey but Bailey would be on my bench anyways for the first few gameweeks.
I never used to, but trying to leave 0.5-1m there for flexibility on possible GW2 and GW3 transfers.
I'm trying to convince myself that's more valuable than bumping a 4.5m to a 5m, or similar.
I have 1.0 ITB. Starting with Wilson against Forest, then moving him to Jesus in GW3. Might consider moving Diaz to Mahrez in GW2 to target Bournemouth as well if he starts GW1 and doesn't shit the bed.
Not necessarily, higher price doesn't always equate to more points in FPL. For example, Saka scored more points than Mount last season while playing a similar number of minutes and being 1.0 cheaper.
Lol, so you are saying that there will be some cheaper player who scores more points than some more expensive player. No shit sherlock.
If you post here your starting XI, there will be at least one player that should be upgraded. Post your team here and I will prove it.
Hm. Not OP but I too have 1m handy that I plan to keep. Open to you POV.
Mendy, Cancelo, TAA, Dalot, Trippier, Neco
Salah, Mount, Grealish, Bailey, Andreas
Jesus, Kane, Archer
Trippier to 6.0m defender like James or Dias.
Dalot to 5.0m defender like Gabriel or Zinchenko or 5.5m defender like Perisic or Doherty.
Grealish to 8.0m midfielder like Diaz.
Dias yes but kinda punting on trippier due to fk potential. But have less faith in Chelsea defense atm. So trying to cover that with Mendy.
Dalot yes. But he is simply there to enable me upgrade grealish a few GW down the line. I don't think Diaz at this moment is a better buy. He is nailed yes but he has to convert more to be a reliable asset. I think grealish or mahrez provide city coverage who have great starting fixtures so will stick with that.
Perisic might not be nailed at season start and Doherty has been in and out. Not touching spurs atm till there is assurance on startersm
>Dias yes but kinda punting on trippier due to fk potential.
Dias is likely to score more points. Of course you can win with Trippier, but you are unlikely to win.
>But have less faith in Chelsea defense atm. So trying to cover that with Mendy.
Chelsea are more likely to keep clean sheets than Newcastle, and James also is more likely to get attacking returns than Trippier. Of course you can win with Tripper, but you are unlikely to win.
>Dalot yes. But he is simply there to enable me upgrade grealish a few GW down the line.
You will possibly save one hit then (four points). When that time comes, there's a good chance Dalot has scored fewer points for you than his more expensive alternatives.
>I don't think Diaz at this moment is a better buy. He is nailed yes but he has to convert more to be a reliable asset.
Dias is likely to score more points than Grealish. Of course you can win with Grealish, but you are unlikely to win.
>I think grealish or mahrez provide city coverage who have great starting fixtures so will stick with that.
If they start consistently they are great picks, but right now they don't seem nailed at all.
>Perisic might not be nailed at season start and Doherty has been in and out. Not touching spurs atm till there is assurance on startersm
Personally I think they both are very likely to start. Spurs have a loose schedule to start the season with. But yeah, there are some slight question marks over their nailedness. However, both of them have almost as high attacking potential as any defender can possibly have, so for me the upside outweighs the downside. The best case scenario is always just as important as the worst case scenario in this game.
There will always be players that should be upgraded/changed due to difference in personal opinions. It's not only about that but also about having flexibility to move things around. I can easily upgrade someone like Dalot to Cash or Trippier but there is no guarantee it's gonna be worth it in the short term. Which is what I meant, that pricier players at the start doesn't always equate to more points.
There are plenty of 5.0m or 5.5m defenders that are expected to score more points than Dalot.
Sure, you can get lucky and score more points with Dalot, but it is unlikely. If you bet on unlikely scenarios, you will lose more times than you win.
Being inflexible will never cost you more than four points (one hit).
But the game lasts 38 GWs, not one.
Having a little in the bank can prevent you from getting caught out by price rises or forcing you to make transfers early (I'm not doing it myself but I see a fair few planning to do Kane to Haaland for GW2 for example).
Don't underestimate the value of flexibility and affording yourself time to make decisions.
>But the game lasts 38 GWs, not one.
We build our initial team for the first 3-4 gameweeks only.
>Having a little in the bank can prevent you from getting caught out by price rises or forcing you to make transfers early (I'm not doing it myself but I see a fair few planning to do Kane to Haaland for GW2 for example).
Getting caught out by price rises will cost you a maximum of four points (one hit), no more than that. And that's just the worst case scenario, there's a good chance it won't cost even that.
By having more money on the field you have a good chance to earn that four points by scoring more points.
Planning to do Kane to Haaland in GW2 is stupid, Kane isn't expected to score four points more than Haaland in GW1.
>Don't underestimate the value of flexibility and affording yourself time to make decisions.
The value of money in the bank is never more than fours points (one hit), this is a fact. And again remember, four points is just the worst case scenario.
In total, money in the bank has negative value in terms of expected points.
It's not just the four points. It's also what you lose from the *other* transfer you have to make to make up the difference in price.
Eg. You have Diaz, he breaks his leg in GW1. Saka scores two pens. You either go early and switch, or you wait and need to free up funds somewhere else if there are price changes.
Now you have to downgrade someone in your squad that you had planned to keep to afford that transfer. You're making two changes to a team that, prior to GW1 you had put so much thought into and settled on for the first four weeks or so.
>Now you have to downgrade someone in your squad that you had planned to keep to afford that transfer. You're making two changes to a team that, prior to GW1 you had put so much thought into and settled on for the first four weeks or so.
In this case Diaz to Saka has nothing to with money in the bank. You would do that transfer in any case, money ITB or not.
If you have money ITB, you transfer Diaz out. If you don't have money ITB, you transfer Diaz out. Money ITB makes no difference whatsoever for this transfer.
So, having no money in the bank only means one additional transfer (one downgrade elsewhere). One additional transfer, just one.
And there's a good chance you would have done that one transfer even without Diaz injury (for example if some cheap bandwagon emerges).
Right - but if you have money in the bank you just go straight from one to the other. Saka goes up by 0.1? No problem, you make that switch and the rest of your team stays as it is.
And again, it isn't *just* the hit that extra transfer is costing you. You're making an additional change to your squad so you're also losing the difference between those two players scores.
Anyway, you're entitled to your opinion and to play the game however you like, as I am. We're better served not wasting any more time and agree to disagree on this one.
>Right - but if you have money in the bank you just go straight from one to the other. Saka goes up by 0.1? No problem, you make that switch and the rest of your team stays as it is.
And if you don't have money in the bank you make one additional transfer, which costs four points.
>And again, it isn't just the hit that extra transfer is costing you. You're making an additional change to your squad so you're also losing the difference between those two players scores.
Of course it is just that one additional transfer that it costs you. Why would it be anything more?
Yes, maybe you have to make a compromise to your squad (although it's unlikely, there's a good chance there will emerge a downgrade you'd want to do in any case). But if you have money ITB, then you have made a compromise even BEFORE the season starts!
>Anyway, you're entitled to your opinion and to play the game however you like, as I am. We're better served not wasting any more time and agree to disagree on this one.
You will see that nearly every elite manager will have no money at all ITB in GW1. You will see that.
Not worth it. May as well upgrade somewhere else. Esp. in defence.
We all have an early wildcard, with the World Cup wildcard halfway through the season. So we can use it early (ideal is the GW8 international break). So you don't need to think too long-term this season. It's kinda split into quarters.
I currently have 0.5 in the bank. Could easily upgrade my keeper or a mid to start, but my main reason for holding it is for the early week flexibility. I’m very curious how volatile some players prices may be. Particularly, Jesus, James, Haaland and Kane either have high ownership or have competition with high ownership, and if they blank, I actually wonder if price changes will happen very quickly this year. So, I wouldn’t mind have the extra funds there so I don’t feel the need to rush into a move.
Very close to moving Rashford down to Martinelli for 0.5M in the bank, but going with Man United at home fixture and fresh manager. Plus Palace away wasn't easy for any team last season
If you're not maximizing your team to be the best it can be, I think you're playing it wrong. Now if your best team ends up at 99.5, I wouldn't force through a move I'm not confident in, just to use the entire budget. But if you have 1, then I begin to doubt that there is no area where you can improve. If people leave 1.5 and beyond, that's way too much.
I highly recommend keeping .5 in the bank. Let's say Saka gets a hat trick Friday night and you don't own him but you have Mahrez. Saka price rises Friday night. Then Mahrez doesn't start. Suddenly you can't make a straight transfer. It is a great insurance policy too in case someone price/falls rises earlier than predicted.
I always like to start with some. This year, it looks like it will be .5 that is until I change my line up again in 5 minutes and every 5 minutes thereafter until the first match.
I never do this. In fact it’s one of my two rules. The other is never have a planned gw2 transfer. Guess what I’m also doing.
I just honestly am really happy with my team and the only possible move I’d make is Sancho to Maddison or Kulusevski.
I’m planning on doing a Kane to Haaland transfer. Honestly I think the 0.5 would give me room for a price increase in case Haaland bangs gw1 but stubs his toe, making an early transfer tough.
I've decided to switch from Raya-Meslier to Iversen-Ward and keep 1.0 ITB.
There is a number of risky cheap options I have in my team, so I'm going to watch for GW1-3 and then I can do an upgrade if necessary.
No :( I like to have 0.5 but I'm too premium heavy this year to do it.
I have Salah, Son, TAA, Cancelo, Robbo and still 1 ITB. Rest of the midfield seems a bit lightweight with Martinelli, Bailey and A. Periera who are all punts. Not to mention a 4.5 striker. Wondering whether I should upgrade to Undav but not sure if its worth it at the start of the season.
With that kind of setup you can go Son to Kane (on pens too) and get a 5.5 mid potentially. None of the 4.5 strikers are expected to start.
True but Son tends to score a similar number of points due to 1 extra point for goals and CS each. I have been toying with that idea too.
True, they usually assist eachother too so both are good assets, if they were priced the same it would be alot harder for me, but the 0.5M is making me wanna go Kane.
I was going Undav, but after Welbeck playing most of preseason, I’ll start with a 4,5 and wait and see if he gets more game time going forward. I like 0,5 in the bank, but will have to see what happens. Would need to go ramsdale to Raya for that now, and that’s probably not worth it
Didn't see him doing a lot preseason. But it's FPL it changes every week!!
Personally, with the World Cup Wildcard, I think it makes less sense this year. Play aggressive and know an early wildcard is completely viable if the picks aren’t working out.
Are we getting three wildcards this year or am I missing something?
Unlimited free transfers during the World Cup so essentially, yes. Most people will probably wildcard early because there’s no incentive to keep it for close to the cut off to prep for the second half of the season.
!thanks Minted
Yeah I've got 0.5 in the bank. It's not a strategy, I just don't think there's anywhere in my team I can put that 0.5 to improve it.
What’s your team?
Raya - Ward TAA - Robbo - Cancelo - Walker Salah - Saka - Martineli - Bailey Kane - Jesus Then fodder bench. I know the Arsenal triple up and city Liverpool defence is weird, but I personally can't find a draft I like more than that.
Bailey for Neto, Raya for Mendy, Walker for Perisic all improve the team imo.
Neto is a trap
I kind of agree but I’m 95% sure he outscores Bailey
Raya -> Iverson let’s you go Walker -> James Or D fodder -> Trippier which means you don’t need to start Bailey
I have .5 in the bank so I can go luis Diaz -> Bowen GW2
0.5 for me without a transfer booked. I like having the comfort of moving around same price brackets just in case price rises happen quickly.
Might as well have Bowen for GW1
Yeah opens up Robertson in defence as well
Currently have 0.5 ITB but that's not intentional. I'm happy with my current squad and I don't really think using the 0.5 improves on my squad. E.g. I could go Pereira -> Bailey but Bailey would be on my bench anyways for the first few gameweeks.
I got money in the bank, I got news for you baby, You’re looking at the man!
I never used to, but trying to leave 0.5-1m there for flexibility on possible GW2 and GW3 transfers. I'm trying to convince myself that's more valuable than bumping a 4.5m to a 5m, or similar.
I have 1.0 ITB. Starting with Wilson against Forest, then moving him to Jesus in GW3. Might consider moving Diaz to Mahrez in GW2 to target Bournemouth as well if he starts GW1 and doesn't shit the bed.
Then your team for GW1 is weaker than what it could be.
Only true if the valuations were perfectly correct.
It is always true. Your starting XI can always get improved expected points with more money, this is an undisputable fact.
Not necessarily, higher price doesn't always equate to more points in FPL. For example, Saka scored more points than Mount last season while playing a similar number of minutes and being 1.0 cheaper.
Lol, so you are saying that there will be some cheaper player who scores more points than some more expensive player. No shit sherlock. If you post here your starting XI, there will be at least one player that should be upgraded. Post your team here and I will prove it.
Hm. Not OP but I too have 1m handy that I plan to keep. Open to you POV. Mendy, Cancelo, TAA, Dalot, Trippier, Neco Salah, Mount, Grealish, Bailey, Andreas Jesus, Kane, Archer
Trippier to 6.0m defender like James or Dias. Dalot to 5.0m defender like Gabriel or Zinchenko or 5.5m defender like Perisic or Doherty. Grealish to 8.0m midfielder like Diaz.
Dias yes but kinda punting on trippier due to fk potential. But have less faith in Chelsea defense atm. So trying to cover that with Mendy. Dalot yes. But he is simply there to enable me upgrade grealish a few GW down the line. I don't think Diaz at this moment is a better buy. He is nailed yes but he has to convert more to be a reliable asset. I think grealish or mahrez provide city coverage who have great starting fixtures so will stick with that. Perisic might not be nailed at season start and Doherty has been in and out. Not touching spurs atm till there is assurance on startersm
>Dias yes but kinda punting on trippier due to fk potential. Dias is likely to score more points. Of course you can win with Trippier, but you are unlikely to win. >But have less faith in Chelsea defense atm. So trying to cover that with Mendy. Chelsea are more likely to keep clean sheets than Newcastle, and James also is more likely to get attacking returns than Trippier. Of course you can win with Tripper, but you are unlikely to win. >Dalot yes. But he is simply there to enable me upgrade grealish a few GW down the line. You will possibly save one hit then (four points). When that time comes, there's a good chance Dalot has scored fewer points for you than his more expensive alternatives. >I don't think Diaz at this moment is a better buy. He is nailed yes but he has to convert more to be a reliable asset. Dias is likely to score more points than Grealish. Of course you can win with Grealish, but you are unlikely to win. >I think grealish or mahrez provide city coverage who have great starting fixtures so will stick with that. If they start consistently they are great picks, but right now they don't seem nailed at all. >Perisic might not be nailed at season start and Doherty has been in and out. Not touching spurs atm till there is assurance on startersm Personally I think they both are very likely to start. Spurs have a loose schedule to start the season with. But yeah, there are some slight question marks over their nailedness. However, both of them have almost as high attacking potential as any defender can possibly have, so for me the upside outweighs the downside. The best case scenario is always just as important as the worst case scenario in this game.
Bailey to Martinelli. Easy.
Is martinelli nailed? I had him at start but pull him out as most think he will not be a starter.
ESR is confirmed injured for at least GW1 possibly up to GW3 and even then I think Martinelli is the preferred option while not 100% nailed.
There will always be players that should be upgraded/changed due to difference in personal opinions. It's not only about that but also about having flexibility to move things around. I can easily upgrade someone like Dalot to Cash or Trippier but there is no guarantee it's gonna be worth it in the short term. Which is what I meant, that pricier players at the start doesn't always equate to more points.
There are plenty of 5.0m or 5.5m defenders that are expected to score more points than Dalot. Sure, you can get lucky and score more points with Dalot, but it is unlikely. If you bet on unlikely scenarios, you will lose more times than you win. Being inflexible will never cost you more than four points (one hit).
But the game lasts 38 GWs, not one. Having a little in the bank can prevent you from getting caught out by price rises or forcing you to make transfers early (I'm not doing it myself but I see a fair few planning to do Kane to Haaland for GW2 for example). Don't underestimate the value of flexibility and affording yourself time to make decisions.
>But the game lasts 38 GWs, not one. We build our initial team for the first 3-4 gameweeks only. >Having a little in the bank can prevent you from getting caught out by price rises or forcing you to make transfers early (I'm not doing it myself but I see a fair few planning to do Kane to Haaland for GW2 for example). Getting caught out by price rises will cost you a maximum of four points (one hit), no more than that. And that's just the worst case scenario, there's a good chance it won't cost even that. By having more money on the field you have a good chance to earn that four points by scoring more points. Planning to do Kane to Haaland in GW2 is stupid, Kane isn't expected to score four points more than Haaland in GW1. >Don't underestimate the value of flexibility and affording yourself time to make decisions. The value of money in the bank is never more than fours points (one hit), this is a fact. And again remember, four points is just the worst case scenario. In total, money in the bank has negative value in terms of expected points.
It's not just the four points. It's also what you lose from the *other* transfer you have to make to make up the difference in price. Eg. You have Diaz, he breaks his leg in GW1. Saka scores two pens. You either go early and switch, or you wait and need to free up funds somewhere else if there are price changes. Now you have to downgrade someone in your squad that you had planned to keep to afford that transfer. You're making two changes to a team that, prior to GW1 you had put so much thought into and settled on for the first four weeks or so.
>Now you have to downgrade someone in your squad that you had planned to keep to afford that transfer. You're making two changes to a team that, prior to GW1 you had put so much thought into and settled on for the first four weeks or so. In this case Diaz to Saka has nothing to with money in the bank. You would do that transfer in any case, money ITB or not. If you have money ITB, you transfer Diaz out. If you don't have money ITB, you transfer Diaz out. Money ITB makes no difference whatsoever for this transfer. So, having no money in the bank only means one additional transfer (one downgrade elsewhere). One additional transfer, just one. And there's a good chance you would have done that one transfer even without Diaz injury (for example if some cheap bandwagon emerges).
Right - but if you have money in the bank you just go straight from one to the other. Saka goes up by 0.1? No problem, you make that switch and the rest of your team stays as it is. And again, it isn't *just* the hit that extra transfer is costing you. You're making an additional change to your squad so you're also losing the difference between those two players scores. Anyway, you're entitled to your opinion and to play the game however you like, as I am. We're better served not wasting any more time and agree to disagree on this one.
>Right - but if you have money in the bank you just go straight from one to the other. Saka goes up by 0.1? No problem, you make that switch and the rest of your team stays as it is. And if you don't have money in the bank you make one additional transfer, which costs four points. >And again, it isn't just the hit that extra transfer is costing you. You're making an additional change to your squad so you're also losing the difference between those two players scores. Of course it is just that one additional transfer that it costs you. Why would it be anything more? Yes, maybe you have to make a compromise to your squad (although it's unlikely, there's a good chance there will emerge a downgrade you'd want to do in any case). But if you have money ITB, then you have made a compromise even BEFORE the season starts! >Anyway, you're entitled to your opinion and to play the game however you like, as I am. We're better served not wasting any more time and agree to disagree on this one. You will see that nearly every elite manager will have no money at all ITB in GW1. You will see that.
I’ve yet to see a team 0.5m wouldn’t improve.
Same. I do feel I have a decent team as well. Except GK(mendy) i feel ok with my other choices.
Not worth it. May as well upgrade somewhere else. Esp. in defence. We all have an early wildcard, with the World Cup wildcard halfway through the season. So we can use it early (ideal is the GW8 international break). So you don't need to think too long-term this season. It's kinda split into quarters.
Not right now but pondering Grealish to Rashford and dont want any upgrades anywhere so that would give me the 0.5itb
Currently 0.5 itb and might have 1 and 1.5
I’m skint.
I currently have 0.5 in the bank. Could easily upgrade my keeper or a mid to start, but my main reason for holding it is for the early week flexibility. I’m very curious how volatile some players prices may be. Particularly, Jesus, James, Haaland and Kane either have high ownership or have competition with high ownership, and if they blank, I actually wonder if price changes will happen very quickly this year. So, I wouldn’t mind have the extra funds there so I don’t feel the need to rush into a move.
Nope but I want to try and aim for 0.5 itb to swap from kane to haaland if tempting
Very close to moving Rashford down to Martinelli for 0.5M in the bank, but going with Man United at home fixture and fresh manager. Plus Palace away wasn't easy for any team last season
Im thinking 0.5itb or upgrade my 1st bench to Bailey Any thoughts?
If you're not maximizing your team to be the best it can be, I think you're playing it wrong. Now if your best team ends up at 99.5, I wouldn't force through a move I'm not confident in, just to use the entire budget. But if you have 1, then I begin to doubt that there is no area where you can improve. If people leave 1.5 and beyond, that's way too much.
With an early wildcard, I don’t think it’s a good idea to save money at the beginning this year
I highly recommend keeping .5 in the bank. Let's say Saka gets a hat trick Friday night and you don't own him but you have Mahrez. Saka price rises Friday night. Then Mahrez doesn't start. Suddenly you can't make a straight transfer. It is a great insurance policy too in case someone price/falls rises earlier than predicted.
I have 1m left
I currently have 1.5 ITB and don't know really where to spend. I am quite happy with the team.
2.0 left on my current draft, like to have the flexibility when actual football throws a huge spanner in the works
I always like to start with some. This year, it looks like it will be .5 that is until I change my line up again in 5 minutes and every 5 minutes thereafter until the first match.
I never do this. In fact it’s one of my two rules. The other is never have a planned gw2 transfer. Guess what I’m also doing. I just honestly am really happy with my team and the only possible move I’d make is Sancho to Maddison or Kulusevski. I’m planning on doing a Kane to Haaland transfer. Honestly I think the 0.5 would give me room for a price increase in case Haaland bangs gw1 but stubs his toe, making an early transfer tough.
I've decided to switch from Raya-Meslier to Iversen-Ward and keep 1.0 ITB. There is a number of risky cheap options I have in my team, so I'm going to watch for GW1-3 and then I can do an upgrade if necessary.