Geezers! Welcome back to the first edition of the TWS Story Series, where Champions Norwich recite their glorious tale. Before you venture into Part 2 of the Norwich Story, remember to check out Part 1 if you haven’t already.
Feel free to interview The Shadow and his team further in the comments below.
Sent: Tue, Jul 16, 2013
I like the idea of putting in three bids of 6 tokens each for the players between 20-22m because they aren’t paltry bids but as you say it’s finding which ones – I would be very surprised if we weren’t successful with at least one of these but possibly more.
From: The Shadow
Sent: Tue, Jul 18, 2013
My goal is to finish first which right now means passing Fulham. To do that we need to make up about 80 in value spending no more than 30 tokens. . . . I do not think we can do it all this round because defenders aren’t high value enough. But if we could make up approx 54 of the gap spending only 18 tokens we will have done well this round . . . I don’t think we can afford not to pick up significant value this round. So bidding 6 for players makes sense to me. Bidding too low and risking only nabbing one player this round doesn’t look viable to me as I don’t want to be that far behind the leaders.
Sent: Sat, Jul 20, 2013
Cool! Be nice to see a full contingent at the back tomorrow!
From: The Shadow
Sent: Sat, 20 Jul 2013
I think we can win all three and steal a march on some teams.
Norwich basically sits out the first transfer window. Norwich wants players – all incoming offers are asking us to sell players. Conservative, high ROI bidding and the failure to land Ronaldo has us sitting in the middle of the standings 80m off of Fulham’s pace. But we have 30 more tokens than Fulham, and we decide it’s time for a complete change of strategy going into round 5. The TWS game is at its core a game about bidding and winning players: and that’s what Norwich decides to do now. Win every bid possible, starting with 3 defenders for our three open slots this round. For Round 5 we come up with the 666 strategy. Three bids of six tokens each targeting three players at lower ROI than we have been. This round is not about chasing high value players or players who are likely to rise in value – it’s about who can we most likely land. We choose Coentrao, Agger, and Nastasic, three players in the 18-19 value range. Literally at the last minute, we play a hunch that 6 might not be enough to land Nastasic and 666 becomes 667 with a seven token bid on him. It pays off. No one bids on Coentrao, surprisingly we have to win a tie breaker for Agger at six, and fortuitously we win another tiebreaker for Nastasic at seven, thank the gods of fantasy football for the inspiration to raise our bid to seven. The 666 strategy has to survive 2 tiebreakers but works. Norwich goes three for three and significantly closes the gap on the leader Fulham.
Sent: Thu, Jul 25, 2013
Subject: 6 fo’ 6
Going into this round it was mentioned by the Shadow that perhaps we might look at bidding big for 2 mids and going for a cheaper 3rd option. This idea I’m keen on and so decided to have a quick look to see what sort of way we could go.
Thankfully the way things have gone so far we have a great ROI but at the end that counts for little and it’s all down to final squad value so I think from now on we should concentrate on bringing high value players even if we have to pay for them as we should be able to outbid all the other teams at the top, with only Liverpool close to us with tokens remaining. The only problem with regards this though is we are not just bidding against our current competitors at the top but the rest who haven’t managed to spend their funds yet, I would worry that if we were to go for the top few players in each round we could out gunned by teams looking to say they signed the top players, without any real interest in how it affects their spending in the following rounds . . . I would imagine that it will take us bids in the double figures to secure these targets so my thinking is maybe to go for players in the region of Gundogan and Pastore around the 12 mark? Perhaps this is too high? If nothing else it is a starting point for discussion.
If we take our 55 tokens left and say allocate 3 or 4 to our cheap midfielder and 1 or 2 to our goalkeeper it leaves us with about 12.5 for each of the other positions I guess now is just figuring out how best to maximize it’s worth!
This round we want to duplicate what we did in round 5 by filling all three of open midfielder slots – going six fo’ six in the two rounds. Up until now, Nastasic at 7 tokens is the most expensive player on our roster. Six token bids won’t cut it anymore though. The players we want just won’t be available at that price, so we dust the cobwebs off of the checkbook and prepare to bid 12 tokens each for Gundagon and Pastore. These bids don’t fit with our past pattern of high ROI bids, Gundagon and Pastore are good players, but not 12 token good. But as the player pool dwindles and a number of teams seem to be still rich with tokens, it appears overall ROI is dropping. We hope to make up for the decline in our own ROI with a 2 token flyer on a lower value midfielder – Veratti. We go three for three again and are shooting up the standings.
From: The Shadow
Sent: Aug 2, 2013
Subject: Chivas means Little Goats
I am in favor of using the upcoming transfer round to target big value players even if it means doing 2 for 1 or even 3 for 1. I think we’ve done a good job filling our roster spots but there are still some good players out there I’d like to have room to bid for. 1 60 player rather than 2 30s on the roster makes that so much easier. Of course we have to continue to land players to be able to trade 3 for 1.
This round, I’d like to shoot for 1 big value striker and two cheap bids and continue to nominate crap players to screw people who are counting on the homeless allocation to overtake us.
On the Transfer Chat Window:
Fulham Owner: If everyone refuses to trade with Norwich, their value will be maxed out and they won’t be able to win. (paraphrased)
The strategy of winning every bid we put in that Norwich has used the past two rounds continues into round 7. We have 2 open striker spots and we fill them both. That’s eight of eight open slots filled in the last three rounds. Unfortunately we miss out on our big target El Shaarawy and we now have every roster filled except one GK.
Several teams are seems to be leaving roster spots open as if they are intentionally planning on spending high on big players and then rely on filling their roster spots in the homeless draft. We had begun to try to offset this last round by nominating 5 midfielders from MLS side Chivas USA (‘chivas’ apparently is slang for ‘little goats’ and given the way the quality of their lineup, their players are the perfect goats to stick teams with come time for the homeless draft). With our roster largely full, from here on out, Norwich will use its nominations on a combination of players from Chivas and Chinese league teams.
Norwich is now at the top of the standings, but we are at 311m total value and well off our target. And it seems the whole league now knows that 311 is not good enough and it’s unlikely we are going to move much higher by adding a single GK. This would be fine as we wanted to win players, we have won players, and we had planned to use this to our advantage in next week’s transfer window by trying to exchange multiple mid -level players for single upper tier players. However a concerning set of messages appears in the Transfer Window Simulator chat room. Teams have begun to talk about freezing Norwich out of the transfer window. If Norwich can’t trade, we can’t add enough value to win. If the freeze-out comes to pass, Norwich has no hope of the title.
Fortunately, hope does arrive in the form of two messages: one comes from our arch rival Fulham; the other will become the catalyst for the most critical event of the whole season, and it turns up from an anonymous source.
To be concluded . . .