DT 2011 Rucks Thread

[54Dogs]

Any interest in Hale if DP?

Moves like a glacier and turns like the Queen Mary but is certainly underpriced now he's the lead ruck at Hawthorn. Will get plenty of TOG with the Hawks limited ruck stocks and should push forward as well if Roughy pinch hits. Can average 75 without too many issues IMO.

 

[favourites]

I think he will be the 2nd ruck and mainly play as a key fwd. I suspect if Bailey is fit he will take the number one ruck. I suspect rough will play more backline as the big brut they have been missing, just need to keep an eye on haw training reports.

 

[Ollies]

Am I missing something with the Hawthorn rucks? What makes Bailey the likely number 1 ruck? What has happened to Renouf?

With regard to Hale Dogs got it one when he said moves like a glacier and turns like the queen mary. That makes him very suss as a forward and if Renouf and Bailey are ahead of him as rucks he would struggle to get a game imo.

 

[favourites]

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...er-for-defenders/story-e6frf9jf-1225974657737

"Haley will definitely be in the forward line, too," Franklin said. "I think there's going to be three tall targets. It's going to be a pretty dangerous forward line."

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...er-for-defenders/story-e6frf9jf-1225974657737

It also mentions Roughead won't go back. So I was wrong with that prediction. I always assumed that Bailey was #1 ruck but due to injuries he hasn't played. I could be completely off track but my opinion is Renouf isn't anything special outside of the ruck and that is why they traded for Hale.

http://www.hawthornfc.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/4742/newsid/106467/default.aspx

Max Bailey continues to train well in his return from a third knee reconstruction

http://www.hawthornfc.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/4742/newsid/106467/default.aspx

He will be cherry ripe round 1, it's just a matter of can he stay injury free.

 

[Sergian]

At the moment I have Petrie as my second ruck, much like everyone else. However, I have a really bad feeling about his 2011 season. I think he's going to provide everyone with a whole heap of problems. He'll miss games if he's sore, that's for sure. I think with all the issues next year presents with byes and the like he may actually be more trouble than he's worth. People seem to be expecting Daw to get games to cover Petrie but this seems highly unlikely to me. I'm wondering if it's worth spending a bit of extra cash for a Tippett or McEvoy for that second ruck position.

 

[Ollies]

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...er-for-defenders/story-e6frf9jf-1225974657737



http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...er-for-defenders/story-e6frf9jf-1225974657737

It also mentions Roughead won't go back. So I was wrong with that prediction. I always assumed that Bailey was #1 ruck but due to injuries he hasn't played. I could be completely off track but my opinion is Renouf isn't anything special outside of the ruck and that is why they traded for Hale.

http://www.hawthornfc.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/4742/newsid/106467/default.aspx



http://www.hawthornfc.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/4742/newsid/106467/default.aspx

He will be cherry ripe round 1, it's just a matter of can he stay injury free.

I sincerely hope Bailey can get an injury free run. But with 6 games (Ave 32 DT) and 3 knee re-co over 5 years I just can't join the love fest.

 

[timskul]

Another option not discussed, and a very unlikely one at that, Petrie as first bench ruck? covering, in my case, a jolly/ryder combo. a very handy sub when required, and hopefully can gain some cash and provide a downgrade to another ruck, who doesnt have to play every game if you have Zac Smith who should play most games. Or another option is if you have a F/R rookie up forward, you could swap him and petrie and have a forward upgrade with a trade. A lot of this depends on injury, but im actually considering him for a bench spot if hes 170k

 

[Ollies]

Another option not discussed, and a very unlikely one at that, Petrie as first bench ruck? covering, in my case, a jolly/ryder combo. a very handy sub when required, and hopefully can gain some cash and provide a downgrade to another ruck, who doesnt have to play every game if you have Zac Smith who should play most games. Or another option is if you have a F/R rookie up forward, you could swap him and petrie and have a forward upgrade with a trade. A lot of this depends on injury, but im actually considering him for a bench spot if hes 170k

Too much coin on the bench imo Timskul although some will have rookie mids on their bench at similar prices I guess. For mine if he's fit enough coming in to the start of the season he warrants a starting spot in the forwards from where he still provides ruck cover if DP is in place. I can't see any others I'd prefer as 7th forward at or below his expected price.

 

[Sergian]

Interesting stuff from Port. Lobbe struggled last year so this guy may get a shot.

'Jarrad Redden started the pre-season behind veteran Dean Brogan and three-gamer Matthew Lobbe in the ruck pecking order at Alberton, but has pressed his claim for an unlikely round one berth with a blistering two months of training. The 20-year-old's strength testing and skin folds have reflected a significant improvement in lean muscle mass and he's been 'killing it' on the track, according to teammate Jackson Trengove.'

 

[Ollies]

Interesting stuff from Port. Lobbe struggled last year so this guy may get a shot.

'Jarrad Redden started the pre-season behind veteran Dean Brogan and three-gamer Matthew Lobbe in the ruck pecking order at Alberton, but has pressed his claim for an unlikely round one berth with a blistering two months of training. The 20-year-old's strength testing and skin folds have reflected a significant improvement in lean muscle mass and he's been 'killing it' on the track, according to teammate Jackson Trengove.'

V interesting Sergian. Not a lot standing in his way at Port so he could well be an option. Apparently Trengove himself has also come back in tiptop order and is training well so could be a back/ruck DP option if he gets that classification and there's an apprpriate link option. Unfortunately the only likely looking links might be Bradley(no thanks) and Michael Johnson who might be OK.

 

[Pumbi]

Too much coin on the bench imo Timskul although some will have rookie mids on their bench at similar prices I guess. For mine if he's fit enough coming in to the start of the season he warrants a starting spot in the forwards from where he still provides ruck cover if DP is in place. I can't see any others I'd prefer as 7th forward at or below his expected price.

I completely see your view point, but I do think there is merit playing a cautious approach to Petrie.

This is an extract from a post I made on a different forum on my initial thoughts on the ruck conundrum, especially the Petrie factor.

My current thoughts on the ruck situation:

Sandilands, Jolly (Smith/Daw)

(Petrie on FWD Bench)

What I like about this scenario is that I reckon a lot of teams will take the gamble on Petrie either as a starting ruckmen or a starting forward. A combination of his job security, past scoring record and Dual Positioning will see a lot of people pick him. And I will be one of them. However, i'm not as convinced as some that he will initially score at even a solid rookie rate. I'm still suspect on North's plans to integrate three talls, and they will very cautious over his return from such a fragile injury. Having him on my bench for the early rounds allows me to gauge his performances. If he starts with a bang, no problem, I'll more than likely be starting with a rookie type player in the forward line. If his scoring stagnates at around an average of 60ish, then again, I have no qualms with this. Now that we have 33 players, it may not be necessary to upgrade all starting rookies. For example, Dustin Martin became very important for me in the latter parts of 2010 (And thats when we had only 30 players).

The key to my plans however is this. I'm banking on Jolly and Sandilands (lets not forget his start to last season) to be the two dominant ruckmen in 2011. A lot of sides will probably have one of these, and not both. When Jolly has the bye, I will turn to Petrie. Other sides who are already starting Petrie will have to turn to Smith for example.

Now for some maths to illustrate my point. Sandilands and Jolly have byes in Rounds 6 and 7 respectively. Lets have a look at some calculations for the all important first 12 rounds, where every team has had a bye. Assumed averages in brackets.

Pumbi: Jolly (100), Sandilands (100) (Petrie (60) to cover byes)

(11x100) + (11x100) + (2x60) = 2320 points

Other Teams: Jolly/Sandilands (100), Petrie (60) (Smith (50) to cover byes)

(11x100) + (11x60) + (2x50) = 1860

Difference: 460 points

I have been a bit generous with my predictions, Petrie could average 70+ and this will significantly alter the results, but I think the calculations are realistic enough for my point to have merit. Obviously you need to factor in the points you could make up with the extra cash you would have if you opted to go with Option Two, and weigh up if that extra cash will net you <460 points.

Just some food for thought.

Bolded is very important obviously.

I would like to emphasise another one of my points.

A closer look at Sandilands and his averages

2008

Rounds 1-10 = 91
Season Average = 82

2009

Rounds 1-10 = 95
Season Average = 95

2010

Rounds 1-10 = 101
Season Average = 98

Sandiland's scoring pattern reflects his playing style. He is a dominant, often sole, ruckmen. At the same time, his playing style reflects his scoring consistency. He will net you 40 hit outs a game, which will form the basis of a premium ruckmen score. It is natural for him to tire as the season unfolds (And subsequently will score poorly and/or miss games). Something to factor into your selection, yes. Something to base your selection on, no.

If you consider that Petrie may well be used as consistent back up, the selection of Sandilands becomes far more appealing imo. There is little to suggest at this stage, that he won't be close to the highest scoring ruckmen once again. The bulk of his consistently high scores come at the beginning of the season. This is a double edged sword. Not only is your player scoring well, he is making it more difficult for your opposition to obtain his services. If people do trade in Sandilands, they will be getting lesser value for money, as history suggests his scoring will gradually decline as the season goes on. If Sandilands breaks down/gets monitored through the season I can either trade him or simply replace with Petrie in the games he misses.

Very early to be making judgements and whatnot but nothing like a bit of December Analysis to get the DT blood pumping.

 

[Jolldo87]

You make alot of good points within that post Pumbi but the one thing you need to consider is the fact that by having Petrie starting in your forward line you can always sub him into the ruck when your ruckmen have byes and therefore effectively replace your ruckmen with your rookie forward instead of Smith. I'm sure that the rookie forward will average more than 50 and therefore reduced the points gained by starting Petrie on the bench.

Also Cox was the highest scoring ruck last season, not Sandi.

 

[Crows88]

The rucks....headaches every year. I agree with a few others on here with the fact that starting 2 premium rucks might be shooting yourself in the foot this season. Many players started with a combo of 2 premo's (including clark) last year and got burnt quite badly. A few started with Clark and Kreuzer and really got hurt. Plus they lots alot of hair throughout the season!

This season there are huge question marks around a number of the premo ruckman and how this sub rule will affect them. For this reason I think there is alot of merit in taking a mid-pricer as your second option to get a good look at how the premo's are shaping up and dealing with the sub rule...I wouldn't be surprised to see a couple of surprises with the rucks pop up in the first 4-6 rounds and with those extra trades you could sacrifice a trade to get on the guy who is made for this sub rule.

 

[54Dogs]

Nice post Pumbi, and I sort of agree and disagree with you but you definitely got me thinking.

I think, not dissimilar to DP last year, a lot of people are discounting the importance of the byes, and good coverage. It's an absolute minefield to work through when you look closer. 6 possible premium backs with the bye in Rd 4, 8 in Rd 6 etc.

I agree that Petrie will score below his mid 80s level of previous years, 70 around the mark IMO if he's stuck forward. I also agree he has solid value on the bench but for slightly different reasons.

Lets say you go with the Jolly / Sandilands ruck combo. With Sandilands you are looking to use Petrie for DP cover in Rd 6. If Petrie is your 7th fwd it is also highly likely you will have at least 2, possibly 3 of Chapman, SJ, Pav, Buddy etc who also have the bye in the same week in the forwards. So how do you cover all of these guys in one week, especially if Petrie was on the field and he's now a ruck.

Same thing happens when Jolly has the bye. It's not only Jolly with the bye, it's also Didak, Krak, Thomas and co. If Petrie's at 7 and you move him it leaves you very thin in the fwds.

So whilst the DP link will be vital the wholistic team balance is paramount.

I wouldn't be surprised to see plenty of extra cash on the bench because it's not like other years where they only covered injury and made cash, this year we know that a bench fwd has 14 games to cover before the year even starts.

 

[Ollies]

Now we're cooking! Some excellent discussion starting to develop. Interestingly most of the popular premiums have their byes early while the teams with attractive mid-pricers have their byes last in the first half of the year. By round 10, say, we will have upgraded some of these mid-pricers with premiums who have already had their first bye so it won't be 14 byes to cover but nevertheless bench cover is far more important than ever before. Two or three good rookies combined with DP links should be sufficient to cover most byes but inevitably injury will conspire to wreck our best laid plans.

 

[Walesy]

Same thing happens when Jolly has the bye. It's not only Jolly with the bye, it's also Didak, Krak, Thomas and co. If Petrie's at 7 and you move him it leaves you very thin in the fwds.

But then you just move Gilbert forward from the back line.

and if that's a problem, move Goddard back from the mids!

Seriously though Dogs, great point on the ruck-byes, it's the perfect example of thinking of your team as a whole, not just one theoretical aspect at a time.

Certainly makes picking up premium rucks from the lesser scoring teams a little more valuable (ie- Ryder, two single byes and it's doubtful that you'll have a Bomber on your list when he plays his byes)

 

[Quigley]

Any of our Richmond posters care to make a comment on Derickx and how he is going. At 22 he could be right to go early and he might be a little bit of a different option that could pay off.

 

[Tom12]

Nice post Pumbi, and I sort of agree and disagree with you but you definitely got me thinking.

I think, not dissimilar to DP last year, a lot of people are discounting the importance of the byes, and good coverage. It's an absolute minefield to work through when you look closer. 6 possible premium backs with the bye in Rd 4, 8 in Rd 6 etc.

I agree that Petrie will score below his mid 80s level of previous years, 70 around the mark IMO if he's stuck forward. I also agree he has solid value on the bench but for slightly different reasons.

Lets say you go with the Jolly / Sandilands ruck combo. With Sandilands you are looking to use Petrie for DP cover in Rd 6. If Petrie is your 7th fwd it is also highly likely you will have at least 2, possibly 3 of Chapman, SJ, Pav, Buddy etc who also have the bye in the same week in the forwards. So how do you cover all of these guys in one week, especially if Petrie was on the field and he's now a ruck.

Same thing happens when Jolly has the bye. It's not only Jolly with the bye, it's also Didak, Krak, Thomas and co. If Petrie's at 7 and you move him it leaves you very thin in the fwds.

So whilst the DP link will be vital the wholistic team balance is paramount.

I wouldn't be surprised to see plenty of extra cash on the bench because it's not like other years where they only covered injury and made cash, this year we know that a bench fwd has 14 games to cover before the year even starts.

Good point. I think it's hard to justify using DPP if your side lacks balance. Not being able to cover players is a huge loss, and while DP adds flexibility, in the case of Petrie (a fwd/ruck), a lack of structure could see moving him into the rucks as a certain 0. Picking out the cheaper guys who will play is important, but recognising the fixture to allow for this balance is the biggest factor.

 

[The Falcon Strike]

Some good discussion in here - particularly around Fraser - think he might be an inspired choice - or perhaps one we all rue come round 4 when he does his knee.

Had a look at Cox at training earlier this week and he is running around free as a bird. Personally - i'm locking him in if he looks halfway decent in the NAB cup.

I'll consider Sandi - but only if he is getting genuine support.

We've seen with Sandi and Cox over the last few years that rucking 90% of the game just ends in overwork injuries. It's why having NN in the side isn't an issue. I see it as an advantage in terms of durabilty for Cox - plus if he is playing 2nd ruck - he is going to destroy the taps against the bit part players.

I'll be leaning towards a Cox/Tippett combo. The other downside is that in the past you could always choose a rookie ruckman fromt he same club as your main ruckman for injury cover. However with the bye - it blows this option out of the water.

 

[chadleverington]

couple years ago cox was the king. Now sharing the time with NN has had serious impact. He is one i am considering, but i like jolly over cox at the moment.

 

[LemmingMaster]

Not sure why everyone is attempting to DP links in the rucks when you potetially have Smith sitting as your 3rd ruck. I think he will provide more than adequate cover on those bye rounds or the one or two week injuries.

Anything longer than that may actually just require a trade, so not sure I am going to waste a spot in my forwards just for something that may never happen. I would prefer the DP links to my mids and forwards or mids and backs.

 

[Ollies]

Not sure why everyone is attempting to DP links in the rucks when you potetially have Smith sitting as your 3rd ruck. I think he will provide more than adequate cover on those bye rounds or the one or two week injuries.

Anything longer than that may actually just require a trade, so not sure I am going to waste a spot in my forwards just for something that may never happen. I would prefer the DP links to my mids and forwards or mids and backs.

Precisely Tarqs. More so than wasting a spot in the forwards (because Petrie might warrant a spot regardless of DP) I'm not wasting the second ruck spot on Daw or someone who won't play. I know its the least productive spot but Bailey might just earn a $$ this year.

 

[54Dogs]

Not sure why everyone is attempting to DP links in the rucks when you potetially have Smith sitting as your 3rd ruck. I think he will provide more than adequate cover on those bye rounds or the one or two week injuries.

Anything longer than that may actually just require a trade, so not sure I am going to waste a spot in my forwards just for something that may never happen. I would prefer the DP links to my mids and forwards or mids and backs.

2nd time I've agreed with you today.

That's a worry.

 

[bombermick]

Who is better as the fourth ruck, Bailey or Campbell? Bailey will probably get the no.1 spot if fit, but Campbell is a proven ruck.

 

[Quigley]

Who is better as the fourth ruck, Bailey or Campbell? Bailey will probably get the no.1 spot if fit, but Campbell is a proven ruck.

Derickx