DT rucks 2009

[54Dogs]

There's been some nice discussion happening on a couple of different threads in relation to options for rucks in 2009.

Obviously Cox will be the number 1 ruck by years end (barring injury) but this does not mean he is a cut and dried selection in your initial team, particularly at his price of 500K. If you select Cox you have the benefit of a player who is 20 ppw clear of all other ruckmen and a solid captain option in your team. That's the upside. The downside is that he is coming off an average of 107 last season so unless you believe he can do this again you are paying a large premium for a player who will drop in value. My belief is that the Cox of 2008 scores best when the team gets well beaten due to the lack of midfield options. Here are some 2008 stats:

Here's this years breakdown of his scores in losses by 6 goals or more:-

Rd 2, Crows (lost by 86 pts) - Score 140
Rd 4, Swans (lost by 62 pts) - Score 75
Rd 6, Dogs (lost by 60 Pts) - Score 85
Rd 7, Blues (lost by 37) - Score 114
Rd 10, Pies (lost by 100 pts) - Score 152
Rd 13, Cats (lost by 135 pts) - Score 115
Rd 14, Hawks (lost by 57 pts) - Score 124
Rd 15, Tigers (lost by 77) - Score 152
Rd 16, Lions (lost by 46) - Score 157
Rd 21 Hawks (lost by 61) - Score 96
Rd 22 Cats (lost by 99) - Score 83


Cox 2008 average when WC lose by 6 goals or more: 117.5

Cox 2008 average when WC win or lose by less than 6 goals : 95.9


Also interesting to note that Cox had 6 games over 120 this year and 5 are on this list with an average losing margin of 73 points. The other game was in Rd1.

My theory is that Cox scores at his scoring peak when he is used as the outlet player in the backline with cheap kicks / marks in the pockets and back flanks. This only happens when the Eagles have no run so when they are playing well they do not need to use him in this role. The 2 Crows games were a real example of this. 140 points when they got smashed in Rd 2 and yet when the Eagles win by 9 goals in Rd 9 he only scores 81.


Having said that, I think that Cox will continue to be used frequently as a mid next year and have pencilled him in for 100 average. I'm struggling to come to grips with paying a premium for someone I believe to be not worth their price, like paying 2K for golf clubs worth $1500.

He is some injury risk however. Missed 8 games through 2006 and 2007 and the workload will start to tell with his style of game. The conservative option is to select him, the aggressive option is not to and wait for him to drop in price or get injured.

There are really 3 choices here:

1) Select your 2 starting rucks you want to be there at the finish (Say Cox / Sandi etc)

2) Take Cox and a value ruck and either cop the points loss on the second ruck or upgrade them later (say Cox / Warnock)

3) Take 2 value rucks and trade Cox in during the season

The choices really revolve a lot around what you see Cox doing and how much value is in the second tier rucks.

There are plenty of options for the second ruck spot but all have some element of risk. From a durability perspective only 3 of the next 20 ruckmen after Cox only played every game this year. This did not have a huge impact on most because of the Simmonds / Cox combination for a lot but certainly could next year. The injury impact in the rucks is also substantial when it happens because of the poor scoring of emergencies.

Junior Boi and Cartman have done some quick analysis on MacIntosh and Ottens which is posted below.

Overall, some interesting decisions to be made in the rucks in 2009.

 

[54Dogs]

Posted By Junior Boi

Many of us are picking Cox, but then with our second ruck selection we are looking for an underpriced player who is probable keeper.

Hamish McIntosh v Brad Ottens - Key matchup in 2009 team

Now since the introduction of Planteam for 2009, I have had Brad Ottens as my second ruck the whole way through. Although I can see points for

1. North's ruck selection is a topic talked about in detail and their depth in that area can be viewed as an arguement against Hamish.

Drew Petrie is touted as a future captain and a possible captain in 2009 with AS stepping down. I am pretty sure he was in the AA squad which showed his great form in 2008. Drew can play anywhere on the ground whether it is up forward, down back or in the middle.

Whilst H-Mac was out injured we saw the birth of David Hale. Providing versitility with the ability to play multiple positions Hale has made his mark, showing he is one of the hardest to match up on when he goes forward. He ain't too bad in the ruck either and is very mobile. It is sometimes forgotten also that both are the same age so no 'going for youth' policy is going to be implemented.

Even if all 3 play, McIntosh's TOG could be lowered which means lower scores

Todd Goldstein is also a young developing tap ruckman who could be putting his hand up in 2009 and putting pressure on H.

So in conclusion, is Hamish's output dropped by 15% he could be out of the side with a click of the fingers due to this depth in North's ruck stocks, unlike Brad Ottens who is cleary Geelong's no. one ruckman and has little pressure placed on him for his spot.

2. Rucks are proven to peak at an old age and play their best football in their twilight years

This is demonstrated with Dean Cox in recent years, Brendan Lade a couple of years ago and with both Simmonds and Hille reaching their their peak at the ages of 30 and 27 respectively. Brad Ottens is 28.

3. Past seasons' averages

Ottens has averaged over 80 in 5 seasons, whereas Hamish only once - although to be fair Hamish has played senior footy for 4 years.

4. Team's performance

Disregarding 2008 due to injury, Brad Ottens averaged 82 in 2007. Geelong are locked in as a top 4 team and I can't see things changing much from what their team delivered in 07 and 08. Their team is sound with no pressure for change.

North on the other hand are less predictable. They could be top 4 again but they could also be out of the 8 in '09. More pressure for change et taking H-Mac over Ottens in my mind it is a no brainer at this stage. c

 

[54Dogs]

Posted by Cartman121

Great post JB. I agree with you on nearly all the points raised, with just a few minor exceptions.

I think Hale will be used as a permanent forward next year. IIRC he used to play down forward before he was drafted, so I believe this is where he is most comfortable. He is a fantastic contested mark and has great accuracy in front of goal. We have all seen what he is capable of down there (i.e. R21 against Geelong).

I think Petrie is most effective playing the loose man in defence where he is able to use his height and smart footy brain to read the play. I hope this is where we see the majority of him next year, with him also drifting into the forward line or into the ruck for periods of time.

Goldstein is a great tap ruckman, with a basketball background but I don't think he is ready to step up to AFL level just yet. If he was anywhere near ready I think he would have been given a chance to prove himself this year in the absence of McIntosh.

I still think McIntosh will be our no.1 ruckman rotating with Petrie, and on rare occasions Hale. Although I do see your point of playing all three possibly leading to reduced tog for McIntosh, I can't see these three working against each other, rather I think they compliment each other quite well. McIntosh's fitness levels are terrible anyway so he will need a rest on the bench regardless (everytime he comes off the bench he is panting like crazy.)

I think McIntosh will/can only improve on his average of 68 this year. I think there may have been a little bit of pressure for him to perform as well as he did in 07 which resulted in his poor early season form. Taken at pick 9 in the 2002 draft the potential is clearly there, he's heading into his 5th season now (4th full AFL Season) and should be able to lift his numbers up to the 07 standard, if not higher. There is alot of room for improvement.

My only concern with Ottens is his durabilty;

• Missed the first 9 in 08
• 3 games in 07
• Played all 22 in 06
• Missed 9 in 05
• Missed 4 in 04

*Not as bad as I initially thought.

As you stated he is 28 now, you can look at it from the perspective of this is a time where he is most experienced and can now shine, or from the perspective that typically older players are more likely to be injured / have there best footy behind them. Personally I believe the 2nd is true. Although he has shown very promising signs at the end of 08 with an average of 94ppg in his last 6 games (inc. finals) I can't see much room for improvement over the course of an entire season; McIntosh is also $35k cheaper.

 

[Junior boi]

Looking more closely at Otten's durability, I think I might look at finding some extra cash to upgrade him to David Hille.

This is how I see it:

Option A:

Cox
Ottens
Naitanui/Vickery
$91,900

Option B:

Cox
Hille
$91,900
$77,700

RE: Option A

In taking the risk with Ottens, this frees up cash for me to pursue Naitanui or Vickery. If Ottens gets injured and misses 2-4 weeks then I have more insurance on my bench. If Ottens doesn't get injured, it will still allow me to have a good cash cow in Naitanui or Vickery, who I can downgrade to free up some cash later on in the season.

RE: Option B

I'm assuming that a more durable David Hille, on average, will outscore Ottens. However it does not allow me to pick Naitanui or Vickery, which means if Cox or Hille gets injured I might be in a bit of trouble. Also, assuming that Naitanui or Vickery will be the highest scoring rookie rucks out there, it will not allow me to utilise my bench ruck positions as cash cow spots.

...or I could just make it easier, and find extra money elsewhere

P.S. I have a very good idea on who I am going to pick as my 3rd or 4th ruckman dependant on which option I take. He is priced at $91,900 and will be his team's no. 2 ruckman in all likliehood.

 

[SkankDanker]

Another great thread, and all the previous posts on this situation have been quality and a subject that continues to intrigue. This is the classic DT situation and why in my view selecting the starting side is a 50% contributor to your success.

I think most will look to go with a Cox/McIntosh start and hope for a similar scenario to this year with Simmonds - unlikely in the extreme. I think JuniorBoi has covered McIntosh extremely well in his post, and the Kangaroos rucks in general, but I agree with Cartman that an average of 68 does not refelect McIntosh's value.

From memory Cox had a broken jaw or something similar, so that can happen and doesn't = injury prone (I'm conveniently forgetting what else he was injured from), but the point about his average of 107 leading to a drop in price is true.

The question I have is for a class player who trends down throughout he season, do you take the risk of NOT having him in the starting side.

If you have a Cox who gets a 121 a 140 and a 96 followed by a break-even or rise in price as in 08 that is win win, though I do think the price becomes pretty irrelevant with Cox (once he's in your side of course).

Dogs, on the way he performs when they win or lose, I find that very difficult to factor in - thinking well the Weagles are going to get thrashed, I'll pick Cox as captain shouldn't make sense - but it does!

Despite win/loss stats the 357 points Cox got in the first three rounds vs the 271 by Hille (ignore the captaincy angle) represents 86 points. While that may not seem significant (consider good captaincy choices probably only net you 200 - 250 points throughout the whole year), the hidden cost is the use of 2 trades at least to get Cox into your side.

Putting all the stats aside, I will stick to my guns by saying that due to the difference in potential between Cox and the next he is a must have in your starting side. It can't all be about trading the good players in - those opportunities can pass you by and are risky.

For example Cox is 20ppg better than the next, yet there are a range of players within 20ppg of Bartel.

And for me, Ottens is off the radar. I'm glad he played 22 in '06 but he probably won't do that next year.

 

[Junior boi]

Great post SD.

Cox had a broken bone in his foot which he carried for many weeks if that is what you are thinking of SkankDanker. It didn't hamper his DT output.

I can only hope that Ottens can string 22 games together, but on the balance of probabilities I'd have to say it's doubtful.

 

[Chris25]

Am I the only one with any love for Darren Jolly?

He has played all 22 games in the last three seasons, so there are no questions over his durability. With no Everitt at the Swans now, Jolly will be sharing ruck duties with kids in Currie and White. So it's fairly likely he will be playing anywhere up to 75% of game time. He had a break out year this season, both in his ruck work and around the ground. He is also more than capable of playing up forward and kicking goals. And he averaged 101 between rounds 13 and 17. So he has shown he can score big.

With only two ruckmen, in a perfect world you don't want to have to trade either of them out. Jolly is the same price as Ottens, and might seem expensive, but it's his durability which you are paying for. Not only would you be paying for a ruckman who's history suggests he wont miss any matches, but I see no reason why he won't have a David Hille like year, and average 80+ next season.

 

[Buddyman]

Yep I've always felt that Ottens will average more than McIntosh but there is less risk with injuries and in overall points McIntosh will probably win. Hes cheaper to. Ottens on the other hand was talked up at the start of this year as being a potential low 90's player. In teh geelong side I think I could believe that. But H is the safer option!

 

[54Dogs]

One really important factor here is the captaincy situation.

There are only 6-8 genuine captaincy choices you can default to week in, week out and all of these (barring Chad) will be at a premium in relation to price.

If you don't take Cox then you need to fork out top $ for one of the others anyway but the key difference is that of all the captaincy options Cox is the only one that HAS TO be in the winning team at years end. So by selecting say Bartell / Ablett as your default captain you are effectively commiting a trade to bring in Cox wheras by taking Cox as your default captain you have more room to move because there are so many premium mids to trade in later. This more than anything is swaying me towards an initial Cox selection however in mid November that's by no means guaranteed.

I think the data on Cox's scores when the Eagles are thrashed is more a sidelight to factor in based on how you see the Eagles (and their midfield) performing next year. Personally if Priddis and Kerr stay on the park along with Masten's development this may mean less need to use Cox as an outlet player in defence so he may take a hit in his scoring capacity.

 

[SELFCONFESDAFLNERD]

P.S. I have a very good idea on who I am going to pick as my 3rd or 4th ruckman dependant on which option I take. He is priced at $91,900 and will be his team's no. 2 ruckman in all likliehood.

I think i have the same guy in mind, this club just had their 2nd ruckman retire right.eek: gave too much away)

Hille's stats below

2008
Hille missed 2 games

2007
Hille missed 4 games

2006
Hille missed 1 game

2005
Hille missed 9 games

2004
Hille missed 1 game

2003
Hille played a full season


I think going back any further than that is into his real early development stage so would be unfair to count missed games against him, when comparing to other ruckman he rates highly.

Here are all the keeper/premum ruckman options amount of games over the last 3 regular seasons (out of 66 games)....

Jolly - 66 games (4524 points)
Petrie - 65 games (5128 points)
Hille - 59 games (4508 points)
Cox- 58 games (5935 points)
Fraser - 57 games (4828 pojnts)
Sandilands- 55 games (4479 points)
Ottens - 54 games (4119 points)
Simmonds - 53 games (4362 points)
McIntosh - 53 games (3579 points)

EDIT: I think those stats re aiffirm Cox's dominance as a ruckman, in 2006 he missed 5 games but still managed to score 1677 which was only topped by Simmonds and Fraser who scored 1975 & 2095 respectively. Might indicate that Fraser's best numbers are behind him, scoring 1526 in 19 games in 07.


In my head, Cox or Simmonds (or both) are a must have as they have both shown there massive scoring potential. Don't think the numbers truely reflect McIntosh's ability as he should be coming into his prime. Jolly is also steadily increasing his output, with Everitt's retirement he should get even more TOG. This could balance out however, as when Jolly went forward he was very dangerous, (think he kicked 3/4 in a quarter against the doggies) so i'm not sure that his numbers will increase dramatically. With his steady improvement, average of very high 70's and low 80's is on the cards but i wouldn't expect too much.

 

[SkankDanker]

Great post SD.

Cox had a broken bone in his foot which he carried for many weeks if that is what you are thinking of SkankDanker. It didn't hamper his DT output.

I can only hope that Ottens can string 22 games together, but on the balance of probabilities I'd have to say it's doubtful.

Thanks JB I was referring to previous years' injuries costing 8 games.

Am I the only one with any love for Darren Jolly?

He has played all 22 games in the last three seasons, so there are no questions over his durability. With no Everitt at the Swans now, Jolly will be sharing ruck duties with kids in Currie and White. So it's fairly likely he will be playing anywhere up to 75% of game time. He had a break out year this season, both in his ruck work and around the ground. He is also more than capable of playing up forward and kicking goals. And he averaged 101 between rounds 13 and 17. So he has shown he can score big.

With only two ruckmen, in a perfect world you don't want to have to trade either of them out. Jolly is the same price as Ottens, and might seem expensive, but it's his durability which you are paying for. Not only would you be paying for a ruckman who's history suggests he wont miss any matches, but I see no reason why he won't have a David Hille like year, and average 80+ next season.

Nice post, and I doubt you are the only one with any love. He was up and down towards the end of last year, and I think largely ignored because of the Cox/Simmo combination. He must be considered.

One really important factor here is the captaincy situation.

There are only 6-8 genuine captaincy choices you can default to week in, week out and all of these (barring Chad) will be at a premium in relation to price.

If you don't take Cox then you need to fork out top $ for one of the others anyway but the key difference is that of all the captaincy options Cox is the only one that HAS TO be in the winning team at years end. So by selecting say Bartell / Ablett as your default captain you are effectively commiting a trade to bring in Cox wheras by taking Cox as your default captain you have more room to move because there are so many premium mids to trade in later. This more than anything is swaying me towards an initial Cox selection however in mid November that's by no means guaranteed.

I think the data on Cox's scores when the Eagles are thrashed is more a sidelight to factor in based on how you see the Eagles (and their midfield) performing next year. Personally if Priddis and Kerr stay on the park along with Masten's development this may mean less need to use Cox as an outlet player in defence so he may take a hit in his scoring capacity.

And that is a summary and a half. The only thing wrong with that post is Dogs continues to spell Bartell with two "l"s. If he reads these forums he'll be getting annoyed. Apart from that perfect.

 

[Junior boi]

Jolly really did fade late in 2008. Everitt playing or not playing had no real impact, this might be because LRT was #2 ruck when he was out.

 

[54Dogs]

And that is a summary and a half. The only thing wrong with that post is Dogs continues to spell Bartell with two "l"s. If he reads these forums he'll be getting annoyed. Apart from that perfect.

LOL mate.

I'll work on my Ps, Qs and Bartels

 

[54Dogs]

Jolly really did fade late in 2008. Everitt playing or not playing had no real impact, this might be because LRT was #2 ruck when he was out.

Jolly comes under consideration really only for one reason. It starts with D and ends with urability.

 

[Dunn - Well Done]

- Im am defiatnly getting Cox, i think not getting him from the start is a mistake. He is just a player you need at the end of the year in your team and better to get him from the start as he starts well and also avg's 107 each week.

- My 2nd ruck will be Mcintosh, has showed plenty of promise and if he can stay injury free should be having an avg of 80 for the year. I am also considering Charman but he seems to be falling away. Ottens and Petrie are too expensive. Ottens is getting older and will have less time in the ruck plus he is an extra 35k than Mcintosh. Petrie is expensive and will probably play as a CHF or CHB most liley CHB where he may not get as much of it there. Hale is also a consideration could he dominate playing FF rotating through the ruck was a top draft pick.

Cox, Mcintosh seem the safe option and will not take many risk in the ruck department.

Mcintosh
avg 80 (2007)
avg 75.3 (Rnd 1 - 10 (2008)

 

[Beau_Waters for PM]

Jolly comes under consideration really only for one reason. It starts with D and ends with urability.

And durability is of greatest importance in the rucks. This is because the ruck reserves are largely inefficient in regards to your overall team. Let me explain.

In the midfield, defense and forwards you are often able to find "reliable" reserves for cheap. Either first-year players or under-performing 2nd/3rd/4th year players. Most would say that a 'rookie' is good enough as a reserve. They can often score 60+ when you need them to. Think of 2008's first year guns (Ibbottson, Palmer, Ebert, Rioli, Gamble etc). These guys were all 83k this season iirc, except Palmer.

However, young ruckmen are not so crash-hot in DT terms. I'm sure most of you have realised this already. Take Leuenberger, Hudson, Griffen, S.Martin, Renouf and Warnock who all averaged less than 50 (or thereabouts) in their first season or two.

So, in other words, if you want a reserve ruckman who will score you 50+ on a regular basis you will have to either:
1) Pay for a reliable one. Not a popular option for most coaches.
2) Pick a rookie ruckman and hope his name is Matthew Kreuzer (however, even Kreuzer could not produce anywhere near Palmer-esque numbers in his first year).
3) Pick a rookie and hope that they can a) play games when you need them to (a dangerous assumption to make in its own right!); and b) hope they can score well. But as mentioned, Kreuzuer-type players are rare. Even the critically acclaimed Leuenberger has only shown glimpses of what he is capable of.

So, relating this back to durability, your two starting rucks need to be good picks because:
1) The gap between the elite rucks and the rest of the field is as big as the grand canyon; and
2) The gap between the elite rucks and the rookie rucks is even bigger. A typical rookie ruckman won't get you more than 50 points - and that's on a good day.

 

[Beau_Waters for PM]

I think dazza's post is relevant to discussions on Petrie, Hale and McIntosh, so I'll quote it here.

Great post and I agree with everything you have said except this little bit. I think he is ready and when he got his chance this year he impressed. With another pre-season under his belt he should be ready to go in 2009. He won't make an immediate impact but should be solid. I believe we will line up something like this:

FB: Urqhart - Gibson - Pratt
HB: Hansen - Petrie - Harding
C: Wells - Rawlings - Smith
HF: Jones - Edwards - Harvey
FF: Thomas - Hale - Campbell
R: McIntosh - Harris - Firrito

I/C: Goldstein - Simpson - Lower - Swallow

You take Petrie out of that defence and it suddenly looks very shaky, must play CHB IMO.

 

[Junior boi]

I think dazza's post is relevant to discussions on Petrie, Hale and McIntosh, so I'll quote it here.

That's why Shannon Watt should be in the lineup

 

[Daz]

That's why Shannon Watt should be in the lineup

So you're saying the backline would look better with Watt in it?

 

[Junior boi]

In my opinion is, if the backline is so shakey, why not have Shannon Watt in there as he is a proven key defender? This allows Petrie to play in the ruck, where he played the footy that won him the AA squad selection. Wasn't Watt in your best 22 all year anyway?

 

[54Dogs]

I'd be highly surprised if Petrie had 1 set position this year. Comes across as so versatile he'll be in the ruck, forward and back depending on where the issue is greatest.

Makes it very hard to assess him from a DT perspective.

 

[Daz]

In my opinion is, if the backline is so shakey, why not have Shannon Watt in there as he is a proven key defender? This allows Petrie to play in the ruck, where he played the footy that won him the AA squad selection. Wasn't Watt in your best 22 all year anyway?

Petrie and McIntosh could be the best ruck combination in the comp but our team looks far better with Dish at CHB. Let's not forget, McIntosh is a gun ruckman and it would be a waste to leave him #2 ruck. Our biggest weakness is in the backline and Petrie can fill that hole (well, some of it). We also have a very promising young ruckman in Todd Golstein so the #2 ruck spot is not an issue.

 

[Hirdy_5]

I'd be highly surprised if Petrie had 1 set position this year. Comes across as so versatile he'll be in the ruck, forward and back depending on where the issue is greatest.

Makes it very hard to assess him from a DT perspective.

Agreed, will be interesting to see how Champion date position him.

 

[Daz]

I'd be highly surprised if Petrie had 1 set position this year. Comes across as so versatile he'll be in the ruck, forward and back depending on where the issue is greatest.

Makes it very hard to assess him from a DT perspective.

Good point Dogs, and of course, as has happened in previous years, injury could change evrything for Drew.

 

[Virgil]

FB: Urqhart - Gibson - Pratt
HB: Hansen - Petrie - Harding
C: Wells - Rawlings - Smith
HF: Jones - Edwards - Harvey
FF: Thomas - Hale - Campbell
R: McIntosh - Harris - Firrito

I/C: Goldstein - Simpson - Lower - Swallow

You take Petrie out of that defence and it suddenly looks very shaky, must play CHB IMO.

What a sight that is! Though personally I don't think Goldstein is necessary. Hale can ruck in the forward 50 and up the wing, where he leads a lot of the time anyway. McIntosh can rest forward and Petrie is a great second ruck option. TBH I wouldn't mind seeing Shannon Watt in that side to rotate off the bench with McIntosh (allowing Petrie to own the centre square). The other option is Firrito back, which I think is highly plausible anyway.

Off topic, I think one of Jones or Edwards should be in the forward pocket rather than the half forward flank, and I wanna see Ben Ross on that bench .

Agreed, will be interesting to see how Champion date position him.

Petrie will be available in every position next season, and twice in the backs .