DT rucks 2009

[Walesy]

Taking the flip side I guess... a 400k midfielder has more scope for improvement than a 400k ruck...

I do see that...

Perhaps you'll just have to take the middle ground and grab Ottens or HMac.

 

[54Dogs]

Rucks aren't that great scorers (apart from Cox). I figure the 200K between A Simmonds and Warnock will be worth more in other areas then the difference between say Simmonds and Warnock.

I guess last year was just lucky that Simmonds was so cheap, so I enjoyed the cheap 2nd ruckman, whereas this year Warnock is no gurantee at all of being good.

That being said, apart from Cox I can't confidently pick a good ruckman (380-420K) whereas I can definitely see good mids/forwards/backs at the price.

Hope that helps you see how I'm thinking haha.

You just have to ask how much improvement they have. IE: How much value is a Warnock compared to a Higgins, Lucas or Haselby. The lower the price of the player the more money you need them to make you. You wouldn't pick Yarren if you thought he would improve by 10 ppg to average 28 but picking Gibbs to improve by 10 ppg to average 97 is fine as he becomes a safe keeper.

If Warnock is going to improve 10-15 ppg to average 55-60 he makes very little cash but still requires upgrading. Where this makes you money though is that he is not going backwards as some premiums may be.

This is where the true dilemma sits with the rucks this year. The one you want is over priced and whilst there are others who are the right price there are very few who are value. As someone said earlier those who are value are an injury risk.

I guess that's why there's 500 posts of opinions here.

 

[Lakey91]

True.

In scoring terms, Cox (90) + Warnock (55) vs Hille (75) + Hmac (70) and yeh bout the same imo.
.

More like Cox (102) + Warnock (55) vs Hille (80) + Hmac (78) IMO.

I see a few options in the rucks personally, and these are the ones im sorting through:

Cox + Simmonds
Cox + HMAC
Simmonds + HMAC

I like the lock and leave - not much lower priced players of value in the rucks IMO.

 

[Effes]

Or 90 for Hille...should still score better...IIRC has a leadership role so he will feel as though he has to give 110% every time whereas in previous years he may have slackened off.

 

[Eye of the Hawk]

Anyone fancy Ottens?

 

[sante]

Rucks are very hard to decipher whether they're value or not. Take the easy/safe option with Cox, overpriced, maybe but you know you will get 90+. Take a Hille and Ottens and you could see a few 50s during the year.

 

[Dunn - Well Done]

^^ cant go wrong or regret the choice of a 400k ruck + Cox, unless 1 gets injured which is just bad luck. Also think you cant go wrong with a premium ruck and MAC

 

[Modra93]

I think Cox from the start is the best option as I expect 105-110 average with a massive start as per usual. As long as the big boy is fully fit from the word go he will be in my side no questions asked. Last year I went with Josh Fraser instead of Cox, in hope that Frasers would increase heavily on his average and that Cox's average would remain or fall. Epic fail.

The big question for me is who is the 2nd ruckman? I've narrowed it down to Jolly and Simmonds at this early stage.

Jolly due to durability and potential to improve as the only mature ruckman at Sydney. However Jolly never has averaged 90+

Simmonds due to Richmond as a possibly big improver (he scores very well in wins) and he has proven to be a big scorer previously. Also durable. Negative that he costs more than Jolly. But at this point in time I think it's worth it.

This year my focus is on durability and if players arent fully fit at round 1 then they wont be selected.

 

[sante]

I think Cox from the start is the best option as I expect 105-110 average with a massive start as per usual. As long as the big boy is fully fit from the word go he will be in my side no questions asked. Last year I went with Josh Fraser instead of Cox, in hope that Frasers would increase heavily on his average and that Cox's average would remain or fall. Epic fail.

The big question for me is who is the 2nd ruckman? I've narrowed it down to Jolly and Simmonds at this early stage.

Jolly due to durability and potential to improve as the only mature ruckman at Sydney. However Jolly never has averaged 90+

Simmonds due to Richmond as a possibly big improver (he scores very well in wins) and he has proven to be a big scorer previously. Also durable. Negative that he costs more than Jolly. But at this point in time I think it's worth it.

This year my focus is on durability and if players arent fully fit at round 1 then they wont be selected.

No love for HMAC? Considerably cheaper and is entering his prime.

 

[Modra93]

No love for HMAC? Considerably cheaper and is entering his prime.

I will have lots of love fro Hmac if he has a big preseason and nab cup. He and David Hille are both 4th and 5th in my pecking order at the moment.

Problem with McIntosh is that I expected big things last year following his breakout year. If he is flying early then at his price I think I like most people will go with the Cox-McIntosh combo, however at this stage I feel Simmonds could easily be potentially a 90-95 ppg player (10 kicks, 7 marks, 7 handballs, 1 goal, 1.5 tackles, 17 hitouts, plus a few behinds/frees for minus a free kick or so..= ~95 dt points) if he has a consistent year in a winning Richmond side.

I also query McIntosh's fitness levels

 

[Ants]

Nah, it's easy to ration it.

Quite simply- DON'T.

Buy players where you see value.

If you see a 200k ruckman who you think will go up more than a 200k forward/mid/back, then you get him in your squad.

If however, you think the 200k midfield will probably do better, then perhaps that 400k mid of yours could be turned into a 400k ruckman...

It's all about value. And when looking at value, you should be judging each player on their merits. Not their position.

I disagree with this. The Ruck position is unique.

In most of the other positions, you should be able to get bench players who in a pinch can fill in. This is usually not the case for rucks, first and second year players usually have terrible averages, and sporadic gametime. Even the slightly older rucks are often sporadic due to form and injuries. It means that your main two rucks have far more weight put on them playing week in week out than a forward, midfielder or back. You can probably get away with missing a few weeks from a player in these positions. But if you choose a Warnock/Kruezer/Leunbeurger/Laycock as a ruck option because of potential upside, any missed weeks could kill you.

 

[Dunn - Well Done]

I disagree with this. The Ruck position is unique.

In most of the other positions, you should be able to get bench players who in a pinch can fill in. This is usually not the case for rucks, first and second year players usually have terrible averages, and sporadic gametime. Even the slightly older rucks are often sporadic due to form and injuries. It means that your main two rucks have far more weight put on them playing week in week out than a forward, midfielder or back. You can probably get away with missing a few weeks from a player in these positions. But if you choose a Warnock/Kruezer/Leunbeurger/Laycock as a ruck option because of potential upside, any missed weeks could kill you.

Thus they wouldnt display or represent value. Due to their durability which all have risk for those players listed. Thus they dont really represent a whole lot of value. I agree that missing a game in the rucks hurts more than the other positions, simply due to that the 91k back up rucks are limited and they dont usually score well to their 4th years or beyond.

 

[longytap]

I disagree with this. The Ruck position is unique.

In most of the other positions, you should be able to get bench players who in a pinch can fill in. This is usually not the case for rucks, first and second year players usually have terrible averages, and sporadic gametime. Even the slightly older rucks are often sporadic due to form and injuries. It means that your main two rucks have far more weight put on them playing week in week out than a forward, midfielder or back. You can probably get away with missing a few weeks from a player in these positions. But if you choose a Warnock/Kruezer/Leunbeurger/Laycock as a ruck option because of potential upside, any missed weeks could kill you.

Spot on! Two premium rucks are must, it's the first 2 players i select

 

[Dunn - Well Done]

Spot on! Two premium rucks are must, it's the first 2 players i select

nothings a "must"

 

[lion_gooner]

is anyone else having trouble picking ruck reserves theres shit all this year

 

[Lakey91]

Currie/Mcevoy for me or currie/rookie. Not convinced extra cash is worth it for a nicnat/vickery type player.

 

[LemmingMaster]

is anyone else having trouble picking ruck reserves theres shit all this year

They're not much different to most years to be honest.

 

[the_berger]

I think Charman and Clark/Leuenberger would be a decent tandem, but I can't see the value of spending 200k on a bench player (and I've actually done it before ).

if there is any place to spend big on a reserve its the ruck im seriosuly considering luenberger/rookie ruck reserves

 

[James23]

Ruck Reserves:

Vickery and Roughead

 

[Atavistic]

is anyone else having trouble picking ruck reserves theres shit all this year

I'm looking at: NicNat, Currie, McEvoy and McKernan. Though I doubt McKernan will get many games, he takes a good mark and could be useful in the Crows' forward line.

 

[LemmingMaster]

I'm looking at: NicNat, Currie, McEvoy and McKernan. Though I doubt McKernan will get many games, he takes a good mark and could be useful in the Crows' forward line.

Those three are some handy options to consider, McKernan I think is behind a few players in both the Rucks and Forwards.

 

[sante]

Angus Graham should be another to consider. I wouldn't be surprised at all to see Wallace try him as our 2nd Ruck before Patto.

I'm leaning towards selecting two 'no name' players. How much $$$ can those 100-140k rucks make you?

 

[LemmingMaster]

How much $$$ can those 100-140k rucks make you?

My bench rucks are not about making money, they are just there to supply cover for injuries. This is why I hope to spend as little as possible and pick the most likely player(s) that will get a game.
If I can find a player 91k that might play 12+ games, they're in my team.

 

[chadleverington]

If I can find a player 91k that might play 12+ games, they're in my team.

Currie is a dam good chance at this stage. Still early though. Giles could be a good chance too if Lade and/or Brogan get an injury.

 

[LemmingMaster]

Currie is a dam good chance at this stage.

He is on my radar, you just never know what might happen.