-
AFLW 2024 - Round 8 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
DT rucks 2009
- Thread starter 54Dogs
- Start date
- Tagged users None
dzeRnumbrd
Senior List
if there is any place to spend big on a reserve its the ruckim seriosuly considering luenberger/rookie ruck reserves
Not entirely sure that I agree:
Rucks: 2 emergencies covering for 2 players
Mids: 2 emergencies covering for 6 players
Forwards/Backs: 2 emergencies covering for 7 players
Surely it is overkill to load up on the ruck bench when you only have to cover 2 players with it?
Surely he was being sarcastic/joking? I think most people use the 4th ruck spot as a "junk spot"
dzeRnumbrd
Senior List
I didn't think he was?! He said he was considering Leuenburger & a rookie
Leuenburger = $200k
Likely just stay with last yrs Cox/Simmonds combo. Really need a good reason to change it and so far havent seen it nor can think of it.
If u go looking for a reason to change something u'll always find it. Would like to pick Jolly coz he's improving consistently..BUT i dunno.
Ben "The Falcon" McEvoy will likely get a cpl of preseason games for us to check out his development. Currie looks set to debut coz of few options...tho i wont expect too much too soon.
Cox, Simmonds....(Natthenewbie, McEvoy)
Likely to change tho.
If u go looking for a reason to change something u'll always find it. Would like to pick Jolly coz he's improving consistently..BUT i dunno.
Ben "The Falcon" McEvoy will likely get a cpl of preseason games for us to check out his development. Currie looks set to debut coz of few options...tho i wont expect too much too soon.
Cox, Simmonds....(Natthenewbie, McEvoy)
Likely to change tho.
Agree. Can't see a reason to change at the moment.
- Thread starter
- #532
Except that last year they cost a total of 600K and this year they cost 900K.
As mad as it may sound I have decided to turn my rucks upside down.. after much consideration I have figured that rucks should not be any different to any other position and good value should not be passed up. As much as it pains me to say it Cox will probably not be in my starting lineup.
Say a HMac + Kreuzer + 2 decent rookies combo gives a fairly durable starting two with good potential upside. Plus saves you about 400 grand from the Cox/Simmo combo which has little if no upside. This money goes a long way to adding more depth to the rest of your side.
I know it is nothing new but this thread has definatly changed my thinking of value and durability in DT terms..
Say a HMac + Kreuzer + 2 decent rookies combo gives a fairly durable starting two with good potential upside. Plus saves you about 400 grand from the Cox/Simmo combo which has little if no upside. This money goes a long way to adding more depth to the rest of your side.
I know it is nothing new but this thread has definatly changed my thinking of value and durability in DT terms..
Dont know how many people planned on getting Warnock but he will miss 8 weeks with a stress fracture in his foot.
What will Ivan Marics price be. I reckon he could take the next step.
According to Fan Footy it should be $305,100.
My worry would be that he has already stepped up. On another note, hasn't Kruezer had a interrupted pre-season as well?
I'm pretty sure I'll take Cox and lock him in for Captain for the first 5 weeks. H-Mac is also a lock in my opinion. He burnt me last year, but I was unaware that he had a pretty shotty pre-season. He is burning up the track this year, much like he did in 07.
Just a quick note, I would have called Warnock the Woods of 2009. He is a still a project player for Carlton, he will need a good couple of years to be a force in DT scoring.
Kreuzer to improve to average about 65 IMO, shift through this thread and there are a few earlier posts about rucks second year scoring.
I can see ways of disproving this statement:
Cox has improved on his previous seasons performance every single season he has played.
Cox averaged 110.53 over first 17 rounds of 2008.
Cox seemed to have a few injury niggles thus he may of been playing restricted a little meaning he may be able to score even more.
Cox is hard to trade into your team as he traditionally starts very very well and ends not so well - lowest price in 2008 was after round 22.
Simmonds averaged 94 over the last 9 rounds of 2008.
If richmond win, simmonds often scores well, and IMO richmond will win more games in 2009.
Not saying i agree with it all, but its just some of the facts.
By all means, you put over some great thoughts, and on value cox simmonds may not be the best in some regards.
If you want durable though, Cox Simmonds present great value. Simmonds has played 21 or 22 games 5 of the past 6 years and cox has played 19 in 4 of the past 5. The other advantage is you dont use trades.
Are you thinking of finishing the DT year with HMac+Kruzer in the rucks? or will you be using a trade or even two in your rucks?
The issue for me is that I'm focusing on a league win and am confident I can make the eight with or without Cox. As has been pointed out, Cox generally finishes the year with lower scores than he starts so you're likely to get the least value for him in the last 4 rounds of the season when it really counts for a league win. In rounds 19-22 there might not be much of a difference between him and a Hille, Simmonds, etc so why pay so much more for him.
That being said it is hard to predict what a certain player will do at the end of the season. He was playing injured in late 2008 so who knows. This is just something else I'll consider when making my decision.
That being said it is hard to predict what a certain player will do at the end of the season. He was playing injured in late 2008 so who knows. This is just something else I'll consider when making my decision.
- Apr 28, 2007
- 4,083
- 1,819
- AFL Club
- West Coast
I'm not taking a side on the HMac + Kreuzer decision, but I applaude you for taking value where you see it.
Some may select Cox + Simmonds because they see value in their durability and their high scoring potential as opposed to the other rucks, and the saving of trades (lock & leave setup).
Others may choose not to select Cox + Simmo because they see limited upside and believe they are paying overs, perhaps seeing better value elsewhere.
But both of those approaches are better than simply selecting Cox because he is a "must have" and Simmonds because "he did the job last year" - both of which are hardly convincing grounds for selection.
sante
Emu
The way I see it, is that the Ruck position is the hardest to find genuine, consistent DT guns. Cox is the only genuine one. He is as close as it will get to 'no risk'. Not every player selected in yor initial team needs to represent value.
For my second Ruck option, I'm looking for value for money. Can I get a cheapish Ruckman who can score like Hille/Simmo etc? HMAC looks the likely pick at this stage, to be that player.
Those not selecting Cox will save some serious cash, but its what they do with it that will determine whether or not it's the right decision.
Team A selects Dean Cox.
Team B selects David Hille.
Over the first 8 weeks of 2009, Cox averages 100. Hille over the first 8 weeks averages 85. 120pt difference already, not counting the possible selection of Cox as captain.
Can the extra money you saved be enough to find a midfielder/defender/forward to close the gap?
For my second Ruck option, I'm looking for value for money. Can I get a cheapish Ruckman who can score like Hille/Simmo etc? HMAC looks the likely pick at this stage, to be that player.
Those not selecting Cox will save some serious cash, but its what they do with it that will determine whether or not it's the right decision.
Team A selects Dean Cox.
Team B selects David Hille.
Over the first 8 weeks of 2009, Cox averages 100. Hille over the first 8 weeks averages 85. 120pt difference already, not counting the possible selection of Cox as captain.
Can the extra money you saved be enough to find a midfielder/defender/forward to close the gap?
Absolutely in the scenario you have outlined sante.
Not splitting straws but in this example you have paid $637 per point for Cox (based on expected prices) whereas with Hille you have only paid $604 per point. So Hille has been better value.
The extra money you have saved should be able to be put to good use as you are in front anyway.
Just thought I'd chime in here. While I completely understand the angle your coming from here in regards to the whole value issue in saving cash at the beginning and waiting for Cox to fall/Kruezer to rise, I think it is incorrect to suggest Cox and Simmonds have little upside. Disregarding injury, IMO those two are far and away the best ruckman on offer, and having the two of them from the beginning seems like a pretty good upside to me
I would say a bit more, but Lakey91 covered a fair bit a few posts earlier.
And I am in total agreement with the second part I've quoted, I have never given the ruck department the consideration that has been shown here. As far as I was concerned it was Step 1) Pick Cox then Step 2)Find suitable scoring partner then Step 3)Never look at the rucks again. This thread has really opened my eyes, and I'm sure those of others that there is much more to consider when selecting rucks.
I will add tho that this thread has made my head hurt, "hmmmm should i start with Cox or not? Who should be my second ruck? Who should i start on the bench, two cheap rookies?" e.t.c
Okay, back to lurking I go
Sounds good to me.
sante
Emu
I'm not so sure. I guess this is why we have a huge thread on it. It will be interesting to see how it all pans out.
