2016 Ruckmen

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't like the Grimley selection, won't play any games unless someone gets injured. Even if he does play I doubt he'll average more than 50, meaning he won't make much cash and you probably aren't going to bother trading him out for the 80k or so that he makes. I think you get better value picking a 102k loophole player.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

I'm almost certainly locking in Goldy. IF he has a poor first couple of games, you can downgrade him to ANYONE who's started well, then trade him back in once he drops in price and the traded in player goes up in price. Sure it costs you 2 trades, but that's the risk you take.

Also, he may not even drop in price. I remember a few years ago Ablett had a massive starting price - those who didn't jump on him instantly regretted it as his price went >$700k
 
Pill Cosby said:
I'm almost certainly locking in Goldy. IF he has a poor first couple of games, you can downgrade him to ANYONE who's started well, then trade him back in once he drops in price and the traded in player goes up in price. Sure it costs you 2 trades, but that's the risk you take.

Also, he may not even drop in price. I remember a few years ago Ablett had a massive starting price - those who didn't jump on him instantly regretted it as his price went >$700k
Click to expand...
*ing love the username, lol...oh and yes lockin Goldie.
 
Rucks is a really tough line for me.
I'm sure Goldy will beast up and score well in 2016.
What do people think his highest potential ceiling is?
His 2015 was just ridiculous, and if your starting with him your betting on him either replicating or improving on that output. I'm sure he will be a great pick and finish up as a top 5 ruck, but I think he will come back to the pack this year.

From my perspective Martin is a my clear R1 because I think he has more upside than goldie and he's cheaper+new rules suit him+rucking solo.

R2 is the real pain, there is guaranteed value in Sinclair and Lobbe but both are in that awkward price range where they HAVE to be keepers to justify starting them. I would back Sinclair because he scored ok competing with nicnat and lycett, while Lobbe has been underwhelming historically.
Nathan Vardy is risky but understandable pick. People knock him as a player but he has cranked out some pretty big scores in his first 22 games. If he is fit he plays, if he plays will score ok.

Either way going the mid price or bargain bin option on R2 really messes up overall structure for my strategy. So Ive got 590k for r2 and keep flipping between Nic Nat, Blix and Jacobs.

Nic Nat has the most upside of the three I think. More time in the Ruck, More time on the ground,less competition, healthy pre-season, Proven history, stable team. He is probably the best choice from an analytical standpoint.

Jacobs is a mystery to me. He plays ruck for a team called the crows. Every time the cats play them he lumbers around chasing the ball and just generally being a ruckman. He seems to score ok though, So I guess he is an option. Should go 100+, but with Danger gone has to lose a few HOTA, so i reckon stagnation awaits.

Im a Blicavs groupie, but i dont think he will score as well as Nic nat this year. He can run a bit, which helps for footy ballers and should help particularly this season. Does a bit of everything and holds the additional ace of being able to traded into the mids should(when?) Goldie goes friggan apeshit, which isn't possible with any of the other top rucks. Also he seem very durable(touch wood) so ill probably throw him in for rd1.

Does anyone think Brodie grundy could finish up 105+ this year? cracked 90 last season, very young, no competition in a very deep midfield?
 
catstragic said:
Rucks is a really tough line for me.
I'm sure Goldy will beast up and score well in 2016.
What do people think his highest potential ceiling is?
His 2015 was just ridiculous, and if your starting with him your betting on him either replicating or improving on that output. I'm sure he will be a great pick and finish up as a top 5 ruck, but I think he will come back to the pack this year.

From my perspective Martin is a my clear R1 because I think he has more upside than goldie and he's cheaper+new rules suit him+rucking solo.

R2 is the real pain, there is guaranteed value in Sinclair and Lobbe but both are in that awkward price range where they HAVE to be keepers to justify starting them. I would back Sinclair because he scored ok competing with nicnat and lycett, while Lobbe has been underwhelming historically.
Nathan Vardy is risky but understandable pick. People knock him as a player but he has cranked out some pretty big scores in his first 22 games. If he is fit he plays, if he plays will score ok.

Either way going the mid price or bargain bin option on R2 really messes up overall structure for my strategy. So Ive got 590k for r2 and keep flipping between Nic Nat, Blix and Jacobs.

Nic Nat has the most upside of the three I think. More time in the Ruck, More time on the ground,less competition, healthy pre-season, Proven history, stable team. He is probably the best choice from an analytical standpoint.

Jacobs is a mystery to me. He plays ruck for a team called the crows. Every time the cats play them he lumbers around chasing the ball and just generally being a ruckman. He seems to score ok though, So I guess he is an option. Should go 100+, but with Danger gone has to lose a few HOTA, so i reckon stagnation awaits.

Im a Blicavs groupie, but i dont think he will score as well as Nic nat this year. He can run a bit, which helps for footy ballers and should help particularly this season. Does a bit of everything and holds the additional ace of being able to traded into the mids should(when?) Goldie goes friggan apeshit, which isn't possible with any of the other top rucks. Also he seem very durable(touch wood) so ill probably throw him in for rd1.

Does anyone think Brodie grundy could finish up 105+ this year? cracked 90 last season, very young, no competition in a very deep midfield?
Click to expand...
Personally I think Bliz better value than Nic Nat. Still not 100% on Nics overall durability/fitness. Bliz will be my number 2 ruck I think. Less rotations may see his athleticism at least hold his value, maybe increase it a touch.
 
spangleduck said:
For me, Goldy is very likely to be top ruck and therefore is a must have. I see a couple of options however:

I feel there could be a lot of upside in selecting Lobbe as a stepping stone in order to save money initially. I can definitely see the merit in starting Lobbe with Martin/Jacobs/NicNat etc. with the intention of pickup up Goldy as soon as he drops value. It's highly likely that you'll be able to pick up Goldy at a reduced price early on. IF the money is well spent elsewhere in the initial team, the risk could well be worth it. For example, If Goldy goes down to ~$600k, and Lobbe up to $500k, you've netted yourself ~$200k. This is at the cost of a trade and the difference in points between Goldy and Lobbe. Interestingly, the difference in points isn't really a factor when you assume he (Goldy) hasn't been a captain option and you've used the leftover cash effectively (big assumption of course).

The other option is to go a combination of Goldy + Lobbe. This would allow the upgrade of Lobbe to a Martin/Jacobs/NicNat etc. down the track. A player could be presenting great value, or may stand out above the rest. I suppose this allows a wait and see approach, which could also be beneficial.

Personally, I think I over-value the prices of players too much. I generally get very high team values, but this may result in less points.

After all of this, I'm likely going with two set and forgets! :p
Click to expand...
I like these approaches, not sure which one yet, probably Goldy + lower priced ruck and wait and see who to upgrade to.:)
 
Pill Cosby said:
I'm almost certainly locking in Goldy. IF he has a poor first couple of games, you can downgrade him to ANYONE who's started well, then trade him back in once he drops in price and the traded in player goes up in price. Sure it costs you 2 trades, but that's the risk you take.

Also, he may not even drop in price. I remember a few years ago Ablett had a massive starting price - those who didn't jump on him instantly regretted it as his price went >$700k
Click to expand...

I can't see the logic in picking Goldy initially and even considering the prospect of using 2 trades to dump him and bring him back in. Unless he gets an injury the spot his his for the long haul imo. If you think he may drop in price, the only startegy is to start without him and bring him in later as an upgrade imo. At least that is only one trade (possibly) and the initial cash spent elsewhere. Trades are too valuable to be wasting imo. I'll be starting with him and if he drops in value, so be it. I can't see him being that much of a disaster to be worth worrying about.
 
Pedro said:
I can't see the logic in picking Goldy initially and even considering the prospect of using 2 trades to dump him and bring him back in. Unless he gets an injury the spot his his for the long haul imo. If you think he may drop in price, the only startegy is to start without him and bring him in later as an upgrade imo. At least that is only one trade (possibly) and the initial cash spent elsewhere. Trades are too valuable to be wasting imo. I'll be starting with him and if he drops in value, so be it. I can't see him being that much of a disaster to be worth worrying about.
Click to expand...
Even if he drops a bit, you still will have the best scoring ruck in your team and no need to burn a trade. Safest bet. Worst case scenario he ends up being R2...
 
catstragic said:
Rucks is a really tough line for me.
I'm sure Goldy will beast up and score well in 2016.
What do people think his highest potential ceiling is?
His 2015 was just ridiculous, and if your starting with him your betting on him either replicating or improving on that output. I'm sure he will be a great pick and finish up as a top 5 ruck, but I think he will come back to the pack this year.

From my perspective Martin is a my clear R1 because I think he has more upside than goldie and he's cheaper+new rules suit him+rucking solo.
Click to expand...

Goldy has been up since mid-2014. People forget this when considering him. Check out his final half of 2014, that might change your mind (averaged 125 over his final 11 games).

Goldy's ceiling should be the same, there is no indication that he will drop his scoring. He hasn't dropped off yet, that's the best indicator.

Why does Martin have more upside? Sure, he's cheaper, but the new rules also suit Goldy (massive tank), and he has rucked solo for a long time now. He is also in a team that will score more overall points (ie: more points to share).

There are no real standout players to take his points away either, where Stef has a resurgent Rockliff, and a fit Beams to tangle with. Will he get a 115 average whilst Rocky and Beams go 115+ as well? Factor in the amount of wins/losses expected by the Lions.
He's also never gone above 112.

I just can't see him as a clear R1 like you do. Definitely a contender for R2 with NicNat, Jacobs, Mummy and even Gawn.

Good luck.
 
Raveneyes said:
Goldy has been up since mid-2014. People forget this when considering him. Check out his final half of 2014, that might change your mind (averaged 125 over his final 11 games).

Goldy's ceiling should be the same, there is no indication that he will drop his scoring. He hasn't dropped off yet, that's the best indicator.

Why does Martin have more upside? Sure, he's cheaper, but the new rules also suit Goldy (massive tank), and he has rucked solo for a long time now. He is also in a team that will score more overall points (ie: more points to share).

There are no real standout players to take his points away either, where Stef has a resurgent Rockliff, and a fit Beams to tangle with. Will he get a 115 average whilst Rocky and Beams go 115+ as well? Factor in the amount of wins/losses expected by the Lions.
He's also never gone above 112.

I just can't see him as a clear R1 like you do. Definitely a contender for R2 with NicNat, Jacobs, Mummy and even Gawn.

Good luck.
Click to expand...
Good points. Who is your R2. Im really considering Blic with his tank and possesions around the ground. I am even going cold on Jacobs
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Raveneyes said:
Goldy has been up since mid-2014. People forget this when considering him. Check out his final half of 2014, that might change your mind (averaged 125 over his final 11 games).

Goldy's ceiling should be the same, there is no indication that he will drop his scoring. He hasn't dropped off yet, that's the best indicator.

Why does Martin have more upside? Sure, he's cheaper, but the new rules also suit Goldy (massive tank), and he has rucked solo for a long time now. He is also in a team that will score more overall points (ie: more points to share).

There are no real standout players to take his points away either, where Stef has a resurgent Rockliff, and a fit Beams to tangle with. Will he get a 115 average whilst Rocky and Beams go 115+ as well? Factor in the amount of wins/losses expected by the Lions.
He's also never gone above 112.

I just can't see him as a clear R1 like you do. Definitely a contender for R2 with NicNat, Jacobs, Mummy and even Gawn.

Good luck.
Click to expand...
Your overthinking it IMHO.

Stefan is a gun, 110+ avg the past 2 seasons & now that Leuy is gone I expect a little improvement.

Jacobs & Nic Nat/Gawn are the iffy ones to crack 110+ IMO.
 
buttox said:
goldys the easiest choice in 2016 supercoach for mine.
its R2 which will make or break seasons imo
Click to expand...
Yep, the coaches who pay for Stef, Jacobs, etc at R2 will be fine, the ones who go for Luey and Grundy or whoever else will struggle
 
SincMagic said:
Your overthinking it IMHO.

Stefan is a gun, 110+ avg the past 2 seasons & now that Leuy is gone I expect a little improvement.

Jacobs & Nic Nat/Gawn are the iffy ones to crack 110+ IMO.
Click to expand...

We're all over-thinking dude, that's why we've been talking crap months before the start. :confused:

Jacobs > Martin IMHO
 
Raveneyes said:
We're all over-thinking dude, that's why we've been talking crap months before the start. :confused:

Jacobs > Martin IMHO
Click to expand...
Agree to disagree.

Not many ruckman pick up 30+ touches, 10+ marks, 50+ hitouts in a game as shown by Stef against the WB last year in round 23.

Jacobs a better tap ruckman though, that's about it.
 
SincMagic said:
Agree to disagree.

Not many ruckman pick up 30+ touches, 10+ marks, 50+ hitouts in a game as shown by Stef against the WB last year in round 23.

Jacobs a better tap ruckman though, that's about it.
Click to expand...
To be fair, Jamie Lawson would've gotten 30+ hitouts that day against the Dogs
gc4668637694493822970.jpg
 
Daniels said:
Disagree.

Starting a 'light' R2 can work brilliantly. Look at some past winners start teams for example.
Click to expand...
Yeah fair enough, last year's winner started with NicNat, who would have been cheap because of a shocking 2014 (only avg 90)

You need somebody with a decent scoring history at least
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top