Remove this Banner Ad

Position 2013 Rucks

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Suma Magic said:
Nightmare scenario:

Round 3 Brisbane drop Longer for Leuenberger. No gain for Longer's points, but trading him for Leuenberger means wasting more important trades.

Is this likely?
Click to expand...

I don't think that will happen. Leuey will most likely be eased into it so they will need Longer to ruck a fair bit.

The reason that I won't be going Longer is that once Leuenburger returns I think they will both score poorly until Leuey hits his straps and is fit enough to take up the number 1 ruck spot. I think that is a likely scenario. I really don't think it will be as easy as Longer to Leuey as some people are hoping.
 
Butler said:
I don't think that will happen. Leuey will most likely be eased into it so they will need Longer to ruck a fair bit.

The reason that I won't be going Longer is that once Leuenburger returns I think they will both score poorly until Leuey hits his straps and is fit enough to take up the number 1 ruck spot. I think that is a likely scenario. I really don't think it will be as easy as Longer to Leuey as some people are hoping.
Click to expand...

Do you think they'll play both of them? I had assumed it would be one of them and Martin, unless Martin is playing crap. But maybe there is a decent change that Martin won't be that good.

I've got Longer at the moment but I'm not convinced. Will either restructure the team and try to get Maric or maybe go with Smith for a cheaper option which wouldn't require much change.

I also don't think Currie or Daw will play.
 
Suma Magic said:
Do you think they'll play both of them? I had assumed it would be one of them and Martin, unless Martin is playing crap. But maybe there is a decent change that Martin won't be that good.

I've got Longer at the moment but I'm not convinced. Will either restructure the team and try to get Maric or maybe go with Smith for a cheaper option which wouldn't require much change.

I also don't think Currie or Daw will play.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure but I would have thought Longer has done enough during the NAB cup to be pushing for a spot in the team even with Leuenburger back.

I have Smith and I have had him locked in for a while now. Cox has been my other ruck but I just played around with Currie as my second ruck and I was very happy with how the team looked with that setup. It's just too bad that I'm not confident enough in Currie to go with it.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Butler said:
I'm not sure but I would have thought Longer has done enough during the NAB cup to be pushing for a spot in the team even with Leuenburger back.

I have Smith and I have had him locked in for a while now. Cox has been my other ruck but I just played around with Currie as my second ruck and I was very happy with how the team looked with that setup. It's just too bad that I'm not confident enough in Currie to go with it.
Click to expand...

If Currie gets picked I think it's worth the risk, but then again he'd be a great R3 if you wanted to go with Smith and Cox. Doubt Currie will get picked though. Be massive to leave out Goldstein.
 
Butler said:
I'm not sure but I would have thought Longer has done enough during the NAB cup to be pushing for a spot in the team even with Leuenburger back.

I have Smith and I have had him locked in for a while now. Cox has been my other ruck but I just played around with Currie as my second ruck and I was very happy with how the team looked with that setup. It's just too bad that I'm not confident enough in Currie to go with it.
Click to expand...

it will be interesting to see who gets the gig at NM... Currie has put forward a very compelling case
and only played 45% today for 26 dt points apparently, and Goldstein amassing 59 from 52%...
NM got smashed so you have to wonder if they even tried? and maybe the hawks came to play today!
 
VSTone said:
it will be interesting to see who gets the gig at NM... Currie has put forward a very compelling case
and only played 45% today for 26 dt points apparently, and Goldstein amassing 59 from 52%...
NM got smashed so you have to wonder if they even tried? and maybe the hawks came to play today!
Click to expand...

Fairly large list of players missing for North and they played last week in the heat as well so I don't think they put too much into it.

Currie is just too risky. Even if he is selected round 1 he has too much pressure on him to keep his spot. I think I will just go with him on the bench and hope he gives me some nice price rises.
 
And the headache just got worse!

The battle for North's No.1 ruck spot continues - Todd Goldstein had 19 hitouts and six possessions to Daniel Currie's 16 hitouts and four possessions.
Scott said Goldstein's first quarter was his best quarter of footy "in two or three years'' and admitted Currie "wasn't as good today'' before endorsing his pre-season as a whole.
Scott said the coaching staff had a tough decision to make, but conceded it was unlikely he would play both in the one team throughout the season proper.
"Who does it in the AFL these days? The Swans did it, but one of the rucks plays key forward. West Coast do it because (Nic) Naitanui is a rare athlete,'' he said.
Click to expand...
 
Surely one out of Currie/Daw/Witts/Rowe will play each week? Honestly I'm seriously considering just selecting them (with Cox), and just rotating them through 2nd ruck until Leuenberger has played a few games and is on the bubble and ready to be traded in.
 
Crawb said:
Surely one out of Currie/Daw/Witts/Rowe will play each week? Honestly I'm seriously considering just selecting them (with Cox), and just rotating them through 2nd ruck until Leuenberger has played a few games and is on the bubble and ready to be traded in.
Click to expand...

You're probably right, but with my luck i'll be rotating the non-playing ruckman into R2 each week, although the 4 sub rule will make life easier in that regard...
 
Crawb said:
Surely one out of Currie/Daw/Witts/Rowe will play each week? Honestly I'm seriously considering just selecting them (with Cox), and just rotating them through 2nd ruck until Leuenberger has played a few games and is on the bubble and ready to be traded in.
Click to expand...

I'm now thinking that none of them will play each week and that I'll just go for 2 premo rucks and 2 89k's on the ruck bench. If a starting ruck gets injured, just trade him out to the next best. In the forwards have a decent F7 like Macaffer and an 89k @ F8. If the ruck & fwd rooks aren't going to play every week and score over 50, might as well just have a strong starting 22 and just the 1 benchie in the forwards. Back & mids would have 2 decent benchies on both those lines though. The 60k saved on R3, R4 & F8 could be utilised elsewhere or just hang onto it until someone worthy puts their hand up...
 
Gingy said:
I'm now thinking that none of them will play each week and that I'll just go for 2 premo rucks and 2 89k's on the ruck bench. If a starting ruck gets injured, just trade him out to the next best. In the forwards have a decent F7 like Macaffer and an 89k @ F8. If the ruck & fwd rooks aren't going to play every week and score over 50, might as well just have a strong starting 22 and just the 1 benchie in the forwards. Back & mids would have 2 decent benchies on both those lines though. The 60k saved on R3, R4 & F8 could be utilised elsewhere or just hang onto it until someone worthy puts their hand up...
Click to expand...

I agree with starting two premos and eliminating all this Goldy/Currie/Leuy second guessing (at the moment I'm going with Cox/Kreuzer) but even if it saves you a little coin not having Currie at R3 strikes me as silly. He'll play a bit it seems, and earn some cash even if he's not starting ruckman. Or am I misunderstanding your post?
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Matching Mole said:
I agree with starting two premos and eliminating all this Goldy/Currie/Leuy second guessing (at the moment I'm going with Cox/Kreuzer) but even if it saves you a little coin not having Currie at R3 strikes me as silly. He'll play a bit it seems, and earn some cash even if he's not starting ruckman. Or am I misunderstanding your post?
Click to expand...

No, you're not misunderstanding, MM. I realise it's only 13k less to have an 89k non playing rook instead of Currie, but if he's only going to play when Goldy is injured or rested, what's the point if he doesn't end up playing until after Rd6 or whatever? Unless the Rook is playing most weeks and gives you a Ruc emergency it seems like a waste of money, especially if you end up waiting half the season or even longer for his first price rise....
 
Gingy said:
No, you're not misunderstanding, MM. I realise it's only 13k less to have an 89k non playing rook instead of Currie, but if he's only going to play when Goldy is injured or rested, what's the point if he doesn't end up playing until after Rd6 or whatever? Unless the Rook is playing most weeks and gives you a Ruc emergency it seems like a waste of money, especially if you end up waiting half the season or even longer for his first price rise....
Click to expand...

I guess I'm assuming Currie will play in the same team as Goldy, which is probably wrong.

Like a lot of my other "what if?" debates, I think I might stop chewing on it until teams are named. Juggling all these hypotheticals can do your head in.
 
My negativity regarding Currie stems from this post which is on the same page...

The battle for North's No.1 ruck spot continues - Todd Goldstein had 19 hitouts and six possessions to Daniel Currie's 16 hitouts and four possessions.
Scott said Goldstein's first quarter was his best quarter of footy "in two or three years'' and admitted Currie "wasn't as good today'' before endorsing his pre-season as a whole.
Scott said the coaching staff had a tough decision to make, but conceded it was unlikely he would play both in the one team throughout the season proper.
"Who does it in the AFL these days? The Swans did it, but one of the rucks plays key forward. West Coast do it because (Nic) Naitanui is a rare athlete,'' he said.​
 
Gingy said:
My negativity regarding Currie stems from this post which is on the same page...

The battle for North's No.1 ruck spot continues - Todd Goldstein had 19 hitouts and six possessions to Daniel Currie's 16 hitouts and four possessions.​
Scott said Goldstein's first quarter was his best quarter of footy "in two or three years'' and admitted Currie "wasn't as good today'' before endorsing his pre-season as a whole.​
Scott said the coaching staff had a tough decision to make, but conceded it was unlikely he would play both in the one team throughout the season proper.​
"Who does it in the AFL these days? The Swans did it, but one of the rucks plays key forward. West Coast do it because (Nic) Naitanui is a rare athlete,'' he said.​
Click to expand...
Don't Carlton play about eight ruckmen? :p
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Keystone agony said:
Has the headache finally gone away?

I went to put Blicavs in my team and to my amazement the 200cm ruckman is a midfielder and not a ruck (okat Virtualsports). This was a few days ago. I thought they had completly forgot him or something when he wasnt in the rucks.
Click to expand...
CD saw his running records and assumed he was a midfielder I'm guessing. :thumbsdown:
 
happy_eagle said:
Longer is shit Gingy
Stop trying to convince people otherwise
Click to expand...

I thought he played alright against Kruezer/Hampson the other night. Like I said, I don't have him (and don't plan on having him either), but he is still better value than that spud Zac Smith...if you're looking for a cheap (-250k) 2nd DT ruck that is 1st ruck for his team then Longer>Smith IMHO.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Position 2013 Rucks

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top