Position 2017 Rucks

[rumoursofwinter]

Thanks for that. That stuffs up my team! I don't want to waste trades on injuries or mid prices this year.Oh well. There's still months to go. I think Witts is a good chance to play but with 3 rucks at Gold Coast it makes it a big risk without dpp. Wanted to be able to swing him with Stradica. Witts scores were impacted by Grundy. He had some big games in the vfl last year. Back to the drawing board.

Marshall had a promising year in the vfl last year.

 

[Sydney Kicker]

Will you be taking any of the 1st rd draftees from 2016?

McGrath
mcLuggage types?

I guess in theory Witts is a very high 1st rd draft pick based on price alone - not ability

Don't think that question can be answered until we see which rookies are named R1 and what they look like in pre season. My preference is to take 123k guys if I'm confident they have JS. The history of 200k 1st year players isn't that good. Even Weitering last year was at best an ok selection in terms of cash generation. If I start someone at 200k most likely it would be McCarthy who has a few years under his belt.

In the ruck though it's a bit different with only one bench spot. If Witts had 100% cast iron JS then I would be super keen (even as an R2 you could select him). However with competition from Nicholls he could easily miss games or play as number 2 ruck when you need his score when one of your other rucks misses for whatever reason. I much prefer a non playing R3 with DPP cover in the F line.

 

[Here2tellyouwhy]

Witts is a bit risky but then so is Sandi.

Gawn is overpriced but the only true set and forget ruck.
You could go Gawnstein and forget about the rucks for the year but you'll lose money on everyone else for only a 20-30 point advantage.

The ballsy borderline insane ruck combo would be Ryder and Sandi.
Both guaranteed number 1 rucks with 80% game time and no competition
Both can get HTA
Both proven to go 90+

A 180 average for 720k is almost worth the risk when the set and forget combo is
1250k for maybe a 240 average at best and most likely a 220 average.

Does the extra 500k go to upgrading a rookie to premo midfielder and does that more than cover the points difference and risk factor.

I can feel my coconuts swelling

 

[toxic]

Don't think that question can be answered until we see which rookies are named R1 and what they look like in pre season. My preference is to take 123k guys if I'm confident they have JS. The history of 200k 1st year players isn't that good. Even Weitering last year was at best an ok selection in terms of cash generation. If I start someone at 200k most likely it would be McCarthy who has a few years under his belt.

In the ruck though it's a bit different with only one bench spot. If Witts had 100% cast iron JS then I would be super keen (even as an R2 you could select him). However with competition from Nicholls he could easily miss games or play as number 2 ruck when you need his score when one of your other rucks misses for whatever reason. I much prefer a non playing R3 with DPP cover in the F line.

Cheers - same logic as me

Altho by all accounts Nicholls has returned in the shape of Mick Nolan

Seems Witts is locked into R1 for the Suns

 

[Fooler]

Tom Hickey to be the big winner from the death of third man up.
22.2% of all Saints hitouts were 3rd man up. Hickey with a 30% HOA. As per J.Reynolds podcast today. Thoughts?

 

[gutsroy]

Someone asked about TBC, from memory.
Knee will see him out for a while, by sounds.
Am just posting, not looking for 16,386 replies about how shit he is.
http://www.sportingnews.com/au/afl/...ssendon-bombers-afl/o8fssnq41io91i34diy3ejhif

 

[rumoursofwinter]

TBC is shit X 16386.

Phillips and TBC broken in the last few days. It's a tough gig being a ruck. I'm going safe with rucks. Posting so I don't change my mind.

 

[stevebbb]

Goldy R1 has just happened

 

[toxic]

Goldy R1 has just happened

Did Gawn die?

 

[stevebbb]

Did Gawn die?

haha nah, but the big Goldman looks good

I want Gawn + Goldy, but Sandi looks good

Sandi going down in the preseason will definitely shake things up

 

[Me Myself and I]

Sandi going down in the preseason will definitely shake things up

Of course not wishing anyone to get injured, but him going down in the first quarter of round 3 would shake things up a lot more.
Would be great SC entertainment for those of us not going near him. Sit back and watch the early panic stations set in, especially if teams with Sandi don't have Ryder.

 

[toxic]

Of course not wishing anyone to get injured, but him going down in the first quarter of round 3 would shake things up a lot more.
Would be great SC entertainment for those of us not going near him. Sit back and watch the early panic stations set in, especially if teams with Sandi don't have Ryder.

If Sandi goes down early on I dont think Ryder is the answer (unless it's a one - two week injury at most)

I'd then look at upgrading him to a Goldy / Grundy type, teams with only 1 decent ruck option

 

[toxic]

haha nah, but the big Goldman looks good

I want Gawn + Goldy, but Sandi looks good

Sandi going down in the preseason will definitely shake things up

I haven't read anything good or bad regarding Goldy (off to the Norf pre-season thread)

He is an interesting option

Was 2015 a season out of the norm for Goldy??

 

[kirbonavich]

Admittedly Goldsteins 2015 was a blinder. Unfortunately for all concerned there isn't a great deal of proven talent to choose from. This position is where seasons are won and lost in my opinion. I had Nankervis and Witts as my 1-2 rucks for quite some time contemplating running the risk and spending the remaining difference and risking it on an Ablett to have a huge season. The Geelong boys are also interesting given how many TMU they had last season.

 

[toxic]

Admittedly Goldsteins 2015 was a blinder. Unfortunately for all concerned there isn't a great deal of proven talent to choose from. This position is where seasons are won and lost in my opinion. I had Nankervis and Witts as my 1-2 rucks for quite some time contemplating running the risk and spending the remaining difference and risking it on an Ablett to have a huge season. The Geelong boys are also interesting given how many TMU they had last season.

Thoughts on Proven Talent possibilities

Gawn
Goldy
Grundy (2nd half of 2016 based....)
Stef Martin
Mummy
Sandilands
Jacobs (spud last year tho)

Nutnut (obviously injured now till late 2017)


I'd be surprised if the majority don't start with a combination of those 7

7 out of 18 teams can provide a top 3 ruck

How many teams can provide a top 3 mid for instance? is it 7 or more or less?

 

[kirbonavich]

Thoughts on Proven Talent possibilities

Gawn
Goldy
Grundy (2nd half of 2016 based....)
Stef Martin
Mummy
Sandilands
Jacobs (spud last year tho)

Nutnut (obviously injured now till late 2017)


I'd be surprised if the majority don't start with a combination of those 7

7 out of 18 teams can provide a top 3 ruck

How many teams can provide a top 3 mid for instance? is it 7 or more or less?

There is a considerable point difference from the first two and the rest if you base it over an entire season. Hardly justifies the risk.
4877 total for the season for Gawnstein combo
4079 is the next best combo (not including NinNat) and thats Mummy and Grundy.
Just a tick under 800 points. I hate picking the rucks every year, i have often wanted to play sub par rucks and spend the difference on another two mid super premiums. Maybe this year will be the year i don't bitch out and go safe.

 

[toxic]

There is a considerable point difference from the first two and the rest if you base it over an entire season. Hardly justifies the risk.
4877 total for the season for Gawnstein combo
4079 is the next best combo (not including NinNat) and thats Mummy and Grundy.
Just a tick under 800 points. I hate picking the rucks every year, i have often wanted to play sub par rucks and spend the difference on another two mid super premiums. Maybe this year will be the year i don't bitch out and go safe.

I assume those numbers are baded off 2016?

If history had proven anything, its that ruck scoring is very fluid and changes from yr to yr

All listed have had "proven" runs of solid scoring.

Picking two low priced rucks (like Sandi & Witts) frees up a swag of cash

But is certainly a massive pod and big risk.

Leaving out Gawn or Goldy takes away a captain option also

 

[Feerits Elf]

How many teams can provide a top 3 mid for instance? is it 7 or more or less?

Less I reckon

 

[toxic]

Less I reckon

Cats..danger
Pies..pendles
Swans..hanners jpk
GC..gaj
Lions..rocky
Freo..fyfe

Then i stop suddenly at 6 teams

 

[Feerits Elf]

Cats..danger
Pies..pendles
Swans..hanners jpk
GC..gaj
Lions..rocky
Freo..fyfe

Then i stop suddenly at 6 teams

I had 6 also

Brisbane: Rockliff, Beams
Collingwood: Pendlebury, Treloar
Fremantle: Fyfe, Neale
Gold Coast: Ablett
Geelong: Dangerfield, Selwood
Sydney: Kennedy, Hannebery

 

[dlanod]

I haven't read anything good or bad regarding Goldy (off to the Norf pre-season thread)

He is an interesting option

Was 2015 a season out of the norm for Goldy??

View attachment 328735

Yep. Before last year I did research on rucks backing up after a 120+ year. Hadn't happened. Turned out the sweet spot for consistency was the 105-115 mark. Gawn would be the obvious example this year, and it's unlikely I'll be starting him when I can get someone like a Goldy who will probably average a similar 105-115 range for cheaper.

Here's the notes:

Every ruck that's hit 112+ has dropped the following year. This makes sense when you consider that in basically every case it's that player's best ever year. There's always rucks in the 110-115 range but it varies every year and the only ruck that's gone back to back in that range in the last four years was Martin (111 in 2014 and 110 in 2015).

Sample of last year's top 10 rucks who'd previously had finishes in the top 10 (Gawn, Blicavs and Grundy omitted as a result):

Ruck: 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015
Goldy: N/A, 114, 106, 128
Stef: N/A, N/A, 111, 110
Jacobs: 102, N/A, 115, 107
Sandi: 113, N/A, 108, 107
Mummy: N/A, N/A, 114, 105
NN: 114, 96, N/A, 103
Maric: 113, 97, 99, 95

 

[gutsroy]

Yep. Before last year I did research on rucks backing up after a 120+ year. Hadn't happened. Turned out the sweet spot for consistency was the 105-115 mark. Gawn would be the obvious example this year, and it's unlikely I'll be starting him when I can get someone like a Goldy who will probably average a similar 105-115 range for cheaper.

Here's the notes:

Every ruck that's hit 112+ has dropped the following year. This makes sense when you consider that in basically every case it's that player's best ever year. There's always rucks in the 110-115 range but it varies every year and the only ruck that's gone back to back in that range in the last four years was Martin (111 in 2014 and 110 in 2015).

Sample of last year's top 10 rucks who'd previously had finishes in the top 10 (Gawn, Blicavs and Grundy omitted as a result):

Ruck: 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015
Goldy: N/A, 114, 106, 128
Stef: N/A, N/A, 111, 110
Jacobs: 102, N/A, 115, 107
Sandi: 113, N/A, 108, 107
Mummy: N/A, N/A, 114, 105
NN: 114, 96, N/A, 103
Maric: 113, 97, 99, 95

Out of interest, did you look at factors like interseason schedule / win-loss / direct opponent which might explain the variance as well or was the focus the magic number?

 

[dlanod]

Out of interest, did you look at factors like interseason schedule / win-loss / direct opponent which might explain the variance as well or was the focus the magic number?

I didn't. IMO the moment you start looking at the minutiae the sample size gets too small to draw meaningful conclusions from so I view it as pretty counterproductive when looking at a season long/starting team plan.

Looking at match ups is great for picking individual match ups or end of season trade-ins, but expecting Goldy to have a negative match up in Round 4 last year against Sandilands, only for it to be against Griffin (positive match up) instead shows some of the issues of over-projecting.

 

[gutsroy]

I didn't. IMO the moment you start looking at the minutiae the sample size gets too small to draw meaningful conclusions from so I view it as pretty counterproductive when looking at a season long/starting team plan.

Looking at match ups is great for picking individual match ups or end of season trade-ins, but expecting Goldy to have a negative match up in Round 4 last year against Sandilands, only for it to be against Griffin (positive match up) instead shows some of the issues of over-projecting.

Wasn't suggesting projecting, was getting at whether there were consistent factors which varied. I looked at the 2016 performance of some blokes i was considering and found interesting stuff which to my mind explained a fair bit of the purported 'next step' or 'decline' people talk up and to me is relevant when gauging their true performance baseline. Doesn't appear to be to you. Fair enough.

 

[toxic]

Nicholls and Currie both not training with the main group.
Witts at R3 firming for Tox (god help me)