DT Rucks 2012

[Keystone agony]

yeh made me want to pick him, the thing i like the most is the trading of Giles before round 11 which is a likely scenario if the Big O is holding his own/getting games. It could be the first time where you genuinely know your gonna have ruck cash cows. Zac Smith was great last year, but many wernt even that confident before the season on him.

I think the rucks are a chance to go a bit unique this year because all the top are so even. It might just be worth picking the most unique of the top bunch in the hope that they avg 5 better than the others.

 

[longytap]

Gotta agree with you here mate - 2012 is the most straight forward R3 and R4 years in memory. There are some considering Orren as their R2 which I'm not too big on. All the interest is in the on ground ruck spots.

Big Matthew Leuenberger I have just about decided on as R1, R2 I'm not too sure. Worried about Coxy and Sandy for $$ and injury... like BigMac.... its a tough one

Mate, just checked out your web site. It's a ripper, good read!!

 

[Impromptu]

Loving the ruck discussion. I'm confused myself.

I don't have the prices for DT therefore haven't decided yet on my rucks. However, from SC I won't be having Cox and Sandilands therefore it is very unlikely I'll be having them in DT.

 

[borrat]

Loving the ruck discussion. I'm confused myself.

I don't have the prices for DT therefore haven't decided yet on my rucks. However, from SC I won't be having Cox and Sandilands therefore it is very unlikely I'll be having them in DT.

agreed

but i think cox could be a good upgrade potentially

to say from a giles or stephenson

 

[dylan123]

has maric been mentioned much???

he could become a premium this year i think

richmonds only other pure ruckmen are graham and browne

could maric be this years mumford?

I think you'd have to be a very brave person to back Maric in personally. Maric will add to the Richmond side in terms of effective hitouts when he gets them but I'm not sure he will be a superstar in DT/SC.

Before Jacobs was at the club he was basically our one and only ruckman with Griffin normally in poor form/injured and Moran struggling with numerous knee injuries. During that time (2009 and 2010) his averages were at 54.7 and 57.8 over 18 and 21 games respectively. Taking a closer look into both of those seasons, he had 5 scores over 80 in 2009 (not one over 90). You could argue that his form picked up towards the end of the season when he scored 4 80+ scores in the final 7 games.

In 2009 he managed only two scores of 80+, a 91 and an 80.

So looking over his history to date, he hasn't shown a great amount to prove that he's going to bring it to the next level.

This is quite a risk to take because if he fails you can't simply downgrade him to another rookie ruck as there just aren't that many options and it would mean Giles would probably become your 2nd ruck for some time (at least until after round 11). The price dfiference between Maric and a premium is about 250k so you would need to do a major downgrade early to be able to bring in another premium.

So personally, I'm not too keen on him myself, I'd probably keep an eye on him to see how he preforms in the NAB cup because if it's the same old I don't think it's worth the risk.

All too easy to dismiss it when people pick a player from their own team as a bit of a flyer. So often we forget that the bias often comes with a higher degree of insight too. Nice analysis mate

Thanks, I'll add a little further on why Jacobs and Leuenberger are my preferred two picks at this stage (a lot can change from now to round 1 though).

Here are the list of premium ruckman I believe should at least be considered:

- Cox
- Goldstein
- Sandilands
-Leuenberger
- Mumford
- McEvoy
- Jacobs


So now, looking through my list of premium rucks, my pros and cons for each:


Cox:
Pros: Easily the best ruckman in DT and has proven so over multiple years with his best year actually coming from last year in both DT and SC.

Cons: High price tag, will be turning 31 and has the excitement machine of Naitanui who continues to develop.

Overall: Naitanui is what worries me the most about Cox, Naitanui again had a shoulder problem very early in the year which he played through but no doubt would have held him back from things such as rucking in the centre square. As he contiunes to develop as a player along with a 100% fit body and Cox gets older, I'm sure we are going to see him spend even more time in the middle. Will this mean Cox is no longer a premium ruckman? Of course not (imo) but it means his average could decrease slightly and could I use that cash (by selecting a Jacobs over Cox) elsewhere to get me a better valued player? I hope so.


Goldstein:
Pros: Averaged the most hitouts out of any ruckman last year and is always going to rack up plenty of points from them alone. Still very young and could still improve on other areas in his game.

Cons: The return of McIntosh, how will this effect Goldstein? With Petrie, Goldstein and McIntosh all in the same side I'm sure we are going to see McIntosh spend some time in the ruck during games. This wouldn't seem so bad although Goldstein averaged about 10% more TOG then the next best premium ruckman last year at 93.76% in which I can only thing is going to be effected with McIntosh coming back into the side.

Overall: Should be a solid pick but I question whether he can maintain his average with less TOG as I expect McIntosh to spend a bit of time rucking in the midfield as well.


Sandilands:
Pros: Always starts the season very strongly and when he isn't injured I'd have him as the 2nd best ruckman. Also has his bye in round 12 instead of 11 like the other premium ruckman (bar McEvoy).

Cons: Wears down as the season goes on which has become more evident in recent years. Has a bit of support in the ruck now which he previously hasn't which means Freo can afford to rest him.

Overall: With Griffin stepping in as a ruckman when Sandliands went down last year and showing he could match it/beat AFL ruckman, he has given Freo another ruck option for Sandilands ontop of Clarke. Freo have made it to the finals for the past couple of years but one of their best weapons in Sandilands has been on one leg for both years and has really cost them. With Clarke and Griffin now on the list, why would they over use Sandilands in the home and away season when they could rest him up and have him fit and firing for the finals? He's going to be a great ruck but I suspect his average will go down and we will see him rested at the first sign of any niggle.


Leuenberger:
Pros: Has buckets of potential and we saw that for the first time last season. You can see in the second half of the season his average really lifted and if he starts where he left off last season then he'll be a bargain. Hudson is his only support in ruck and it's unsure of how much Hudson will be used but Leuenberger will certainty be taking the majority of the ruck load regardless.

Cons: Could we see Hudson playing every game if fit? If so then this could potentially effect Leuenberger as Hudson is really a ruckman only without the capability to play as a forward/back which means he could eat up a bit of Lenenbergers time.

Overall: At the age of 33 (once the season starts) I don't think Hudson will really effect Lenenberger much at all and is a "just incase" option for Lenenberger if he was to go down injured as they have no other ruckman. I think Lenenberger will continue where he left off and will improve on his 2011 average.


Mumford:
Pros: Doesn't have much competition in the ruck bar Seaby and Sydney have shown that Mumford will be their number #1 when both are fit. Mumford averaged 34 hitouts a game last year and the most tackles out of all the ruckman, he gets plenty of points from these two things. He averaged the least disposals out of the premium ruckman as well so he doesn't rely on possessions to get his points and that could always go up slightly.

Cons: Has had a few injury problems as well as issues with suspension (if I recall correctly).

Overall: there really isn't much of a reason as to why you shouldn't select Mumford as there isn't much to say his average will go down, he should maintain it at the minimum and potentially improve on it a bit.


McEvoy:
Pros: Has the round 12 bye instead of the 11. With Gardiner and King stepping down last season he took control of the ruck and made it his own position.

Cons: Will the new coach effect McEvoy's game at all? We all know Ross liked to play a congested game with St.Kilda which meant a lot of stoppages and McEvoy average 4 tackles a game = 16 DT and I'd assume a lot of those were made from stoppages. McEvoy averaged the least hitouts of all the premium ruckman with only 22.7 a game where the next lowest was Cox with 29.86 so he relies on other areas of his game to match it with the best.

Overall: Personally, I'm not too sure I see much room for improvement but he's the youngest of all the ruckman at 23 (well turning 23 this season) so there is no reason why he can't continue to improve. I'll be keeping an eye on how St.Kilda's style changes in the pre season games under a new coach to see if it looks to effect McEvoy's game in either a positive or negative way.


Jacobs:
Pros: Has no competition in the ruck, the lowest TOG out of all the ruckman (bar Sandilands who I don't know what his TOG was last season), first round score is a bit of an outlier. Should continue to improve in only his second season at the Crows.

Cons: Hasn't really shown to be a high possession getter in any of his AFL seasons so there is no reason to suggest it will go up and something you will be relying on if you're banking on him improving his average.

Overall: As I've already stated, I think there are plenty of reasons as to why you should pick him as there are not many risks in him.





So basically, I can personally see reasons as to why I should avoid Cox, Sandilands and Goldstein. I'm not too keen on McEvoy which leaves me three options of Jacobs, Leunenberger and Mumford in which they all unfortunately share the round 11 bye. If Sandilands misses 1 game during the season where the other 3 don't then even if I get a zero on round 11 I believe I'd be the overall winner of that as I believe they will average more then him over the season and are only likely to get an extra 60 odd points on me in round 11 if I cop a zero. 60 points over 22 games 2.7 which is what they need to average more then Sandilands for me to come out on even/on top.

Anyways, that will end my ramble for now, hope it makes a bit of sense.

Loving the ruck discussion. I'm confused myself.

I don't have the prices for DT therefore haven't decided yet on my rucks. However, from SC I won't be having Cox and Sandilands therefore it is very unlikely I'll be having them in DT.

m0nty has them up on the fanplanner if you wish to check them out.

 

[Impromptu]

m0nty has them up on the fanplanner if you wish to check them out.

Thanks! Will have a look when I have a chance.

Very nice analysis above.

 

[54Dogs]

I'm not too keen on McEvoy which leaves me three options of Jacobs, Leunenberger and Mumford in which they all unfortunately share the round 11 bye.

Mummy's bye is Rd 12.

Also, another positive for Jacobs is he has far and away the best draw of the 3 with GC, GWS and Port each to be played twice. 3 of these games in the first 5 rounds. Last year he went 146 and 106 against GC

 

[dylan123]

Mummy's bye is Rd 12.

Well that's quite a decent pro I completely missed!

Also, another positive for Jacobs is he has far and away the best draw of the 3 with GC, GWS and Port each to be played twice. 3 of these games in the first 5 rounds. Last year he went 146 and 106 against GC

Very good point.

 

[GUMBLETRON]

And McEvoy's is actually 13, probably the only decent option missing that round, and easily covered by the choice rookies.

 

[WCE_phil]

I'll be going with Leuenberger and Mumford at this stage however if kreuzer blitzes the preseason then that may change but thats the only way i can see it changing for me.

 

[Keystone agony]

You would think Kruezer has to avg high 80's (88+ish) to not warrant an upgrade. Thats a pretty big effort if he can do that.

Mumford may have the R12 bye but so does the big O.

By the looks Mcevoy could be quite a good unique he was the ruck that missed out for me last year, bugger. But this year i dont have the same feelings towards him as being a good pick, but im just not sure why.

New coach and his gameplan needs to be answered and thats about it. You would think his game time in the ruck doesnt decrease, has all the ability to be a very good forward aswell. Kozi been labelled as a potential move down back which can only help. Still very young, youngest of the lot i think? Playing in a side that still thinks they have another shot at it and will give it another go which is what the players and coaches have said.

The problem is that Lyon had such a high tackling game and wanted everyone to tackle and apply pressure, Mcevoy avg around 4 tackles a game which is impressive for a ruck. Will that continue?

 

[Docker Dolph]

Anyways, that will end my ramble for now, hope it makes a bit of sense.

It did make sense and was once again a good read, nice job.

The problem is that Lyon had such a high tackling game and wanted everyone to tackle and apply pressure, McEvoy avg around 4 tackles a game which is impressive for a ruck. Will that continue?

In general I don't like picking guys with new coaches, unless the new coach is a known quantity who has moved clubs, like Lyon to my guys.

However, I think one thing we can be reasonably sure of is that Watters will take with him the high pressure game he was a part of at Collingwood. I think McEvoy will still get his tackles. Like NicNat (although on a different level) his tackle count is as much about his mobility and intent as it is about the game style I think.

On Kreuzer, I'm hoping to see his name in every one of my league's teams this year - except mine. I think he is fools gold. By the end of the year I think he will have gone up $60k max at his peak and is just as likely to be about the same price.

He won't be the #1 ruck. he may even share #2 duties. He's not a highly mobile KPF who will rack up heaps of cheap stats and he is a guy who will draw opposition attention wherever he goes. All in all I think he will be a DT let down for people who grab him expecting a keeper.

 

[borrat]

It did make sense and was once again a good read, nice job.



In general I don't like picking guys with new coaches, unless the new coach is a known quantity who has moved clubs, like Lyon to my guys.

However, I think one thing we can be reasonably sure of is that Watters will take with him the high pressure game he was a part of at Collingwood. I think McEvoy will still get his tackles. Like NicNat (although on a different level) his tackle count is as much about his mobility and intent as it is about the game style I think.

On Kreuzer, I'm hoping to see his name in every one of my league's teams this year - except mine. I think he is fools gold. By the end of the year I think he will have gone up $60k max at his peak and is just as likely to be about the same price.

He won't be the #1 ruck. he may even share #2 duties. He's not a highly mobile KPF who will rack up heaps of cheap stats and he is a guy who will draw opposition attention wherever he goes. All in all I think he will be a DT let down for people who grab him expecting a keeper.

good point

but surely your pro's for jacobs far outweigh the fact sanderson hasnt coached yet???

and on your point about him not averaging many positions surely that will increase with the fact he is adelaide's only ruckman

 

[Docker Dolph]

good point

but surely your pro's for jacobs far outweigh the fact sanderson hasnt coached yet???

and on your point about him not averaging many positions surely that will increase with the fact he is adelaide's only ruckman

I don't think that was my point but no matter.

It's not about whether Sanderson can coach or not, it is the complete lack of understanding of what his game plan will be and how it will affect the DT scoring of his teams.

He's come from Geelong so you could look there I guess, but Geelong rucks haven't been particularly exciting from a DT aspect.

This also throws a question mark over his possessions. More TOG will likely see more possessions, all things being equal. However, maybe he doesn't get many touches because he has average skills. Or perhaps he prefers to make space for others? Or his coaches have identified he doesn't make the right decisions? Or because the coach doesn't want the ruckman slowing down the ball movement?

If any of these are true then increased TOG will have only limited impact on possessions.

I like the arguments for him, but I think others offer the same potential with less uncertainty and for very similar prices.

 

[Ashb23]

yeh made me want to pick him, the thing i like the most is the trading of Giles before round 11 which is a likely scenario if the Big O is holding his own/getting games. It could be the first time where you genuinely know your gonna have ruck cash cows. Zac Smith was great last year, but many wernt even that confident before the season on him.

I think the rucks are a chance to go a bit unique this year because all the top are so even. It might just be worth picking the most unique of the top bunch in the hope that they avg 5 better than the others.

The thing is, you will be trading him for a guy who either isn't playing that week, or who will be missing one of the next two games. GWS bye is very inconvienient. Wish it was R13.

 

[dylan123]

The thing is, you will be trading him for a guy who either isn't playing that week, or who will be missing one of the next two games. GWS bye is very inconvienient. Wish it was R13.

True but part of the reason (well at least for my plan in) your best two premium ruckman will be missing for the round 11 bye, you will have Stephenson and the guy you trade Giles out for that week both playing to cover your two round 11 ruck premium byes. If not, there really isn't much point in moving Giles on imo.

 

[Impromptu]

On Kreuzer, I'm hoping to see his name in every one of my league's teams this year - except mine. I think he is fools gold. By the end of the year I think he will have gone up $60k max at his peak and is just as likely to be about the same price.

He won't be the #1 ruck. he may even share #2 duties. He's not a highly mobile KPF who will rack up heaps of cheap stats and he is a guy who will draw opposition attention wherever he goes. All in all I think he will be a DT let down for people who grab him expecting a keeper.

I agree.

Kruezer is more of a SC player than DT player as he takes contested marks and to me he is already a risk with SC. For DT, he is a no.

Kruezer is a good player, but if Kruezer plays in the forward he won't get much DT points.

Disclaimer - Kruezer nearly cost me in SC in 2011, so I'm not sure if this is an impartial view It was very painful watching Kruezer every week and at the end I started my rookies (i.Smith/Mzungu) over Kruezer through using Petrie MPP link as I had no faith in Kruezer. But again, I think it's because he is a KPP.

 

[Ashb23]

True but part of the reason (well at least for my plan in) your best two premium ruckman will be missing for the round 11 bye, you will have Stephenson and the guy you trade Giles out for that week both playing to cover your two round 11 ruck premium byes. If not, there really isn't much point in moving Giles on imo.

Agreed. But what if there isn't any viable options to trade Giles for? It means you could be stuck with one ruckman for round 11. By picking Mummy or McEvoy (or anyone else who has a bye after round 11) as one of your premiums, it means Giles missed round 11 along with one premium, so you still have 2 rucks and you can trade him for a guy who isn't playing at all and take the cash. I just don't know if having 3 rucks with their bye in the same round is a good idea.

 

[Keystone agony]

Agreed. But what if there isn't any viable options to trade Giles for? It means you could be stuck with one ruckman for round 11. By picking Mummy or McEvoy (or anyone else who has a bye after round 11) as one of your premiums, it means Giles missed round 11 along with one premium, so you still have 2 rucks and you can trade him for a guy who isn't playing at all and take the cash. I just don't know if having 3 rucks with their bye in the same round is a good idea.

I might go ricky with the rucks this year and try something different.

FWIW i think J.Roughead of the dogs is going to be this years ruck climber i predicted Mcevoy and Vickery last year, so might go with him as my second ruck or try the BIG O or Giles as the second ruck.

 

[dylan123]

Agreed. But what if there isn't any viable options to trade Giles for? It means you could be stuck with one ruckman for round 11. By picking Mummy or McEvoy (or anyone else who has a bye after round 11) as one of your premiums, it means Giles missed round 11 along with one premium, so you still have 2 rucks and you can trade him for a guy who isn't playing at all and take the cash. I just don't know if having 3 rucks with their bye in the same round is a good idea.

If there isn't then you take the zero which hurts short term but I believe those points can be made up long term.


Lets say my ruck combo is Jacobs and Leuenberger with Giles and Stephenson as my bench ruck.

Round 11 Jacobs, Lenuenberger and Giles all have their bye and there are no rookies to trade Giles down to so I take a zero while Stephenson gets me a 55. For the next two bye weeks I have my two main ruckman back who for arguments sake, score 95 a piece. So from round 11-13 I've scored a total of 435 with 1 zero in round 11.


Now looking at another combo more suited to the bye my ruck combo is Leuenberger and Sandilands with Giles and Stephenson on the bench.

Round 11 I have Sandilands and Stephenson on and in round 12 I have Leuenberger and Giles on. Again, I'll give both premium rucks scores of 95, Stephenson a score of 55 and Giles a 65. Over the course of round 11-13 I score a total of 500.

Between those three rounds I lose 65 points in total but what if I believe Jacobs can average more then Sandilands over the course of the year or play a full 22 games in which I can't back Sandilands to do the same?

If Jacobs and Sandilands both were to play the full season then I'd need Jacobs to average 2.95 points a game more the Sandilands to make up for that zero in round 11. If Sandilands was to miss a round and you have Giles cover for him, I make up 30 points in one round bringing that margin of space right down.

So I'm personally happy to take the risk of a zero if I believe the second ruckman I'm picking are going to be higher scoring ruckman rather then the Sandilands/Mumford/McEvoy 2nd ruckman option.

I might go ricky with the rucks this year and try something different.

FWIW i think J.Roughead of the dogs is going to be this years ruck climber i predicted Mcevoy and Vickery last year, so might go with him as my second ruck or try the BIG O or Giles as the second ruck.

Has Roughead even returned to full training yet? For some reason I thought he had a bit of time before we would see that and even then, are they going to risk him in a damaging role (the ruck) after what happened last season again?

 

[54Dogs]

If there isn't then you take the zero which hurts short term but I believe those points can be made up long term.


Lets say my ruck combo is Jacobs and Leuenberger with Giles and Stephenson as my bench ruck.

Round 11 Jacobs, Lenuenberger and Giles all have their bye and there are no rookies to trade Giles down to so I take a zero while Stephenson gets me a 55. For the next two bye weeks I have my two main ruckman back who for arguments sake, score 95 a piece. So from round 11-13 I've scored a total of 435 with 1 zero in round 11.


Now looking at another combo more suited to the bye my ruck combo is Leuenberger and Sandilands with Giles and Stephenson on the bench.

Round 11 I have Sandilands and Stephenson on and in round 12 I have Leuenberger and Giles on. Again, I'll give both premium rucks scores of 95, Stephenson a score of 55 and Giles a 65. Over the course of round 11-13 I score a total of 500.

Between those three rounds I lose 65 points in total but what if I believe Jacobs can average more then Sandilands over the course of the year or play a full 22 games in which I can't back Sandilands to do the same?

If Jacobs and Sandilands both were to play the full season then I'd need Jacobs to average 2.95 points a game more the Sandilands to make up for that zero in round 11. If Sandilands was to miss a round and you have Giles cover for him, I make up 30 points in one round bringing that margin of space right down.

So I'm personally happy to take the risk of a zero if I believe the second ruckman I'm picking are going to be higher scoring ruckman rather then the Sandilands/Mumford/McEvoy 2nd ruckman option.

Nice analysis Dylan

So essentially having 2 premiums and 1 benchie with the Rd 11 bye you only miss the score of 1 benchie over the course of the season. Given there are so many solid options in Rd 11 it may pay not to be consumed to much by the rucks bye. 1 game missed by any premium ruck will almost off set this.

 

[Keystone agony]

Has Roughead even returned to full training yet? For some reason I thought he had a bit of time before we would see that and even then, are they going to risk him in a damaging role (the ruck) after what happened last season again?

Am talking about the western bulldog roughead, is he injured aswell

 

[dylan123]

Am talking about the western bulldog roughead, is he injured aswell

Oh that makes a bit more sense, I was thinking of the Hawks one.

 

[borrat]

I might go ricky with the rucks this year and try something different.

FWIW i think J.Roughead of the dogs is going to be this years ruck climber i predicted Mcevoy and Vickery last year, so might go with him as my second ruck or try the BIG O or Giles as the second ruck.

why?

what role do you see minson having??

 

[Keystone agony]

why?

what role do you see minson having??

I think its time for the dogs to play Roughead ahead of Minson. The experience he is going to gain, something new and development he will gain will be better for the dogs than playing Minson IMO.

Although the dog fans do say Minson is severely underrated on BF.