Must Get Players...

[hawka_fan]

If you dont have Cox in your team round 1 you are already a good 100+ points behind the other teams that have him imo.

 

[Virgil]

If you dont have Cox in your team round 1 you are already a good 100+ points behind the other teams that have him imo.

Not necessarily. You spend 400k on Cox and get 100 points every week. I spend that 400k on a gun forward and get 100 points per week. Same amount spent, same result.

All that matters is that you get value for your selections. Admittedly, value is harder to find in the rucks than any other position, but you don't NEED Cox so long as you pick the right players elsewhere.

 

[bloods01]

If you dont have Cox in your team round 1 you are already a good 100+ points behind the other teams that have him imo.

Agreed. He has set the benchmark in recent years and is by far the best ruckman going around. There aren't to many ruckman that can rack up 28 touches and 30 hitouts in a game. He's a star.

 

[hawka_fan]

Not necessarily. You spend 400k on Cox and get 100 points every week. I spend that 400k on a gun forward and get 100 points per week. Same amount spent, same result.

All that matters is that you get value for your selections. Admittedly, value is harder to find in the rucks than any other position, but you don't NEED Cox so long as you pick the right players elsewhere.

If you dont have Cox and everyone else in your comp does your only paying about 50k less. And you could be losing 20-30 points a week. The thing is there are heaps of elite forwards - Pav, Riewoldt, Brown, Johnson, Ablett, Chapman and only 1 elite ruck.

 

[Virgil]

If you dont have Cox and everyone else in your comp does your only paying about 50k less. And you could be losing 20-30 points a week. The thing is there are heaps of elite forwards - Pav, Riewoldt, Brown, Johnson, Ablett, Chapman and only 1 elite ruck.

Not necessarily. I plan on getting Simmonds and Laycock, who only total 15k more than Cox combined. The money saved buys an extra gun elsewhere. In the end, we'll both start with the same amount of gun players, just in different positions.

If you AREN'T buying Cox, I don't see much value in the rest of the expensive rucks (White, Ottens, MacIntosh, Fraser, etc), so may as well go cheap.

 

[hawka_fan]

I guess there are so many strategies to use when choosing the set up of your team.

This year I've gone for the 2 gun forwards straight away(Pav and Roo), Cox, one gun back(cornes), and a few mid range mids who are underpriced.

Every team has to have a weak area if you have big guns in your team.

Does anyone have any idea when DT officially opens?

 

[bloods01]

Not necessarily. I plan on getting Simmonds and Laycock, who only total 15k more than Cox combined. The money saved buys an extra gun elsewhere. In the end, we'll both start with the same amount of gun players, just in different positions.

If you AREN'T buying Cox, I don't see much value in the rest of the expensive rucks (White, Ottens, MacIntosh, Fraser, etc), so may as well go cheap.

Cox scored 100+ on 8 occasions last year with a season high of 150. Not to mention he missed the first two games of the season. Those number are just way to good to overlook.

I do agree with you though. If you dont get Cox you may as well go cheap.

 

[Souup]

If you dont have Cox in your team round 1 you are already a good 100+ points behind the other teams that have him imo.

Bullshit

 

[Clanger]

It's an interesting debate. Should you have Cox in your team? At $394,000 he's not likely to increase in value too much. I guess the problem here is that there aren't as many options for Elite ruckmen as there are in say the midfield or the forwards.
Saying that I'll probably only have 1 or 2 Eagles players in my team and he will be one of them.

 

[hawka_fan]

Bullshit

Yet you don't state a reason.

Go on, don't pick Cox. I dare you.

 

[Souup]

Yet you don't state a reason.

Go on, don't pick Cox. I dare you.

I'll just posted what i posted about this on the other thread, which you obviously missed -

I dont see how Cox is treated as a must get for everyone or else they wont do any good. I had as shit a ruck as you could possibly have if you wanted to be competitive and ended up finishing 67th

I started with Sandilands, Hudson, Griffen and Renouf, and stayed with those 4 for a majority of the season. Finished with Lade, Hudson, Griffen and Renouf. The only reason i took out Sandi was because of injury

I'd rather buy cheaper rucks and use the money on strengthening other positions. I'm not a fan of buying players when they cost a shitload aswell, such as J.Brown last season, and Cox will no doubt cost a shitload

 

[dont bowl there]

If you dont have Cox in your team round 1 you are already a good 100+ points behind the other teams that have him imo.

Riiiight, I will be going with Sandilands and Simmonds.

Round 1: Say Cox gets 100 and Sandi only gets 70. Thats 30 points difference. I will also have $101,000 to spend in other areas where I can easily make that 30 points up.

 

[hawka_fan]

Riiiight, I will be going with Sandilands and Simmonds.

Round 1: Say Cox gets 100 and Sandi only gets 70. Thats 30 points difference. I will also have $101,000 to spend in other areas where I can easily make that 30 points up.

and say Cox averages 100. and sandilands averages 70.

660 points less the you could of had.
the difference between a 300k mid and 400k mid wont be that much. Nor a forward or a back.

 

[dont bowl there]

and say Cox averages 100. and sandilands averages 70.

660 points less the you could of had.
the difference between a 300k mid and 400k mid wont be that much. Nor a forward or a back.

You are saying that Pavlich/Chad Cornes wont average 30 points more than someone like Thomas/Hunter? Or the $100,000 could be used to make your bench better which will be of more use.

 

[hawka_fan]

You are saying that Pavlich/Chad Cornes wont average 30 points more than someone like Thomas/Hunter? Or the $100,000 could be used to make your bench better which will be of more use.

players around that price could be birchall, goddard, franklin, lynch, or underpriced players.

Id much rather Cox in my team then not in it. But thats my opinion.

 

[Blinger]

players around that price could be birchall, goddard, franklin, lynch, or underpriced players.

Id much rather Cox in my team then not in it. But thats my opinion.

Just because you don't have Cox in your team to start with, doesn't mean you cant pick him up during the season. I'm still tossing up whether to pick him up from the start or 7-8 rounds in when some of the cash cows have made some money to do the trade. While other areas are strengthened by the fact I didn't spend top dollar on Cox to start with.

 

[Blinger]

Cox scored 100+ on 8 occasions last year with a season high of 150. Not to mention he missed the first two games of the season. Those number are just way to good to overlook.

I do agree with you though. If you dont get Cox you may as well go cheap.

As long as the cheaper players are getting regular games, it's not a bad option. As these players can quickly go up in price & with some smart trading, you can still get Cox & end up with some change as well.

 

[matty lloyd the champ]

If sandilands will average 80 odd I would be happy to have him instead of cox and spend the 100k on something else

 

[dont bowl there]

If sandilands will average 80 odd I would be happy to have him instead of cox and spend the 100k on something else

Thats the hope, it is a risk though.

 

[chickens_law]

If i would to choose a ruckman besides Cox i would choose Mcintosh.

 

[T Rick]

Peter Burgoyne as a back!

 

[deledio_gun]

Backs: The chad
Mids: Bartel, Kane Cornes, Corey...
Forwards: Pavlich, Riewoldt, J.Brown, Ablett (if a forward which I doubt)
Rucks: Big Cox...

Good luck fitting them all in

 

[Burly FF]

Backs: The chad
Mids: Bartel, Kane Cornes, Corey...
Forwards: Pavlich, Riewoldt, J.Brown, Ablett (if a forward which I doubt)
Rucks: Big Cox...

Good luck fitting them all in

Impossible to fit them all in...which is why I think the value picks (those who should score appreciably higher than their price suggests) are the true 'must haves'. Simmonds, McLean, Cross, Judd etc...

 

[chickens_law]

Birchall, Burgoyne, Foley, Mcleod also.

 

[Virgil]

Backs: Burgoyne, Kennelly
Rucks: Simmonds
Forwards: J. Brown, Didak

Whether or not a player is a "must get" depends on their price, as well as whether or not other players can do a similar job for that price. With that in mind, I'd say these five are musts, everybody else is replaceable if you look for an adequate replacement.