Opinion Questions For Rowsus
- Thread starter Rowsus
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- 31 Mar 2014
- Messages
- 2,909
- Likes
- 2,122
- AFL Club
- Brisbane
my initial squad included Ryder. A couple of reasons why. i think he'll get good TOG. Port are a strong team, likely to be stronger. He can take a grab and kick a goal! Reasonable history. Probably a little overpriced but DPP makes him attractive considering the ruck history. Might have just talked myself into him!???!?!
UPDATE: Where do i fit him? At the expense of Zorko, Swan or Titch? Not sure i can fit him???!!!
UPDATE: Where do i fit him? At the expense of Zorko, Swan or Titch? Not sure i can fit him???!!!
Last edited:
- Joined
- 31 Mar 2014
- Messages
- 2,909
- Likes
- 2,122
- AFL Club
- Brisbane
- Joined
- 22 Jan 2013
- Messages
- 3,858
- Likes
- 1,652
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
Not sure if the stats have been done on it or not but my feeling on Ryder is that he always scored well for us when he was the sole ruckman, when he was really needed and asked to step up. I can see him being lazier at Port like he always seemed to do for us in lumps, if he is resting forward he can certainly go missing for large portions of the game and Lobbe is a good ruck so it is a worry.
The cover he provides for your rucks is that you can then use one of your forward rookies to cover your ruck positions, as Ryder is already on the field, moving him to the ruck and putting a rookie forward on the field only gives the forward rookies score, not Ryders score again. So the cover provided is the same as the cover provided by the cheaper R/F options of TBC, Hale or Lycett. I think TBC and Lycett provide better potential than Hale as Lycett has some good stats when playing as the 2nd ruck and his scores really suffered as the third ruck which he will no longer be with Cox retired, TBC is the right age and potential number 1 ruck, unlikely but could break out. Hale is never going to be a keeper of any sort and isn't offering value either. If I was looking at cover I would probably save the 150 - 200k and go for one of these two cheaper options over Ryder personally, but that's just my 2 cents!
The cover he provides for your rucks is that you can then use one of your forward rookies to cover your ruck positions, as Ryder is already on the field, moving him to the ruck and putting a rookie forward on the field only gives the forward rookies score, not Ryders score again. So the cover provided is the same as the cover provided by the cheaper R/F options of TBC, Hale or Lycett. I think TBC and Lycett provide better potential than Hale as Lycett has some good stats when playing as the 2nd ruck and his scores really suffered as the third ruck which he will no longer be with Cox retired, TBC is the right age and potential number 1 ruck, unlikely but could break out. Hale is never going to be a keeper of any sort and isn't offering value either. If I was looking at cover I would probably save the 150 - 200k and go for one of these two cheaper options over Ryder personally, but that's just my 2 cents!
Thanks Rowsus - as I say, no issue with the TOG mistake, it was more a question of whether the thesis still stacks up excluding that potential benefit. Sometimes it can be easy to leave someone locked in your side without adequately reassessing from time to time (especially if circumstances or information change) - Danger could be an example in my own, and I'm conscious of guarding against that risk. Your reasoning on Docherty appears solid, and I see that you are not the only one who holds these views, so that gives me something additional to think about.
Also, I feel it was remiss of me to be the author of the 3000th (!) post in this thread without congratulating you. It's a pretty amazing effort, thanks again.
Also, I feel it was remiss of me to be the author of the 3000th (!) post in this thread without congratulating you. It's a pretty amazing effort, thanks again.
Hi Bones,
as indicated it is a very complicated question.
First let me acknowledge Slugus' point, that a lot of coaches fail to take into account. If you use a R/F link to cover a Ruck out, and that R/F is sitting in your starting 22, then it is your F7 that is actually covering the missing Ruck score. Going by previous seasons, you can expect something in the 50-70 point range from your F7 early in the season.
I don't share Slugus' view that Ryder may become a bit lazy. Yes, he appeared that way at times in previous seasons, but being at a new Club, I believe he has the two best reasons in the World not be lazy this season. He has to make an impression at his new Club, and he has to secure a safe spot in their starting 22. Neither of those things are achieved with laziness. I believe he will work hard..... this season, next season...? Who knows?! For that reason alone, I believe even with the less Rucking, more Fwd time doubt, I think he can average in the 90's. I think he will average less than his 101 last season, but something in the 93-95 area wouldn't surprise me.
Having stated that, I'm not sure he is the best option to have sitting in your Fwd line, if you are going to commit to cover sitting in your starting Fwd 6. Yes, he could potentially score at a suitable level to become a F5-7 Keeper, and injuries permitting, provide season long cover. The double edged problem to that is, he is almost certain to drop in value, and he's only (imo) around 15-20% chance of achieving that lofty standard, given the Ruck changes, the seemingly wealth of scoring potential in the Fwds this year, and the chance that Ryder himself will go missing.
Some might query why I put importance on this position holding it's value. You are selecting this player to cover a potential occassional 50-70 point donut. If the player scores at a rate that sees him drop in value say $80k (Ryders estimated Price drop if only averages around 93), you have 2 problems. Firstly, you are battling against coaches you have given a $80k "free kick" to. They might turn that $80k into 15 points/game (or more!). If you carry Ryder (for arguments sake) through to maybe Rnd 14-16 before you trade him, or F7 him, that's 200 points you have given away, to insure against a loss of points that may potentially be between 0 - 200 points anyway! Madness! Secondly, if the need arises to fix Ryder himself (injury, suspension etc) it's a lot harder to fix a problem with a falling commodity, than a rising one. Partly and mostly, due the expectations you have for a commodity that cost you so much in the first place.
Keeping in mind, we are talking about selecting a Fwd starting R/F to cover a 50-70 point donut or two (or four!), you probably need to be picking a R/F that at least will appreciate in value, and hopefully find a balance between points and cash generation. At this stage of the season we should only be thinking about coverage for the early to mid rounds. As we complete our team we can consider what coverage, if any, we can have for the later rounds.
That would appear to leave picking between Lycett or TBC, and to a much lesser extent Hale or Gawn. IF we decide to plonk a R/F in our starting Fwd 6!
Hale will soon be 31, and even though he's only missed 5 games in the last 3 seasons, may not have the JS of previous seasons. He's also no good thing to increase in value.
Gawn has a number of players to compete against to get a regular spot, even though Melbourne's talls seem to be eternally injured! (Long suffering Melbourne fan here!). Not many people realise that Melbourne as a Club had the fifth most Hitouts last season. not bad for a Club struggling for fit and in form talls! Gawn actually has a game with 48 Hitouts in AFL (against Geelong Rnd 16, 2013.). His HO/100%TOG in 2013 was just 24, and SC/100%TOG just 87. In 2014 those numbers were only 21 and 88, so hardly inspiring. He is only 23, so young for a Ruck, and if you can believe the available stats, his hitouts in some VFL games last season were literally off the chart, this includes a game with 80 (***? that must be wrong! Are there even 80 contests in some games?!) against Bendigo on 12/7/2014, he also had a 63 and a 57 in games, and 52 against McEvoy (McEvoy only had 25!) and Box Hill!. If Fitzpatrick and/or Jamar don't come up, Gawn could be an option, though it's probably a year or two early yet.
That leaves the obvious, and much discussed, other 2 options. Unless TBC shows us something extraordinary in the NAB, and we have a very good lead he, and not Giles, will be Essendons first Ruck pick, I think it means Lycett. He showed last season he can score well when playing 2nd ruck (95/game from memory).
So, if you want to complete your link/coverage in Rnd 1, at the moment to my mind it means Lycett.
But why rush? Why not put the tools in place, but not commit until you need to commit? Have your R/F link sitting at R3, but don't complete the link. This allows you the luxury of assessing the situation, when it arises (and it will arise). With luck, you can drag through 8 or 9 rounds before needing to decide. If it looks like a one week out, you just probably eat the 50-70 point donut! Remember it's not a 110 point donut because Goldy, for example, is out, it's a donut equal to the value of his replacement in your team's score! If it looks like being a longer out, you can assess if your best option is to trade out your missing R1/R2, or trade to cover through your R/F R3. Maybe an option like Wright from GC might have sprung up by then, and if he's gone well, and hit the bubble, could already be sitting in your team! To me this a much better option.
The short answer to your question is, unless you think the R/F starting in your Fwd line will do enough to be kept throughout the season, and that's a lot Money to carry through to F7, it's not often you can carry a Lycett (or Ryder!) through your season to sit at F7 at their starting price, then don't commit yet. Chances are you are looking at a corrective trade, one way or the other, no matter which way you go!
as indicated it is a very complicated question.
First let me acknowledge Slugus' point, that a lot of coaches fail to take into account. If you use a R/F link to cover a Ruck out, and that R/F is sitting in your starting 22, then it is your F7 that is actually covering the missing Ruck score. Going by previous seasons, you can expect something in the 50-70 point range from your F7 early in the season.
I don't share Slugus' view that Ryder may become a bit lazy. Yes, he appeared that way at times in previous seasons, but being at a new Club, I believe he has the two best reasons in the World not be lazy this season. He has to make an impression at his new Club, and he has to secure a safe spot in their starting 22. Neither of those things are achieved with laziness. I believe he will work hard..... this season, next season...? Who knows?! For that reason alone, I believe even with the less Rucking, more Fwd time doubt, I think he can average in the 90's. I think he will average less than his 101 last season, but something in the 93-95 area wouldn't surprise me.
Having stated that, I'm not sure he is the best option to have sitting in your Fwd line, if you are going to commit to cover sitting in your starting Fwd 6. Yes, he could potentially score at a suitable level to become a F5-7 Keeper, and injuries permitting, provide season long cover. The double edged problem to that is, he is almost certain to drop in value, and he's only (imo) around 15-20% chance of achieving that lofty standard, given the Ruck changes, the seemingly wealth of scoring potential in the Fwds this year, and the chance that Ryder himself will go missing.
Some might query why I put importance on this position holding it's value. You are selecting this player to cover a potential occassional 50-70 point donut. If the player scores at a rate that sees him drop in value say $80k (Ryders estimated Price drop if only averages around 93), you have 2 problems. Firstly, you are battling against coaches you have given a $80k "free kick" to. They might turn that $80k into 15 points/game (or more!). If you carry Ryder (for arguments sake) through to maybe Rnd 14-16 before you trade him, or F7 him, that's 200 points you have given away, to insure against a loss of points that may potentially be between 0 - 200 points anyway! Madness! Secondly, if the need arises to fix Ryder himself (injury, suspension etc) it's a lot harder to fix a problem with a falling commodity, than a rising one. Partly and mostly, due the expectations you have for a commodity that cost you so much in the first place.
Keeping in mind, we are talking about selecting a Fwd starting R/F to cover a 50-70 point donut or two (or four!), you probably need to be picking a R/F that at least will appreciate in value, and hopefully find a balance between points and cash generation. At this stage of the season we should only be thinking about coverage for the early to mid rounds. As we complete our team we can consider what coverage, if any, we can have for the later rounds.
That would appear to leave picking between Lycett or TBC, and to a much lesser extent Hale or Gawn. IF we decide to plonk a R/F in our starting Fwd 6!
Hale will soon be 31, and even though he's only missed 5 games in the last 3 seasons, may not have the JS of previous seasons. He's also no good thing to increase in value.
Gawn has a number of players to compete against to get a regular spot, even though Melbourne's talls seem to be eternally injured! (Long suffering Melbourne fan here!). Not many people realise that Melbourne as a Club had the fifth most Hitouts last season. not bad for a Club struggling for fit and in form talls! Gawn actually has a game with 48 Hitouts in AFL (against Geelong Rnd 16, 2013.). His HO/100%TOG in 2013 was just 24, and SC/100%TOG just 87. In 2014 those numbers were only 21 and 88, so hardly inspiring. He is only 23, so young for a Ruck, and if you can believe the available stats, his hitouts in some VFL games last season were literally off the chart, this includes a game with 80 (***? that must be wrong! Are there even 80 contests in some games?!) against Bendigo on 12/7/2014, he also had a 63 and a 57 in games, and 52 against McEvoy (McEvoy only had 25!) and Box Hill!. If Fitzpatrick and/or Jamar don't come up, Gawn could be an option, though it's probably a year or two early yet.
That leaves the obvious, and much discussed, other 2 options. Unless TBC shows us something extraordinary in the NAB, and we have a very good lead he, and not Giles, will be Essendons first Ruck pick, I think it means Lycett. He showed last season he can score well when playing 2nd ruck (95/game from memory).
So, if you want to complete your link/coverage in Rnd 1, at the moment to my mind it means Lycett.
But why rush? Why not put the tools in place, but not commit until you need to commit? Have your R/F link sitting at R3, but don't complete the link. This allows you the luxury of assessing the situation, when it arises (and it will arise). With luck, you can drag through 8 or 9 rounds before needing to decide. If it looks like a one week out, you just probably eat the 50-70 point donut! Remember it's not a 110 point donut because Goldy, for example, is out, it's a donut equal to the value of his replacement in your team's score! If it looks like being a longer out, you can assess if your best option is to trade out your missing R1/R2, or trade to cover through your R/F R3. Maybe an option like Wright from GC might have sprung up by then, and if he's gone well, and hit the bubble, could already be sitting in your team! To me this a much better option.
The short answer to your question is, unless you think the R/F starting in your Fwd line will do enough to be kept throughout the season, and that's a lot Money to carry through to F7, it's not often you can carry a Lycett (or Ryder!) through your season to sit at F7 at their starting price, then don't commit yet. Chances are you are looking at a corrective trade, one way or the other, no matter which way you go!
Last edited:
Rowsus, I would love your thoughts and projected yearly averages for Swan and Goddard.
I have reservations picking both. I expect both to be half-forwards who rotate in younger, rebuilding midfields. Both going on 30+ and declining their output, physical ability to play 22 games and role within the team.
Goddard at $550k I see as offering no value. But if he is a top-8 fwd lock in terms of total point --- he is still worth starting. If not, he is not.
Swan, unless he starts off great (though I suspect he builds into the year) is either a stepping-stone player that you need to start off well, or is a top-8 keeper...or is a mid-range waste of a trade?
Any thoughts?
I have reservations picking both. I expect both to be half-forwards who rotate in younger, rebuilding midfields. Both going on 30+ and declining their output, physical ability to play 22 games and role within the team.
Goddard at $550k I see as offering no value. But if he is a top-8 fwd lock in terms of total point --- he is still worth starting. If not, he is not.
Swan, unless he starts off great (though I suspect he builds into the year) is either a stepping-stone player that you need to start off well, or is a top-8 keeper...or is a mid-range waste of a trade?
Any thoughts?
Last edited:
- Joined
- 22 Jan 2013
- Messages
- 3,858
- Likes
- 1,652
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Joined
- 9 Jan 2014
- Messages
- 1,073
- Likes
- 2,924
- AFL Club
- Essendon
Hi Rowsus,
I am interested to know what you think of four of the more popular midfield picks in the $500K-$550K range.
The four I have in mind are Wines, Crouch, A.Swallow and Griffin (assuming back is fine).
It feels like one of these will break 110+ this year, but it really is a crap-shoot on which one (in my mind at least).
I am interested to know what you think of four of the more popular midfield picks in the $500K-$550K range.
The four I have in mind are Wines, Crouch, A.Swallow and Griffin (assuming back is fine).
It feels like one of these will break 110+ this year, but it really is a crap-shoot on which one (in my mind at least).
Hi again Row. Thanks for your help thus far.
I'm interested to know who you think the alternatives are to Swan (besides Titch). I've got 530k and am really not sold on him - at the moment I've got Devon Smith and I'm also considering Roughy or Reiwoldt for the first few rounds with the view of trading him.
I'm interested to know who you think the alternatives are to Swan (besides Titch). I've got 530k and am really not sold on him - at the moment I've got Devon Smith and I'm also considering Roughy or Reiwoldt for the first few rounds with the view of trading him.
Last edited:
- Status