Position Ruck Discussion

[Toothless Tigers]

 

[Ironhawk]

2020= 6

You left out the 2 before the 6. Normally you don't include finals in these game counts though.

 

[Bomber18]

Completely agree. Despite injury history, his numbers are not supportive. Maybe gets some boost with new HTA rule as he is a good tap ruck, just think Sinclair may get 40pct ruck time.

I thought Blicavs would smash it due to aerobic ability (he went ok in the end, R3), Witts R2 (not super popular), Sandi when back from injury R2, started Gawn in fwd line when first selected, Lycett R2 2018, ROB was a no brainer despite not all chasing him R3, took too long on Marshall due to his 80’s is my blemish. Chastised myself to give rucks respect as always been a focus for me.

It is why Ceglar is interesting yet nothing in history helps on Naismith. If wanting to not go Gawn, I would start Ceglar R2 and call it a day. Naismith has height and good tap ruckman, just doesnt get mid time and his possession level is low which hurts him. If Callum was injured then you could suggest atleast one of these factors improve.

Will say Lycett took a while to get going and it hurt. $250k is a painful level.

I look at Noah Anderson and think he may ave 60 and that is a 50-50 choice at best. Sinclair is still a notch below still.

Could work out if Gawn doesnt fire or Naismith can go 85, is that at least 50pct likely.

Gee this thread blew up today but Naismith still only has a 2.1% ownership so it's still a huge POD play.

I received my copy of the Prospectus today and found some interesting ruck stats.

In 2019, Sinclair had a Hit Out Win (HOW) % of only 37% (AFL ruck average is 44.8%) and a Hit Out to Advantage (HOTA) % of only 7.5 (AFL ruck average is 12.9%). Naismiths' career averages are 44.6% HOW% and 13.5% HOTA% (average rating for both).

For some comparison points in 2019:
Goldstein went 47.4% HOW% and 16.2% HOTA%
Bellchambers went 42.1% HOW% and 15.5% HOTA%
Nankervis went 43.9% HOW% and 11.3% HOTA%
Reily O'Brien went 43.5% HOW% and 11.2% HOTA%
Stef Martin went 43.2% HOW% and 12.4% HOTA%
Grundy went 53.9% HOW% and 15.5% HOTA%
Gawn went 57.9% HOW% and 20% HOTA%

Basically, Naismith's most important metrics as a ruck are "average" but still better than guys like ROB, Martin and Nankervis. Better HOW% than TBC but worse HOTA%. Most importantly, Naismith's HOW% and HOTA% are far better than Sinclair's!

I posted the above on Naismith earlier in the thread from the Prospectus. Sinclair is rated below average for HOW% and poor for HOTA% by CD. Naismith is at least rated average on his career numbers so is a clear upgrade for the Swans as a ruck compared to Sinclair.

 

[GrainFedBeef]

I posted the above on Naismith earlier in the thread from the Prospectus. Sinclair is rated below average for HOW% and poor for HOTA% by CD. Naismith is at least rated average on his career numbers so is a clear upgrade for the Swans as a ruck compared to Sinclair.

Appreciate that, however, 2017 HO's would suggest Naismith/Sinclair ratio was closer to 60% ruck time to Naismith, not 80%. Only looked at it roughly, thats what it would appear to the naked eye.

 

[Bomber18]

Appreciate that, however, 2017 HO's would suggest Naismith/Sinclair ratio was closer to 60% ruck time to Naismith, not 80%. Only looked at it roughly, thats what it would appear to the naked eye.

Yeah that could be right for 2017. Although it was looking like Naismith had more of a 80/20 split with Sinclair in Marsh 1 during the first half. Marsh 2 will be interesting.

I have been waiting on AFL Stats Pro to open to check the ruck contests attended for Sinclair/Naismith in 2017

 

[GrainFedBeef]

Yeah that could be right for 2017. Although it was looking like Naismith had more of a 80/20 split with Sinclair in Marsh 1 during the first half. Marsh 2 will be interesting.

I have been waiting on AFL Stats Pro to open to check the ruck contests attended for Sinclair/Naismith in 2017

Fair point. not sure how much injury during games played a part, Naismith had 64mins TOG (27 HO ave) in 2017 vs Sinclair at 100mins (17 HO ave). I will say Naismith TOG @ 64mins is the same for 2016 and 2017, not sure which one is incorrect (AFL app).

 

[Hondo]

If we removed the name “Naismith” and and inserted “not much over premium rookie priced player, high JS, good chance to go at least 80” would it change anyone’s thoughts?

He’s only $44k more than Rowell.

 

[Bomber18]

Fair point. not sure how much injury during games played a part, Naismith had 64mins TOG (27 HO ave) in 2017 vs Sinclair at 100mins (17 HO ave). I will say Naismith TOG @ 64mins is the same for 2016 and 2017, not sure which one is incorrect (AFL app).

I've now had a look at the HO splits for Sinclair and Naismith for games they played together (including finals).

They played 10 games together in 2017.
Naismith avg 25.7 HOs from 10 games
Sinclair avg 14.5 HOs from 10 games

64% / 36% split

Their setup during the 2017 finals was interesting. Only 2 game sample but HOs were
Naismith avg 32
Sinclair avg 3

90% / 10% split

 

[Ironhawk]

Naitanui averaged 79 pts from his two Marsh games and 54.5% TOG.

Naismith in Marsh 1 scored 79 pts from 55% TOG.

 

[Kidult]

Ceglar's game count.

View attachment 16196

Wasn't #1 Ruck during that time tho and McEvoy looks like 90% TOG keyback

 

[Bomber18]

So Ceglar scored 80 (66% TOG) and 101 (71% TOG).

Not high enough to convince me to start him so it's a pass/wait and see for me.

A breakout season at the age of 29 is almost unprecedented. I say almost as I think the closest was Will Minson who went at 114 in 2013 as a 28 yo. But he did have a season of 94 before that.

 

[Rowsus]

So Ceglar scored 80 (66% TOG) and 101 (71% TOG).

Not high enough to convince me to start him so it's a pass/wait and see for me.

A breakout season at the age of 29 is almost unprecedented. I say almost as I think the closest was Will Minson who went at 114 in 2013 as a 28 yo. But he did have a season of 94 before that.

..... crashed like a soggy paper plane after that!

 

[jobeywatto]

With cash generation looking like a issue at the start of the year, I think it makes Gawn even more of a "must pick" for me. I'd rather just not have that headache of trying to find the money to bring him in while he pumps out 130s every week, worrying about injury-prone Naismith not breaking down yet again before the byes. It'll mean going weaker on another line (probably backline) but Gawn is just too valuable for me.

Cameron, Williams and Xerri are all very sketchy for R1 berths now too. Makes Naismith even more risky not having the safety net of a playing R3 if something goes wrong.

 

[Kidult]

Crows seriously need ruck depth with their pre season spot (Darcy Cameron should have gone to Adelaide as he is stuck behind Grundy for 7 years now). The unfortunate injury to Mathews could be a blessing in disguise.

 

[Dimmawit]

A playing R3 would be nice but an injury to Gawn and Grundy still leaves you without cover. You can trade them to anyone sure but you've still got to trade them back.

I think the main reason Naismith is attractive to a few coaches atm is more about the fact he is cheap(ish) and looks a lock for best 22.

Same reason Roberton is in so many teams.

 

[Hondo]

With cash generation looking like a issue at the start of the year, I think it makes Gawn even more of a "must pick" for me. I'd rather just not have that headache of trying to find the money to bring him in while he pumps out 130s every week, worrying about injury-prone Naismith not breaking down yet again before the byes. It'll mean going weaker on another line (probably backline) but Gawn is just too valuable for me.

Cameron, Williams and Xerri are all very sketchy for R1 berths now too. Makes Naismith even more risky not having the safety net of a playing R3 if something goes wrong.

Cash generation affects every upgrade we need to make so therefore you want the best cash cows. I see Naismith at $251k as one of the better cash cows we have. Also if cash generation is tight then you need funds to ensure you can spend to pay extra for rookies where needed and not in theory pay $700k on a bloke that’s missed most of the pre season and arguably most likely to drop in price.

There’s arguments for Gawn but saying it’s because of poor rookie cash generation is not one of them IMO. Cash generation/rookies is my main reason for not picking Gawn currently.

 

[jobeywatto]

Same reason Roberton is in so many teams.

Yeah, but would Roberton at 260k be in so many teams if his best season was a 69 average?

A playing R3 would be nice but an injury to Gawn and Grundy still leaves you without cover. You can trade them to anyone sure but you've still got to trade them back..

But if Gawn goes down you get to pocket the $80k or so you'll get for trading him out for another premium. With Naismith you'll probably need to sacrifice a keeper elsewhere to trade up (so an immediate cost of 2 trades for 1 injury) or find a suitable rookie/midpricer at his level (unlikely). Very awkward position.

 

[Dimmawit]

Rucks are clearly the best scoring players when they have the right role. Is Naismith a risk? For sure
But the issue is more to do with this qn - how many players are there who are assumed best 22 that are extremely likely to av 80+ subject to staying fit

 

[GrainFedBeef]

Rucks are clearly the best scoring players when they have the right role. Is Naismith a risk? For sure
But the issue is more to do with this qn - how many players are there who are assumed best 22 that are extremely likely to av 80+ subject to staying fit

It is positive that most playing 1st ruckmen score at least 75-80. Hopefully Naismith can lift from his prior levels.

If u go Gawn to Naismith, who is the player you want to bring in thats not currently in your side. Would be good to hear several responses.

For me, 5th mid likely. Not sure who yet, maybe a Fyfe or Danger. Neale run over last 4 games turns me off for league games.

 

[jobeywatto]

Cash generation affects every upgrade we need to make so therefore you want the best cash cows. I see Naismith at $251k as one of the better cash cows we have. Also if cash generation is tight then you need funds to ensure you can spend to pay extra for rookies where needed and not in theory pay $700k on a bloke that’s missed most of the pre season and arguably most likely to drop in price.

There’s arguments for Gawn but saying it’s because of poor rookie cash generation is not one of them IMO. Cash generation/rookies is my main reason for not picking Gawn currently.

I guess in the end it just comes down to expectations of Naismith. If he averages 80+ and plays every game before the bye rounds it's probably a win. I think I'd just rather find a way to weaken other areas while keeping Gawn and getting the rookies I need.