Position 2021: Ruck Discussion

[Herbie66]

Don't think I have seen it mentioned yet

Marshall + Treacy = $ 659,600.00

Preuss + Martin = $ 575,200.00

Preuss + Hickey = $ 564,100.00

Haven't checked the fixture to see the game order if the Treacy/Marshall swing easily covers a late out for Gawn or Preuss.

It is then F7 that provides the cover , appears Cockatoo , Durdin, Laurie , Rowe are the popular "cheaper" forward options at this stage.

Just wondering if not starting Marshall is a viable option and using either Martin or Hickey at R3 instead could possibly work.

 

[Herbie66]

Are we 100% certain that Grundy regains his lofty heights and remains the best R2 (behind Gawn) ?

Think from memory he averaged 107 with Cameron in the side last season so suddenly Goldstein or Nic Nat could be viable options (I guess shorter quarters helped Nic Nat) so the annual Cameron/Cox debate will continue.

Further development could even see ROB enter into the equation.

Given Treloar has left , not sure how his clearance work will affect Grundy's scoring.

Certainly haven't recruited anyone to replace him , so changes will have to come from within.

I am sure the media will build JDG up as the next midfield superstar.

Might be easier to start Marshall as R2 until the position becomes clearer.

 

[Shannon]

Are we 100% certain that Grundy regains his lofty heights and remains the best R2 (behind Gawn) ?

Think from memory he averaged 107 with Cameron in the side last season so suddenly Goldstein or Nic Nat could be viable options (I guess shorter quarters helped Nic Nat) so the annual Cameron/Cox debate will continue.

Further development could even see ROB enter into the equation.

Given Treloar has left , not sure how his clearance work will affect Grundy's scoring.

Certainly haven't recruited anyone to replace him , so changes will have to come from within.

I am sure the media will build JDG up as the next midfield superstar.

Might be easier to start Marshall as R2 until the position becomes clearer.

Yep, I recall the final v WCE where Darcy Cameron was very good in the ruck, here is a snippet about it :-

Collingwood coach Nathan Buckley has confirmed he and his coaching staff chose to send Darcy Cameron into the centre bounce that would decide their season against West Coast, over dual All-Australian Brodie Grundy.

However he maintains Grundy is still the Magpies’ number one ruckman heading into their semi-final with Geelong, despite his decline in form across the season and struggles in the elimination final.

Grundy was surprisingly spotted on the bench for periods of the second half, with 10-gamer Cameron sent to try and neutralise Nic Naitanui, the best centre bounce ruckman in the AFL.

That included the final centre bounce of the game with just over a minute to play and with one point the difference.

While some have speculated Grundy is carrying an injury which explains his decline in form, Buckley has waved that idea away, instead telling AFL 360 it was a decision based on the match-up.

 

[Chumpion]

Are we 100% certain that Grundy regains his lofty heights and remains the best R2 (behind Gawn) ?

Think from memory he averaged 107 with Cameron in the side last season so suddenly Goldstein or Nic Nat could be viable options (I guess shorter quarters helped Nic Nat) so the annual Cameron/Cox debate will continue.

Further development could even see ROB enter into the equation.

Given Treloar has left , not sure how his clearance work will affect Grundy's scoring.

Certainly haven't recruited anyone to replace him , so changes will have to come from within.

I am sure the media will build JDG up as the next midfield superstar.

Might be easier to start Marshall as R2 until the position becomes clearer.

I saw an interview with Grundy where he was quite candid about how much he struggled with the hub life, so wouldn't be surprised if that was a large factor in some of his struggles last season.

My understanding - and I'll be honest, I have no stats to back this up - was that Grundy's elite scoring was more driving by him effectively being an additional midfielder/winning disposals rather than pure ruckman ability (not that he's a bad ruckman, but it's just not the point driver it is for say a Gawn). Certain match ups will hurt that more than others but also don't underestimate the impact of shorter quarters on that too.

I can see Grundy being a higher TOG ruckman with above average disposals (including contested disposals), and getting good points from either exploiting a tiring ruckman around the ground or getting additional minutes vs a second/backup ruckman.

Absolute lock for me!

 

[wogitalia]

Grundy sure looked injured to me, haven't followed it since but that's how he looked. The real question is to make sure he's healed and it's not something we should anticipate impacting him all year.

For mine he's fairly priced to slightly underpriced even which makes him an easy choice. Think shorter quarters hurt him as well, his fitness and workrate are his super elite area. My feeling on him are him putting up big points late in quarters a lot. As an average level ruck I think that also is a factor, he loses the red time ruck where his fitness gives him an advantage. He also got to ruck against 2nd rucks a lot less because they weren't used nearly as much with all the 1st rucks playing much higher percentages of the game.

Don't think Treloar should hurt that much, could make a case that guys like Sier that are likely to get more time are better pure clearance types and Adams and Pendles will still be there.

 

[froffershanners]

The whole Grundy conundrum really depends on how the Pies lineup looks for round 1. The stats say that Cameron playing does affect Grundy's scoring;

Average w/o Cameron and Cox 145.5 from 2
Average w Cameron and Cox 106 from 2
Average w Cameron and w/o Cox 107.5 from 6
Average w/o Cameron and w Cox 129 from 7

 

[wogitalia]

The whole Grundy conundrum really depends on how the Pies lineup looks for round 1. The stats say that Cameron playing does affect Grundy's scoring;

Average w/o Cameron and Cox 145.5 from 2
Average w Cameron and Cox 106 from 2
Average w Cameron and w/o Cox 107.5 from 6
Average w/o Cameron and w Cox 129 from 7

I wonder how much of that is coincidence/timing and how much is actual impact. In 2019 he played 14 games with Cox and averaged 129 again.

Looking at it those games include the Gawn, NicNat, Goldy, Marshall/Ryder and ROB (99.4) matchups to go with the Tigers, Dockers and Blues (120 average). The real standout is, Gawn and I guess Brisbane (104) aside, how much of a flat track bully Grundy was last year.

Further the majority of Cameron's games came during the hub, which Grundy has said he struggled with and the evidence does support, 133 pre-hub and 111 during hub. They also, obviously, come towards the end of the season when Grundy looked to be playing hurt (to me at least).

On a flipside, you can make a case that the reason so many of the top rucks are in that group with Cameron is because they wanted Cameron against them and that will continue. I still think the lack of chances against 2nd rucks hurts him a lot, Cameron when he played didn't ruck any more than Cox did or did the previous season (finals not included in this).

Also worth noting in 2019 that aside from Gawn, who rucks close to as much and nullified him twice, Grundy had no real difference against any teams, he just flat out scored well all year good or bad opponents.

Final takeaway for me is that Grundy, in 48% of teams, is a very dangerous option to try and differentiate on. Any mistakes in the rucks are amplified by there being only two spots. It's very easy to be right and still get it wrong, going against Grundy still requires you to nail who you pick instead and their inherent uniqueness gets your further behind if that goes wrong.

It certainly can work but the rucks are the most punishing position to chase uniqueness.

 

[lavenderbandit]

Warning: incoherent rambling post ahead.

Loving the rucks discussion! It's been one of my favourite pre-season threads the last few years. Rucks can be make/break, and I think the extra trades helped me last year no end as I started Naismith/pittonet (I think!) and was able to bail myself out more than once. My rambling take on ruck strategy and my current thinking and where my side is at, subject to change without warning or logic

The Big 2:
+ve: just pick both gawn and Grundy. if they aren’t the top 2, then i wager that one of them will finish as the best total scorer, the other right up there anyway. They have been top 2 rucks last 3 years on average. Perma-captains, worth every dollar. If one of them really doesn’t work/gets injured, you can trade down to pretty much any other ruck.
-ve: did shorter games artificially increase their scores, esp. Gawn? Massive $$, your starting side will only have 12-13 premiums meaning at least 1, potentially 2/3 extra rookies on field, and you need likely need more trading weeks (by my logic anyway) to complete your final side potentially giving a big head start to those who squeeze 14 prems if you are going overall.

Mix (1 of grawndy, 1 mid pricer eg Preuss, Marshall fwd.)
+ve: you have more $$ for the starting side. Hopefully you can generate funds via Preuss to bridge the gap to the other ruck. If for whatever reason one of grawndy doesn’t fire you aren’t committed. Marshall provides flex.
-ve: miss out on 1 captain’s option. Still big $$ esp. gawn and they are fully priced IMO, perhaps less so Grundy.

Madness (2 of Preuss/hickey/Omac/Draper etc & Marshal fwd)
+ve: allows 14 premiums in other positions minimising rookies on field – you should be able to swing a side with only 6 on-field rookies plus the 2 mid-price rucks. If the 2 you pick fire and you chose the 14 premiums right, you are gonna be right up the pointy end come round 23! If 1 of them go pear-shaped after round 2 you can trade them out early, you have a bail out option to swing Marshall to rucks, trade in the rookie bolter you missed on the round 3 bubble.
-ve: Miss out on 2 serious captain’s options and you must be spot on with the certainty you have of the 14 premiums you are choosing elsewhere. its a huge negative POD that you will spend the entire season probably trying to close out. If the 2 of them go pear-shaped, be prepared to finish 100k lol. Absolutely a big risk.

Currently my side had Hickey/Preuss as Rucks, but I think I will waiver and end up with the Mix option.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Interestingly below is some research i did before the 2019 season on averages, not total points, rucks/age they turn that year, I think anyway. Gawn is 29 going into this year and 30 in Dec, will age catch him? Has missed 22 games in last 6 years.

You can add to the table below
2020: Gawn 140 (age 29) Grundy 121 (age 26)
2019 Grundy 130 (25) Gawn 128 (28)

*may be some errors there with Grundy in 2018

 

[Connoisseur]

O McInerney:
Played with S Martin in Rounds 1, 2, 5, 6, 7 and 18
With S Martin: 70.5 from 6 (low of 38 and a high of 123, 3/6 below 50, 5/6 below 100, 1/6 120+)
Without S Martin: 89.09 from 11 (low of 30 and a high of 132, 1/11 below 50, 4/11 below 80, 7/11 below 100, 2/11 120+)

https://www.afl.com.au/stats/stats-pro#/Discover/CD_I1005521/McInerney-Oscar

 

[Zim^zuM]

Warning: incoherent rambling post ahead.

Loving the rucks discussion! It's been one of my favourite pre-season threads the last few years. Rucks can be make/break, and I think the extra trades helped me last year no end as I started Naismith/pittonet (I think!) and was able to bail myself out more than once. My rambling take on ruck strategy and my current thinking and where my side is at, subject to change without warning or logic

The Big 2:
+ve: just pick both gawn and Grundy. if they aren’t the top 2, then i wager that one of them will finish as the best total scorer, the other right up there anyway. They have been top 2 rucks last 3 years on average. Perma-captains, worth every dollar. If one of them really doesn’t work/gets injured, you can trade down to pretty much any other ruck.
-ve: did shorter games artificially increase their scores, esp. Gawn? Massive $$, your starting side will only have 12-13 premiums meaning at least 1, potentially 2/3 extra rookies on field, and you need likely need more trading weeks (by my logic anyway) to complete your final side potentially giving a big head start to those who squeeze 14 prems if you are going overall.

most likely not having Gawn also equals more trading weeks trying to afford him to stop bleeding captain points.

 

[wogitalia]

Warning: incoherent rambling post ahead.

Loving the rucks discussion! It's been one of my favourite pre-season threads the last few years. Rucks can be make/break, and I think the extra trades helped me last year no end as I started Naismith/pittonet (I think!) and was able to bail myself out more than once. My rambling take on ruck strategy and my current thinking and where my side is at, subject to change without warning or logic

The Big 2:
+ve: just pick both gawn and Grundy. if they aren’t the top 2, then i wager that one of them will finish as the best total scorer, the other right up there anyway. They have been top 2 rucks last 3 years on average. Perma-captains, worth every dollar. If one of them really doesn’t work/gets injured, you can trade down to pretty much any other ruck.
-ve: did shorter games artificially increase their scores, esp. Gawn? Massive $$, your starting side will only have 12-13 premiums meaning at least 1, potentially 2/3 extra rookies on field, and you need likely need more trading weeks (by my logic anyway) to complete your final side potentially giving a big head start to those who squeeze 14 prems if you are going overall.

Mix (1 of grawndy, 1 mid pricer eg Preuss, Marshall fwd.)
+ve: you have more $$ for the starting side. Hopefully you can generate funds via Preuss to bridge the gap to the other ruck. If for whatever reason one of grawndy doesn’t fire you aren’t committed. Marshall provides flex.
-ve: miss out on 1 captain’s option. Still big $$ esp. gawn and they are fully priced IMO, perhaps less so Grundy.

Madness (2 of Preuss/hickey/Omac/Draper etc & Marshal fwd)
+ve: allows 14 premiums in other positions minimising rookies on field – you should be able to swing a side with only 6 on-field rookies plus the 2 mid-price rucks. If the 2 you pick fire and you chose the 14 premiums right, you are gonna be right up the pointy end come round 23! If 1 of them go pear-shaped after round 2 you can trade them out early, you have a bail out option to swing Marshall to rucks, trade in the rookie bolter you missed on the round 3 bubble.
-ve: Miss out on 2 serious captain’s options and you must be spot on with the certainty you have of the 14 premiums you are choosing elsewhere. its a huge negative POD that you will spend the entire season probably trying to close out. If the 2 of them go pear-shaped, be prepared to finish 100k lol. Absolutely a big risk.

Currently my side had Hickey/Preuss as Rucks, but I think I will waiver and end up with the Mix option.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Interestingly below is some research i did before the 2019 season on averages, not total points, rucks/age they turn that year, I think anyway. Gawn is 29 going into this year and 30 in Dec, will age catch him? Has missed 22 games in last 6 years.

You can add to the table below
2020: Gawn 140 (age 29) Grundy 121 (age 26)
2019 Grundy 130 (25) Gawn 128 (28)

*may be some errors there with Grundy in 2018

That Mix +ve only works if you pick the right one who doesn't fire Otherwise your committed into the losing horse and missing the winner!

I hope Hickey went better than the highlights from the practice match suggest, literally every highlight he was in was him getting soundly beaten in the ruck and it's not like Amartey or Sinclair are the types you want to be getting beaten by!

 

[Maso]

Costly but Gawndy locked in one line i dont need to think about until a injury hits

 

[stephen]

I agree that it's not impossible.. it's just extremely tricky and requires a lot of things to line up. Even using a 2 week lead time to create the bank you need is no simple thing as you're potentially culling rookies early or moving on the ones you're relying on for on field scoring. Couple that with the fact that you're probably selling 2(?) rookies to create the bank to trade Preuss (or a similar maxed rookie) that's 3 trades.. meaning you're using 10% of your season trades to bring in one player.

To break that down.. you're using ~3 trades to save 100k (getting Gawn at 650k instead of 750k).

For that to be a win you would need to spend the 450k saved going Preuss over Gawn extremely well and definitely needs to be on a keeper as you probably can't afford a trade or 2 to fix that player as well. Not an impossible ask, and there are probably options that in hindsight we'd look back at and go "yep, Preuss + mystery player was a genius move".. I'm just not sure who the mystery players would be!

You have to factor in the trades saved as well. Preuss over Gawn gets you the money for an extra keeper, so it's:

Gawn + 123k rookie v Preuss + 570k keeper.

Team A needs to use trades to turn the rookie into a keeper, and team B needs to use trades to turn Preuss into Gawn.

The debate is around which one we think will be a bigger gap to bridge, and which pairing provides more points in the meantime. Going on what we know now I think both are rational but that there is more to be lost with A and more to be gained with B.

FWIW I have it as

125 + 55 on field but 50 for cash generation v 90 + 110 (my last-picked premo in that range is Walsh), meaning a 20 point advantage to team B and the likelihood of a 100k advantage, which is the equivalent of being almost a trade ahead, which is why I currently prefer the Preuss combo. I think it will lose some points to captaincy disadvantage but not enough to even it up.

If rookies look stronger than I expect the calculation changes a bit.

And obviously everyone has their own opinion about what Preuss is capable of and what Gawn will do and whether they are confident on finding a good premo with that 570k. But I think the above is the kind of calculation we should be making about the cost of trades etc.

 

[wogitalia]

You have to factor in the trades saved as well. Preuss over Gawn gets you the money for an extra keeper, so it's:

Gawn + 123k rookie v Preuss + 570k keeper.

Team A needs to use trades to turn the rookie into a keeper, and team B needs to use trades to turn Preuss into Gawn.

The debate is around which one we think will be a bigger gap to bridge, and which pairing provides more points in the meantime. Going on what we know now I think both are rational but that there is more to be lost with A and more to be gained with B.

FWIW I have it as

125 + 55 on field but 50 for cash generation v 90 + 110 (my last-picked premo in that range is Walsh), meaning a 20 point advantage to team B and the likelihood of a 100k advantage, which is the equivalent of being almost a trade ahead, which is why I currently prefer the Preuss combo. I think it will lose some points to captaincy disadvantage but not enough to even it up.

If rookies look stronger than I expect the calculation changes a bit.

And obviously everyone has their own opinion about what Preuss is capable of and what Gawn will do and whether they are confident on finding a good premo with that 570k. But I think the above is the kind of calculation we should be making about the cost of trades etc.

A few counterpoints here...

Preuss over Gawn doesn't get you an extra premium, it gets you a midpricer and a lesser premium in place of a premium and a rookie. It's the same 880k.

I also don't like using a bad rookie as the 2nd part for the comparison. For comparison my on field rookies last year at round one averaged: 73, 102, 77, 73, 72 and 61. The average of that group is well over 70 (admittedly Rowell is a freak) which significantly changes the points projection to the point of being even for on field scoring (give or take).

I don't disagree with the projections but Gawn could definitely put up 135 and not surprise me and Preuss could certainly put up 75 and/or get dropped and not surprise me either, in either of those scenarios the cost of trades is going to tilt heavily into the Gawn starters favour.

Preuss is such an interesting choice, if he was a forward I'd start him without hesitation but I can't see a keeper narrative that doesn't border on sensationalism and so you're picking him to trade and essentially as a cash cow, he's priced at 56, he needs to average in the 95+ range to match a rookie putting up roughly 60 on that front. Max King for example at 123k made 200k averaging 61 last year, in comparison Setterfield had to average 98 over 13 weeks to make 185k from a 310k point.

Preuss' preseason game is going to be massive for me. From hard experience rucks are a terrible position to mess around with but if he genuinely supports that he could hit 105 (ROB first year for example) then I think he makes more sense. If he looks like 95 is the ceiling I don't like it very much given I think that's also the cutoff for a successful pick.

 

[Chumpion]

You have to factor in the trades saved as well. Preuss over Gawn gets you the money for an extra keeper, so it's:

Gawn + 123k rookie v Preuss + 570k keeper.

Team A needs to use trades to turn the rookie into a keeper, and team B needs to use trades to turn Preuss into Gawn.

The debate is around which one we think will be a bigger gap to bridge, and which pairing provides more points in the meantime. Going on what we know now I think both are rational but that there is more to be lost with A and more to be gained with B.

FWIW I have it as

125 + 55 on field but 50 for cash generation v 90 + 110 (my last-picked premo in that range is Walsh), meaning a 20 point advantage to team B and the likelihood of a 100k advantage, which is the equivalent of being almost a trade ahead, which is why I currently prefer the Preuss combo. I think it will lose some points to captaincy disadvantage but not enough to even it up.

If rookies look stronger than I expect the calculation changes a bit.

And obviously everyone has their own opinion about what Preuss is capable of and what Gawn will do and whether they are confident on finding a good premo with that 570k. But I think the above is the kind of calculation we should be making about the cost of trades etc.

Fair call.. I think in your example though you're saying mid you pick (Walsh in this case) is a season keeper. Otherwise you have 2 players needing to be upgraded, vs the Gawn scenario where you have a guaranteed keeper and just need to upgrade the rookie. It's pretty tricky to nail <570k mid and know for sure they are a season keeper as most have asterisks against them.

Also, not sure you can use Gawn + rookie vs mid pricer + 570k mid as a fair points comparison as a mid pricer will usually outscore a rookie. Yes, it's equal in cash in this scenario but you would be worried if there wasn't a points gain in option 2!

I honestly can't see Preuss making much more than 100k.. meaning he probably tops out at between 400-425k which I don't think will be enough for a 1 rookie down, Preuess to Gawn trad scenario. You (and others) may think differently and are banking on being able to do it 1 up/1 down, but I think that is extremely optimistic and pretty risky. In any situation where Pruess requires either 2 rookies' worth of cash, or you forgo Gawn to get the best ruckman you can afford from 1 rookie cull I think it's a clear win to starting Gawn and the extra rookie (which also increases the odds you won't miss one of the better cash cows).

I will say though, this is also assuming Gawn is a clear top 2 ruckman for the season - if that doesn't happen the egg on my face will be pretty incredible! But.. if I was a betting man.. I would bet on Gawn being top 2 and if that's the case, then it does feel super risky to bank on getting him down the line.

 

[Chumpion]

A few counterpoints here...

Preuss over Gawn doesn't get you an extra premium, it gets you a midpricer and a lesser premium in place of a premium and a rookie. It's the same 880k.

I also don't like using a bad rookie as the 2nd part for the comparison. For comparison my on field rookies last year at round one averaged: 73, 102, 77, 73, 72 and 61. The average of that group is well over 70 (admittedly Rowell is a freak) which significantly changes the points projection to the point of being even for on field scoring (give or take).

I don't disagree with the projections but Gawn could definitely put up 135 and not surprise me and Preuss could certainly put up 75 and/or get dropped and not surprise me either, in either of those scenarios the cost of trades is going to tilt heavily into the Gawn starters favour.

Preuss is such an interesting choice, if he was a forward I'd start him without hesitation but I can't see a keeper narrative that doesn't border on sensationalism and so you're picking him to trade and essentially as a cash cow, he's priced at 56, he needs to average in the 95+ range to match a rookie putting up roughly 60 on that front. Max King for example at 123k made 200k averaging 61 last year, in comparison Setterfield had to average 98 over 13 weeks to make 185k from a 310k point.

Preuss' preseason game is going to be massive for me. From hard experience rucks are a terrible position to mess around with but if he genuinely supports that he could hit 105 (ROB first year for example) then I think he makes more sense. If he looks like 95 is the ceiling I don't like it very much given I think that's also the cutoff for a successful pick.

This says what I was trying to say only 1,000,000 times better - completely agree!

 

[THCLT]

This says what I was trying to say only 1,000,000 times better - completely agree!

@wogitalia does have a way with words when it comes to players and SC, however, all opinions are welcomed regardless of whether you're a wordsmith on SC or not.

Truth be told, he has made my lunchtime reading very enjoyable over the past few days.

 

[THCLT]

My experiences have taught me that getting your Rucks right from the start is so much more enjoyable, particularly so when we've arguably two of the most dominating rucks currently at their peak.

I'll be on Gawn & Grundy for as long as I can until lack of R1 Rookie forces my hand.

 

[freowho]

The stumbling block for me starting Preuss is the draw. Double teamed in rnd1 by St Kilda, Rnd 3 and 4 against Gawn and Grundy, rnd 6 Stef Martin and Rnd 10 NicNat. It's hard to see him getting a clean run where he can climb past $400k. If I want to bet against Gawn I think I'd rather have Marshall at R2 or a cheaper Hickey with a better draw. Is there a chance for someone younger, Coleman-Jones, Williams?

 

[Wheedus]

A few counterpoints here...

Preuss over Gawn doesn't get you an extra premium, it gets you a midpricer and a lesser premium in place of a premium and a rookie. It's the same 880k.

I also don't like using a bad rookie as the 2nd part for the comparison. For comparison my on field rookies last year at round one averaged: 73, 102, 77, 73, 72 and 61. The average of that group is well over 70 (admittedly Rowell is a freak) which significantly changes the points projection to the point of being even for on field scoring (give or take).

I don't disagree with the projections but Gawn could definitely put up 135 and not surprise me and Preuss could certainly put up 75 and/or get dropped and not surprise me either, in either of those scenarios the cost of trades is going to tilt heavily into the Gawn starters favour.

Preuss is such an interesting choice, if he was a forward I'd start him without hesitation but I can't see a keeper narrative that doesn't border on sensationalism and so you're picking him to trade and essentially as a cash cow, he's priced at 56, he needs to average in the 95+ range to match a rookie putting up roughly 60 on that front. Max King for example at 123k made 200k averaging 61 last year, in comparison Setterfield had to average 98 over 13 weeks to make 185k from a 310k point.

Preuss' preseason game is going to be massive for me. From hard experience rucks are a terrible position to mess around with but if he genuinely supports that he could hit 105 (ROB first year for example) then I think he makes more sense. If he looks like 95 is the ceiling I don't like it very much given I think that's also the cutoff for a successful pick.

Good to see some ghosts of FFC plying their trade. Keep up the good work @wogitalia