Position 2021: Ruck Discussion
- Thread starter THCLT
- Start date
Williams has been penciled in since prices dropped. Little bit on the expensive side but worth consideration.
Prefer Williams over Thilthorpe.
Like the look of Fullerton, looks to have added size to his frame over the off season, but cannot see him given a roll his year. Any Lions supporters with more info on Fullerton.? Has been in and out of my FWD Bench.
Prefer Williams over Thilthorpe.
Like the look of Fullerton, looks to have added size to his frame over the off season, but cannot see him given a roll his year. Any Lions supporters with more info on Fullerton.? Has been in and out of my FWD Bench.
Williams is $ 19k cheaper than Impey if you look at it that way , could provide similar scores and has DPP.
You would think with Thilthorpe they will be cautious with him given his injury worries last season , but Nicks said last night if he looks ready to start , they will play him early (obviously at this time of year clubs are putting positive spins on all their players especially the young ones)
Not sure how all of Fog , Himmelberg , Tex & Thilthorpe work together but that's their problem to work out.
I keep looking at Fullarton as well.
I guess at this time of the year , should be considering all options for our starting teams.
You would think with Thilthorpe they will be cautious with him given his injury worries last season , but Nicks said last night if he looks ready to start , they will play him early (obviously at this time of year clubs are putting positive spins on all their players especially the young ones)
Not sure how all of Fog , Himmelberg , Tex & Thilthorpe work together but that's their problem to work out.
I keep looking at Fullarton as well.
I guess at this time of the year , should be considering all options for our starting teams.
I thought I read Williams picked up an injury?
Any WCE supporters know more? @Lost In The Sky @GrainFedBeef @Shannon
Any WCE supporters know more? @Lost In The Sky @GrainFedBeef @Shannon
I think this kind of logic is where people get themselves into trouble with the rucks.
Why pair what is a relatively good pick in Flynn (prima facie) with what seems to be a relatively terrible pick in McEvoy.
This obviously changes if McEvoy is the lone ruck and thus actually makes sense as a stand alone pick but as a defender he's overpriced if anything.
Don't really like this logic either, 5 years of development surely trumps an injury as a rookie option if the JS/Scoring potential is there. History of "rookie" rucks is pretty sound when rucking, last year we had Draper at 70, ROB at 95 in 2019, Grundy at 75, Sinclair at 65 (not #1), Darcy at 79 and Naismith at 70 for comparisons of many various circumstances, Draper probably the most direct but he had a ruck share situation as well and did score better when one out.
That's an excellent on-field starter. If you picked say Taranto he'd need to average 132 to provide equivalent value and cash generation for the money spent. If all your rookies and midpricers are providing +47 points on their price you're going to have a pretty amazing season, especially to the point where you're not thinking that's starter worthy (aka you've got enough better rookies to start instead)
And here is the real flaw in the plan. If Mummy wasn't there and you were looking at a Flynn > Preuss equation down the road, I think it's much stronger. The lack of coverage with a hardened senior body right there lurking is certainly the massive risk and the reason to look at him as an R3 instead of an R2.
He's an outstanding pick at r2 though if he scores at 65+ and definitely makes starting either Gawn or Grundy disposable if we were to get an indicator that his JS was reliable.
Lobb hasn't shown better scoring in the ruck, he's basically been the perfect second ruck where he gains from the advantage against weaker 2nd rucks but as a first ruck he gets beaten up on.
Like McEvoy, he screams of ruining a good pick by making a bad pick as a reaction to the other pick.
Agree on the risk element and that Marshall would have made it a slam dunk pick at 65+ projections but if Flynn is scoring at those levels he's actually at the trade out Gawn/Grundy to get him in level of production so I think your requirements are a bit extreme, if he flashed that kind of potential there's almost no way you can't not start him given the value he'd represent.
Gawn isn't really a strong starting pick, his realistic best case is he falls back to 135 and basically protects his starting value and is a strong captain choice. He's at best an efficient allocation of starting resources. Grundy has a bit more upside but still is most likely a slightly underpriced starting pick who will defend his starting value. Basically their value lies in that no one else really presents a better option and that starting them is a lot easier than trading into them around moving parts. I say all this as someone who has had that GG pairing in every draft as well but the reality is you'd hope to do better at every other position with the Gawn money than you're likely to do with Gawn.
Reckon he should compare pretty favourably to Jackson last year or Kreuzer in his first year who went at 58/60 respectively. At his price that's not a great outcome though and would probably need to display an ability to spike his scoring at the very least. From what I've seen of him he actually reminds me quite a bit of Kreuzer as a player, would want to somehow have excellent job security to justify the premium given he seems a pretty low ceiling scorer.
Why pair what is a relatively good pick in Flynn (prima facie) with what seems to be a relatively terrible pick in McEvoy.
This obviously changes if McEvoy is the lone ruck and thus actually makes sense as a stand alone pick but as a defender he's overpriced if anything.
Don't really like this logic either, 5 years of development surely trumps an injury as a rookie option if the JS/Scoring potential is there. History of "rookie" rucks is pretty sound when rucking, last year we had Draper at 70, ROB at 95 in 2019, Grundy at 75, Sinclair at 65 (not #1), Darcy at 79 and Naismith at 70 for comparisons of many various circumstances, Draper probably the most direct but he had a ruck share situation as well and did score better when one out.
That's an excellent on-field starter. If you picked say Taranto he'd need to average 132 to provide equivalent value and cash generation for the money spent. If all your rookies and midpricers are providing +47 points on their price you're going to have a pretty amazing season, especially to the point where you're not thinking that's starter worthy (aka you've got enough better rookies to start instead)
And here is the real flaw in the plan. If Mummy wasn't there and you were looking at a Flynn > Preuss equation down the road, I think it's much stronger. The lack of coverage with a hardened senior body right there lurking is certainly the massive risk and the reason to look at him as an R3 instead of an R2.
He's an outstanding pick at r2 though if he scores at 65+ and definitely makes starting either Gawn or Grundy disposable if we were to get an indicator that his JS was reliable.
Lobb hasn't shown better scoring in the ruck, he's basically been the perfect second ruck where he gains from the advantage against weaker 2nd rucks but as a first ruck he gets beaten up on.
Like McEvoy, he screams of ruining a good pick by making a bad pick as a reaction to the other pick.
Agree on the risk element and that Marshall would have made it a slam dunk pick at 65+ projections but if Flynn is scoring at those levels he's actually at the trade out Gawn/Grundy to get him in level of production so I think your requirements are a bit extreme, if he flashed that kind of potential there's almost no way you can't not start him given the value he'd represent.
Gawn isn't really a strong starting pick, his realistic best case is he falls back to 135 and basically protects his starting value and is a strong captain choice. He's at best an efficient allocation of starting resources. Grundy has a bit more upside but still is most likely a slightly underpriced starting pick who will defend his starting value. Basically their value lies in that no one else really presents a better option and that starting them is a lot easier than trading into them around moving parts. I say all this as someone who has had that GG pairing in every draft as well but the reality is you'd hope to do better at every other position with the Gawn money than you're likely to do with Gawn.
Reckon he should compare pretty favourably to Jackson last year or Kreuzer in his first year who went at 58/60 respectively. At his price that's not a great outcome though and would probably need to display an ability to spike his scoring at the very least. From what I've seen of him he actually reminds me quite a bit of Kreuzer as a player, would want to somehow have excellent job security to justify the premium given he seems a pretty low ceiling scorer.