Position 2021: Ruck Discussion

[Wheedus]

GG for me. I'm just glad I'll be generating cash from R3 for a change.

 

[SuchIsLife]

There’s no guarantees Mumford doesn’t get a run either. They gave him undeserved games last year and I’ve seen nothing from the club to reassure me they won’t this year.

“But it gives Flynny and possibly Briggsy an opportunity to take that No.1 ruck spot, then Preussy has to fight for it when he gets back.

“I’m sure Leon will give me the call-up to play a game here and there.

Is here and there a couple times for the season or once a month? That’s the entire point, there’s no guarantees and if he were to miss - forcing a donut or even worse an early trade or 2 or 3 as we know can happen with your rucks - you lose much of the perceived benefit of starting a rookie ruck in the first place.

So if you have Flynn at R3, and one of Hunter/Meek retains the job, and is averaging 70+ while generating 200k+, how do you plan on taking advantage of this with Gawndy? Would you be content on missing one of the best scoring/most profitable cash cows in the season?

I mean there's no guarantee that both will miss too right? I for one think Freo give Meek a proper shot even if Darcy is fit (who they have tried to relied upon for awhile and continues to disappoint).

FWIW I think Gawn/Grundy + 2 rookies is the way to go. The thing I'm struggling with is being able to efficiently deploy the cash saved (after using 380k, have about 170k ish I should be using, but I don't exactly want to go rookie - midpricer)

 

[mike89]

I've just had a play around with this in my own team: taking Grundy out and replacing him with Meek (bringing Flynn on field) lets me upgrade my weakest on-field choice (which I think is Butts) to basically anyone I want - so I could go straight to Lloyd, or to a Ridley type and use the extra to upgrade a speculative mid pricer (Taranto) to a Kelly/Fyfe type. Now, structurally I actually like that a lot better, Flynn should get every opportunity for most of the season and I think the marginal points I'd gain from my upgrades would be more than I'd lose on my downgrade.

The big thing for me is the risk profile though. Depending how Fremantle structure up Meek might play one game and then disappear into the ether, particularly if Darcy doesn't get up for round 1. The only way I'd feel confident of Meek getting a good run of games is if Darcy plays round 1 alongside Meek. That reduces the risk of a structural reshuffle enough, at least in the short term, that I'd be happy to carry the extra risk of no Grundy.

Of course all of you have been doing this longer than me and your mileage may vary, but that's where I'm at at the moment.

 

[BigRuss]

So if you have Flynn at R3, and one of Hunter/Meek retains the job, and is averaging 70+ while generating 200k+, how do you plan on taking advantage of this with Gawndy? Would you be content on missing one of the best scoring/most profitable cash cows in the season?

I mean there's no guarantee that both will miss too right? I for one think Freo give Meek a proper shot even if Darcy is fit (who they have tried to relied upon for awhile and continues to disappoint).

FWIW I think Gawn/Grundy + 2 rookies is the way to go. The thing I'm struggling with is being able to efficiently deploy the cash saved (after using 380k, have about 170k ish I should be using, but I don't exactly want to go rookie - midpricer)

I won’t, I’ll just collect my ~ 400 points a week from the 2 of them and miss out on a 70 point rookie over a 50 point one.

There’s definitely an argument for both sides of the coin and in no way am I trying to persuade people either way. I just think you need the perfect storm for a rookie ruck to work and there are other lines where I prefer to take my gamble this year.

Plenty seasons have been written off from the ruck merry go round.

 

[jobeywatto]

The other thing you need to consider is captaincy options. Besides Gawn and Grundy, which players could you confidently put the C on? Neale if he repeats last year's form, maybe Macrae and Lloyd if they have good opponents. I wouldn't really want to trust anyone outside that. If Gawn averages 150 over the opening rounds (possible considering his matchups) that's potentially 300 points a week for your team. Hard to see any combination that could beat that.

Hunter, Meek and Fullerton may not make it past the first month and if Flynn were to go down with an injury after that you'd be screwed. I like what a Gawn-less team looks like (replaced by midfield premo, upgrade H.Clark to safer Ridley with money left over for more expensive rookies) but I think I'm too scared of what Gawn may produce.

 

[Grundogging]

Not like we couldn't see this coming but Channel 10 News just reported that Hunter will debut in round 1 and share ruck duties with McKernan.

 

[SuchIsLife]

I won’t, I’ll just collect my ~ 400 points a week from the 2 of them and miss out on a 70 point rookie over a 50 point one.

There’s definitely an argument for both sides of the coin and in no way am I trying to persuade people either way. I just think you need the perfect storm for a rookie ruck to work and there are other lines where I prefer to take my gamble this year.

Plenty seasons have been written off from the ruck merry go round.

The other thing you need to consider is captaincy options. Besides Gawn and Grundy, which players could you confidently put the C on? Neale if he repeats last year's form, maybe Macrae and Lloyd if they have good opponents. I wouldn't really want to trust anyone outside that. If Gawn averages 150 over the opening rounds (possible considering his matchups) that's potentially 300 points a week for your team. Hard to see any combination that could beat that.

Hunter, Meek and Fullerton may not make it past the first month and if Flynn were to go down with an injury after that you'd be screwed. I like what a Gawn-less team looks like (replaced by midfield premo, upgrade H.Clark to safer Ridley with money left over for more expensive rookies) but I think I'm too scared of what Gawn may produce.

Oh don't get me wrong, Gawn is locked in as R1 for me, and hasn't left for months and will not leave.

I was more talking about Gawn + Grundy + Flynn vs Gawn + 2 rookies. Realistically it's a debate is whether 550k is more valuable than 60 points or not (Grundy - Flynn).

If you think you can improve your team by 60 points using 550k, or even by 50 points (considering the additional cash), then the double rookies option appeal. For me it's a little annoying because after getting a premo elsewhere with the cash saved, there's still 170 left, and I'm not sure if Ziebell - De Goey is worth it.

 

[Athomas]

Would want to be awfully confident Nank can average 125+ in a month, early in the season, and that you'll have the guts to trade him out when he does as I just can't see him pushing 115+ for the season like he'd need to, to otherwise make sense as a pick. Or you're awfully confident that he can be 110 and that the one of Gawn/Grundy you're not starting is dropping to 115 or lower.

Feeling pretty confident on Nank at the moment. Here are some stats from 2020 (not sure on the actual match-ups, so potentially could've benefitted from these)

With Soldo: 62.75 average from 4 games (actually includes a 99 too when Soldo was injured with 20% TOG)
27 (46% TOG)
90 (66% TOG)
35 (63% TOG)
99 (77% TOG, Soldo injured)

W/O Soldo 116 average from 6 games
184 (80% TOG)
56 (70% TOG)
54 (Final 1, 91% TOG)
113 (Final 2, 77% TOG)
153 (Final 3, 69% TOG)
136 (Final 4, 87% TOG)

Injury game 86 average
86 (47% TOG)


If (big if) we assume this is a good indicator, I see no reason he can't average 110-120. (Nice to see a 62 from a half in the AAMI series too)


Of course the hard part would be if Grawndy average 130+, or when the right time would be to offload Nank. My current plan is to start Nank and hold all year unless a 2+ week injury occurs and one of Gawn/Grundy have fallen in price nicely.

I'm honestly not that scared of Gawn or Grundy at the moment, maybe I have a short memory

 

[BarginHunter]

I don't think Flynn, Meek (hunter) can really be ok anyone's radar unless you like a gamble and don't really care if your season is over in a month.

So I think the viable options are grawndy (Flynn), gawn, Flynn (meek/hunter) or Grundy, Flynn (meek/hunter).

My advice would be to make your best grawndy team. Then take gawn out and make the best additions you can with the money. Do the same with Grundy. Then you have your X v Y v Z.

Add up your projections for each combination. If the grawndy team wins it's a no-brainer. If one of the other teams wins it's a matter of whether you think it wins by enough to cover the captaincy disadvantage (if you deem there to be one) and whether it's by enough to be worth the risk of it going bad.

EDIT: if you think cash gen is a major factor (ie you think meek makes 200k and the rookie he replaces in the XvY is a donut or a likely dud, include that in your factoring.

For me to go down the rookie ruck path I’d need almost 100% certainty that they’ll both be playing the first 6 or so rounds, injury withstanding. There’s no certainty even one of them play he first 6 so to me the decision is very easy.

If Gawn/Grundy go gangbusters over the first third of the season - which is entirely possible if not likely, you’ve missed the points, you’ve missed the captains points AND you have to make a non negotiable 650k+ upgrade, 2 if you’re starting both rookies.

Personally I think it is going to depend on how you structure the rest of your side.

If you go 5 premium deep in defence (and then are you confident in picking the right 5 from about 12 options ?)

Lloyd interupted preseason , Whitfield out so do you save 2 spots for them ?

You are not getting 5 x $ 600 k + mids in your starting team so probably need 2 of Cripps , Rowell & Taranto price types to start all who may or not need to be upgraded.

Campbell at M6 , Bruhn (?) at M7 , Powell at M8......yes cheaper alternatives may be named.

Danger + Fantasia/Ziebell/Daniher/Impey + many rookie priced players have been mentioned eg Cahill , Warner , Fullarton , Bergman , Jones , Rowe , Scott etc etc

Compelling arguments to start Gawn due to his draw and historical averages as a C option.

Does history repeat ? Do the new game rules affect ruck scores significantly ?

Does Jackson demand more ruck time ?

Does Treloar hurt Grundy's HTA and clearances ?

The Cameron effect on Grundy ?

If Flynn is fit (practice match today or tomorrow) he is arguably GWS 1st ruck.

Does he outscore a similar priced rookie D, M or F onfield significantly enough ?

Then can you replace Gawn/Grundy with a alternative scoring option eg Neale , Steele , Oliver , Macrae for example.

Hunter will play Round 1 , if we know Marshall & Ryder will miss 6-8 rounds he then becomes a no brainer to start (in my opinion).

Meek could share ruck duties with Darcy (if fit) if they play Darcy forward as Lobb replacement or Cox or Logue going forward are also options.

Fyfe was probably playing more forward before Lobb was injured in any case.

Gawn + Grundy could expose you at D4-6

Gawn/Grundy + rookie R2 could strengthen those positions.

All about your overall structures.

Been pages and pages of comments/ideas/thoughts on the rookie rucks.

So just a matter of seeing which option actually makes your overall team structure better.

I think you need at least one of Gawn or Grundy, there is too much unknowns for the long term job security specifically of Meek and Hunter. Flynn I think is more of a safer pick although we haven't seen him play yet.

Gawn or Grundy is the big question. Gawn will again most likely end up the number one ruckman but his price is extreme. Grundy in contrast has a bit of value to him, had a down season last season and will probably bounce back, prior to his 120 ppg season last year (a "down" season for him), he posted two 130ppg seasons. Gawn on the other hand has a really nice run of games to start the season and could go large early on. I think for me I am in the Grundy camp, his price unlike many other top end premiums across most of the lines is not over-inflated and will finish at the very least in the top 2 rucks. I just wish Darcy Cameron would go away.

I like the Meek R2, Flynn R3 combo as you only need one to play every week and I think they will both play the first 8 weeks of the season.
Darcy for Freo if selected ,will play forward to replace Lobb according to the Freo coaches, Flynn is the only player left to play ruck at GWS besides some rookies and Mumford who is only there as an emergency back up.
I'll keep Gawn for his very easy early match ups and captaincy.
The only concern I have is Grundy going up in price.

Ok, after a whole afternoon of crunching numbers, flipping coins and in general umming and ahhing,
I have brought myself to 3 possible options
1. Gawndy = 1877, 12ish premos
2. Gawn + Meek/Flynn =1856, 12 premos
3.Meek/Flynn/Hunter= 1884, 13ish premos
All give me around the same amount of leftover cash
Or there is also no. 4 which is clear my team and let Supercoach auto pick my team and hope for the best?

I feel if i crunch so more i can optimise Gawndy more, but the same goes for the other two. I guess it comes down to;
-how the new rules affect rucks,
-whether i think i can get back Gawn and/or Grundy if i do the cash cow strategy, and plenty more reasons.

Thanks all for your input, looks like this coming week is going to be hard to see which team to pick??
Its the calm before the storm i feel

 

[Diabolical]

Enjoying the mass debate on rucks!

Given the potential for so many rookie options has me wondering about some sort of out of the box thinking manoeuvre:

Start Gawndy who should score significantly more than Gawn + rookie or Grundy + rookie (or even 2 x rookies) options. If the situation allows after round 2, trade the poorer performer of Gawndy for the rookie you don’t have who is looking most secure. Use your second trade to do the usual rookie correction trade.

Stay cashed up and sacrifice on field points for a round or two while rookies start to rise in value then start to try and use cash to bring some fallen premiums in quicker.

The cost is a trade but probably one that was going to be made correcting anyway and less risky than starting a rookie ruck. If Gawndy does come out firing, abort plan, nothing lost.

 

[wogitalia]

Feeling pretty confident on Nank at the moment. Here are some stats from 2020 (not sure on the actual match-ups, so potentially could've benefitted from these)

With Soldo: 62.75 average from 4 games (actually includes a 99 too when Soldo was injured with 20% TOG)
27 (46% TOG)
90 (66% TOG)
35 (63% TOG)
99 (77% TOG, Soldo injured)

W/O Soldo 116 average from 6 games
184 (80% TOG)
56 (70% TOG)
54 (Final 1, 91% TOG)
113 (Final 2, 77% TOG)
153 (Final 3, 69% TOG)
136 (Final 4, 87% TOG)

Injury game 86 average
86 (47% TOG)


If (big if) we assume this is a good indicator, I see no reason he can't average 110-120. (Nice to see a 62 from a half in the AAMI series too)


Of course the hard part would be if Grawndy average 130+, or when the right time would be to offload Nank. My current plan is to start Nank and hold all year unless a 2+ week injury occurs and one of Gawn/Grundy have fallen in price nicely.

I'm honestly not that scared of Gawn or Grundy at the moment, maybe I have a short memory

I feel like you do this every season

What reason do you have to think Nank is going to score 20 points above his best result, especially when they've been pretty open that they want to play 2 rucks once they've got two available.

I actually really like Nank but that seems an incredibly high range to set for him.

 

[Hondo]

Enjoying the mass debate on rucks!

Given the potential for so many rookie options has me wondering about some sort of out of the box thinking manoeuvre:

Start Gawndy who should score significantly more than Gawn + rookie or Grundy + rookie (or even 2 x rookies) options. If the situation allows after round 2, trade the poorer performer of Gawndy for the rookie you don’t have who is looking most secure. Use your second trade to do the usual rookie correction trade.

Stay cashed up and sacrifice on field points for a round or two while rookies start to rise in value then start to try and use cash to bring some fallen premiums in quicker.

The cost is a trade but probably one that was going to be made correcting anyway and less risky than starting a rookie ruck. If Gawndy does come out firing, abort plan, nothing lost.

yes I think it’s easier to correct Gawndy down if we had to than the other way unless you go the other way and park some cash just in case.
If you are going to spend it on things like Taranto to Macrae or bringing in Lloyd then you could get stuck trying to correct back, if that looks necessary.

 

[Athomas]

What reason do you have to think Nank is going to score 20 points above his best result, especially when they've been pretty open that they want to play 2 rucks once they've got two available.

I actually really like Nank but that seems an incredibly high range to set for him.

It's an optimistic range, based on 2020 seems achievable, based on other years seems less likely.

2018 he averaged 98, 2019 he had multiple Soldo games as well (similar to 2020 really)

98 would not be a disaster at his 82 price but I'll concede he would leak a lot of points to Grawndy in that situation.

Soldo is the key though, he's out for 4-5 months. Chol/CCJ/Balta aren't comparable to Soldo, they are certainly pinch hitting rucks to me.

I feel he's one of the few ruckman with no competition at all who will ruck 75%+ of the time. Certainly from a point per $ perspective, I don't feel it's going to cost me early in the year.

 

[Connoisseur]

T Nankervis:


Doesn't register enough hitouts or hitouts to advantage, nor does Richmond's game style favour Nankervis to allow a high average increase.

 

[GrainFedBeef]

So if you have Flynn at R3, and one of Hunter/Meek retains the job, and is averaging 70+ while generating 200k+, how do you plan on taking advantage of this with Gawndy? Would you be content on missing one of the best scoring/most profitable cash cows in the season?

I mean there's no guarantee that both will miss too right? I for one think Freo give Meek a proper shot even if Darcy is fit (who they have tried to relied upon for awhile and continues to disappoint).

FWIW I think Gawn/Grundy + 2 rookies is the way to go. The thing I'm struggling with is being able to efficiently deploy the cash saved (after using 380k, have about 170k ish I should be using, but I don't exactly want to go rookie - midpricer)

You will make the cash up by the extra rookie that Grawndy carries. When you use the Gawn cash, it likely upgrades two players. This puts. you a premium ahead, however, extra trades are likely to get to Gawn's price.

Alternatively if Meek/Hunter is diluted by Marshall/Darcy, you now have a weaker rookie similar probably other rookies on other lines.

Marshall coming back in round3 is not an alternative if there is an issue unless you sideways a premium and trade your ruck rookie out.

There is clearly a good case if you can pick the one who plays 70% ruck, if they do.

 

[Baglimit]

Enjoying the mass debate on rucks!

Given the potential for so many rookie options has me wondering about some sort of out of the box thinking manoeuvre:

Start Gawndy who should score significantly more than Gawn + rookie or Grundy + rookie (or even 2 x rookies) options. If the situation allows after round 2, trade the poorer performer of Gawndy for the rookie you don’t have who is looking most secure. Use your second trade to do the usual rookie correction trade.

Stay cashed up and sacrifice on field points for a round or two while rookies start to rise in value then start to try and use cash to bring some fallen premiums in quicker.

The cost is a trade but probably one that was going to be made correcting anyway and less risky than starting a rookie ruck. If Gawndy does come out firing, abort plan, nothing lost.

I think you can probably go a little more aggressive, with Gawn or Grundy and Rookie R2 and R3.

My choice would be Grundy over Gawn with Gawn priced at 140 at his most likely highest average and Grundy at 121 after an ave year

We all have a lot to think about

 

[The Saltshaker]

I've just had a play around with this in my own team: taking Grundy out and replacing him with Meek (bringing Flynn on field) lets me upgrade my weakest on-field choice (which I think is Butts) to basically anyone I want - so I could go straight to Lloyd, or to a Ridley type and use the extra to upgrade a speculative mid pricer (Taranto) to a Kelly/Fyfe type. Now, structurally I actually like that a lot better, Flynn should get every opportunity for most of the season and I think the marginal points I'd gain from my upgrades would be more than I'd lose on my downgrade.

The big thing for me is the risk profile though. Depending how Fremantle structure up Meek might play one game and then disappear into the ether, particularly if Darcy doesn't get up for round 1. The only way I'd feel confident of Meek getting a good run of games is if Darcy plays round 1 alongside Meek. That reduces the risk of a structural reshuffle enough, at least in the short term, that I'd be happy to carry the extra risk of no Grundy.

Of course all of you have been doing this longer than me and your mileage may vary, but that's where I'm at at the moment.

Inever thought we would have so many rookie rucks at the start of the year + the game has fundamentally changed.

If rucks are 13 to 15 less stoppages as seen in pre season, they might be set and forget in a 1 & 2 end of year type thing but all should suffer 10% less and 5% overs, and 10% plump / inflation from last year that many have shown detailed graphs of - espesh on high end scores. So its a perfect storm for Rucks.

Plus Draper is Gawn at his break out year - he is fitter than ever, been beasting pre season, he has said he wants to be the best in the game

Grundy wants the #1 spot again

 

[The Saltshaker]

I think you can probably go a little more aggressive, with Gawn or Grundy and Rookie R2 and R3.

My choice would be Grundy over Gawn with Gawn priced at 140 at his most likely highest average and Grundy at 121 after an ave year

We all have a lot to think about

100%

 

[The Saltshaker]

It's an optimistic range, based on 2020 seems achievable, based on other years seems less likely.

2018 he averaged 98, 2019 he had multiple Soldo games as well (similar to 2020 really)

98 would not be a disaster at his 82 price but I'll concede he would leak a lot of points to Grawndy in that situation.

Soldo is the key though, he's out for 4-5 months. Chol/CCJ/Balta aren't comparable to Soldo, they are certainly pinch hitting rucks to me.

I feel he's one of the few ruckman with no competition at all who will ruck 75%+ of the time. Certainly from a point per $ perspective, I don't feel it's going to cost me early in the year.

Witts fit great price

 

[The Saltshaker]

Ok, after a whole afternoon of crunching numbers, flipping coins and in general umming and ahhing,
I have brought myself to 3 possible options
1. Gawndy = 1877, 12ish premos
2. Gawn + Meek/Flynn =1856, 12 premos
3.Meek/Flynn/Hunter= 1884, 13ish premos
All give me around the same amount of leftover cash
Or there is also no. 4 which is clear my team and let Supercoach auto pick my team and hope for the best?

I feel if i crunch so more i can optimise Gawndy more, but the same goes for the other two. I guess it comes down to;
-how the new rules affect rucks,
-whether i think i can get back Gawn and/or Grundy if i do the cash cow strategy, and plenty more reasons.

Thanks all for your input, looks like this coming week is going to be hard to see which team to pick??
Its the calm before the storm i feel

Therds risk with the best 3 not playing next week, i think Flynn Hunter present the longest games. I think Meek could keep #1 ruck over darcy as darcy can play fwd but he could get smashed too.....i think draper covers that


How long Rider out?