Position 2021: Ruck Discussion
- Thread starter THCLT
- Start date
For mine...
Flynn - 82.5 - Similar to Pittonet with no ruck share, which was 84.6 last year. He's the same age as Pittonet was, 5 years in the system, has an elite midfield underneath him. If they play Briggs or Mummy he drops down to ~70 as ruck share is not good.
Meek - 65 - Assuming Darcy is the 2nd ruck/forward chosen, bump it to 75ish if it's Treacy and they hold Darcy out (I expect we see Darcy) but I've not seen much of him and what he flashed could be higher, trying to be conservative.
Hunter - 85-90 - Mature aged, experienced ruck with the clear #1 ruck role until he has no role who will throw his weight around. Think he'll be comparable to big Jono Giles back in the day. Of course he's possibly out when Marshall is back (I expect he beats McKernan and they keep Marshall forward to ease in) and almost certainly out when Ryder is back. Only way I can see Hunter playing would be injury to King where they go with both of Ryder and Marshall forward and keep Hunter in the ruck but even then I imagine they quite probably go McKernan and Ryder rucks. Both those guys could be back by round 3 which is why Hunter is not a guy I'm picking at this point in time.
The hopeful answer would be they all do a ROB
I've also ranked them in what I think their JS levels are.
Flynn - 82.5 - Similar to Pittonet with no ruck share, which was 84.6 last year. He's the same age as Pittonet was, 5 years in the system, has an elite midfield underneath him. If they play Briggs or Mummy he drops down to ~70 as ruck share is not good.
Meek - 65 - Assuming Darcy is the 2nd ruck/forward chosen, bump it to 75ish if it's Treacy and they hold Darcy out (I expect we see Darcy) but I've not seen much of him and what he flashed could be higher, trying to be conservative.
Hunter - 85-90 - Mature aged, experienced ruck with the clear #1 ruck role until he has no role who will throw his weight around. Think he'll be comparable to big Jono Giles back in the day. Of course he's possibly out when Marshall is back (I expect he beats McKernan and they keep Marshall forward to ease in) and almost certainly out when Ryder is back. Only way I can see Hunter playing would be injury to King where they go with both of Ryder and Marshall forward and keep Hunter in the ruck but even then I imagine they quite probably go McKernan and Ryder rucks. Both those guys could be back by round 3 which is why Hunter is not a guy I'm picking at this point in time.
The hopeful answer would be they all do a ROB
I've also ranked them in what I think their JS levels are.
One thing to keep in mind is that if Gawn/Grundy are losing say 5-10% from less stoppages across the board, so are the rookie R2 types. Might mean that instead of that 80-85+ upside the average No.1 ruck role usually entails, it might be down to 70-75. Perhaps the effect would be harsher on the inexperienced rucks who aren’t able to contribute and take marks around the ground to the extent Grundy/Gawn are. Just some food for thought.
Less than half here are choosing to start both Gawn and Grundy so far. That surprises me a bit. I'd back the consensus here to be right significantly more often than not.
Based on the last few years I would say the right option is to set and forget, but I get a feeling it probably won't end up being the best option this year. No idea which IS going to be the best though - lots of decisions/options to review in the next few days.
Based on the last few years I would say the right option is to set and forget, but I get a feeling it probably won't end up being the best option this year. No idea which IS going to be the best though - lots of decisions/options to review in the next few days.
A very fair point. I probably should have added a disclaimer of "assuming no material change in ruck scoring happens".
The thing I would note though is if the rucks are down probably a significant group of the mids will also come down with it and given the general consensus that just about all the premiums are overstated from last year's gimmick season, that would imply a shift downwards which would also mean less is required hopefully!
Personally think there could be genuine substance to the ruck drop across the board, it's whether it's enough to really dent the top guys or not and whether shading them over it is actually worth the risk. Be nice to have a couple of genuinely solid Preuss types where you'd know they're #1 and will score decently and not be at threat to others.
The thing I would note though is if the rucks are down probably a significant group of the mids will also come down with it and given the general consensus that just about all the premiums are overstated from last year's gimmick season, that would imply a shift downwards which would also mean less is required hopefully!
Personally think there could be genuine substance to the ruck drop across the board, it's whether it's enough to really dent the top guys or not and whether shading them over it is actually worth the risk. Be nice to have a couple of genuinely solid Preuss types where you'd know they're #1 and will score decently and not be at threat to others.
It's the kind of thing that you could just about win the whole thing on the back of if you went all in and were right... the one positive is I actually don't see a huge negative downside of attempting it. Shading the rucks obviously high risk but focusing on more balanced midfielders and shading the inside guys doesn't really change the equation, a lot of them in teams anyway. Guys like Neale, Merrett, Kelly and Macrae already tick the outside boxes.
Thanks for the replies guys
If 40-50% of teams in the comp had 2 of Flynn/Meek/Hunter scoring 80+, would those with Gawndy (assuming they score their projected score), would that sway their decision making - losing bankable dollars/value gain early on to 40-50% of teams versus holding value/status quo
It gives those that start 2 of those 3 rucks (provided 2 or more of the 3 start the season on field) a significant advantage - 3 price jumps would easily become a $200k deficit in value, which early on could mean the difference between upgrading 1-2 rounds earlier
A lot of water to go under the bridge but many decisions to be made this week..
If 40-50% of teams in the comp had 2 of Flynn/Meek/Hunter scoring 80+, would those with Gawndy (assuming they score their projected score), would that sway their decision making - losing bankable dollars/value gain early on to 40-50% of teams versus holding value/status quo
It gives those that start 2 of those 3 rucks (provided 2 or more of the 3 start the season on field) a significant advantage - 3 price jumps would easily become a $200k deficit in value, which early on could mean the difference between upgrading 1-2 rounds earlier
A lot of water to go under the bridge but many decisions to be made this week..
While reading the above, I kept thinking that there are 3,300 SC pts to be shared each game and if the Rucks and Inside Mids SC pts are down, who will benefit from the 3,300 pts?
Judging from the preseason games, there was a large increase in uncontested marks, which are only worth only 2 pts. (contested marks are worth 6 pts.). Also, likely the game is expected to be more free flowing, which means less tackling (that's 4 pts per tackle not counted).
If there are too many SC pts not used up in a game, then Champion Data will inflate the SC pts, so maybe the Ruckmen and the inside Mids SC pts will be bolstered to something that they have been scoring
Just a though!
Judging from the preseason games, there was a large increase in uncontested marks, which are only worth only 2 pts. (contested marks are worth 6 pts.). Also, likely the game is expected to be more free flowing, which means less tackling (that's 4 pts per tackle not counted).
If there are too many SC pts not used up in a game, then Champion Data will inflate the SC pts, so maybe the Ruckmen and the inside Mids SC pts will be bolstered to something that they have been scoring
Just a though!
Remember it’s only the incremental difference from the ruck rookie to another rookie. It’s not like if you pick two rookie rucks the rest are picking a blank spot.
I think if the second ruck actually gets that $200k early by playing through to R6 that’s important but as I said the alternative rookie may have made $100k.
Basically hunter who is the most likely to do that needs to keep his spot. He might, he might not.
And if you still need $350k to get to Gawn the differential is as big as the $200k rookie up to a fallen mid premium say.
just offering the counter argument here ..
I think if the second ruck actually gets that $200k early by playing through to R6 that’s important but as I said the alternative rookie may have made $100k.
Basically hunter who is the most likely to do that needs to keep his spot. He might, he might not.
And if you still need $350k to get to Gawn the differential is as big as the $200k rookie up to a fallen mid premium say.
just offering the counter argument here ..
For mine...
Flynn - 82.5 - Similar to Pittonet with no ruck share, which was 84.6 last year. He's the same age as Pittonet was, 5 years in the system, has an elite midfield underneath him. If they play Briggs or Mummy he drops down to ~70 as ruck share is not good.
Meek - 65 - Assuming Darcy is the 2nd ruck/forward chosen, bump it to 75ish if it's Treacy and they hold Darcy out (I expect we see Darcy) but I've not seen much of him and what he flashed could be higher, trying to be conservative.
Hunter - 85-90 - Mature aged, experienced ruck with the clear #1 ruck role until he has no role who will throw his weight around. Think he'll be comparable to big Jono Giles back in the day. Of course he's possibly out when Marshall is back (I expect he beats McKernan and they keep Marshall forward to ease in) and almost certainly out when Ryder is back. Only way I can see Hunter playing would be injury to King where they go with both of Ryder and Marshall forward and keep Hunter in the ruck but even then I imagine they quite probably go McKernan and Ryder rucks. Both those guys could be back by round 3 which is why Hunter is not a guy I'm picking at this point in time.
The hopeful answer would be they all do a ROB
I've also ranked them in what I think their JS levels are.
Flynn - 82.5 - Similar to Pittonet with no ruck share, which was 84.6 last year. He's the same age as Pittonet was, 5 years in the system, has an elite midfield underneath him. If they play Briggs or Mummy he drops down to ~70 as ruck share is not good.
Meek - 65 - Assuming Darcy is the 2nd ruck/forward chosen, bump it to 75ish if it's Treacy and they hold Darcy out (I expect we see Darcy) but I've not seen much of him and what he flashed could be higher, trying to be conservative.
Hunter - 85-90 - Mature aged, experienced ruck with the clear #1 ruck role until he has no role who will throw his weight around. Think he'll be comparable to big Jono Giles back in the day. Of course he's possibly out when Marshall is back (I expect he beats McKernan and they keep Marshall forward to ease in) and almost certainly out when Ryder is back. Only way I can see Hunter playing would be injury to King where they go with both of Ryder and Marshall forward and keep Hunter in the ruck but even then I imagine they quite probably go McKernan and Ryder rucks. Both those guys could be back by round 3 which is why Hunter is not a guy I'm picking at this point in time.
The hopeful answer would be they all do a ROB
I've also ranked them in what I think their JS levels are.
The more i wriggle down that rabbit hole and drink lots of beer...
Meek and Treacy look pretty safe to me.
Darcy - drafted 2016, debut 2017, 28 games in 4 years, fitness issues.
Lobb out half of season with knee.
Currently in my best Freo 22 . Their job to lose.... can they play and score enough to warrant extended selection?
- Joined
- 31 Jul 2013
- Messages
- 491
- Likes
- 1,397
- AFL Club
- Richmond
The only real question is who to take at R3, Gawn and Grundy absolutely have to be locked in, the fixture ensures it.
Grundy, already underpriced, plays the Dogs Round 1, a team he averages 166.25 against over the last four, and Gawn plays the teams the rookie rucks play for over the first 3 rounds. Even if they're good players, they could be losing 100-150 points against Gawn during the single round he plays them.
There's no guarantees in SC scoring, but the safe bet is not going against Gawn and Grundy.
If the fixture was different, maybe it would work, but there's an absolute perfect storm brewing for Gawndy to be averaging 150+ in the first month and rookies all being hamstrung by coming up against Gawn in the first 3 rounds of the season.
Grundy, already underpriced, plays the Dogs Round 1, a team he averages 166.25 against over the last four, and Gawn plays the teams the rookie rucks play for over the first 3 rounds. Even if they're good players, they could be losing 100-150 points against Gawn during the single round he plays them.
There's no guarantees in SC scoring, but the safe bet is not going against Gawn and Grundy.
If the fixture was different, maybe it would work, but there's an absolute perfect storm brewing for Gawndy to be averaging 150+ in the first month and rookies all being hamstrung by coming up against Gawn in the first 3 rounds of the season.
Ruck structure is doing my head in!
I reckon I spend more time thinking about it than the other 3 lines combined.
Keep flipping flopping between loading up on the rookies and going back to GawnGrundy.
The other idea I have to remind myself is that there are many ways to skin a cat. It may not be so black and white that one path will be better than the other. We may find at the end of the year that the top teams were evenly split between the different strategies.
I reckon I spend more time thinking about it than the other 3 lines combined.
Keep flipping flopping between loading up on the rookies and going back to GawnGrundy.
The other idea I have to remind myself is that there are many ways to skin a cat. It may not be so black and white that one path will be better than the other. We may find at the end of the year that the top teams were evenly split between the different strategies.