Position 2021: Ruck Discussion
- Thread starter THCLT
- Start date
Was from my hawks group which is the biggest on FB. Have members who are close to the club. Guess will have to wait and see as the hawks haven’t updated their injury list online as yet. Will also see how they line up pre season. With Patton gone, Gunston also to miss prob a month, Ceglar, if fit, may play forward or not at all.
First I have heard of him being out too. Their latest training session was Wednesday and the feedback was pretty much what @Goodie's Guns said. From the BF post that was brought up in another topic:
Ceglar was rucking for the blue team against Reeves and Brooksby. He easily won most of the contests but reeves definitely made life hard for him. However it was his work around the ground that stood out today. Ceglar is looking ready for a really good year.
Unless he has got injured away from training, sounds like dodgy info to me that he is missing six weeks.
Ceglar was rucking for the blue team against Reeves and Brooksby. He easily won most of the contests but reeves definitely made life hard for him. However it was his work around the ground that stood out today. Ceglar is looking ready for a really good year.
Unless he has got injured away from training, sounds like dodgy info to me that he is missing six weeks.
Well the price difference is about 100k between Marshall and McEvoy.
I expect McEvoy if full time ruck to push 100 average. Marshall could even push 110 again but prob depends on Ryder. Although at 32 surely plays less ruck this year. Can’t see myself not starting Marshall. McEvoy .. well seriously considering it.
I expect McEvoy if full time ruck to push 100 average. Marshall could even push 110 again but prob depends on Ryder. Although at 32 surely plays less ruck this year. Can’t see myself not starting Marshall. McEvoy .. well seriously considering it.
https://www.sen.com.au/news/2021/02/08/report-ex-crow-vying-for-vacant-saints-list-spot/
Former Adelaide ruckman Paul Hunter will reportedly train with St Kilda ahead of the AAMI Community Series.
AFL Media reporter Mitch Cleary understands that the Saints will allow Hunter to train with the club for two weeks after impressing for SANFL club South Adelaide last season.
The 27-year-old was delisted by the Crows at the end of 2019 and was preparing to play for the Panthers again before receiving St Kilda’s invitation.
Former Adelaide ruckman Paul Hunter will reportedly train with St Kilda ahead of the AAMI Community Series.
AFL Media reporter Mitch Cleary understands that the Saints will allow Hunter to train with the club for two weeks after impressing for SANFL club South Adelaide last season.
The 27-year-old was delisted by the Crows at the end of 2019 and was preparing to play for the Panthers again before receiving St Kilda’s invitation.
I understand everyone has been discussing Grundy, but is Goldstein just no good anymore?
601k, been more than durable his entire career
Only had 1 score <100 in the first 12 rounds of the 2020 season, with a high of 696k in R5 (+90k in 5 rounds)
Had a pretty average last 3rd of the season, but the 47% (Grundy) v 3% ownership is a bit over skewed in my opinion
Thoughts?
601k, been more than durable his entire career
Only had 1 score <100 in the first 12 rounds of the 2020 season, with a high of 696k in R5 (+90k in 5 rounds)
Had a pretty average last 3rd of the season, but the 47% (Grundy) v 3% ownership is a bit over skewed in my opinion
Thoughts?
1 is a 33 year old priced as high as he's been since his one and only season that hits the premium standard for the last 3 years (2015).
The other is 27 year old who is 10 points cheaper than he has started the last two seasons who is part of that aforementioned premium standard.
I like Goldy but it just seems like the kind of move that offers so little upside, let's look at the scenarios...
Goldy goes boom and gets to 120. Grundy fails and drops to 110. A big win.
Goldy goes boom and Grundy stagnates. You saved 50k. A win sure but not much.
Goldy goes boom, Grundy goes boom. You're still 10 points a game behind the standard so you lose 220 points for that 50k, better make it up!
Goldy stagnates, Grundy falls to 110. You saved 50k.
Goldy stagnages and Grundy stagnates/booms is a loss, it's just the size.
Goldy falls back and you lose no matter what, again, just the size. The uniqueness of the pick magnifies the loss as well.
10th scenario is Grundy fails miserably or is injured. Injury would depend when/how but may well put you a trade ahead, a gain but not significant, failing is the huge win for Goldy.
Basically you have a 30% chance of coming out ahead and a 70% chance of being even or worse. For 50k I don't really like those odds.
The other is 27 year old who is 10 points cheaper than he has started the last two seasons who is part of that aforementioned premium standard.
I like Goldy but it just seems like the kind of move that offers so little upside, let's look at the scenarios...
Goldy goes boom and gets to 120. Grundy fails and drops to 110. A big win.
Goldy goes boom and Grundy stagnates. You saved 50k. A win sure but not much.
Goldy goes boom, Grundy goes boom. You're still 10 points a game behind the standard so you lose 220 points for that 50k, better make it up!
Goldy stagnates, Grundy falls to 110. You saved 50k.
Goldy stagnages and Grundy stagnates/booms is a loss, it's just the size.
Goldy falls back and you lose no matter what, again, just the size. The uniqueness of the pick magnifies the loss as well.
10th scenario is Grundy fails miserably or is injured. Injury would depend when/how but may well put you a trade ahead, a gain but not significant, failing is the huge win for Goldy.
Basically you have a 30% chance of coming out ahead and a 70% chance of being even or worse. For 50k I don't really like those odds.
One thing that I think is going unnoticed with Preuss and his numbers is the pure eye-test.
I remember watching his first game of the gear last season where, rucking against Grundy - he was such an incredible physical presence... often bullying Brodie out of the contest when everyone expected Grundy to dominate.
It was enough to justify, for me, why he’d been talked up for so long. New team, first ruck - he’s a pretty easy selection if you’re looking for value.
I remember watching his first game of the gear last season where, rucking against Grundy - he was such an incredible physical presence... often bullying Brodie out of the contest when everyone expected Grundy to dominate.
It was enough to justify, for me, why he’d been talked up for so long. New team, first ruck - he’s a pretty easy selection if you’re looking for value.
- Joined
- 3 Jul 2017
- Messages
- 38,960
- Likes
- 126,628
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
Don't see it. You're paying 180k extra to get a rookie averaging the equivalent of 71 if he went at 105. Needs to average 95 to match a Max King type rookie last year, I don't think anyone is really clamouring after Max King types.
FWIW, I think he's better than King because I think he can score big and I do think he's a pretty good bet to push 95+ because I agree with your eye test, he's physical, big and moves well but there's absolutely a case for him busting as well.
I'd actually say he's a moderate risk, moderate reward 300k rookie, none of that screams value and while I like his JS, role and all that, I'm still not convinced that's worth the 180k premium.
And I still am very tempted to have him at R3 to start! If I end up with 180k that I can't really find a better use for I'll do it at this point.
FWIW, I think he's better than King because I think he can score big and I do think he's a pretty good bet to push 95+ because I agree with your eye test, he's physical, big and moves well but there's absolutely a case for him busting as well.
I'd actually say he's a moderate risk, moderate reward 300k rookie, none of that screams value and while I like his JS, role and all that, I'm still not convinced that's worth the 180k premium.
And I still am very tempted to have him at R3 to start! If I end up with 180k that I can't really find a better use for I'll do it at this point.
I agree with this and this is the point that makes me want preuss as someone who watches a lot of games rather than going off pure numbers. He's not just an average ruck who has landed in a number 1 ruck role, when he first started getting games at North people started questioning if it was viable for North to trade Goldy because Preuss was that impressive. Then got traded to Melbourne and sat in the seconds which I think is why people have forgotten that he's a genuinely good prospect. I think he's at the right age and collected enough experience from two of the best rucks in the last decade to have a big impact at GWS. There is no chance that GWS go back to Mummy, in my view they've recruited Preuss so that they never have to die on that hill again. The game counts in previous seasons don't count for a whole lot because he was stuck behind Goldy and Gawn. He got one game as a lone Ruck in 2019 when Gawn was injured where he put up 140 so he's definitely capable of grabbing an opportunity with both hands. I sit on a different side of the fence to the people who've been burnt by mid price rucks, I always pick the premium rucks and regret not picking the mid pricer. I avoided Witts, Lycett and Naismith and copped Gawn's injury when Witts broke out, picked Stef Martin over Lycett when Lycett would've been a perfect stepping stone to Grundy when he broke out and it cost me about 20 points a week and last year I think I broke even by picking Gawn over Naismith because Naismith owner's got an easy trade to Pittonet and Gawn only worked out because he had his best ever season or I possibly would've regretted it again. Funnily enough after saying all this I still haven't learned my lesson and have got Gawn and Grundy because I don't have a pair lol.
- Joined
- 4 Jul 2012
- Messages
- 839
- Likes
- 2,748
- AFL Club
- North Melb.
Alot of people seem to only be looking at one side of the equation with Preuss over Gawn. I think there is just as much chance that Pruess makes 100k as there is of Gawn dropping 100k. If Gawn drops 100k you have effectively gained a trade as it is equivalent of a rookie downgrade.
People will come at me with the argument you would have had to wait until round 15 to get him at a cheaper price. Yes you would have but he also started at 695k not 755k and we all know last year that those with higher averages got a bigger piece of the pie that won't happen again this year. Started at 690k in 2019 and dropped 50k in 6 weeks. Will be interesting to see what happens this year.
People will come at me with the argument you would have had to wait until round 15 to get him at a cheaper price. Yes you would have but he also started at 695k not 755k and we all know last year that those with higher averages got a bigger piece of the pie that won't happen again this year. Started at 690k in 2019 and dropped 50k in 6 weeks. Will be interesting to see what happens this year.
The question is what are your expectations.
Firstly... What can Preuss do? Quantify it.
Secondly... What will the ruck premium level be? Quantify it.
If you come up with 105 for Preuss but 125 for the ruck, all you've got is a good cash cow in Preuss and a gap to close later (not a problem). Preuss still makes sense as a pick but know what he is. He's still just a rookie averaging 71 on your field. That's all the value he presents in this scenario assuming you break even on that 180k (aka it doesn't generate additional value).
I actually think this is a really bad thing to consider with Preuss. You're trying to tie two independent variables and relate them to make a bad choice (by your numbers) look like a good choice. The only relationship between them is that there are only 3 ruck spots and so if you like two others more than either of them you have to pick only one of them. If you've found two rucks better than them, then please do share
If Preuss makes 100k he's a bad pick, regardless of what Gawn does independently of him. This isn't a binary option between two players. If Preuss makes 300k he's a great pick, again, regardless of what Gawn does.
If Preuss averages 105 and Gawn maintains his average, Preuss is still a very good starting pick instead of Gawn. If Preuss averages 60 and Gawn averages 95, Preuss is still a very bad pick.
You need to set your parameters on what a ruck keeper is likely going to be and you need to set your expectations on Preuss. Assuming you're like most and set that at ~120+ for a keeper and 105 as a high end outcome for Preuss, then Preuss is being picked over other rookies and that is the group you should compare him with.
I think too many people are making it a Gawn vs Preuss comparison, you can quite easily pick neither of them in your starting team and there's an absolutely sound case that this is the best option. You can pick both of them in your team and there is a great case this is the right choice. You can pick both of them with Grundy and have it be the right choice.
But don't pick Preuss if you don't think he's far more likely than not to go 95+ regardless of how you feel about Gawn, Grundy or anyone else. Unless you honestly don't think you can fill your team with 123k rookies who average 60, then Preuss at anything under 95 as an average is a losing pick to all them and they are his peers unless you legitimately think he's got keeper numbers in him!
Your logic is akin to saying that some rookie who doesn't play is a good pick because you didn't start some premium who fell 100k.
Firstly... What can Preuss do? Quantify it.
Secondly... What will the ruck premium level be? Quantify it.
If you come up with 105 for Preuss but 125 for the ruck, all you've got is a good cash cow in Preuss and a gap to close later (not a problem). Preuss still makes sense as a pick but know what he is. He's still just a rookie averaging 71 on your field. That's all the value he presents in this scenario assuming you break even on that 180k (aka it doesn't generate additional value).
I actually think this is a really bad thing to consider with Preuss. You're trying to tie two independent variables and relate them to make a bad choice (by your numbers) look like a good choice. The only relationship between them is that there are only 3 ruck spots and so if you like two others more than either of them you have to pick only one of them. If you've found two rucks better than them, then please do share
If Preuss makes 100k he's a bad pick, regardless of what Gawn does independently of him. This isn't a binary option between two players. If Preuss makes 300k he's a great pick, again, regardless of what Gawn does.
If Preuss averages 105 and Gawn maintains his average, Preuss is still a very good starting pick instead of Gawn. If Preuss averages 60 and Gawn averages 95, Preuss is still a very bad pick.
You need to set your parameters on what a ruck keeper is likely going to be and you need to set your expectations on Preuss. Assuming you're like most and set that at ~120+ for a keeper and 105 as a high end outcome for Preuss, then Preuss is being picked over other rookies and that is the group you should compare him with.
I think too many people are making it a Gawn vs Preuss comparison, you can quite easily pick neither of them in your starting team and there's an absolutely sound case that this is the best option. You can pick both of them in your team and there is a great case this is the right choice. You can pick both of them with Grundy and have it be the right choice.
But don't pick Preuss if you don't think he's far more likely than not to go 95+ regardless of how you feel about Gawn, Grundy or anyone else. Unless you honestly don't think you can fill your team with 123k rookies who average 60, then Preuss at anything under 95 as an average is a losing pick to all them and they are his peers unless you legitimately think he's got keeper numbers in him!
Your logic is akin to saying that some rookie who doesn't play is a good pick because you didn't start some premium who fell 100k.