Position 2022: Ruck Discussion

[Shaunpro1]

Mid priced rucks is the ticket to misery, I dont see trade boosts as the bail out either really, all it would be doing is getting you behind the pack when people can upgrade their teams faster than ever before.
(Yes I'm still scarred from the ruck merry go round I went through the last time I did it.)

 

[OnTopBar]

Mid priced rucks is the ticket to misery, I dont see trade boosts as the bail out either really, all it would be doing is getting you behind the pack when people can upgrade their teams faster than ever before.

I appreciate other views, set and forget has been the way to go. So how do you get ahead of the pack?

 

[Shaunpro1]

I appreciate other views, set and forget has been the way to go. So how do you get ahead of the pack?

I just think you can be unique in areas that arent going to ruin your season if you make a bad call, if you dont get mid priced rucks right you can pretty much kiss goodbye a top 1000 finish before you've even begun, I learnt that the hard way in 2020.

 

[OnTopBar]

I just think you can be unique in areas that arent going to ruin your season if you make a bad call, if you dont get mid priced rucks right you can pretty much kiss goodbye a top 1000 finish before you've even begun, I learnt that the hard way in 2020.

What if you get them right?

 

[wogitalia]

I appreciate other views, set and forget has been the way to go. So how do you get ahead of the pack?

The logic on set and forget would answer that question with "by not starting out behind it"

Seriously though, it's genuinely about removing the exposure to the position and sharing it with the majority of coaches instead of taking the opposite approach. If Grundy were to fail then the majority of coaches need to fix it. If Witts fails, it's just you (basically). Then you're an upgrade behind, depending how you handle it possibly 2-3 trades behind.

 

[OnTopBar]

The logic on set and forget would answer that question with "by not starting out behind it"

Seriously though, it's genuinely about removing the exposure to the position and sharing it with the majority of coaches instead of taking the opposite approach. If Grundy were to fail then the majority of coaches need to fix it. If Witts fails, it's just you (basically). Then you're an upgrade behind, depending how you handle it possibly 2-3 trades behind.

Like you said, this is a whole team scenario, a very dynamic circumstance. What if Grundy fails? He had a **** finish to last year. How was Gawn for you when you traded him in? Who can start Darcy with his injury history? NicNat same with low TOG. For me there's just too many ??

And you are still 'in the pack' going with Grundy et al.

What will actually separate your team from the rest?

It's obviously a given that trading strategy and luck throughout the year gives the most separation, but I'm just coming from a starting team perspective.

*Edit...I've given a very conservative scoring regime for the 3 I'm thinking of starting, what do you think would be the 'best case' scenario for those players and their cash gen projection?

 

[Shaunpro1]

What if you get them right?

Go through every mid priced starting ruck of the last 10 seasons, and tell me how many of them actually worked, thats fundamentally my issue with this strategy, it just burns you 9 times out of 10.

 

[OnTopBar]

Go through every mid priced starting ruck of the last 10 seasons, and tell me how many of them actually worked, thats fundamentally my issue with this strategy, it just burns you 9 times out of 10.

Didn't @Impromptu win it with Witts?

I'm not here to argue, just to offer my thoughts on different ways of doing things. I really don't think that history has as as much bearing on season 2022, given Covid and an extra 5 trades

 

[Shaunpro1]

Off topic but is anyone else having trouble with the site? Cannot get a thing to load and the response times are taking forever.

 

[OnTopBar]

Go through every mid priced starting ruck of the last 10 seasons, and tell me how many of them actually worked, thats fundamentally my issue with this strategy, it just burns you 9 times out of 10.

Max Gawn 2015 started at 339k in rnd 10 and averaged 102 for the rest of the year
Brodie Grundy 2015 started at 336k and averaged 91 for the year
Todd Goldstein 2011 started at 320k and averaged 113 for the year
Jarrod Witts 2017 started at 217k and averaged 93 for the year
Steph Martin 2014 started at 242k and averaged 112 for the year

You seem to forget that all of the rucks were MP's at some stage, but you are missing my point, I'm not banking on any of my 3 'breaking out' like the ones above, it'd be bloody great if they did of course, what I want is a bit of cash gen and then upgrade.

 

[GrainFedBeef]

Didn't @Impromptu win it with Witts?

I'm not here to argue, just to offer my thoughts on different ways of doing things. I really don't think that history has as as much bearing on season 2022, given Covid and an extra 5 trades

I started with Witts when he was $200k, wasn't as far back as that. maybe 2017.

I have often started with rucks that are lower price, Lycett (WCE) when he was $260k, took a while to get going but ended up over $400k. Gawn also, he was fwd only, ROB late in season at R3 etc.

Witts was very good.

There is a couple of variations to other times to bear in mind and I had Witts in my team over the last month.

1) Witts - at $380k he is discounted, my calculation is he may get to $500k. However coming back from an ACL typically has a 10% impact. Look at Nic Nat, they were very slow in ramping up his TOG. Not like Rayner, these are big men so you need to allow he may average 80-90 early.

2) Grundy/Gawn/Darcy - most will start these three. Now, if the rucks were full priced then the Witts strategy gains ground. Gawn maybe is with Jackson getting more CBA's. Grundy looks to be fitter and has upside and if he does this could hurt you. Darcy is young and still building.

3) Injury risk of Darcy a factor. However players who do one ACL I think have high chance of another, often though can be other leg. May not happen, maybe adds to why they get built up.

4) I get the uncertainty on rucks although if everyone has them, like @wogitalia said, you are not behind anyone. However, would you starts a $380k mid if you thought they were going to average 90. Libba was a highly debatable one and he was $300k, starts with a bang, some jumped on at $370k and by $450k he was maxing out and those who started him were trading him out. Debatable and was $300k, thats $80k cheaper. If you dont go Witts, then a like for like is Rowell who has higher upside.

If you dont mind me throwing a spanner in the works, there is a chance we have a $123k ruck (one of the Mayes), a $200k Preuss and a $123k Comben R/F in the forward line. This may be worth rolling the dice.

I ended up moving away from Witts as looking at his recent scores it was a bit less than expected, Grundy news flow is positive and basically the return on $380k invested didn't way up the risk/return.

I also considered the R2 rookie last year, however, it did look like the main rucks would be back by week 4-5 (they came earlier) and the risk/return was not there as your flexibility to adjust was not there. If Preuss looks good and a cheaper R3 has solid outlook, then maybe consider that option. Witts is not a disaster choice at all, it will be ok, just maybe suboptimal.

 

[OnTopBar]

Off topic but is anyone else having trouble with the site? Cannot get a thing to load and the response times are taking forever.

yep

 

[Shaunpro1]

Most of the guys that have worked were clear number one Rucks, durable and in their prime age bracket ready to take the comp by storm, Preuss isnt even guaranteed to be ahead of Flynn on a week to week basis and his durability is one of the worst going around, whats the back up plan if Preuss gets injured 5 minutes into Round 1, plays rubbish having missed so much footy and gets dropped or Cameron decides Flynn's aerobic capacity is a better option on their upcoming opponent? I just do not see a world where you aren't absolutely stuffed in any of those scenarios.

Witts I could potentially get around if he was 150k cheaper but even he is almost 30 coming back from an ACL, has to be genuine concerns hes eased in with a scoring cap due to less centre bounces attended/ managed through the year, especially with Chol coming through the door.

Reeves has the battle with Lynch and the fact that the Hawks Captain is also primarily a Ruckman, can't trust that one either.

I'm all for different strategies I just struggle to see the selection that works this year.

 

[randomcliche]

It's not hard for me to turn Reeves and Preuss into Omac and I have a few MP's that could be downgraded to get me out of trouble with Witts,

Be careful, OMac could get out of hand quickly.

My 2c on ruck lines, I’m a massive fan of the new loan wolf. But that loan wolf has to be fit, strong and actually be a loan wolf. The scoring certainty you can get from a $400k ruck or RF is amazing. But having selected Kreuzer, Ryder et al many times on this basis and had it come unstuck you do have apply some critical judgement whether it’s worth it.

I’m not convinced this season there are reliable ways to do it. So it’s Darcy and plus someone >$500k tBC for me.

If you do go down the route, check out the blues basement D/R dpp that can allow a R/F to swing in via Coleman. I think it’s a reasonable bail out option strategy should you start Jackson, but don’t like him as teir 1 pick. I’d almost be tempted to gamble in a better R/F after R6, but leaving the rest of the dpp loop in place.

Good luck.

 

[Shaunpro1]

Is OMac even a safe selection?, only takes a Darcy Fort strong pre season and the option of playing him forward to cover Hipwood will be seriously looked at by the coaching panel IMHO.

 

[TopBillings]

The more I tinker the more I stick with Darcy/Grundy

Just feel like I’ll get stuck with OMac/Witts types & it will be a pain to upgrade

 

[Backbone]

Gawn being severely slept on imo

 

[Darkie]

Thanks for responding Wogi, I rate your knowledge in this game and it's important for relative newcomers like myself to listen and learn, and believe me I am.

I started an all rookie ruckline last year which turned into the train wreck that you outlined can happen. I still think there's merit in starting a cheaper ruckline and maybe this year is the one to try it given the doubt over the potential scoring of all of the top line rucks combined with the ability to now use a boost trade, not to mention the risk of Covid, which could affect those teams starting with the set and forget rucks (mine too). I learnt a few lessons last year and I'm going to use that knowledge to try and circumvent the obvious risk attached to this strategy.

I'm only willing to start the 3 amigos if they're all fit and are 1st rucks, Preuss and Witts are durability risks and maybe Reeves if he gets back into the boxing ring.

I like how you put a range on the scoring of the players that you're looking at, so I'll try and do that too.

Witts: Priced at 70 and should score around 85-95, a 90 average should see him increase by 100k
Reeves: Priced at 66, should score at around the same, but I'll be conservative and say 80-90, an 85 average will see an increase of 100k
Preuss: Priced at 38, again if 1st ruck should score the same as the others but I'll be more conservative and say 70-80, an average of 60 will see him increase by 100k.

I would think that they'll need around 6-7 rounds to let them fatten up, maybe earlier if there's a couple of spike games thrown in (I stand to be corrected on my math as I'm not sure of the time required at those higher averages to attain the cash gen that I'm forecasting) I know that the rule of thumb is to make 150k for those players in your side as cash generators/rookies, I'm not sure whether that applies to stepping stones which all of my rucks are. Once Preuss and Reeves have made 100k@ then it's a simple 2 trade upgrade to a top scoring ruck which I'm sure will have identified themselves after 6 or so rounds. I might hold Witts till the rnd 13 bye but that's totally reliant on his scoring which would need to be over 105 at least, if not then I'll add a fattened rookie and turn him into another premo.

Now to look at contingencies should things go awry. It's not hard for me to turn Reeves and Preuss into Omac and I have a few MP's that could be downgraded to get me out of trouble with Witts, I think the withheld value in the rucks price diminishes the risk involved in moving them to premos, especially with the availability of boost trades, of course if I have to use them and others don't then that puts me behind the 8 ball. It's a much easier situation to bail out of than an all rookie ruckline.

My main worry is that one is coming off an LTI and are injury prone (particularly Preuss) so as I said, I'm only taking them if they're fit

As 1st rucks I would doubt that they would get dropped, if they did then it would be down to poor form and I would move them on anyway. Suspension is a risk with all players, but having a 1st ruck at R3 gives a bit of insurance on that front.

It's a risk that one or more of the top rucks, or 2nd tier rucks go on a scoring spree but which one or two do you pick and start with to take advantage of it? Do you trade one of your premo ruck starting picks to get on that train? I'm willing to sit back for a while and assess after a few rounds and then maybe hitch a ride. Because I've strengthened all of my other lines I think that the risk is considerably diminished, added to that is the ability to start a few more MP's which in themselves are stepping stones and require less trades to upgrade than would a rookie as well as providing increased scoring potential.

I'm not a risk averse individual and actually enjoy taking an alternative path, even after starting with an all rookie ruckline last year I still managed a ranking of 11k but that was also due to a myopic view on MP's where I refused to take even one and went full G n R's for the year.

I'm sure that there are flaws to my logic and by all means let me know your thoughts.

Some interesting thoughts here!

Regarding your pricing calcs, I think your magnitudes are about right, but the timing is a bit off.

The last $25k of cash gen is very slow to make, in the absence of a spike game.

I usually ignore the last $25k for mental maths purposes, because it can come so slowly that it’s not worth waiting for. So your estimated $100k over 6-7 weeks is probably more like $75k over 6-7 weeks, or $100k if you’re willing to wait more like 12.

Alternately, the players may need to score 5ppg higher than the above/be priced 5ppg below the above, to make cash at around the pace you have mentioned. Or have a spike game at the right time, which isn’t o***et by a similar/sized downward spike!

 

[Bermi]

What if you get them right?

Just saying, the more 'IFs' you need to get your plan to work, the less chance it has of succeeding.

 

[Ironhawk]

Just saying, the more 'IFs' you need to get your plan to work, the less chance it has of succeeding.

Pretty much. Honestly, if you look at last year a starting ruck line of say Gawn/Hickey/Flynn would have been a better option than set and forget. It's just getting the rest right, and someone who can nail a better ruck line than set and forget will probably also pick an 'IF'fy selection or two that doesn't work elsewhere.