Position Ruck Discussion
- Thread starter IDIG
- Start date
A half from Gawn was probably overkill as I only needed to see the 1st quarter. He looked his dominating self and despite all the taping around his legs, it didn't hindered his movements whatsoever. This was the reassurance I needed to keep my GG rucks and I'll just have to build my team around them, with or without the cheaper Rookies.
I need to see how Naismith goes and all the other rookies first rather than fixate on one $700k premium and force myself to budget 29 players on a $9.3m cap just because.
If the right rookies show up then fine, maybe.
I don’t think 1/2 a pre season match tells us anything we didn’t already know. They said he was in full training so yes he’s going to look good in a pre season game isn’t he? No one is going flat out in Marsh 2. If he was hobbling he wouldn’t even be out there.
If the right rookies show up then fine, maybe.
I don’t think 1/2 a pre season match tells us anything we didn’t already know. They said he was in full training so yes he’s going to look good in a pre season game isn’t he? No one is going flat out in Marsh 2. If he was hobbling he wouldn’t even be out there.
I don't have a fixation on the Rucks as GG was always going to be the cornerstone of my team for this year. I just wanted to see preseason minutes from Gawn to validate and confirm that his injury was what it was and nothing more, not concerned at his fitness base as he's pretty much had a full preseason.
Also, I just don't buy into the 'running GG will compromise other positions in your team' as we have a plethora of value in both DEF and FWD options available to us. The 'real' fixation part, for me anyways, are those coaches who're set on having a particular structure and/or only looking at viable cheaper Rookies.
The one part of my team that I don't want to compromise is my starting Rucks and the core of my MIDs, I'm willing to punt in other positions.
Running a Naismith at R2 will help to alleviate the on-field Rookies concern, and I'll admit to exploring that option over the past week. However, it's not for me and I'm much more comfortable with a GG setup, rightly or wrongly.
This Ruck decision, along with other positions in your team, makes for an interesting start to the season in my opinion...and that's definitely a good thing to my eyes.
Also, I just don't buy into the 'running GG will compromise other positions in your team' as we have a plethora of value in both DEF and FWD options available to us. The 'real' fixation part, for me anyways, are those coaches who're set on having a particular structure and/or only looking at viable cheaper Rookies.
The one part of my team that I don't want to compromise is my starting Rucks and the core of my MIDs, I'm willing to punt in other positions.
Running a Naismith at R2 will help to alleviate the on-field Rookies concern, and I'll admit to exploring that option over the past week. However, it's not for me and I'm much more comfortable with a GG setup, rightly or wrongly.
This Ruck decision, along with other positions in your team, makes for an interesting start to the season in my opinion...and that's definitely a good thing to my eyes.
It feels Gawn now has an overwhelming level of support off only one half of preseason football after missing about 4-5 weeks of full training. I’m going to play devil’s advocate (as what good are we without a devil’s advocate keeping us in check) but I still fear of the backlash 
I wonder if say Macrae did the same knee injury as Gawn in late January and scored 60 odd off one half of preseason football, would he get the same level of support? (yes, I understand that there are less options in the ruck but leaving that point aside). I would say most coaches would avoid Macrae in such scenario.
Also it was interesting to see Jackson also score quite well (more than Gawn in fact) and compete admirably in the second half in Gawn’s absence... would Jackson being named in R1 change anything for Gawn? (ie the old second ruck concern combined with Gawn’s heavily interrupted preseason)? I also noticed Weiderman (the other potential backup ruck) came off with some sort of ankle injury.
Gawn (and Grundy)’s main strengths are running their opposition rucks into the ground in the second halves of games, unfortunately, we haven’t had enough preseason games to see how Gawn fares in the second half of a game post knee injury. Would’ve been nice to see Gawn’s full game TOG in the preseason game and also who the Dees proper backup ruck would’ve been in that scenario but I guess we will only find out in Round 1.
Just wondering whether Gawn has the same ceiling early on to really “burn”? Those 150s are what usually keep his price up.
FWIW I still may pick Gawn but it depends now on structure and quality of rookies. I’m looking at XYs such as Whitfield/Naismith v Gawn/McAsey or Neale/Naismith v Bonar (in the mids)/Gawn
I wonder if say Macrae did the same knee injury as Gawn in late January and scored 60 odd off one half of preseason football, would he get the same level of support? (yes, I understand that there are less options in the ruck but leaving that point aside). I would say most coaches would avoid Macrae in such scenario.
Also it was interesting to see Jackson also score quite well (more than Gawn in fact) and compete admirably in the second half in Gawn’s absence... would Jackson being named in R1 change anything for Gawn? (ie the old second ruck concern combined with Gawn’s heavily interrupted preseason)? I also noticed Weiderman (the other potential backup ruck) came off with some sort of ankle injury.
Gawn (and Grundy)’s main strengths are running their opposition rucks into the ground in the second halves of games, unfortunately, we haven’t had enough preseason games to see how Gawn fares in the second half of a game post knee injury. Would’ve been nice to see Gawn’s full game TOG in the preseason game and also who the Dees proper backup ruck would’ve been in that scenario but I guess we will only find out in Round 1.
Just wondering whether Gawn has the same ceiling early on to really “burn”? Those 150s are what usually keep his price up.
FWIW I still may pick Gawn but it depends now on structure and quality of rookies. I’m looking at XYs such as Whitfield/Naismith v Gawn/McAsey or Neale/Naismith v Bonar (in the mids)/Gawn
- Joined
- 24 Feb 2015
- Messages
- 6,697
- Likes
- 30,160
- AFL Club
- Sydney
Most will know I'm bullish on the Gawn Grundy set and forget, but firstly let me say I still respect everyone's individuality in the game and why it's so enjoyable seeing others view.
But for me it really is lack of options. In a perfect world I'd be more inclined to go to Naismith but if things go pear shaped, well, let's just say I can't go through that again.
I'm not sure whether others know or care, but Gawn actually completed 15 minutes of solid continuous running at half time to keep his minutes up. I watched him and all I wanted to see was his ability to move freely around the ground and secondly that there was no favouring of the knee. That's enough for me.
Additionally I'll say trying to find the right balance around the other lines when starting both Gawn and Grundy is difficult.
But for me it really is lack of options. In a perfect world I'd be more inclined to go to Naismith but if things go pear shaped, well, let's just say I can't go through that again.
I'm not sure whether others know or care, but Gawn actually completed 15 minutes of solid continuous running at half time to keep his minutes up. I watched him and all I wanted to see was his ability to move freely around the ground and secondly that there was no favouring of the knee. That's enough for me.
Additionally I'll say trying to find the right balance around the other lines when starting both Gawn and Grundy is difficult.
Any Gold Coast supporters on here?
Trying to work out if GC will run with both Witts and Smith and if Witts will even be right to go for round 1?
Trying to work out if GC will run with both Witts and Smith and if Witts will even be right to go for round 1?
- Joined
- 7 Jul 2012
- Messages
- 11,740
- Likes
- 34,742
- AFL Club
- West Coast
Going to be real interesting to see how this pans out. Traditionally going against the Gawn/Grundy combo is a bad move, it only costs you points and trades to try catch up with the pack. Is going a Naismith type and using the extra cash elsewhere going to net you extra points & use less trades than just starting the Gawn/Grundy combo? Or will it be the winning move? I guess we will see.
I’m not saying it will compromise your team because I can’t say that until we are clearer on the rookies. I think how Steven looks may influence structures. And what Naismith scores next game of course.
I’m 60/40 on Naismith right this second.
For mine the cash cows are priority one. I’m not going to force dud rookie scores on field just to fit Gawn in because I think then you negate the Gawn benefit. But if we have options in the rooks then fine.
I’m 60/40 on Naismith right this second.
For mine the cash cows are priority one. I’m not going to force dud rookie scores on field just to fit Gawn in because I think then you negate the Gawn benefit. But if we have options in the rooks then fine.
Last edited:
Yes, definitely agree. I think you've done well historically taking a more set and forget approach to the rucks. I think others have also done well with an alt R2 ruck approach as well (i.e. Witts, Lycett at WCE or even Lycett at Port (@All is Wells ?)). We never really saw how Witts R2 v Gawn R2 played out in 2017 as Gawn had an LTI in Round 3 that year. I didn't take Witts that year and it's been one of my worser seasons of late (caught up later in the year when everyone upgraded Witts).
If it's the "lack of options" that's driving the Gawn selection, is a half a preseason game of 60 odd enough to conclude that he's fine and will score 120-125 early on in the year? Using my Macrae example, if Macrae was in the exact same situation, would we all be starting him and expecting a 120 avg early season?
If the answer is, "look I expect Gawn to average 110-115 given his interrupted preseason but given the lack of good ruck options, I will still take him as he'll be the second best ruck once fit" then I can completely understand that line of thinking and have no other comments.
But the impression I got from the earlier comments was that, "Gawn scored 68 in one half of a preseason game, therefore, he'll score 125 early and burn the daylight out of those silly coaches taking Naismith R2". If it was Macrae in the same situation, I'm not so sure people would be expecting 120 early season from Macrae after a heavily interrupted preseason.
General rule of thumb is that players with interrupted preseasons start slow (and sometimes their performance for the whole season is compromised). Again, only trying to present the devil's advocate position. I'm still open to the Gawn selection but am expecting a 110-115 avg early.
If it's the "lack of options" that's driving the Gawn selection, is a half a preseason game of 60 odd enough to conclude that he's fine and will score 120-125 early on in the year? Using my Macrae example, if Macrae was in the exact same situation, would we all be starting him and expecting a 120 avg early season?
If the answer is, "look I expect Gawn to average 110-115 given his interrupted preseason but given the lack of good ruck options, I will still take him as he'll be the second best ruck once fit" then I can completely understand that line of thinking and have no other comments.
But the impression I got from the earlier comments was that, "Gawn scored 68 in one half of a preseason game, therefore, he'll score 125 early and burn the daylight out of those silly coaches taking Naismith R2". If it was Macrae in the same situation, I'm not so sure people would be expecting 120 early season from Macrae after a heavily interrupted preseason.
General rule of thumb is that players with interrupted preseasons start slow (and sometimes their performance for the whole season is compromised). Again, only trying to present the devil's advocate position. I'm still open to the Gawn selection but am expecting a 110-115 avg early.