FanFooty Forum

I don't see what the huge is fuss is about ruck cover tbh. I feel like I am seeing a lot of teams willing to lose points just so they can have Leuy at F4.

Would love your thoughts on it.

Just depends on if your willing to burn a trade or not. If you start someone like Nic nat he is guaranteed to miss a game or 2 somewhere. Rucks have proven to be prone to injury more so than other players. someone like goldy is okay. He seems to get out a season mostly. If you started Martin and Goldy together, id see no reason to have Luey in r4. But if you had a combo like Nicnat, Sandi. id be wanting tio have that r4...

Im still undecided how ill set up my rucks but

Quote from: The_Captain on December 18, 2015, 02:21:26 PM
Just depends on if your willing to burn a trade or not. If you start someone like Nic nat he is guaranteed to miss a game or 2 somewhere. Rucks have proven to be prone to injury more so than other players. someone like goldy is okay. He seems to get out a season mostly. If you started Martin and Goldy together, id see no reason to have Luey in r4. But if you had a combo like Nicnat, Sandi. id be wanting tio have that r4...

Im still undecided how ill set up my rucks but

I'm currently going Nic Nat who was fit all year from memory but missed games because he was mourning his mothers death and Leuy at R2 who will be traded to Goldy ASAP.

Leuey will score well and rise in value regardless of the position you play him in. Having him in the forward line just gives you the extra option of covering an injured ruck if needed. You will also need decent cover on your forward line bench to cover Leuey if he's needed to cover an injured ruckman. If you start Leuey in your forward line you either need to find another value ruckman for your rucks or you go a 2 premo ruck, depends what structure you want to go with.

You dont need to cover Goldy.

So its only one spot you need to worry about

Quote from: Money Shot on December 18, 2015, 02:17:12 PM
I don't see what the huge is fuss is about ruck cover tbh. I feel like I am seeing a lot of teams willing to lose points just so they can have Leuy at F4.

Would love your thoughts on it.

How is it losing points?

A 300k player who can average 90-100 and provide ruck cover to save a trade/s

Remember, when you are perceived to lose points somewhere, you're generally making them up in another line.

Tippo and Mummy set and forget.

Quote from: RaisyDaisy on December 18, 2015, 02:32:55 PM

Quote from: Money Shot on December 18, 2015, 02:17:12 PM
I don't see what the huge is fuss is about ruck cover tbh. I feel like I am seeing a lot of teams willing to lose points just so they can have Leuy at F4.

Would love your thoughts on it.

How is it losing points?

A 300k player who can average 90-100 and provide ruck cover to save a trade/s

Remember, when you are perceived to lose points somewhere, you're generally making them up in another line.

Leuy and another mid pricer
Lids and a rookie

I feel like Lids and the rookie would score more! I guess that's just my opinion.

Quote from: Money Shot on December 18, 2015, 02:40:58 PM

Quote from: RaisyDaisy on December 18, 2015, 02:32:55 PM

Quote from: Money Shot on December 18, 2015, 02:17:12 PM
I don't see what the huge is fuss is about ruck cover tbh. I feel like I am seeing a lot of teams willing to lose points just so they can have Leuy at F4.

Would love your thoughts on it.

How is it losing points?

A 300k player who can average 90-100 and provide ruck cover to save a trade/s

Remember, when you are perceived to lose points somewhere, you're generally making them up in another line.

Leuy and another mid pricer
Lids and a rookie

I feel like Lids and the rookie would score more! I guess that's just my opinion.

You're just focussing on the forward line. We are all generally able to start with about 14ish prems each year, so it doesn't matter what line they are on.

Luey and Crouch or Lids? See :)

Quote from: RaisyDaisy on December 18, 2015, 02:53:26 PM

Quote from: Money Shot on December 18, 2015, 02:40:58 PM

Quote from: RaisyDaisy on December 18, 2015, 02:32:55 PM

Quote from: Money Shot on December 18, 2015, 02:17:12 PM
I don't see what the huge is fuss is about ruck cover tbh. I feel like I am seeing a lot of teams willing to lose points just so they can have Leuy at F4.

Would love your thoughts on it.

How is it losing points?

A 300k player who can average 90-100 and provide ruck cover to save a trade/s

Remember, when you are perceived to lose points somewhere, you're generally making them up in another line.

Leuy and another mid pricer
Lids and a rookie

I feel like Lids and the rookie would score more! I guess that's just my opinion.

You're just focussing on the forward line. We are all generally able to start with about 14ish prems each year, so it doesn't matter what line they are on.

Luey and Crouch or Lids? See :)

That's true!

It's not so much about picking ruck cover at all costs as it is identifying that there are a couple of really good value DPP rucks at the moment who could be considered for a spot in the forward line based on their output alone. If you consider that rucks are generally the hardest line to replace/upgrade, you should also consider how the F4 ruck will strengthen your ruck line.

I feel like Leuey would give away 5-10 ppg max to any player that's under 500k in the forward line at the moment, which is really all you can consider for F4. If he can do that for 300k, he's in. If he can do that for 300k, and save me 100 points at some stage when one of my rucks goes down for a week, he's a lock.

I didn't start ruck cover last year and it's by far my biggest regret. Had I have had Bellchambers at F4 and not at R2, I would have finished much higher than what I did.

Really depends on your starting rucks. If you're picking Luey as a ruckmen or someone else injury prone then ruck cover is probably good insurance for the games your R1 or R2 may miss. Last year I steered clear of Belly and went with no ruck cover and all went well till Goldy missed a game in our Grandfinal. My ruck combo this year will be 2 out of Goldy Martin or NicNat. I'll play Luey in the fwd line not because I want ruck cover but it's a bonus that he can cover for me, the main reason for having him in the fwd line is he's dpp and he's cheap as chips for what he can produce rucking alone, he'll either be a stepping stone to a gun mid or a gun fwd/mid or stay pretty much the whole year as F7/R3 cover swapping with a rookie on my ruck bench that has dpp.
He'll make good coin if he stays fit long enough so for me it's a gamble worth taking. You're seeing him in alot of teams because he is a cheap fwd option who can score not because people want him as ruck cover necessarily but it's bonus that he can cover should you lose a ruckmen for a week or two through injury. So theres 2 reasons you can pick him.

1) Cheap fwd option that can score well and be used as stepping stone to a prem wherever you may need one.
2) Cheap enough to eventually sit on your bench when your fwd line is full and provide good cover for your fwd's and rucks.

I personally wouldn't pick him as a R1 or R2 without cover because he is injury prone and if he happened to go down early your going to need to do a fair bit of trading to get him to a Gun Ruckmen that will be a top 3-4 ruckmen or trade in a ruckmen you don't really want because he's cheap enough to do it in one trade and you'll probably burn another trade later getting a Gun Ruck in to compete for finals, rank etc.
If you sit him in your fwd line you can bench him till he's right or trade him to a rookie for the cash and upgrade another, alot less risky in my eyes.

Quote from: Money Shot on December 18, 2015, 02:17:12 PM
I don't see what the huge is fuss is about ruck cover tbh. I feel like I am seeing a lot of teams willing to lose points just so they can have Leuy at F4.

Would love your thoughts on it.

I don't see where were loosing points having him at F4, he can score very well, great for a bloke priced at 300k (bargain) and allows coaches to strengthen another line with the money saved, where are we loosing points mate. it's more like we're making points than loosing them i think. Yes other fwd lines may outscore ours if they can squeeze a gun fwd in at F4 but we will outscore them on another line so it's six of one and half a dozen of another.

Basically my reasoning is as follows:

Even the premium rucks from last year missed games including Goldy, Jacobs and Martin.  Fair enough the bye after Round 22 may stop some though. So if you want to save a trade for these that miss one or 2 then a back up Ruck is essential. At this stage of the season hard to see which rookies may get games as a ruck so hence why I am starting Berger at F4 at the moment. He will score as well as any F4 (unless you have a stacked forward line) and if he stays healthy could be a keeper to sit at F6 to give cover. Also have the option to downgrade to a rookie ruck who starts getting games and make cash.
In my case by starting Martin and Jacobs I can have King at R3 to give me a perfect loophole as well.  So i egt the best of both worlds a back up ruck when required and the perfect loophole player with the number of Sunday Games melbourne play.

Do not see either how lose to many points by having Berger at F4. Need to consider the effect in the total team structure and points.

Quote from: Ringo on December 18, 2015, 06:41:51 PM
Basically my reasoning is as follows:

Even the premium rucks from last year missed games including Goldy, Jacobs and Martin.  Fair enough the bye after Round 22 may stop some though. So if you want to save a trade for these that miss one or 2 then a back up Ruck is essential. At this stage of the season hard to see which rookies may get games as a ruck so hence why I am starting Berger at F4 at the moment. He will score as well as any F4 (unless you have a stacked forward line) and if he stays healthy could be a keeper to sit at F6 to give cover. Also have the option to downgrade to a rookie ruck who starts getting games and make cash.
In my case by starting Martin and Jacobs I can have King at R3 to give me a perfect loophole as well.  So i egt the best of both worlds a back up ruck when required and the perfect loophole player with the number of Sunday Games melbourne play.

Do not see either how lose to many points by having Berger at F4. Need to consider the effect in the total team structure and points.

You mean King at R3 don't you mate ?

Quote from: Grazz on December 18, 2015, 07:49:49 PM

Quote from: Ringo on December 18, 2015, 06:41:51 PM
Basically my reasoning is as follows:

Even the premium rucks from last year missed games including Goldy, Jacobs and Martin.  Fair enough the bye after Round 22 may stop some though. So if you want to save a trade for these that miss one or 2 then a back up Ruck is essential. At this stage of the season hard to see which rookies may get games as a ruck so hence why I am starting Berger at F4 at the moment. He will score as well as any F4 (unless you have a stacked forward line) and if he stays healthy could be a keeper to sit at F6 to give cover. Also have the option to downgrade to a rookie ruck who starts getting games and make cash.
In my case by starting Martin and Jacobs I can have King at R3 to give me a perfect loophole as well.  So i egt the best of both worlds a back up ruck when required and the perfect loophole player with the number of Sunday Games melbourne play.

Do not see either how lose to many points by having Berger at F4. Need to consider the effect in the total team structure and points.

You mean King at R3 don't you mate ?

Thanks Grazz being a male should not do two things at once  :D

Quote from: Holz on December 18, 2015, 02:30:31 PM
You dont need to cover Goldy.

So its only one spot you need to worry about

That's the perfect Jinx if ever i have seen it.

Quote from: Grufflez on December 19, 2015, 04:31:55 AM

Quote from: Holz on December 18, 2015, 02:30:31 PM
You dont need to cover Goldy.

So its only one spot you need to worry about

That's the perfect Jinx if ever i have seen it.

Agree Grufflez haha the bloke has been very durable but anyone can get suspended or have a 2 week injury and he's well overdue. I think Currie will play for GC so he is perfect bench cover without needing Leuey. I think Leuy is a good pick though in his own right and can score 90+ and be a potential F6 keeper

Quote from: quinny88 on December 19, 2015, 10:33:45 AM

Quote from: Grufflez on December 19, 2015, 04:31:55 AM

Quote from: Holz on December 18, 2015, 02:30:31 PM
You dont need to cover Goldy.

So its only one spot you need to worry about

That's the perfect Jinx if ever i have seen it.

Agree Grufflez haha the bloke has been very durable but anyone can get suspended or have a 2 week injury and he's well overdue. I think Currie will play for GC so he is perfect bench cover without needing Leuey. I think Leuy is a good pick though in his own right and can score 90+ and be a potential F6 keeper

This

Quote from: Southstorm on December 18, 2015, 03:17:08 PM
It's not so much about picking ruck cover at all costs as it is identifying that there are a couple of really good value DPP rucks at the moment who could be considered for a spot in the forward line based on their output alone. If you consider that rucks are generally the hardest line to replace/upgrade, you should also consider how the F4 ruck will strengthen your ruck line.

I feel like Leuey would give away 5-10 ppg max to any player that's under 500k in the forward line at the moment, which is really all you can consider for F4. If he can do that for 300k, he's in. If he can do that for 300k, and save me 100 points at some stage when one of my rucks goes down for a week, he's a lock.

I didn't start ruck cover last year and it's by far my biggest regret. Had I have had Bellchambers at F4 and not at R2, I would have finished much higher than what I did.

grat summary of benefit of value selection and where leuy could fit into fwd keeper.  i see him as f6/7 r3 at year end

Very interested to hear members opinions on Ruck Cover for 2016.
Have read some different views on this and I think it could be a interesting topic.

2014. I started with the Jacobs, Sandi combo which worked a treat. Thought I needed some cover and went with Hale in the fwd line. This backfired big time as I lost points playing Hale. As soon as Stef Martin played mid season I pounced and he provided excellent cover. Luke Parker was roughly the same starting price as Hale and this cost me many points.

2015. Started with Goldy and Maric. Saw others with TBC as cover but avoided that debacle. Was keen to have ruck cover then Max Gawn arrived during the season. Jumped on and was very happy with his scores.

2016. At this stage I have Stef Martin and Nic Nat pencilled in. Will go with a R/F at R3 just in case.  No ruck cover for me at this stage but will be monitoring a few in the pre season games.

Keen to see other opinions.

Set and forget for me and hopefully a cheapie that plays a bit on the bench , not getting caught up in all the Luey hype

Goldy NicNat with Luey at F4

300k for a player capable of averaging 100 and providing ruck cover is a no brainer. Woosha has said he will be the main ruck and I don't see a lot of forwards I like to start this year anyway so Luey turning into a potential F6 ala Gawn this year is locked for me

Both very valid points above.
Oh, I guess I should have looked at the SC Strategy Thread. Same topic there.
Not sure what to do now, delete or leave it.
Sorry mods. Delete if you wish.

I am going with Goldy and Leuenberger with Currie at R3. Currie is 100% a lock if he is named as he can just sit on my bench earning me some cash hopefully. I have never really been a fan of going two big price guys in the ruck to start the season. Cox has generally been the only guy in the past I have been willing to fork out the cash for and then I would go with  one of the mid price guys as my R2. Rucks have been fickle, Cox was generally going to be a top guy regardless which is why I would fork out the cash for him, but doing this would give me time to evaluate the next best.

I am leaning towards a similar strategy this year but replace Cox with Goldy. Leuenberger was huge for me a couple years back, I started him and Goldstein in the ruck and it helped me fill out my team quite nicely. Berger ended up averaging 97 as a solo ruck but I think I ended up upgrading him to Minno. In the two games he solo rucked last year he had huge hitout totals, tonned up against the Dockers and then had a disappointing 64 in a loss against the Swans. If he can even go at a 90 average at his price it's a win as a ruck 2 while I can use the cash elsewhere to maybe bring in a premium mid instead. I can then move him to my forward line if he is playing well and use him as coverage later in the season by downgrading Currie to one of the DPP nobodies. It's a bash and crash position so guys will get injured, I don't really want to be burning trades to cover these guys down the line, but I am not keen to fork out a ton of cash to cover these guys either.

Have merged both threads so as not to lose comments in thread from SC Players.

Quote from: Mat0369 on January 01, 2016, 04:05:50 PM
I am going with Goldy and Leuenberger with Currie at R3. Currie is 100% a lock if he is named as he can just sit on my bench earning me some cash hopefully. I have never really been a fan of going two big price guys in the ruck to start the season. Cox has generally been the only guy in the past I have been willing to fork out the cash for and then I would go with  one of the mid price guys as my R2. Rucks have been fickle, Cox was generally going to be a top guy regardless which is why I would fork out the cash for him, but doing this would give me time to evaluate the next best.

I am leaning towards a similar strategy this year but replace Cox with Goldy. Leuenberger was huge for me a couple years back, I started him and Goldstein in the ruck and it helped me fill out my team quite nicely. Berger ended up averaging 97 as a solo ruck but I think I ended up upgrading him to Minno. In the two games he solo rucked last year he had huge hitout totals, tonned up against the Dockers and then had a disappointing 64 in a loss against the Swans. If he can even go at a 90 average at his price it's a win as a ruck 2 while I can use the cash elsewhere to maybe bring in a premium mid instead. I can then move him to my forward line if he is playing well and use him as coverage later in the season by downgrading Currie to one of the DPP nobodies. It's a bash and crash position so guys will get injured, I don't really want to be burning trades to cover these guys down the line, but I am not keen to fork out a ton of cash to cover these guys either.

Currie extremely unlikely to play round 1. Nicholls would basically need to get injured between now and then.

Was reluctant to follow the hype and select Currie, but with a R13 and R14 bye ruck already locked in, it just makes sense.

Quote from: ben_020285 on January 01, 2016, 04:48:48 PM

Quote from: Mat0369 on January 01, 2016, 04:05:50 PM
I am going with Goldy and Leuenberger with Currie at R3. Currie is 100% a lock if he is named as he can just sit on my bench earning me some cash hopefully. I have never really been a fan of going two big price guys in the ruck to start the season. Cox has generally been the only guy in the past I have been willing to fork out the cash for and then I would go with  one of the mid price guys as my R2. Rucks have been fickle, Cox was generally going to be a top guy regardless which is why I would fork out the cash for him, but doing this would give me time to evaluate the next best.

I am leaning towards a similar strategy this year but replace Cox with Goldy. Leuenberger was huge for me a couple years back, I started him and Goldstein in the ruck and it helped me fill out my team quite nicely. Berger ended up averaging 97 as a solo ruck but I think I ended up upgrading him to Minno. In the two games he solo rucked last year he had huge hitout totals, tonned up against the Dockers and then had a disappointing 64 in a loss against the Swans. If he can even go at a 90 average at his price it's a win as a ruck 2 while I can use the cash elsewhere to maybe bring in a premium mid instead. I can then move him to my forward line if he is playing well and use him as coverage later in the season by downgrading Currie to one of the DPP nobodies. It's a bash and crash position so guys will get injured, I don't really want to be burning trades to cover these guys down the line, but I am not keen to fork out a ton of cash to cover these guys either.

Currie extremely unlikely to play round 1. Nicholls would basically need to get injured between now and then.

Which isn't all that unlikely :P

I think that the obvious base issue is that none of us want to spend more than rookie dollars on R3, who wants excess dollars sitting on the pine?

If there are none available, the sensible thing to do is have a well priced solid RUC/FWD DPP (if available) to interchange as ruck cover when required.

It's a simple insurance policy. So if you're not inclined to take out insurance, you probably won't start Leuey, or any other ruck DPP for that matter.

I think it's a well rounded strategy, and I will be employing it, provided Leuey is a viable pick when the real stuff begins, it is only January the 1st after all  ;D

Quote from: ben_020285 on January 01, 2016, 04:48:48 PM

Quote from: Mat0369 on January 01, 2016, 04:05:50 PM
I am going with Goldy and Leuenberger with Currie at R3. Currie is 100% a lock if he is named as he can just sit on my bench earning me some cash hopefully. I have never really been a fan of going two big price guys in the ruck to start the season. Cox has generally been the only guy in the past I have been willing to fork out the cash for and then I would go with  one of the mid price guys as my R2. Rucks have been fickle, Cox was generally going to be a top guy regardless which is why I would fork out the cash for him, but doing this would give me time to evaluate the next best.

I am leaning towards a similar strategy this year but replace Cox with Goldy. Leuenberger was huge for me a couple years back, I started him and Goldstein in the ruck and it helped me fill out my team quite nicely. Berger ended up averaging 97 as a solo ruck but I think I ended up upgrading him to Minno. In the two games he solo rucked last year he had huge hitout totals, tonned up against the Dockers and then had a disappointing 64 in a loss against the Swans. If he can even go at a 90 average at his price it's a win as a ruck 2 while I can use the cash elsewhere to maybe bring in a premium mid instead. I can then move him to my forward line if he is playing well and use him as coverage later in the season by downgrading Currie to one of the DPP nobodies. It's a bash and crash position so guys will get injured, I don't really want to be burning trades to cover these guys down the line, but I am not keen to fork out a ton of cash to cover these guys either.

Currie extremely unlikely to play round 1. Nicholls would basically need to get injured between now and then.

It is very unlikely with the new interchange rotations and removal of the sub that teams will only go in with one ruck.

The only back up options are Currie and Brooksby. I'd be picking Currie over Brooksby in a heartbeat.

If fit I'd be surprised if Currie didn't play a lot of games for the suns this season.

On the point of the topic I will likely be selecting Goldy and Nic nat as R1,R2 and Leuenberger as F4 as cover. If a sub 200k ruck plays round 1 and fits the bye structure I want to have then I will select them as well, other wise Max King will be R3 again.

Leuenberger will be the 2016 Lumumba that everybody convinces themselves they should jump on, that does not deliver.

Leuey ave 102 once in his career, back in 2011. Can't see it happening again.

If he stays on the park, he may ave 75, imo.

Quote from: frenzy on January 24, 2016, 10:34:05 PM
Leuenberger will be the 2016 Lumumba that everybody convinces themselves they should jump on, that does not deliver.

Leuey ave 102 once in his career, back in 2011. Can't see it happening again.

If he stays on the park, he may ave 75, imo.

Big call and I think its very wrong. Since 2011, when Leuys played more than 5 games in a season he's averaged over 85, with the exception if this year when he was played out of position. He should go 85, but the question is is that good enough to warrant starting with him.

You simply can't rely on Berger to be a consistent player. Even if he did average 85, he's still not a good F6 and definitely not a good R2...

So he goes to Essendon, becomes their #1 man in ruck and shoulders the load of the whole team, gets belted every week and maybe scratches out 15 games @ 85... What does your rookie score to cover him? 60? So effectively, 15 @ 85, 7 @ 60 = 77 average.

- He averages 12 games per season for Christ's sake! 
- 2 seasons out of 9 above an average of 70
- 3 seasons of 9 above 15 games.

No deal for me.

I think some people are over looking what Leuy could be used for. I'll be starting him.
I don't need him to play every game and ave 100- although if he did, it would be great.
He's a number one ruck, priced to ave 57 ppg... what i need from him is to play as many games in a row as possible- HOPEFULLY ave >80 ppg. He scores you some handy points on field, but more importantly he makes enough $ that if his body fails then you can sideways to a keeper.

He represents value. That is all. Sure there is risk, but it's up to you whether or not you accept it- especially given that for most who select him will be using him as cover only.

Quote from: MC on January 24, 2016, 11:59:39 PM
You simply can't rely on Berger to be a consistent player. Even if he did average 85, he's still not a good F6 and definitely not a good R2...

So he goes to Essendon, becomes their #1 man in ruck and shoulders the load of the whole team, gets belted every week and maybe scratches out 15 games @ 85... What does your rookie score to cover him? 60? So effectively, 15 @ 85, 7 @ 60 = 77 average.

- He averages 12 games per season for Christ's sake! 
- 2 seasons out of 9 above an average of 70
- 3 seasons of 9 above 15 games.

No deal for me.

and now with the signing of Jamar will Leu be R1 @ dons?

Quote from: Capper on February 03, 2016, 03:30:06 PM
and now with the signing of Jamar will Leu be R1 @ dons?

Yep. Jamar will be supporting role. Wont play every week... that'll probably come back to bite me  :P

Quote from: FactHunt on February 03, 2016, 03:24:49 PM
I think some people are over looking what Leuy could be used for. I'll be starting him.
I don't need him to play every game and ave 100- although if he did, it would be great.
He's a number one ruck, priced to ave 57 ppg... what i need from him is to play as many games in a row as possible- HOPEFULLY ave >80 ppg. He scores you some handy points on field, but more importantly he makes enough $ that if his body fails then you can sideways to a keeper.

He represents value. That is all. Sure there is risk, but it's up to you whether or not you accept it- especially given that for most who select him will be using him as cover only.

The problem is what you need from him is the biggest risk about him.

Quote from: FactHunt on February 03, 2016, 03:24:49 PM
I think some people are over looking what Leuy could be used for. I'll be starting him.
I don't need him to play every game and ave 100- although if he did, it would be great.
He's a number one ruck, priced to ave 57 ppg... what i need from him is to play as many games in a row as possible- HOPEFULLY ave >80 ppg. He scores you some handy points on field, but more importantly he makes enough $ that if his body fails then you can sideways to a keeper.

He represents value. That is all. Sure there is risk, but it's up to you whether or not you accept it- especially given that for most who select him will be using him as cover only.

Most people said the same thing about Bellchambers last year. As an F4/F5 cover yes he is worth considering.

As an M1, M2 not for me - too much risk when there are many decent mid price and bargain based rookies in the other lines.

I don't think Leuy's scoring potential is as big a worry as Belly's was (and turned out to be)... but definitely injury is the worry.

Quote from: FactHunt on February 05, 2016, 08:37:49 PM
I don't think Leuy's scoring potential is as big a worry as Belly's was (and turned out to be)... but definitely injury is the worry.

His scoring potential is still a worry though, considering last year's changes to ruck scoring and the midfield he'll be rucking to

What's everyone's thoughts on Sinclair and Tippett? I've been doing a bit of research and am trying to figure if either of them are worth it.

So we all know Tippett went bang after the byes. He pretty much increased all his stats, big increases in possessions and hit outs and smaller increases in marks, tackles and goals.

This looks promising for 2016 right? Not so promising when I dug a little deeper

Tippett's meteoric rise after the byes conveniently coincided with drastic drops in the output of Pyke and Buddy.

           Pre Bye   Post Bye
Tippett   75.5          108.2
Franklin   98.3          66.0
Pyke       67.2          54.2

So I'm thinking with a fit Buddy and the inclusion of Sinclair in the team, Tippett is probably going to struggle to get a 90 average.

Now Sinclair, he averaged a respectable 76 last year considering his numbers were fairly crappy

Disp - 13 pg
HO  - 19 pg
Goals - 13 total
TOG - 77.6%

Wlll Sinclair improve enough to average 90+ and be a solid F6/Ruck cover?

I would say its a strong possibility,he will be rucking to a midfield that on paper is stronger than West Coasts. He should increase his HO per game by 10-15 so even with a crappy HOTA% he should get 10-15 more points from HOTA alone.

With the no subs and the lowering of the rotation cap he will increase his TOG% which hopefully means more forward time and more goals as he is a more than handy full forward (knows how to lead and take contested marks)

The biggest question is how much will he ruck? I think more than Tippett as Tippett is a better forward


TL:DR Summary

So if you want ruck cover in your forward line and for good reason don't trust Leuys body, I would lean towards Sinclair at this stage, he is 75k cheaper and has lots of up side.

Tippett only scored well last year when Buddy and Pyke were shower

I don't think it's fair to say that Tippett is only good when both Pyke and Buddy were out, Science class tells me that is not a fair test.
My real test will be watching NAB when only Pyke is gone and Buddy still remains, that might give some definitive answers.
But then there is Sinclair to throw into the mix now  :-\

Okay, say Currie and another cheap ruckman (Grimley/Howard etc) are named round 1. With Goldy R1 would it be stupid to even consider starting Currie at R2 with.. Very risky but would save some valuable coin (if it paid off). Keen to hear people's thoughts :)

Quote from: dosstheboss on February 15, 2016, 10:38:01 PM
Okay, say Currie and another cheap ruckman (Grimley/Howard etc) are named round 1. With Goldy R1 would it be stupid to even consider starting Currie at R2 with.. Very risky but would save some valuable coin (if it paid off). Keen to hear people's thoughts :)

You run the risk of Currie getting dropped next round, which would be a disaster really.
Plus, Howard is FWD only?

Quote from: dosstheboss on February 15, 2016, 10:38:01 PM
Okay, say Currie and another cheap ruckman (Grimley/Howard etc) are named round 1. With Goldy R1 would it be stupid to even consider starting Currie at R2 with.. Very risky but would save some valuable coin (if it paid off). Keen to hear people's thoughts :)

I'd probably just chuck one at R3 and not loophole early on...Currie and Grimley could both make some cash, although if Nicholls goes down before round 1, I guess Currie could be worth an R2 spot even, as he can score well

Quote from: GoLions on February 15, 2016, 10:41:02 PM

Quote from: dosstheboss on February 15, 2016, 10:38:01 PM
Okay, say Currie and another cheap ruckman (Grimley/Howard etc) are named round 1. With Goldy R1 would it be stupid to even consider starting Currie at R2 with.. Very risky but would save some valuable coin (if it paid off). Keen to hear people's thoughts :)

I'd probably just chuck one at R3 and not loophole early on...Currie and Grimley could both make some cash, although if Nicholls goes down before round 1, I guess Currie could be worth an R2 spot even, as he can score well

If Nicholls went down before round 1 I would have no hesitations starting Currie at R2, then have Brooksby at R3. Actually I'd settle with Grimley at R3 for 100k less

Quote from: dosstheboss on February 15, 2016, 10:46:01 PM

Quote from: GoLions on February 15, 2016, 10:41:02 PM

Quote from: dosstheboss on February 15, 2016, 10:38:01 PM
Okay, say Currie and another cheap ruckman (Grimley/Howard etc) are named round 1. With Goldy R1 would it be stupid to even consider starting Currie at R2 with.. Very risky but would save some valuable coin (if it paid off). Keen to hear people's thoughts :)

I'd probably just chuck one at R3 and not loophole early on...Currie and Grimley could both make some cash, although if Nicholls goes down before round 1, I guess Currie could be worth an R2 spot even, as he can score well

If Nicholls went down before round 1 I would have no hesitations starting Currie at R2, then have Brooksby at R3. Actually I'd settle with Grimley at R3 for 100k less

Yep definitely would consider, and would then allow me to finally bring in either Lids, Dahl, or Robbo as my F4 (well, F1-4 depending on which one I'd choose)

Quote from: GoLions on February 15, 2016, 10:50:21 PM

Quote from: dosstheboss on February 15, 2016, 10:46:01 PM

Quote from: GoLions on February 15, 2016, 10:41:02 PM

Quote from: dosstheboss on February 15, 2016, 10:38:01 PM
Okay, say Currie and another cheap ruckman (Grimley/Howard etc) are named round 1. With Goldy R1 would it be stupid to even consider starting Currie at R2 with.. Very risky but would save some valuable coin (if it paid off). Keen to hear people's thoughts :)

I'd probably just chuck one at R3 and not loophole early on...Currie and Grimley could both make some cash, although if Nicholls goes down before round 1, I guess Currie could be worth an R2 spot even, as he can score well

If Nicholls went down before round 1 I would have no hesitations starting Currie at R2, then have Brooksby at R3. Actually I'd settle with Grimley at R3 for 100k less

Yep definitely would consider, and would then allow me to finally bring in either Lids, Dahl, or Robbo as my F4 (well, F1-4 depending on which one I'd choose)

I'm in the same boat, want that fourth premo up front but I'm about 250k away. Lobbe to Currie saves about 235k ::)

Would take balls to pick Currie at r2,
High risk, high reward but could also end in disaster..

Get around Grimley 8)

If Grimley or Currie start Rd 1 no real need to have forward cover can sit as R3 and make some cash for you.

Quote from: Ringo on February 16, 2016, 10:43:07 AM
If Grimley or Currie start Rd 1 no real need to have forward cover can sit as R3 and make some cash for you.

According to a recent report Mason Cox has taken huge steps and is a very real chance to play this year so maybe rucks will be easy on us this year  :)

Yup .. seems to be a few options, as Ringo said don't think we will need to bother with forward cover, time will tell.

Quote from: Football Factory on February 16, 2016, 03:40:38 PM
Yup .. seems to be a few options, as Ringo said don't think we will need to bother with forward cover, time will tell.

If Cox does play he would be very handy on the FWD bench with another cheap DPP on the ruck bench

Quote from: shaker on February 16, 2016, 03:54:55 PM

Quote from: Football Factory on February 16, 2016, 03:40:38 PM
Yup .. seems to be a few options, as Ringo said don't think we will need to bother with forward cover, time will tell.

If Cox does play he would be very handy on the FWD bench with another cheap DPP on the ruck bench

Yeah for sure, I meant you don't really need to start with a more expensive F/R like a Leuy or Sinclair as an example.

But R3 is usually the best spot to pick your loophole player. So I would be picking a R/F as my ruck cover and sticking him at F8, with a non playing R/F at R3 (Well R2 and the other guy as emergency) to be the captain loophole

Forgot about the craptain poophole 

Quote from: creeker on January 01, 2016, 02:23:24 PM
Very interested to hear members opinions on Ruck Cover for 2016.
Have read some different views on this and I think it could be a interesting topic.

2014. I started with the Jacobs, Sandi combo which worked a treat. Thought I needed some cover and went with Hale in the fwd line. This backfired big time as I lost points playing Hale. As soon as Stef Martin played mid season I pounced and he provided excellent cover. Luke Parker was roughly the same starting price as Hale and this cost me many points.

2015. Started with Goldy and Maric. Saw others with TBC as cover but avoided that debacle. Was keen to have ruck cover then Max Gawn arrived during the season. Jumped on and was very happy with his scores.

2016. At this stage I have Stef Martin and Nic Nat pencilled in. Will go with a R/F at R3 just in case.  No ruck cover for me at this stage but will be monitoring a few in the pre season games.

Keen to see other opinions.

Creeker love your thinking mate.   Almost same experience as me. Though had nicnat and sandi in 2014 with Martin mid season addition.   Also have  Stef and NicNat this year

Spent a fair bit of time on this. Looked at 102k options/ DPP fwds/ loophole options/ fixturing/ considered captain options/more expensive options and I keep coming back to Grimley and Cox.
Currie may prove to be consistent good cover but at 163k robs the initial team of a hefty 45k. No guarantee he'll lock no1 ruck in with Nicholls an option too.
Loersh, Wyatt and other cheap options with DPP just don't consistently have the late round games to make the loophole attractive.
MKing looks a decent option too but the benefit with Cox and Grimley is they're both likely to play, score well and make coin too.
Hopefully Cox will be upgraded before R1... Think the pies have room for 1 more.

Rucks ?  Rucks?.. they are the tall uncordinated blokes right?   :o