Following a few weeks of inaction, doing some last minute cramming. Initially dismissed the 1-0-3 Ruck setup, but it's growing on me. Initially went Cox/Mummy/Giles/Redden, but now opting for Mummy/Giles/Redden/Stephenson. Thought I'd consult the brains trust on their opinion. As a result of the juggling and freeing up cash, considering fielding the following options: * Cox/Clifton (in mids, or alternative rookie, already have Magner, Shiel, Ledger, 3-0-5 mid, 2-0-2 ruck, 4-1-4 fwd), No Fyfe in Fwds, no Swan in mids * Swan/Giles on ground (4-0-4 mid, 1-0-3 ruck, 4-1-4 fwd), no Fyfe in fwds * Fyfe/Giles on ground (3-0-5 mid, 1-0-3 ruck, 5-1-3 fwd), no Swan in mid Which of the 3 pairings would be expected to have highest scoring ability? Option 1 looks the worst to me. Essentially, I'm trying to decide on Swan and an extra fwd cow or Fyfe and an extra mid cow? Trying to be brief, otherwise this'll start looking like a RMT
I have Cox and Sandilands at the moment. Not entirely confident on Sandilands. If money isn't your concern, who do you think will end up with the most points at the end between Mumford, Sandilands, Leuenberger and McEvoy? I'm thinking Sandilands or Mumford, though could be sold on someone else.
Just watching Derrix in the VFL, and wouldn't think he'll play a heap of seniors unless there are a lot of injuries to talls. Graham and Elton definitely looked better this game. HPCD: Sandilands will be a POD, if he's fit. Everyone's jumped off him, but his record is still second only to Cox, the word is he's fit, and he'll play virtually one-out ruck. He was averaging over 120 when injured last year, so I reckon he's worth the risk at R2. Berger and McEvoy are looking poor in pre-season, not that you can really judge by those games. Longer and Hudson worry me - look like they could get plenty of ruck time vs Berger. Mummy's got a great run early in the year - I've gone Mummy / Sandi myself. If Giles goes BIG tonight, I may drop Sandi for the 1-0-3 structure, but if he spuds it the 2-0-2 looks like a POD to me.
@Tango, I think you might be right about Longer mate, but I decided to go with who I wanted rather than sacrifice other lines to fit the big hitters into the ruck. I'm hoping he gets a run early and makes some cash, hoping. Also, I'm realistic, I know I'm not about to win the whole comp so I figured I didnt want to come 12,875th by listening to others, I'd rather come 15,000th and know, (sing along), I did it my way. It was actually quite liberating going against the common opinion of the masses, I really like my side, I've enjoyed going thro the selection process. I got talked into a few things that cost me last year, so not done that this. Good luck !.
How many people went Mumford & Giles? Reckon that would be worst case scenario you could have dreamt off!
Can't agree on Giles SKT. Giles was always a cash cow and I thought he went ok and his 87 SC was pretty solid.
Not really worse case at all, Giles' score for a rookie is more than acceptable and Mumford had a bad game and still scored 89. Not an ideal start but not a disaster by any means.
No was more meaning Mumfords score, Giles was better then what i was expecting. (thought 75-80 for him)
I guess we can only really gauge Mumford's score when all of the other premium rucks have played. I'm not particularly concerned yet (I went the Mumford, Giles combo), it's not a disaster of Joel Selwood round 1 2011 proportions. SC scores updated on the sc site, Mumford scaled up to 96, not bad for a relatively ordinary game.
Decision for this week is Sandi vs Selwood for me. Can trade in Sandi as R2 and go with Giles / Redden and bring Selwood into the mids, or stick with Sandi as a POD and hope he can get back to his 110-120 scoring of the past. Tending towards the later, as a POD if nothing else.
So far, I've not read anyone else here with a 0-2-2 strategy. My concerns were: Cox - $$$, the push to get NicNat firing, and whether two injury free years in a row is possible for Cox? Sandilands - Form and persistent injury cloud with his foot/toe Mumford - huge talent, but style is injury prone and head is still young. Will be the next Cox, but not yet McEvoy - rate him, but at that price? Leuenberger - the only one worth the money. No competition, did well last year when finally on the park. Initially I opened up with Berger and Kreuzer (who I believe in 100% despite hating Carlton), but the form or McIntosh pre-season made me drop Berger and spend the money on others I believed in. At present, I have Kreuzer-McIntosh-Giles and Redden, a four cash cow strategy with at least one possibility of investing in a cheap prem. I expect all the current prems' price to drop by Rd 8-12, and those who won't stay on the park to have broken down already. Am I mad?
@Lancepm I think your doubts about 2-0-2 might be more of "urban myth" than anything else, however if not going 2 Prem rucks then your set up is great. Maric and Naitanui also I'm sure you have thought about. You can buy from Aldi or from Harrods but sometimes David Jones is just right. I really toyed until the end with selecting the number two rucks in teams with only 2 prime rucks. Naitanui and McIntosh perfect candidates. If no 1 ruck goes out for any reason then remaining one goes ballistic (eg Hale), and lets face it there is a lot of upside to Mcanui anyway. Actually I'm now starting to regret not taking this POD. Sometimes lockout takes an eternity to come and sometimes I just needed one more day!!!!!
@Lancepm I have the 0-2-2 set up and I agree it is the best way to go! The prems are just too expensive and I share the belief they will drop significantly in price...except perhaps nicnat and Berger. I have HMac, Hale, Giles and Redden. 4, possibly 3 cash cows if HMac blows up.
Not sure if anyone has contemplated the idea of 0-1-3 I am running this set up at mo with Kreuzer and 3 rooks Using the extra $ to upgrade another DEF Not necessarily looking for certification of my madness, but more interested in hearing if anyone else rolling these dice?
To those considering anything but a 2-0-2 ruck strategy, I give this logic (and I may be proven wrong come September): I expect that $1.2m worth of rucks (say Cox and Mummy) and $250k worth of mids (say McDonald and Magner) will score me more points over the first 6-8 weeks, and make me more money (remembering that my two rucks are keepers so it doesn't matter what happens to their price, assuming they don't get injured) than any other option. The 1-0-3 strategy will swap my Mummy for a Murphy (for example) and my McDonald for a Stephenson. Lets assume that Cox and Magner remain, and this strategy fields Giles at R2. Mummy will outscore Giles, while Murphy will outscore McDonald (probably by more). However, come trade time McD is ready to moo for any mid I choose and can afford, while Orren hasn't mooed yet, so you can't upgrade your rucks. I'm now 1 premium up on you! Meanwhile you're waiting for one of your rookie rucks to moo suficiently and have a premium ruck drop in price suficiently (but still have upside), and you want these to coincide! Its just so much more likely to happen in the mids than in the rucks! The 0-1-3 strategy hopes that Kreuzer / NicNat and Giles can get close to my Cox / Mummy pairing, which isn't going to happen, meanwhile your Murphy / Selwood (for example) pairing is beating my McD / Magner, but my boys are earning plenty of cash, and very soon I'll be able to afford both of Murphy and Selwood, while you're still waiting for the opportune time to upgrade into my Cox / Mummy pairing. Finally, the 0-2-2 works the same as the above, only now you're relying on two mid-pricers to improve in points, cash, or both, which is nigh on impossible to get right (there's plenty of examples on TS of mid-pricers who stagnate rather than improve, and only a select few each year who are worth it - what are the odds that two of them are ruckmen, and the two rucks that you pick???). Meanwhile my rucks were keepers from the beginning, and I've now upgraded to the same premium mids (or better) that you have, so I'm well ahead. For me, the rucks are just too limited on selection and opportunity to take the mid-pricer risk, and this limited selection makes it hard to get upgrade timing right. In the mids there is always a cow mooing, and always a premium ripe for the picking. Its just risk mitigation, but its also likely to be more profitable (in terms of points on the board and dollars in the bank) to start with 2 premium ruckmen!