I've been toying with the idea of starting two premium ruckmen, say Sandi & Jolly, and slotting J.Tippett (R/F) into R4 to switch with Petrie R/F) up forward. I even advised dabomber to move Petrie forward when I saw he had him at R3. Whilst I still think you would want Petrie on the ground if you're going to fork out the cash for him, I'm starting to see the logic in dabomber's thinking. There are two main issues here for me. 1. Do I want a player at R4 (Tippett) who's unlikely to get many games and is there purely for DP? Traditionally, R4 has been given little value. This year, however, even if you play two premium ruckmen who play every game there's four weeks you are going to need cover. So having two viable options could be vital in avoiding donuts. The question becomes, are there viable cheap alternatives? Zac Smith As the season gets closer it seems more apparent that Fraser was picked up to support and mentor Smith. This guy should play all year and looks like having an impact. An ideal candidate for R3. Jarrad Redden From the AFL site's Pre-Season Snapshot: Who's burning: Jarrad Redden started the pre-season behind veteran Dean Brogan and three-gamer Matthew Lobbe in the ruck pecking order at Alberton, but has pressed his claim for an unlikely round one berth with a blistering two months of training. The 20-year-old's strength testing and skin folds have reflected a significant improvement in lean muscle mass and he's been 'killing it' on the track, according to teammate Jackson Trengove. Early days I know but it looks like there might be some decent R3/R4 options available this year. This makes J Tippett a potential liability. 2. If I do play Petrie forward, how much will I be compromising my forward line when I want to move him into the ruck? This is my main cause for concern and the problem is a big one: Aaron Sandilands. Sandi has his byes in Rds 6 & 16, both multi-team bye rounds. So I'm looking at Rd 6, with potentially Chapman, Petrie and Isaac Smith in my forward line. Chappy & Smith have byes and need to be covered and even with their DP status, I'd need a lot of luck to be able to cover three forwards and move Petrie into the ruck. So if you're taking Sandilands there's a decent chance you'll be looking to your R3 for cover anyway. Which pretty much defeats the purpose of sacrificing R4. Now there's lots of factors here. If you don't have Sandi, or your forward line has plenty of depth, you may be able to swing it. With my team structure, I think I might start Petrie at R2. I had him in 09 (ave 91.3) and wasn't dissappointed. If he can reproduce that he could be a keeper. If not he'll certainly add value and I might get a good deal on a fallen premium.
Wal i'm concerned with this situation too - I have had Petrie at R3 on the fanplanner for this eventuality, but having him as a fwd does however free up a good deal of cash. My concern is he may not score as well as most people seem to think so committing him to a starting berth may be an issue. At this stage I'll wait and see...
It's definitely an idea to keep in the back of your mind as both options have valid points- all depending on pricing- and how the preseason goes. To have the benefit of moving Petrie to the rucks, you have to assume that you forward bench can't outscore both of your bench rucks- which in the past, hasn't been too big an issue- but with Smith available, he certainly has the ability and potential TOG to be a viable cover. That said, I like the idea of possibly starting with Petrie up forward, then as the season progresses, I have the option to turn Smith into Tippett and keep hold of Petrie as a premium bencher- covering donuts in both the forward line and the rucks- remember, 4 extra trades means that you can get a better squad on the field than in years past, and that might be a viable option.
Where have teams fallen apart from in the past. For myself last year it was in the rucks, taking Sandi and Hill, had to use 2 trades on my rucks with money that would be better used in the fwd line or centres.. That was my mistakes and I'm looking to cover those this year so I dont have to Upgrade the rucks but hopefully downgrade to ge some cash. Pts is only good if it helps the team out long term. Thats why I'm thinking of the Sandi plus another quality ruck and putting Petrie on the bench. If his foot goes again hopefully hes made some cash if not bonus. I wish Day was a ruck still as I reckon he's a cash cow but now as only a fwd he's a bench option as expensive as he is. Lots of analysis still to go and form in cup will make or break some teams.... eg will it carry on to season form????? so much to take in....... Has anyone got the results to this test. aka Septembers numbers. cos I'd love to see where its all gonna pan out.
Good point walesy. I'm big on the idea of premium benchers this year so that is another plus for playing Petrie forward. I guess my problem has been it takes two players to maintain his DP flexibility. As you rightly point out, though, it's not crucial to take advantage of this early on. Starting with two cheapies both getting games at R3/R4 gives the option of using one of them as a cash cow at the appropriate time. Hmmm.... option c & it's still January
Burly might be right on the old scoring I think. Petrie needs to be carefully watched. If he's back to the form of old he is a definite IN, but the injuries sustained might make the 10% drop to his score and make him not as good a value option. Will watch with interest to see if he gets F/R and then to see where his starting $ value is.
I've got two F/R starters up forward, Petrie and Stanley. I will have Joel Tippett in R4 for MPP and Zac Smith in R3. I'm not prepared to accept rookie scores in the ruck to cover injuries and bye rounds, and I'm not blowing trades there either. I'm not sold on rookie priced R3 & R4's scoring anything more than 50, and I'd rather spend my money elsewhere than have midpriced backups on the bench
This is the kind of rucks selection discussion i've been looking for. I've been smashed by the rucks the last 2 years and this year is so critical with the rucks. Firstly I see Sandi and Z.Smith as locks. Then what? In the past I'd always take the premier ruckman, the cheapest speculative rookie, maybe an injury discounted player and r2 would be reliant what was left in the budget after selecting all the other lines. This year I'm more inclined to be picking my ruckline first and letting it dictate other lines budgets. Getting that midpricer ruckman like Mumford last year would be the ticket but picking who it be is often a downfall. A Petrie and sandi combo will probably be the most budget friendly fav choice by a stretch. I really would prefer two legitimate premiums in r1/r2. Petrie will be hard to pass up at a discount so your plan of using J.Tippet at R4 is a solid idea. The big unknown for me this year is the subrule. Coaches will be looking for more rotations for their midfield, especially in the later stages of the game. Come on down subrule. Lumbering ruck man will be subbed off and fresh midfield legs on. So you need to be careful not to get a ruck man adversely affected by this rule. Players like Blake are prime candidates for this. Who else do people think?? ?Jacobs?Ottens? On the flip side is that specialist ruckman, that a coach can I'll-afford to have off the ground at crunch time, shouldn't ever be subbed off. Furthermore, the ruckman that can rest forward will only increase his on ground time perhaps. If they can rest forward it will allow more midfield bench rotation. Do people agree with this? So if this be the case sandi and Jolly, with the rotation mad Collingwood team, may well benefit with increase SC points and be well worth the added cost. Petrie I think would fit into this category.
The more I look at it the more Jolly is a lock. Sandi will need to show me some fitness, durability is a concern at the price. Mumford might have his good games but he can go very poorly. Struggling to see better options. For me maybe this year it will end up as Jolly and Mumford and take a big risk on Sandi.
Dunno why there's not more love for Fraser? Proven SC performer and should get plenty of TOG. With the lack of reliable premiums surely he's worth a punt, should at least increase in value.
Another 2 options for resting rucks up forwards would have to be the Bombers duo of Hilly and Ryder. both have proven effective up fwd, with the exception of injuries will stay on the ground a full game resting up fwd. Hilly is getting on and has big injury questions up against his name, So Thats leaning me towards the Jolly, Ryder combo and will decide what to do with Petrie based on pre season games. With McIntosh out for a bit his case for game time has improved, but Goldstein has shown me enough last year to say he's a big improver for this year. Will Nth play 3 rucks I highly doubt it so what happens when McIntosh comes back as it should be his spot at No.1 ruckman. Could just say bugger the rucks and go 4 Playing Cheepies take the 30 pts hit there not spend much over the Mil mark. And use the extra cash not put on Sandi to play another quality Fwd or Back, as cash is made in the midfield. Who knows as others have said its January.....
I'm surprised at how many people are considering leaving out Sandi. he averaged over 20ppg (points per game) better then the next best ruckman, and from 19 games, still comfortably had the highest total. He'll be one of the first players picked in my team. also, I will seriously be considering Dean Cox as my #2 ruckman. The perception is he had a poor season last year coming back from injury, and by his previous lofty standards, he did. But looking at the stats, he played all 22 games at an avg of 88ppg(ranked 4th) and acumulated the 2nd highest points total for a ruckmen behind sandi. I think his $460k price is great value, given I would be happy if he returned the same stats as last year, but there's a chance that he could return to his previous form of 100+ ppg.
dabombers, I spent years scrooging in the rucks, and it cost me dearly. Pick keepers and hope you don't have to touch them all year.
Agreed that omitting Sandilands would be a huge risk. Just unsure about whether Sandilands represents value after last year - i.e. can he improve? Jolly can, given his first half-year was playing half time with Fraser and his scores upped later. Ryder can, given he is a young player and probably with a few more players having a better injury run, will be released more often. Cox certainly can. If you can't improve, you represent risk in fantasy sports, because the key is about maximising your dollars. If you get an improving Jolly and Cox, the difference is you could have Judd in midfield instead of Murphy. On Fraser, I think he represents value, but let's see if he gets a discount from last season. Anything over 400 is not going to really be value, because though Fraser was SC gold in many ways, it was because there was a team around him getting him the ball. Fraser is not a good tap ruckman, and needs to find it around the ground. Could be difficult in a forming side, something he found out a bit when he went back to the VFL. He didn't completely dominate as one might expect.
I see what you're saying Lucas, but there's no difference between finding a player that might replace sandi ata better price, and trying to find a player that might replace Judd at a better price. They're both keepers, and captain options, if you put them in your team from day one, their price fluctuations are irrellivant, they're not there to make money, they're there to accumulate points for your team right from the word go. there were 10 midfielders last year who were either better then, or within 5 points of Judd's avg. but there is not another ruckman in cooee of Sandi.
<blockquote>Quote from Lucas on January 22, 2011, 13:50 On Fraser, I think he represents value, but let's see if he gets a discount from last season. Anything over 400 is not going to really be value, because though Fraser was SC gold in many ways, it was because there was a team around him getting him the ball.</blockquote> Fraser will be 250k
250 is value for Rogan Josh. On keepers, I know the thinking there, but if you can get a keeper cheaper then you do so. I am not sure there are any players who you just put in without regard for the value. Every player needs to be finely weighted, because by paying over the odds for a champion, you are needing to go under the odds somewhere else. I'm currently looking at the graphs of the past two years salaries to try to work out what "under the odds" actually means for a champion. Let's go with Sandilands. Looking at the salary prediction graph, 530 looks like the right value to get Sandilands at, 550 would be paying slightly over the odds, but right when you take 2010 into consideration. 605k...I think that's a fair way over the odds.
Don't get me wrong, I think that you will have to get some great players over the odds to start the year. The question is how much over you are paying, and how many great players you can fit in.
@ Tylo The problem with fraser is that he has never been the same since he did his knee in the state of origin gave a couple of years ago. Unless his preseason form is solid be very cautious.
Is anyone game enough to factor in Kurt Tippett this season? Started like a horror show but came good towards the end of the season. Got badly burnt by him last season but I'm thinking of going to the well again. regards, REB