rucks

valkorum · February 09, 2011, 04:55:42 PM

Absolutely Hardnut - just throwing out the main reason why people are going down this path. Your 4th ruck generally is not gonna make much money for you anyway. I think the most I have made from a 4th ruck is about $50k - $70k

If Tippett doesnt play I havent lost much cash but I have gained the MPP all season. If he does play well I gain the cash (if I trade him) and the MPP.

For my strategy it is worth it.

hardnut · February 09, 2011, 05:05:54 PM

I think we've managed to totally derail the original thread but still a discussion worth having.

This is why it will never be a problem with teams being too similar as despite all the info out there people will all go down their own roads.

Slap · February 09, 2011, 06:22:19 PM

agreed with valkorum here. IMO a fourth ruck shouldn't be significant unless you have selected a really bad team to begin with. I have never really used my 4th ruck whether they are playing or not. Should it come to that stage where I'm starring down the barrel, i'd imagine I'd use a trade and swap in another gun ruck from my presumed injured ruck stocks.

Tippett, provides that versatility, at least to begin the season with. Should Petrie remain the same price all year due to underpermances, he'd simply become an upgrade target in my FWD line from one of my many rookie cash-cows.

In theory anyway.

Holz · February 09, 2011, 06:42:32 PM

i spent some time calculating the totla score i would get from the 2 different compositions
sandi and cox with smith and tippet on the bench and petrie in the forward line
or sandi and petrie with smith and 80k ruck on the bench with any forward under 385k but i choose higgins and have added 40 k to spend elsewhere.

i believe option 2 will always out for ranking as the difference in smith and a forwards score wont be more than 100 over the 4 games you need them and that will easily be caught up over the season by having a beter team.

for me it was the choice between bartel and cox or higgins and boyd and for me the choice was easy

hardnut · February 09, 2011, 06:53:43 PM

Nice number crunching Holzman - I always struggle to convince myself do that but I'm glad somebody puts it to the acid test!

It is a comparison of flexibility vs having the best possible 22 essentially

Blueboys · February 09, 2011, 07:27:01 PM

Which Tippet are you taking about Crows or Gold Coast? lol

Prospector_1 · February 09, 2011, 08:51:18 PM

Quote from: valkorum on February 09, 2011, 04:55:42 PM
If Tippett doesnt play I havent lost much cash but I have gained the MPP all season. If he does play well I gain the cash (if I trade him) and the MPP.

But you could get a much cheaper R4 - you gotta decide if the extra $$$ for JTippett is worth the flexibility - and Holzman's post suggests - ?

Slap · February 09, 2011, 10:26:56 PM

you lost me holzman.. can you break it down again. "you believe option 2 for ...??"

So no Sandi Cox combo for you..

Holz · February 10, 2011, 02:25:36 AM

Quote from: Slap on February 09, 2011, 10:26:56 PM
you lost me holzman.. can you break it down again. "you believe option 2 for ...??"

So no Sandi Cox combo for you..

sorry i cut down my post so i could fit it all in, it doesnt make much sense to me either.

Holz · February 10, 2011, 02:30:35 AM

what i was trying to say was rather than go the option were you have sandilands and cox with smith and tippet on the bench (with petrie in the forward line), will be results in less points than having sandilands and petrie with smith and a 80k 4th ruck with a forward under 385k.

the reason being smith will hopefully score just under your forward rookies. Also round 6 when sandilands is out is also the round in which most of the top forwards are out e.g Chappy, Pav, Franklin. Also the 30k you save by going the 80k ruck can be used to get a forward that will hopefully easily outscore cox by 100 points in the season, to make up the points lost by playing smith instead of a forward rookie.

Slap · February 10, 2011, 12:57:12 PM

thats a good point. But, have you factored in if you did take in petrie, he'd earn you more money throughout the season than if you purchased a 400k player (i have some spare cash).. I'd end up getting Pav or someone similar.

In my eyes, with the Sandi Cox combo, with smith and tippet benched and Petrie MPP'ed in the FWDs, it give you the oportunity for extra expansion than the two 80k ruckmen on the bench.

The extra money you'd earn from Petrie as opposed to the maxxed out premium, you could then upgrade either a rookie or Petrie himself to a proven and CURRENTLY performing FWD.

I think your FWDs are VERY important in your chances to win the car/league. By locking in more Premium Fwds before the season, I think you increase your risk - because Fwds may not find their stride early/or at all etc.. By picking up performing players during the season, you can semi eliminate the risk.

(sorry, ive been working all night and that may not make sense).

Holz · February 10, 2011, 05:37:37 PM

i still have petrie in the ruck position so the only difference is i will have a forward premium over cox . So it fills as many forward positons as it would the other way.

If you really dont want many forward premiums my method is also beter because petrie isnt filling up that extra forward postion so you could go for a mid pricer or a rookie in the spot petrie would be and than get a back or a mid premium

CuStArDaRm · February 11, 2011, 01:00:41 AM

right on Holzman :)
For me atthe minute im not goin with petrie Dish but if i do it will be in the rucks not chewing up my fwd line where i can pick up real scorers

rucks

Prospector_1