Krooz, Leuey, Belly and the DPP Saga

[RaisyDaisy]

Ok, so I know there have been heaps of threads around about these 3 guys, what ruck setup people are going with etc etc but I have just reviewed the 2015 draw and noticed something that I haven't seen mentioned at all

I have reviewed the first half of the season up until the byes and have noticed that if you start Leuey at R2 and have Belly in the forwards for cover, with Read at R3 which I have seen in heaps of teams, mine included, there is not one single round where you will be able to swing Belly into the rucks if Leuey is a late out. Belly can only cover Leuey if Leuey is announced as being out on the Thursday night

Does this change peoples thoughts on this setup now? Because it changes mine

For all of us going with this sort of setup, I think we need to pick Krooz as R2, because Carlton play so many early games each round, before Essendon and Geelong so if Krooz is a late out we can actually swing Belly in

If we go with Leuey, it looks like having Belly as cover is pretty much a waste, and I am now thinking Leuey isn't even an option for me

Discuss :)

[RaisyDaisy]

Something else I would like to add.

Collingwood only plays before Carlton twice up until the byes, so if going with Krooz and Belly you can also save a few k by downgrading Read to Cox

I seriously feel like we have two options now

Krooz, Cox and Belly up forward or two set and forget rucks with no forward coverage

This discovery has pretty much ruled out Leuey all together for me now. If I'm going to go with Belly it's because I want full ruck coverage. I'm not picking Belly just for the off chance my R2 is a Thursday night out. He needs to be able to cover R2 late outs too to justify going with the strategy, so it's Krooz and Belly or no cover IMO

[GCSkiwi]

Personally I think if you're going with one of Kreuze or Leuey that Kreuze is the better pick anyway - both are injury prone so that's a draw, Kreuze I tghink warrants selection based off the fact that he's been out for basically an entire year so shouldn't get too many rest games to start out, plus will be sole ruck. Leuey has Martin for competition so we've yet to see how the Lions manage that, and I think it could mean he spends more time up front.

I was initially going to play Kreuz but have decided for 100k extra NicNat is a safer option...

[Mat0369]

As long as our coach doesn't spaz out and try and play one of the hacks in Warnock and Wood Kreuz has no competition where Leuenberger has Martin to compete with. I still think the two best mid price options are Kreuz and Nicholls, depending on how they line up. I also think I would rather save the cash in the forward line and avoid Bellchambers who is more likely to play as the forward between him and Giles and hopefully one of Durdin/Lobb get games. That extra cash could come in really handy on other lines, so the 30 point loss (best case Bellchambers 80 and Lobb/Durdin 50) on coverage can be made up with the extra cash to maybe get in an extra premium instead of a mid price option.

[meow meow]

Krooze has to play as solo ruck if the Blues are playing all 3 tall forwards (two of which can give Krooze a chop out).

[eaglesman]

As long as our coach doesn't spaz out and try and play one of the hacks in Warnock and Wood Kreuz has no competition where Leuenberger has Martin to compete with. I still think the two best mid price options are Kreuz and Nicholls, depending on how they line up. I also think I would rather save the cash in the forward line and avoid Bellchambers who is more likely to play as the forward between him and Giles and hopefully one of Durdin/Lobb get games. That extra cash could come in really handy on other lines, so the 30 point loss (best case Bellchambers 80 and Lobb/Durdin 50) on coverage can be made up with the extra cash to maybe get in an extra premium instead of a mid price option.

But surely they are not going to expect krooz to shoulder the entire work load ? If he was he would be a must have

[Bones Bombers]

If Carlton play Kreuz as their only true ruck then stay away. He will play 2 good games and then get injured again.

[Goosey]

I just think that having Bellchambers in the forward line for possible ruck cover is not 100% foolproof if your R1/R2 is a late out. Also, if the R1/R2 out is confirmed on Thursday and you can use the swing, you're then facing the issue of having to play one of your forward bench players, who if its still reasonably early in the year, aren't going to be providing much input anyway. I am therefore, at this point, going with Goldstein and Naitanui and leaving Bellchambers out in the hope that a cheap R3 will become available, even if I have to pay more than a rookie price, at least the R3 doesn't require swinging from the forward line and leaving that line exposed. If you had the Bellchambers swing and made this move, I know i would still be tempted to trade to improve the gap in the forward line anyway!

I tell you what, this ruck structure change has definitely given us coaches something to muse over for the past month or so, and will continue to up to the first bounce!! Good luck finding the right balance!

[Bully]

Beware of Kreuz, Malthouse has indicated that he will spend more time up forward this year.

Leuey is a pure ruckman so he's every chance to play as the clear number 1, he is more than capable of averaging 100. Martin can still play as a tall midfielder, his hit outs weren't that special to start with.

As for back-up, tough call, the only fail safe method is to spend 1 million on Kreuz, Leuey & Belly (playing Belly as a permanent R3).

[Mat0369]

But surely they are not going to expect krooz to shoulder the entire work load ? If he was he would be a must have

Kreuz was ready to come back from surgery and play at the end of last season but the club was being cautious with him. This allowed him to have a full pre-season which means he has his fitness base up. You would have him ruck 65-75% of the game and have Levi and even Rowe can do some work deep in defense meaning he doesn't have to cover the whole ground early. Carlton really missed Kreuzer last year because Wood and Warnock are not AFL standard players. He does his work around the ground and if his foot is holding up (which it seems to be) he will be fine. 

You also can't play Kreuz/Levi in the same forward line, you are too top heavy and screwed when the ball hits the ground. Throw in someone like Wood and Warnock and have them in the forward line at times and it just doesn't fit the team structure. I wouldn't be surprised to see Walker thrown down forward again with Jaksch currently injured and have a forward line something similar to this

Walker Hendo Menzel
Thomas Levi Ellard

You then have Liam Jones, Watson and Jaksch (who it looks like they might play in defense) as other tall options. If Malthouse plays him forward, not only does that limit his structure and the forward defensive pressure, it also is a square peg/round hole type deal since Kreuz is not a natural forward and struggles when playing there.

If Carlton play Kreuz as their only true ruck then stay away. He will play 2 good games and then get injured again.

You only need him to play 10 games and then you can trade him out come bye time.

[Bully]

But surely they are not going to expect krooz to shoulder the entire work load ? If he was he would be a must have

Kreuz was ready to come back from surgery and play at the end of last season but the club was being cautious with him. This allowed him to have a full pre-season which means he has his fitness base up. You would have him ruck 65-75% of the game and have Levi and even Rowe can do some work deep in defense meaning he doesn't have to cover the whole ground early. Carlton really missed Kreuzer last year because Wood and Warnock are not AFL standard players. He does his work around the ground and if his foot is holding up (which it seems to be) he will be fine. 

You also can't play Kreuz/Levi in the same forward line, you are too top heavy and screwed when the ball hits the ground. Throw in someone like Wood and Warnock and have them in the forward line at times and it just doesn't fit the team structure. I wouldn't be surprised to see Walker thrown down forward again with Jaksch currently injured and have a forward line something similar to this

Walker Hendo Menzel
Thomas Levi Ellard

You then have Liam Jones, Watson and Jaksch (who it looks like they might play in defense) as other tall options. If Malthouse plays him forward, not only does that limit his structure and the forward defensive pressure, it also is a square peg/round hole type deal since Kreuz is not a natural forward and struggles when playing there.

If Carlton play Kreuz as their only true ruck then stay away. He will play 2 good games and then get injured again.

You only need him to play 10 games and then you can trade him out come bye time.

Well argued, have got me back on the Kreuzer train.

[RaisyDaisy]

I just think that having Bellchambers in the forward line for possible ruck cover is not 100% foolproof if your R1/R2 is a late out. Also, if the R1/R2 out is confirmed on Thursday and you can use the swing, you're then facing the issue of having to play one of your forward bench players, who if its still reasonably early in the year, aren't going to be providing much input anyway. I am therefore, at this point, going with Goldstein and Naitanui and leaving Bellchambers out in the hope that a cheap R3 will become available, even if I have to pay more than a rookie price, at least the R3 doesn't require swinging from the forward line and leaving that line exposed. If you had the Bellchambers swing and made this move, I know i would still be tempted to trade to improve the gap in the forward line anyway!

I tell you what, this ruck structure change has definitely given us coaches something to muse over for the past month or so, and will continue to up to the first bounce!! Good luck finding the right balance!

I'd rather field Hogan that week and take his score then burn a trade because one of my rucks is missing a week or two

[H1bb3i2d]

I just think that having Bellchambers in the forward line for possible ruck cover is not 100% foolproof if your R1/R2 is a late out. Also, if the R1/R2 out is confirmed on Thursday and you can use the swing, you're then facing the issue of having to play one of your forward bench players, who if its still reasonably early in the year, aren't going to be providing much input anyway. I am therefore, at this point, going with Goldstein and Naitanui and leaving Bellchambers out in the hope that a cheap R3 will become available, even if I have to pay more than a rookie price, at least the R3 doesn't require swinging from the forward line and leaving that line exposed. If you had the Bellchambers swing and made this move, I know i would still be tempted to trade to improve the gap in the forward line anyway!

I tell you what, this ruck structure change has definitely given us coaches something to muse over for the past month or so, and will continue to up to the first bounce!! Good luck finding the right balance!

I'd rather field Hogan that week and take his score then burn a trade because one of my rucks is missing a week or two

This.

Also, it's not the late outs that worry me. It's the 1-2 week injuries that can easily be covered. If you have no cover and need to trade for a 2-3 week injury, then your replacement misses a game or 2, man, you'll lose a not of points and not be happy.

[RaisyDaisy]

Yep.

People say it now, that they will go with 2 set and forget rucks and if they miss a week or two trade them to avoid a donut, but when it actually comes time to do that you're going to be so filthy about it

In addition to all the benefits of having cover in Belly, they (cheap r2 and belly) are going to be so easy to upgrade to premo's too

[Mat0369]

This is my issue with using Bellchambers as a swing player. Injuries are going to happen, I don't think you can afford to have someone like Cox who isn't going to play because if you need to swing Bellchambers for ruck cover and then are also missing a couple of forwards through suspension you are forced to burn a trade. If Durdin/Lobb look to get games early I would rather them in the ruck, dump Bellchambers for cash and have a full forward line in terms of guys that are playing to cover the outs on that line. If we still had a 4th ruck spot I can understand it because you would play your rolling donut for captains choices on that line, but with the 3rd ruck position actually needing someone available for points and cash generation it isn't worth it.

I would rather sit someone like Krak in my bottom midfield spot and use him for loopholing my captain because he actually has the potential of getting a game down the stretch. I can also use his DPP to swing a forward into my midfield need be.