McKenzie down

[RaisyDaisy]

I'm not 100% locked in doing this, but exploring it's merit means it's a genuine option for me

For me, you need to factor in the savings too

Maric, Bellchambers, 2 x 117-123k mid rookies vs Lycett, Sinclair, 2 x 200k mid rookies

That's the scenario for me

[honza]

First 4 rounds of the season Read does the job

Rounds 5,6,8,10 and 11 Read plays first so there is exposure there

So up until WCE rd13 bye, there are just the 5 weeks where you would need to make a call on whether you think you should move Sinclair to R3. It's only NicNat being a late out that this happens, so the chances of him being a LATE out on these 5 rounds has to be quite minor anyway

I'm not even moving or using the dpp. Set. And. Forget. All year long. Just put the E on Sinclair and laugh if he outscores Lycett.

I'm putting Sinclair in the forward line. I mean, if he is playing he should always score more than our F7 anyway, so I'll take his score and only switch him to the rucks if one of NicNat or Lycett is out. Why miss out on his score when he is most likely going to score better than a rookie forward

IMO Sinclair will produce scores similar to a m/f rook.

The main value for you as fantasy coach is freeing up your brain to worry about the rest of the team, while everyone else in fantasy land has a massive tanty each week sorting ruck coverage.

[Gigantor]

I'm not even moving or using the dpp. Set. And. Forget. All year long. Just put the E on Sinclair and laugh if he outscores Lycett.

I had some confidence in this strategy. Now with McKenzie down it's the gold standard.

The problem with this is the impact Sinclair and Lycett would have on each others scores if a 3 rucks played. I could see lycetts scores dropping at least 20ppg when playing with Sinclair. So you need to weight up how many times all 3 will be playing vs how many times you will need Sinclair to cover NN or Lycett.

[honza]

I'm not even moving or using the dpp. Set. And. Forget. All year long. Just put the E on Sinclair and laugh if he outscores Lycett.

I had some confidence in this strategy. Now with McKenzie down it's the gold standard.

The problem with this is the impact Sinclair and Lycett would have on each others scores if a 3 rucks played. I could see lycetts scores dropping at least 20ppg when playing with Sinclair. So you need to weight up how many times all 3 will be playing vs how many times you will need Sinclair to cover NN or Lycett.

Brings us back to the OP. McKenzie out, McGovern moves, new opening for a marking forward. All 3 are no longer fighting over taps to score (or get a game!).

[Mat0369]

Tom Lamb

[YoungGun]

While this strategy seems pretty good, I just dont think that Lycett or Sinclair are gonna be good enough scoring potential wise. You are giving up the chance to get a good ruck option and I would think Hogan and Clark will do better than Sinclair anyway so you are just paying a steep price for Sinclair who in my mind is simply a permanent emergency

[honza]

Tom Lamb

Can play anywhere. Played KPP in u18s, but kpp in u18s isn't kpp in the AFL. His fortunes are tied more to Darling. While he's a developing body he'll be a running player, not holdingthe fort.

[eaglesman]

Sinclair is better than lycett ... Can't wait for Simpson to work this one out ... I actually have been disappointed with lycett first 2 games given the hype

[Mat0369]

Can play anywhere. Played KPP in u18s, but kpp in u18s isn't kpp in the AFL. His fortunes are tied more to Darling. While he's a developing body he'll be a running player, not holdingthe fort.

And the fact that he can play anywhere while also having an overhead marking game means his job security looks better. I would say he might be sub early, but if McGovern has to play in defense Lamb will play forward. Darling won't be ready early so you would say they trial him in his role, but If they carry Nic Nat, Lycett and Sinclair they are too tall. They are better off going Lycett/Sinclair, JJK, Darling (when fit) and Lamb due to his versatility.

[H1bb3i2d]

I'm not even moving or using the dpp. Set. And. Forget. All year long. Just put the E on Sinclair and laugh if he outscores Lycett.

I had some confidence in this strategy. Now with McKenzie down it's the gold standard.

The problem with this is the impact Sinclair and Lycett would have on each others scores if a 3 rucks played. I could see lycetts scores dropping at least 20ppg when playing with Sinclair. So you need to weight up how many times all 3 will be playing vs how many times you will need Sinclair to cover NN or Lycett.

Brings us back to the OP. McKenzie out, McGovern moves, new opening for a marking forward. All 3 are no longer fighting over taps to score (or get a game!).

And whoever is sitting in the goal square ain't gonna be scoring very many points.

[LF]

Confirmed ACL :(

http://m.westcoasteagles.com.au/news/2015-02-28/acl-for-ezy

[Nige]

 :( :( :( :( :(

[Mat0369]

Damn. He is such a good player too. It is sad to see an injury to anyone let alone one of the better players in the league at their position

[Gigantor]

This is gonna hurt the eagles a lot. I'd say Priddis and LeCras are the only other two players as important as McKenzie

[honza]

The positive for him is he'll get almost - if not all - of a pre season for 2016.