Rucks

[Gigantor]

Barely a mention of Sam Jacobs around?

Has missed 2 games in 4 years and averaged around 102 in that time

Last 2 years averaged 115.3 and 107.1 and missed 1 game

I'm not necessarily sold on him but he seems like the pick with the least risk?

No Danger could equal less HOTA's, I think that is what turning people off

[Grazz]

Mumford's been put on ice in this game already with a toe injury.

It begins  :o :o

Toe injury is it, was wondering why he wasn't out there.  :(

Yep, hopefully not that Aaron Sandilands turf toe.

Nothing serious by the sounds of it at least.

Just said it's his left ankle, not the ankle from last year or the toe.

[Slightly01]

I think Danger leaving has scared most off tbh

[sammy123]

Barely a mention of Sam Jacobs around?

Has missed 2 games in 4 years and averaged around 102 in that time

Last 2 years averaged 115.3 and 107.1 and missed 1 game

I'm not necessarily sold on him but he seems like the pick with the least risk?

No Danger could equal less HOTA's, I think that is what turning people off

sloane could pick up where danger left. mayne even matt crouch

[barlowlove]

Barely a mention of Sam Jacobs around?

Has missed 2 games in 4 years and averaged around 102 in that time

Last 2 years averaged 115.3 and 107.1 and missed 1 game

I'm not necessarily sold on him but he seems like the pick with the least risk?

No Danger could equal less HOTA's, I think that is what turning people off

sloane could pick up where danger left. mayne even matt crouch

agreed. I mean i understand the role the a gun mid plays in reading the taps, but jacobs gets a HOTA as long as he hits the hands of one of his mids, so surely danger missing won't make a huge difference

[supercoachhelp]

what about max gawn

[Mat0369]

Mummy looked really, really good before the injury. If he manages to play the next NAB game and gets through unscathed I'd be tempted to pick him. Obviously if I am starting with him I know there is a real chance I'll have to trade him out, but Goldy and Mummy could be huge to start the year.

[Holz]

Mummy looked really, really good before the injury. If he manages to play the next NAB game and gets through unscathed I'd be tempted to pick him. Obviously if I am starting with him I know there is a real chance I'll have to trade him out, but Goldy and Mummy could be huge to start the year.

Wasnt today warning enough

[Mat0369]

Wasnt today warning enough

Nope, if he is sore in a meaningless game why risk him? Basically like I said, I am picking him with the expectation I will have to trade him down the track. Other then Goldy I'm not sold on any of the other rucks. Sandi maybe but he is suspended for round 1. If I can get a 105-110 average out of him I'll be happy. I can then look to turn him into the breakout ruck at that point of the year who might be averaging around the same. I had him sitting at R2 for about a week and a half based on this strategy.

[quinny88]

Wasnt today warning enough

Nope, if he is sore in a meaningless game why risk him? Basically like I said, I am picking him with the expectation I will have to trade him down the track. Other then Goldy I'm not sold on any of the other rucks. Sandi maybe but he is suspended for round 1. If I can get a 105-110 average out of him I'll be happy. I can then look to turn him into the breakout ruck at that point of the year who might be averaging around the same. I had him sitting at R2 for about a week and a half based on this strategy.

That's a very brave strategy that a lot would have to go right to be able to pull off. If Mummy is going along nicely for the first part of the year I assume you aren't going to trade him until the injury comes. When it does inevitably come you are hoping that it happens late in a game where he's already scored well. What if he gets injured in a first half and has a big price dip as a result?
Wouldn't be banking in the stars aligning to just switch him over to another gun unless you want to pull the trigger before the injury comes. But that just seems like a waste of a trade

[Mat0369]

During the off season I read some pretty good advice in regards to fantasy games. Go with the guys with injuries as question marks over someone with other question marks over their game. I know Mumford's injury history and the risk involved there, however his situation and scoring are not issues so he essentially fits into that category. I know he could potentially get injured during a game like tonight and be done for 37, it's a risk you take to get top tier production for however long that may be. There is nothing to say that any of the other top line rucks don't get injured so if he is fit and named round 1 I'll probably pick him.

Brad Crouch is the other, there is no question in how well he can score or how he fits into the team. It's the foot that's an issue, but if he looks ready to go round 1 the reward outweighs the risk when you look at some of the other guys people are starting in the same price range.

I'm not looking to go overboard, I probably wouldn't go more  then 1 in each line. I've got Crouch, Wells and Mummy that all fit that category, they aren't speculative in ability,  just injury wise

[Marstar]

During the off season I read some pretty good advice in regards to fantasy games. Go with the guys with injuries as question marks over someone with other question marks over their game. I know Mumford's injury history and the risk involved there, however his situation and scoring are not issues so he essentially fits into that category. I know he could potentially get injured during a game like tonight and be done for 37, it's a risk you take to get top tier production for however long that may be. There is nothing to say that any of the other top line rucks don't get injured so if he is fit and named round 1 I'll probably pick him.

Brad Crouch is the other, there is no question in how well he can score or how he fits into the team. It's the foot that's an issue, but if he looks ready to go round 1 the reward outweighs the risk when you look at some of the other guys people are starting in the same price range.

I'm not looking to go overboard, I probably wouldn't go more  then 1 in each line. I've got Crouch, Wells and Mummy that all fit that category, they aren't speculative in ability,  just injury wise

But Mumford is not in the same price bracket as Couch or Wells ... so if you want to compare lemons with lemons then you need to be bringing in Leuenberger.

The logic is sound making decisions based on known risks. You'll either get lemonade or a sour taste in your mouth.

I'm going with Wells only ... lemon water my greatgrand father to 100+. Hope he does too :D

[Mat0369]

While that is true Mumford can score like a top 2 guy and is priced at 5. The fact is I'm comparing Mummy to Martin, Sauce, Blitz, Nic Nat, Gawn and co. I think Mummy can outscore all those guys but the difference with Mumford is the body.

Matty Boyd  or Bartel would be the equivalent in defense (I've got Bartel). Scoring isn't a question with those two, it's missing games through injury or resting. I'm not going to avoid Bartel when I think he could be a top 6 defender because he might miss a game when compared to guys like Kade Kolo and Birch who I see in a ton of teams.

I used the other two as they are more popular examples and I was comparing Crouch and Wells to some of the other mid price picks others have been suggesting, same way I am comparing Mummy to the other premium rucks

[Holz]

During the off season I read some pretty good advice in regards to fantasy games. Go with the guys with injuries as question marks over someone with other question marks over their game.

Where do you read this im really interested as thats my golden  rule.

[piesfan1989]

What do people think about starting currie?

We will all have a minimum of 4 rookies on the ground, so you basically need to pick the top 4 rookies, regardless of their position.

Anyone think currie could be one of those?