i dont have dean cox

[kelso129]

i have hille and sandi. anyone serioulsy think i cant win now. tell me why?

[Watto]

The thing with Cox is that he will pretty much score 100+ every week

Hille and Sandilands are both good ruckmen - but they aren't very good at everything else (well Hille is O.K.)

Having both H. + S. means that you've spent $974,700 just on your starting ruckmen, as well as at least another $166,800 on the reserves (if you just get rookies). So just for your Ruck, you've put $1,141,500.

And that's $1,141,500 that isn't spent on other players

So yes, you can still win, but only if Hille + Sandilands dominate or Cox has a poor year

[kelso129]

cox has a broken checkbone. wouldnt suprise me if he was a late withdrawell rd 1. And i want both hille and sandi who shouldd i drop for cox then?

[hibbo]

Kelso i have sandi and hille as well...so i would say stick with them. Big sandi averaged 93 last year and will do better this year IMO- he takes a lot of marks off opposition kicks which is worth heaps in sc. Hille averaged 88 last year and should crack into the 90's this year- his only issue is whether he will play 22 games this year. Together they should get u 180+ points consistently and now barring injury u wont need to use any trades on your rucks.

[Prospector_1]

Nice work hibbo, and kelso. A degree of prescience in the comments?

[hibbo]

lol, in the end when Hille went down I traded him to Cox and now I've traded Cox to HMAC.

[kelso129]

I ended up starting with cox and hhmac which turned out well...

[Prospector_1]

looks like it worked out OK for both of you - and got to similar end points?