Top 5 forwards

[RaisyDaisy]

3 minutes in ... lock him in boys

39 at 1/2 time, about what you'd expect

[Ingram]

He must have seen his score at HT he's had a good 3rd.

[RaisyDaisy]

Alright, so Ceglar put up 80 last night from 66% TOG, and that's prompted me to do a little more research

I still don't think he is a must to start, but like I said on the previous page I don't mind the pick -  he's in the same group as Steven/Dev/TMac etc - and it looks like most of us are going to be starting with at least 1 from that group, most likely 2. The fact that he provides ruck cover is certainly appealing, but I still maintain he should be easy to trade in during the season should we need ruck cover, so he isn't a must to start, but certainly a valid option

One thing I hadn't bothered to check recently was that when he did ruck those 3 games last year, Big Boy didn't ruck at all - just 1 hitout is all he had - I just assumed that he gave Ceglar a chop out at some point during those games, but he didn't. Ceglar's scores weren't massive then, but decent enough for a fwd in SC for sure - most importantly though, it shows me he can ruck out full games on his own, and that's something I wasn't aware of so that changes things

That then prompted me to look at other rucks who are their teams solo ruck

Guys like Darcy, Sinclair, even Nank lately etc who averaged mid 70's usually had someone else giving them a chop out, where as the guys who did all the ruck work (GGG, Marshall, ROB etc) all went 90+

For that reason, I certainly see the appeal in Ceglar because it does look like Big Boy ain't rucking at all

I'll admit I've slightly changed my view and am open to the idea of picking him. If we actually had a bunch of good premo fwds to pick from then I wouldn't be looking at Ceglar at all, but because it's slim pickings and looking like going cheap up fwd is the way to go, I now have Ceglar in the Steven/Dev group of guys to consider

eaglesman, you made a good point - even if he does go 88-90 like I think he will, that's still probably going to be good enough for F6 this year based off what forwards are available. Last year I had Hoff as F7 for F/R cover, so maybe Ceglar will be that spot for me this year

Still don't have Ceglar in my side at the moment, but he's in the mix

That fact that he was up against Marshall last night and still did well certainly helps his case now - maybe 90+ is possible

[frenzy]

you should wait and see Marsh two, hopefully Maxy plays Cegs. I doubt he gets a touch.

[shaker]

King looks like he will be only a bench player , Gresham firmed as a F3 , Ceglar still an option if Gawn's knee looks iffy before R1.
and nearly forgot Membrey was awesome he was everywhere is this a new role under a new coach ?

[eaglesman]

Alright, so Ceglar put up 80 last night from 66% TOG, and that's prompted me to do a little more research

I still don't think he is a must to start, but like I said on the previous page I don't mind the pick -  he's in the same group as Steven/Dev/TMac etc - and it looks like most of us are going to be starting with at least 1 from that group, most likely 2. The fact that he provides ruck cover is certainly appealing, but I still maintain he should be easy to trade in during the season should we need ruck cover, so he isn't a must to start, but certainly a valid option

One thing I hadn't bothered to check recently was that when he did ruck those 3 games last year, Big Boy didn't ruck at all - just 1 hitout is all he had - I just assumed that he gave Ceglar a chop out at some point during those games, but he didn't. Ceglar's scores weren't massive then, but decent enough for a fwd in SC for sure - most importantly though, it shows me he can ruck out full games on his own, and that's something I wasn't aware of so that changes things

That then prompted me to look at other rucks who are their teams solo ruck

Guys like Darcy, Sinclair, even Nank lately etc who averaged mid 70's usually had someone else giving them a chop out, where as the guys who did all the ruck work (GGG, Marshall, ROB etc) all went 90+

For that reason, I certainly see the appeal in Ceglar because it does look like Big Boy ain't rucking at all

I'll admit I've slightly changed my view and am open to the idea of picking him. If we actually had a bunch of good premo fwds to pick from then I wouldn't be looking at Ceglar at all, but because it's slim pickings and looking like going cheap up fwd is the way to go, I now have Ceglar in the Steven/Dev group of guys to consider

eaglesman, you made a good point - even if he does go 88-90 like I think he will, that's still probably going to be good enough for F6 this year based off what forwards are available. Last year I had Hoff as F7 for F/R cover, so maybe Ceglar will be that spot for me this year

Still don't have Ceglar in my side at the moment, but he's in the mix

That fact that he was up against Marshall last night and still did well certainly helps his case now - maybe 90+ is possible

I probably should have mentioned this before now. Ceglar is 100% a keeper pick at F7 for me with a SuperCoach marathon not a sprint mentality. If he proves to be better than that it’s a bonus. But he’s most definitely a ruck safety selection for me.
He is an unknown as it’s the first time in his career he will have the shot at extended stint as number 1.

We can’t keep getting this lucky with gawngrundy not missing games. I hope Gawn tears him to pieces next week and keeps his ownership low.

[RaisyDaisy]

I guess the other thing that has my interest in Ceglar increasing is that we just have to look at Lycett and Marshall last year

When a ruck is given the mantle and rucks out the entire game on his own - high 80's - 90+ seems pretty safe, as the role of ruck is just so friendly for SC

I've looked at Dusty, Cegalr, Dev as my 3 forwards, and I can actually get 14 keepers + Robbo (Ceglar and Smith keepers)

[fanTCfool]

Ceglar will be an absolute trap. Calling it now

[Gigantor]

If Gawn misses round 1 (in Perth, hard Optus surface so its a good chance of happening) do you still pick him and field Ceglar?
Or just pick Ceglar R2 and hope for a significant dip in Gawns price.

[LordSneeze]

I think it all depends on the amount of risk you are taking in your team overall, if you are taking limited risk in other positions I can see it being worth a risk and correction if required, as the upside is there if it works.

If you are taking a lot of other risk, then I wouldn't want to add that on the pile too.
lets say to you Steen, Smith, Ceglar, Doc, Sauce and Roberton & 3 or 4 don't work you will be in a world of pain.

[RaisyDaisy]

Ceglar will be an absolute trap. Calling it now

Quote everything I said or don't quote me at all  ::)

Still not entirely convinced, but it's certainly worth looking at. Happy to admit when I am wrong, but never completely ruled him out and he could still be a trap

If Gawn misses round 1 (in Perth, hard Optus surface so its a good chance of happening) do you still pick him and field Ceglar?
Or just pick Ceglar R2 and hope for a significant dip in Gawns price.

I do end up picking Ceglar (still early days on that) I'd be starting Gawn even if he misses Round 1, and just field an extra fwd rookie in Round 1 while Ceglar moves from forward to R2

[Mat0369]

I've been playing around with Ceglar R2 instead of Nic Nat. I still believe Nic Nat will score more and is a better pick at the price, however it means I have an extra keeper in Ceglar compared to the stepping stone in Nic Nat. I'll monitor how Ceglar goes in the next game before making the call. I know I would rather Ceglar and Steven/Smith compared to Sauce, Ceglar and one of Dev/Steven

[crowls]

I've been playing around with Ceglar R2 instead of Nic Nat. I still believe Nic Nat will score more and is a better pick at the price, however it means I have an extra keeper in Ceglar compared to the stepping stone in Nic Nat. I'll monitor how Ceglar goes in the next game before making the call. I know I would rather Ceglar and Steven/Smith compared to Sauce, Ceglar and one of Dev/Steven

Ceglar is not the R2 option,  his benefit is to other FWD keeper options.    Steven, Smith, Greenwood etc.  Given guaranteed ruck coverage and potential to be a keeper fwd makes him a long term selection that reduces overall team risk.     Do not see benefit in starting him at R2 and then having to find money to upgrade to Gawn later.    Ceglar will be my F2/3 depending on how deep I want to start rookies in the fwds if I decide this path is the best option for the year. 

[Pokerface]

I've been playing around with Ceglar R2 instead of Nic Nat. I still believe Nic Nat will score more and is a better pick at the price, however it means I have an extra keeper in Ceglar compared to the stepping stone in Nic Nat. I'll monitor how Ceglar goes in the next game before making the call. I know I would rather Ceglar and Steven/Smith compared to Sauce, Ceglar and one of Dev/Steven

Ceglar is not the R2 option,  his benefit is to other FWD keeper options.    Steven, Smith, Greenwood etc.  Given guaranteed ruck coverage and potential to be a keeper fwd makes him a long term selection that reduces overall team risk.     Do not see benefit in starting him at R2 and then having to find money to upgrade to Gawn later.    Ceglar will be my F2/3 depending on how deep I want to start rookies in the fwds if I decide this path is the best option for the year.

I have him at R2. He doesn't need to be upgraded to Gawn. The upgrade can be done in the forward line, and swing Ceglar into the forwards as part of the trade. Not starting with Gawn in this fashion really is no different to not starting with Whitfield, Macrae etc, especially if you think he might start on par with other uber-premiums not in your initial squad.

[crowls]

I've been playing around with Ceglar R2 instead of Nic Nat. I still believe Nic Nat will score more and is a better pick at the price, however it means I have an extra keeper in Ceglar compared to the stepping stone in Nic Nat. I'll monitor how Ceglar goes in the next game before making the call. I know I would rather Ceglar and Steven/Smith compared to Sauce, Ceglar and one of Dev/Steven

Ceglar is not the R2 option,  his benefit is to other FWD keeper options.    Steven, Smith, Greenwood etc.  Given guaranteed ruck coverage and potential to be a keeper fwd makes him a long term selection that reduces overall team risk.     Do not see benefit in starting him at R2 and then having to find money to upgrade to Gawn later.    Ceglar will be my F2/3 depending on how deep I want to start rookies in the fwds if I decide this path is the best option for the year.

I have him at R2. He doesn't need to be upgraded to Gawn. The upgrade can be done in the forward line, and swing Ceglar into the forwards as part of the trade. Not starting with Gawn in this fashion really is no different to not starting with Whitfield, Macrae etc, especially if you think he might start on par with other uber-premiums not in your initial squad.

Hi Pokerface,   my fault did not explain myself clearly.    It is better to play a rookie in fwds and get additional cash generation and still start GG.   Ceglar just DPPs into R2 if Gawn is affected.   Sure Gawn will drop at some stage but you are going to have to bring him in.   Why not make it easier and just start Ceglar in FWDS.   Effectively 2 Keepers as Cegalr ends up F6/7 Ruck cover