Can anybody challenge the ruck GOATS?

[Wanderer]

Anybody worried about Grundy's poor showing in Marsh series? I know he is a proven gun but he looked like he was struggling against Marshall.

Im not worried about the poor showing in Marsh series, Marsh series historically doesn't really prove much outside Rookies to watch.
My biggest issue is the backing up Year to Year, historically this isn't something that is a common occurrence

Over the last 5 years there has only been 37 players that have averaged more than 110 over the course of a season.
1 has averaged over 110 in 5 years - Dangerfield
4 have averaged over 110 in 3 years - Gawn, Fyfe, Ablett, Neale
11 have averaged over 110 in 2 years
21 have averaged over 110 in only 1 year

Only 2 players in the last 5 years have gone 3 years consecutively over 110 (Danger & Ablett), whether due to injury or form it just hasn't been something we have seen happen often. This year we have Macrae, Grundy, Neale, Gawn, Fyfe & Cripps who are all coming of 2 years back to back.
Can we really see only 2 in 5 years and then 6 in 1 year?

Interesting insight. Thanks for sharing the analysis. Grundy 2 years in a row over 130. Getting into rare territory.

[RaisyDaisy]

Im not worried about the poor showing in Marsh series, Marsh series historically doesn't really prove much outside Rookies to watch.
My biggest issue is the backing up Year to Year, historically this isn't something that is a common occurrence

Over the last 5 years there has only been 37 players that have averaged more than 110 over the course of a season.
1 has averaged over 110 in 5 years - Dangerfield
4 have averaged over 110 in 3 years - Gawn, Fyfe, Ablett, Neale
11 have averaged over 110 in 2 years
21 have averaged over 110 in only 1 year

Only 2 players in the last 5 years have gone 3 years consecutively over 110 (Danger & Ablett), whether due to injury or form it just hasn't been something we have seen happen often. This year we have Macrae, Grundy, Neale, Gawn, Fyfe & Cripps who are all coming of 2 years back to back.
Can we really see only 2 in 5 years and then 6 in 1 year?

Sure we can

The game has changed dramatically over that time, and even more so when it comes to SC scoring, especially for certain types of players

If you dig a lot deeper I'm sure you'll be able to see that 6 could do it again this year, and many more will do it for their 2nd year etc

Grundy and Gawn: We haven't seen rucks like these two since Dean Cox, so it only makes sense that no other ruck has had back to back 110+ seasons since Cox. Coxy never hit the 110+ 3 peat, but again, SC has changed a lot since then and there's no reason to think GG won't back it up again, or go close enough

Look at the current crop of mid super prems - nearly all of them (except Danger) are either entering or bang smack in the middle of their prime. Again, no reason any of these guys should regress

Point being, I think the past counts for little when we're looking at stuff like this. The last 12-24 months are really all that's relevant in the now

[Wanderer]

Im not worried about the poor showing in Marsh series, Marsh series historically doesn't really prove much outside Rookies to watch.
My biggest issue is the backing up Year to Year, historically this isn't something that is a common occurrence

Over the last 5 years there has only been 37 players that have averaged more than 110 over the course of a season.
1 has averaged over 110 in 5 years - Dangerfield
4 have averaged over 110 in 3 years - Gawn, Fyfe, Ablett, Neale
11 have averaged over 110 in 2 years
21 have averaged over 110 in only 1 year

Only 2 players in the last 5 years have gone 3 years consecutively over 110 (Danger & Ablett), whether due to injury or form it just hasn't been something we have seen happen often. This year we have Macrae, Grundy, Neale, Gawn, Fyfe & Cripps who are all coming of 2 years back to back.
Can we really see only 2 in 5 years and then 6 in 1 year?

Sure we can

The game has changed dramatically over that time, and even more so when it comes to SC scoring, especially for certain types of players

If you dig a lot deeper I'm sure you'll be able to see that 6 could do it again this year, and many more will do it for their 2nd year etc

Grundy and Gawn: We haven't seen rucks like these two since Dean Cox, so it only makes sense that no other ruck has had back to back 110+ seasons since Cox. Coxy never hit the 110+ 3 peat, but again, SC has changed a lot since then and there's no reason to think GG won't back it up again, or go close enough

Look at the current crop of mid super prems - nearly all of them (except Danger) are either entering or bang smack in the middle of their prime. Again, no reason any of these guys should regress

Point being, I think the past counts for little when we're looking at stuff like this. The last 12-24 months are really all that's relevant in the now

I agree we look at the last 12-24 months but one thing the past has taught us is things change from year to year, and especially moreso over a number of years. For those of us looking at an alternative to GG, there are many things that can and have happened in the past to show that things don't stay constant for too long. Having said that, if I had to put my money on the best two rucks it would be GG.

[Ringo]

Im not worried about the poor showing in Marsh series, Marsh series historically doesn't really prove much outside Rookies to watch.
My biggest issue is the backing up Year to Year, historically this isn't something that is a common occurrence

Over the last 5 years there has only been 37 players that have averaged more than 110 over the course of a season.
1 has averaged over 110 in 5 years - Dangerfield
4 have averaged over 110 in 3 years - Gawn, Fyfe, Ablett, Neale
11 have averaged over 110 in 2 years
21 have averaged over 110 in only 1 year

Only 2 players in the last 5 years have gone 3 years consecutively over 110 (Danger & Ablett), whether due to injury or form it just hasn't been something we have seen happen often. This year we have Macrae, Grundy, Neale, Gawn, Fyfe & Cripps who are all coming of 2 years back to back.
Can we really see only 2 in 5 years and then 6 in 1 year?

Sure we can

The game has changed dramatically over that time, and even more so when it comes to SC scoring, especially for certain types of players

If you dig a lot deeper I'm sure you'll be able to see that 6 could do it again this year, and many more will do it for their 2nd year etc

Grundy and Gawn: We haven't seen rucks like these two since Dean Cox, so it only makes sense that no other ruck has had back to back 110+ seasons since Cox. Coxy never hit the 110+ 3 peat, but again, SC has changed a lot since then and there's no reason to think GG won't back it up again, or go close enough

Look at the current crop of mid super prems - nearly all of them (except Danger) are either entering or bang smack in the middle of their prime. Again, no reason any of these guys should regress

Point being, I think the past counts for little when we're looking at stuff like this. The last 12-24 months are really all that's relevant in the now

Agree 100% How much would Cox have scored if H/Os to advantage were available in SC when he was playing. We have seen a number of tweaks to SC scoring over the years making past comparisons not entirely reliable.

[shaker]

Is this the year to avoid both Gawn and Grundy and spend the cash on other lines seriously thinking of doing it.

[Wanderer]

Is this the year to avoid both Gawn and Grundy and spend the cash on other lines seriously thinking of doing it.

Run the numbers and see if you can score more from the investment in the other lines and keep in mind you will have two less viable captain options. I would think early days you might be in front, but unless you can upgrade one or both GG if they are firing, then you will be behind the eight ball in league finals for sure.

[jfitty]

I've been on the Grundy with Jacobs/Naismith type all preseason, but definitely reconsidering at the moment...

One thing I'm worried about is not being able to generate enough cash to bring these top guys in. Even with a slow start, by the time you'd be looking to bring Gawn in, there's every chance he's still 600k+. Not ideal.

Thinking the strategy is to pay up, as we always get the chance to bring in cheaper defenders and forwards. But rucks are a whole different ball game, can't afford to not have GG in a shorter season. Whether that be from round 1 or later on..

[dmac07]

I've been on the Grundy with Jacobs/Naismith type all preseason, but definitely reconsidering at the moment...

One thing I'm worried about is not being able to generate enough cash to bring these top guys in. Even with a slow start, by the time you'd be looking to bring Gawn in, there's every chance he's still 600k+. Not ideal.

Thinking the strategy is to pay up, as we always get the chance to bring in cheaper defenders and forwards. But rucks are a whole different ball game, can't afford to not have GG in a shorter season. Whether that be from round 1 or later on..

Exactly this. For your D6/F6 your likely to be able to get any of 7-8 players averaging within a few points of each, and pick whoever is the best value when you are ready to upgrade, likely getting a bargain. The difference between Gawn and the third best ruck would likely be 10 to possible 20 points, so if he isnt a bargain at the right time of year you still have to find 600k plus to bring him in.

[IntegralX]

Swapped to NN and I feel dirty about it. I think he's the biggest SC beneficiary from the reduced quarters...he'll play the same amount of minutes and it translates to a higher % of game time. Plus CD loves him, and it lets me squeeze out an extra premium; B. Smith becomes my D2.

If this was standard quarters, I wouldn't do consider doing this at all especially given how against him I've been from the outset.

[Gavdroid]

Naismith named sole ruck for swans too, Sinclair didn't make the cut. Could open thing's up as well, but NicNat looks dangerous with the new shorter games. Would need cover in forwards though as he's sure to get rested if games are played in close succession

[Samsturmfels]

Naismith named sole ruck for swans too, Sinclair didn't make the cut. Could open thing's up as well, but NicNat looks dangerous with the new shorter games. Would need cover in forwards though as he's sure to get rested if games are played in close succession

only issue with sinclair being dropped is that it means if Naismith performs badly theres a good chance he'll be dropped.

[Goosey]

Can anybody challenge the ruck GOATS, well...Grundy has spoken. We'll see what Max has to say tomorrow.

[Wanderer]

Can anybody challenge the ruck GOATS, well...Grundy has spoken. We'll see what Max has to say tomorrow.

Had Grundy, but don't have Gawn. The team structure looks so much better not going GG. It allowed me to get Howe who scored a handy 156 and shuffle a couple of other things around. Only time will tell.

[SydneyRox]

wow!! 179 from Grundy is insane!!!  still wish I had been able to jig my team enough to have GG plus Naismith.....

[js19]

wow!! 179 from Grundy is insane!!!  still wish I had been able to jig my team enough to have GG plus Naismith.....

I’ve got all 3 atm. If Naismith goes 100+ today I might ditch Gawn for another fwd and def :D