crazy ruck strategy

[AndrewY]

The more you risk ...the more you risk!!..it's more about your confidence in your best team on the park. If the 1st group you check is not your rucks then go with the strategy...if you keep going to rucks 1 st then the strategy is not for you. Surely this strategy means you have an extra premium elsewhere to offset any concerns about rookie rucks.

[Kuruki]

Barlow was an once in a decade player. He isn't going to pop up every year in the form of anybody.

Plus the stat comparison doesn't take age, club and the fact Smith averaged like 50 in the last 6 games of last year

Ok then let's use a Backman then.

Broughton 87 dt 98 sc

It makes no sense to load up on rook rucks because your just happy if they are playing they are rarely cash cows.
By the way don't forget this is fantasy footy the stats are all that matter

Someone like krooze on the other hand I reckon that's a risk worth taking but not 3 Rook rucks.
Good luck to ya if you go that way though, nothing risked nothing gained as they say

You can look at it another way. A premium mid like Swan avg 120. Cox 107. Drop down a few ranks and you are around 110 points in the Mid's vs 90 in the ruck. Money can be better spent elsewhere on the paddock. The premium rucks you guys are talking about are only averaging 90 points. Not having one is by no means going to land you in trouble too quickly. Having only three Mids avg 110 compared to someone else who has 4 will land you in trouble pretty damn quick.

[picker_man]

Barlow was an once in a decade player. He isn't going to pop up every year in the form of anybody.

Plus the stat comparison doesn't take age, club and the fact Smith averaged like 50 in the last 6 games of last year

Ok then let's use a Backman then.

Broughton 87 dt 98 sc

It makes no sense to load up on rook rucks because your just happy if they are playing they are rarely cash cows.
By the way don't forget this is fantasy footy the stats are all that matter

Someone like krooze on the other hand I reckon that's a risk worth taking but not 3 Rook rucks.
Good luck to ya if you go that way though, nothing risked nothing gained as they say

Its better having someone like giles on the field as there rnt a big amount of other players who can take his role at gws compared to say a gws rookie back who will be apart of continuese rotation in nd out the team. So yeah it is probably better to have a rookie you know who will play everyweek compared to one with a bigger chance of missing out every few weeks. game time is points, points is moula ;D

[elephants]

I am taking 1 gun, 1 undervalued gun and 2 rookies. My guns will be reasonably unique though...
Rookie rucks aren't as good as rookie mids. Rookie mids will score you usually between 60-80. Rucks can be anywhere from 30-70...
Smith was different to must tall rookie ruckmen imo.

[fattony]

I am taking 1 gun, 1 undervalued gun and 2 rookies. My guns will be reasonably unique though...
Rookie rucks aren't as good as rookie mids. Rookie mids will score you usually between 60-80. Rucks can be anywhere from 30-70...
Smith was different to must tall rookie ruckmen imo.

who are you looking at as an undervalued ruckman elephants?

[elephants]

Trent West, I rate him. And please, call me LE :P

[matt1985]

Someone like Ivan Maric maybe?

[upthemaidens]

The less you risk, the less you lose   ;)

or   The more you risk,the more you win...
  this subject has been done to death,read other posts before starting another on the same thing..
if the money you save is used wisely enough than it could pay off, and if giles is scoring 80+ points you'll look like a hero,,
, if ofcourse big O and giles happen not to play on the same week  you may be forced to trade one of them early to avoid a donut

[elephants]

Someone like Ivan Maric maybe?

I would class him as a much more risky mid-pricer. Yes he is the number one at the improving tigers but he has no previous history of good scoring. Too risky for mine with Hmac just a little more.

[matt1985]

Someone like Ivan Maric maybe?

I would class him as a much more risky mid-pricer. Yes he is the number one at the improving tigers but he has no previous history of good scoring. Too risky for mine with Hmac just a little more.

Fair point LE. Just itching for NAB cup so we can see who performs!

[CuStArDaRm]

Barlow was an once in a decade player. He isn't going to pop up every year in the form of anybody.

Plus the stat comparison doesn't take age, club and the fact Smith averaged like 50 in the last 6 games of last year

Ok then let's use a Backman then.

Broughton 87 dt 98 sc

It makes no sense to load up on rook rucks because your just happy if they are playing they are rarely cash cows.
By the way don't forget this is fantasy footy the stats are all that matter

Someone like krooze on the other hand I reckon that's a risk worth taking but not 3 Rook rucks.
Good luck to ya if you go that way though, nothing risked nothing gained as they say

Its better having someone like giles on the field as there rnt a big amount of other players who can take his role at gws compared to say a gws rookie back who will be apart of continuese rotation in nd out the team. So yeah it is probably better to have a rookie you know who will play everyweek compared to one with a bigger chance of missing out every few weeks. game time is points, points is moula ;D

Fair point, personally Im staying away from most gws rooks as they will be terrible like GC last year and it effexted there scores. Giles obviously is the standout in terms of game time as you say