Mumford or Cox

[powersuperkents]

Cox's price has plummeted

Mummy's has inflated

At the same price tag, who is the better choice to replace Grundy at R1?

So far I'm thinking of taking the chance on Mumford. Both have the proven ceiling, but Cox is the only one to prove some consistency (in terms of ruck men haha)

[pommyadam]

Cox's scores will fluctuate (running NicNat and Sinclair as ruck help won't be of assistance here)

And Mumford seems to be the sole ruck (with Giles being moved completely away from it)
I'm not sure that Mumford can keep up this 120 average mind, maybe a high 90s

personally, I'd go for Mumford, but I wouldn't expect his average to stay this high

[powersuperkents]

Cox's scores will fluctuate (running NicNat and Sinclair as ruck help won't be of assistance here)

And Mumford seems to be the sole ruck (with Giles being moved completely away from it)
I'm not sure that Mumford can keep up this 120 average mind, maybe a high 90s

personally, I'd go for Mumford, but I wouldn't expect his average to stay this high

Exactly what I'm thinking. It makes me sway more towards Cox. The thing is Mumford is new and the best feeling is selecting a player in breakout season. I'm not sure if Mumford will average +100 but I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt. Injuries is the other concern I have with Mummy whilst conversely Cox is incredibly durable