Main Menu

2015 Ruck Strategy

Started by Doggoneit, December 14, 2014, 10:11:17 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Money Shot

Quote from: RaisyDaisy on December 22, 2014, 09:29:16 PM
Article in Herald Sun today with Malthouse talking about how he wants Warnock and Wood to ruck and is still persisting with Kreuz as a forward
Did see that but still I see him making money and being a good upgrade target with Leuy (if fit) being a keeper.

Ricochet

Now going with NN, Luey and Belly

RaisyDaisy

Quote from: Ricochet on December 22, 2014, 11:20:57 PM
Now going with NN, Luey and Belly

Exactly what I have currently too

No doubt it will change 100 times over the next month but that's what I've gone with for now

RaisyDaisy

OK, so now that we only get 1 ruck on the bench we can no longer loophole, so what are people doing?

I don't see the point in having Cox at R3 and Belly in the fwds, because the only time that will be of benefit is if one of your starting 2 rucks is out, and Collingwood still hasn't played allowing you to switch, and that's not going to happen often

I loved the idea of having Kruez, Leuey and Belcho with a spud at 4th because we could have loopholed the first playing ruck each week, but now we cant do that

So, with all that being said, to me, it looks like we have to have a playing ruck on the bench, which is a real pain having to have all that money just sitting there without an ability to even loophole

What other option do we have?

I don't want to have a spud at R3 and cop a donut or have to burn trades when a ruck misses a week or two

Looking like 3 playing cheap rucks is the way to go. NicNat, Luey and Belcho for me so far.

Not exactly loving it, but cant see a better option

RaisyDaisy

Oh, and I'd like to here what people think about playing Ryder and Belcho, one in the rucks and one in the fwds, so that you could actually have DPP that works, and not some 102k spud who wont play

Say something like Ryder, Leuey and Cox in the ruck, and Belcho at F4/5, so that if you need to swing Cox and Belcho you can bring on a fwd bench player to cover

Holz

Quote from: RaisyDaisy on December 23, 2014, 01:01:49 AM
OK, so now that we only get 1 ruck on the bench we can no longer loophole, so what are people doing?

I don't see the point in having Cox at R3 and Belly in the fwds, because the only time that will be of benefit is if one of your starting 2 rucks is out, and Collingwood still hasn't played allowing you to switch, and that's not going to happen often

I loved the idea of having Kruez, Leuey and Belcho with a spud at 4th because we could have loopholed the first playing ruck each week, but now we cant do that

So, with all that being said, to me, it looks like we have to have a playing ruck on the bench, which is a real pain having to have all that money just sitting there without an ability to even loophole

What other option do we have?

I don't want to have a spud at R3 and cop a donut or have to burn trades when a ruck misses a week or two

Looking like 3 playing cheap rucks is the way to go. NicNat, Luey and Belcho for me so far.

Not exactly loving it, but cant see a better option

it doesn't work for late outs but it certainly works when the rucks are announced on Thursday that they wont be playing as they are being rested for the week. I see that happening more likely than not.

I don't have confidence in Nic Nat, Kreuz, Burger with zero cover. Feel much better with Bellchambers up front.

GM

Goldy/Nic Nat  With Belly up front.
R3 good cover or DPP cover will definitely be needed with the new field structure.

WizzFizz

Quote from: GM on December 23, 2014, 01:19:42 PM
Goldy/Nic Nat  With Belly up front.
R3 good cover or DPP cover will definitely be needed with the new field structure.

Grazz

#38
Quote from: Holz on December 23, 2014, 11:41:54 AM
Quote from: RaisyDaisy on December 23, 2014, 01:01:49 AM
OK, so now that we only get 1 ruck on the bench we can no longer loophole, so what are people doing?

I don't see the point in having Cox at R3 and Belly in the fwds, because the only time that will be of benefit is if one of your starting 2 rucks is out, and Collingwood still hasn't played allowing you to switch, and that's not going to happen often

I loved the idea of having Kruez, Leuey and Belcho with a spud at 4th because we could have loopholed the first playing ruck each week, but now we cant do that

So, with all that being said, to me, it looks like we have to have a playing ruck on the bench, which is a real pain having to have all that money just sitting there without an ability to even loophole

What other option do we have?

I don't want to have a spud at R3 and cop a donut or have to burn trades when a ruck misses a week or two

Looking like 3 playing cheap rucks is the way to go. NicNat, Luey and Belcho for me so far.

Not exactly loving it, but cant see a better option

it doesn't work for late outs but it certainly works when the rucks are announced on Thursday that they wont be playing as they are being rested for the week. I see that happening more likely than not.

I don't have confidence in Nic Nat, Kreuz, Burger with zero cover. Feel much better with Bellchambers up front.

Having Belly up front works as long as you don't work weekends or shift work, those that do are probably going to need their ruck benchy to be one of Krooz or Luey or alike to ensure they don't cop a donut with their #1/#2 ruck being a late out.

GM

Quote from: Grazz on December 23, 2014, 01:57:28 PM
Quote from: Holz on December 23, 2014, 11:41:54 AM
Quote from: RaisyDaisy on December 23, 2014, 01:01:49 AM
OK, so now that we only get 1 ruck on the bench we can no longer loophole, so what are people doing?

I don't see the point in having Cox at R3 and Belly in the fwds, because the only time that will be of benefit is if one of your starting 2 rucks is out, and Collingwood still hasn't played allowing you to switch, and that's not going to happen often

I loved the idea of having Kruez, Leuey and Belcho with a spud at 4th because we could have loopholed the first playing ruck each week, but now we cant do thats

So, with all that being said, to me, it looks like we have to have a playing ruck on the bench, which is a real pain having to have all that money just sitting there without an ability to even loophole

What other option do we have?

I don't want to have a spud at R3 and cop a donut or have to burn trades when a ruck misses a week or two

Looking like 3 playing cheap rucks is the way to go. NicNat, Luey and Belcho for me so far.

Not exactly loving it, but cant see a better option

it doesn't work for late outs but it certainly works when the rucks are announced on Thursday that they wont be playing as they are being rested for the week. I see that happening more likely than not.

I don't have confidence in Nic Nat, Kreuz, Burger with zero cover. Feel much better with Bellchambers up front.

Having Belly up front works as long as you don't work weekends or shift work, those that do are probably going to need their ruck benchy to be one of Krooz or Luey or alike to ensure they don't cop a donut with their #1 ruck being a late out.
Yeah G , both will work.

SydneyRox

it is early days, but i am not sure I trust bellchambers to be the saviour people are making him out to be.

At this point, i am happy to be the guy with a griffin/sinclair/lobb as my R3

JBs-Hawks

Quote from: SydneyRox on December 23, 2014, 02:06:34 PM
it is early days, but i am not sure I trust bellchambers to be the saviour people are making him out to be.

At this point, i am happy to be the guy with a griffin/sinclair/lobb as my R3

He will be a bigger savior then 3 blokes with 0 JS ;)

SydneyRox

Quote from: JBs-Hawks on December 23, 2014, 02:09:17 PM
Quote from: SydneyRox on December 23, 2014, 02:06:34 PM
it is early days, but i am not sure I trust bellchambers to be the saviour people are making him out to be.

At this point, i am happy to be the guy with a griffin/sinclair/lobb as my R3

He will be a bigger savior then 3 blokes with 0 JS ;)

not if doesnt play himself, or does another knee, then the guys trying to loop him with cox are screwed with no ruck cover

GM

Quote from: SydneyRox on December 23, 2014, 02:10:53 PM
Quote from: JBs-Hawks on December 23, 2014, 02:09:17 PM
Quote from: SydneyRox on December 23, 2014, 02:06:34 PM
it is early days, but i am not sure I trust bellchambers to be the saviour people are making him out to be.

At this point, i am happy to be the guy with a griffin/sinclair/lobb as my R3

He will be a bigger savior then 3 blokes with 0 JS ;)

not if doesnt play himself, or does another knee, then the guys trying to loop him with cox are screwed with no ruck cover
Belly might not be the answer but you will need a strong DPP link or a sstrong R3.

SydneyRox

Quote from: GM on December 23, 2014, 02:21:26 PM
Quote from: SydneyRox on December 23, 2014, 02:10:53 PM
Quote from: JBs-Hawks on December 23, 2014, 02:09:17 PM
Quote from: SydneyRox on December 23, 2014, 02:06:34 PM
it is early days, but i am not sure I trust bellchambers to be the saviour people are making him out to be.

At this point, i am happy to be the guy with a griffin/sinclair/lobb as my R3

He will be a bigger savior then 3 blokes with 0 JS ;)

not if doesnt play himself, or does another knee, then the guys trying to loop him with cox are screwed with no ruck cover
Belly might not be the answer but you will need a strong DPP link or a sstrong R3.

yeah, but structure wise, right now i would rather sit $250-$300k on my ruck bench than $100k and bellchambers in the fwds