The effectiveness of F/R in 2015 (MUST READ)

Bluesman · January 10, 2015, 07:23:51 PM

...so can someone enlighten me - where have I seen the guarantee that Belly is immune to injuries as almost everyone is suggesting??????? Belly is at that awkward price and will not be a keeper in any position so better off to spend money elsewhere! 8)

Ricochet · January 21, 2015, 03:58:53 PM

Great read felsty.

For those going with 2 premo rucks and those that are off Belly... who is your bench option?

shaker · January 21, 2015, 04:23:48 PM

Was thinking about ruck cover in the FWD's with Belly or Lycett but have gone off it would much rather spend some more and get a FWD - MID in there , with Giles arrival plus Daniher and Carlisle can't see them playing them all so I think Lycett would be a safer choice , might just run with 2 rucks and replace if injured

The_Captain · January 21, 2015, 08:02:28 PM

Quote from: shaker on January 21, 2015, 04:23:48 PM
Was thinking about ruck cover in the FWD's with Belly or Lycett but have gone off it would much rather spend some more and get a FWD - MID in there , with Giles arrival plus Daniher and Carlisle can't see them playing them all so I think Lycett would be a safer choice , might just run with 2 rucks and replace if injured

Yeah belly playing isn't a certainty at all!

H1bb3i2d · January 26, 2015, 09:38:25 AM

My R3 will be just as much a captain loophole as a swingman to Belly. And I'm more concerned about my rucks missing the teamsheets rather than being a late out. In all honesty, at F5 with 3 forward rookies, I can see him making just as much money as the 4th best forward rookie would have. I plan on keeping him as cover though, he'll be needed come SC finals! People were killing for a player who could average 85 at the $300k price mark last year for cover (doherty, weller etc), so why not jump on early? He wont go huge, no, but he certainly wont be the one to let your team down either.

Tylo · January 29, 2015, 08:14:22 PM

If Giles isn't named round 1 then obviously Belly will be ruck and you'd be mad not to pick him. If Giles is named he will be no.1 ruck and Belly will play mostly fwd, in which case it's hard to see him scoring well at all. I think it's as simple as waiting for round 1 teams and the choice will be clear. FWIW I think Giles will play.

Mr Adams · February 01, 2015, 10:47:05 PM

Great analysis Feisty.

I currently have Belly locked, but not wit a shred of confidence because the bloke is a MASSIVE hack. 80 average or not, I just do not rate the guy - yet still have him. Go figure?

bennynam · February 02, 2015, 11:41:01 PM

Quote from: The_Captain on January 01, 2015, 07:11:05 PM
Can someone please explain why everyone is on belly? He won't even be number 1 ruck will he? giles has him covered and I reckon he is a better option. Can't see belly scoring well at all.

Essendon man here. Bellchambers is a lazy footballer. I'm not going near him. Will burn plenty of SC's.

Mat0369 · February 09, 2015, 10:46:57 PM

I am still curious as to what Bellchambers hit out to advantage numbers are.

Ricochet · February 10, 2015, 10:03:20 AM

Quote from: Mat0369 on February 09, 2015, 10:46:57 PM
I am still curious as to what Bellchambers hit out to advantage numbers are.

Not sure man. I know they've never been great though

Speculator · February 10, 2015, 11:52:52 AM

If Bellchambers is fully fit he should in theory have his best ever season.

He is about 25/26 years old. Should be entering into his best years so far. Tick.

His ruck time should increase now that the incumbant Ryder is gone. He may even become the number 1 ruckman. He certainly won't be worse off with Giles to compete with instead of Ryder. Tick.

So the way I see it, injuries aside, in theory he should average at least close to his previous best of 86. Chuck in some natural improvement plus potential increased time on ball and we may be looking at a 95 average. Optimistic I know but break outs do happen and this bloke seems to have a lot going for him at the moment. The presence of Giles is the only question mark.

Ricochet · February 10, 2015, 11:54:25 AM

Quote from: Speculator on February 10, 2015, 11:52:52 AM
If Bellchambers is fully fit he should in theory have his best ever season.

He is about 25/26 years old. Should be entering into his best years so far. Tick.

His ruck time should increase now that the incumbant Ryder is gone. He may even become the number 1 ruckman. He certainly won't be worse off with Giles to compete with instead of Ryder. Tick.

So the way I see it, injuries aside, in theory he should average at least close to his previous best of 86. Chuck in some natural improvement plus potential increase time on ball and we may be looking at a 95 average. Optimistic I know but break outs do happen and this bloke seems to have everything going for him at the moment. The presence of Giles is the only question mark.

and just have to factor in the change in scoring for rucks man. But agree, its more positive than negative

Speculator · February 10, 2015, 11:57:39 AM

Quote from: Ricochet on February 10, 2015, 11:54:25 AM
Quote from: Speculator on February 10, 2015, 11:52:52 AM
If Bellchambers is fully fit he should in theory have his best ever season.

He is about 25/26 years old. Should be entering into his best years so far. Tick.

His ruck time should increase now that the incumbant Ryder is gone. He may even become the number 1 ruckman. He certainly won't be worse off with Giles to compete with instead of Ryder. Tick.

So the way I see it, injuries aside, in theory he should average at least close to his previous best of 86. Chuck in some natural improvement plus potential increase time on ball and we may be looking at a 95 average. Optimistic I know but break outs do happen and this bloke seems to have everything going for him at the moment. The presence of Giles is the only question mark.
and just have to factor in the change in scoring for rucks man. But agree, its more positive than negative

Excellent point. However when priced at a 50 something average there appears to be little downside.

My Chumps · February 10, 2015, 12:09:58 PM

Quote from: ben_020285 on January 04, 2015, 08:37:18 PM
A thing to remember with the RUC/FWD link is that it won't just be used for late outs.

Like in other positions on the field, if one of our players has a minor injury and is out 1 or 2 weeks, most of us would be inclined to keep this player and play a rookie for the 1 or 2 weeks they are out. This can also happen with our rucks. Say Leuey does a minor hammy, we will know when teams are named on Thursday whether he is playing and we can easily move Belly on for him regardless of when the Bombers play.

So basically, a late out for one of our ruckman in a round where Belly has already played will result in a donut but any other time it should be fine.

^
Here's why having the f/r link is essential; if you're going with one of Kreuzer, Burger or Nic Nat chances are they're going to get injured at some point during the season. There doesn't seem to be any rookie rucks likely to start and you really don't want to be burning trades in that department to save doughnuts. Late outs is of course an issue, and Bellchambers doesn't have the best injury record either, but I'm gonna do all I can at the start of the season to avoid burning sideways trades down the track.

Also, anybody considering Peter Wright instead as the R3 F/R? I know he's got a lot of developing to do but he's definitely more likely to get games than the other candidates. Could be a waste of 70k tho if he doesn't.

Ricochet · February 10, 2015, 12:19:00 PM

Quote from: My Chumps on February 10, 2015, 12:09:58 PM
Also, anybody considering Peter Wright instead as the R3 F/R? I know he's got a lot of developing to do but he's definitely more likely to get games than the other candidates. Could be a waste of 70k tho if he doesn't.

Yeh i think someone like him or Lobb will pop up come NAB man. It'll be hard for him to break into the GC lineup but would not surprise me one bit if he does