It needs work, but these things can be improved over time, much easier to do that than teach a player to get 20 touches a game.
-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
Rucking Hell
- Thread starter Baloo
- Start date
Well, that's not a 4 years in the gym body. Looks like a cross between a sequoia and the Hulk.
He also averaged 14.5 disposals in the U18 championships.
Is there precedent of a midfielder with such low numbers going at pick 3?
I'm only going by vibes, so maybe it does happen and I just haven't noticed?
Always worth being open-minded and willing to spot exceptions, too. Drafting is a science after all.
If Shaun Grigg can become a premiership ruck anything is possible. The problem with Samson is he's useless below the knees and moves at glacial pace. His development has also been held back by inordinate amounts of time in the forward line.
As a pure mid? Not really, but even Duursma at 1 is kind of unprecedented, this is the worst midfielders draft I can recall.
A bit more analysis on the new ruck rule - typical that it’s still a bit of an unknown.
www.theage.com.au
My take
* Saying there is still a role for a Nankervis as I thought this spelt the end for him as a grappling ruckman
* This rule change will suit our forgotten man in Balta
* Simms becomes an astute pick at the beginning of last year’s second round, will watch his development with interest
* gee I would love us to somehow manufacture a pick this year that lands us Emmett but I reckon he will go late first round, he is a sleeper for me, mobile, footy smarts, plays tough, can mark and kick goals and could solve our rucking problem going forward (together with Sims). If we traded down to a late top 10 and mid teens pick, he would be an astute 3rd pick for us.
Extinct or flourishing: Which ruckmen will survive the AFL’s new rules?
Clubs are going to spend many hours over pre-season working out how to best use their ruckmen under the new ruck rules. They will cause some sleepless nights for some of the game’s best big men.
My take
* Saying there is still a role for a Nankervis as I thought this spelt the end for him as a grappling ruckman
* This rule change will suit our forgotten man in Balta
* Simms becomes an astute pick at the beginning of last year’s second round, will watch his development with interest
* gee I would love us to somehow manufacture a pick this year that lands us Emmett but I reckon he will go late first round, he is a sleeper for me, mobile, footy smarts, plays tough, can mark and kick goals and could solve our rucking problem going forward (together with Sims). If we traded down to a late top 10 and mid teens pick, he would be an astute 3rd pick for us.
I can't see Samson being suited by this, but Sims will be. Smillie is going to be the second coming of Grigga. How much more growth does Robey have?
Draft profile has him at 199cm. Unless he grows 3-4 cm not sure he is the right size for the new rules. Cant see us picking up another ruck unless CDT slides.A bit more analysis on the new ruck rule - typical that it’s still a bit of an unknown.
Extinct or flourishing: Which ruckmen will survive the AFL’s new rules?
Clubs are going to spend many hours over pre-season working out how to best use their ruckmen under the new ruck rules. They will cause some sleepless nights for some of the game’s best big men.
My take
* Saying there is still a role for a Nankervis as I thought this spelt the end for him as a grappling ruckman
* This rule change will suit our forgotten man in Balta
* Simms becomes an astute pick at the beginning of last year’s second round, will watch his development with interest
* gee I would love us to somehow manufacture a pick this year that lands us Emmett but I reckon he will go late first round, he is a sleeper for me, mobile, footy smarts, plays tough, can mark and kick goals and could solve our rucking problem going forward (together with Sims). If we traded down to a late top 10 and mid teens pick, he would be an astute 3rd pick for us.
The club has consistently said Sims is a forward with ruck potential but they see him as forward first and foremost.
I like the look of CDT i think he will be a ruckman first and foremost and i like the look of his frame he aint gunna be a weed.
Unlike some he is a good mark he gets plenty of ball and he is athletic.
It depends on do we think he is say a luke Jackson type or lets say a better marking version of Brodie Grundy you then have to consider taking him
How about Rowan Marshall we are talking that type.
Ruck going forward is a problem and this kid while a ruckman is considered the best tall in the entire draft.
I think people are being hoodwinked by all the talk of a shallow draft. This draft has plenty of talent.
I like the look of CDT i think he will be a ruckman first and foremost and i like the look of his frame he aint gunna be a weed.
Unlike some he is a good mark he gets plenty of ball and he is athletic.
It depends on do we think he is say a luke Jackson type or lets say a better marking version of Brodie Grundy you then have to consider taking him
How about Rowan Marshall we are talking that type.
Ruck going forward is a problem and this kid while a ruckman is considered the best tall in the entire draft.
I think people are being hoodwinked by all the talk of a shallow draft. This draft has plenty of talent.
Just an add on to the above. I think with where we are on the clock we should take a mature type for now simply because Ryan OHB dont cut it atm and sims is primarily a kpf .
Get the mid field right build the depth, and next year we can target one of a fair few decent ruckmen for development.
Get the mid field right build the depth, and next year we can target one of a fair few decent ruckmen for development.
I wouldn't be taking a ruckman until we see the effect of the new rules. That may well hurt us in 2026 if Nankervis goes down but to me that doesn't really matter in the larger scheme of things
You also have to consider the zero sum game of salary cap limitations and which positions need to be prioritised. Paying for a ruck inherently devalues everyone else.
A "good" ruck who reaches his ceiling will require a large salary cap investment.
Is it smart to allocate a disproportionately high amount of limited resources to the single least influential position on the ground?
That's before considering development time.
100% just find a cheap mature ruck later. That saves on dev time, lowers risk of a bust, and saves on salary (so we can pay the rest of the team more as it's a zero sum game).
Least influential position on the ground should be addressed with minimal resources possible.
Minimal dev time, minimal salary, minimal upfront cost in picks.
A chance at a sliding scale that will land between Luke Jackson and Brodie Grundy is ridiculous to consider at Pick 3 IMO and totally unjustifiable. The notion is entirely a vestigial remnant of outdated thinking that infests an industry that only became full-time this past generation.
Im not disagreeing except to say if a Jackson type or a ruckman who projected forward like Gawn you would seriously consider using an early pick on them. Especially when you have more than one good pick.
We should be looking for proper decent cover for Nankervis with a cheap mature option. Geez Essendon bought goldy into their team as cover for Draper and they lost Draper.
It Ended up a smart move and it did not set them back a thing. We need some cover for Nankervis we dont want our kids being belted up at stoppages. No Nankervis and thats really on the cards.
Naismith a few years back while a injury bust was the way to go providing some cover for Nankervis. The process was right but the outcome or injury didnt show it. Not a thing has changed Nankervis needs decent back up.
Get some actual cover in on the cheap and end of next year draft a genuine young ruckman for when Ryan fails and Nankervis retires.
Im not saying invest a top 10 pick on one. But we need to at least try and develop one.
If you dont draft any at all you wont give yourself a chance of finding one at all.
You leave one option trading and i see no reason why we should not be developing our own as well as trading if need be.
Atm we have one ruckman capable of playing to the level the other two are currently duds.
Seems to me we didnt look like winning a thing until we recruited Nankervis. Failure to develop lead to us having to take this Route. decent ruckmen are still important. undervalue them at your peril.
How we get them i dont care but development also gives us a chance of finding one. There is room on all lists for developing ruckmen.
We should be looking for proper decent cover for Nankervis with a cheap mature option. Geez Essendon bought goldy into their team as cover for Draper and they lost Draper.
It Ended up a smart move and it did not set them back a thing. We need some cover for Nankervis we dont want our kids being belted up at stoppages. No Nankervis and thats really on the cards.
Naismith a few years back while a injury bust was the way to go providing some cover for Nankervis. The process was right but the outcome or injury didnt show it. Not a thing has changed Nankervis needs decent back up.
Get some actual cover in on the cheap and end of next year draft a genuine young ruckman for when Ryan fails and Nankervis retires.
Im not saying invest a top 10 pick on one. But we need to at least try and develop one.
If you dont draft any at all you wont give yourself a chance of finding one at all.
You leave one option trading and i see no reason why we should not be developing our own as well as trading if need be.
Atm we have one ruckman capable of playing to the level the other two are currently duds.
Seems to me we didnt look like winning a thing until we recruited Nankervis. Failure to develop lead to us having to take this Route. decent ruckmen are still important. undervalue them at your peril.
How we get them i dont care but development also gives us a chance of finding one. There is room on all lists for developing ruckmen.
It's fun to explore undervalued factors, but the flip side of moneyball is identifying roles, traits, and actions in the game that are overvalued.
Hampson and Grigg taught me that hitouts are on that list, to my eye.
We won 3 flags without developing any
So it's not a prerequisite
Huge cost tho - it's 5-7 years for zero output.
No developing ruck means we have a bigger list. That's an extra spot to churn.
A developing ruck is like we're watching a baby giraffe that's watching trees grow. Sure the baby giraffe is cute, but the money is in the trees.
Important is both subjective and relative.
How would you define decent in this case?
Sometimes there's a huge jump in pay for a small bump in output. We want to avoid inefficiencies like that. Player Output x Salary Cap allocation is a non-linear line. Important to think about where to find value in that.
That's why I never want to have an AA quality ruck in our team
Because it means we have to significantly overpay on that line for Output x Salary Cap. And that's a club killer.
I think a B-grader with selective traits who isn't good enough to make the AA team is the sweet spot.
That's what we want.
Nank is perfect. Cheap trade, modest salary, B-grade impact in his role compared to peers - maximum value relative to investment.
Just my opinion of course, happy to change my mind when presented with new evidence
Hampson and Grigg taught me that hitouts are on that list, to my eye.
We won 3 flags without developing any
So it's not a prerequisite
Huge cost tho - it's 5-7 years for zero output.
No developing ruck means we have a bigger list. That's an extra spot to churn.
A developing ruck is like we're watching a baby giraffe that's watching trees grow. Sure the baby giraffe is cute, but the money is in the trees.
Important is both subjective and relative.
How would you define decent in this case?
Sometimes there's a huge jump in pay for a small bump in output. We want to avoid inefficiencies like that. Player Output x Salary Cap allocation is a non-linear line. Important to think about where to find value in that.
That's why I never want to have an AA quality ruck in our team
Because it means we have to significantly overpay on that line for Output x Salary Cap. And that's a club killer.
I think a B-grader with selective traits who isn't good enough to make the AA team is the sweet spot.
That's what we want.
Nank is perfect. Cheap trade, modest salary, B-grade impact in his role compared to peers - maximum value relative to investment.
Just my opinion of course, happy to change my mind when presented with new evidence
Don't stress people.
Yze has this all under control.
We have a ruckman that cant jump.
Our midfield will rove to the opposition ruckman for 22 games.
Yze has this all under control.
We have a ruckman that cant jump.
Our midfield will rove to the opposition ruckman for 22 games.
Makes sense, Jack put everything on the line to get us into a grand final, even when it meant guaranteeing he epitome be to injured to play.
That's the Angus way
<
Taj Hotton
|
Community series
>