The TEAM 2019 – Ruck Poll #1

Written by Schwarzwalder on March 9 2019

Welcome back to the TEAM for a fourth year now!  If you are visiting the site, then you are part of our TEAM!  You have as much say on our TEAM as anyone else here……..

We finished just inside the Top5k with our TEAM in 2018 and we’re aiming higher for 2019.  No mucking around with the TEAM names (TheTEAM@SCT is just fine) this year, we’ll just get straight into the polls if that’s ok?

Now obviously we won’t be able to fulfil every single wish of all our Coaches and there is always the hectic nature of Rd1 being spread out over numerous days.  So it is important to set up certain parameters that guide me in shaping our final TEAM.

Over the next few days we’ll be setting up these parameters with the player polls taking place towards the end of the week.  I’ll then organise two line-ups that meet our guidelines and they’ll be put to a final vote right before Rd1.  Rookies may be subject to ‘executive decisions’ over the Rd1 weekend depending on who is selected.  In every case though, I’ll be sure to stick to our parameters as best I can.  Now then………….

In my first write-up of the season (First Glance), I mentioned that the Ruck line is most important and the choices made will influence every other line.  Nothing has changed there.  History is against Grundy & Gawn repeating their 2018 efforts but they were so far ahead of the 3rd-placed Ruckman.  Even a slightly disappointing season could still see them finish 1st & 2nd.  Please answer the following polls as best you can.  A final vote on the Ruck combination will take place on Monday or Tuesday.

Should the TEAM stick with SET&FORGET (two premiums/keepers) for the season or a different combination?

Which Ruck set-up is best for the TEAM?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

 

 

If you had to start with just one of Grundy or Gawn at R1, who would you take?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

 

 

If you had to take another premium at R2, who would it be? (two choices)

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

 

Thank you, Coaches!  I’ll be back each day with a new poll to decide on.  Stay tuned………

 

11
0


Leave a comment / Scroll to bottom

17 thoughts on “The TEAM 2019 – Ruck Poll #1”

  1. Who’s keen on seeing how a mid price madness team goes this year? So much value to select this year. Then again they could mostly be traps.

    Witherden, mills, Williams, newman, Roberton, smith.
    If I had a secondary team I’d definitely try it…

    10

    1
  2. Can’t see anyone finishing top 2 ruck besides Grundy, Gawn or Goldstein.

    If Grundys average dropped to 120 and Goldsteins went upto 110, who would you prefer? Would you still prefer Grundy, or do you think you would make up that 10 point difference with the money saved?

    9

    1
    1. It’s a great question and I deliberately wrote that post to prompt a discussion. But it is my personal view. Here is my rationale:

      I’m not willing to look past Grawndy this year. The gap is just too significant to cover. If it goes wrong then it’ll be a very expensive corrective trade, but manageable. But if it goes right, then those who don’t start them both will likely never catch up! It’s a calculated risk, but one I’m willing to take. The VC/C options alone make it more than justifiable.

      13

      0
  3. For me the best ruck setup is pretty clear.

    Gawn or Grundy, Goldy, Bines and Lobb fwd.

    Gives 2 rucks right through byes.

    5

    7
    1. Definitely worth considering HH. That is a serious plan that might just work. But I think it’s at least, if not more risky than the set&forget option.

      Plenty of food for thought already.

      #democracyrulesok

      7

      0
    2. Solid plan. Would it work just as well if you traded in Westhoff after his bye (since he has the early one) for those who would rather Westhoff? Obviously the downside would be you don’t have cover till byes

      3

      0
      1. Downside of Hoff is the question over him getting equal or better than his best season.

        You could argue for Lycett instead. Especially with Ryder’s injury, but that probably won’t last long.

        4

        0
    3. All respect HH, but I think this is a mistake. Lobb will score little better than a good rookie, and clog up a forward spot for someone who deserves it.
      Compromising your team for 19 rounds for the sake of the byes is the sort of move that will short-circuit your season. If the swingman was something like Westhoff in last season’s form then it would definitely work, but otherwise it’s a risk not worth taking IMO.

      10

      0
  4. Serious question- Does going Grundy/Gawn and Goldstein help solve the ruck bye week issues? Planning on upgrading Goldstein over the bye weeks or is that a waste of a trade?

    6

    0
    1. Personally I don’t think going Goldstein over one of the others helps that much during byes…. Am I crazy? Probably… But I reckon there are so many players on other lines missing during Goldsteins bye that the better option might be to go in 2 short in Grawndys bye. Make sense?

      6

      0
  5. Gawn and Grundy is well worth the punt.
    Grundy had a massive breakout last year increasing his average from high 90’s to 130.

    Gawn went 130+ on 12 occasions with 5 scores 150+.
    Grundy on 12 occasions with 7 scores 150+.

    Apart from Goldies best year in 2015 where he scored in excess of 130 – 10 times and 7 scores in excess of 150 he now appears to be a 105-110 ruckman at best. Looking at his last 14 games in 2018 he scored 12 tons with only 2 scores over 130 (high of 133.)

    Minimum of 10 -15 points per week plus a look at the captain options over 22 weeks is the go plus should one go down hopefully sufficient cash is in the bank to correct.

    6

    0
    1. Who cares about the ruck and the byes, heaps of people will have gawn/grundy so everyone is in the same boat. There are other factors to consider for sure but not big enough for me to pass starting them.

      2

      0

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *