Should we play a 2nd ruck?

[Wrecker45 3,378]

Now Jake Spencer is fit and playing again should we consider playing him?

Max Gawn is such a dominant ruckman now opposition rucks are just jumping into him. They don't care if they win the tap out they just want to make sure Max doesn't.

Could we negate this by sending Max forward where he is dangerous and fight a battering ram with an even tougher battering ram in Spencer?

[ArtificialWisdom 4,045]

Its a legitimate option, although I'd give spencer another week or 2 at casey. My question though, is spencer a threat or a liability inside forward 50? If he can clunk a few marks a game he may well be worth it but at ground level im not sure his skills are up to scratch.

[Elusive Tunbridge 795]

Jake's kicking was always a liability, but if the goal he kicked at the weekend is anything to go by, he must have improved quite a bit.  It's probably a question of match-ups.  When the other team have a strong second ruck, I'd prefer Jake to Pedo.  In all other circumstances, Pedo's value around the round is much greater.

[rjay 25,202]

No, we don't have a 2nd ruck or 1st ruck for that matter that can play forward...

I know someone will bring up the Geelong game, and yes it will work once in a blue moon but more often than not it doesn't...

Also remember Geelong's ruck stocks were down in that game, from memory they only had Blitz...and we didn't have Hogan.

Let's hope the selectors can time that once in a blue moon game because I'm sure they will try it again at some time.

[Wrecker45 3,378]

2 minutes ago, Elusive Tunbridge said:

Jake's kicking was always a liability, but if the goal he kicked at the weekend is anything to go by, he must have improved quite a bit.  It's probably a question of match-ups.  When the other team have a strong second ruck, I'd prefer Jake to Pedo.  In all other circumstances, Pedo's value around the round is much greater.

Horses for courses. But is it just limited to other teams having a strong 2nd ruck? I'm not as concerned about Gawn going up against good ruckman as I am about him going up against average ruckman that are just there to jump into him. When this happens or is likely to happen I wonder whether we should bring in Spencer to jump into them.

[Wrecker45 3,378]

4 minutes ago, rjay said:

No, we don't have a 2nd ruck or 1st ruck for that matter that can play forward...

I know someone will bring up the Geelong game, and yes it will work once in a blue moon but more often than not it doesn't...

Also remember Geelong's ruck stocks were down in that game, from memory they only had Blitz...and we didn't have Hogan.

Let's hope the selectors can time that once in a blue moon game because I'm sure they will try it again at some time.

I wouldn't be surprised if big Maxxy can play forward now. He was OK down there when he was an ok ruckman. His confidence and stature have grown since then.

Now he is considered a dominant ruckman I wouldn't be surprised if he was a more influential forward. 

[ArtificialWisdom 4,045]

4 minutes ago, Wrecker45 said:

Horses for courses. But is it just limited to other teams having a strong 2nd ruck? I'm not as concerned about Gawn going up against good ruckman as I am about him going up against average ruckman that are just there to jump into him. When this happens or is likely to happen I wonder whether we should bring in Spencer to jump into them.

Its about giving max a rest really. If we had spencer in against the dogs would it have helped? id probably say yes in the middle but no up forward. Its a really risky move but i wouldnt be crying if they tried it. Also depends what % they want max in the middle. Assuming they want him in 80%+ then having a full time ruckman like spencer forward is not going ot help us much.

[ManDee 7,239]

Yes.

 

Maybe not every week but regularly to look after Gawny. I also agree that with his new found confidence he will be a better forward.

[rjay 25,202]

Just now, Wrecker45 said:

I wouldn't be surprised if big Maxxy can play forward now. He was OK down there when he was an ok ruckman. His confidence and stature have grown since then.

Now he is considered a dominant ruckman I wouldn't be surprised if he was a more influential forward. 

Max is more likely to kick goals drifting forward when in the ruck.

He's not a forward and never will be.

1 minute ago, ArtificialWisdom said:

Its about giving max a rest really. If we had spencer in against the dogs would it have helped? id probably say yes in the middle but no up forward. Its a really risky move but i wouldnt be crying if they tried it. Also depends what % they want max in the middle. Assuming they want him in 80%+ then having a full time ruckman like spencer forward is not going ot help us much.

Max can rest on the bench, the dogs ran us off our legs. How would Spencer have helped? although the way Pedersen jogged around Spencer probably wouldn't have been as big a liability as I would have thought.

We do need to find someone who can really play this 2nd ruck/ key forward role though. A Gawn/Spencer combination isn't the answer.

[McQueen 17,867]

Yes, we need a second ruck to support the clearance work all around the ground. Spencer has the height and strength, I just hope that his ruck craft is coming along now and his tap work is more creative and accurate.

If we want Gawn to get through the whole year as a dominant ruckman, he will need a chop-out more regularly or we'll see more games like the Bulldogs where he wins enough ruck contests but is severely out-gunned around the ground.

[Wrecker45 3,378]

5 minutes ago, rjay said:

Max is more likely to kick goals drifting forward when in the ruck.

He's not a forward and never will be.

I'm not so sure. But there is only one way to find out.

[Wiseblood 24,637]

No.  We can't carry two ruckmen.  Gawn had a bad game on the weekend, but it's not a reflection on his tank, more a reflection on how well the Bulldogs played him.

It might work once in a blue moon but Spencer isn't exactly an athlete and I feel like it would hurt our running game if we had both of them on the field at the same time.

[beelzebub 23,388]

I dont mind the idea of Max as a resting forward....what a novel concept...footy is always NEW  

Is Jake that player ( 2nd ruck )  Hmm..  given its a game of swappsies and the 2nd ruck would I suppose go forward  I'm not sure that Jake brings that to the game, not in a really meaningful way. Might be someone else out there that could though

[stuie 7,374]

One of our biggest assets is that we have a big mobile ruckman with a good tank which frees us up somewhat to play more runners.

Why would we decrease that advantage by playing another tall who is not versatile enough to do much else other than ruck?

 

Edited May 18, 2016 by stuie

[beelzebub 23,388]

3 minutes ago, stuie said:

One of our biggest assets is that we have a big mobile ruckman with a good tank which frees us up somewhat to play more runners.

Why would we decrease that advantage by playing another tall who is not versatile enough to do much else other than ruck?

 

In my opinion youre not. We still play someone else at times on the paddock to ruck giving big Maxxy a spell.

if however  we keep Max on th park whilst having a bit of a rest we still keep his other great assets alive and well. He can mark, he can kick goals and he knows how to lurk and position himself in the forward  50.If he wasnt a ruck he COULD be a tall forward. Hes that good.

By just moving pieces around the board as opposed to taking them off the board has a bonus in not chewing up some rotations. We can keep the engine fresher as well.

Its worth thinking about

[stuie 7,374]

2 hours ago, beelzebub said:

In my opinion youre not. We still play someone else at times on the paddock to ruck giving big Maxxy a spell.

if however  we keep Max on th park whilst having a bit of a rest we still keep his other great assets alive and well. He can mark, he can kick goals and he knows how to lurk and position himself in the forward  50.If he wasnt a ruck he COULD be a tall forward. Hes that good.

By just moving pieces around the board as opposed to taking them off the board has a bonus in not chewing up some rotations. We can keep the engine fresher as well.

Its worth thinking about

Pedo has done an excellent job with the backup ruck duties this year, can't see Spencer winning many more hitouts, and definitely can't see him being anywhere near as useful in the forward line. Spencer would be sitting on the bench when not rucking, at least Pedo goes forward (or back), so he'd be "chewing up" far more rotations.

Edit - Ditched the bit about Pencil after misreading your post initially Bub, apologies.

 

Edited May 18, 2016 by stuie

[Elusive Tunbridge 795]

If our development wizards can wave the wand over Max King, he could be the answer.  He was drafted to improve our ruck stocks, but it seems he's spent more time as a tall forward.  If his ruck work comes up to scratch, he'd certainly provide a tall option in the forward line.  Not a solution for this year, however.

[Undeeterred 3,127]

46 minutes ago, stuie said:

Pedo has done an excellent job with the backup ruck duties this year, can't see Spencer winning many more hitouts, and definitely can't see him being anywhere near as useful in the forward line. Spencer would be sitting on the bench when not rucking, at least Pedo goes forward (or back), so he'd be "chewing up" far more rotations.

Ironically enough, now #PencilMyths are beginning...

"He can mark, he can kick goals and he knows how to lurk and position himself in the forward  50. If he wasnt a ruck he COULD be a tall forward. Hes that good."

Give me a spell. He's a depth ruckman.

He was referring to Maxy, methinks.

[ArtificialWisdom 4,045]

43 minutes ago, Elusive Tunbridge said:

If our development wizards can wave the wand over Max King, he could be the answer.  He was drafted to improve our ruck stocks, but it seems he's spent more time as a tall forward.  If his ruck work comes up to scratch, he'd certainly provide a tall option in the forward line.  Not a solution for this year, however.

He is the ruck/forward we desperatly need but im not sure his development is coming along as quickly as we would like. He has some tallent no doubt but he doesnt seem any bulkier than he was 2 years ago...

[stuie 7,374]

8 minutes ago, Undeeterred said:

He was referring to Maxy, methinks.

Ah yes, on second read through you're probably right there.

 

[Fat Tony 5,291]

IMO we would be better off just giving Gawn a rest at some stage. (Maybe this week with the bye five matches away.) I think Pedersen, Dawes and Frost offer more up forward, particularly in the way of defensive pressure.

[Bring-Back-Powell 15,065]

I'd consider bringing in Spencer for the Hawks game in 3 weeks.

They have 2 genuine rucks in McEvoy and Ceglar who would both be too good for Pedersen when he's relieving Gawn.

Plus Gawn would need a rest after the NT game, so 50% game time in ruck and the other as a key fwd may be the way to go.

and hopefully Dawes would've replaced Pedo by then.

 

[Slartibartfast 17,789]

2 hours ago, stuie said:

Why would we decrease that advantage by playing another tall who is not versatile enough to do much else other than ruck?

To protect Gawn from burnout for one.

If Spencer players it must be on the basis he is used extensively in the ruck, say 40% of the time and plays forward say 25% of the time.  Gawn rucks 60% and plays forward 20%.

It works if Spencer can ruck effectively and Gawn can play forward effectively.  Spencer is surprisingly quick and he is also physical in stoppages. 

Max looked cooked to me on Sunday, couldn't jump or get around the ground.  He's rucked in 11 games straight with no help. I can't see it's a bad idea to give him a rest this week and play Spence as well.  Pedo is a workhorse but rarely plays well against good teams so he's not the long term answer. Reality is we are filling time until one of the King boys makes it.

[The Song Formerly Known As 6,479]

could send Gawn forward more and give him a break without making the ruck such a liability without having him in there (pedo, and co. do their best)

 

Gawn can take grabs and kick goals. Don't mind it.

[stuie 7,374]

4 minutes ago, Baghdad Bob said:

To protect Gawn from burnout for one.

If Spencer players it must be on the basis he is used extensively in the ruck, say 40% of the time and plays forward say 25% of the time.  Gawn rucks 60% and plays forward 20%.

It works if Spencer can ruck effectively and Gawn can play forward effectively.  Spencer is surprisingly quick and he is also physical in stoppages. 

Max looked cooked to me on Sunday, couldn't jump or get around the ground.  He's rucked in 11 games straight with no help. I can't see it's a bad idea to give him a rest this week and play Spence as well.  Pedo is a workhorse but rarely plays well against good teams so he's not the long term answer. Reality is we are filling time until one of the King boys makes it.

I'd rather manage Max and give him a week off then. We'd basically be using 2 players for 1 role which means we're down a player on the bench.

If he's burnt out then better to have a proper rest and not risk injury by pushing it too much.