Hannebery Lycett Gaff

[dragit]

Lycett averaging 20 hit outs as a back up compared to longer and hickeys 24 hit outs as the prime ruckman.
Billy Longer hasn't taken a contested mark this season according to AFL stats however Lycett and Hickey have the same number of contested marks at 11.

Lycett has played 6 more games than Hickey > who takes twice as many contested marks as Lycett on average, both this year and over their careers.

[DJ Higgins]

Sounds like he is a mix between hickey and longer. Average to good. I'd trade both hickeys and longer and get him

[dragit]

What do people think they are getting though?

He's an average ruckmen, miles behind Hickey in Hitouts to advantage % despite rucking against goliaths like Blake Acres and Shaun Grigg.

He's also an ordinary forward who averages well under a goal per game

With a bonus of being injury prone.

Sounds like a gem.

[Yorkeys]

Can you wait till we see Lewis and Rowan in action tonight? Bellchambers and Hurley will give them serious tests. Also waiting to hack Myhealth to see Dan's MRI results, although a man's groins are not aways pretty at the best of times let alone potentially shredded. I think Gaff will come to us - I tossed a coin.

[Linton Lodger]

Lycett is a must. We just can’t continue getting smashed in the ruck each week. He’ll play for another 5 years barring injury. No brainer.

I'm not actually sure if Lycett is a better ruckmen than either of Longer or hickey, he's certainly a better forward than both... but has barely won a hitout count in his career.

He's probably closer to what Marshall is trying to become rather than a full time ruck.

All jokes aside about our rucks, one of Longer or Hickey won't be there next year, probably Longer who has deals on the table from at least two other clubs, having said that, he may just walk from the game all together!!!!!

I'm not taking the piss or being a smart arse on this, so do with it what you wish!!!!!

The club would like to keep both, however it's very doubtful both will be there!!!!!

Let me guess, Longer has interest from Geelong and GWS?

[saintsRrising]

With Lycett's stats you have to remember that they were mainly gained with Nic Nat in the No 1 spot.

So you cannot compare them directly with Longer or Hickey.

[HitTheBoundary]

I would take Lycett as the number one ruck just to get rid of the endless Hickey vs Longer posts.

[Moods]

A lot of people are comparing Lycett to Hickey and Longer without realising majority of the games Lycett has played 2nd ruckman to Nic Nat... While Hickey and Longer have played their games as the prime ruckman yet are averaging same whiteout numbers; that's saying something. Seems an obvious upgrade to me without giving up anything except for money, the club has to pay a minimum of 95% of the salary cap which means we can't keep saving our money forever. This means that we are going to have to pay someone, I'd prefer to pay Lycett over Hickey and Longer even if it does cost us more.

Spot on Goat, he is costing us money only as RFA.
Problem is his stocks will have risen at WCE with NN knee injury.

A Lycett/ Marshall ruck forward combo could be damaging as both can play genuine key forward unlike Hickey or Longer.

Marshall as key forward has a lot more upside than Paddy IMO and is a genuine second ruck option rather than Bruce, Gilbo, Acres, Paddy etc.

This! Both posts spot on.

Also my interest in Lycett is more pricked by what he can do once Nic Nat hasn't been in the team, rather than what he does when he was in the team. Lycett has been good. Without running down our other two rucks. One is not very skilful and struggles to win possessions around the ground at all. The other has no real presence, has good skill. Personally I would be happy with a Lycett/Hickey/Marshall rucking squad, with a developing ruckman rookie listed. Less pressure on Hickey to be the main man. If he can't handle the 1st rucking duties
then Marshall gets a crack. It's not perfect - or the best in the league, but it's certainly an upgrade on what we currently have.

[dragit]

A lot of people are comparing Lycett to Hickey and Longer without realising majority of the games Lycett has played 2nd ruckman to Nic Nat... While Hickey and Longer have played their games as the prime ruckman yet are averaging same whiteout numbers; that's saying something. Seems an obvious upgrade to me without giving up anything except for money, the club has to pay a minimum of 95% of the salary cap which means we can't keep saving our money forever. This means that we are going to have to pay someone, I'd prefer to pay Lycett over Hickey and Longer even if it does cost us more.

Spot on Goat, he is costing us money only as RFA.
Problem is his stocks will have risen at WCE with NN knee injury.

A Lycett/ Marshall ruck forward combo could be damaging as both can play genuine key forward unlike Hickey or Longer.

Marshall as key forward has a lot more upside than Paddy IMO and is a genuine second ruck option rather than Bruce, Gilbo, Acres, Paddy etc.

This! Both posts spot on.

Also my interest in Lycett is more pricked by what he can do once Nic Nat hasn't been in the team, rather than what he does when he was in the team. Lycett has been good. Without running down our other two rucks. One is not very skilful and struggles to win possessions around the ground at all. The other has no real presence, has good skill. Personally I would be happy with a Lycett/Hickey/Marshall rucking squad, with a developing ruckman rookie listed. Less pressure on Hickey to be the main man. If he can't handle the 1st rucking duties
then Marshall gets a crack. It's not perfect - or the best in the league, but it's certainly an upgrade on what we currently have.

But nothing suggests that Lycett is ready to be the main man any more than Hickey


Lycett has been the #1 ruck for the last 3 weeks

Averaging

26 hitouts
6 hitouts to advantage
14 disposals
3 marks

Hickey this year

24 hitouts
8.3 hitouts to advantage
14.5 disposals
3 marks



Nothing about that says upgrade.

[Crossy66]

A lot of people are comparing Lycett to Hickey and Longer without realising majority of the games Lycett has played 2nd ruckman to Nic Nat... While Hickey and Longer have played their games as the prime ruckman yet are averaging same whiteout numbers; that's saying something. Seems an obvious upgrade to me without giving up anything except for money, the club has to pay a minimum of 95% of the salary cap which means we can't keep saving our money forever. This means that we are going to have to pay someone, I'd prefer to pay Lycett over Hickey and Longer even if it does cost us more.

Spot on Goat, he is costing us money only as RFA.
Problem is his stocks will have risen at WCE with NN knee injury.

A Lycett/ Marshall ruck forward combo could be damaging as both can play genuine key forward unlike Hickey or Longer.

Marshall as key forward has a lot more upside than Paddy IMO and is a genuine second ruck option rather than Bruce, Gilbo, Acres, Paddy etc.

This! Both posts spot on.

Also my interest in Lycett is more pricked by what he can do once Nic Nat hasn't been in the team, rather than what he does when he was in the team. Lycett has been good. Without running down our other two rucks. One is not very skilful and struggles to win possessions around the ground at all. The other has no real presence, has good skill. Personally I would be happy with a Lycett/Hickey/Marshall rucking squad, with a developing ruckman rookie listed. Less pressure on Hickey to be the main man. If he can't handle the 1st rucking duties
then Marshall gets a crack. It's not perfect - or the best in the league, but it's certainly an upgrade on what we currently have.

But nothing suggests that Lycett is ready to be the main man any more than Hickey


Lycett has been the #1 ruck for the last 3 weeks

Averaging

26 hitouts
6 hitouts to advantage
14 disposals
3 marks

Hickey this year

24 hitouts
8.3 hitouts to advantage
14.5 disposals
3 marks



Nothing about that says upgrade.

Good post. Its a sign of our desperation that we're holding up lycett as the great hope. For the same sort of coin, you could probably land polec and he would improve us far more.
Although personally i would add it to An offer for
A gaff, sheil type. A grade mids only- forget rucks!

[Raph Goat Clarke]

Last game he got 21 hitouts 20 possessions and 2 goals. We know what we are gonna get with Hickey and Longer. I'd prefer we keep Hickey and get rid of Longer, but I'd prefer Lycett over the both of them.

[saintsRrising]

Chasing Ruckman??

My view for over a decade is you chase them last when you already have a good team. Before that it is just a waste. History shows that it is pretty easy for good teams to pick up a serviceable to good ruckman when they are threatening. ie Ottens, Jolly (Swans and Pies), Naish etc

They are way too unpredictable to take early in a draft. Better to grab rookies like Marshall or cheap older rucks with later picks in the meantime.

It makes a lot more sense to get a really good midfield and the rest of your team and then to chase a better ruckman if you need it.


With Lycett the only way it makes sense now, as he is only a small upgrade on what we have, is if we are confident that we can swap Hickey/Longer for picks and/or players that we need.

ie

That it is not Lycett vs Longer or Hickey BUT Rather it Lycett is a FA plus picks for Longer and Hickey.

For Example a bunch of 3/4 round picks may be bundled to the Swans if they need points for an academy pick and that plus salary cap relief may assist in landing Hannebery.

So we end up with a small ruck upgrade, but PLUS with either picks that we can use, a player from say the Cats OR that it helps to land Hannebery.

[Sainternist]

Getting Lycett and Gaff would be an enormous coup. Getting the experience of Hannebery on top of that would be a bonus. Yes, I really like the idea of chasing a good quality ruckman. Since McEvoy was traded, we've sorely lacked rucking consistency. Hickey managed to string together a good season in 2016 and that has been it. Lewis Pierce was good last night and looks to have a future at AFL level. Richardson is a deadset flog for not giving him more experience before last night. In recruiting Lycett could well mean we won't be requiring the services of those two mediocre rucks anymore.

[saintsRrising]

Well after Pierce's game if he can back that up over the next two weeks it may less appropriate to try and get Lycett.

[groupie1]

Lycett is a must. We just can’t continue getting smashed in the ruck each week. He’ll play for another 5 years barring injury. No brainer.

I’d love a top shelf kid like Gaff but if we don’t get him then we need to turn our attention to some of the GWS mids next year. I think Shiel is a RFA next year ? A 25-year-old jet like Shiel or Kelly would be perfect.

I’d avoid Hannebery. We’d give up too much for a player who might be cooked. A bit old too.

If we go into 2019 with Lycett and one of Walsh, Smith or Rankine I’d be content, with to getting a gun 24-year-old next year. Maybe Lethlean come work some magic to get some 2nd round picks as well.

I absolutely agree with you, but fear that - as a lone strategy - may be too risky. Let's assume Kelly and Shiel will go to a Melbourne club after 2019; if we haven't significantly improved by then, they ain't coming to us. And that's why I think we need to make as many bold plays for Lycett, Gaff, Hannebury, etc NOW... to attract one of those guys. I'm also a fan of bringing Goddard back to be captain for a couple years, for the same reason. This is as listless as I've ever seen the team... and I've been routinely watching them since 1983. The only year that comes close is the Blight year, but at least there was some hope - Hamill, Gehrig, Harvey, Hudghton, Reiwoldt, top picks to come for a year or two and a young list including Hayes and Baker. There was spirit.