Changes v Hawthorn - Semi Final

[Demon17 4,541]

5 hours ago, Dr.D said:

Not sure which player you've been watching. No offence but Petracca has been awful. It was further highlighted on Footy Classified last night when Chris Judd singled him out and showed a highlights package of his mistakes. Fumbling, missing goals, dropping marks, missing tackles etc. Of course when you're on the footy field for 2 hours you're going to do some good things but his dropped mark in the 2nd quarter let Geelong right back into the game. It was his dropped mark that really changed the momentum of the game and started the string of mistakes. And then he has the chance to kick a goal from 30 out on a slight angle and he misses.  I want to see him lift big time because he has been annoying me for months now. 

 

Sadly he's  a bottom 6 player at the moment. Good around packs and pressure for sure but when opportunities arise has usually hard to predict outcome.

[Dwight Schrute 16,747]

Would be consider bringing Bernie back in for spargo? Another experienced head wouldn’t hurt 

[Watson11 1,882]

6 hours ago, Dr.D said:

Not sure which player you've been watching. No offence but Petracca has been awful. It was further highlighted on Footy Classified last night when Chris Judd singled him out and showed a highlights package of his mistakes. Fumbling, missing goals, dropping marks, missing tackles etc. Of course when you're on the footy field for 2 hours you're going to do some good things but his dropped mark in the 2nd quarter let Geelong right back into the game. It was his dropped mark that really changed the momentum of the game and started the string of mistakes. And then he has the chance to kick a goal from 30 out on a slight angle and he misses.  I want to see him lift big time because he has been annoying me for months now. 

 

Disagree.  He is down on confidence but his "awful" games are mostly good.  When you are on the footy field for 2 hours you're going to make mistakes, especially in finals.  15 possessions, 6 tackles, 3 inside 50 tackles, 2 goal assists (most for a D), 3 1%ers etc is not awful.  Judd could have put a package together for any player to make them look bad.  Brayshaw, Harmes and Oliver were brilliant but had more clangers than Petracca.  The stats that take everything into account had him ranked 20 or 24 out of the 44 who played. 

[deanox 8,561]

16 hours ago, SFebes said:

The point is, they’d give a lot more than Spargo in his current state, even if they weren’t 100%. Personally I’d prefer Kent but that looks doubtful 

I don't think they'd give more than Spargo.

In fact, they'd make us worse by not following the team plan. Their lack of synergy with the rest of the team has been obvious this year. 

[deanox 8,561]

8 hours ago, Nasher said:

 

t_u, I reckon this is the first time in 11 years I've read one of your posts and gone "what?!". I fully understand the concerns over his ball use sometimes, and he had too many clangers against Geelong for sure (also an outlier compared to recent form this year IMO), but he exemplifies the way we want to approach the game.  Of the names he's competing with, including Hannan, Spargo, JKH, Kent, Garlett etc - he is tougher, more contested and tackles better than any of them. It outweighs the occasional misuse of the ball easily.

His name doesn't even come up if I'm in the match committee.

Edit: some stats, if interested:

If you use the "clanger" stat as proxy for poor ball use (I prefer it over DE% as what's defined as an efficient disposal seems totally arbitrary - a clanger is defined as a disposal that directly gives the opposition the ball back), the stats support your position - his percentage of clangers to possessions was 38% - second only to Melksham at 55% (want to drop Melksham?) - the only other to come close was Brayshaw at 31%.  Looking at the team's season average, the median is about 14% and the mean 16% so the acceptable range is somewhere in the 11-20% range. On that basis, 38% is way out of bounds.  

Our worst players across the season have been Hunt, Maynard, Bugg, Pedersen and Frost.  There are no surprises there, accept that none of them have played a lot of games, though most have been available for most of the season with the exception of Maynard, and Hunt if you really want to stretch the definition, which is probably not a coincidence.  

Vanders previous games registered 14%, 20%, 14% and 14%, so that would support my supposition that this game was an outlier.

I know it relies on a heavy assumption that the CG stat is a good proxy for poor disposal (especially in that it doesn't account for the kicks that slightly miss the mark and cause a contest, where a better one would have put it down the forward's throat etc), but I thought it interesting and tells the story I thought it would.  I know plenty of people will say "stats schmats", those people need not bother replying.

Fwiw clangers also include free kicks against and other general stuff ups. Wikipedia says it includes:

-Any disposal or deliberate knock-on that goes directly to an opposition player.

-Any free kick conceded

-Dropped marks or fumbles under no pressure

-50-metre penalties conceded

-A Ball-Up Kick In (Stepping over the line when kicking in after a behind)

 

 

An effective disposal (how they calculate DE%) is either:

- A handball that hits its intended target; or

- A kick of more than 40 metres to a 50/50 contest or better for the team; or a kick of less than 40 metres that results in the intended target retaining possession.

 

 

Neither are particularly useful measures because they are so situational. 

[My name is legion 158]

1 hour ago, Demon17 said:

Sadly he's  a bottom 6 player at the moment. Good around packs and pressure for sure but when opportunities arise has usually hard to predict outcome.

Krap. Petracca is a very good player. You need to watch some games fool.

[Earl Hood 5,788]

2 hours ago, Demon17 said:

Sadly he's  a bottom 6 player at the moment. Good around packs and pressure for sure but when opportunities arise has usually hard to predict outcome.

I think I remember giving him votes the match before last. Not bottom six but I agree he needs to lift this week. 

[DV8 2,271]

On 9/10/2018 at 12:19 PM, rpfc said:

We didn’t want to keep him and got Brayshaw out of him...

 

Is that right,,, wow.  OK by me.

[DV8 2,271]

On 9/10/2018 at 1:59 PM, Deespicable said:

"We didn't see that coming."

It was the most memorable line of Mark Neeld's tenure and funniest depending on how you do your humour. It came after a 79-point Rd 1 smashing at the MCG to Port Adelaide in 2013 and followed a dismal pre-season where similar beltings had ensued. Blind Freddie could have seen it coming, but not Mr Neeld.

Simon Goodwin faces a similar moment in the next two games - assuming we survive the first one, which I think we will.

The bandwagon is rolling and the wave of euphoria is hitting everyone - even our coach. It was the same in 1987 and it was similar for the Dogs in 2016 and Tigers of 2017.

One of the hardest things for any coach is to make changes in September unless they are forced on them. The side's momentum is growing, everyone is putting in and it's blood hard to make a tough call on a player for team balance. You got a glimpse of how hard it was when JKH was left out for the skipper and Goody's presser became a virtual JKH eulogy.

Last week he must have been secretly hoping Dom Tyson hand wouldn't have come up, just so that he could make the call that he wanted to do - the Joel Smith call. But then the Cats realised that Esava wasn't ready and pulled the pin on a third tall forward and the Joel Smith call wasn't needed.

The next two week's Goody has no such luxury. He can stick with the status quo and if he loses a big forward or defender (injuries do happen, just ask Brad Sheppard or Ben Stratton), he then has to put up with a wave of criticism about why he didn't have a back-up plan. Of course if we win, all is forgiven. But if we lose, we all jump up and down like armchair experts do in between stubbies and say: "You'd think he would have organised that better."

Making the situation worse is that Hawthorn and West Coast have adopted big sides - we aren't playing a bunch of pesky little midgets like the Tigers.

The Hawks will have Roughead, Gunston and most likely Schoenmakers (Ceglar will be chopped) for us to combat. The Eagles go even bigger - Kennedy, Vardy and Darling.

Now I know we all love Jetta and Hibberd, but seriously they cannot be expected to outmark giants and in Jetta's case he has already got key match-ups awaiting him - Breust and Rioli.

So with Frosty (Gunston and Kennedy) and O-Mac (Roughy and Darling) already occupied, Goody is wanting to take out insurance more than the Indian call centre operator that rings me almost every week.

Joel Smith is his man and for those of you who have forgotten what he was doing just five weeks ago before his injury, he not only solves the height problem, he also is quick and loves to tackle, something which is critical at this time of year and throwing forward to a potential Tiges game, imperative. Sure he is inexperienced, sure he is not as precise as Jordy or Christian with his kicking, but he is needed. He brings enough to the table that makes him a MUST in.

But we are talking finals now. With no injuries, how do you make room for him?

That's what the coach is there for with their selection panel to help advise. And it won't be easy, just as it wasn't pulling the pin on our underacheiving golden boy Jack Watts at the end of last season, although I suspect Goody will now say that was way easier for him.

To me there are three options, but some of you have more. It should be noted that none of the following players deserve to be omitted in normal circumstances and in the event of injury, they may yet get another crack this year. In the meantime one of them will have to console themselves with a leading role in claiming Casey's first premiership. It is a tough call. 

1) Bayley Fristch - No I hear some of you say. Clearly Smith will slot into our back seven and there's only one player currently back there that can make room - Fritta. I watched him train last week and  he was going head-t-head with Jack Viney for much of it and I was so impressed with how his game had developed physically this season. But he is not quite tall enough for the role that we need down back so he has to either be omitted or returned to the wing spot where he performed so admirably mid-season. He's also a first-year player which means it's easier to tell him he's out and explain it. But when you weigh it up, it would be a massive call to omit him. 

2) Charlie Spargo - No I hear some of you say. Our little dynamo teenager has a cult following like Ricky Jackson did in 1987. He's not as quick as Ricky but he's highly-skilled and he's already shown he can read a crumb coming his way better than my dog. Sure his lack of size presents some obstacles, but he's a goer. And taking him out of that role for a defender means we have to send a midfielder forward and which one - Jones (he's too slow, you say), Oliver (why waste your best mid you say). The balance is right with him in the side. Some will argue that he's a kid and will understand his omission better and get over it. But when you weigh it up, it would be a massive call to omit him. 

3) Dom Tyson - No I hear some of you say. Dom has had to adjust to a new role as an outside mid this season and was a big factor in wins against WC and GWS (until Gawny kicked him). Goody decided that against the Cats he would wear an extra mid to give him options against their strength (mids) and he showed amazing courage to get back and play. Had he kicked a couple of his his shots on the run he would have been in our best. His long-kicking can be a huge bonus to our side on the break, but with Viney back, Jonesy now spends more time on the wing and you have to wonder if we can afford that. And Dom has never really shown he can play anywhere else except as a mid, which is why Fritta rotating from wing to high half-forward is appealing. Already Trac has been returned to more a permanent forward role because Viney, Harmes, Angus and Olly are first choice centre square options. Can we afford to play an extra mid and forsake either Smith or Spargo or Fritta? Can we afford to not have him linking up so well with deft handballs. Unlike Spargo and Bayley, he's not a first-year player, so it would not be easy for Goody to justify his omission. But when you weigh it up, it would be a massive call to omit him. 

But one trigger has to be pulled ... anyone think Goody has an easy job?

Yep. rest hibbo. ?

[Gator 16,891]

Clangers is probably the worst stat in football (and I love stats).  The best players in the game always have the highest clangers.

And it's closely followed by disposal efficiency.  Richmond have the third worst kicking efficiency in the league.  They play a high pressure territory game that leads to poor, but 'effective' kicking.

[Redleg 37,549]

MELBOURNE has ruled out the prospect of Dean Kent making a return this season, with the forward undergoing surgery to repair the AC joint in his shoulder.

Kent injured the AC joint in his right shoulder after coming off second best in a ground level contest with Giant Lachie Whitfield as the pair battled for a loose ball in round 23.

The forward missed Friday night's elimination final against Geelong and was expected to be sidelined for a 2-3 week period before the decision was made to book him in for surgery.

"Dean was trying to get back to play, but his progress was really slow, so unfortunately he’s had to go into surgery today (Tuesday) on that AC joint," Demons elite performance manager Dave Misson told the club's website.

In better news, veteran Bernie Vince – who suffered an AC joint injury while playing in the VFL in August is a chance to play in the VFL this weekend as he bids to earn a recall should Melbourne progress past Hawthorn in Friday night's semi-final.

AFL Site Report.

[titan_uranus 22,272]

11 hours ago, Nasher said:

 

t_u, I reckon this is the first time in 11 years I've read one of your posts and gone "what?!". I fully understand the concerns over his ball use sometimes, and he had too many clangers against Geelong for sure (also an outlier compared to recent form this year IMO), but he exemplifies the way we want to approach the game.  Of the names he's competing with, including Hannan, Spargo, JKH, Kent, Garlett etc - he is tougher, more contested and tackles better than any of them. It outweighs the occasional misuse of the ball easily.

His name doesn't even come up if I'm in the match committee.

Edit: some stats, if interested:

If you use the "clanger" stat as proxy for poor ball use (I prefer it over DE% as what's defined as an efficient disposal seems totally arbitrary - a clanger is defined as a disposal that directly gives the opposition the ball back), the stats support your position - his percentage of clangers to possessions was 38% - second only to Melksham at 55% (want to drop Melksham?) - the only other to come close was Brayshaw at 31%.  Looking at the team's season average, the median is about 14% and the mean 16% so the acceptable range is somewhere in the 11-20% range. On that basis, 38% is way out of bounds.  

Our worst players across the season have been Hunt, Maynard, Bugg, Pedersen and Frost.  There are no surprises there, accept that none of them have played a lot of games, though most have been available for most of the season with the exception of Maynard, and Hunt if you really want to stretch the definition, which is probably not a coincidence.  

Vanders previous games registered 14%, 20%, 14% and 14%, so that would support my supposition that this game was an outlier.

I know it relies on a heavy assumption that the CG stat is a good proxy for poor disposal (especially in that it doesn't account for the kicks that slightly miss the mark and cause a contest, where a better one would have put it down the forward's throat etc), but I thought it interesting and tells the story I thought it would.  I know plenty of people will say "stats schmats", those people need not bother replying.

It's funny, watching the game live there wasn't a single player I was disappointed with other than Vanders.

I can appreciate now, having read the comments on here, that I'm very much alone on that, but I find it interesting that Vanders is being singled out for "exemplifying the way we want to play the game" when all 22 of them did exactly that on Friday. It's not like we lacked intensity or tackling pressure, is what I'm getting at.

I don't think he should be dropped (I don't think anyone should be dropped), but for mine he was not only ineffective as to our team offence, he had a negative effect on us given his mistakes, and that stood out to me more than anything.

Agree with you on DE%, by the way.

[DeeSpencer 23,092]

24 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

It's funny, watching the game live there wasn't a single player I was disappointed with other than Vanders.

I can appreciate now, having read the comments on here, that I'm very much alone on that, but I find it interesting that Vanders is being singled out for "exemplifying the way we want to play the game" when all 22 of them did exactly that on Friday. It's not like we lacked intensity or tackling pressure, is what I'm getting at.

I don't think he should be dropped (I don't think anyone should be dropped), but for mine he was not only ineffective as to our team offence, he had a negative effect on us given his mistakes, and that stood out to me more than anything.

Agree with you on DE%, by the way.

2 really bad mistakes - the playing on and trying to take a bunch of players on in the city end forward flank and the rushed play on to Jetta in the last quarter. Apart from that I didn't think he had too many huge mistakes.

I get that we have a lot of players who were really good with their tackling but only Vanders injured an opponent in Murdoch. Along with Viney they are the meanest players in our side, they set the tone for the others to follow. The Cats started to make really uncharacteristic mistakes under pressure as the game went on, that's perceived pressure worrying about getting crunched and Vanders contributes a lot to that.

[DV8 2,271]

1 hour ago, titan_uranus said:

It's funny, watching the game live there wasn't a single player I was disappointed with other than Vanders.

I can appreciate now, having read the comments on here, that I'm very much alone on that, but I find it interesting that Vanders is being singled out for "exemplifying the way we want to play the game" when all 22 of them did exactly that on Friday. It's not like we lacked intensity or tackling pressure, is what I'm getting at.

I don't think he should be dropped (I don't think anyone should be dropped), but for mine he was not only ineffective as to our team offence, he had a negative effect on us given his mistakes, and that stood out to me more than anything.

Agree with you on DE%, by the way.

Our game is baste on winning contested ball, and pressuring the opposition, primarily. and then we move it forward when we have it, until we have to create a stoppage. And go again.

Vanders seems a key, in this method.

[DV8 2,271]

33 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

2 really bad mistakes - the playing on and trying to take a bunch of players on in the city end forward flank and the rushed play on to Jetta in the last quarter. Apart from that I didn't think he had too many huge mistakes.

I get that we have a lot of players who were really good with their tackling but only Vanders injured an opponent in Murdoch. Along with Viney they are the meanest players in our side,

they set the tone for the others to follow. The Cats started to make really uncharacteristic mistakes under pressure as the game went on, that's perceived pressure worrying about getting crunched and Vanders contributes a lot to that.

And Jetta.

[deanox 8,561]

1 hour ago, titan_uranus said:

It's funny, watching the game live there wasn't a single player I was disappointed with other than Vanders.

I can appreciate now, having read the comments on here, that I'm very much alone on that, but I find it interesting that Vanders is being singled out for "exemplifying the way we want to play the game" when all 22 of them did exactly that on Friday. It's not like we lacked intensity or tackling pressure, is what I'm getting at.

I don't think he should be dropped (I don't think anyone should be dropped), but for mine he was not only ineffective as to our team offence, he had a negative effect on us given his mistakes, and that stood out to me more than anything.

Agree with you on DE%, by the way.

Honestly, I agree he was poor with the ball and was easily our worst player.

I think the are two things people are trying to say: 

1. "Even though he was poor with the ball, and therefore probably did not positively contribute to our offensive game (ie turnovers and errors probably balanced positives, in that sense), his physical presence was strong enough that he can justify retaining his place in a winning team when the is no player pressing for selection"

 

2. "If we want to make way for a structural change (ie bring in a 3rd tall down back), even though VDB was probably our worst,  the physical pressure he adds, including attack on the man and ball, is preferred to low numbers of better quality disposals because a) it is a point of difference between our other players and b) finals can be physically demanding. 

Although we have plenty of ferocious players inside (Viney, Oliver, Jones,  Brayshaw, Harmes), out on the flanks we have a number of lighter bodied players (Hannan, Fritsch, Spargo, ANB, and even though they are still tough Melksham, Salem and Hibberd aren't physically dominating).

As a result, if we are losing a flanker, one of Hannan, Fritsch or Spargo is preferred because they are similar players while AVB offers a different attribute set"

[Skuit 9,163]

I would love to see Fritsch released from the back-line to give us an extra dimension on the wing and half-forward.

I agree that despite his contribution Spargo is still a little bit undersized and slightly out of his depth.

I think Tyson remains one of our poorer performers and is possibly superfluous to our midfield mix.

I'm disappointed that Garlett, our ailing but still classiest finisher from nothing around goals remains sidelined.

And I'm concerned that with Vanders, Jones, Tyson and Lewis in the team that we could be exposed for speed in the packs.

No change.

[dee-tox 4,792]

8 minutes ago, Skuit said:

I would love to see Fritsch released from the back-line to give us an extra dimension on the wing and half-forward.

I agree that despite his contribution Spargo is still a little bit undersized and slightly out of his depth.

I think Tyson remains one of our poorer performers and is possibly superfluous to our midfield mix.

I'm disappointed that Garlett, our ailing but still classiest finisher from nothing around goals remains sidelined.

And I'm concerned that with Vanders, Jones, Tyson and Lewis in the team that we could be exposed for speed in the packs.

No change.

Fair assessment Skuit!

[Nasher 33,047]

9 hours ago, ProDee said:

Clangers is probably the worst stat in football (and I love stats).  The best players in the game always have the highest clangers.

And it's closely followed by disposal efficiency.  Richmond have the third worst kicking efficiency in the league.  They play a high pressure territory game that leads to poor, but 'effective' kicking.

That’s why I went for “clanger rate” / clangers per possession rather than just the raw clangers. It pretty much irons out the bias towards players who get the ball the most. eg Oliver is top 5 (edit: top 1 in fact) in clangers because he gets so much more of the ball than anyone else, but was a long way down the list in clanger rate, and the team’s notorious ball butchers like Bugg and Frost oddly enough simmered their way to the top of the list. 

[Wollongong Demon 182]

22 hours ago, Nasher said:

stats schmats

Yep. How do you measure sheer will, determination and physical presence. This guy can put opposition players out of the game by legitimate tackles.

[Superunknown 3,308]

10 hours ago, DeeSpencer said:

2 really bad mistakes - the playing on and trying to take a bunch of players on in the city end forward flank and the rushed play on to Jetta in the last quarter. Apart from that I didn't think he had too many huge mistakes.

I get that we have a lot of players who were really good with their tackling but only Vanders injured an opponent in Murdoch. Along with Viney they are the meanest players in our side, they set the tone for the others to follow. The Cats started to make really uncharacteristic mistakes under pressure as the game went on, that's perceived pressure worrying about getting crunched and Vanders contributes a lot to that.

Yes. Happy to have Vanders make 2 bad mistakes when he creates a fear in opposition players of getting slammed. If not fear, uncertainty/delay in making decisions. Creates an environment to make mistakes then start falling apart.

[KysaiahMessiah 725]

Please a late out....umpire Nicholls ?

[Deemania since 56 6,131]

16 hours ago, Demon17 said:

Sadly he's  a bottom 6 player at the moment. Good around packs and pressure for sure but when opportunities arise has usually hard to predict outcome.

Still plays as if he is continuously rushed - needs a cooler head to exploit his assets. 

[Deemania since 56 6,131]

8 hours ago, Skuit said:

I would love to see Fritsch released from the back-line to give us an extra dimension on the wing and half-forward.

I agree that despite his contribution Spargo is still a little bit undersized and slightly out of his depth.

I think Tyson remains one of our poorer performers and is possibly superfluous to our midfield mix.

I'm disappointed that Garlett, our ailing but still classiest finisher from nothing around goals remains sidelined.

And I'm concerned that with Vanders, Jones, Tyson and Lewis in the team that we could be exposed for speed in the packs.

No change.

All pertinently true, Skuit. You'd think that point 1, point 2, point 3, point 4 could be easily and quickly and widely recognised by a skilled FD with amendments and immediate development or strategies applied. Are we locked into a FD and coaching staff that live in a world of denial? If we see these issues for the finals, why can the FD not see these and respond? I see point 5 as being more complex, multidimensional and 'risk-vulnerable' but for other virtues, almost tolerable (eg: Vanders might be a little slow but his play slows all competitors in contact with him; Jones is slowing noticeably but runs to space well to 2nd-play the moment, usually effectively; Tyson just needs to be dropped; Lewis is slow, too, but strategically justified in current weeks of his performances).

[demoniac 1,243]

We need to release wider from the contest than we did against Geelong. Too often our release handballs were to a player about to be tackled. 

I would  bring in Kennedy-Harris for Tyson.

Tyson attributes and instincts are primarily those of an inside mid. 

JKH is a much more natural winger than Tyson. Does not get sucked into the contest when we need him to stay out and provide an offensive release to player in space or or a defensive player shutting down an opponent who could be released into space. Also tracks back to cover for defenders who've left their man.