How does winning contested ball affect team performance?

[Axis of Bob 11,812]

OK, I first would like to show you all the following ranking of AFL sides:

Collingwood

West Coast

Essendon

Carlton

Western Bulldogs

Geelong

Port Adelaide

Melbourne

Fremantle

Hawthorn

Adelaide

Gold Coast

Richmond

North Melbourne

St Kilda

Sydney

Brisbane

While not perfect, I think that you’d agree that this list seems to generally reflect the ladder, or at least how teams seem to be travelling. What metric do you think this ranking is using?

The contested possession differential. The first 2 teams are well in front and the next two have a bit of distance on them too.

Melbourne have 4 players that average over 10 contested possessions per game (Moloney – 12.4, Trengove – 10.3, Jamar – 10.2 and Sylvia – 10.1).

As a comparison, Collingwood have 9 players who average over 10 contested possessions per game (Pendlebury – 15.9, Ball – 14.0, Swan – 13.4, Dawes – 10.4, Thomas – 10.4, Blair – 10.4, Sidebottom – 10.1 and Wellingham – 10.1).

Against Adelaide it was clear to see that we employed a forward press. The only difference between the Adelaide game and the others was that against Adelaide we were actually able to get the ball inside 50 and apply enough pressure to hold it there. That’s the secret. Without the pressure the forward press breaks down. And the way to get the ball there is to win contested possession. That’s why the 3 best pressing teams have the highest contested possession differential. Against Adelaide we had 9 players with 10 or more contested possessions

So how do we improve this?

Contested possessions come with time, and additional body size. So a large element of our improvement will come from natural improvement from our young players. Look at the players on the lists of top contested possession winners I put up: almost all are midfielders and all are seasoned players with good bodies, aside from Trengove, Sidebottom and Blair. As our youngsters gain experience and body hardness they will naturally improve.

But, in addition to that, we have some of our best inside ball winners out of the side. Especially I refer to Scully and McKenzie. In the future you could reasonably expect these two to be the top two or three of our contested ball winners.

Our senior players are, generally, outside type players (Moloney and Jamar excepted) so a lot of this inside ball winning has fallen to the younger players who simply aren’t ready to compete with the big boys yet.

I know that emotions on here run week to week, but I hope that we can see that patience is required.

But, as a question to think about, how do we improve our ability to win contested possessions?

Should we bring in older players that are less talented but have 'heart'? If so, who do we bring in? Should we trade for one at the end of the year, forgoing drafting a kid? Or do we ride out the peaks and troughs of the youngsters and wait for them to slowly build up their ball winning ability?

[jackaub 1,402]

Great post and food for thought

i will take note a see how the analysis holds for the rest of the season

This could explain a great deal

Edited May 17, 2011 by Rogue
No need to quote massive slabs of text - just enough to indicate what you're replying to is fine

[Dockett 32 1,239]

Well done and I'm with you on this, but with 9 blokes on the list 180 or under ( mostly lightly framed) I wonder if we have this right.

[jackaub 1,402]

Well done and I'm with you on this, but with 9 blokes on the list 180 or under ( mostly lightly framed) I wonder if we have this right.

Agree on this also

We have in the past recruited a number of highly skilled ball players with light frames and not much body development

The game now requires hard solid thicker types with strength to stand in tackles and get the ball away or win one on ones ie contested possessions. The players we picked were skilled and capable at under 18' s it is a very different matter at AFL level against bodies like Hodge Swan etc

So in addition to your comments it comes again back to some football recruiting Other teams have simply done it better

[deanox 9,923]

My only problem with the contested bal l start is that it isn't what it sounds. Any lose ball get is contested ball, as it is in dispute. If you play 20 m lose and keep picking up the lose ball you could get 20 contested possessions for the day.

That being said, it is a measure of how often you take possession when it's in dispute.

[Radar Detector 1,347]

Is it any surprise then that we were over-run with two of our top four contested ball winners out?

[Curry & Beer 5,444]

Nathan Jones is proof that even if you are a little bloke, a few years in the system building your body and gaining experience will mean you will get better and better around the hard ball. The ratio of how often he gets caugth holding it vs how often he walks through a tackle has improved dramatically

[Dockett 32 1,239]

Maybe your right on the Jonesy example C & B, although firstly I wouldn't call him lightly framed and secondly I'd like more consistency from him now with the no. of games he's played.

My issue however doesn't concern one bloke, it's more to do with list balance in relation to winning contested ball in the hard, strength required, one on one stuff.

When I watch Geelong for instance, I see Corey, Enright, Chapman, Selwood, Milburn, Bartel, Scarlett, Wojinski and on and on.

Taller and bigger bodied blokes whohold their feet,can win the contested ball and also run. Granted they have their outside players in Varcoe and Stokes but not in the numbers we do.

[Sir Why You Little 37,039]

Look Bob, it's easy for you to come up with some statistically based analysis like this but if you trawl through statistics long enough you're bound to find correlations between things like ladder positions and stats. Hell, I've always thought that wins/losses were a good guide!!

But personally I'm sick of factually bases reasons. Why shouldn't young kids who weigh 8 kgs less than older mature players not be able to compete and win things like, well, the ball for instance? Why shouldn't young players who have had 3 or 4 less preseasons and 60 odd less games to develop their skills be as efficient with the ball and as calm under pressure????

Look for all the reasons and logic that explain performance you like, but come the weekend if we lose they are all just excuses. Yes, apologists excuses. You know it, I know it and Artie know's it.

Get a grip son, it's not players that win and lose matches it's everyone else. Until you realise that we're not going anywhere.

HaHaHa...Gold.

"Never Fear....Smith is Here"...

[Demon16 69]

Look Bob, it's easy for you to come up with some statistically based analysis like this but if you trawl through statistics long enough you're bound to find correlations between things like ladder positions and stats. Hell, I've always thought that wins/losses were a good guide!!

But personally I'm sick of factually bases reasons. Why shouldn't young kids who weigh 8 kgs less than older mature players not be able to compete and win things like, well, the ball for instance? Why shouldn't young players who have had 3 or 4 less preseasons and 60 odd less games to develop their skills be as efficient with the ball and as calm under pressure????

Look for all the reasons and logic that explain performance you like, but come the weekend if we lose they are all just excuses. Yes, apologists excuses. You know it, I know it and Artie know's it.

Get a grip son, it's not players that win and lose matches it's everyone else. Until you realise that we're not going anywhere.

i completely agree with the younger/smaller bodies and the inconsistency etc, but i really think most people on here are not complaining about the kids, they are complaining about the leaders of this club and the way the team throws in the towel.

[Tricky 341]

Look Bob, it's easy for you to come up with some statistically based analysis like this but if you trawl through statistics long enough you're bound to find correlations between things like ladder positions and stats. Hell, I've always thought that wins/losses were a good guide!!

But personally I'm sick of factually bases reasons. Why shouldn't young kids who weigh 8 kgs less than older mature players not be able to compete and win things like, well, the ball for instance? Why shouldn't young players who have had 3 or 4 less preseasons and 60 odd less games to develop their skills be as efficient with the ball and as calm under pressure????

Look for all the reasons and logic that explain performance you like, but come the weekend if we lose they are all just excuses. Yes, apologists excuses. You know it, I know it and Artie know's it.

Get a grip son, it's not players that win and lose matches it's everyone else. Until you realise that we're not going anywhere.

Great post. Now, back to the sacking threads...

[dee-luded 2,959]

OK, I first would like to show you all the following ranking of AFL sides:

Thanks for articulating what I've been trying to show.

In answer to whether we play the kids and take the losses, Or play some less talented but bigger players, I say both, and balance. What I mean is we on average have (1) less youngster in the ratio,,, than have had previosly. But in the interim, to get the wheels back on, and to stop the carnage, we should bolster the side with harder players till we can filter young ones back in, one at a time till it looks about right.

The players will let us know when their balance is right, by reading the 'Teams', "Mojo".

I know we have to push games into kids so as to Not Prolong this development period, But Not at the expense of the 'Winning Feeling' about the place. The Winning feeling is paramount for our club to Keep our course.

Edited May 17, 2011 by Rogue
No need to quote massive slabs of text - just enough to indicate what you're replying to is fine

[Hobbits's 17]

But, as a question to think about, how do we improve our ability to win contested possessions?

Should we bring in older players that are less talented but have 'heart'? If so, who do we bring in? Should we trade for one at the end of the year, forgoing drafting a kid? Or do we ride out the peaks and troughs of the youngsters and wait for them to slowly build up their ball winning ability?

i think the footy department would be in the best position to answer those. We can improve our contested possessions by playing the kids in there. gysberts, mckenzie, jeta. we should play MacDonald this week due to garlands injury. only trade at end year for the right trade, but would rather draft again. we should ride out peaks and troughs, gradually they will improve that shoud make it that much sweeter. the loss of trengove hurt us. we need the young leaders to step up eventually and they will. guys like scully, trengove, mckenzie are severely missed. they are the kind that lead by example and mark my words when they are up and running with gysberts the grins on everyone here will light up the AFL. everyone's heart will be pounding red and blue.

[Axis of Bob 11,812]

The size of players we have drafted is something that could be questioned. Does it affect the ability to win contested footy?

Certainly that was the theory several years ago when any kid under 180 was virtually undraftable due to their inability to compete one on one and against bigger bodies. Of late there have been more and more drafted, such as Dion Prestia last year. J Blair of Collingwood is about 170cm, but he is a stocky build that lets him win those possessions.

In relation to Snoopy’s point about the senior players, what do we do about it? Our senior players aren’t that good, and there aren’t enough of them to cover for their lack of class. Is now the time where we should be chasing a Judd type? Maybe not to that extreme level, but a good AFL midfielder to take the pressure off. The other factors here are to do with salary cap, since any player we bring in will be paid more than market rate.

How do we help the side to develop their contested ball winning best to win a flag?

Our best at it are still kids who will get better and better, but they will still need time before they become good enough to take us where we want to be. Do we need to trade in some older players to help allow the kids to play the game at a higher level rather than simply be swamped by big bodies? Or do we just stick with the kids and just wait out the time until they are good?

[Hobbits's 17]

How do we help the side to develop their contested ball winning best to win a flag?

Our best at it are still kids who will get better and better, but they will still need time before they become good enough to take us where we want to be. Do we need to trade in some older players to help allow the kids to play the game at a higher level rather than simply be swamped by big bodies? Or do we just stick with the kids and just wait out the time until they are good?

have any suggestions? if you are loking for a trade would there be a preferable age? or someone who will lead them in the right direction like work ethic, before moving on in a couple of years? ie. lenny hayes. to make a move will come at a cost and considerable thought with list management.

let's not forget, the reasoning for the staggered contrcts of trengove, scully and the front end contracts had everything to do with netting a big fish if and when the time come. perhaps that day is approaching sooner! But who? is it a big body up forward? or one who thrives as a contested ball winner? or both?

interesting thread axis.

[Demon16 69]

The first it that it isn't that our mature players are letting us down, that implies attitude, it's that they are not that good. Moloney, Green and (sadly) Sylvia have shown they are not top notch. They are capable of very good performances but top notch players do it all the time. Judd, Ablett, Boyd, Hayes, Selwood, Priddis and the like play well and influence results every week. The bad game is the exception, not the good game. Our blokes aren't that good and seem to be easily taken out of the game by tags. Davey is the same. I think we are "blaming" players for not doing things they are not capable of.

That is where we differ. i think you are accepting that what our senior players are producing is as good as it gets, i disagree. i think your making excuses for their poor performances. Run through the bunch of "gun" midfielders that Essendon is trotting out and tell me why they are performing so much better than us, and it ain't because their youth is a year ahead of ours.

[Demon16 69]

Fletcher 330+ games

Hille 166 + games

Lovet Murray 115 + games

McVeigh 210 + games

Ryder 100 + games

Slattery H 86 + games

Stanton 141 + games

Watson 119 + games

Walsh 156 + games

Williams 115 + games

Winderlich 98 + games

Monfries 110 + games

Total games on list (approx) 2526

Total games on MFC list 1930

There are 484 games available to player in a year excluding finals and given that games leave your list at the end of each year we are probably about 1.5 to 2 years behind Essendon.

Happy??

Oh, and to help you further Essendon have the 8th most experienced list in the competition, we have the 15th ahead of only Richmond and Suns. For interest Adelaide have the 14th most inexperienced and we beat them by 96 points.

you've named 3 midfielders there and one of them gets bronx cheers from his own supporters.

Edited May 17, 2011 by Demon16

[Demon16 69]

I've never mentioned midfielders in the post you originally referred to. I gave examples of players who influence games and they were midfielders but I could have picked Franklin, Scarlett, Glass, Brown, Reiwoldt etc.

What I said is our mature players aren't all that good. I didn't say our mature midfielders aren't all that good.

Hope this helps.

no you didn't mention midfielders but i asked you to look at Essendons.

my point being the midfield is the most important part of modern footy as we all know, so why does a side who has what i believe to be an inferior midfield, an inferior defense, we'll call the forwards even..... perform 7 consistent, competitive games of footy? our mids are just as experienced as theirs but ours can't perform 2 weeks in a row let alone 7. that has nothing to do with youth, and more to do with attitude. We are anything but an honest footy side, thats why North always beat us. We get very happy with ourselves after a win or 2.....the reason we always stubble over the line(if at all) against weaker opposition. We are a soft footy club, have been for a long time.

[Axis of Bob 11,812]

nWe are anything but an honest footy side, thats why North always beat us. We get very happy with ourselves after a win or 2.....the reason we always stubble over the line(if at all) against weaker opposition. We are a soft footy club, have been for a long time.

Sorry Demon16, but this is the emotive rubbish that I was trying to avoid on this thread. If you want to do that then there are any number of other thread where people will be falling over each other trying to congratulate you for your 'passionate' response.

This is not such a thread.

Please stick to the topic of whether we need to bring in mature players to improve our team development (through improved contested possession) or whether we should stick to youth by itself.

Thanks.

[Axis of Bob 11,812]

That's a pretty impressive list of experienced Essendon players, Snoopy, most of whom are having really good seasons.

I have just been watching a few games from last year to see how our games have changed, if at all, in light of everyone's expectations for the year.

One thing that I noticed was in our older players. Despite Bruce's limitations, he was very solid across half back. Nullified his man and won a lot of one on one contests to rebound. Junior was still effective around the packs too. We are missing these two players, and their mature bodies, this year. Players like Moloney, Sylvia and Jones didn't necessarily have the impact that they're having for us now, which is an improvement.

The other thing I noticed was that when we were really up and running our best contested ball winners were Scully, McKenzie and Trengove. The first two haven't played a game yet and Trengove didn't play last week. I looked at the stats and Scully averaged 9.1 contested possessions a game in his career (1 year), McKenzie averages 10.4 and Trengove averages 10.3. Also interesting is that Gysberts averages 9.0 in his five games this year despite having bad games against West Coast and Gold Coast.

As those kids mature you could imagine them being dominant contested ball winners.

So I actually go into the future with great optimism, as our contested ball winners are around but just aren't playing at the moment.

Edited May 17, 2011 by Axis of Bob

[Demon16 69]

Sorry Demon16, but this is the emotive rubbish that I was trying to avoid on this thread. If you want to do that then there are any number of other thread where people will be falling over each other trying to congratulate you for your 'passionate' response.

This is not such a thread.

Please stick to the topic of whether we need to bring in mature players to improve our team development (through improved contested possession) or whether we should stick to youth by itself.

Thanks.

1000 apologies, so sorry to upset your thread.

A clever person might have picked up on the comparison i have been trying to make between our midfield and Essendon's, their success with an average midfield Vs our lack of with an average midfield, and garner the reason is not purely about a player's ability.

please continue to over analyse with this rubbish if it makes you feel better though.

[Axis of Bob 11,812]

Essendon's top contested midfield ball winners are Watson, Hocking, Howlett and Lonergan. They are 26, 23, 22 and 24 respectively, and have mature bodies. Watson is probably the form player in the AFL at the moment,

Our top midfield ball winners are Moloney, Trengove, Sylvia, Jones and Gysberts. They are 27, 19, 25, 23 and 19 respectively. Probably our two best are Scully and McKenzie, who are 19 and 20.

In other words our midfield is based around Moloney, Sylvia and Jones. Any midfield that relies on these three is stuffed because, as Snoopy said, they just aren't that good.

Let's see how Essendon's midfield goes this week without Watson and Hocking. Their game against Richmond will be an interesting game to analyse. As an aside, Richmond's top 5 contested possession winners are Cotchin, Jackson, Foley, Deledio and Martin who are 21, 25, 25, 24 and 19 years old respectively.

[Demon16 69]

i understand your points and believe it or not i enjoy getting your perspectives. i look at the game a little differently. i think the one thing lacking most in our game is consistent workrate. workrate gives you the contested ball stats you want to see, it gives you the defensive pressure that has been the cornerstone of essendons success this year, it enables you to apply a press effectively. even you guys must have scratched your heads when you look at how thin the age argument is when listing the bomber mids.

IF our senior players do not have the ability i can live with that, but they have no excuse for not having the required workrate. you guys see them as not being good enough, i see them as failing to work hard enough. I think it all stems from attitude, motivation, and obviously training hard. We had a good workrate last year, this year we have gone backwards and i think it is more than just losing Junior and Bruce.

i have no problem with anyone looking for answers to our problems, i always like to hear theories, i just don't think it's right to make excuses for every poor performance the team or players put in.

[H_T 3,047]

I think it all stems from attitude, motivation, and obviously training hard. We had a good workrate last year, this year we have gone backwards and i think it is more than just losing Junior and Bruce.i have no problem with anyone looking for answers to our problems, i always like to hear theories, i just don't think it's right to make excuses for every poor performance the team or players put in.

I think much of it has to do with attitude (& concentration), application and dedication. If they are dedicated and applying themselves at training and on match day to the "absolute best of their ability", then the motivation and workrate should just about look after themselves. That said..

i think it is more than just losing Junior and Bruce.

you're right. There is more than those two. There is Scully and McKenzie. Together with Junior they were ultra competitive at times, highlighted by Junior & McKenzie's rankings for contested possessions (stop the press - that's what this topic is about) and rankings for tackling (ranked No.1 & 2). They were also up there in clearances. And as Axis & Snoopy touched on, it is easier to apply pressure to the opposition when you're winning it first and taking it inside 50 more often by applying a press.

As for AoB's opening post question what can we do about it, well Bob I was keen on Mundy last year, but acknowledged that we keep pursuing through the draft. I love watching footy players such as Mundy, Ablett, Judd, Pendlebury, Swan, Hodge, Mitchell, Black, Jack, J.McVeigh, Watson, Hayes lead the way by contesting contest after contest. Unsure whether to trade for someone, it would depend on needs. It would also depend upon where we see our leadership group (current leaders). On top of this, whether or not someone was available and was happy to move to Mfc.

edit: For now though, this might help...

[dee-luded 2,959]

Fletcher 330+ games

Hille 166 + games

Lovet Murray 115 + games

McVeigh 210 + games

Ryder 100 + games

Slattery H 86 + games

Stanton 141 + games

Watson 119 + games

Walsh 156 + games

Williams 115 + games

Winderlich 98 + games

Monfries 110 + games

Total games on list (approx) 2526

Total games on MFC list 1930

There are 484 games available to player in a year excluding finals and given that games leave your list at the end of each year we are probably about 1.5 to 2 years behind Essendon.

Happy??

Oh, and to help you further Essendon have the 8th most experienced list in the competition, we have the 15th ahead of only Richmond and Suns. For interest Adelaide have the 14th most inexperienced and we beat them by 96 points.

Thats right Snoopy, and thats why I had them in the top 6 I think from memory, in my ladder predictor time capsule. Their experience is a lot and has class.