Game plans, tactics and all that jazz

[Engorged Onion 9,262]

This could probably go into the Burgess thread, but with the acknowledgement on AFL360 of Max's aerobic impact around the ground on Monday night, it led me into thinking about the impact of Burgess on the group.

As dedicated fans on this site know - our 2020 campaign was curtailed (amongst many reasons) due to shorter quarters on the assumption that with Burgess on board, he would transform the players aerobically.

Now the reality is this...

You can work in elite sport, and not be elite in your field.

I'll say it again... you can work in elite sport and not be elite in your field, I know it, as I have lived it.

So if there are 17 other High Performance Managers within the AFL system, what is about Burgess's planning and frameworks that are markedly different from what the players were exposed to before (or other teams are exposed to)..

And the inference is that if/when he heads to Adelaide, then they get to drink the magic Burgess Elixir... but it can't simply be Burgess's IP that no-one else has... as HPM's operate in such a small niche world, they all know one another.

So, as pundits, are we legitimately seeing an aerobic difference in our players? Are we drinking some of the kool-aid? Attributing improved aerobic fitness, when it may not be there?  

I mean, it looks to be there... but is that due to his frameworks, or is it the age bracket of some of our players, compared to two years earlier?

Any input is good input...

post script

I know that Burgess spent a lot of time in the EPL - their athletes historically have run more km per game than AFL - but now (I believe) we surpass them...with the high collision impacts as well (which is pretty incredible as a sport to bare witness to).

However the media and coaches for many years have been recruiting 'athletes' to turn them into footballers, or acknowledging how aerobically large the game is now.

My point is - surely it isn't mere exposure to working in the EPL as Burgess has (have other HPM's in the league spent time there?) - that the penny has dropped for them to add in more aerobic work (to come from a simplistic perspective).

Any High Performance Managers in Demonland want to add their 20cents worth? 

Edited April 1, 2021 by Engorged Onion

[whatwhat say what 18,912]

18 hours ago, deelusions from afar said:

Genuinely think it's because he's a ranga.  

peptides supporting mate of mine always says that she reckons he's got a super punchable face

i just tell her she's jealous that we traded up to secure him ahead of her mob picking parish and francis

[binman 37,992]

1 hour ago, Engorged Onion said:

This could probably go into the Burgess thread, but with the acknowledgement on AFL360 of Max's aerobic impact around the ground on Monday night, it led me into thinking about the impact of Burgess on the group.

As dedicated fans on this site know - our 2020 campaign was curtailed (amongst many reasons) due to shorter quarters on the assumption that with Burgess on board, he would transform the players aerobically.

Now the reality is this...

You can work in elite sport, and not be elite in your field.

I'll say it again... you can work in elite sport and not be elite in your field, I know it, as I have lived it.

So if there are 17 other High Performance Managers within the AFL system, what is about Burgess's planning and frameworks that are markedly different from what the players were exposed to before (or other teams are exposed to)..

And the inference is that if/when he heads to Adelaide, then they get to drink the magic Burgess Elixir... but it can't simply be Burgess's IP that no-one else has... as HPM's operate in such a small niche world, they all know one another.

So, as pundits, are we legitimately seeing an aerobic difference in our players? Are we drinking some of the kool-aid? Attributing improved aerobic fitness, when it may not be there?  

I mean, it looks to be there... but is that due to his frameworks, or is it the age bracket of some of our players, compared to two years earlier?

Any input is good input...

post script

I know that Burgess spent a lot of time in the EPL - their athletes historically have run more km per game than AFL - but now (I believe) we surpass them...with the high collision impacts as well (which is pretty incredible as a sport to bare witness to).

However the media and coaches for many years have been recruiting 'athletes' to turn them into footballers, or acknowledging how aerobically large the game is now.

My point is - surely it isn't mere exposure to working in the EPL as Burgess has (have other HPM's in the league spent time there?) - that the penny has dropped for them to add in more aerobic work (to come from a simplistic perspective).

Any High Performance Managers in Demonland want to add their 20cents worth? 

Great question.

I am to High Performance Management what the demons are to premiership success, but i reckon Burgess seems to have the ability of convincing the players they are fitter than other teams and that they can, and will run out quarters and games.

Now, i'm sure all HPMs try and convince their charges of the same thing but you only have to listed to the dees players post the 2020 preseason and this year to understand they have drunk the Burgess kool-aid. They believe they have the edge. 

Maybe the best HPMs are the ones that combine knowledge, communication skills, interpersonal skills AND high level sport psychology skills.

[Kent 2,581]

"Collingwood coach Nathan Buckley says “the hit-out stat is a furphy” after the Magpies won the count 63-4 but still lost to the Brisbane Lions at Marvel Stadium on Thursday night."

In the modern game its a non issue. Brisbane weren't even contesting the ruck on some occasions. Grundy blew himself up getting meaningless  Hit outs.

The Dees are in a similar position but  thankfully we are not as reliant on Max hitouts as we were

[Dr. Gonzo 22,412]

2 hours ago, Kent said:

"Collingwood coach Nathan Buckley says “the hit-out stat is a furphy” after the Magpies won the count 63-4 but still lost to the Brisbane Lions at Marvel Stadium on Thursday night."

In the modern game its a non issue. Brisbane weren't even contesting the ruck on some occasions. Grundy blew himself up getting meaningless  Hit outs.

The Dees are in a similar position but  thankfully we are not as reliant on Max hitouts as we were

 

[Binmans PA 26,033]

I'll say it again. The ruck position is trash...

Edited April 2, 2021 by A F

[Dr. Gonzo 22,412]

52 minutes ago, A F said:

I'll say it again. The ruck position is trash...

Unless you have someone like Max who utilises his strength to mark around the ground both intercept marks deep in defense and for get out kicks aroubd the centre. One stat I found fascinating was that Nic Nat averaged less than a mark a game in 2020 (0.8 compared to Gawn 4.5), I don't know why more rucks don't model themselves on what Maxy does.

[binman 37,992]

38 minutes ago, A F said:

I'll say it again. The ruck position is trash...

It depends how you define it.

If you define the ruck position as the person who takes ball ups, bounces and throw in then maybe.

But as bucks said that's actually a small part of the role.

Athletic talls ie ruck man can play a critical role structurally. Just as Max does. 

For example maxy running hard defensively and blocking the corridor inside 50 severely disrupts the quality and effectiveness of the opposition's entries. 

When they're not kicking it to him, they're trying to avoid him, which forces them to kick to the pockets.

The saints game was the perfect example of this. 13 less scoring shots from 2 less inside 50s was in part down to the Max factor.

Similarly he disrupts opposition kick outs and defensive clearing kicks.

And then there is his impact pushing forward. Someone has to man him up, and there is often a mismatch. He creates goals. I can think of four of tbe tip of my head in tbe first two games.

And whilst opposition teams can set up to rove to Max  he can still create 2 or 3 goals from stoppages agamr, like the viney goal.

In games of small margins that is critical.

Bucks point was tap outs is a nothing stat. But not stoppage work, clearnces, goals from them, marks around the ground etc etc.

I reckon the dees are now really maximising Max.

And I also reckon he is in our top 3 most important players.

So def nor trash.

 

[binman 37,992]

Its interesting actually.

Bucks was basically whinging that he is always asked the same things and people just don't get it. For example hits our being a useless stat.

Said every other coach would say the same and are asked bonehead questions. My words.

I get he says, super frustrated.

But those questions are a function of how puerile the coverage of the game is in terms of tactics and tbe meaning of stats.

How about the coaches try and educate the fans. 

[Binmans PA 26,033]

So to me the ruck position has little to do with Max playing spare man in defence in the hole. You could argue the ability to get involved in the spread from a stoppage is ruck work, but not really. Hits to advantage and hit outs are very imprecise or too predictable. You might get a a goal or two out of it a match, but that's it. I'd much rather have three Oliver's and a McEvoy who competes at stoppages.

I think I just view the position in a similar way to Luke Beveridge. It's functional and if your team becomes too reliant on one position it's unsustainable, and too easy to counter.

[Redleg 37,566]

5 hours ago, Kent said:

"Collingwood coach Nathan Buckley says “the hit-out stat is a furphy” after the Magpies won the count 63-4 but still lost to the Brisbane Lions at Marvel Stadium on Thursday night."

In the modern game its a non issue. Brisbane weren't even contesting the ruck on some occasions. Grundy blew himself up getting meaningless  Hit outs.

The Dees are in a similar position but  thankfully we are not as reliant on Max hitouts as we were

The real stat is “effective hit outs”. Meaningless hit outs to a contest are just that, meaningless, unless for example a centre square hit out is smashed into our forward line, where the contest might be a one on one contest, between say Tracc and a hbflanker. That hit out gives you an immediate chance of scoring.

We need to be smart the way Max plays. He is a huge asset if used to advantage. I think we waste a lot of Max’s first hands to the ball.

Edited April 2, 2021 by Redleg

[binman 37,992]

15 minutes ago, Redleg said:

The real stat is “effective hit outs”. Meaningless hit outs to a contest are just that, meaningless, unless for example a centre square hit out is smashed into our forward line, where the contest might be a one on one contest, between say Tracc and a hbflanker. That hit out gives you an immediate chance of scoring.

 

Exactly. That's pretty much what bucks said. 

Riddle me this AF. If the ruck position is of no value why do every team have one?

[binman 37,992]

The other thing about an effective tap ruck is that sure other teams can set up to shark their taps, but the ruck can control where they do so.

Which means that the team with the dominant ruck can set up their  defensive structure in response.

And for us, as aob noted earlier in this thread, we can set up to maximise our intercepts off half back.

We control the structure because we control which part of the ground the roved ball is collected and kicked or handballed from (eg defensive side  boundary side etc etc).

we change that spot it is hit to which makes it very hard for the oppositionto set up a structure forward of the ball with any certainty.

[In Harmes Way 7,492]

From a ruck perspective. I think we're starting to look at the difference between a Gawn and a Pruess. If we only wanted a tall bloke in the middle, then we'd be OK with Pruess + salary cap space for others. Gawn offers so much more around the ground and has amazing aerobic capacity compared to his peers to bring his height to required zones of the ground when needed.

[Dr. Gonzo 22,412]

43 minutes ago, A F said:

So to me the ruck position has little to do with Max playing spare man in defence in the hole. You could argue the ability to get involved in the spread from a stoppage is ruck work, but not really. Hits to advantage and hit outs are very imprecise or too predictable. You might get a a goal or two out of it a match, but that's it. I'd much rather have three Oliver's and a McEvoy who competes at stoppages.

I think I just view the position in a similar way to Luke Beveridge. It's functional and if your team becomes too reliant on one position it's unsustainable, and too easy to counter.

Depends how they're used. Have a look at the great post earlier in the thread by I think @Axis of Bob

a great example of how we might now be utilising Max's hitout dominance to our advantage to put the ball away from their +1 around the stoppage and maximising our midfielders strength to win contested possessions. This allows us an extra behind the ball in case we lose the stoppage or to have one on ones in our forward line if we win.

[CBDees 3,162]

On 2/8/2021 at 10:52 AM, Axis of Bob said:

Goals from number 1 ruckmen:

English 8, McInerney 6, Goldstein 6, Naitanui 5, Darcy 5, Grundy 3, Sinclair 3, Lycett 2, Soldo 2, Gawn 1, Witts 0, O'Brien 0, Pittonet 0.

Basically, no ruckman really kicks goals. The way they get goals is through mobility or when rucking int he forward line. The problem is that most ruckmen aren't quick enough to get to the position to do damage against a smaller opponent, so the only plays where they can get forward are in slow plays with the defence camped out in numbers inside 50. The odds of marking this kick are really, really, low. You're much better off camping Gawn outside 50 ready to intercept the defensive kick and give yourself another opportunity to score. 

The other problem with Gawn forward is that he offers zero defensive pressure inside 50, due to his size and mobility. This allows players to break a line and get the ball past our defensive zone.

This may be different with Jackson, who is far more mobile. He has the ability to link up and out run his opponent into the forward line before the numbers get there. This is like what happens with English for the Dogs.

Gawn may play forward for the occasional burst to mix things up but I'd be surprised if it's any more than that.

Interesting that McInerney is #2 for goals scored when they picked him up from Casey (right under our noses)!

[titan_uranus 22,321]

On 3/31/2021 at 10:07 AM, Axis of Bob said:

Some interesting discussion about stoppages, which has been a theme since we were dominant here in 2018. A few interesting things from the weekend:

This is a typical stoppage from the weekend.

Notice that we are playing one short in here, with the extra player being Sinclair on the far right. His counter, Salem, is sitting 30 metres defensive side of the contest (left of screen). We lose this clearance, but the the ball is just dumped straight to Salem who launches a counterattack. 

We leveled the clearances on the weekend but that only tells part of the story. We are committing our resources away from the stoppages because we've got such talent in there. We are diverting it from stoppages and into a structure behind the ball, minimising the danger of any lost clearances. Effectively we are saying that one of our lost clearances is kicking to a defensive outnumber for us, but any won clearance goes forward to an even contest for us. 

This is what a gameplan that maximises our strengths looks like. We've been talking about our gun inside players cannibalising each other's possessions and clearances, but this game plan actually maximises the value we get from two of the best contested ball winners in the league (Oliver and Viney), even if they'll actually have fewer clearances because of it, and also having Max. 

The plan is in several parts:
1- We go into a stoppage with a numerical disadvantage but superior behind the stoppage.
2- Max can direct the ball away from the spare players in the stoppage and to where we have 50/50 numbers, so that the impact of the opposition extra numbers in the stoppage is lessened.
3- Oliver/Viney/Trac can win a lot of these clearances now and get it forward to 50/50 contests. But if the extra numbers win out, we have defensive cover.

Max is a big part of this because, whilst getting a clean tap to advantage is really hard, having a big dominant ruck advantage means that we can direct the area of the stoppage that the clearance battle will take place in (ie, where we have even numbers). For instance, in the above stoppage, Max directed the ball front left, which gave Oliver, Petracca and Langdon a fair go at it before the extra opposition numbers can arrive.

The end result of this is that we play a pretty distinctive style of game. We're in the middle of the pack league wide for most statistics but we are currently first in intercepts (quite comfortably) and first in intercept differential (by an absolute mile). Check out the intercept differential below:

So we intercept the ball 11.5 times more than our opponents every game. If we can stay in the ballpark with clearances then we're getting a massive advantage. 

Often the biggest strengths of a team are used counter-intuitively because that's where you get the most incremental value. I think about it in terms of the late 2000s premiership teams, Sydney, West Coast, Geelong and Hawthorn. Sydney and Hawthorn both had their strengths in their forward line. Barry Hall, Micky O, Goodes .... Buddy, Roughy. Both those teams played defensive game styles, with Sydney crowding stoppages and Hawthorn employing a very aggressive defensive zone to cover their defensive weakness (Croad and Brichall, then later threw Hodge in as cover, whilst Sydney had Bolton and Barry, who were both undersized). Conversely, Geelong and West Coast had very strong defences (Scarlett, Enright, Mackie, Milburn, Harley etc, and Glass, Wirrpanda, Banfield, Waters) but comparatively weak forward lines (Mooney and N Ablett as keys, and Hansen and Hunter as keys), so they played very aggressive, creative and expansive game styles so make it easier for their less talented forward to score (although they still had Stevie J!).

You can solve your weaknesses with numbers but you can back your best players to win contests if given a sniff. Like Richmond does with Riewoldt, Lynch and Dusty up forward, who have to fight against extra numbers but they'll win enough of them to kick you a score, whilst they throw extra number behind the ball to cover their less talented defenders. 

Unlike previous years, we aren't doubling down on our big midfielders to smash the opposition in clearances every week, we are backing in their ability to win difficult contests and committing our numbers outside the contests where we are weaker. Our mids must be respected, but our ability to commit numbers outside is making it easier for us to defend but also making it easier for our less formidable forwards to kick goals. 

We evened the clearances last week, which is a great effort when we go into each stoppage outnumbered. If we split the clearances with the opposition this year then that will be a massive win for us.

I'm very happy with how our game style has looked over the first two weeks. 

A truly excellent post.

Under Goodwin we used to bring the spare up to the stoppage when our opponent would drop it into their backline. We'd inevitably win the clearance but regularly turn it over kicking to their spare defender.

We can't expect that each week our opponent will leave a spare player behind the ball like St Kilda did, but it's a set up that works for us and it shows me that we're learning how to adapt to our list: as you say, we can afford to be one down at stoppages because of who we send to them.

On 4/1/2021 at 9:18 AM, Axis of Bob said:

Funnily enough I've been thinking about the Dogs. I'm trying to work out how good they actually are.

Their best 6 players (Caleb Daniel aside) all play the same role in the team (Bont, Macrae, Libba, Dunkley, Treloar and Smith), which is different to pretty much every other team. They monopolise the ball with all their mids and they often flood the stoppages with numbers, making it difficult to get the ball out cleanly. Then they pretty much just have those midfielders follow the ball around everywhere as they try to make it a midfield slog. But if the ball gets out and away from their midfield then they just don't have the talent around the ground, especially aerially. We saw that in the final last year, where they dominated the inside 50s but then struggled to contain any reasonable St Kilda forward entry, They conceded 20+ contested marks in a shortened game, and are conceding 18.5 a game already this season, which is easily the worst. So it looks like they're doubling down on last year's game. I just worry that they're spending so many of their resources in an overpowering midfield that they're going to get diminishing returns as they eat each other's lunch.

I'd say the Dogs aren't too bad aerially in the forward line with Naughton, Bruce and English dropping down there too Their issue is their backline. They rely on Wood to be a key defender and their other key defenders, Keath and Gardiner, are really average.

Their midfield isn't as crowded as it sounds though. Smith plays off half-back and Dunkley outer on the wing to free up space. Bontempelli goes forward too, and is another aerial threat. So they have some flexibility in half their mids that allows them to rotate them through other parts of the ground.

[Grr-owl 1,075]

On 4/1/2021 at 9:16 AM, Engorged Onion said:

This could probably go into the Burgess thread, but with the acknowledgement on AFL360 of Max's aerobic impact around the ground on Monday night, it led me into thinking about the impact of Burgess on the group.

As dedicated fans on this site know - our 2020 campaign was curtailed (amongst many reasons) due to shorter quarters on the assumption that with Burgess on board, he would transform the players aerobically.

Now the reality is this...

You can work in elite sport, and not be elite in your field.

I'll say it again... you can work in elite sport and not be elite in your field, I know it, as I have lived it.

So if there are 17 other High Performance Managers within the AFL system, what is about Burgess's planning and frameworks that are markedly different from what the players were exposed to before (or other teams are exposed to)..

And the inference is that if/when he heads to Adelaide, then they get to drink the magic Burgess Elixir... but it can't simply be Burgess's IP that no-one else has... as HPM's operate in such a small niche world, they all know one another.

So, as pundits, are we legitimately seeing an aerobic difference in our players? Are we drinking some of the kool-aid? Attributing improved aerobic fitness, when it may not be there?  

I mean, it looks to be there... but is that due to his frameworks, or is it the age bracket of some of our players, compared to two years earlier?

Any input is good input...

post script

I know that Burgess spent a lot of time in the EPL - their athletes historically have run more km per game than AFL - but now (I believe) we surpass them...with the high collision impacts as well (which is pretty incredible as a sport to bare witness to).

However the media and coaches for many years have been recruiting 'athletes' to turn them into footballers, or acknowledging how aerobically large the game is now.

My point is - surely it isn't mere exposure to working in the EPL as Burgess has (have other HPM's in the league spent time there?) - that the penny has dropped for them to add in more aerobic work (to come from a simplistic perspective).

Any High Performance Managers in Demonland want to add their 20cents worth? 

I am to HPM what Binman is, but without his natural talent. Nevertheless, Burgo says that EPL players have far more acceleratIons and decelerations than AFL players, and the players are smaller, lighter and far, far more agile. Robbie Gray is a bog standard soccer player in terms of agility. I think these points of difference figures into his methods somehow as I have never seen a team as lean as ours this season.

Don’t know how, but if I knew what he knew and thought there was an advantage in it somewhere, I’d use it. Of course. The question is, what advantage could there be in being leaner and more agile than others while maintaining optimum upper-body strength to compete with the opposition?

[Kent 2,581]

5 hours ago, Redleg said:

The real stat is “effective hit outs”. Meaningless hit outs to a contest are just that, meaningless, unless for example a centre square hit out is smashed into our forward line, where the contest might be a one on one contest, between say Tracc and a hbflanker. That hit out gives you an immediate chance of scoring.

We need to be smart the way Max plays. He is a huge asset if used to advantage. I think we waste a lot of Max’s first hands to the ball.

Yes absolutely agree RL!

[PaulRB 5,919]

3 hours ago, Grr-owl said:

I am to HPM what Binman is, but without his natural talent. Nevertheless, Burgo says that EPL players have far more acceleratIons and decelerations than AFL players, and the players are smaller, lighter and far, far more agile. Robbie Gray is a bog standard soccer player in terms of agility. I think these points of difference figures into his methods somehow as I have never seen a team as lean as ours this season.

Don’t know how, but if I knew what he knew and thought there was an advantage in it somewhere, I’d use it. Of course. The question is, what advantage could there be in being leaner and more agile than others while maintaining optimum upper-body strength to compete with the opposition?

The ability to play four quarters of old style footy with 2021 skills, basketball influences and endurance. 

Edited April 2, 2021 by PaulRB

[deanox 8,576]

7 hours ago, Redleg said:

The real stat is “effective hit outs”. Meaningless hit outs to a contest are just that, meaningless, unless for example a centre square hit out is smashed into our forward line, where the contest might be a one on one contest, between say Tracc and a hbflanker. That hit out gives you an immediate chance of scoring.

We need to be smart the way Max plays. He is a huge asset if used to advantage. I think we waste a lot of Max’s first hands to the ball.

My problem with the hit outs to advantage, is that they rarely report hit outs to disadvantage. My bet is that on average they are close cancelling each other out on average over the league.

I think rucks need to neutralise the opposition ruck (so that the they don't get a free ride), and then it is more about how do they use their bulk to assist clearances, and height around the ground to mark both offensive and intercept balls.

For that reason, an athletic ruck like Jackson has the potential to be a force around the ground, but also an athletic ruck who doesn't make use of their height does risk being just a slow, worse midfielder.

[PaulRB 5,919]

With higher scoring, we’ll have more centre bounces and tactical mid-field battles. 
loving it.

[binman 37,992]

58 minutes ago, deanox said:

 but also an athletic ruck who doesn't make use of their height does risk being just a slow, worse midfielder.

Which describes Grundy i reckon  who is not particularly tall anyway.

Height is a big advantage late in quarters and games, particularly if combined with the fitness and athleticism of a gawn.

Edited April 2, 2021 by binman

[whatwhat say what 18,912]

8 minutes ago, binman said:

Which describes Grundy i reckon  who is not particularly tall anyway.

Height is a big advantage late in quarters and games, particularly if combined with the fitness and athleticism of a gawn.

202cm is massive imo!

it's not just height tho, it's mobility - grundy's natural instinct is to sit himself between the arcs and provide the cut out and / or outlet target, allowing him to get involved in chains of ball movement

he's very good around the contest with quick hands too

fourth best ruckman in the game behind gawn, goldstein, and nic nat

if push came to shove, i probably think stef martin provides more value too

[titan_uranus 22,321]

Been looking at scoring maps on statsinsider.com.au. Here's a comparison of heat maps of all our shots on goal from Round 1 2019 to date, compared with Richmond.

Obviously Richmond have generated more shots through that time than us given our relative poor form, but we seem to generate too many shots from 30+ metres whilst Richmond are more central and closer to goal.

Hopefully we see more shots from closer/straight in 2021 than this.