Centre Clearances - Considered Analysis Requested.

[Ted Lasso 19,549]

3 minutes ago, binman said:

Lord nev put up some stats earlier in this thread about the tigers centre clearance differential over the last few years. Mid table

Mid table will work for us.

 

I'm sure it will, but i think we're capable of being better than that, with the midfield we have, which imo at least on paper is stronger than the Tigers, we should be in the top 4 teams for clearance, and i think that's a good aim. the players are still getting used to a new system and a new coach there so i'm sure as the year plays out we'll just get better and better

 

[defuture15 900]

On 5/10/2021 at 12:22 PM, binman said:

Good post.

In all the years i have followed the dees i have never seen one of our players play better over a sustained period than max has in the first third of this home and away season. And that includes Robbie. 

And that is off the back of an immense 2020.

His athleticism has gone up a level, as has his ball handling skills, particularly when the ball is on the deck.

There was a brilliant example in the Swans game (i can't remember if it was the second or last quarter - we were kicking to the Punt Road end, which is where I was sitting).

Max collected the ball off the ground right in the pocket, only a meter or so from their goal. From the distance i was watching it took me a sec to register that it was max, such was the way he smoothly picked it up, took some steps and delivered the ball by foot.  

The ball tic tacked up the ground and went out on our goal side of the wing. Max ran from the back pocket to take the ruck.

I think he got a free from the throw in (or if not grabbed it) and kicked a perfect pass to Harmes who somehow dropped it over the line on our HF. 

He then went to the next throw in and tapped it brilliantly to a moving Oliver who if memory serves got it to Salem who kicked it to brown 20 meters out.  

Incredible skills. Incredible work rate. And the key actor in a critical goal. 

All while looking not 100% fit.

And as occurs every week with how we play, after getting physically smashed in aerial contests and taking his turn tackling and being tackled. 

And again copping hits to the head from opposition players who know they can hit him with impunity.  

Max is a million miles away from being the problem.

He is the solution. 

 

Max played an almost perfect game against the Hawks.

He was dominant and unstoppable.

It was joyful to hear the groans of the hawks supporters every time he marked it.

[deanox 9,989]

5 hours ago, binman said:

Exaclty.

The clubs have access to champion dat and their own stats. And  i presume custom stats from other sources.

The difference in the sates is that the sports market is so huge there that the public has access to advanced metrics becuase there is viable market for it.  And multiple private companies exist that generate data , analysis and stats. 

Here is an example of what i mean:

https://technology.mlblogs.com/introducing-statcast-2020-hawk-eye-and-google-cloud-a5f5c20321b8

All the advanced stats here are monopolized. 

And i have vague memory of the AFL making it hard for anyone but Champion data to actually collect the stats.

Wouldn't be because the AFL own 49% of champion data and Andrew Dillon (the AFLs chief legal counsel) and Simon Lethlan (former AFL GM of broadcasting, and Football Ops Manager, now St Kilda GM) were directors of CD would it?

https://www.afr.com/technology/how-the-afl-could-crush-an-aussie-tech-success-story-20150904-gjewar

[Cheesy D. Pun 1,765]

I don't have any statistical analysis to back this up but I've noticed anecdotally that we are terrible at centre clearances when its wet/humid.

We get to the ball first, then can't find the handle and the opposition gets a shot at the ball.

It's almost as if we're too eager to be first to the ball.

I'd like to see us take the Chris Scott approach and avoid aiming for the Hollywood exit from the stoppage. Instead, play man to man and sweat on them.

[binman 43,732]

4 hours ago, Patches O’houlihan said:

I'm sure it will, but i think we're capable of being better than that, with the midfield we have, which imo at least on paper is stronger than the Tigers, we should be in the top 4 teams for clearance, and i think that's a good aim. the players are still getting used to a new system and a new coach there so i'm sure as the year plays out we'll just get better and better

 

The point is they are not interested in being near the top of the centre square differential table.

Because in order to achieve that we would actually score less and the opposition would score more. 

As was tbe case for the four years under goody where were near the top of tbst table

So net effect is we would lose more games

[Lord Nev 13,512]

12 minutes ago, binman said:

The point is they are not interested in being near the top of the centre square differential table.

Because in order to achieve that we would actually score less and the opposition would score more. 

As was tbe case for the four years under goody where were near the top of tbst table

So net effect is we would lose more games

To be fair though, the year we made a prelim under Goody we were 1st for team v opponent centre clearance differential...

 

[binman 43,732]

12 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

To be fair though, the year we made a prelim under Goody we were 1st for team v opponent centre clearance differential...

 

Yes. But only after getting on a roll at seasons end.

Where was the two gf teams on tbst list?

And the game has changed a fair bit in 3 years

[Lord Nev 13,512]

4 minutes ago, binman said:

Yes. But only after getting on a roll at seasons end.

Where was the two gf teams on tbst list?

And the game has changed a fair bit in 3 years

Current context is obviously different, just pointing out you may have been a bit loose with the facts binny.

For the record, both of last years Grand Finalists were in the top 8 for team v opponent centre clearance differential. It's not a make or break stat, and you can't judge it on it's own without context, but I don't think either saying 'we should lose centre clearances to win' or 'we should dominate centre clearances to win' is an accurate way to put this discussion forward.

IMO, at least breaking even in centre clearances will be vital come finals time.

[binman 43,732]

2 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

Current context is obviously different, just pointing out you may have been a bit loose with the facts binny.

For the record, both of last years Grand Finalists were in the top 8 for team v opponent centre clearance differential. It's not a make or break stat, and you can't judge it on it's own without context, but I don't think either saying 'we should lose centre clearances to win' or 'we should dominate centre clearances to win' is an accurate way to put this discussion forward.

IMO, at least breaking even in centre clearances will be vital come finals time.

Yes. And breaking even would put us middle if the table would it not?

And to be clear none is saying we should lose centre clearances to win - of course we are trying to win clearances. But not as and in of itself

As ooze said ee are trying to win more clean clearnces and concede less clean clearances 

[Flag 2021 143]

Gus is a most sloppy user of the pill, definitely not AFL standard at the moment. Terrible early today and not much better later on either.

Clearance numbers were once again heavily against us.

I don't understand how we can rate so low on this statistic, particularly from Centre bounces.

Someone suggested that we don't mind losing since this puts the ball in a position for our rebound defence to take control. This hardly seems feasible and sounds like a wacko strategy if that is indeed the case.

Any comments?

[Jaded No More 68,972]

This is the one area where we must get better before finals. 

[JimmyGadson 3,455]

On 5/13/2021 at 11:36 PM, binman said:

Yes. And breaking even would put us middle if the table would it not?

And to be clear none is saying we should lose centre clearances to win - of course we are trying to win clearances. But not as and in of itself

As ooze said ee are trying to win more clean clearnces and concede less clean clearances 

And again we gave an average oppo a great look in. 

Lose clearance like that to the Dogs and they will absolutely take us to the cleaners given their better ball users. 

Gawn has been extremely underwhelming for three weeks in a row now. 

[binman 43,732]

7 minutes ago, Jaded said:

This is the one area where we must get better before finals. 

Disagree.

Break even in the centre is fine. I don't think they scored a single point form centre square clearances. And they set up to attack.

And as general rule, win around the ground clearances for stoppages.

We didn't today but as goody noted in his presser they had an extra at stoppages, hence their 'win' in this stat today.

Except it wasn't a win at all.

If we wanted to 'win' more all we had to do is match that extra and with our bulls hey presto we 'win' more of those clearances. 

But, again as Goody noted he was fine with our stoppages because even with an extra at the stoppage their clearance 'wins' were under immense pressure, and so time after time they dumped kicked in to the forward half allowing (parpahrasing goody) 'our boys to go to work' .

We had 15 intercept marks in our back half on a wet night, with lever 5 of them. And as a result more than third of our score came from the back.

 We scored about half of their total score rebounding from the backline. And they scored almost nothing from clearances.

Another tactical battle won by goody.

[BDA 22,875]

We've lost centre bounces again yet still won. Story of the season so far and proves the point that its not a do or die stat.

That said, I'm not sure giving the doggies first use is a smart strategy when we face them. We'll have to have plans to nullify them and make sure they don;t get too much clean ball. Our defence has been fantastic but i don;t like the idea of Treloar or Macrae pinging it into Naughton and Bruce.

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

We can’t get the balance between getting to Gawn’s feet and staying clear of him.

We also have players that just plainly run away from the ball at centre bounces.

[binman 43,732]

2 minutes ago, JimmyGadson said:

And again we gave an average oppo a great look in. 

Lose clearance like that to the Dogs and they will absolutely take us to the cleaners given their better ball users. 

Gawn has been extremely underwhelming for three weeks in a row now. 

A look in? What on earth are you talking about? We were always in control of that game and we won by 4 goals easing up.

They had no chance of winning that game once we came with the right level of pressure. 

A look in? Sheesh

And we won't lose the total clearances to the dogs as they won't put an extra at stoppages to give them half a chance to win one

[binman 43,732]

13 minutes ago, Clint Bizkit said:

We can’t get the balance between getting to Gawn’s feet and staying clear of him.

We also have players that just plainly run away from the ball at centre bounces.

Why do you think they do that?

[Jaded No More 68,972]

15 minutes ago, binman said:

Disagree.

Break even in the centre is fine. I don't think they scored a single point form centre square clearances. And they set up to attack.

And as general rule, win around the ground clearances for stoppages.

We didn't today but as goody noted in his presser they had an extra at stoppages, hence their 'win' in this stat today.

Except it wasn't a win at all.

If we wanted to 'win' more all we had to do is match that extra and with our bulls hey presto we 'win' more of those clearances. 

But, again as Goody noted he was fine with our stoppages because even with an extra at the stoppage their clearance 'wins' were under immense pressure, and so time after time they dumped kicked in to the forward half allowing (parpahrasing goody) 'our boys to go to work' .

We had 15 intercept marks in our back half on a wet night, with lever 5 of them. And as a result more than third of our score came from the back.

 We scored about half of their total score rebounding from the backline. And they scored almost nothing from clearances.

Another tactical battle won by goody.

I don’t disagree. But there’s a big difference losing clearances to Carlton and losing them to Bulldogs, Geelong or Port who have very potent midfielders and very potent forwards. 

[binman 43,732]

1 minute ago, Jaded said:

I don’t disagree. But there’s a big difference losing clearances to Carlton and losing them to Bulldogs, Geelong or Port who have very potent midfielders and very potent forwards. 

Sure. But we won't lose clearances to them. And the blues have a pretty good midfield and a pretty good forward line.

The dogs beat them last week but they hard too much firepower up until 3 quarter time. We reduced their firepower to a pop gun 

[Jaded No More 68,972]

I still don’t understand how we struggle so much. It used to be our biggest strength and our players have not changed. In fact you could argue Trac and Oliver have gotten better. 
Is it Viney being injured and down on output? Is it the loss of Brayshaw to the wing? Is it opposition teams learning to play to Gawn’s taps? 

[binman 43,732]

We are not struggling. We are simply not as concerned with winning clearances as were up until about half way of last season.

Watch goody's presser and ask if he is a ciach concerned about us losing tge clearance count.

We have won 9 straight, by an average of some like 4 or 5 goals. Clearances are not an issue.

I'm more worried about a lack of a gun small defender 

[Engorged Onion 10,223]

14 minutes ago, Jaded said:

I still don’t understand how we struggle so much. It used to be our biggest strength and our players have not changed. In fact you could argue Trac and Oliver have gotten better. 
Is it Viney being injured and down on output? Is it the loss of Brayshaw to the wing? Is it opposition teams learning to play to Gawn’s taps? 

I would say that the evidence is that the club does not place a premium on centre clearances as an avenue to goal. As enough data has been obtained to suggest that winning a centre clearance is typically hurried and does not result in enough scoring shots directly from a centre clearance.

Vs

Generating scoring shots from the back half and intercepts.

 

What did we learn as supporters by our dominate I50's in 2018-2019 ? We absolutely smashed teams in clearances and I50's - but we would still lose matches.

So now it's about quality - not quantity.

The other thing is - thus far in 2021 - we have lost centre clearances consistently.

(I dispute that we are 'poor' as I don't believe the team values them the same way anymore - so you can't be poor at it if it doesnt matter)

So we keep losing centre clearances but keep winning matches... so what's the correlation? What's different? How does one not effect the other.

Being hard at the contest - doesn't necessitate getting the ball every time. 

So this is Goodwins and the FD's department 'geekdom' coming out in looking at data to formulate a Plan B, if we don't win it, what do we prioritise - pressure the ball carrier for dump kick to find clearer avenues to goal.

Edited May 16, 2021 by Engorged Onion

[Jaded No More 68,972]

6 minutes ago, binman said:

 

I'm more worried about a lack of a gun small defender 

Hibbo is having a great season. Hunt is also playing very well. I’m not that concerned. May can also play small. 

[Ted Lasso 19,549]

On 5/13/2021 at 10:52 PM, binman said:

The point is they are not interested in being near the top of the centre square differential table.

Because in order to achieve that we would actually score less and the opposition would score more. 

As was tbe case for the four years under goody where were near the top of tbst table

So net effect is we would lose more games

I'm with you on the club shifting the importance it places on winning clearances in the sense that we've moved to a quality vs quantity approach, and that's fine, but i think we still have room to be better in that space, because regardless we still have one of the most dominant ruckmen that's played the game, and 2-3 of the very best midfielders in the entire competition, so getting smacked in there isn't ideal, i think we can break even without compromising anything else, and if we do that, we become a much better side again. 

I am concerned how this approach will stand up against a team like the Dogs who likely won't rush and waste the midfield dominance they're likely to get against us, ultimately the goal is to win a premiership and they're the blue print of the team we're likely going to have to beat to do that. 

i'm confident our system can stand up against any other side, but that's the one area i could see the Dogs getting us. 

[Engorged Onion 10,223]

 

1 minute ago, Patches O’houlihan said:

because regardless we still have one of the most dominant ruckmen that's played the gam

I think it's helpful to recognise that even if a ruckman is so so dominant that he can win most taps (though he has to do so under duress and will still mistime/mis direct) it is far easier to to set up around him as the defensive team, than if each tap was a 50/50 role of the dice.

Max's dominance is not advantageous to the team at centre clearances - it is his aerobic ability and marking around the ground that helps.