POSTGAME: Rd 18 vs Hawthorn

[deanox 9,915]

10 hours ago, Lord Nev said:

 

Ranked 1st out of players classed as ruckmen for hitout win %.

Ranked 16th out of players classed as ruckmen for hitout to advantage %

 

I'm not saying this isn't a big part of our issue but  I would say the start is misleading.

If Gawn wins more hit outs than anyone else, he might still be leading the total "hit outs to advantage" but be 16th in the % column.

 

For example, Gawn has 100 hit outs with 10 to advantage, so 10% to advantage.

Another ruck might have 50 hit outs and 6 to advantage, so 12% to advantage.

 

Given Gawn leads the comp for hit outs (528) and the #16 ruck has only 215 hit outs (Blicavs), it is quite possible Gawn sits at least top 10 for total hit out to advantage.

[Engorged Onion 10,215]

5 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

But most of these stats were the same when we were 11-1.

We've been mid-table for hit outs to advantage and clearances all season, it's not like we were dominant and have fallen away.

So the two areas that are of real concern IMO are pressure and transition, and for mine pressure takes the cake - it's elite when we're the hunters, against a strong side, etc., but it's nowhere near as good when we're the hunted and our lesser opponent throws caution to the wind. I don't consider our ball movement to be a big concern - we're generating plenty of inside 50s, marks inside 50 and shots on goal, and if we were nailing our easier set shots we'd probably have beaten GWS and Hawthorn.

By leaving 10 out of 12 premiership points on the table vs Adelaide, Collingwood and Hawthorn, we're forcing ourselves to bring elite pressure every time we play a top 8 side, including again this week. I have faith we can do it, but one slip up vs the Dogs, West Coast or Geelong and we could well lose our top 4 spot.

Just to add to yours @titan_uranus.

This fact is no different to the Dogs, Swans, Port, Brisbane and Geelong, who have all worse records against the top 8, and similar records against those outside the top 8. And there is no evidence that they do it in perpetuity either.

So why do we expect our team to operate outside the norms of whats realistic for a team in this competition? 

Edited July 20, 2021 by Engorged Onion

[deanox 9,915]

Just now, deanox said:

I'm not saying this isn't a big part of our issue but  I would say the start is misleading.

If Gawn wins more hit outs than anyone else, he might still be leading the total "hit outs to advantage" but be 16th in the % column.

 

For example, Gawn has 100 hit outs with 10 to advantage, so 10% to advantage.

Another ruck might have 50 hit outs and 6 to advantage, so 12% to advantage.

 

Given Gawn leads the comp for hit outs (528) and the #16 ruck has only 215 hit outs (Blicavs), it is quite possible Gawn sits at least top 10 for total hit out to advantage.

Ok so I found the stat.

 

Gawn is 2nd in the comp for hit outs to advantage, with 174. Naitanui leads with 202, Grundy and Darcy are in the 170s, Goldstein has 155, but then it drops with O'Brien in 6th with only 137.

[deanox 9,915]

Basically I think that the more important stat here is hit outs to disadvantage (exactly the same criteria as to advantage, but to the opposition gain) and it's missing.

Without that stat were cannot assess if a ruckman is simply breaking even or gaining.

In Gawns case, it is whether the "not to advantage" taps are neutral results or direct losses.

Edited July 20, 2021 by deanox

[old55 23,571]

Everything is not rosy - I maintain our biggest issue is goal conversion. 

We won:

i50s: 58v50 - Maximum team average is the Lions on just under 56
https://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/fts_team_rankings?type=TA&year=2021&sby=20

Marks in i50: 14v6 - Maximum team average is the Lions on 14.6
https://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/fts_team_rankings?type=TA&year=2021&sby=28&advv=Y

Tackles in i50 11v8 - Maximum team average is Port at 11.
https://www.afl.com.au/stats/team-rankings?CompSeason=20&GameWeeks=-1#rankingstable

Scoring shots: 24v19 - Maximum average is the Dogs on 26.8, and next the Lions on 24.7, then us on 24.3
https://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/fts_team_rankings?type=TA&year=2021&sby=4

We definitely generated enough chances on a wet freezing night - but we failed to take them.  If that continues we won't beat the Dogs or win the flag.

[Lord Nev 13,512]

11 minutes ago, deanox said:

I'm not saying this isn't a big part of our issue but  I would say the start is misleading.

If Gawn wins more hit outs than anyone else, he might still be leading the total "hit outs to advantage" but be 16th in the % column.

For example, Gawn has 100 hit outs with 10 to advantage, so 10% to advantage.

Another ruck might have 50 hit outs and 6 to advantage, so 12% to advantage.

Given Gawn leads the comp for hit outs (528) and the #16 ruck has only 215 hit outs (Blicavs), it is quite possible Gawn sits at least top 10 for total hit out to advantage.

Sure, but I don't think for hitouts that totals is a great way to measure effectiveness. Different amount of ruck contests, different amount of stoppages in each game, etc etc.

The point of that stat isn't to say he's bad at hitouts, it's more about the disconnect going on in the middle as it illustrates that Gawn is winning the hitouts but it's not going to our players very often. This is evident visually IMO and the stat just backs it up a bit.

[binman 42,941]

1 hour ago, Mazer Rackham said:

It appears in a lot of matches, and not just our ones, that the ruckmen don't seem to hit the ball anywhere in particular, it just drops to their feet or within a metre of them, then a pile-on ensues. There appear to be very few "set plays" where a ruckman can put the ball down the throat of one of his mids, which is something I would have assumed would be gold standard for a midfield coach.

That's right.

And a big reason is, no matter how good your ruckman it is extremely hard at center bounces to execute the perfect tap to a mid who is moving at speed and can get out the front of the stoppage and kick cleanly inside 50. 

But that is exactly what max is trying to achieve when he does win a hit to advantage. A clean hit to a mid who, coming from 10-15 metres, hits it at pace and gives it off to another mid out the front of the contest, who kicks deep into our forward 50, or if possible to a leading forward. 

There were two perfect examples of this against the hawks that resulted in Viney kicking the ball deep inside 50 (unfortunately both to a hawks defender). Another great example was the goal we got in the Port game where Nibbler got a clean possession out the front of the centre bounce and drilled it to Tmac. 

If he can't execute this set play (becuase the bounce is not straight, the mids are blocked, he doesn't time his leap, can't get a clean tap etc etc) he more often than not hits to the defensive side of the contest and/or drops it close to the contest. Either way it rarely goes to advantage becuase Oliver and Trac, when in the centre, stand well away from the bounce.  

This doesn't mean it goes to an opposition player - it is often just a scrap. If it does go to an opposition player, or we lose the scrap, the resulting disposal is under pressure and that's where our defensive intercepts come in to play.

I'm sure the club could could increase max's hit out to advantage stats should they wish to. For one thing Oliver and tracc could set up much closer to the contest. In 2018 Max was number one in the AFL in hit outs to advantage. And on the back of that we were the dominant centre clearance team.

But those hit outs to advantage were often to a Viney or Oliver right next to him and their kick inside 50 was under pressure and often swallowed up by the opposition defenders. Which was a big factor in why we lost some games where we dominated centre clearances and had way more inside 50s than the opposition.

By the by, i'm assuming that hit out to advantage stat is for centre bounces? If it is also for around the ground stoppages, then there is an another obvious reason for max's ranking in the hit outs to advantage stats - as everyone now knows we are at a numerical disadvantage at every around the ground stoppages because we send an extra back. And more often than not opposition team send an extra to the contest. Makes sense then that it is harder to hit to advantage. Max is good but he is not a magician.

Again, if we simply wanted max to win more hit outs to advantage we could achieve that by bringing our extra to the contest, as King has advocated (which i think we did against the bombers after half time). But as Montagna said in response, that's not our game. 

Looking at stats like hit out to advantage in isolation can be misleading. Same goes for centre clearances. As Hardwick has pointed out, what is important is what happens after winning the clearance. 

I might be wrong as i don't have the stat at hand, but i recall reading or hearing a couple of weeks back that we are in the top 3 for scores from clearances that we win. If so my assumption is that clean hit outs to advantage of the type Nibbler set up Tmac from are a big reason why.

 

 

Edited July 20, 2021 by binman

[Lord Nev 13,512]

20 minutes ago, deanox said:

Ok so I found the stat.

 

Gawn is 2nd in the comp for hit outs to advantage, with 174. Naitanui leads with 202, Grundy and Darcy are in the 170s, Goldstein has 155, but then it drops with O'Brien in 6th with only 137.

Yes but it's irrelevant to use totals unless they've all attended the same amount of ruck contests.

No coincidence that the top ruckmen for hitouts attended are Gawn, NicNat, Grundy, Darcy and Godstein, in that order.

 

[jnrmac 20,061]

1 hour ago, dazzledavey36 said:

All good and well to say we're flying if we win. We beat Port Adelaide and yet we dished up an extremely poor performance the week after?

On recent form we could easily roll the Dogs and lose to GC and the Crows the week after.

Not only recent form. We did it last year and in 2017 missing finals because we took it easy against lower ranked teams.

We don't seem to have learned anything from the 'learnings'

[jnrmac 20,061]

2 hours ago, BW511 said:

The King article gives the perfect example of what a few have been banging on about for weeks. We are playing a negative brand of footy, sitting back of centre and letting the opposition come at us. It's designed to allow Lever and May to control the ball and tempo of the game, however when we are a little off or teams really come at us, it falls apart. It's utilizing a strength but an incredibly risky strategy.

I'm very confident that our mids (Gawn, Trac and Oliver) pay absolutely no attention to what the opposition are doing or are instructed that way, because we were zigging when Max was zagging at an extremely high percentage of the centre bounces on the weekend.

Hawthorn gave it everything and exposed us, they just were not good enough across the board to actually win the game. Collingwood and Adelaide did the same, but got over the line.

I don't care if our record is good against the top teams and we 'get up' for those games, it's only a matter of time before we don't and it would be heartbreaking if that were week 1 or week 1 and 2 of finals.

 

 

Agree with this. 

You can't win forever by generating your scores from the defensive 50. Its great that we have dominant players there but May even said a few weeks ago we "can't keep playing that way"  Eventually teams work you out or the dam wall breaks.

Our midfield have really escaped scrutiny because Gawn Tracc and Oliver in particular are regarded as elite players.

If the are so elite why do we get beaten so often in centre clearances? Why does Oliver always grapple with his opponent? Why are the running patterns and hit outs so off?

Then to top it off we kick to the pockets so our scoring is XXX. And our fwds have been unable to hold the ball in as much as we need them to.

Playing a back half game is the oppposite of what Goodwin has said he wants. So why are we here?

We have largely the same team every week, We're having a great run with injuries. And we are so predictable the way we play. 

Coaching and leadership are wanting. To bring 'it' only when we play 'good teams' is disrespectful and stupid.

Edited July 20, 2021 by Grapeviney
language

[Engorged Onion 10,215]

9 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

Not only recent form. We did it last year and in 2017 missing finals because we took it easy against lower ranked teams.

We don't seem to have learned anything from the 'learnings'

What's with this incessant belief that the players/the FD are complacent or 'take it easy' against lower teams?

It's does not take into consideration how tight the competition is.

We would have won all the matches if we had better conversions, but we didn't. (that is also not a symptom of being complacent).

 

@jnrmac - when you watch other teams, who play against lower teams and lose (too many to mention) - do you also stand by that they lose as they are taking it easy?

[deanox 9,915]

15 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

Yes but it's irrelevant to use totals unless they've all attended the same amount of ruck contests.

No coincidence that the top ruckmen for hitouts attended are Gawn, NicNat, Grundy, Darcy and Godstein, in that order.

 

It's as irrelevant as the original stat.

Max gets more hit outs to advantage per game this year than any ruckman other than NicNat (he has had 174 for the year).

For GWS Mumford and Flynn combine for 159, for Geelong Blicavs and Stanley combine for 100. 

NicNat and Vardy combine for 239.

Given Jackson sits at 21 on the total list with 47, the Melbourne ruck duo combine for 221 hit outs to advantage, the 2nd most of any ruck combo. 

 

We get advantage on hit outs more than anyone except West Coast. We also win more hit outs than almost anyone else.

What we don't know is whether the hit outs we won, that don't go to advantage, are neutral result or to disadvantage, because those stats aren't available.

Basically, all of these stats are useless and don't illustrate anything because they are incomplete and don't tell the full picture. @binmannails it in their post.

[Neil Crompton 5,555]

8 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

Not only recent form. We did it last year and in 2017 missing finals because we took it easy against lower ranked teams.

We don't seem to have learned anything from the 'learnings'

A team that beats the bottom feeders but loses against the top sides has a lot of things to learn.

I think that a team that can account for the top sides but struggles against the lowest sides simply lacks maturity - and this will only come with time. Not sure how our team will go this year in the finals, but I believe we will be a more consistent (mature) side next year.

 

[Lord Nev 13,512]

Just now, deanox said:

It's as irrelevant as the original stat.

Max gets more hit outs to advantage per game this year than any ruckman other than NicNat (he has had 174 for the year).

For GWS Mumford and Flynn combine for 159, for Geelong Blicavs and Stanley combine for 100. 

NicNat and Vardy combine for 239.

Given Jackson sits at 21 on the total list with 47, the Melbourne ruck duo combine for 221 hit outs to advantage, the 2nd most of any ruck combo. 

 

We get advantage on hit outs more than anyone except West Coast. We also win more hit outs than almost anyone else.

What we don't know is whether the hit outs we won, that don't go to advantage, are neutral result or to disadvantage, because those stats aren't available.

Basically, all of these stats are useless and don't illustrate anything because they are incomplete and don't tell the full picture. @binmannails it in their post.

 

Mate, you can't measure effectiveness in totals.

It's like saying whoever kicks the most goals is the most accurate goal kicker.

 

[jnrmac 20,061]

Just checked some stats

We are last for tackles in the whole comp

We are 16th in total clearances

That puts huge pressure on our defence to hold the fort. Its not sustainable.

[Engorged Onion 10,215]

11 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

Then to top it off we kick to the pockets so our scoring is XXX. And our fwds have been unable to hold the ball in as much as we need them to.

Playing a back half game is the oppposite of what Goodwin has said he wants. So why are we here?

Why are we here? You mean on top of the ladder? 

We kick to pockets to have repeat entries - the risk is of course, inaccuracy. 

It's far better than kicking to the centre of the f50 - where other teams defensive setups are also skilled - and then the ball having multiple ways to exit our F50 if we fail to mark it or keep it in.

Do you (we) all remember the wave of 'sling shot' goals over the last few years and how ugly that looked.

Edited July 20, 2021 by Engorged Onion

[Kick_It_To_Pickett 3,293]

7 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

Agree with this. 

You can't win forever by generating your scores from the defensive 50. Its great that we have dominant players there but May even said a few weeks ago we "can't keep playing that way"  Eventually teams work you out or the dam wall breaks.

Our midfield have really escaped scrutiny because Gawn Tracc and Oliver in particular are regarded as elite players.

If the are so elite why do we get beaten so often in centre clearances? Why does Oliver always grapple with his opponent? Why are the running patterns and hit outs so off?

 

This does my head in. And then gets pushed off balance at the end. Mix it up. Seperate yourself. Get separation at the bounce then attack the football. He gets consumed with grappling 

[jnrmac 20,061]

5 minutes ago, Engorged Onion said:

What's with this incessant belief that the players/the FD are complacent or 'take it easy' against lower teams?

It's does not take into consideration how tight the competition is.

We would have won all the matches if we had better conversions, but we didn't. (that is also not a symptom of being complacent).

 

@jnrmac - when you watch other teams, who play against lower teams and lose (too many to mention) - do you also stand by that they lose as they are taking it easy?

The track record is damning. You may not like the fact but no good team loses as much as we do to lower ranked teams.

Feel free to prove me wrong with evidence

[Engorged Onion 10,215]

2 minutes ago, Kick_It_To_Pickett said:

He gets consumed with grappling 

Probably cause the bloke rarely gets a free kick awarded for being held ?

[jnrmac 20,061]

4 minutes ago, Engorged Onion said:

Why are we here? You mean on top of the ladder? 

We kick to pockets to have repeat entries - the risk is of course, inaccuracy. 

It's far better than kicking to the centre of the f50 - where other teams defensive setups are also skilled - and then the ball having multiple ways to exit our F50 if we fail to mark it or keep it in.

We are not holding it in like we used to though. And we are 10th on i50s.

Its part of hte reason our last 8 weeks hasn't been as good as the first 10

 

[deanox 9,915]

18 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

 

Mate, you can't measure effectiveness in totals.

It's like saying whoever kicks the most goals is the most accurate goal kicker.

 

If you kick the most goals you will win your games. Who cares how accurate you are at that point?

 

But again, it's irrelevant because we only have one of the outputs - hit outs to advantage - and not information about whether the remaining hit outs are neutral or to disadvantage.

Max is 1st in total hit outs, 2nd in total hit outs to advantage. The MFC ruck combo is also 2nd in total hit outs to advantage. Who cares that Max is 16th in hit out to advantage %?

If we knew that Max was also 16th or lower on hit outs to disadvantage, we'd be able to assess his effectiveness.

[dpositive 1,665]

On 7/17/2021 at 10:29 PM, DeeZee said:

Our mindset is all wrong.

when we play the bottom teams it should be to out tackle and pressure them not to out finesse them 

I've said for years our game is affected by umpiring. Again in this game our opponents had the confidence to attack the ball with their head down and they receive high tackle free kick. Our players get no protection and become hesitant in both tackling and in attacking the ball.

The only stats we lost, by large margins, were tackles and fee kicks.

We must ask the umpires to come to our training and help us refine our techniques. We are obviously doing something wrong in our positioning or actions.. It has been noticeable that against the top teams there is less discrepancy in free kicks and possibly less free kick counts. Perhaps this is because we are in front or more intense.

Would like to see some analysis of wins and losses with free kick analysis and umpire involved.

But really need to address set shot kicking as a priority.

[Kent 2,909]

21 minutes ago, deanox said:

If you kick the most goals you will win your games. Who cares how accurate you are at that point?

 

But again, it's irrelevant because we only have one of the outputs - hit outs to advantage - and not information about whether the remaining hit outs are neutral or to disadvantage.

Max is 1st in total hit outs, 2nd in total hit outs to advantage. The MFC ruck combo is also 2nd in total hit outs to advantage. Who cares that Max is 16th in hit out to advantage %?

If we knew that Max was also 16th or lower on hit outs to disadvantage, we'd be able to assess his effectiveness.

You can if the hit out advantage leads directly to clearances 

Edited July 20, 2021 by Kent

[Lord Nev 13,512]

26 minutes ago, deanox said:

If you kick the most goals you will win your games. Who cares how accurate you are at that point?

No mate, we're talking about the effectiveness of a player. You misunderstood the point.

Measuring effectiveness you can't use totals in this kind of scenario. My example is to say it's like saying whichever player kicks the most goals is therefore the most accurate kick for goal. Doesn't add up.

You've also seemingly missed the point that we've included the 'hitouts won %' so there's a direct comparison between the amount won and their effectiveness.

Seriously, measuring total hitouts is non-sensical when talking about their effectiveness. As already mentioned, Max has attended more hitouts than anyone else, plus as a comparison, he averages more than 20% more game time than NicNat.

Different amounts of stoppages, different amounts of games played, different amounts of hitouts attended, different amounts of game time... You can't use totals as the comparison given all this.

I've explained this multiple times now, so clearly you're just being difficult for the sake of an argument.

I'm tapping out mate, not worth going in circles with this.

Edited July 20, 2021 by Lord Nev

[deanox 9,915]

38 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

No mate, we're talking about the effectiveness of a player. You misunderstood the point.

Measuring effectiveness you can't use totals in this kind of scenario. My example is to say it's like saying whichever player kicks the most goals is therefore the most accurate kick for goal. Doesn't add up.

You've also seemingly missed the point that we've included the 'hitouts won %' so there's a direct comparison between the amount won and their effectiveness.

Seriously, measuring total hitouts is non-sensical when talking about their effectiveness. As already mentioned, Max has attended more hitouts than anyone else, plus as a comparison, he averages more than 20% more game time than NicNat.

Different amounts of stoppages, different amounts of games played, different amounts of hitouts attended, different amounts of game time... You can't use totals as the comparison given all this.

I've explained this multiple times now, so clearly you're just being difficult for the sake of an argument.

I'm tapping out mate, not worth going in circles with this.

All good, thanks for the chat. 

Im not just looking for an argument, I do fundamentally disagree with your interpretation of the stats, and surprisingly mostly for the reasons given: the stats are so general they are meaningless.

I don't think we can draw positive or negative conclusions from them is all im saying.