5 hours ago, Deedubs said:

I saw afl360 and they spoke about melbourne: We've gone from 3rd in pressure to 14th. This is something that I've been concerned about for some time. David king thinks that it's a mentality thing and that we turn it up when we need but I agreed with Montagna in that it's certainly not by design and we're getting in bad habits and that showed with the ease of the ball movement that the Hawks enjoyed against us. 

I want to see manic pressure this week and start turning things around. 

Here is my hot take @Deedubs

It's helpful to remember that our preseason started 6 weeks after most other clubs, fatigue management and our 'pre-season' is still occurring.  It's occurring IN game, that we are 7-0 -> currently we're a bit more about absorbing pressure rather than having ours ramped up. 

Management and loading will change post mid season bye - in which case, barring injuries, we will have caught up so to speak with loading.

Montagna would know this, King would know this, but it aint sexy for a narrative. It'd be great if they addressed it though... but then that feeds into the 'no excuses' mentality that perpetutated.

It's not about bad habits... its about context.

Further, the team had 5 athletes out from the premiership team against Hawthorn,  this is also not spoken about in the media (see media this week in how 6 out will affect Fremantle).

Pickett etc, as individuals bring a particular type of energy, in closing down space, it is their specific forte....again context is useful to make sense of numbers.

David King might call it a 'mentality thing'... I'd call it deliberate, and systemic, and given the context of certain players being out last week in particular, and our defensive 6 in the first few rounds, again speaks volumes of our system and it's flexibility and how it allows certain features to be 'off' (at least from the outside looking in) yet the team can still perform at a high level and find ways to win, when these ratings are down. (how is the the other grand final team performing, with a delayed pre-season etc?),

 

 

Edited May 5, 20222 yr by Engorged Onion

7 hours ago, Deedubs said:

I saw afl360 and they spoke about melbourne: We've gone from 3rd in pressure to 14th. This is something that I've been concerned about for some time. David king thinks that it's a mentality thing and that we turn it up when we need but I agreed with Montagna in that it's certainly not by design and we're getting in bad habits and that showed with the ease of the ball movement that the Hawks enjoyed against us. 

I want to see manic pressure this week and start turning things around. 

I wonder if this is also semi selective - by this I mean that in nearly every game we've had the match pretty much done by 3 quarter time and then seem to just coast in the last quarter. Other teams can't afford to do that, so I'd love to see the stats up until 3 quarter time and see if there's a massive drop off in the last. As much as they might think it's a mental thing, or not by design, maybe it is - we look like we've got so much better control over the game than other sides at the moment, and that doesn't mean we have to thrash or beat up on teams - just get the win and move into the next week very comfortable.   

14 hours ago, Bitter but optimistic said:

Has he done much at Casey? Maybe getting named in the squad is a sort of encouragement award!

He played perhaps his best game last week and showed some signs Uncle, however, Fraser Rosman is my pick as the most improved player at Casey since his move to the backline. Runs like the wind, can take a mark and generally uses the ball well.

12 hours ago, Engorged Onion said:

Here is my hot take @Deedubs

It's helpful to remember that our preseason started 6 weeks after most other clubs, fatigue management and our 'pre-season' is still occurring.  It's occurring IN game, that we are 7-0 -> currently we're a bit more about absorbing pressure rather than having ours ramped up. 

Management and loading will change post mid season bye - in which case, barring injuries, we will have caught up so to speak with loading.

Montagna would know this, King would know this, but it aint sexy for a narrative. It'd be great if they addressed it though... but then that feeds into the 'no excuses' mentality that perpetutated.

It's not about bad habits... its about context.

Further, the team had 5 athletes out from the premiership team against Hawthorn,  this is also not spoken about in the media (see media this week in how 6 out will affect Fremantle).

Pickett etc, as individuals bring a particular type of energy, in closing down space, it is their specific forte....again context is useful to make sense of numbers.

David King might call it a 'mentality thing'... I'd call it deliberate, and systemic, and given the context of certain players being out last week in particular, and our defensive 6 in the first few rounds, again speaks volumes of our system and it's flexibility and how it allows certain features to be 'off' (at least from the outside looking in) yet the team can still perform at a high level and find ways to win, when these ratings are down. (how is the the other grand final team performing, with a delayed pre-season etc?),

 

 

All good points EO.

I really like montagna's analysis as a rule - he, daisy, Sanderson and Bartel are my favourite footy analysts.

I read those stats on here but hadn't watched the segment, so did so last night.

It was weird because he didn't provide any real analysis, context for the numbers or possible factors tha might help explain them.

Could the fact that Salem hasn't played this season (bar half a game) be a factor in both numbers (for example Gus seems to be playing deeper than salo does).

Or Brown missing three games, a player who now provides great pressure, being replaced by weed who is low pressure.

Surely the fact we have yet to have our best back seven play together is a factor in both stats - both in terms of the impacts of elite pressure players like petty, Lever and Salo missing games AND the impact of those players missing on our all ground defensive system (which is is the key factor in disrupting oppo ball movement) .

How does he reconcile the drop in those numbers with the fact that we remain one or two on scores conceded inside 50? 

Or the fact that we are number one in marks conceded inside 50, in spite of the fact Petty and Lever having both missed multiple games.

He also didn't explain the numbers.

For example is there much statistical difference between number one and mid table in pressure acts or defending ball movement?

It was doubly weird because the premise of the segment (made clear by a  graphic and pumped up by wheatley at the top of the show) was 'are Melbourne gettable'.

Montagna found two isolated stats out of a sea of stats he has at his disposal to make a case we are 'gettable'. Those two stats were the best he could find to make that case?

Agree on your comments on context and the fact Montagna provided precious little of it

To your comments id add he didn't break down where the pressure had dropped (inside our 50?, defensive zone? mids?) or perhaps that some individual players had dropped off (eg are tmac's pressure acts down?)

But more importantly he didn't compare the numbers to those at the comparative point last season. I assume the 2021 rankings he used were at the end of the home and season (or even post gf), but that includes the last third of our season when we really ramped things up.

Given we were also 7 zip last season it would have been interesting to see the comparison to that point in time.

The analysis would have been completely different if say the rankings were similar ('dees still building') after round 7 last year. 

Edited May 6, 20222 yr by binman

By the by, I'm not saying the numbers are not concerning.

Just that in the absence of context and proper analysis it would be folly to assume they are. 

Edited May 6, 20222 yr by binman

Predicting the final line-up is pretty much guesswork. Players may still miss because they haven't fully recovered from Covid and new players, who haven't previously had Covid, may enter H&S protocols between now and Sunday. In addition, the club may not wish to bring into the side 5 players who have just had Covid in the same week, even if they test negative. 

After watching Lever last week, I’m concerned that the players returning from Covid might not be at their best. I’d be most reluctant to play ANB. 

12 minutes ago, Fanatique Demon said:

After watching Lever last week, I’m concerned that the players returning from Covid might not be at their best. I’d be most reluctant to play ANB. 

Lever had his boot off straight after the Hawks game. I'd suggest his problem is his foot not covid.

15 hours ago, old dee said:

No he is a far better option than the Weid. The Weid can do one thing reasonably on his good days. 

I think that's a little unfair. Weideman is a much better back-up ruck than TMac.

16 hours ago, titan_uranus said:

In: Jackson, Pickett, Sparrow, Petty, ANB, Laurie

Out: Smith, Melksham, Chandler

Weideman named on the extended bench; TMac named in the starting 18. Although not sure if that means anything these days.

Yes, it does mean something. Under the AFL rules the clubs have  til 5pm on Thursday to name an 18-man team plus 8-man interchange for Sunday games. Then they have til 5pm on Friday to further refine the interchange to a 4 men plus 3 emergencies with the medisub chosen from the emergencies on game day.

What that means in reality is that Melbourne couldn't name all 5 players coming back from COVID on the interchange because that would restrict them to only choosing 4 of them in the starting 22. Interesting that they named Petty in the starting side even though he came out later than ANB, Sparrow, Picket & Jackson. Maybe that shows he was a  close contact rather than actually having COVID (a pure guess on my part). TMac is in the starting 18 so is playing. Wiedeman will only be playing if Jackson doesn't get up.

16 hours ago, Garbo said:

Interesting if Weid does go out, tmac went back for one game and played well in the two's gets in on back on covid changes and plays just ok. But Weid who despite flaws in his game has kicked goals and even helped in the ruck last week. Not sure what message that sends 

Not a great message. IMV they shouldn't have brought TMac back in last week. He was dropped and shouldn't have been brought back after only one week even with Jackson out. They could have brought Van Rooyen or Mitch Brown in for a week (that would have sent the appropriate message. TMac kicked 3 goals against Richmond Reserves but again laid only 1 tackle).

So TMac fortuitously (undeservedly IMV) comes back in, has a so-so game and then gets rewarded while Weideman adapts his game as asked, also has a so-so game and gets dropped. TMac did that nice move on the boundary line which ended up as a goal (fortunately, TMac's kick was a shocker), he took 5 marks and kicked 2 goals (as we all know it should've been 4/1). Weideman only took 1 mark but kicked a nice goal, made 4 tackes, 6 hit-outs & 1 clearance (TMac 1/1/0). It seems to me that people posting to this site consistently apply different standards to Weideman than they do to TMac. There's a lot more upside for Melbourne with Weideman improving his game and becoming a key member of the side than there is for TMac hanging on for another season. He's hardly about to take his game to a new level. I'm not saying Weideman necessarily is going to make it either but give him another couple of weeks, and if TMac doesn't make a compelling case to be in the seniors bring Van Rooyen in (he definitely has an up-up-upside 😁).

2 hours ago, binman said:

All good points EO.

I really like montagna's analysis as a rule - he, daisy, Sanderson and Bartel are my favourite footy analysts.

I read those stats on here but hadn't watched the segment, so did so last night.

It was weird really because he didn't provide any real analysis, context for the numbers or possible factors explaining them.

Could the fact that Salem hasn't played yet be a factor in both numbers (for example Gus seems to be playing deeper than salo does).

Or Brown missing three games, a player who nowvprovides great pressure, being replaced by weed who is low pressure.

Surely the fact that at no point have we had our best back seven play together is a factor in both stats - both in terms of the inpact of elite pressure players like petty , Lever and Salo not playing all games AND the impact on our ground defensive system (that is the key factor in disruptiing oppo) ball movement.

How does he reconcile the drop in those numbers with the fact that we remain one or two on scores conceded inside 50?

Etc, Eric.

He also didn't explain the numbers.

For example is there much statistical difference between number one and mid table in pressure acts or defending ball movement?

It was doubly weird because the premise (made clear by a  graphic and pumped up by wheatley at the top of the show) was 'are Melbourne gettable'.

And montagna found two isolated stats out of a sea of stats he has at his disposal  to make a case we are 'gettable'. Those two stats were the best he could find to make that case?

Agree on your comments on context and the fact montagna provided precious little of it

To your comments id add he didn't break down where the pressure had dropped (inside our 50?, defensive zone?, mids?) or perhaps that some individual players had dropped right off (eg are tmac's pressure acts down?)

But more importantly he didn't compare the numbers to those at the comparative point last season. I assume the 2021 rankings he used were at the end of the home and seaon (or even post gf), but that includes the lsdt third of our season we"re we really ramped things up.

Given we were also 7 zip last season it would have been interesting to see the comparison to thst point in time.

The analysis would have been completely different if say the rankings were similar ('dees still building') after round 7 last year. 

Montagna was just saying that our forward half pressure isn’t where it was last year. Stats bear that out and so does the eye test. 

We are allowing the ball further up the ground and that may be part of the plan as I said before - playing helter skelter in the forward half is not easy. 

I just think they better lift that on Sunday. The saints slingshot so well because they are front runners at heart.

46 minutes ago, Sydney_Demon said:

I think that's a little unfair. Weideman is a much better back-up ruck than TMac.

Let’s face it, if we had someone better neither TMac or Weid would get a game.  (hurry up JVR).

Given the form of both players this season, I don’t think our team performances will change very much for having one over the other. 

However, I think the Weid has far more upside potential than TMac and therefore should be informed he will be given an extended run to give him the confidence to reach that potential. If he can’t, he can’t. We always have TMac to fall back on. 

10 hours ago, Deedubs said:

I saw afl360 and they spoke about melbourne: We've gone from 3rd in pressure to 14th. This is something that I've been concerned about for some time. David king thinks that it's a mentality thing and that we turn it up when we need but I agreed with Montagna in that it's certainly not by design and we're getting in bad habits and that showed with the ease of the ball movement that the Hawks enjoyed against us. 

I want to see manic pressure this week and start turning things around. 

Fox Footy's analysis is superficial in the extreme. As they say lies, damned lies & statistics. I appreciate your post though because it gives others more learned than myself to actually respond with analysis rather than just quoting a stat. Stats are the starting point of analysis, not the end point.

Somewhere I read that our 'pressure acts' and 'defence of ball movement' are well down on last year.

I get what 'pressure acts' are and how they are measured. 

But what does 'defence of ball movement' mean and what elements are measured in that stat?

I'm guessing it includes things like:  opps goal to goal ball movement and a score maybe with us touching it or maybe not, turnovers when they have the ball, turnovers when we have the ball...?

Any clarification would be appreciated. 

Then I can work if I should be worried...🤔

Edited May 6, 20222 yr by Lucifers Hero

1 hour ago, Sydney_Demon said:

I think that's a little unfair. Weideman is a much better back-up ruck than TMac.

I don't he carried the  ruck a few seasons ago when Gawn was out for weeks. And we won a large number of the games. The weid is very average at all positions he is used in. Add Tmac can play in defence and at a pinch on the wing. 

Edited May 6, 20222 yr by old dee

15 minutes ago, old dee said:

I don't he carried the  ruck a few seasons ago when Gawn was out for weeks. And we won a large number of the games. The weid is very average at all positions he is used in. Add Tmac can play in defence and at a pinch on the wing. 

Fair enough but the fact that Weideman was doing back-up ruck work rather than TMac last week I think shows where the club thinks it's at right now. I really don't care what Tmac did a few seasons ago, that he used to play in defence or that he trained to play on the wing pre-season last year when there was no spot for him in the forward line and Brayshaw hadn't developed in the role. I'm talking about 2022, not 2018.

What I was responding to was you saying that Weideman could only do one thing reasonably well, which I (and apparently the Club) disagree with. Did the Club put TMac in the ruck ahead of Weideman? But responding to your comments re TMac, he would be our 3rd or 4th choice forward, maybe 6th choice ruck, 6th choice winger, and 10th choice defender. He has gone back in defence twice this year, Round 1 when we were missing 4 premiershiop defenders and Salem went down, and last week when Smith went off injured at 3-Quarter time. The only time he plays in defence is when a key defender goes down injured during a match. He would never be picked as a defender, as was shown both last year and this. We conceded 3 goals in defence last week in the last quarter. Now, I'm not saying that was all TMac's fault but arguably he is now a liability down back.

2 minutes ago, Sydney_Demon said:

Fair enough but the fact that Weideman was doing back-up ruck work rather than TMac last week I think shows where the club thinks it's at right now. I really don't care what Tmac did a few seasons ago, that he used to play in defence or that he trained to play on the wing pre-season last year when there was no spot for him in the forward line and Brayshaw hadn't developed in the role. I'm talking about 2022, not 2018.

What I was responding to was you saying that Weideman could only do one thing reasonably well, which I (and apparently the Club) disagree with. Did the Club put TMac in the ruck ahead of Weideman? But responding to your comments re TMac, he would be our 3rd or 4th choice forward, maybe 6th choice ruck, 6th choice winger, and 10th choice defender. He has gone back in defence twice this year, Round 1 when we were missing 4 premiershiop defenders and Salem went down, and last week when Smith went off injured at 3-Quarter time. The only time he plays in defence is when a key defender goes down injured during a match. He would never be picked as a defender, as was shown both last year and this. We conceded 3 goals in defence last week in the last quarter. Now, I'm not saying that was all TMac's fault but arguably he is now a liability down back.

We all have options I don't agree with yours. After six year Weideman is average and don't see him getting any better. IMO we are playing him for to him to prove his worth.

17 hours ago, dl4e said:

Interchange should be Jackson, Pickett, Sparrow and ANB. Bedford and weed next in line.

I guess it all depends on recovery from COVID. Replacements for Jackson, Pickett, Sparrow and ANB included on the extended interchange bench are Weideman, Bedford, Dunstan & Laurie. Laurie has effectively come in ahead of Melksham & Chandler. I would normally agree that Laurie shouldn't play his first game as medisub but surely they wouldn't include Picket, Sparrow or ANB as medisub if they haven't fully recovered from COVID. The other option is Laurie in and Bedford medisub but that seems extremely unfair on Bedford. Laurie ahead of Dunstan perhaps if Sparrpw doesn't play? (seems unfair on Dunstan) I guess (nearly) all will be revealed when the team list is updated tonight.

One thing I am not understanding is if our pressure acts and team defence are much worse than last year how come no one can score against us? Still the best defence in the league perhaps we've got them all so mesmerised we dont even have to try that hard anymore!  

11 hours ago, Deedubs said:

I saw afl360 and they spoke about melbourne: We've gone from 3rd in pressure to 14th. This is something that I've been concerned about for some time. David king thinks that it's a mentality thing and that we turn it up when we need but I agreed with Montagna in that it's certainly not by design and we're getting in bad habits and that showed with the ease of the ball movement that the Hawks enjoyed against us. 

I want to see manic pressure this week and start turning things around. 

I personally am loving the commentary this week, it’s just enough to annoy the boys into flogging the Saints.
Our forward line pressure was down against Hawthorn mainly due to the absence of ANB and Kozzie. ANB is averaging 5.2 tackles and 23.8 pressure acts (Elite) a game in 2022, the highest on our list, Kozzie Pickett 3.2 tackles 20.7 pressure acts (also elite) a game.
Bedford and Melksham had a combined 6 tackles and 32 pressure acts that’s not bad but it’s -2.4 and -13.6 on what we get usually. For us it’s huge drop in pressure up front, which allowed Hawthorn to more easily transition the ball. And that’s just two players! Jackson is also more mobile and commits more pressure acts than both Weideman and TMac (Jackson is good for tackles, elite for inside 50 tackles and above average for pressure acts, Tom Mac is closer but both he and Weid are down against Jackson). Front half pressure is a huge part of our game and it was down against the Hawks, and we still won, and were never behind in the second half and always had at least a two goal buffer, that’s an easy kill. 
As many have noted it appears we win the game and then shelve the attacking stuff in the last quarter, our last quarter scores are down on last year yet we have never been behind in a last quarter this year, that’s a significant stat. If the opposition never have you in fear of losing, preserving players, playing defensively and shutting the game down is fine, it doesn’t mean we can’t annihilate a team but coming off a shorter pre-season, missing key personnel and knowing every week teams are trying to get us, we’re not wasting energy on a percentage we won’t need if we keep winning. 
Also I really love the “Melbourne hasn’t beaten anyone” commentary, we’re the REIGNING PREMIERS! We’ve beaten almost everyone! In fact we currently have the unique stat of having beaten every team in the AFL the last time we played them, except Collingwood. It’s a long way off but should we keep this streak going to after QB we will be the only team in the modern AFL era to have a winning record against every team in the league!!! 
I hope the media and their desperate, disrespectful narrative attempts to make Melbourne seem vulnerable filter back to the club and spur them on to smash the saints, that’s all it’s good for. Regardless of what happens this weekend the worst we will be heading into round 11 is 9-1, every other team in the league would envy that, that’s the stat that matters. It sets us up to get ready for the real stuff in September, the rest is noise, long may it continue!

I think playing a rebounding intercept game as opposed to a forward half game would naturally result in lower pressure numbers 

19 minutes ago, old dee said:

We all have options I don't agree with yours. After six year Weideman is average and don't see him getting any better. IMO we are playing him for to him to prove his worth.

We all have opinions (and options) but I don't agree with yours which is also fine. Weideman may not make it (as I've said) and I agree that after 6 years you'd like to think he would have shown conclusively that he was going to make it by now. He hasn't. He is contracted til the end of 2023 when he'll be 26 and TMac til the end of 2024 when he'll be 32 (like Ben Brown). The Club would be mad to give up on Weideman now given those age profiles. Yes, we are playing him to prove his worth (like every other player). If TMac was starring there'd be absolutely no argument from me about who should be in the side. We have 2 struggling forwards and at least 1 of them (ideally both) needs to find some form. I think that should be Weideman right now, others think TMac. That's fine. 

1 hour ago, rpfc said:

Montagna was just saying that our forward half pressure isn’t where it was last year. Stats bear that out and so does the eye test. 

We are allowing the ball further up the ground and that may be part of the plan as I said before - playing helter skelter in the forward half is not easy. 

I just think they better lift that on Sunday. The saints slingshot so well because they are front runners at heart.

Agreed but where do you start with the this. Its easy to say that forward half pressure is not the same as last year, but that could also be attributed to the shallow and rushed F50 entries that dont allow us to setup defensively.

The opposition are putting pressure on our midfiled (as this was our strength last year) hence leading into the increase in dump kicks into the F50 only to see it rebound straight out. Our DNA is to create stoppages in F50 and ramp up the pressure from there, but we have not been able to do this effectively, allowing the ball to come straight back out. 

Given our primary scoring avenue is from Turnovers, we have to either score from turnover, or create a stoppage in the F50, anything else will see the ball come straight back. So in the end, (IMO) its not necessary being about our own pressure dropping but a combination of poor use going forward (shallow entries), inability to score (think about what the score would have been like against the Tigers had we been accurate) or create stoppage. 

9 hours ago, Bombay Airconditioning said:

I don’t think it would be a good idea to announce a preferred option this early in the season. Covid & or injury has and will continue to give Weideman chances to prove himself.

Could be that, but l was thinking it was also about worrying the opposition about whether they will need an extra tall defender should weid, tmac, jacko and BBB play

Edited May 6, 20222 yr by Demons1858

1 hour ago, sisso said:

One thing I am not understanding is if our pressure acts and team defence are much worse than last year how come no one can score against us? Still the best defence in the league perhaps we've got them all so mesmerised we dont even have to try that hard anymore!  

Oh! That's an easy one @sisso - the reason is, is that we haven't played anyone of note. Just half the comp effectively. 🤷‍♂️

Edited May 6, 20222 yr by Engorged Onion