23 minutes ago, Axis of Bob said:

Were we fast last year?

Name you're standards for measurement

7 minutes ago, Damo said:

I need to ask my annual question. Define quick and fast ball movement please.

@Axis of Bob, @Damo has said it perfectly.

On pure footspeed and gameplan we are not a fast side.

You always look fast when you're winning. If you're going to argue we are fast state the criteria. If it is ball movement i think it's obvious we were not fast this year.

1 minute ago, Cheap Seats said:

@Axis of Bob, @Damo has said it perfectly.

On pure footspeed and gameplan we are not a fast side.

You always look fast when you're winning. If you're going to argue we are fast state the criteria. If it is ball movement i think it's obvious we were not fast this year.

Agree we lack pure leg speed, but that wasn't the issue this season, it was slow, predictable ball movement with no dare.  Last year we hit the daring kick from half back, this year down the line

Cal Twomey reporting if the Hopper to Tigers deal can't get done, the giants would be open to trading Whitfield. He would be exactly the player we need and we could place him on the opposite wing as Langdon for some class and run. Could trade Bedford and a couple of picks/players to get that done. One can only hope.

1 minute ago, Simon Port said:

Cal Twomey reporting if the Hopper to Tigers deal can't get done, the giants would be open to trading Whitfield. 

The guy is afraid of his own shadow, pass

1 hour ago, Cheap Seats said:

Sure cheif, anytime a team wins they are world beaters, that in itself is an obvious statement.

The reality is though we are not. Collingwood, Geelong and Sydney exposed us outside of the contest. We are not a fast side even if we look fast when we beat up on sides early in the season.

 

37 minutes ago, Cheap Seats said:

Name you're standards for measurement

I asked if we were fast last year. You said that we were not a fast side, even if we looked fast at times. It's your criteria I'm asking for, as I asked if we were a fast team last year.  

Rather than waiting for your answer, I'll preempt it to save myself time. Speed is not just how many running bounces you take, or how you operate in open space. Just because we don't play the expansive game of Collingwood, it doesn't mean that we don't play fast football. We would be one of, if not the top, team for defensive speed. This means that we use our speed to make games less open and less free flowing. Why would we do this? Because we have Gawn, Oliver, Petracca, Viney, Brayshaw and a bunch of gun tall defenders. When we can force the team into contests we will probably win, so we use our fast players to use that speed defensively to shut down space and rebound before the opposition gets a chance to escape our defensive squeeze. 

Being a fast team isn't just about being Peter Matera down the wing, it can also be Kozzie, Spargo and ANB immediately running out to the far pocket after a turnover to prevent a switch kick. 

I hear the Saints saw Zaine Cordy's performance at mad monday and immediately called his manager - We need this guy!

Great culture fit for them

44 minutes ago, Cheap Seats said:

Are you saying we are a fast team? Or are you just repeating narratives from games where everyone is a world beater?

I'm saying speed across the ground is not an issue for us.

We are plenty 'fast' enough. My comment about the 'narratives' is the commentators regularly noted we were a 'fast team' - when in fact that what they should have focused on is our ability to move the ball quickly. We looked like world beaters in that 10 zip run because we were fit and running in waves - and when we pressed the button regularly transitioned the ball super quickly, just as we did in the first half and last third of 2021.

And as a result i I wouldn't prioritize an ability to run fast in anyone we draft or trade in.

I would prioritize foot skills because that is what will increase our ability to transition the ball quickly. 

In footy these days, how fast a player can run is barely a factor in how fast a teams can move the ball given how infrequently players actually get the chance to run and carry and how little space they have 

Which is not to say speed is not helpful. I think Freo has the most genuinely quick players - and if they can get the ball on the outside and into space use that leg speed to good effect. The Swans are probably second to Freo in terms of leg speed.

But we have very few plodders and have plenty of players who can cover ground quickly - including our bigs who are all pretty quick for their size. 

You imply the Cats, Swans and Pies are fast teams. What's is you evidence that is the case? Their performances in the last part of the season? Their ability to transition the ball quickly?. 

Or do you actually think they have more quick players than us?

I don't, with the possible exception of the Swans. The Cats quicker than us? Please. 

Go back and look at two in season lions game. We torched them them for speed. Yes, but lions are slow i hear you say. Then go to the first Giants game - again we absolutely torched them for speed.

Still not convinced?

Go back and watch the first half of the second Pies game - the pies were chasing our tail, and as a result looked slow and we looked fast. 

Hunt is arguably our fastest player. He was in our best 22, so no fringe player. Clearly pace isn't a priority for the club if they are trading him out. 

The Swans and the Pies got us on the outside because they were less banged up and were fitter than us. They could run faster for longer. The Cats didn't get us on the outside when we played them at Kardina Park - but come finals they too were fitter and less banged up than us. 

And crucially all three teams have better kicks than us, which in the Pies and Swans case meant they could go through the corridor more often. And in doing so move the ball quickly - and look fast as a result.

We lost our ability late in games to cover the corridor kick and spread, the Cats didn't and consequently smashed the Swans. Who by the by, looked incredibly slow in the GF - in part because they couldn't hit targets under the pressure of a GF and in part because they had, like us, clearly hit the wall physically. 

 

8 minutes ago, Simon Port said:

Cal Twomey reporting if the Hopper to Tigers deal can't get done, the giants would be open to trading Whitfield. He would be exactly the player we need and we could place him on the opposite wing as Langdon for some class and run. Could trade Bedford and a couple of picks/players to get that done. One can only hope.

There's two big issues with Whitfield (assuming he's over running away from ASADA testing).  

The first is that he's on a massive Brodie Grundy like contract.

The second is we'd need to have a thorough medical investigation.  He hasn't looked right since coming back from a very serious illness and I'm not sure whether that will impact his footy into the future. 

Jon Ralph. Carlton has today offered Paddy Dow to Essendon for the Bombers 5th round pick and unsurprisingly the Bombers have declined as their list is already full of list cloggers. #AFL  #AFLTrade

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

??  Dees any appetite to spin the wheel and offer pick “88” or a future 4th rounder. 

6 minutes ago, binman said:

We looked like world beaters in that 10 zip run because we were fit and running in waves - and when we pressed the button regularly transitioned the ball super quickly, just as we did in the first half and last third of 2021.

We did? I thought we were ordinary in just about all of those games, relied on our backline and defensive grid stone walling teams and generally put them away with a burst of pressure/contest stuff they couldn’t handle.

Apart from the GWS Witches Hats we didn’t have anything like a complete performance in the first 10 weeks and our ball movement was stagnate in most games. 

That said, speed really wasn’t an issue. Run and creativity were the problems. 

11 minutes ago, binman said:

I'm saying speed across the ground is not an issue for us.

We are plenty 'fast' enough. My comment about the 'narratives' is the commentators regularly noted we were a 'fast team' - when in fact that what they should have focused on is our ability to move the ball quickly. We looked like world beaters in that 10 zip run because we were fit and running in waves - and when we pressed the button regularly transitioned the ball super quickly, just as we did in the first half and last third of 2021.

And as a result i I wouldn't prioritize an ability to run fast in anyone we draft or trade in.

I would prioritize foot skills because that is what will increase our ability to transition the ball quickly. 

In footy these days, how fast a player can run is barely a factor in how fast a teams can move the ball given how infrequently players actually get the chance to run and carry and how little space they have 

Which is not to say speed is not helpful. I think Freo has the most genuinely quick players - and if they can get the ball on the outside and into space use that leg speed to good effect. The Swans are probably second to Freo in terms of leg speed.

But we have very few plodders and have plenty of players who can cover ground quickly - including our bigs who are all pretty quick for their size. 

You imply the Cats, Swans and Pies are fast teams. What's is you evidence that is the case? Their performances in the last part of the season? Their ability to transition the ball quickly?. 

Or do you actually think they have more quick players than us?

I don't, with the possible exception of the Swans. The Cats quicker than us? Please. 

Go back and look at two in season lions game. We torched them them for speed. Yes, but lions are slow i hear you say. Then go to the first Giants game - again we absolutely torched them for speed.

Still not convinced?

Go back and watch the first half of the second Pies game - the pies were chasing our tail, and as a result looked slow and we looked fast. 

Hunt is arguably our fastest player. He was in our best 22, so no fringe player. Clearly pace isn't a priority for the club if they are trading him out. 

The Swans and the Pies got us on the outside because they were less banged up and were fitter than us. They could run faster for longer. The Cats didn't get us on the outside when we played them at Kardina Park - but come finals they too were fitter and less banged up than us. 

And crucially all three teams have better kicks than us, which in the Pies and Swans case meant they could go through the corridor more often. And in doing so move the ball quickly - and look fast as a result.

We lost our ability late in games to cover the corridor kick and spread, the Cats didn't and consequently smashed the Swans. Who by the by, looked incredibly slow in the GF - in part because they couldn't hit targets under the pressure of a GF and in part because they had, like us, clearly hit the wall physically. 

 

I agree overall with what you've said, the key difference in our arguements is 2 part.

a - our game plan is slow & Contested - but yes if we are winning the ball we look fast.

b - Overall our players aren't fast. Compare us to essendon, we are a big bodied contested team, we are not fast.

12 minutes ago, grazman said:

The second is we'd need to have a thorough medical investigation.  He hasn't looked right since coming back from a very serious illness and I'm not sure whether that will impact his footy into the future. 

I assume this is referring to Marlion Pickett snatching his soul in the ‘19 grand final. Wasn’t that keen on the contest before then and has only gone down hill since 

4 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

We did? I thought we were ordinary in just about all of those games, relied on our backline and defensive grid stone walling teams and generally put them away with a burst of pressure/contest stuff they couldn’t handle.

Apart from the GWS Witches Hats we didn’t have anything like a complete performance in the first 10 weeks and our ball movement was stagnate in most games. 

That said, speed really wasn’t an issue. Run and creativity were the problems. 

Yes, I feel like I am going insane when people say ‘we were amazing during that 10-0 run! What happened?’ 

We weren’t great. We won sometimes before the game was played, and played a great quarter or good half for most of that run. Plus we played teams that weren’t great.

We had the same problems with a lack of pressure and little run and dare.

Once we came up against better teams - bang, there’s the wall…

32 minutes ago, Axis of Bob said:

 

I asked if we were fast last year. You said that we were not a fast side, even if we looked fast at times. It's your criteria I'm asking for, as I asked if we were a fast team last year.  

Rather than waiting for your answer, I'll preempt it to save myself time. Speed is not just how many running bounces you take, or how you operate in open space. Just because we don't play the expansive game of Collingwood, it doesn't mean that we don't play fast football. We would be one of, if not the top, team for defensive speed. This means that we use our speed to make games less open and less free flowing. Why would we do this? Because we have Gawn, Oliver, Petracca, Viney, Brayshaw and a bunch of gun tall defenders. When we can force the team into contests we will probably win, so we use our fast players to use that speed defensively to shut down space and rebound before the opposition gets a chance to escape our defensive squeeze. 

Being a fast team isn't just about being Peter Matera down the wing, it can also be Kozzie, Spargo and ANB immediately running out to the far pocket after a turnover to prevent a switch kick. 

See below

13 minutes ago, Cheap Seats said:

I agree overall with what you've said, the key difference in our arguements is 2 part.

a - our game plan is slow & Contested - but yes if we are winning the ball we look fast.

b - Overall our players aren't fast. Compare us to essendon, we are a big bodied contested team, we are not fast.

I am not saying we have all slow players or always play slow but our game plan is slow and contested and our players are built for contest not speed.

It really is a moot point becasue there is no real way to measure it against other clubs, but i stand by our game plan is contested and slow.

We got beaten this year by teams who took us on outside of the contest with quick ball movement and leg spped.

Again i am not saying we are unable to do that, but we were clearly unable to do it for long periods.

Call it stamina or call it style, fact is we weren't good enought to compete with the faster sides so IMO that makes us not fast.

 

Edited October 5, 20222 yr by Cheap Seats

7 minutes ago, rpfc said:

Yes, I feel like I am going insane when people say ‘we were amazing during that 10-0 run! What happened?’ 

We weren’t great. We won sometimes before the game was played, and played a great quarter or good half for most of that run. Plus we played teams that weren’t great.

We had the same problems with a lack of pressure and little run and dare.

Once we came up against better teams - bang, there’s the wall…

rd 9 We played a good first half against the Saints but were beaten in the 2nd half.

17 minutes ago, rpfc said:

Yes, I feel like I am going insane when people say ‘we were amazing during that 10-0 run! What happened?’ 

We weren’t great. We won sometimes before the game was played, and played a great quarter or good half for most of that run. Plus we played teams that weren’t great.

We had the same problems with a lack of pressure and little run and dare.

Once we came up against better teams - bang, there’s the wall…

On the positive side - if we go 10-0 while not playing great we have a heap of upside 

8 minutes ago, DubDee said:

On the positive side - if we go 10-0 while not playing great we have a heap of upside 

Absolutely, but jeez the blinders were on a few people because of that run. 

35 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

We did? I thought we were ordinary in just about all of those games, relied on our backline and defensive grid stone walling teams and generally put them away with a burst of pressure/contest stuff they couldn’t handle.

Apart from the GWS Witches Hats we didn’t have anything like a complete performance in the first 10 weeks and our ball movement was stagnate in most games. 

That said, speed really wasn’t an issue. Run and creativity were the problems. 

Fair points.

The point i was trying to make is that as you say leg speed was not an issue. 

 

3 minutes ago, Demonland said:

 

Giants are accumlating first round picks

Would the Demons be interested in Paddy Dow or Will Setterfield from Carlton?

https://www.zerohanger.com/carlton-provide-update-on-fringe-pair-paddy-dow-and-will-setterfield-afl-trade-news-128563/

We could play one of them on the wing perhaps? 🤔

5 minutes ago, Supreme_Demon said:

Would the Demons be interested in Paddy Dow or Will Setterfield from Carlton?

https://www.zerohanger.com/carlton-provide-update-on-fringe-pair-paddy-dow-and-will-setterfield-afl-trade-news-128563/

We could play one of them on the wing perhaps? 🤔

No

6 minutes ago, Cheap Seats said:

Giants are accumlating first round picks

Thats so they will have ample good players to lose in 5 years time.

Wondering what GWS will be offering for Bedford now.

Think their picks are now 3,12, 19 and 44.