Stats Files - 2023

[layzie 33,989]

33 points conceded from turnover, I know it's wet but that makes it hard to win. 

[Kent 2,913]

On 8/7/2023 at 1:07 PM, old55 said:

Harmes second in pressure, I thought he was good despite some turnovers.

JVR 38% of ruck contests - that's very high.

what was Grundy doing?

[old55 23,687]

7 minutes ago, Kent said:

what was Grundy doing?

That was the week before vs North.  Grundy wasn't playing.

[binman 43,718]

19 minutes ago, layzie said:

33 points conceded from turnover, I know it's wet but that makes it hard to win. 

Agree.

But we scored 35 points from turnover. 

Two almost identical game plans.

Stats almost identical. 

Brilliant game of footy.

[Jaded No More 68,972]

16 minutes ago, binman said:

Agree.

But we scored 35 points from turnover. 

Two almost identical game plans.

Stats almost identical. 

Brilliant game of footy.

The most finals like game we’ve played in since an actual final. It was next level in terms of pressure. 

Where we lost the game was the first quarter where we really had not prepared for Carlton’s pressure. We absorbed it poorly and combined with a wet ground and ball we just butchered our ball use. Comical errors and panicked kicks. Thank god our defense is so good at absorbing repeat entries. 

We also lost the game in the first 10 minutes of the last where we came out napping. Trac twice let Cripps walk out the front of the clearance, and twice it ended in a goal. 
It was a mistake to not let Clarry start in the middle in the beginning of the last quarter. Nor let Kosi through there to start the quarter. 

In a final you have to be switched on every minute of the game. We weren’t. When we switched on we were the better side IMO. We scored with more ease, we moved it better and we won the clearances and the contested possessions. We just needed to play at that level for longer. And to have one actual reliable forward in the mix. Fritta plays and I reckon we win. 

[Deelightful Dee 152]

One stat that caught my eye from the Blues games was the Contested Defensive One on Ones. As @WheeloRatingsnoted, we lost 21.4% of these, but digging deeper we actually had 28 (lost 6) of these CDOoOs which is a season high! We had 27 against Port in Rd 10 (lost 2) and 26 (lost 7) against Bris in Rd 18 with the next highest being 20 (lost 4) against Gee in Rd 15. Interestingly, the only game where we had to defend more CDOoOs since 2016 was Rd 22, 2022 against...Carlton!

A big driver of this is losing the I50 battle: -5 vs Blues (after being down 20 to 2, 20 mins into Q1), -5 vs Lions, -1 vs Cats, -13 vs Power. Unuusal that we were +10 vs Blues in Rd 22, 2022 though.

Thank goodness for our defence when this happens. In 2023, we are 2nd best in terms of CDOoO loss %, only losing 19.7%, behind Lions on 19.1%, although they've had 69 less CDOoOs to defend. We've actually had the second highest CDOoOs to defend so far this year: 315 (avg of 15 per game) with only GWS recording more (345, 16.4 per game) and well above league avg of 264 (12.6 per game). There is a reasonable gap to 3rd with GWS on 21.4% CDOoO loss rate and Coll in 4th on 21.8%. With a league average loss rate of 24.6%, other contenders are: Blues at 25.1% (11th) and Power at 32.1% (worst).

For May to only lose 1 out of 12 on Sat night is remarkable (wet weather helped, but 11 spoils shows how good he was) and Jake Lever did well also, not losing any of his 3!

Player	CDOoO	CDL	CDL%
Steven May	12	1	8.33%
Jake Lever	3	0	0.00%
Joel Smith	3	1	33.33%
Lachie Hunter	2	0	0.00%
Max Gawn	2	2	100.00%
Jake Bowey	2	2	100.00%
Judd McVee	1	0	0.00%
Christian Salem	1	0	0.00%
Jack Viney	1	0	0.00%
Michael Hibberd	1	0	0.00%

Stats courtesy of data provided by @Fryzigg on Twitter/X.

Apoloigies for lots of words, but the current size limit on posts doesn't allow my preferred data visualisations.

[Watson11 2,241]

The other thing on the @WheeloRatings stats that was surprising was the Blues scored more from their D50 than we usually concede (19 points versus 10 as our season average). Contrast this with the fact we only scored a single point from chains starting in our f50.

Our F50 tackles were down again (only 8 v season average of 12). Considering we had 88 tackles that is ridiculously poor. We really need to sort this out as we are short a quality marking tall, and need to compensate with ridiculous forward 50 pressure (like Richmond did in 2017).  If we don’t then we will get torched at some point in the finals (and at some point this week against the Hawks).  I am worried that Goody thinks setting a zone to defend inside 50s is the better option.

 

[Engorged Onion 10,223]

I place a lot of weight in a teams ability to arrest momentum of its opponent piling on goals.

Seems to be pretty good alignment with the ladder as well...

Five-plus goal streaks conceded in 2023

23 - West Coast
16 - Hawthorn, North Melbourne
13 - Gold Coast
11 - Western Bulldogs
9 - Essendon
8 - Fremantle
7 - Adelaide, Richmond, St Kilda
6 - Greater Western Sydney
5 - Carlton, Collingwood, Port Adelaide, Sydney
4 - Brisbane, Geelong, Melbourne

Edited August 17, 2023 by Engorged Onion

[Adam The God 30,403]

On 8/14/2023 at 10:34 AM, Jaded No More said:

The most finals like game we’ve played in since an actual final. It was next level in terms of pressure. 

Where we lost the game was the first quarter where we really had not prepared for Carlton’s pressure. We absorbed it poorly and combined with a wet ground and ball we just butchered our ball use. Comical errors and panicked kicks. Thank god our defense is so good at absorbing repeat entries. 

We definitely panicked on occasion with ball in hand and made poor decisions, but our structure and contest game absorbed their pressure beautifully. On actual score and expected score, given the repeat entries.

Does anyone know if under Goody, we've ever had an inside 50 differential as high as that first quarter? I'd suggest we haven't. So the Blues' contest game was awesome in that first quarter.

On 8/14/2023 at 10:34 AM, Jaded No More said:

We also lost the game in the first 10 minutes of the last where we came out napping. Trac twice let Cripps walk out the front of the clearance, and twice it ended in a goal. 
It was a mistake to not let Clarry start in the middle in the beginning of the last quarter. Nor let Kosi through there to start the quarter. 

In a final you have to be switched on every minute of the game. We weren’t. When we switched on we were the better side IMO. We scored with more ease, we moved it better and we won the clearances and the contested possessions. We just needed to play at that level for longer. And to have one actual reliable forward in the mix. Fritta plays and I reckon we win. 

It's interesting, because the two goals JVR missed, he usually kicks both, if not at least one of those. That's the game.

I think ultimately Carlton could be a more dangerous forward half team, and arguably more dangerous around the ball with their omissions, but I think our ceiling and scope for improvement on Round 22 is way higher.

In retrospect, it's still a game we should have won and let slip. That's 4 now, I'd suggest, we've let slip. Port, Freo, GWS and Carlton. We didn't play well enough for long enough against Geelong. Those losses will cost us the minor premiership. But as long as we sew up the top 4, it might be okay.

[old55 23,687]

2 minutes ago, Binmans PA said:

In retrospect, it's still a game we should have won and let slip. That's 4 now, I'd suggest, we've let slip. Port, Freo, GWS and Carlton. We didn't play well enough for long enough against Geelong. Those losses will cost us the minor premiership. But as long as we sew up the top 4, it might be okay.

Yes but we won by 5 pts vs GC, 4pts vs Collingwood, 1 pt vs Brisbane and 4 pts vs Adelaide so it all cancels out in the end.

[Adam The God 30,403]

On 8/15/2023 at 12:19 PM, Deelightful Dee said:

One stat that caught my eye from the Blues games was the Contested Defensive One on Ones. As @WheeloRatingsnoted, we lost 21.4% of these, but digging deeper we actually had 28 (lost 6) of these CDOoOs which is a season high! We had 27 against Port in Rd 10 (lost 2) and 26 (lost 7) against Bris in Rd 18 with the next highest being 20 (lost 4) against Gee in Rd 15. Interestingly, the only game where we had to defend more CDOoOs since 2016 was Rd 22, 2022 against...Carlton!

A big driver of this is losing the I50 battle: -5 vs Blues (after being down 20 to 2, 20 mins into Q1), -5 vs Lions, -1 vs Cats, -13 vs Power. Unuusal that we were +10 vs Blues in Rd 22, 2022 though.

Thank goodness for our defence when this happens. In 2023, we are 2nd best in terms of CDOoO loss %, only losing 19.7%, behind Lions on 19.1%, although they've had 69 less CDOoOs to defend. We've actually had the second highest CDOoOs to defend so far this year: 315 (avg of 15 per game) with only GWS recording more (345, 16.4 per game) and well above league avg of 264 (12.6 per game). There is a reasonable gap to 3rd with GWS on 21.4% CDOoO loss rate and Coll in 4th on 21.8%. With a league average loss rate of 24.6%, other contenders are: Blues at 25.1% (11th) and Power at 32.1% (worst).

For May to only lose 1 out of 12 on Sat night is remarkable (wet weather helped, but 11 spoils shows how good he was) and Jake Lever did well also, not losing any of his 3!

 

Player	CDOoO	CDL	CDL%
Steven May	12	1	8.33%
Jake Lever	3	0	0.00%
Joel Smith	3	1	33.33%
Lachie Hunter	2	0	0.00%
Max Gawn	2	2	100.00%
Jake Bowey	2	2	100.00%
Judd McVee	1	0	0.00%
Christian Salem	1	0	0.00%
Jack Viney	1	0	0.00%
Michael Hibberd	1	0	0.00%

Stats courtesy of data provided by @Fryzigg on Twitter/X.

Apoloigies for lots of words, but the current size limit on posts doesn't allow my preferred data visualisations.

This is a bloody great post mate. Fast becoming one of my favourite posters. 🙌

I'd suggest sides are hyper aware of moving the ball quickly against us, so that they get 1v1s and don't allow our interceptors a chance to intercept, hence the 2nd highest CD1v1s.

It is exceptionally rare that we lose inside 50s though, so even if there is a clear correlation between higher CD1v1s and losing inside 50s, we know we're bound to have relatively high CD1v1s either way, simply because modern ball movement has evolved precisely to beat Melbourne Football Club's back 7-8.

[Adam The God 30,403]

6 minutes ago, old55 said:

Yes but we won by 5 pts vs GC, 4pts vs Collingwood, 1 pt vs Brisbane and 4 pts vs Adelaide so it all cancels out in the end.

That's one way of looking at it certainly. But if we looked Collingwood's record and offset say half of their close wins against the rest of their close wins, they'd likely be out of the 8 altogether.

So it shows you that these small margins can potentially be hugely importantly. A home final, let's say, or even the idea of missing the top 4 or top 8 altogether.

And I know there's nothing we can do about it, but I think we will rue to some extent not getting over the line in at least half of those losses.

Edited August 17, 2023 by Binmans PA

[Adam The God 30,403]

On 8/16/2023 at 8:36 AM, Watson11 said:

The other thing on the @WheeloRatings stats that was surprising was the Blues scored more from their D50 than we usually concede (19 points versus 10 as our season average). Contrast this with the fact we only scored a single point from chains starting in our f50.

Our F50 tackles were down again (only 8 v season average of 12). Considering we had 88 tackles that is ridiculously poor. We really need to sort this out as we are short a quality marking tall, and need to compensate with ridiculous forward 50 pressure (like Richmond did in 2017).  If we don’t then we will get torched at some point in the finals (and at some point this week against the Hawks).  I am worried that Goody thinks setting a zone to defend inside 50s is the better option.

 

But on the inside 50 tackle count, we backed off for a half and allowed them to chip and handball receive from the kick ins. This was when Kozzy played higher up the ground.

He played deeper in the second half and was tasked with tracking that runner from the kick out. 

That explains our lack of forward 50 tackles.

[Deelightful Dee 152]

Turning attention to this week's game and the the Hawks are in strong form. In particular, they have the best inside 50 differential in the league and 2nd best intercept differential in the league over the last 5 weeks. Our intercept differential is the best over the season, but 4th worst over the last 5 weeks (ahead of Bombers, Blues and Suns). If we can win the territory battle and lift our intercept game, I think it will go a long way to getting the win.

Edited August 19, 2023 by Deelightful Dee

[WheeloRatings 1,163]

Melbourne v Hawthorn (Round 23, 2023)

https://www.wheeloratings.com/afl_match_stats.html?ID=20232306

Key Team Stats

Stats highlighted purple were won by Melbourne.

Stat	For	Against	Diff
Disposal Efficiency	74.5	75.3	-0.8
Kicking Efficiency	70.2	70.5	-0.3
Metres Gained	5369	5045	+324
Inside 50s	61	38	+23
Shots At Goal	29	17	+12
Shots Per Inside 50	47.5	44.7	+2.8
Contested Possessions	116	124	-8
Ground Ball Gets	80	82	-2
Intercepts	69	63	+6
Intercept Marks	20	14	+6
Centre Clearances	11	13	-2
Stoppage Clearances	15	22	-7
Contested Marks	14	9	+5
Marks Inside 50	14	10	+4
Hitouts	26	34	-8
Hitouts To Advantage	5	9	-4
Tackles	55	42	+13
Tackles Inside 50	9	7	+2
Def One On One Loss %	28.6	42.9	-14.3

Pressure

Team pressure

Quarter	For	Against
1	172	173
2	192	155
3	180	159
4	179	167
Match	180	163

Source: Herald Sun

Most Pressure Points

Note: pressure points are the weighed sum of pressure acts. Physical pressure acts are worth 3.75 points, closing acts are worth 2.25 points, chasing acts are 1.5 points and corralling are 1.2. ( https://www.championdata.com/glossary/afl/ )

Player	Pressure Acts	Pressure Points	Season Average*
Jack Viney	28	60	56.0
Tom Sparrow	23	52	44.3
Clayton Oliver	18	49	57.5
Kade Chandler	24	49	31.4
Kysaiah Pickett	22	48	42.0
Angus Brayshaw	13	32	34.9
Christian Salem	14	32	30.2
Christian Petracca	17	31	46.8
Lachie Hunter	14	31	24.1
Bailey Laurie	16	31	13.4
Jake Melksham	13	28	16.4
Steven May	10	26	14.7
Alex Neal-Bullen	13	22	44.9
Jake Bowey	9	22	22.7
Ed Langdon	11	20	27.9
Trent Rivers	9	19	23.1
Max Gawn	7	18	22.0
Joel Smith	8	18	18.3
Jake Lever	6	17	15.4
Adam Tomlinson	7	16	14.1
Jacob van Rooyen	8	13	22.1
Judd McVee	3	11	18.0
Josh Schache	3	5	13.0

* Pressure points for rounds 4 and 6 have not been able to be sourced from the Herald Sun. Pressure points for these matches have been estimated from the number of pressure acts for each player.

Source: Herald Sun

Time in Forward Half

Quarter	For	Against
1	50%	50%
2	62%	38%
3	70%	30%
4	69%	31%
Match	63%	37%

Source: Match total sourced from the Herald Sun; quarter values are my own calculations.

Score Sources

Summary

Score sources highlighted purple were won by Melbourne.

Category	For			Against			Diff
	G	B	T	G	B	T
Kick-in	1	0	6	1	0	6	+0
Centre Bounce	1	0	6	2	0	12	-6
Stoppage (Other)	2	5	17	3	1	19	-2
Turnover	9	4	58	3	5	23	+35

Category	For		Against
	Match	Season	Match	Season
Kick-in	6	2.5	6	2.4
Centre Bounce	6	11.5	12	7.7
Stoppage (Other)	17	23.9	19	21.0
Turnover	58	53.0	23	41.8

Chain start region

Note: region is from the scoring team's perspective. Against season average represents average points conceded by Melbourne across the season, not average points scored by Hawthorn.

Category	Region	For		Against
		Match	Season	Match	Season
Kick-in	D50	6	2.5	6	2.4
Centre Bounce	Centre	6	11.5	12	7.7
Stoppage (Other)	D50	0	0.6	0	2.0
Stoppage (Other)	Centre	0	2.8	0	1.2
Stoppage (Other)	Wing	2	12.6	6	6.9
Stoppage (Other)	F50	15	7.8	13	10.9
Turnover	D50	25	11.9	3	6.2
Turnover	Centre	6	7.6	0	6.1
Turnover	Wing	21	26.9	13	21.4
Turnover	F50	6	6.6	7	8.1

Region	For		Against
	Match	Season	Match	Season
D50	31	15.0	9	10.6
Centre	12	22.0	12	15.1
Wing	23	39.5	19	28.2
F50	21	14.5	20	19.0

Points from defensive half

For		Against
Match	Season	Match	Season
33	34.5	22	24.6

Shots at goal

Team	Shots	G	B	T	Acc.
General Play
Melbourne	12	7	4	46	58.3
Hawthorn	6	3	3	21	50.0
Set Position
Melbourne	17	6	4	40	35.3
Hawthorn	11	6	2	38	54.5

Centre Bounce Attendances

	CBAs	CBA %	2023 %	2022 %
Max Gawn	23	88	61.8	65.5
Jack Viney	19	73	71.2	74.6
Clayton Oliver	16	62	80.1	86.5
Angus Brayshaw	16	62	35.3	16.0
Tom Sparrow	13	50	45.6	32.2
Christian Petracca	11	42	61.9	74.6
Kysaiah Pickett	3	12	11.7	1.3
Jacob van Rooyen	3	12	7.2
Trent Rivers	0	0	3.2	0.0
Alex Neal-Bullen	0	0	2.3	3.5
Josh Schache	0	0	0.0	13.8
Brodie Grundy			54.4	83.7
James Jordon			27.6	0.2
James Harmes			26.7	14.6
Tom McDonald			5.4	0.0
Harrison Petty			0.7	0.0

Ruck Contests and Hitouts

Ruck Contests

	Ruck Contests	RC %	2023 %	2022 %
Max Gawn	52	71	55.1	57.8
Jacob van Rooyen	11	15	12.1
Josh Schache	4	5	6.2	13.4
Joel Smith	2	3	0.3	0.0
Christian Petracca	2	3	0.3	0.1
Clayton Oliver	1	1	0.1	0.0
Tom Sparrow	1	1	0.1	0.0
Steven May	0	0	0.1	0.0
Alex Neal-Bullen	0	0	0.1	0.0
Brodie Grundy			47.7	77.4
Tom McDonald			8.9	7.0
Ben Brown			2.3	3.6
Harrison Petty			2.0	0.0

Hitouts

	Ruck Contests	Hitouts	To Adv.	To Adv. % (2023)	To Adv. % (2022)
Max Gawn	52	22	5	31.6	33.6
Jacob van Rooyen	11	3	0	31.0
Josh Schache	4	1	0	0.0	33.3
Alex Neal-Bullen	0	0	0	0.0
Brodie Grundy				30.4	30.2
Harrison Petty				25.0
Tom McDonald				25.0	33.3
Ben Brown				0.0	14.3

Opposition hitouts

	Ruck Contests	Hitouts	To Adv.
Ned Reeves	55	26	7
Max Ramsden	11	5	2
Jacob Koschitzke	7	3	0

Expected scores (Champion Data)

91 - 54

 

Premiership metrics

Melbourne is currently ranked in the top 6 in all 19 of the "premiership metrics" and ranked number 1 in seven. A reminder that these are the metrics where at least nine of the last eleven premiers ranked in the top 6 in home and away matches of their premiership year.

Although not one of the 19 metrics as I don't have data pre-2021, "time in forward half" is another important stat and I have Melbourne ranked second this year to Port Adelaide. Interestingly, here are the best quarters (average across all matches) for time in forward half this year:

58.7% Melbourne Q4
56.1% Melbourne Q3
55.7% Port Adelaide Q3
55.5% Port Adelaide Q2

 

 

[titan_uranus 25,042]

@WheeloRatings, what’s our W/L record when losing both CPs and clearances this year?

[layzie 33,989]

That first quarter looks quite low pressure wise from both sides which is surprising. 

[binman 43,718]

5 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

@WheeloRatings, what’s our W/L record when losing both CPs and clearances this year?

My guess that may not have happened more that 2-3 times.

Probably lost them all and they are probably during our mid season fatigue phase, as we hardly ever lose cp full stop.

Symptom not cause. 

[old55 23,687]

On 8/7/2023 at 5:41 PM, WheeloRatings said:

You can access the top 5 players in a given match in the Tracker section of the AFL app, but I think that's all.

I found player heat maps are available per match in the AFL mobile app by clicking on the player name in the Player Stats section.

It also shows "% in defensive half" and "% in forward half" - I believe this is % possessions not % gametime.

It doesn't show kms covered AFAIK.

Some interesting information is available there.

[binman 43,718]

1 minute ago, layzie said:

That first quarter looks quite low pressure wise from both sides which is surprising. 

The highest pressure element is physical pressure - worth 3.75.

That is literally when a player touches another player - pushes, bump, tackles etc.

If every single act was a physical pressure act, the pressure score would 375.

But of course it never is otherwise it would be one long contest.

in the first, there was a lot of short kicks and switches. Less contests and period where the ball is in dispter so less chance for physical pressure acts.

The second we really liked to close them down more with frontal pressure and tackle more. Hence our pressure number jumped to 192.

We didn't get scoreboard seperation in that quarter, but we flexed and took the wind out of the hawks sail I reckon.

There was a 37 point differential in pressure in the second. Which is huge, and very unusual.

I suspect that is if not our highest diff, close to it in one quarter.

It's a good thing they had one less day and travel between games I reckon.

[binman 43,718]

16 minutes ago, old55 said:

I found player heat maps are available per match in the AFL mobile app by clicking on the player name in the Player Stats section.

It also shows "% in defensive half" and "% in forward half" - I believe this is % possessions not % gametime.

It doesn't show kms covered AFAIK.

Some interesting information is available there.

The heat maps are interesting. 

As is the kms run during games.

They also show the top 5 players accross a number of distance covered fields eg total, defence speed, Sprints etc.

But this is all only available during a game (I might start screen shotting them).

By the by old, a follow up to our discussion about spargo and the high half forward role (which is relevant to heat maps and ks covered), Laurie explicitly played that role yesterday.

I heard yze interviewed on abc right before the game started and he was asked about Laurie.

He said he had been playing well for 20 weeks and deserved the call up and that he had been brought into the team to play the 'high half forward role' (direct quote).

Suggests they are indeed looking for a second high half forward, Laurie was given the chance to make that role his (instead of spargo) and that there is no issue with doing so and also playing  Chandler, koz as small forwards.

The question for Laurie will be whether he covered the ground well enough, and the answer will be in their gps data that provides the telstra Tracker data 

Edited August 20, 2023 by binman

[layzie 33,989]

12 minutes ago, binman said:

The highest pressure element is physical pressure - worth 3.75.

That is literally when a player touches another player - pushes, bump, tackles etc.

If every single act was a physical pressure act, the pressure score would 375.

But of course it never is otherwise it would be one long contest.

in the first, there was a lot of short kicks and switches. Less contests and period where the ball is in dispter so less chance for physical pressure acts.

The second we really liked to close them down more with frontal pressure and tackle more. Hence our pressure number jumped to 192.

We didn't get scoreboard seperation in that quarter, but we flexed and took the wind out of the hawks sail I reckon.

There was a 37 point differential in pressure in the second. Which is huge, and very unusual.

I suspect that is if not our highest diff, close to it in one quarter.

It's a good thing they had one less day and travel between games I reckon.

That was going to be my next observation but I couldn't find the uncontested possessions for that quarter. Hawthorn seem to do a fair bit of the uncontested mark style which would have meant less opportunity for pressure stats.

Also, do you think after a game like last week it was likely we weren't going to come out all guns blazing with pressure? 

[old55 23,687]

7 minutes ago, binman said:

The heat maps are interesting. 

As is the kms run during games.

They also show the top 5 players accross a number of distance covered fields eg total, defence speed, Sprints etc.

But this is all only available during a game (I might start screen shotting them).

By the by old, a follow up to our discussion about spargo and the high half forward role (which is relevant to heat maps and ks covered), Laurie explicitly played that role yesterday.

I heard yze interviewed on abc right before the game started and he was asked about Laurie.

He said he had been playing well for 20 weeks and deserved the call up and that he had been brought into the team to play the 'high half forward role' (direct quote).

Suggests they are indeed looking for a second high half forward, Laurie was given the chance to make that role his (instead of spargo) and that there is no issue with doing so and also playing  Chandler, koz as small forwards.

The question for Laurie will be whether he covered the ground well enough, and the answer will be in their gps data that provides the telstra Tracker data 

The heat maps for all players for all matches are available on the AFL Mobile App.

I compared Spargo's and Chandler's heatmaps across the season and to my eye there is no significant difference. And Laurie's was not significantly different yesterday either.

[binman 43,718]

2 minutes ago, layzie said:

That was going to be my next observation but I couldn't find the uncontested possessions for that quarter. Hawthorn seem to do a fair bit of the uncontested mark style which would have meant less opportunity for pressure stats

Also, do you think after a game like last week it was likely we weren't going to come out all guns blazing with pressure? 

I thought they would try to actually - do what they did in the second and crack the hawks, then go into tempo control.

But they couldn’t quite bring it early doors- unsurprisingly given how brutal last weeks game was. The blues also struggled.

The brilliant thing about our run home is the roos and hawks game sere both lower pressure games that the preceding ones meaning we don't have the mutiple back to back high pressure, taxing games the blues and pies have had to push thru.

Even if the Swans game is full on pressure, which it might be but perhaps less than if they were still fighting for 8th and or we were fighting for a top 4 finish, we then have the pre final bye to freshen up.

So from the tough run of lions, creos, yigers hames we went roos (second half low pressure), blues (brutal) , hawks (relativy low pressure), swans (high pressure?) then bye.

If we play the pies they will be coming off the bye too, but geez they'll need it.

Hopefully the bombers will be stung into action and at least try and apply pressure. If so that's 5 or 6 very tough games in a row for the pies. Hard core.

[binman 43,718]

31 minutes ago, old55 said:

The heat maps for all players for all matches are available on the AFL Mobile App.

I compared Spargo's and Chandler's heatmaps across the season and to my eye there is no significant difference. And Laurie's was not significantly different yesterday either.

Ok, but you acknowledge that they are playing different roles though don't you?  

ie chandler is a small forward and spargo and laurie are playing the distinct high half forward role?

I mean as I noted, yze specifically said Laurie would be playing the 'high half forward role'.

And that is exactly the role he played. He wasn't a crumbing forward or part of the midfield rotation (the role he played at casey).

My understanding was you argued that spargo was surplus to requirements in that we didn't need another small or medium forward.

And that if he were to come in, it would be at chandlers expense - and Chandler was the better option (better kick, more disposals, goal kickers and arguably as fit).

That's to say it was an either or scenario and you would go with Chandler.

I argued Chandler and spargo were not competing for the same spot. And that both would be selected.

Well Laurie came in and played spargo's high half forward role.

And so as we just saw, there was/is room for another small forward (ANB, Spargo/Laurie, koz, chandler).

I was wrong on th player, but right on the role and number of small forwards that can be selected.

The question is does spargo win his role back from Laurie.

I thought Laurie was good yesterday, but as I suggested it's hard to know how well he went without the gps data.

I did wonder a few times how well he was getting to his defensive spots as they picked their way through us fairly easily at times and that is a least partly a function of all team defence being off and is a key job for the hhf (eg say a Laurie can't prevent a switch or a lad up option).

I hope, and expect, he'll get another go at the role against the swans.

Edited August 21, 2023 by binman