Contenders & Pretenders

[Superunknown 3,330]

I’m interested in the comment that our scoring accuracy is the least of our problems. Had we lost, it would have been all of the problems. 

“Scoring” can be taken to mean accurate kicking at goal for a better balance between goals and points. Will cost us a game.

 

[old55 21,356]

I think if Tomlinson can continue yesterday's form, our structural issus are fixed. Petty comes in forward paired with JVR, with Smith as depth. And we don't rely on one of TMac and BBB who appear unlikely to get up.

Edited June 13, 2023 by old55

[whatwhat say what 19,050]

Just now, old55 said:

I think if Tomlinson can continue yesterday's form, our structural issus are fixed. Petty comes in forward paired with JVR, with Smith as depth. And we don't rely on one of TMac and BBB who appear unlikely to get up.

agreed

tomlinson was absolutely superb yesterday i thought; excellent in the air and looked more confident with the 'dirty ball' coming in at ground level too

[Winners at last 4,742]

29 minutes ago, Superunknown said:

I’m interested in the comment that our scoring accuracy is the least of our problems. Had we lost, it would have been all of the problems. 

“Scoring” can be taken to mean accurate kicking at goal for a better balance between goals and points. Will cost us a game.

 

It already has ... v Freo.

[loges 6,085]

31 minutes ago, Superunknown said:

I’m interested in the comment that our scoring accuracy is the least of our problems. Had we lost, it would have been all of the problems. 

“Scoring” can be taken to mean accurate kicking at goal for a better balance between goals and points. Will cost us a game.

 

It's the least of our problems because as long as we're playing well it's the easiest to fix.

[binman 38,398]

54 minutes ago, Watson11 said:

I’m not really worried about our forward line.  If we get forward half turnover we can really have anyone there.  But the media (and half of demonland) go on about it as nauseum.  And if we kicked straight the last 3 weeks no one would raise it as an issue. But the reason it’s been raised is our low goals per inside 50 the last 3 weeks (13%, 13%, 17%).  I expect us to get back to our season average later in the season (24%).

Yes, but the low goals per inside 50 ratio is related to our poor set shot accuracy, so is not indicitive of a connection, or related problem, at all.

A much better stat to assess the perfomance of the forward line would be scoring shots per inside 50, not goals per inside 50. 

[BigMacjnr 278]

8 minutes ago, binman said:

Yes, but the low goals per inside 50 ratio is related to our poor set shot accuracy, so is not indicitive of a connection, or related problem, at all.

A much better stat to assess the perfomance of the forward line would be scoring shots per inside 50, not goals per inside 50. 

Yep, and adding the 'expected score' of 20 point difference, which when added to scoring shots gives a good indication of what the scoring should have been like. Actually surprised it was only 20 points. 

Edited June 13, 2023 by BigMacjnr

[binman 38,398]

43 minutes ago, Superunknown said:

I’m interested in the comment that our scoring accuracy is the least of our problems. Had we lost, it would have been all of the problems. 

“Scoring” can be taken to mean accurate kicking at goal for a better balance between goals and points. Will cost us a game.

 

Goody was talking holistically, not specifically about the pies game.

His point is well made - even with three average weeks for accuracy, we remain the most accurate team from set shots in the AFL. 

It needs to be remembered that we will play faster at the back end of the year, whcih will help our accuracy. 

The reference point is the first 5 games, when we were least fatigued and our ball movement was electric.

Not coincidentally, our accuracy was brilliant as when we play fast and with dare we create more outnumbers and a lot more joe the goose and centre corridor goals. 

[binman 38,398]

1 hour ago, Altona-demon said:

I think Jordy was more making an insight (which I tend to agree with) that the quality of entries into forward 50 suffers because of the lack of connection.  Numerous examples of this last night - Fritsch and JVR on the same ball springs to mind, Kossie flying rather than crumbing.  As Goody said on AFL 360, this is a young forward line with some new entrants - connection and managing space and leads is going to take time.  I agree with you that the quantity is not an issue. 

Yep, goody did highlight it is a young forward line that is still building synergy.

But my take was he was simply responding to another silly question about forward half connection and didn't want to point out for the millionth time we are the highest scoring team and/or it is just a blip re accuracy.

But leaving aside trying to interpret goody speak, the quality of entries was objectively not an issue yesterday.

There are always going to be missed opportunities going inside 50 that could be highlighted.

But if the quality of our entries was poor, it would be reflected in a low number of scoring shots - and to a lesser extent, where the shots are from.

We missed alot of easy set shots, so the latter point wasn't a factor.

And 26 scoring shots is probably close to our season average (and again we are the best scoring team). So a tick there

Another relevant measure for the quality of forward entries and connection is marks inside 50.

We had 15 marks inside 50 to their 7. Another tick.

15 is a lot of marks inside 50 - evidence of quality entries

And taking 8 more marks inside 50 than the pies is a significant differential.

The actual shots on goal, inclusive of out on the full and kicks that fell short were:

Dees: 28 shots from 59 entries - 48% efficiency 

Pies: 19 shots from 49 entries - 39% efficiency

When you consider those numbers, and the fact the pies only had seven marks inside 50 on a perfect day for football (albeit a little swirly wind wise), the picture I see is the pies struggling with the quality of their entries and connection not us.

Yet i have not heard anyone suggest this to be tbe case.

That's what I mean about the way the media frames things and create self reinforcing false narratives.

And on that, here's my tip.

Some  clever clogs footy media person will be fed those numbers by champion data, or some such, via their producer and start questioning the pies forward connection - which by the by has been average for weeks.

We'll easlily beat say the giants, because we kick straight, and our 'connection issue' will deemed to have been solved.

And the narrative will switch to the pies' connection and scoring issues.

Edited June 13, 2023 by binman

[Wodjathefirst 2,309]

It is interesting to hear what coaches say at press conferences. Typically you would not expect them to give too much away for obvious reasons. 

Having said that, McRae certainly seemed to mean it when he said in his Melbourne loss press conference he would rather see Collingwood take risks and take the game on when they are behind in the last quarter to try and win and would not be disappointed if they then lost by 10 goals.

Not that it is any sort of secret, that is their general game plan. However, if you are the opposition coach it must be a very nice to know likely strategy of Collingwood if you are going to play them and are in front at the final break.

Knowing that,  I’ve been shocked about how many teams that tried to go into defensive mode when they were leading against the Pies at 3/4 time and lost (eg Essendon). Sure, you must defend but surely launch counter attacks wherever possible. (Like we did bar the last couple of minutes- we will learn from that)

[Jaded No More 58,070]

3 minutes ago, Wodjathefirst said:

I’ve been shocked about how many teams that tried to go into defensive mode when they were leading against the Pies at 3/4 time and lost (eg Essendon). Sure, you must defend but surely launch counter attacks wherever possible. (Like we did bar the last couple of minutes- we will learn from that)

Very few teams can defend like us.

This was their lowest score of the year, bar the Adelaide game where they scored 59 points and won by 1 point (but they still had 2 more scoring shots in that game than they did against us).

 

Edited June 13, 2023 by Jaded No More

[praha 10,283]

On 6/5/2023 at 6:08 PM, praha said:

 

Looking forward to people taking us seriously when we bury the Pies on Monday.

this is why they pay me the big bucks.