"We aren't great at any phase of the game"

[Dr. Gonzo 24,550]

18 hours ago, Gator said:

I wouldn't be worried by Sparrow's kicking.  He just doesn't do enough of anything.  Disposals, goals, etc.

True, this conversation started in the context of our poor disposal across the board. I pointed out a few of our mids who are less than elite kicks, Sparrow amongst them. But you're correct, Sparrow needs to get more of the footy or his career will peter out which would be a shame considering the place he holds in our hearts as the 2nd bang in Bang! Bang! Bang!!

Edited December 25, 2024 by Dr. Gonzo

[The Taciturn Demon 688]

On 23/12/2024 at 12:28, Axis of Bob said:

Disposal efficiency is a truly terrible statistic for measuring kicking quality.

Possibly the worst stat among a huge field of contenders. 

Zach Merrett is comfortably one of the best 10 kicks I've seen in the last 20 years. Ed Langdon is easily one of the 10 worst. Their disposal efficiency stats are almost identical.

 

[The Taciturn Demon 688]

On 25/12/2024 at 11:08, Dr. Gonzo said:

Sparrow needs to get more of the footy or his career will peter out which would be a shame considering the place he holds in our hearts as the 2nd bang in Bang! Bang! Bang!!

So true. I often ask myself "Do I really think Sparrow can make it or am I just wishfully thinking because of THAT goal?"

[Bring-Back-Powell 15,717]

2 hours ago, The Taciturn Demon said:

So true. I often ask myself "Do I really think Sparrow can make it or am I just wishfully thinking because of THAT goal?"

Sparrow also kicked as equally good a goal in the 3rd quarter of the 2022 qualifying final Vs Sydney, but you’re right about THAT goal.

He also kicked a very difficult set shot to seal the game against Essendon in mid 2021, so he can certainly kick a crucial goal when required.

Doesn’t change the fact that he’s at the cross roads.

[binman 45,231]

On 21/12/2024 at 10:01, rpfc said:

Isn’t that the point? We could only be ‘in’ games when we played an unwatchable, unsustainable to win big games, style. 

No it's not the point.

So much rewriting of history.

#demonland myths 

As I have noted several times recently, we tried to implement a different, more transition based game plan last season.

We faced several barriers to doing so successfully, in short:

- it takes time to implement a new game plan (particularly one so different to the one drilled into the team over the previous 5 seasons)

- injury meant we almost never had our best 23 play together 

- we didn't have enough of the right type of players, in particular enough elite kicks who could be relied on to hit high risk kicks (exacerbated by injury to our best players)

- and perhaps of most significance, we were clearly not fit enough, for any game plan, particularly one that demands so much all team running 

We could only be ‘in games when we played an unwatchable, unsustainable to win big games, style'?

That's just not true.

There was really only one game where we reverted to a defence first method in a big game to maximise our chance of winning - our heartbreaking two point loss to port late in the season.

Two rounds prior we came out firing, with exciting all out attack against the Giants, up nearly 5 goals at the end of the first quarter before running out of puff in the second half to  lose by two points.

In another big game, our round 16 match against the ultimate premiers, we blitzed them in the second quarter, kicking 8 goals. Very watchable. Another heartbreaking loss ensued after once again running out of gas in the second half.

Another big game was our early season win over Port at a sold out Adelaide Oval where we beat Port at their own transition game (coming on the heels of smashing the dogs - our third highest score of the season - and hawks with a fast, exciting, transition game).

Not a big game given we couldn't make finals, and our opponents were woeful, but our highest score of the season came in round 23 when we played a fast, exciting transition game to smash the Suns.

Yes we were often low scoring and terrible to watch. And we got hammered more often than we had in the previous four seasons combined.

But not because of an 'unwatchable, unsustainable' game plan - we just couldn't consistently implement the new game plan we were working on, or defend against that game plan when used effectively against us (hence the number of big losses).

Ironically, we would have likely won more games last season, albeit not enough, and certainly not have been opened up as often, if we had stuck to our previous defence first method.

Edited December 27, 2024 by binman

[The Taciturn Demon 688]

1 hour ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

He also kicked a very difficult set shot to seal the game against Essendon in mid 2021, so he can certainly kick a crucial goal when required.

I was sitting behind a set shot goal he kicked against Essendon in maybe 2022 - 45 to 50 out on a tricky angle.  The noise it made off the boot was pornographic. 

[Sir Why You Little 37,665]

1 hour ago, binman said:

No it's not the point.

So much rewriting of history.

#demonland myths 

As I have noted several times recently, we tried to implement a different, more transition based game plan last season.

We faced several barriers to doing so successfully, in short:

- it takes time to implement a new game plan (particularly one so different to the one drilled into the team over the previous 5 seasons)

- injury meant we almost never had our best 23 play together 

- we didn't have enough of the right type of players, in particular enough elite kicks who could be relied on to hit high risk kicks (exacerbated by injury to our best players)

- and perhaps of most significance, we were clearly not fit enough, for any game plan, particularly one that demands so much all team running 

We could only be ‘in games when we played an unwatchable, unsustainable to win big games, style'?

That's just not true.

There was really only one game where we reverted to a defence first method in a big game to maximise our chance of winning - our heartbreaking two point loss to port late in the season.

Two rounds prior we came out firing, with exciting all out attack against the Giants, up nearly 5 goals at the end of the first quarter before running out of puff in the second half to  lose by two points.

In another big game, our round 16 match against the ultimate premiers, we blitzed them in the second quarter, kicking 8 goals. Very watchable. Another heartbreaking loss ensued after once again running out of gas in the second half.

Another big game was our early season win over Port at a sold out Adelaide Oval where we beat Port at their own transition game (coming on the heels of smashing the dogs - our third highest score of the season - and hawks with a fast, exciting, transition game).

Not a big game given we couldn't make finals, and our opponents were woeful, but our highest score of the season came in round 23 when we played a fast, exciting transition game to smash the Suns.

Yes we were often low scoring and terrible to watch. And we got hammered more often than we had in the previous four seasons combined.

But not because of an 'unwatchable, unsustainable' game plan - we just couldn't consistently implement the new game plan we were working on, or defend against that game plan when used effectively against us (hence the number of big losses).

Ironically, we would have likely won more games last season, albeit not enough, and certainly not have been opened up as often, if we had stuck to our previous defence first method.

We have been unwatchable many times during 23/24 Seasons. I know this because i was the one who turned the TV off

Each week “connection” was talked about by the coach in the aftermatch. But each week we played the same style…

Kicking to a congested Forward Pocket 

 

[bing181 9,559]

5 hours ago, binman said:

- and perhaps of most significance, we were clearly not fit enough, for any game plan, particularly one that demands so much all team running 

Injury-related e.g., even if they're able to play, players carrying/nursing/recovering from injury miss training or can't train fully.

Also playing more younger players who don't have the fitness depth.

In both cases fitness is compromised.

[DistrACTION Jackson 10,966]

On 24/12/2024 at 14:15, Adam The God said:

I have Tom as midfield/half forward depth. Injuries permitting, I think he'll be on the fringes this year unless he really starts to impact with accumulation and/or with ball in hand.

Agreed and that’s totally fine. He’s very solid depth, which all strong sides need.

[rpfc 29,155]

17 hours ago, binman said:

No it's not the point.

So much rewriting of history.

#demonland myths 

As I have noted several times recently, we tried to implement a different, more transition based game plan last season.

We faced several barriers to doing so successfully, in short:

- it takes time to implement a new game plan (particularly one so different to the one drilled into the team over the previous 5 seasons)

- injury meant we almost never had our best 23 play together 

- we didn't have enough of the right type of players, in particular enough elite kicks who could be relied on to hit high risk kicks (exacerbated by injury to our best players)

- and perhaps of most significance, we were clearly not fit enough, for any game plan, particularly one that demands so much all team running 

We could only be ‘in games when we played an unwatchable, unsustainable to win big games, style'?

That's just not true.

There was really only one game where we reverted to a defence first method in a big game to maximise our chance of winning - our heartbreaking two point loss to port late in the season.

Two rounds prior we came out firing, with exciting all out attack against the Giants, up nearly 5 goals at the end of the first quarter before running out of puff in the second half to  lose by two points.

In another big game, our round 16 match against the ultimate premiers, we blitzed them in the second quarter, kicking 8 goals. Very watchable. Another heartbreaking loss ensued after once again running out of gas in the second half.

Another big game was our early season win over Port at a sold out Adelaide Oval where we beat Port at their own transition game (coming on the heels of smashing the dogs - our third highest score of the season - and hawks with a fast, exciting, transition game).

Not a big game given we couldn't make finals, and our opponents were woeful, but our highest score of the season came in round 23 when we played a fast, exciting transition game to smash the Suns.

Yes we were often low scoring and terrible to watch. And we got hammered more often than we had in the previous four seasons combined.

But not because of an 'unwatchable, unsustainable' game plan - we just couldn't consistently implement the new game plan we were working on, or defend against that game plan when used effectively against us (hence the number of big losses).

Ironically, we would have likely won more games last season, albeit not enough, and certainly not have been opened up as often, if we had stuck to our previous defence first method.

Not sure about this #demonland myths trope. I was one to see and applaud the opening up last year of our game plan. And we had success early in the year, as the better teams showed up and as the season wore on the moments where we reverted to type became quarters and halves and subsumed senior players. That was my point and I don’t think it was a ‘myth’, maybe a difference of opinion…

Regardless, moving forward into 2025 I hope we have one group buy in to one gameplan and we can begin to go in one direction. And the reversions become infrequent and irrelevant; that would be a step in the right direction.

[Dr. Gonzo 24,550]

18 hours ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

Sparrow also kicked as equally good a goal in the 3rd quarter of the 2022 qualifying final Vs Sydney, but you’re right about THAT goal.

He also kicked a very difficult set shot to seal the game against Essendon in mid 2021, so he can certainly kick a crucial goal when required.

Doesn’t change the fact that he’s at the cross roads.

Plus a bomb from 50 against the Lions during H&A in 2021.

[dazzledavey36 56,750]

12 hours ago, bing181 said:

Injury-related e.g., even if they're able to play, players carrying/nursing/recovering from injury miss training or can't train fully.

Also playing more younger players who don't have the fitness depth.

In both cases fitness is compromised.

Every. single. team. carries players that are either playing injuried or have missed chunks of pre season. 

We're the number one supporter base for making excuses for the sake of making excuses.

Edited December 27, 2024 by dazzledavey36

[Redleg 42,432]

14 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

 

We're the number one supporter base for making excuses for the sake of making excuses.

Is that an AFL stat?

[DeelightfulPlay 2,753]

So from that ABC kicking article in 2023 (note it was drawing on the last three seasons, not 2024), our kicking efficiency was roughly the same as the Swans but the key difference was the Swans retention per kick was quite high (and we did not generally retain the ball...).  Interesting!  We can only improve upwards, at least!  That being said, retention is not the be all and end all, when you look at some of the high retention teams eg Essendon. 

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-06-01/afl-what-makes-a-good-kick-in-2023/102420562

Edited December 28, 2024 by DeelightfulPlay
Added remark re Essendon / retention more generally

[Roost it far 10,731]

I think one of the things that we should be able to benefit hugely from this coming season is improved fitness and thus greatly improved two way running. 

[Dee Viney Intervention 2,135]

1 hour ago, DeelightfulPlay said:

So from that ABC kicking article in 2023 (note it was drawing on the last three seasons, not 2024), our kicking efficiency was roughly the same as the Swans but the key difference was the Swans retention per kick was quite high (and we did not generally retain the ball...).  Interesting!  We can only improve upwards, at least!  That being said, retention is not the be all and end all, when you look at some of the high retention teams eg Essendon. 

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-06-01/afl-what-makes-a-good-kick-in-2023/102420562

Interesting article and thanks for posting. Illustrates and highlights to me our method of ball movement and most importantly set up ahead of the ball. Great effort by Sydney who play every second week on small ground and still find space to work in. We play on the biggest ground in the league and mange to find nothing but congestion. Sydney to me have have much better ball users and I have always thought that we would have been better served by moving the ball quicker to an open forward line kicking to the advantage side of our forwards. Even a chaos ball would suit us more than slow and precise ball movement as it hasn’t suited our skill set. Having said that we have drafted better users of the ball which will help us going forward. 

[dazzledavey36 56,750]

2 hours ago, Redleg said:

Is that an AFL stat?

Yes

[Adam The God 31,051]

8 hours ago, DeelightfulPlay said:

So from that ABC kicking article in 2023 (note it was drawing on the last three seasons, not 2024), our kicking efficiency was roughly the same as the Swans but the key difference was the Swans retention per kick was quite high (and we did not generally retain the ball...).  Interesting!  We can only improve upwards, at least!  That being said, retention is not the be all and end all, when you look at some of the high retention teams eg Essendon. 

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-06-01/afl-what-makes-a-good-kick-in-2023/102420562

Great post mate, which suggests that the retention issue stems from game style. That is not to say the game style was poor, it won is a flag and had us regularly in top 4, but it meant repeat entries and long kicks to contests, leading to loss of possession and into a contested situation.

I'm glad we're implementing a more attacking game plan again (ala 2017-2018), but these stats will likely shift markedly again when a new game style is employed.

Again, DE and kicking efficiency are junk stats.

[Redleg 42,432]

19 hours ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Yes

I may be on my own here but really would like to see Roy George on our list, but the club may want Jai Culley and atm there are no spots for either of them.

It may take a mid season retirement to open a spot.

I am hoping no other club will/can select Roy earlier, if he doesn’t first agree to go there.

Interesting to see how this pans out.

[Redleg 42,432]

22 hours ago, DeelightfulPlay said:

So from that ABC kicking article in 2023 (note it was drawing on the last three seasons, not 2024), our kicking efficiency was roughly the same as the Swans but the key difference was the Swans retention per kick was quite high (and we did not generally retain the ball...).  Interesting!  We can only improve upwards, at least!  That being said, retention is not the be all and end all, when you look at some of the high retention teams eg Essendon. 

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-06-01/afl-what-makes-a-good-kick-in-2023/102420562

They are interesting stats, given we have employed Choco for several years and this is not a revelation.

[Roost it far 10,731]

56 minutes ago, Redleg said:

I may be on my own here but really would like to see Roy George on our list, but the club may want Jai Culley and atm there are no spots for either of them.

It may take a mid season retirement to open a spot.

I am hoping no other club will/can select Roy earlier, if he doesn’t first agree to go there.

Interesting to see how this pans out.

If McAdam breaks down then surely a spot opens up. We’ve also got likely past it players in Melksham (could still be useful but don’t see him best 25) and Fullarton. Then there’s the ever lingering possibility of a season ending injury. 

[dazzledavey36 56,750]

1 hour ago, Redleg said:

I may be on my own here but really would like to see Roy George on our list, but the club may want Jai Culley and atm there are no spots for either of them.

It may take a mid season retirement to open a spot.

I am hoping no other club will/can select Roy earlier, if he doesn’t first agree to go there.

Interesting to see how this pans out.

I am a Roy George fan as well 'Red' and would happily take him if there was a list spot up for grabs.

I think under a full time professional environment, he is someone i could see thriving in the AFL system especially under the guidance of Whelan and Pickett.

[Fork 'em 7,076]

On 23/12/2024 at 10:38, D4Life said:

Giants let Lions off the hook. Who would have believed that one previously injury prone, point kicking, non pressure game performer in first 90% of his career, in Joe Daniher has final series of his career, comes through under pressure and finally kicks straight rather than chokes.

Hard to believe Joe Daniher made the difference!

Highlights flags hard to win!

Gotta admit.
I loved watching him play well during the finals series.
He copped alot of sheet during his career with his terrible goal kicking and brain fades.
I wanted the big goofy spud to come good and rip those games apart.

Hated when they played us tho'.
Often managed to "come good" during those too.

 

Edited December 29, 2024 by Fork 'em

[binman 45,231]

54 minutes ago, Fork 'em said:

Gotta admit.
I loved watching him play well during the finals series.
He copped alot of sheet during his career with his terrible goal kicking and brain fades.
I wanted the big goofy spud to come good and rip those games apart.

Hated when they played us tho'.
Often managed to "come good" during those too.

 

Agree.

Hard not like someone who so clearly enjoys what he's doing.

Super talented player who probably deserved to win the Norm Smith.

Edited December 29, 2024 by binman

[Fork 'em 7,076]

7 hours ago, binman said:

Agree.

Hard not like someone who so clearly enjoys what he's doing.

Super talented player who probably deserved to win the Norm Smith.

  I wanted it to drive the dagger further into the drugcheats hearts.

Edited December 29, 2024 by Fork 'em