deanox

Play for the free kick, get pinged for HTB

The Zone is lazy today.

We're not working hard to get back and cover the spare that gets created when others push up.

It's why there is constantly a free man ahead of the ball for the tigers.

Langdon having a shocker. Positioning, disposal, just struggling

3 hours ago, Demonland said:

 

It means that they don't have a lot of faith in Tomlinson playing well consistently, and are happy to throw Petty forward this week, then next week drop Tomlinson when he is slightly below par and swing Petty back and put Grundy forward after two strong weeks in the VFL.

Edit: I think Tomlinson has been pretty good, but based on selection patterns this year the selection pattern don't think he is the answer.

On 7/20/2023 at 9:54 AM, Demonland said:

 

I am absolutely shaken.

This is the first time I have seen or heard anyone involved in AFL media use the word laconic correctly.

@Demonland and @binman on the pod there was discussion around why listing Grundy as omitted vs managed or soreness.

I am pretty sure that the CBA requires players to continue to receive match payments when they were in the team, but are unavailable for selection due to injury.

I would hazard a guess that this is part of the reasoning why clubs choose to manage players sometimes but omit other times.

Unsure if it applies here.

6 hours ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

Frees and 50-metre penalties against, No Pressure Errors, Dropped Marks and Debits are all included in clangers.

So, what's a "debit"?

PS: (1) I love Joeboy's work, even when I don't agree and (2) ANB is a critical player in the team for all he does when he doesn't have the ball, such as taking the hits to allow Petracca and others to do the pretty stuff.

Honestly, I had no idea, and couldn't find anything on the champion data website too describe it.

But I found a research article published by researchers at Vic Uni (including a WB staffer) that stated Debits were points lost from dropped marks, no pressure errors, and missed tackles. 

So I think the champion data definition I quoted above is tautological.

Maybe they should listen to the Melbourne theme song over and over again in preparation for the match?

4 hours ago, joeboy said:

I rarely respond to anyone who wishes to rebuke or disagree with me, however ‘Bobby’, (who is a regular negative responder) your stupid comments about my apparent preconceived opinions require a response.

I almost always forward my weekly reviews of the game within an hour of the final siren.. living close to the G affords me this opportunity… I don’t wait for ages to ‘get the feel of the room’ to ensure I get positive responses 

As such, I rarely avail myself of statistical lists, which some others regard as the ultimate assessment.

I have no biases against or for any players  (apart from Dom Tyson ) and my responses are based purely and solely on gut feel and observations. 
I do not claim to be an expert or infallible, and I can accept it when my opinions are dismissed, however they are only my personal opinions , as indicated by the masthead each week , and as such I’m entitled to write whatever I wish.

Everyone has the choice to agree or disagree with my musings, but rather than make spurious comments about my analyses, others are quite welcome to put me on ‘block’ or offer 3 worded alternatives.

Hopefully most D’Landers enjoy or are entertained by my weekly offerings, and I will continue to post them, win , lose , or draw.

@joeboy 

I always enjoy your post because it's a great way to get a vibe and test my own thoughts against other thoughts quickly and easily.

Whenever I disagree I always try to find an alternative three word assessment that captures my perception. It's harder than one would think! I can't imagine doing 23 each week.

2 hours ago, Hampton 22 said:

The fun of this thread aside, does history show that a, say, number 4 pick is really better than a number 6? I would have thought that there’s so much luck and talent development involved that it wouldn’t make much difference. 

2 hours ago, adonski said:

Pick 6 appears to be cursed

Curse aside, it's a really interesting question.

As drafting and recruitment gets better over time, there should be less speculation further down the draft board.

But obviously luc, environment and development would play a big part in any drafting.

I think what it really comes down to is how much of a lock the selected player is.

At pick 1, there is often a standout, or maybe 2-3 in the convo.

At pick 50 there might be 20 players in the conversation.

So the likelihood of getting a good player may depend on when it starts opening up in any given year.

In some years there are a clear top 3, then the next 4 might be not as clear cut. In the case 4 v 6 is going to be much more influenced by drafting nouse and development.

If there is a clear top 4 though, then 4 v 6 is going is much more likely to be about skill/quality of the draftee.

1 hour ago, Redleg said:

Next weekend should determine it.

Such a big game for our Swans!

2 hours ago, Demonland said:

The Giants have the worst theme song in the history of theme songs. 

Take that back sir.

I have been surprised with how we chose to deploy Gawn and Grundy this year, typically leaving one as a forward and one as a follower. I thought we may have tried to get both between the arcs, with one a kick behind play, offering two chop out options, but we never did it.

With the recent form of Trac forward, I'm wondering if that offers an opportunity for playing two rucks like this.

Effectively Gawn start at ruck (as does Track) and Grundy starts forward. However after the clearance, Petracca drifts forward and Grundy comes up the ground.

It could create mismatches: does Grundys defender try to take Trac, leaving our opposition with an extra mid around the contest, but short string the ground?

Yes we'd be one down at the contest, but with ANB and Spargo playing that high half forward role, we'd cover the extra running. And they wouldn't have proper cover for Grundy up the ground unless they run a tall defender with him.

1 minute ago, monoccular said:

Thanks binman.    ANB gets labelled as a Goody favourite - if that means Goody loves the way he gets the ball, attacks the opponent and brings his team mates into the game, then no wonder he is a favourite.  

Wait for your final two paragraphs to lead to ANB maybe being replaced as this forum's kicking boy by Spargo.

Goody favourite could be translated as coaches favourite. To finish high in the bnf means 4 coaches are rating his game week in and out throughout the year. And he has multiple top 10 finishes.

I can't see any reason why a coach wouldn't have players they rate for what they bring to the table, even if that's not outwardly obvious.

I can understand "coaches favourite" being applied to someone who seemingly does nothing. But ANB clearly does. Even if he has flaws.

How's this for the dropped mark/clangers definition:

Dropped Mark: An uncontested marking opportunity that is dropped, resulting in a contest at ground level. Does not include marking contests with an opposition spoil. Dropped marks inside 50 are recorded as clangers, however, they are only clangers in all other areas of the ground if you drop the mark and don’t pick the ball up again uncontested at ground level.

So basically might be a clangers. Might not. Depends what happens after and where. I can see the reasoning but it also makes many stats genuinely useless. They are better off having extra stat categories to cover the different scenarios:

Dropped mark possession retained without contest

Dropped mark possession retained after ground ball contest

Dropped mark possession lost

13 minutes ago, binman said:

Nibbker had 5 clangers.

And so did Salem and Melksham.

JJ, may and jvr all had 4 clangers  - and jvr only had 8 possessions!

And tracc and Gus both had 3.

Nibbler is hardly Robinson Crusoe in our team on the clanger front.

Collectively they turned the ball over 72 times

Nibbler had 5 clangers. Here is the definition of a clangers:

Clanger: An error made by a player resulting in a negative result for his side. Disposal clangers are any kick or handball that directly turns the ball over to the opposition. Frees and 50-metre penalties against, No Pressure Errors, Dropped Marks and Debits are all included in clangers.

Given he had 2 free kicks against, there was a maximum of 3 disposal related clangers. I have a recollection that he dropped a mark too, so perhaps it's only 2 disposal related clangers?

Nibbler definitely isn't a one touch player, he is prone to fumbling at critical times (mostly because he has worked hard to get to the ball at those critical times). But the AFL definitions around effective disposal, disposal efficiency and clangers etc arent conducive to this type of analysis.

1 hour ago, Titus Totty said:

Just a comment. How good was viney’s goal that got us to 5 points?

19 hours ago, Jjrogan said:

He had the equal 2nd most clangers and 3rd worst disposal efficiency. In other words, the less he has of it the better.  And I'm not having a go, I'm just stating facts. His strengths is when the opposition has it. 

His missed handball to Brayshaw running past inside 50 with under 2 minutes left was a wtf moment. 

The 3 word rating was "was rarely sighted".

I highlighted that he was one of our most prolific players on the night, therefore clearly "was often sighted".

I also acknowledged that he was flawed and made mistakes, suggesting alternative three word ratings.

I'm not sure what point your post was trying to make in the context of this thread.

Edit: also of his 5 clangers, 2 are free kicks against. I'm unsure what the other 3 were, but it's not exactly a crazy number. Joe Daniher had his best game ever according to some, with 9 clangers.

We'd all love him to be a one touch player. But let's be honest, if he was he'd be on $650k+ per year and probably playing as a mid not a half forward flank.

Sydney beating Dogs, Carlton beating Port, and GC beating the Saints, are all fantastic results as part of this deathride.

Richmond, Hawthorn and Adelaide wins tomorrow will be icing.

ANB had the 6th most disposals for the dees and the 8th most on ground. He had 20 pressure points: our third highest and 7th on ground. Kicked a goal and had a goal assist.

So "rarely sighted" is a bit harsh.

Plays role continuously?

Limited but industrious?

Always gets involved?

Contributed but flawed?

15 minutes ago, Graeme Yeats' Mullet said:

I apologise to my kids, we left half way through the last...

You have just guaranteed that they'll grow up to never leave early, just in case...

Just now, binman said:

I've got a question. 

Where does that rank on the best home and away wins list?

At the very least it's the best win since round 23 2021, Gawn after the siren to beat Geelong at KP by 4 points.

2 minutes ago, 3183 Dee said:

I agree - and also love the @Demonland podcast for a more in depth look. It would be fun to hear some “cross pod” action: I think Naughtsie was once on the Demonland pod to talk about his Merger podcast, but how about @binman on the DeeBrief for a show?!

The Demonland Podcast might be able to accommodate Naughtsie for a segment, but the Deebrief certainly isn't long enough to accommodate @binman!

1 hour ago, Demonstone said:

Franklin is fourth on the all-time goalkicking list, behind Lockett, Coventry and Dunstall.

Also not in the goal scoring era of Dunstall and Lockett, but in the defence first era.

Overhead marking definitely not a strength, but I'd argue he was a tall strong flanker rather than a true CHF in that sense. And I reckon he'd have a fair case as the GOAT HFF!

22 hours ago, titan_uranus said:

I don't think we can or should drop Rivers. IMO he offers positional flexibility and should be rotated between the backline and midfield as part of our ongoing attempts to revitalise our midfield. He's also been very good for most of the year and even if he was down this weekend that can't cost him his spot.

21 hours ago, Roost it far said:

No one with any football IQ is seriously considering dropping Rivers, it’s absurd.

@Roost it far I don't want Rivers dropped, he has been fantastic all year.

But 8 players don't go into 7 spots. If we want to play 3 talls plus Hibbo down back then we can only have 2 of Salem, Bowey and Rivers.

@titan_uranus it's a good idea about Rivers rotation through the midfield, but even with Oliver out and Track forward Rivers didn't have a single CBA. He has rotated through the midfield only a couple of times this year.