titan_uranus

This would be the most positive way to describe our current situation. For the record, I love where we sit right now. We can finish 2nd, and draw a home QF against an interstate side, and we are still going to integrate a top 5 league player into the side plus, hopefully, our best forward. Still, it's not very far off this to note that we were a kick off losing to both Brisbane and Adelaide, conceded 90+ points for three straight weeks, and have conceded goals from opposition inside 50s at a rate well above standard MFC Goodwin. Part of that will be, I'm sure, that we've modified how we set up to change the balance of offence-defence. But this post reads like it was all so obvious that everyone except you and binman have been fools. I don't think that's right, or fair.

I agree with all that. Pre-GWS game, you'd have expected us to try to win these games by holding our opponents to low enough scores. It's a very different approach under Goodwin for us to be prepared, against these sorts of sides, to relax the defence and look to out-score them.

I don't agree with resting Gawn. He played far less taxing game time in the games Grundy played alongside him. He's in prime form. Resting him and then forcing him to find touch against Carlton the following week is IMO dangerous. Let him build his form. Whether someone like Viney or May needs a rest is a different question but even then, I'm cautious about resting too many players. I like that we're building form. I like that we're seeing key player starting to stand up. I want that build to continue, and I also want to see us see if we are going to tighten the defence just a touch. We have a chance for top 2 and that's not happening if we drop a few games from here.

We are building nicely but intriguingly. We were 4 goals down to Brisbane but fought back and won. We had Adelaide run us down twice in the last quarter but held on and won. We were 20 points down to Richmond in the third quarter but won by 6 goals (a 9-goal turnaround in 1.5 quarters). But in each game we've conceded 90+ points. I said after the GWS game that we needed to relax our defensive mindset to try to "unlock" higher scoring. It appears we're doing that, and I think it's working. But I'm sure we'd prefer it if we weren't conceding as much as we are. There was so much pressure on us today, knowing how many sides around us lost. Securing the win, against a good (not great, but good) side, is IMO huge. Petty today makes you wonder why we rushed him back after his long injury to put him in the backline forcing us to drop Tomlinson in the process, when Tomlinson was coming off one of his best games for us. We have to leave him forward now, even if he kicks 0 next week and struggles, and even if Tomlinson struggles. We can't keep moving him around. We've dropped Brown to get him into the forward line, let's leave him there. We now have to back Tomlinson in or, if need be, revert to Smith or Hibberd. Can Gawn make AA if he keeps this up for the last month? Darcy's out, English is fading, and neither can do what Gawn is doing.

Brown being dropped 5 weeks prior to finals is not a good sign for him. I'm disappointed - I really hoped he could get himself going and be the key forward we really need. Either Petty or Smith gets his spot, presumably Petty. IMO, Petty has to make it as a forward because Tomlinson deserves to hold his spot over Petty in the backline. I'm also disappointed that Dunstan can't get a game over Harmes. I feel like we've seen enough of Harmes in 2023 and we had moved past what he had to offer. I hope he proves me wrong, and I can understand the FD being reluctant to bring in Dunstan who hasn't played all year, but I just feel this isn't the right move.

I don't think he should return until he's fully fit and regained some form at Casey. He might be long term best 23 but I don't think we should be rushing him back.

Listening to Goody's presser, I'm expecting Petty to return. I'm not enthused, unfortunately.

Agree that it’s not at all clear.

The recent article says: “The Fremantle young gun was linked in the pre-season to Melbourne, where his close friend Kysaiah Pickett is a star forward, but the Demons moved on from Henry once they secured Kade Chandler’s signature in mid-June.” https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/bombers-domino-falls-freo-livewire-targeted-blues-irish-expedition-20230724-p5dqtt.html

It may be misogynistic but as for classy, there are plenty on here who have similarly “classy” names for other clubs.

I wouldn’t call it “very good”. There’s a chance, sure, but I doubt we go 5-0 and I doubt Brisbane or Port are dropping enough games to slide past us.

Yes, there is. But swap the word “insane” out for “stunning” if you want. It’s the view point you expressed that I’m addressing here. To focus on 4th as our worst result in three years is to minimise the achievement of being in the top 4 for three straight years. If there is a difference between 1/2 and 3/4, then it’s not significant enough IMO to lead with a negative outlook on our ladder position.

At first I thought I might agree with this but then I thought about it some more and I'm not sure I do. For starters, why are we "looking beaten up"? Is Viney really that in need of a rest? Even if he is, is there a single other player who looks "beaten up" (Brown doesn't count, he isn't "beaten up", he's simply playing at what appears to be his ceiling of fitness). And then there's Richmond. Last week they were 5 goals down to Hawthorn at 3QT. The week before they beat West Coast. The week before they were trailing Sydney most of the game (a side who was in the bottom 6 from the bye until this week). The week before they were blown off the park by Brisbane in one of their worst games in 7 years. Are they actually that good?

I really find this view point insane. If all you see in us sitting 4th on the ladder is "we're not as good as last year" or "this will be our lowest finish of the 3 years", what is the point of following the side? Expecting us to be 1st, or to be better every year (FWIW there are good arguments to be made that we're better this year than last anyway), only sets you up for disappointment. A bar at that level is unreasonably high.

If we stay in the top 4 for the rest of the season, we'll have been in the top 4 for all bar 2 rounds since Round 1, 2021. The two exceptions were Round 2 this year (fell to 8th after losing to Brisbane) and Round 5 this year (fell to 5th after losing to Essendon).

I thought we were long past the days of reducing Oliver down to nothing more than a contested ball winner. He is an elite two-way runner, a damaging burst player, and a physical presence defensively as well as offensively at stoppages. There is IMO very little merit to the argument that we are more effective without him. If you think we’re doing ok without him that’s just a testament to how hard we’ve worked to cover his absence.

In Smith's last full game (vs GWS) he took 1 mark. The week before that (vs Geelong) he took 3 marks. In the four full games he played (Carlton, Collingwood, Geelong, GWS) he took 14 marks at an average of 3.5. In Brown's four games since returning he's taken 12 marks at an average of 3 (bearing in mind he was subbed off this week for a quarter). I've liked Smith's efforts this year but he remains a player for whom his talent distracts from his actual output.

To summarise this - we will make top 4 even if we only go 2-3 from here, provided that the Dogs, St Kilda, GWS, Carlton, Geelong and Richmond all lose at least once and the first three don't make up the 18%-odd on us. By going 3-2 we eliminate Carlton, Geelong and Richmond and could only fall out if the Dogs, St Kilda or GWS go 5-0 and then make that 18% gap on us. By going 4-1 we cannot miss top 4. For climbing up the ladder, we need to out-do Port or Brisbane by 2 games (we have the percentage over Port but not Brisbane). I don't think Brisbane will lose any more than 1 more game (Collingwood at Marvel) which rules that out, and means we can probably only pass Port - they have the Showdown, Geelong in Geelong, GWS, Fremantle away and Richmond. If they drop the first two and we go 5-0, we can pass them. If we go 4-1 they'd have to drop a third and that seems unlikely. So I think 4th is very much the likely landing spot for us.

The expected score I use (AFLxScore on Twitter) is simply an analysis of the AFL average points scored from the shots a side takes (based on distance, angle, and whether it's a set shot or general play). It doesn't take into account pressure (actual or perceived) or time of the game, I don't think. The fact we won on expected score yesterday helps dispel the bolded part of your post. It's not really accurate to say "they missed some easy shots" - on the whole, they scored above what the average side would score from the shots they took, whereas we scored about on that average. So they were outperforming, not underperforming. Of course, these things all have to be taken with a grain of salt. If a goal had actually been kicked, the ball goes back to the centre, and the whole flow of the game changes. But the metric is helpful to consider goal-kicking accuracy and the difficulty of shots, and just on that basis, it's not actually correct to say they missed easy shots - on the whole, they out-did what they should have scored.

What do you mean "starting"? He's been doing this for weeks now. We've had more players rotating through the middle than in 2022. We've rested/managed players who haven't been fit instead of pushing through (with Petty the only exception I can think of). We've gone away from the 2021 preferred forward structure and indeed we're also now trying out a single ruck model. We've tried two tall defenders instead of three. We've dropped Spargo and Harmes more than once, we kept Brown out for weeks, we're now keeping Hibberd out. We currently have three 2023 debutants in our line-up as well as Chandler who had 5 games' experience before this year. And above all, we've spent huge portions of this year developing a turnover/transition game, rather than going all in on our stoppage game.

We’ve changed quite a bit since the first half of the season and one of the important changes IMO has been to reduce the number of small forwards in the side. I don’t think we should go back to having all four in the side, even with Pickett doing a bit more midfield minutes. I’d prefer another midfielder.

Where did I say I was happy giving up that fourth quarter lead? In fact, I said the opposite. Where I’ve engaged with you is in relation to your argument that close wins are worse when you lead first then get clawed back as compared to the other way around. I don’t agree with that.

Circular argument. They’re where they are because they’ve won 5 games when behind at 3QT (including, funnily enough, to Essendon). But if you didn’t like that example how about Port being 3 goals up on Essendon with 10 minutes to go and then needing a goal after the siren to win?

I’m not sure you’ve thought this argument all the way through. On your logic it’s better to be bad for 3 quarters then good for 1, than the other way around.

St Kilda is surely the worst ever side to sit in the top 6 with five games to go.