rpfc

4 hours ago, WheeloRatings said:

It's clearly not a meaningless or bad stat if the clubs put a lot of stock in it. Can you say that a team should have won a match because they won on expected scores by a small margin? No, you can't. So articles like the above from Fox Sports don't really help with interpretation of expected scores.

Goalkicking is not entirely about "who performs under pressure" - there's an element of that, but there is also an element of luck with goalkicking.

Regardless, expected scores provide two very useful and insightful metrics (even completely ignoring the "who should have won" perspective).

Average expected score per shot
This metric is a measure of average shot difficulty.

Melbourne supporters bemoan Melbourne's strategy of kicking it to the pocket because it leads to more difficult shots. This metrics quantifies this. Melbourne rank 18th for average shot difficulty in 2024 (16th last year) and 18th for set shots only (17th last year).

Average difference between actual and expected score per shot
This metric is a measure of goalkicking accuracy, and much better than raw accuracy (goals divided by shots).

People already look at the final tally of goals and behinds and draw conclusions such as a team should have won by more or were lucky to win. Two recent examples are:
 - Essendon defeating West Coast 11.11 to 11.5
 - Adelaide defeating Carlton 16.4 to 14.14

On the surface, you assume West Coast were lucky to get as close thanks to their accurate kicking and you assume Adelaide was very lucky to win thanks to their apparent ridiculously accurate kicking.

 - West Coast had 24 shots to 23 and won expected scores 89.9 to 80.7.
 - Adelaide had 25 shots to 26 (despite it being 20 "scores" to 28) and only lost expected scores 92.8 to 95.8.

Hang on a second. I am talking about insight, the stat itself can help paint a picture as much as my eyes and subjective (yet educated) opinion can, but the insight gleaned by some from this stat- including our coach apparently - is patently misguided. 

Any team that prioritises territory over deliberate movement is going to have more entries, more shots at goal, more ‘repeat’ shots at goal that make the previous ‘miss’ irrelevant to this particular stat as it would not have existed if not for the previous ‘miss’.

It is by definition a flawed stat, and, taken on its own, irrelevant.

But that’s all stats I suppose, but none get treated like this one, there is an ‘expected score’ ladder floating around for crying out flamin’!

I’m sorry, but this is a bad stat. It is just trying to place hard truth upon contests and shots at goal under pressure where there is only nuance and grey. 

There is very little insight with this particular statistic.

48 minutes ago, greenwaves said:

People suggesting we should rest players because of the five day break...forget it.  Goodwin doesn't do that.  If you're fit, you play.

We have 5 players who have less than 10 games experience. Maybe we will evolve…

18 minutes ago, Demonland said:

 

I feel with the crowd building to a crescendo and some of the commentary peppered in its much better that titanic meme.

7 hours ago, PVardy said:

Me with the memes of the younger generation:

Is everyone ok with him in the team now?

His potential for 2024 far outweighs anything any other player can provide across half forward.

We will persist AND we will persist past the next 3 week block of poor form you goldfish ‘endure’…

43 minutes ago, sue said:

why?

Why should he take glib asides about access to his short term memory after a hit to the head to a broadcaster directly after a game out of his witty repertoire?

31 minutes ago, Queanbeyan Demon said:

Not verbatum

Interviewer: How's your head?

Max: Pretty good

Interviewer: What did the doctor say?

Max: he come onto the ground and asked me who we played last week - I said I have no idea

Doctor: Either have I . . . you're right to play on.

Not quite. Gawn referenced the on ground testing they do and that’s what cleared him. 

Max probably should take those jokes out of repertoire though.

Port are the new Melbourne

Yeesh

11 minutes ago, Binmans PA said:

Mid to late 40,000s I reckon.

That is so poor lol

If we continue with crowds like this, we deserve what we get from Sam McLure.

And before I get the nuffy out from everyone- we would 93k for a final with Geelong at the G but 48k for a top4 matchup in Autumn… 

Got to raise that floor…

31 minutes ago, Moonshadow said:

IMO best not to assume.

This is the internet. I am sure they will take heed!

4 hours ago, Lucifers Hero said:

LOL.  I noticed Eddie's lie ... couldn't see his face but I swear he didn't blink.

I know a 4yo who has no problem telling a little white lie while looking you directly in the eye ... but they are so cute at that age ... 

Yes I have a little 4 year old liar too… ah well…

9 hours ago, Lucifers Hero said:

Eddie's training adventures continue.

In the club rooms last week. 

https://www.instagram.com/reel/C50LlZkxNfC/?igsh=bWxkZ3h5Mm1jMGox

My favourite moments:

• How Melksham teaches Eddie to 'look me in the eye' when shaking hands.🤩
• Jvr introduces himself as 'Jacob'.  Eddie hesitates for a confused moment and says:  'Hi Roo'. 🥰 Ah, the joy of childhood.
• a big hug for Petracca  😍 And how Petracca invites him in to 'meet the boys' - I suspect a friendship forged on AFL 360.

Very impressed he knows all the players by sight and remembers their names.

 

Note:  If the above link doesn't work go to instagrams on mfc site.  Apologies if posted elsewhere

This is good content!

Although, Eddie lied to Clayton. He lied. He lied and that needs to be dealt with at some point.

Shame really.

4 year olds these days, constantly lying…

9 hours ago, Binmans PA said:

We are emulating Geelong's slingshot game from the back half, where centre stoppages are less important and an open forward line is generated by slingshot off turnover in D50.

I like to use Round 2 2019 as a good example of this approach. I was at the game and we mauled them from first possession clearance and they beat us by 80 points. In the game, they lost inside 50 by -24 and clearance by -15, scoring 62% of the time they went inside 50.

I'd argue this back half game has been Chris Scott's template for well over a decade. 

Meanwhile, that night, we played the same game we played between 2017-2023, which was an aggressive, gruelling forward half game. This saw us lay +2 tackles and lay 18 to 11 tackles inside 50 for the game.

This week, I expect that we'll back our new defensive slingshot system in against theirs and whilst we'll be happy to take territory when it's on offer, we'll look to follow the same blue print we've followed the rest of the season.

* -1 at stoppage

* send only 1 to the ground ball at stoppage (the rest defending or blocking)

* emphasise post clearance pressure (from the defensively positioned mids and the inside slider off the back or front of the stoppage)

* be happy to soak up pressure with a deep lying defensive zone

* and tempt Geelong's methodical kicking game from the back half and try and turn the ball over across the wing area and slingshot back in.

I think we'll play Fritta on Stewart like we did Moore last year. Fritta did some good jobs as a defensive forward last year. It meant he was often where the ball was (by way of his opponent going for the intercept) or us directly playing through him.

Alternatively, it could be a really good way of getting Petty into the game. Have him sit on Stewart.

Interestingly enough though, Stewart didn't do all the damage last year (another game I was at). Although he had the 2nd most for Geelong on the night and 8 intercept possessions, I felt Jack Henry who had 9 intercept possessions was more damaging. In a game where they lost Cameron in the first quarter to injury mindyou.

I think Geelong will manage to score with their very talented forwardline (notwithstanding Hawkins struggling this year and Cameron being kept goalless earlier in the year), but the nature of their slingshot game means it's their defenders that set up their game, less so their mids. 

Dangerfield is a big out, but if we can prevent Stewart, Henry, Kolodjashnij and De Koning from controlling the area and our A50, I think we'll win. 

Yeah, it’s a balance. As @binmannotes - we are always going to be defence first and contest focussed. But that is brutal, and unless you are powering it out of centre - hard to score quickly in a final if you need 3 goals in 7 mins.

I think Goodwin wants to see us slingshot when the space allows it, and compress and keep territory when it’s fruitful, but we can’t do that until we are mature in the slingshot. 

So i hope we lean into it the next two weeks and the team can see it up against some very good teams.

2 hours ago, Demon Dynasty said:

You two must've been reading the Stats Files - 2024 thread where this was covered on Saturday.

By all means feel free to pinch juicy stuff from there but in future just put a credit as to where you sourced this from pls! 😆

But on a serious note.... Gawndy is correct.

It's referred to as the 'Defensive Mid Zone' which is...  the area from the top of the D50 arc up to the centre circle.

Laptop man (Kingy) refers to it as 'the wedge'.  Not to be confused with a choc wedge or a wedgy!

My understanding is it's a carve out of how much of your total score is sourced as coming from this area of the ground as a percentage.

The source (of the possession chain) being captured to calculate this ratio might include;

Winning the ball from intercept, winning the ball at stoppage / CB (clearance) and/or winning disputed ball at ground level (eg, loose ball gets).

It may also be just score from turnovers in that part of the ground but it doesn't appear to be that as it was not mentioned and the term 'score source' suggests it is referencing 'from which part of the ground the scoring (possession) chain commenced' as a percentage of total score sources.

Don't hold me to those interpretations though.  Would need absolute clarification from a Champion Data rep (which is pretty tricky... maybe @WheeloRatingscan help on this?)

Maybe Andy, Bin & George can score a bit of a coup and get Radford our strategist in to the post match podcast and grill him on it!

Not that Sam would give much away.  Maybe Choco instead, who at leaast might give the odd tasty morsel up with a nudge and a wink 😄

Thank DD. I didn’t read the thread.

7 hours ago, Gawndy the Great said:

It was scores from the defensive mid zone, which ultimately mean scores from back half turnovers.

Funny the stat was a raw number but instead a % of our overall scoring. It’s a bit misleading as we are 8th for total scores for. 

I think the main change is using the corridor more to move the ball by foot quicker to give our forwards a better chance. Simple by design but proving challenging for our team to execute. 

 

Total scores is misleading because we are not a heavily scoring team. We are defence first, so a percentage is a better indicator of progress especially when coupled with us still being competitive at 5-2.

On First Crack they talked about our ‘evolution’ as they called it to transition it better off half back.

King identified a stat around score percentage from ball movement from defence that had us 17th post bye last year and 3rd this year. 

Progress!

Also, like 4 of the last 5 premiers were 1st in this stat. Anomaly was us in ‘21. And that was when we beat Geelong (1st that year) from clearance score dominance).

The Transition is happening!!

6 hours ago, old55 said:

You gave examples of 18, 19 and 18 goals last year. I like fact corrections with more actual facts in them.

But Geelong kicked 18 and Carlton 15 the other night…

Sometimes I think we place KPIs for the Dees on other teams. We like to (or have in the past) keep teams to 60 or less. That desire presupposes the kind of dead slow, brutal, contested game that we would grind out 70 and win.

Geelong and Carlton use more of the field than we have and have great structures to maximise their excellent forward lines. 

So when they are off a little bit they give up scores or runs of goals. 

When we are off for a little bit we are losing 7 goals to 2 at 3 qtr time…

Makes comparing trendline of form on goals scored by good teams a foolhardy endeavour.

No, just no. 

Al Gore - who invented the internet - just groaned from his grave…

5 hours ago, daisycutter said:

"lucky" handball?

it was the most impressive handball of the game and very deliberate ... watch the replay

I watched it multiple times. 

8 hours ago, deanox said:

Why not? He played 70% of one game. Bowey's been named and he only played 48% of one game!

Bowey is a premiership winning player. Turner has taken three impressive marks, to good kicks, and one lucky handball.

8 hours ago, Binmans PA said:

This to me is now why it will be hard to get a read on the Geelong and Carlton games.

If we've got Woey, Lever and TMac trying to hit those angled kicks into the corridor versus Bowser or Salo, it is pretty likely we'll turn the ball over far more often than we would without those two injured. Huge outs.

Hard to read and hard to win. 

We may be 5-4 with increased pressure on Goodwin and some maligned players (injured or not) - the pressure to become insular and protective of our backline will be strong and revert to our inert and boring 22-23 style.

We have to put up the losses and be confident that we are on the right path.

Even if it’s for the sake of 2025.

1 hour ago, binman said:

We are 5-2 with a healthy percentage, with the most difficult part of our fixture in yerms of scheduling (eg interstate travel and breaks between games) done and dusted.

And we are not playing our best football.

The other big factor is we are trying to implement a changed method, which is always a challenge.

On that front we are number one for rebound 50s (tigers second, cats third). Laudable given better transition from the back half is the foundation of the new method.

You see doom. I see upside.

As clarry said in his post match interview, we started hot  in previous years and fell away.  He said they are focused on setting things up to plsy our best footy come finals.

As someone fully on board Team Change The Way We Play I agree that there was always going to be regression as we did this alteration adaption. 

But make no mistake - there are no guarantees we hit this upside that is readily obvious and continue to be ‘in it but not win it’ - especially when the margins are so small.

We did not need Salem and Bowey to miss extended periods and we can that too into a plus, but we are going to go through impotent periods in the next two weeks and I am intrigued to see what we can achieve. I can’t see us winning either this early into our Renaissance to Interesting Footy but I just want us to continue to counter and pivot and run-and-gun. 

One can’t ascribe our fortunes just yet…

I read this as the best Quarter that we have played this season… 

Anyway, Petty is not replaced by Turner after one game from the XVIII.

53 minutes ago, daisycutter said: