old55

AFL Fantasy & Supercoach

Is the Collingwood VFL team published somewhere? That would be interesting to see.

Maybe Melksham? Jordon should be sub and Melksham provides some flexibility, could go forward or be sub if Jordon is required in the 22.

How do you know all this stuff?

No Smiling Assassin, no Petracca Gone Wrong and no Howe Didn't I Win The Car even the ledger up.

Maybe so, we'll see.

Unsure who this change is for - Clarrie didn't play last week. Harmes needs replacing as sub and that should be JJ. Otherwise it's only Bowey as mandatory out and Hibberd is confirmed in.

People frequently rightly complain about the meaningless disposal effectiveness stats as pointed out in the article. It's good to see someone trying to do it better.

I think threat rating is skewed favourably for players in the forwardline, there's less possessions in a scoring chain involving their kick compared to backline players.

watchAFL should be free for Kayo subscribers - I had the same limitation when in Japan at the start of the season.

That's basically correct, Expected threat is how damaging (or risky) the kick type is, threat rating is about the result - does the kick become part of a scoring chain. Kade Chandler employs threatening (and risky) kicks with good results. Steven May and Michael Hibberd go safe long down the line but Hibbo's result in more effective scoring chains. Unsurprisingly in the article it shows Collingwood high in Expected threat kicks (#1). More surprising to me is that MFC are high on this measure too (#3).

There's an opportunity for the receiver to handball to Daicos and shepherd Kossie ... A likely outcome in this scenario is that the receiver doesn't handball to Daicos which could be a win.

You could try clicking through to the article, even use the link I posted above ...

The problem is that Daicos runs outside the receiver who can block Kossie from tackling him if he comes from on the mark. For it to work Kossie would need to be on the outside within 50. Daicos could go either way though.

The "crow" is Liam Crowhurst, data scientist, not Adelaide FC.

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

I think Kossie could do a bit of damage in that situation coming off the mark and pressuring Nick on the receive.

Selection will be interesting assuming Oliver and Hibberd come in. I think there's two alternatives Retain Tomlinson as one of 3 tall backs. Hibberd replaces Bowey. Oliver pushes out Chandler or Spargo. Petracca and Sparrow play more forward time. Hibberd replaces Tomlinson. Brayshaw goes back to replace Bowey. Oliver replaces Brayshaw in the middle. I prefer the first but I suspect it will be the second.

Have you been to Le Jules Verne? It's expensive, but worth it. Lunch is best IMHO.

I'm pretty sure you'll agree that we should have won by more against Carlton but for our inability to convert: MFC 15 marks in i50, 28 shots from 59 i50s vs Carlton 9 marks in i50, 16 shots from 39 i50s - that's a killing Port 17 marks in i50, 32 shots from 61 i50s vs MFC 12 marks in i50, 23 shots from 48 i50s - that's convincingly better, we were only in it because of Port's inability to convert.

Collingwood are clear on top of the ladder. The general consensus seems to be that they move the ball fast, have accurate disposal and avoid the contest. I wanted to have a look at some data to dig a little deeper. I used @WheeloRatings excellent resource https://www.wheeloratings.com/afl_stats_team.html and looked for variables where the Pies are top 4 in For, Against or Difference categories - the numbers represent their ranking. I also looked for where they are bottom 4 and unsurprisingly there are very few but the ones that do exist support the contest avoidance explanation. I've provided some comments for each variable but others may have better insights and I invite them I think my basic conclusion is "yep - they move the ball fast, have accurate disposal and avoid the contest". I'll have a look at the MFC strength areas next and see where we might be able to exploit them.

Seriously give up, you're reminding me of Monty Python's Black Knight now.

I like your posting TU, but I think we need to recognise the Port loss for what it was - they absolutely belted us and it was amazing we were so close at the end. We should have won against Freo but we were fortunate to win against Richmond and Gold Coast. Our W-L record is pretty spot on.

What were you trying to say in your original post then? It seems entirely reasonable that multiple FT coaches would be good, as you now seem to agree ...

So do you reckon a part-time coach would be better at doing this? 50 part-time umpires warrant multiple full-time coaches to get that rapport and mentorship.