bing181

Bad run of injuries for past 2 seasons, has hardly played. More than that, hard to say. Not just a long kick, but an accurate kick. Which we need.

"If there's one thing in life worse than being ignored in Dland, it's not being ignored on Dland". Oscar Wilde said that.

Stringer? Even if we wanted him, hard to see how we'd make it work, we're going to have to clean out the shop to get Lever as it is.

Convincing enough for the Nobel Prize committee.

Which isn't what you said at all is it. You said "significant" blunders ... You also said "Even Goodwin's greatest fan would acknowledge ..." when you don't speak for "Goodwin's greatest fan" nor are you able to predict what he/she would or wouldn't acknowledge. As for the workings of the brain, yes, after 100+ years of study, we have a pretty good idea of how it works. One of those ways is to take assumptions as facts: it's cognitively economical, and helps us function in a world that's a lot more unpredictable than we can deal with. If you want more, a little Kahneman and Tversky would be the place to start.

You're making a number of affirmations as if they were facts, but they're only opinions. I know in your head you think they're facts, it's the way the brain works, but in reality, they're not. When it comes to the inner workings of the coach and the coaching department, you're basically just guessing - as we all are.

You would hope so, if not, this year's miserable end will have been for nought. From seeing both Jones and Gawn, and now hearing from Goodwin, does seem to have put a rocket under them. The thing that jumped out to me in what he said mirrored something I've felt for a while, and that's the very real consequences of suspensions and injuries "which made the continuity of our playing list inconsistent". The long-term benefit of playing week in, week out with the same team in the same configuration can't be underestimated. Hopefully next year we can have a more settled side, and everything that goes with it.

He finished 4th in the B&F last year, might drop a bit this year, but won't be by much.

We’re not investors, we’re clients.

All covered by Jones' post/response, and to a lesser extent, his own post-game Press Conference. To the extent that it needs to be. And people complain that the players are soft.

All that Goodwin owes anyone is to get on with his job and act like a professional. Which, thank god, he's doing. It's not his job to go crawling up to sooky supporters.

Excellent. He's the head coach, his job isn't to wallow in self-pity. The supporters have that covered. (Though as the Jones post pointed out, the responsibility lies fairly and squarely with the players.)

Seriously? A journalist taking the [censored] at the expense of the poor-me, defeatist attitudes of Melbourne supporters is somehow going to help?

Merge with the Jake Lever thread?

Agree on Kennedy, but Spencer has value, even as reliable second ruck, and VDB and Kent could be looked at, they've both had matches where they showed they could play. Bugg ... not sure, perhaps for a team looking for a stopper or tagger. Also agree that none of them are worth much, but even a 3rd round pick isn't to be sniffed at, and I would have thought that that was a possibility.

Great to see that Brayshaw is playing, also the likes of JKH, Stetch etc. Gives them a bit more opportunity to work on their craft and develop.

Yes. Think it means that we're not very good at hanging on to the ball. Any number of reasons, even including game plan (e.g. plough on regardless as opposed to chip it round and wait for an opportunity) but with work, presumably it's the kind of thing that can be improved on with more experienced players, more skilled players (though the two go together), and more intent/intensity/concentration over 4 quarters. I know it's something that many here don't like hearing, but we're still a young team. Yes, there are other young teams, but what's hidden amongst that stat is that many of our key players (Viney, Oliver, Hogan, Petracca, most of our backline, even Gawn in ruck-years) are young/inexperienced, and that's where it's falling down at the moment.

I believe that what they were talking about is the Ball Movements stat developed by Champion Data (Ball Movement Equity or BME) which measures not just possessions but chains of possessions. It's not about speed of ball movement at all, and I'm unaware of a stat that measures speed of ball movement. My layman's understanding is that BME is about ability to hold on to the ball through chains of possessions, to keep possession.

Hard to get an exact explanation from Champion Data, but believe it relates to chains of ball movement. A low BME figure would be an indication of ball movement chains breaking down through turnovers etc. Poor skills? Not working hard enough as receivers? Lack of experience (knowing where to run to receive the ball and/or create space)?

It's not an out, it's an explanation. If all else is more or less equivalent, more experienced sides will always have the upper hand. There are always exceptions, but it's no surprise that premierships are invariably won by teams with a core group of 150+ game players, Hawthorn and Sydney being the case in point in modern times.

Garland is contracted for next year. He can't/won't be delisted. Only possibility for creating space is that he retires or asks for a transfer (to a lower league one would presume), but chance of that happening when he has a contract is pretty well zero.

Yes and no, but we're certainly still paying dearly for the basket case we were 5+ years ago. In terms of experience and thus maturity and leadership we have Jones, Vince, Lewis (especially), but then we drop down to Viney and the 2nd/3rd year players. We have very (very!) few players in the 100 - 200 game group, which is where the leadership and experience should start to come to the fore and flow on through the whole team. Of that group, the only players we have that have come up playing at Melbourne are: Watts. Jetta. Colin Garland. Tom McDonald. That's all. The difference with a team like Sydney is quite staggering. They have 5 players with more than 200 games, and apart from Franklin, most of those have played their whole careers at Sydney (more or less). For us, we have 3 players with more than 200 games, but 2 of those are recent imports. So, only one player (Jones) who has been with us throughout. But just under that, Sydney also have another batch of 4 players in the 150 - 200 game mark, once again, all of whom have come through the club (excepting Tippet ... and I've included Parker on 149 games). We have one who's come through the club - Jack Watts. In other words, Sydney have 9 players with 150+ games, most of whom have come through the club. We have 5 players with 150+ games, but only 2 of which have come through the club. That's a huge difference, especially when you consider the kind of club that Sydney have been over the last 10 years, from the coaches down through the players. Given what he's come up through, that Nathan Jones is any kind of captain at all is a miracle. The onfield leadership we're all clamouring for will come, we have the young(er) players. But it will take time.

... doesn't exist. There are only 3 players in the league who've averaged over 15 CP per game: Dangerfield, Kennedy and Clayton Oliver. All have disposal efficiency around that of Tyson, +/- 66%, and apart from Oliver, all rank high for turnovers.

The perfect player doesn't exist. Yes, Tyson turns it over, but no more than many inside players where disposals are nearly always under pressure. Hopefully it's something that'll improve as he matures, as it has with other players, though it's interesting that his DE has fallen this year from a more than respectable 70+%. Game plan? Other players not working as hard? Dom himself not working as hard? FWIW, Viney also has mediocre disposal. And has been pointed out, the player who leads the AFL stats for most turnovers is ... Dustin Martin.

Which coincided with our two main clearance players, Jones and Viney, being injured.