binman

He was also our fourth highest player for individual pressure points: (Weighed sum of pressure acts. Physical pressure acts are worth 3.75 points, closing acts are worth 2.25 points, chasing acts are 1.5 points and corralling are 1.2. https://www.championdata.com/glossary/afl/) Petracca: 74 Viney: 65 Neal-Bullen: 59 Pickett: 43 Sparrow: 40 Chandler: 40 Langdon: 40 van Rooyen: 37 Brayshaw: 33

Points for the double sledge. Impressive in only 17 words. Bonus points towards the time-honored annual DL troll award - the Olisik - for the excellent use of the underrated backhanded compliment technique. It's a crowded leader board Cranky, but you're in with good shot of winning this year's Olisik if you can stay focused.

Thanks wheelo - makes sense. But for the purposes of my over under competion (that i was the only competitor in), i'm using them just this once because they make my prediction look really good.

My take too. I felt like we were bit nervous and perhaps too wound up. We gifted them those first three goals as all were from turnovers that were a result of missing targets under not much pressure. But around those goals we were winning territitory and stuffed up a few potential scoring chains with some poor skill execution that should have resulted in us scoring. A good example is the Gus handball behind Grundy as he was streaming through the corridor. If we nail that play we are inside 50. Instead it goes deep inside their 50 (did they score off that turnover? If so that is a potential 12 point swing)

I think JJ is better than an ok player, but leaving that aside you're right he hand Spargo play compeltley differnt roels and i cant see JJ being a good fit for the Spargo high half forward role. And the end of the day JJ is used as a Mr fix it utilty, but his best spot, IMO, is in the middle. A totally natural mid, whco can find the pill and makes excelent decsiins under prerssure. The probelm for JJ is how deep we bat through the middle. I have made this comparison before, but he really reminds be of Kennedy at the Hawks. His talent was evident, and the Hawks would have loved to keep him no doubt, but they were loaded for stars in the middle and Kennedy had to go to the Swans to get a regular gig as a mid at AFL level. And once he got regular minutes it soon became clear he was a top shelf mid.

Yep, goody did highlight it is a young forward line that is still building synergy. But my take was he was simply responding to another silly question about forward half connection and didn't want to point out for the millionth time we are the highest scoring team and/or it is just a blip re accuracy. But leaving aside trying to interpret goody speak, the quality of entries was objectively not an issue yesterday. There are always going to be missed opportunities going inside 50 that could be highlighted. But if the quality of our entries was poor, it would be reflected in a low number of scoring shots - and to a lesser extent, where the shots are from. We missed alot of easy set shots, so the latter point wasn't a factor. And 26 scoring shots is probably close to our season average (and again we are the best scoring team). So a tick there Another relevant measure for the quality of forward entries and connection is marks inside 50. We had 15 marks inside 50 to their 7. Another tick. 15 is a lot of marks inside 50 - evidence of quality entries And taking 8 more marks inside 50 than the pies is a significant differential. The actual shots on goal, inclusive of out on the full and kicks that fell short were: Dees: 28 shots from 59 entries - 48% efficiency Pies: 19 shots from 49 entries - 39% efficiency When you consider those numbers, and the fact the pies only had seven marks inside 50 on a perfect day for football (albeit a little swirly wind wise), the picture I see is the pies struggling with the quality of their entries and connection not us. Yet i have not heard anyone suggest this to be tbe case. That's what I mean about the way the media frames things and create self reinforcing false narratives. And on that, here's my tip. Some clever clogs footy media person will be fed those numbers by champion data, or some such, via their producer and start questioning the pies forward connection - which by the by has been average for weeks. We'll easlily beat say the giants, because we kick straight, and our 'connection issue' will deemed to have been solved. And the narrative will switch to the pies' connection and scoring issues.

Goody was talking holistically, not specifically about the pies game. His point is well made - even with three average weeks for accuracy, we remain the most accurate team from set shots in the AFL. It needs to be remembered that we will play faster at the back end of the year, whcih will help our accuracy. The reference point is the first 5 games, when we were least fatigued and our ball movement was electric. Not coincidentally, our accuracy was brilliant as when we play fast and with dare we create more outnumbers and a lot more joe the goose and centre corridor goals.

Yes, but the low goals per inside 50 ratio is related to our poor set shot accuracy, so is not indicitive of a connection, or related problem, at all. A much better stat to assess the perfomance of the forward line would be scoring shots per inside 50, not goals per inside 50.

Couldn't find it

I have vowed not to get into back and forth on DL this season. And resist the urge to repeat the same thing over and over. Resist the urge to rebut is my self talk. But I have felt my will break in the last few weeks. So, i'll make one more post on this topic and leave it. There is actually a statistical measure of what is considered elite kicks. I can't be bothered looking it up, but i'll bet London to a brick that Salem, Fritter, Hunter, Bowey and Mcvee are all rated elite for disposal efficiency. Leaving that aside, your definition of an elite kick is informed by the list of players you consider to be elite: Rich, Tom Stewart, Darcy Moore, N Daicos, Hayden Young, Sicily, Bailey Dale, Jake Lloyd, Jayden Short, Tuohy, Bont, Jordan Dawson, J Daicos, Z Merrett, Pendles, Sidebottom, JHF, Jezza, Hawkins (field kicking), Tex, Gryan and Larkey. By the by, i don't disagree with any of those players being elite kicks, but i honestly can't see how if you think those players are elite you could seriously argue that none of Salem, Fritter, Hunter, Bowey and Mcvee are elite kicks. By way of comparison, few would argue Nick Daicos would be close to the best kick in the AFL. Daicos has a career average DE of 77% - a figure that is padded by the fact he takes most kick outs and gets tonnes of cheapies down back. Here is the career average of the five elite kicks in our team (and please, don't worry about potting DE as a measure of kicking skills - it is the only objective stat out there and it would be disingenuous to argue it is not at least a pretty good guide). Bolded indicates a better DE than Daicos: Bowey (who plays a very comparable role to daicos) 79.5% McVee 77.3% Salem 74.9% Hunter 73.8% Fritter 69.3% Anyway, i disagree with your assessment and you disagree with mine. That is not going to change, so let's draw a line under it here. (note to self here: don't react to the completely whacko assessment of Hunter's kicking skills - wow he turned it over twice, barely an average kick? Ye gads that is nutso - quiet bin, calm down, you don't have to convince everyone you're right, relax, go to your happy place - bang, bang, bang)

Some excellent points there watson. The only thing i'd query is our forward line being a knock. What's that view based on? I worry about BB and Tmac not being fir and firing, and the third tall has been a key part of Goodys preferred forward line model, so i can see it is an issue from that perspective. But they have clearly had an emphasis on spreading the goal kickers and the bottom line is we remain the number one scoring side and still number one for accuracy from set shots, despite falling away in that are in the last 3 weeks (fatigue related is my take). From where i sit the media so often frame particular talking points, get fixated on it, repeat it a million times and it becomes some sort of accepted truth - even when the data does not support, or even contradicts, the talking point. One of the best examples this season is our supposed scoring and 'connection' issues. Both were issues last year and it is if the media can't let it go. And so, regularly i hear paid analysts talk about our forward issues as if there is no debate that it is an issue. Even yesterday that was a theme in much of the post-match commentary. Jordon Lewis, for example, said on 360 something like 'now clearly scoring is an issue for the dees but their defensive structures etc etc." It is so weird because we had 26 scoring shots! If you ignored the scoreboard and just went on scoring shots, that was a solid performance from our forward line and the connection was really good. By way of comparison, two of our best wins this season were against the Dogs in round one and the tigers on Anzac eve. Against the dogs we had 30 scoring shots. A better example is the tiger's game as we had 21 scoring shots that night, five less than we did against the Pies. Yet because we kicked accurately (15.6), no one mentioned any scoring, forward or connection issues. Another interesting example is our highest scoring game of the year when we hammered the Swans in round 3 by 50 points, scoring 134 points. But we only had three more scoring shots that game than we did against the Pies. So, with 26 scoring shots, connection is clearly not an issue. Or scoring for that matter. We just missed too many set shots. It's also worth noting we had 22 scoring shots on a wet and wild night against Port, 22 against Freo and 21 against the blues. Yes, those numbers are down on our average number scoring shots (just), but that reflects the competition wide drop off in scoring shots that happens in this period every year. On set shot accuracy, goody said on 360 we were deadly accurate until the last 3 weeks, but he is super confident it will come good again because of how hard they have worked on it, noting it is 'the least' of our problems.

What I have been most impressed with this year about Jack is his field kicking. Improved out of sight. Technically better, but also very few of his dump turnover kicks. I think a big factor is related to your field webbs. The medical staff at the dees have been dealing with jack's feet issues for years. The amount of physio and rehab he has had to do would be insane. I'm pretty sure the last preseason was his first that was 100% uninterrupted. Didn't miss sessions and trained with footy boots on from the get go. The kms he has to run he must put a strain on his feet, but i imagine the way he so often powers though tackles an contests must put massive stress through his feet. Kudos to all the medical professionals who have helped him get his feet right.

I must have seen that ad a million times. I've seen it si many times I have stated analysing the final frame here a dees supporter 'clips' shaq over the head. What does it mean?

Diff expected score than from here:

I'm not sure what i was watching, def with my red and blue glasses it would seem, because i never realized he was such a tough bugger at the dogs. His kicking is what excited me most, but boy is he hard at it. Suits our focus on the contest.

Stream of consciousness

Seriously? All of those players meet your definition of elite kicks? And you don't rate Salem, bowey, hunter, fritter and mcvee as elite kicks? Not even one of them? No, I mean seriously, are you serious?

MELB 63 from expected 86.9 (+3 rushed) COLL 62 from expected 59.1 (+0 rushed) 89.9 to 59.1.

Joey knows his stuff. Appears he does his own research - or at least, much more than king. And doesn’t flip flop. I suspect king just a series of PowerPoints slides in his laptop.

Big time player.

Would have cleaned up backing us at half time then

Just finished it. Great stuff. Footy mana.

The only recent similar vibe was the cats final in 2018 I reckon. The dees army was in full voice. Felt like a 1980s game the way it was played. Contest to contest. Just how we like it. BT keeps banging on about control versus chaos. Us being the control weirdly. Leaving aside the fact that our finals footy is equally ballistic, fast transition footy as theirs, a better phrase comparing the two teams would be power versus pace. We have more power athletes than them, whereas they have more runners. Lots of them bloody tall too. And good overhead.

Pre game analysis David King, brown and montagns rabbiting on about the 'mcrae sandwich' (high scoring first and last q) and their elite fitness Montagna weakly notes at the end rhe dees are pretty good in the last q. We're bloody number one in the afl for winning last quarters Half time in the replay. David King confident the pies will blow us away. Elite analysis.

He looked gone. I was watching him come off and it looked all the world he had dislocated his shoulder. Maybe he did! He is a serious unit when he plays like he did today. Which is how he plays every big game. Bugger being his opponent.