binman

5 hours ago, DemonWA said:

I believe GWS have a particularly luke warm record at the G, which I'm sure is part of the rationale behind these odds. Similarly our MCG form this year has been solid. 

 

That and form.

They have won all of one more game than us.

And like us have won three of their last five games.

Punters assess games more objectively and strip out emotion than fans of participating teams.

#Don't shoot the messenger but the punters have this game as basically a toss up:

2 hours ago, No10 said:

Jefferson was a first round pick. Playing consistently well in VFL. In his second year.

Maybe Turner sits it out. But it’s a game to play the kid. Desperately holding on to the season isn’t necessarily the best strategy.

The problem is jeffo hasn't been playing consistently well in the VFL.

In fact the only consistent thing about his career thus far is how inconsistent both his performances, and of more concern, his effort has been.

Take the game against Frankston. With the rain, terrible day for forwards so he gets a pass on his performance. But effort is a non-negotiable and his was poor.

Compare and contrast Jefferson's second season in the VFL to JVR's first season in the VFL.

Chalk and cheese.

8 minutes ago, Neil Crompton said:

I’m not going to pot you @binman because I thought your podcast was great, and I agreed with what you said. But I was just thinking, what if Andy’s holiday was a week longer and you had decided in advance to play your Goody pod tonight - I wonder what the DL reaction would be? 

@Webber might not have chosen to create this thread!

But the content of the rant would be the same.

I'm glad our loss to freo has given the face palm posse an opportunity to take their pots shots at me.

I'm not going to bother to defend my opinion on goody other than to say if you listened to my rant and think a loss this weekend gone changes my opinion that goody is a legend of the MFC for the record he has established in his 8 years as senior coach then you have serious comprehension issues.

And if you haven't listened to it but feel the need to come on here to have a pot-shot at me when you dont even know what i said then I live in your head rent free and perhaps you need to put me on ignore for your own well being as my opinions are clearly very triggering.

22 minutes ago, Binmans PA said:

Did you see the little piece in the HUN this morning?

Since R13, we're:

* 3rd for chain to score against.

* 1st for score per inside 50 against.

So I suspect those stats are skewed by Rounds 0-12.

Such was our defence and the inability of teams to move the ball quickly against us.

Makes sense.

And is more reliant on scores from stoppage?

Agree on all points.

Yes, I think more reliant on stoppages.

I wonder if we'll continue to even up at stoppages in every game now.

Game style

• Very similar to the dons in some ways – high uncontested possession numbers (Bombers AFL #1 and Freo #4)
• And a similar use of handballs to the the dons
• And like the dons like to use of the width of the ground to try to spread their opponents and create overlap opportunities
• BUT Freo much more prepared to go lateral and hold possession
• That was their template against us when they thrashed us in the Alice = though they didn’t need dot hold it up much as we weren’t getting across to cover as we clearly had dead legs

• But we are a very different team now in terms of our running power, dynamism and all team defence
• We’ll be more than happy to let them hold onto the ball as it means we can get our d set
• And will likely use very similar tactics as we did against the bombers to make it more difficult to chain out of stoppages and create overlap handball chains by creating congestion around stoppages, applying pressure on the ball carrier and frontal pressure on the receiver in the chain  

 Prediction

• Dees to crack in hard at it and apply too much pressure and be too strong in the contest for Freo
• Take our chances early and we win by 17 after leading by 32 late in the last

46 minutes ago, Binmans PA said:

I think @binman may have touched on this overall point and I certainly have as well, but there was a run down of our stats since R13 in the HUN this morning. We're 1st for groundball differential since this time.

It's pretty clear that we changed the way we set up in the first half of the year, which meant we could generate scores and wins without winning groundball, in fact usually losing it easily.

This goes to that point Binners has often made previously about Chris Scott's mantra of managing players and potentially missing finals, but being cherry ripe by the pointy end. Our philosophy early in 2024 also had the positive side effect of developing our slingshot transition game.

So instead of winning groundball at contest and trying to play a forward half territory game, we were happy to set our zone deeper, win the clean clearance if possible, but otherwise try and intercept when the ball goes inside 50 against or simply reset with a stoppage.

This also meant there was less bang, crash, physicality to each stoppage, and enabled us to win without Clarry dominating.

Since the Brisbane game, we have certainly set up more aggressively at stoppages and tried to play a more forward half territory game. Get the ball forward at all costs, knocks, long kicks to contests etc. The HUN article also noted since R13 that we are 1st for long down the line kicks and 1st for contested possession differential. This contested possession turn around feeds into us being 1st for scores per inside 50 against, so our defenders are doing their jobs as well as mids and forwards.

One other thing I'd note over the last fortnight against West Coast and then Essendon, is our ability to transition the ball quickly from that long kick down the line situation to a goal out the back. Melksham is a key part to this, but so are Petty, Turner and JVR in being able to bring the ball to ground and not have it intercepted. We then follow it up with a ground ball possession and it basically leads to a goal out the back. 

When we broke down in the third quarter last week, McKay took multiple marks on Petty 2 or 3 at least. And our game broke down for this period. It's really vital that we at least halve most of those contests, because if we do, at worst we get territory and at beat, we get a scoring chance.

Our three talls have a big role to play again today against Freo. If they can stop their intercept game, make it more chaotic, and prevent Freo from being able to control the ball with uncontested marks at half back, and we complement this with aggressive, powerful pressure and cleanness at the stoppages, it will go a long way to getting enough chances to win the game. Then it's about taking our opportunities in front of goal.

That increased focus on territory and contest is what I meant by moving to a hybrid method combining the old method and the transition model.

A big watch for mine is scores from defensive half, which with scores from turnover, is a key metric for the transition game and has become a key indicator for success.

On the espn footy pod (which is good, but frustrating because one of the hosts is dead set anti dees and it colours his analysis of us), Christian from champion data noted we are bottom four for points for from our defensive half, and of more concern also points against from defensive half.

That's concerning in terms of our transition game. 

The key questions for mine are:

- are we able to improve those numbers (we have improved points for in the last few weeks, but not really points against the back half)

- our 2021 flag win was an outlier in terms of the dees being one of only two teams in,  iirc, 19 years to win the flag and not be top 6 in scores from turnover.

My question is whether the hybrid model goody is implementing is less reliant on defending scores from turnover and from the defensive half. 

3 hours ago, WheeloRatings said:

Pressure act differential isn't a good measure as you're likely to rank low if you have the ball more often than the opposition. Pressure rating differential would be a better measure as it's based on average pressure per disposal. This is what @binman would have been referring to. Unfortunately, I don't have access to pressure rating data, other than Melbourne for the past two seasons.

Yep, I was referring to pressure rating differential.

I think I heard hoyne say (or perhaps espn footy) last year that it was the strongest correlation to winning.

It was in the context of the pies being an outlier, and when playing their dynamic back half on the first half of last season were unusual because they often had negative pressure rating differential.

The explanation was related to their method- fast ball movement, lots of uncontested possessions ans run in space.

21 hours ago, WheeloRatings said:

It doesn't appear to be as significant (noting that the HBG differential is generally quite a bit lower than over CP diff)

Win HBG by 1-3: 54% win
Win HBG by 4-6: 58% win
Win HBG by 7-9: 67% win
Win HBG by 10+: 71% win

How about win rate for winning the pressure ratings?

What's better than watching the bombers get rolled?

Getting $3.10 for a crows win.

1 hour ago, buck_nekkid said:

For those playing along at home, Stringer is @binman’s Skinner. (Like sparrow was Swallow there for a season or 2…)

One Skinner does not a spring make.

12 minutes ago, Jibroni said:

He makes Nails cry

When jack steps on a nail, the nail needs the tetanus shot.

3 minutes ago, WheeloRatings said:

I don't know exactly how those figures were calculated, but my calculations are as follows:

Win CP by 1-6: 54% win
Win CP by 7-13: 64% win
Win CP by 14-21: 76% win
Win CP by 22+: 87% win

 

My understanding is that the definition has not changed.

Did you run the numbers on the hard ball get in terms of win rate?

45 minutes ago, WheeloRatings said:

I had the privilege of collaborating (in a small way) with Cody Atkinson on the following article regarding contested possessions. These guys regularly put out fantastic and insightful AFL articles for the ABC and are well worth a read.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-07-19/afl-2024-premiership-importance-of-contested-possessions/104113954

 

The contested possession has increasingly gained prominence in recent years, with players, coaches, commentators and fans offering different opinions on its role in the AFL.

Star Sydney Swans midfielder Errol Gulden has described contested possessions as "a key indicator for success", but not everyone in the AFL is enamoured by the concept.

"Contested ball is just a fancy term for everyone in the media," Alastair Clarkson said in 2016.

"We don't give a toss about that … we've won five contested-ball contests in about two years, so we've still won lots of games of footy."

So how important are contested possessions?

And what even is a contested possession?

Great work wheelo.

So win cp by 1 to 10 = 70% win 

Win cp by 10 plus = 79% win

And a 'blow out' is 85% win

What's a blow out?

1 minute ago, seventyfour said:

Billings is in as the sub.

Don't love it but not sure what else we have.

Woey injured with a bad corky.

Billings had 32 disposals and two goals in the VFL last week.

Played well. Laurie did too, so a tad unlucky.

3 hours ago, rumpole said:

The likes of Cornes, Morris, Sam McClure are the equivalent in journalism of the American “yellow press” who use eye-catching headlines and sensationalized exaggerations for increased sales. They are characterized by exaggerated headlines, unverified claims, partisan agendas, and a focus on topics like crime, scandal, sports, and violence. In Britain and here, it’s called the “tabloid press” and these days it’s equivalent can also be found on Tik Tok and other social media platforms. These guys are television’s equivalent of clickbait.

So yes, they are doing their job but it’s a low grade of journalism that relies on speculation and innuendo, often has little regard for the truth and rarely does any fact checking which is why this story clearly deserves the contempt many here have heaped upon the above trio in this thread. 

They’re doing their job which is to attract ratings from a mindless public.

Agree with all of that.

And to be honest I have no real issue with click bait journalism as such. As BDA notes it is a buyers market, and if the market demands rubbish that's what it gets.

But the issue in the coverage of AFL football is, unlike in other spheres like politics, click bait and pantomime is all but the ONLY coverage option.

I've been complaining on demonland for years about the quality of the  media coverage of AFL.

Not unreasonably, the advice I often received is, well don't watch the rubbish - advice I've largely heeded.

The problem is it leaves almost no football media to consume.

In fact it has pretty much left me with 45 mins a week of Daniel Hoyne on sen and the abc 12-1 on Sunday (and even that is border line given the prominence of mathouse, who is really out there).

The problem this click bait monopoly creates is it completely drives and shapes the narrative. And let's be honest shapes the opinions of Joe footy public.

Take the discussion of trading Oliver.

It was a discussion that commenced last seaon and was premised on the idea he was bad for culture. That has been put to bed to a large degree because he and the club have done a brilliant job of getting back on track on that front.

Now it's premised on his form this season.

Which is where the problem starts.

Any discussion on his form is based on a comparison to his best football. Which is fair enough - but only to a degree.

If the hysteria theatre was balanced by some level headed footy media content the misinformation would be counter balanced by facts.

One of which is that by any measure clarry is actually having a pretty good season. Don't believe me? Go check his rankings on footy wire or wheeloratings. 

Clarry is ranked highly and is ahead of lots of excellent mids accross mutiple kpis for mids.

Or pick a couple of gun mids and compare their seasons.

And please spare me I don't need stats to tell me what my eyes and vibes tell me. That just echoes the approach the lazy media take (who often double down on lazy by picking one or two stats in isolation to buttress their vibes based rubbish).

One example. I compared clarry's season to Sam Walsh on wheeloratings and Walsh has him covered- but not by much. 

Walsh's player rating is 14.5 and clarry's is 11.15.

Walsh is averaging 5.7 disposals per game more than clarry, but we know clarry has been playing a defensive mid role.

Despite Walsh having more disposals, their contested possessions and centre clearance numbers are almost the same.

So sure, cornes and McClure have at it with your over the top faux hysteria. But how about introducing some facts into the discussion.

And when it comes to clarry rather than swallowing the click bait hook and sinker and echoing the views of fools like Morris, dees fans might do their own research and push back on false narratives the media push.

2 hours ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

The Port V Richmond game could be an issue.

Richmond are bringing over a VFL side which reeks of a percentage booster for Port.

A 70 point win to Port takes their percentage from 104 to 108, while ours is at 105.

Agree.

And there will mutiple games from now on where contenders are playing teams who are def out of the finals race who have put the cue in the rack.

3 minutes ago, Engorged Onion said:

Must have being high or [censored] as @binman The Collendina is in good ol' Ocean Grove. It was a classic stop for, Midnight Oil, The Hoodoo Guru's, Hunters etc etc...

Right you are. Meant ocean Grove. Wrote Torquay.

14 minutes ago, Neil Crompton said:

Which really begs the question why play him without doing a mini preseason at the start of the year? Why play someone you know is not fit enough and won’t get any fitter during the season? Doesn’t make sense to me. 

Sorry, not sure I follow.

He did a preseason, it was just interrupted.

Why play him?

Because despite his fitness level he remains out best mid. 

And his current level is above that of 80% of mids playing the game.

45 minutes ago, Gawndy the Great said:

I don’t pretend to understand fitness very well but I would have tHought his fitness after 3 months of footy will have improved to the extent of a preseason plus a number of games.
 

So why are we still making references to a pre season. He has played enough footy and gotten enough miles into his legs by now. Or doesn’t it work like that?

Foe players who uninterrupted preseasons, once the season starts fitness is simply maintained at the level they commenced the season at. At best.

Players who have a preseason as interrupted as clarry did might get a bit fiuyer because they are coming off a low base, but its all but impossible to get to their optimal level - unless they do a "mini preseason" at some point, like bbb did one year (which means no games).

2 minutes ago, Nascent said:

Guess it's going to be a simple swap of Woewodin for Laurie as sub.

Or billings

1 hour ago, whatwhat say what said:

"paul's boutique" walked so that "endtroducing" could run

she didn't approve the "holiday" sample, hence why it's only on the 'gimix' mixtape that they gave out before the album came out that had all the 'unapproved' samples

i don't think she approved the ciccone youth sample that's used in the cover of "into the groove(y)" either

you coming to kim gordon next week?

Nup.

Forgot about it to be honest.

An all time favorite gig of mine was seeing Social Youth, supported by Bored, at the Colendena Hotel in Torquay

Only about 200 people there. Just a crazy good gig.  

1 hour ago, whatwhat say what said:

"paul's boutique" walked so that "endtroducing" could run

she didn't approve the "holiday" sample, hence why it's only on the 'gimix' mixtape that they gave out before the album came out that had all the 'unapproved' samples

i don't think she approved the ciccone youth sample that's used in the cover of "into the groove(y)" either

you coming to kim gordon next week?

From Madonna's official website:

1 hour ago, BLWNBA said:

That sure is a lot of words to say very little. 

Sick burn bro