binman

The infatuation with the pies adds a nice touch too

By the by, last night's game, and the data from our previous campaigns and the afl wide data, make a mockery of the rubbish the media has been spouting about our supposed connection, forward issues etc etc. I mean, for petes sake, the issue is accuracy (actually, i would contend accuracy us a symptom, not the issue per se). We had one less scoring shots last night, in perfect condition, than we did last week. We lost last week and everyone goes into hysterical abour some concocted scoring and connection drama. Our much maligned 'efficiency' was 36% last week - as defined by the afl as the percentage of shots on goal per inside 50 (the losing side in that match went at 26% efficiency). Last night our efficiency was 39%. We had less shots for goal this week, but win by four goals, and there us not a peep about connection and scoring issues - despite our efficiency barely improving. Did the saints have a connection issue last night (by the by their efficiency was almost rhe dame as ours - 40%)? Or an accuracy issue? Rhetorical question.

Indeed, that is exactly right. Which is why it is important when the media parrot some supposedly revelatory single data point to consider context and apply some critical thought - a point I made previously in tgis thread. For example, our accuracy falls off a cliff. The key questions might be how badly and why? To answer the first question, helpful data is afl wide accuracy in this same period to get a sense of how bug an issue it is. Instead the media just compare our, say rounds 13-19 accuracy with our own figures from rounds one 1-12. Which of course is useful data - but in isolation, only to a point, pardon the pun. The second question is also interesting. My take is the two key factors why there is a league wide drop off are likely to be weather and fatigue (both accumulative and loading realated). To test that hypothesis there are other data points that could be looked at to support, or contradict it - kms run at speed for instance.

Loss on expected scores - ironic. But also an accurate reflection of the game - the saints played well. I assume expected score is what lyon was referring to as score equity in his presser when he noted they won on score equity - and derided the media for not analysing with 'all your resources'

Thanks so much wheelo. Your key team stats has become a key part of my post match rituals - like buying the Sunday newspapers used to be back in the day - and a key element in gettimg my head around the game

Oh my God- a pattern! I don't know for a fact, but I'm pretty sure the exact same thing happened kadtbyear too in that same period (woeful accuracy rounds 13-19, not the flag bit). So, three years in a row in EXACTLY the same phase of the season our accuracy is under water. That is not a coincidence.

Spot on. They are a good team - as you say 5th to our 4th on the ladder well past the halfway mark of the season. They would have taken our spot in the 4 if they'd won - classic eight point game. Excellent sytem that the players are fully invested in. And well coached and hard to score against - particularly at marvel, their home deck. Marshall was awesome - he is a star. As is Sinclair. And they have some real quality young players.

Don't like being challenged? What on earth you talking about? As any regular reader of DL over the last decade or so can attest, i love being challenged. Love to be challenged and love to debate - assuming it has some sound logical foundations, isn't an exercise in gotcha questions, doesn't involve circular arguments and most of all doesn't involve willful misinterpretation. As i said, you have clearly completely misunderstood what i wrote and the point i was making. And as i also said i'm not going to restate that point As you so pithily say - go back and read again. Or not.

Pace yourself newie

Ta. Doesn't change the analysis that there is only slight increase in the percentage of shots from the pockets in the last 4 games over our season average, and that therefore our inaccuracy in the last few weeks can't be explained by us taking a lot more difficult shots. In fact, the the cats game we had the second highest percentage of shots from dead in front 20-35 meters of any game his season (only behind the 30.3% of shots from from the corridor 20-35 meters in our mauling of the Swans in round 3)

What the hell is this? Are you responding to the right post? Or have you really misinterpreted and/or misrepresented what i wrote so wildly? Note: i don't really care which of the above it is, but if the latter save your legs, as i'm not going to go to the effort to explain why you have got it so wrong.

Fascinating data wheello. Contradicts somewhat the idea that out inaccuracy is caused by our entries ie that we are having heaps of difficult shots becuase we have been kicking to the pockets more An interesting stat from the last 4 games is the percentage of shots from the pocket but from 35 meters plus. It is those shots that are the most likely to miss the shots. There has been a slight increase it seems from our season average of such shots in the last 4 games. I think in part that could be explained by tow interacted elements: we are not moving the ball at speed and so are not creating free players inside 50 our territory and inside 50 dominance means the ball is trapped in our front half a lot, which creates a super congested forward area 9and few free players to spot up) and shots from near the 50 metre arc from intercepts marks from dump clearing kicks from oppo defenders When we start moving the ball quicker i expect there will be less kicks from the pockets and 35 plus metres out. On the data for the last four rounds, it is important to consider how wet it was in the cats and giants games.

The same could be said of the Eagles - who have 30,000 odd people paying for the privilege of being on a waiting list to become a member. The money is great - all power to the pies. But at the end of the day teams are judged on winning flags and having all the resources to do so adds further pressure.

All top deck usually. Or at least top deck behind each goal.

Great. Fans gets the warm and fuzzies. Footy is about winning flags not selling badges. Mcrae had achieved nothing. Zilch. A bunch of home and away wins. Three finals. Two losses - including a preliminary final to a team who proceeded to get flogged by 15 goals in the gf. Meanwhile we have a coach who has actually achieved something - he has won a flag, breaking a 57 year drought. He has coached 150 afl games, with a 58% win loss ratio. Won 5 of 8 finals he has coached, including 50 50 in prelims. By way of contrast, clarkson, often hailed as the best coach of the modern era, had a win loss ratio at the hawks of 60%. Get back to me when mcrae can boast a record anywhere near as impressive as goodys. Mcrae is on a hiding to nothing this year. The pies are a fantastic team. But given the fact they have no record of success, other than some home and away wins, the expectations on them are just ridiculous. People just seem to be accepting they will win the flag and are streets ahead of their rivals. The last time I can recall such expectation is the tigers in 2018. The big difference is the tigers wete coming off aligning a flag, not getting bundled put of the final in a prelim. What happens if they don't win the flag? It will be viewed by most as a failure. Team and coach fail. Which is just ridiculous. What does that do to the optimism and postive energy everyone seems to love about the pies? How does the team rebound? Say it continues to dominate the 2024 home and away season. Two failed finals campaigns will hang over the club like a huge question mark shaped shadow.

A serious question jimmy - not trying a gotcha. Two in fact. Other than 'any team can be beaten on their day' how do you reconcile your assessment of the pies as the dominant team and 'streets ahead of us' with the fact we beat them three games back. I mean that was no lucky win. The scoreboard well and truly flattered them. We were clearly the better team on the day. Goody out coached mcrae, we took away their strengths and smashed them in the contest. The second question is, the lions also beat them, and in much the same manner - deny them space, take away the corridor and smash them in the contest. Yes that game was at the gabba, but like us, the lions also dominated them. Do you not think it is a concern that, added to the fact they lost two of three finals last year, the pies been soundly beaten by 2 of 3 of their key serious rivals tgia season and with the same strategy (and pretty easily too I might add)? On a related note, if we were talking about the dees with a similarly poor record against other genuine contenders and in big games, plenty of dl posters would be highlighting that record and warning we aren't that good (in fact IIRC, variations of that theme were frequently pssted in dl in 2021 and 2022).

Love it. Like a pendles netflix sci fi time loop series

Nah, sorry that's complete rubbish. How do I know that? Well, i don't need some 'expert' with an agenda to protect the reputation of his profession. I have all the experts I need right here on DL. I mean, how could Bruckner hold a candle to people who can confidently say we have botched oliver's treatment with zero access to his private medical information or zero knowledge about what his injury is, or what the complications might have been. Or limited or no medical training whatsoever for that matter. You don't need years of study and training to understand the medical team have stuffed up. It's just common sense. That's all that is needed If covid taught us anything it is that experts are dangerous.

Exec summary: We are near the end of the phase of coming into each match super fatigued. It is this fatigue that is at the heart of our current performance issues -just as was the case in 2021 and 2022 (there's a pattern) Our fast, aggressive ball movement, high scoring and accuracy will all return. We will win the flag this season. Everyone take a chill pill.

Blimey, even Hemingway can't process more than 280 characters these days!

An other potential upside of Oliver being out is it creates an opportunity for JJ. JJ' s best spot in my opinion is as a true mid, so Oliver's' injury could prove a blessing in disguise by giving him the chance to cement his spot in the team as a mid - and potentially change the trajectory of JJ's career (ie he might stay, not leave to get a permanent spot in the ones)

1. i agree. I am big Smithy fan, but i i agree his defensive work on Tom Stewart and Nick Haynes was not good enough. he was given a chance to establish himself in the team, but unfortunately i don't think he took it. It will be interesting to see if he is sub. 2. Could not agree more - does my head in. I mean it is 6 years since the tigers won the their first flag and changed football. One such change was bringing the concept of players given a specific role with KPIs specific to that role (never number the number of possessions - and to explode the head of many, not necessarily even goals for forwards, like the high half forward role Nibbler and Spargo play)

Some additional context for my post about the ins MT: My perspective on selection is informed by a belief that we are coming to the end of s heavy block of training designed to maximize the likelihood we are cherry ripe come finals This block of training exacerbates the accumulative fatigue of the season and individual matches (like last weeks game, which would have been super tiring given our contest numbers and the weather) The form of the team suffers as result of this fatigue, as does the form of individual players - with some, particularly younger players, being impacted more than others [Note: even if you are of view that fatigue is only a minor consideration, or don't believe we do a mid season heavy block of training that impacts our performance, the fact remains the pattern is crystal clear. This is third season in a row where we have had a significant mid season slump characterized by losses in games when favorite, a drop off in skills, a drop off in performance by the team and individual players (particularly younger players) and chronic inaccuracy. So whatever someone's explanation is for that pattern, surely one of them can't be that it's just a weird coincidence] The coaching panel are juggling multiple, often competing, imperatives in terms of selection for the games in this phase of the season - picking a team that can win the game, load management of the team, load management of individual players, development of individual players and most of all maximizing the chances of winning a flag The campaign is not about winning the individual battles (but of course you have to win enough of those battles to be top 4), it is about winning the war - as much as the footy media would love fans to believe it, each game isn't a must win game, an isolated event or a litmus test on premiership chances So, just as i suggested prior to the Cats game when i predicted Spargo would be the sub for load management reasons, the selection would be different for the Saints' game if their sole imperative was to win the game - if it was, JVR probably gets selected As an example of how my perspective informs my thinking on selection, I agree Spargo has been down on form the last few weeks but i think fatigue is likely the main cause (same is true of Chandler, who needs a chop out and is getting one, and other players too) and as opposed to dropping him for form, they are managing his game time as part of his fitness program I always find the debate on selection a little hard to engage with because it's often not clear to me whether posters are expressing an opinion on who they think should be selected or who they think will be selected Normally, i am in the latter camp So when i predicted earlier in this thread the ins would be Woey (who had been announced at that point), Jordon and Spargo, it was based on my prediction of what would happen, not what i think should happen And that prediction was informed by all of the above dot points So, for example, i view JVR's non-selection through the lens of the club wanting to give a young player a break from the rigors of senior AFL football (he is only 19, and in his second season, which is crazy young for a key forward), to enhance his development as a player. work on deficits and maximize the likelihood he is fit, firing and in ripping form come finals I find some of the criticism of selection ironic, as sometimes it comes from posters who this time last year were vociferously bemoaning Goody's so called stubbornness, refusal to be more flexible with selection, not bringing in fresh players from Casey, not managing players, not rewarding form at Casey, and, horrors of horrors, not copying the Cats 'squad mentality' There's a double irony, because before the season started, goody, almost as if answering his DL critics, said we would 100% be taking a different approach to selection this season and taking more of a squad mentality And Goody has been true to his word - and of course still gets slammed by some of the very same posters knocking him last year for his static selection policy I don't share the sky is falling, jumping at shadows vibe that permeates DL at this time of year (well, the last three years) - we are tracking fine and in my opinion will make top 4 and win the flag To be clear, i also accept there is a very good chance we won't win the flag. To demonstrate what i mean by this seeming contradiction, for the sake of argument, let's say the Pies' current odds with the bookies (aprox $3 - which translates to 2-1) are an accurate reflection of the 'true odds' of them winning the flag. At those odds, if the season is played out 100 times, even as 2-1 favorites they still lose lose 40 times. By the by, i don't care what team it is - $3 for any time of the year is ridiculously short odds (under the 'true' odds) given so many things could go wrong between now and the end of September that could negatively impact their chances of winning the flag - eg Nick Daicos tears his hammy badly in round 24. Taking $3 now for the Pies to win the flag is the equivalent of backing the favorite for the Melbourne Cup on the futures market 3 months out from the race - a bet the bookies salivate over as it is money for jam for them. Which is why they have a futures market. I had the same view in 2021 and again last season. I could care less if that view is again dismissed as being delusional. By the by, my perspective on the arc of the season has sometimes been dismissed on the grounds that i was somehow proven 'wrong' last year because we got knocked out of the finals in straight sets. That opinion is logically inconsistent if it is not also accepted i was right in 2021. I'm batting .500 - not bad when talking predicting flags.

Nup. VFL is 100% a chop out - way, way less intense, shorter quarters and because the stakes are not as high, much more flexibility to manage minutes or for example, give a player some specific things to work on and/or play a different role (which might be about helping him work on specific things - eg sending a forward back to improve his defensive skills - or just to free him up to get his hands on the pill). See goody's comments about why they ran spargo through Casey after his concussion (precis: the lower intensity of the vfl meant we could ease him back in after what was a bad concussion)

LN must be reading this thread right now and loving it - 'i can manipulate the DL sheeple even when i don't post!