binman

Pressure Q1: 176 - 180 Q2: 174 - 172 Q3: 201 - 206 Q4: 186 - 177 Tot: 183 - 186

Didn't stop him kicking a late goal unfortunately. They are clever with their blocks. And hands too - the handball from hill, to I think lipinski to set up a goal was a brilliant bit of play.

The pies only had four hitouts to advantage? That's nuts. Hard to get territory if you can't hit to your own players. There's only so many oppo ruck taps teams can shark. On that, my sense is we were better at ensuring the blues and pies couldn't shark our rack taps. We gave up a few of them against port and freo - and rhe hawks for that matter too.

That's interesting. Good pick up. I didn't notice and it wasn't mentioned on the replay. I had the feeling we were strong in the second half, but not covering the ground all that well (nor were Collingwood for that matter). Which would jibe with kev martin's fascinating observation from training last week (Tuesday?) that they did more running than he had seen any session all - and that Selwyn was really pushing them. We don't bring an extra up to stoppages very often. I wonder if it was to mitigate the impact of fatigue a bit because playing one mid down is hard yakka. I think our focus on defence, structure and sytem in the last two games may be part of the same strategy. Don't allow the game to become a running contest.

Di you mean we brought one more player to stoppages and had an even number with the pies?

I'm holding judgement on that 'till I hear tracc confirm he was the one who was in the wrong. Cox is a [censored].

Prophylactic prognostication phil on your part. A common self-protective strategy among dees fans. Dees lose and its ok coz that's what you expected, A win is a bonus. Ok strategy, except when combined with telling every person and their dog the dees will lose, and then celebrating a victory with not a trace of irony. Credit for not going down that path Phil. You are forgiven. By the by, i think there is every chance the cats will beat us.

Clear gap in capabilities...... But, but the COVID!!!!!

Well back on Saturday would certainly explain jack's expression! I thought i recall there being some rule players can't be expected to be at the club on weekends when they are not playing. Might well be imagining that.

Maybe, but much the same was said about Kennedy. But i don't mean to say JJ will be as good as Kennedy. The comparison is more about perhaps needing to leave the dees to get the AFL minutes he deserves.

A dislocated shoulder IS just a stinger for jack.

You can only do your best. But a heads up, you might want to up your ratings as you are not currently favoitite to win the Osilik. Perhaps do a bit of load posting on Big Footy to build your troll tank for the back half of the season.

I saw Viney interviwed post game and he wa sasked about the break. Said they have four days off, but had a curious expression which suggested to me that they maybe the players are not thrilled only having four days off. In the Mcrae presser he was asked the same question and he said their players would have the week off and back fresh next Monday. That sounded a better break than we have. But when i thought about it, it is the same as us. That's to say the dees players get the rest of this working week off (four days), have their weekend and back on deck next Monday like the Pies. So a six day break away from the club for both teams (inclusive of the weekend). The difference is our players come back from their break and play three days later! The Pies don't play their post match bye game until three days later than us with a game at the G against the Crows on the Sunday. Meaning the Pies get a 13 day break between their pre and post bye games, compared to our 9 days. After our cats game, we then have another nine day break into the Giants game in the Alice. Must make planning their prep and training super tricky.

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)