binman

Be brave.

I don't know. Just in terms of accuracy above 50% accuracy from set shots historically seems to be the benchmark. But i'm guessing data like effective % and kicks to goal per game is more of an individual KPI than a teams-based use of analytics. As an example of the latter, on Fox, when a player is having a set shot they show that players record over their career from the (approximate) spot they are kicking from. I assume this is Champion Data data. So, taking out conditions, they know the probability of every player kicking a set shot from any spot in the forward line (assuming they have had shots previously). The clubs would also have access to data on the probability of every player kicking a shot on the run from multiple points on the ground. In addition, they no doubt have data on what happens in both scenarios when the shot on goal is missed (which can occur in both scenarios, though obviously less often from set shots). Taking all this data together they can arrive at the probability of having a net positive score (ie taking into account the chances of the offensive team scoring AND giving up a goal on transition) in both scenarios - ie pass or take the shot. For example, Fritter has won a ground ball in the pocket 30 metres out and has a free player in the corridor, but one that is likely to be covered through the opposition structure youngblood describes above. Using analytics, the club can say with a reasonable degree of certainty (because they have the data) what the probability of a positive net score is if Fritter takes the shot and if he instead elects to pass. If that analysis shows that over the journey Fritter taking the shot is the best option (ie is more likely to result in a positive net score) then it would make sense for him to take the shot. That equation will be different for say, Nibbler or Langdon. For them, the percentage play might be going for a pass or simply centering it the way Langdon so often does.

Top post. On those long kicks, you're right that is key part of our game plan. And is also a major reason why Goody likes a three tall plus a resting ruck up forward. I have little doubt that is a function of analytics based on the probability of both us scoring AND conceding a score on transition. But as you suggest, if we don't mark it, we simply have to bring it to ground. In hindsight, i think it was mistake not bring Schache in as the third tall when BB was an out. Our structure looked out of wack up forward - and down back too it must be said. It was really evident how much we rely on Gawn to be a tall up forward AND down back. I thought Scott did an excellent job exploiting Maxy's absence (and arguably also Grundy's defensive weakness) and stretching our tall defenders - who all struggled, with the possible exception of Petty (though not till the second half) in one on ones - by getting their talls inside 50 and isolating our tall defenders.

On 360 a couple of weeks back, David King highlighted the emergence of analytics in AFL and how important they have become for coaches in terms of informing game plans, strategies etc. I suspect Goody is well and truly on the analytics train. And related to that, i suspect some players have been instructed that unless there is an open player and an easy pass option to go for goal when it is on (ie not crazy shots from the boundary). Why? It's all about percentages. Logic suggests that the probability of scoring is higher in certain circumstances when the player shoots for goal rather than passing to teammate. And i assume this is reflected in the data. Often hitting a target can be almost as difficult as kicking the goal and as you suggest, passing creates an additional opportunity for a turnover. A turnover means we lose control of the ball. A point does too, however we can set up our wall more effectively after a point And even if the pass does hit a target, that player still has to go back and kick the goal. Which even directly in front 30 metres out might only be say a 70% chance of being converted into a goal (less depending on who is kicking). So, it is likely analytics show that in certain circumstances (eg right player, right spot on te ground, no completely free teammate) a goal is more likely if a shot is taken rather than passing - and perhaps also less likley to concede a goal on transition. This sort of analytics has been used in NFL, MBL and the NBA for decades. In the NBA it completely changed the sport because analytics showed that whilst three-point shots are statistically harder to hit than 2-point jump shots (and of course lay ups), putting a huge number of 3-point shots up leads to higher scoring. So now, pretty much every NBA team shoot massive numbers of 3-point shots, numbers that were unheard of 20 years ago. Not only has this led to an explosion in scoring, it has also fundamentally changed the game at the elite level both in terms of how it is played (so much faster and up and down the court running - sounds bit familiar in relation to the shift in the AFL) and what sort of athlete is optimal. Gone (well not completely gone) are the lumbering giants battling in the paint who would never take a three-point shot. Now most players are required to play multiple positions, have to be super-fast and athletic and of course be able to hit a jump shot and three pointers.

That's coz dees fans have class and don't respond to the screeching, beseeching hype person. That and the last 15 mins before the game is for checking the picnic hamper.

That's an excellent hypothesis- you are probably correct. That said I recall many dees losses in the 70s in super muddy conditions.

Agree. One of the biggest myths in footy is wet weather is an equaliser. Teams with good skills, like we have shown this season, are advantaged in the wet over teams with poor skills because generally good skill is a function of good technique and good technique stands up better in wet condtions (and when windy too for that matter, not to mention pressure). I'd add we are a contested ball team, which is another advantage we bring into this match as wet weather usually means lots of ground balls. All that said, we could luck out and miss any heavy rain. radar look ok and the heavy rain and thunderstorms are not forecast to hit until the evening

It's not about the total number of clearances, or the differential. It is about the differential in scoring from clearances. That's to say there are clearances and there are clearances. Our focus is on quality clearances and scoring from stoppages. We set up aggressively to maximise scoring potential and are often outnumbered at stoppages. This means that we will always give up our fair share of clearances. When the oppo do win the clearance, our focus is putting them under enough pressure to force a turnover, or at the least a crappy forward entry. A good example of a stat (like hit outs once was before it became clear it is a relatively meaningless stat) that does not have the relavance it might have say 2-3 seasons ago.

This post has a strange, wistful beauty about it.

Boomers and their obsession with syntax, grammar, accuracy and factual information!

I thought of that gag and soon as i hit submit. Thought it might be a touch lame to go back and edit my post with an intentional typo!

That hasn't been much of an issue with the bombers for some time now.

Proof reading is so 2010.

Funny you should say that. Was literally just about to post that my hatred extends to Hardwick.

I will NEVER forgive Essendon for their violence in the 2000 GF. NEVER.

Please note the following comments are an absolute guess - i have zero intel on this, or any evidence to support my guess. Kozzie will resign. As in in play on at the dees. It will be announced ahead of the King's birthday game against the Pies as part of a strategy to maximise attendance and increase membership numbers. It is a home game for us this year and a big crowd will make a huge difference to the club's bottom line. By the by, the ANZAC eve game is also a home game this year. Both games being our home games is great timing given there are no COVID related restrictions this season.

Note to self: read thread before posting

The BOM forecast is actually not too bad for our game. Rain and thunderstorms in the morning. A 'shower to (sic) two during the day, increasing in the evening with the chance of a thunderstorm' 'High Kozzie catching fire danger rating '

Fair call. Assuming stringer does play as a full forward. He has only played two games this year, so I don't think that is big enough sample size to be confident that will be his role going forward. May has destroyed franklin and darling in consequetive weeks. If he lines up on Stringer he will monster him

I reckon that is both very likely and a good move. Hibbo would have got him. But tomo is a good alternative. He's strong enough. Can sit on him - and run off him (stringer is not afl fit) and exploit stringer's lack of fitness. And stringer wont be able to exploit tomo's relative lack of speed and mobility And stringer is a good one on one mark when he can use his strength. Tomo's height will help negate that ability.

Strange isn't it. Made that exact point to them not that long after they started posting. I have vision of someone yelling at clouds. I'm actually really impressed posters who cop it mostly let it go through to the keeper.

Im just watching the replay now - it was actually Barass he outmarked! Sorry yeo - my bad

I'm watching the replay. Jeez Louise - not sure what the Eagles fans could possibly moan about. How many clear holding the ball frees were not paid to the dees!

Yep. I'm pretty sure it was yeo he outmarked after a pass from kossie, setting up one of his goals. Good mark, but my first thought was it was a hopeless bit of defending.

Yeah, but can kick a goal with a torp from outside 50. So watchable.