binman

Last night's game was yet another example of what i'm talking about above. The dogs had a whopping 16 center clearances last night, twice as many as the Swans who could only manage 8. The Swans were plus 3 for around the ground stoppages, meaning the dogs were +5 for total clearances Six years ago if a team had 16 center clearances and their opponent only 8, that would be the ball game. But as is often the case now, the dogs center square domination was not a decisive factor in the game. They scored 6.6.42 from stoppages (in total, ie centre and around the ground combined) to the swans' 5.2.32. Like so many games now, the decisive factor was scores from turnover, with the dogs scoring 6.10.46 from turnovers and the Swans 11.2.68. On turnovers, there is no doubt the dogs inaccuracy hurt them, they had 16 to 13 turnover scores after all. But an interesting factor to consider, particularly as it relates to the discussion about us changing our game plan, is that the dogs dominated inside 50s, particularly in the last quarter, winning inside 50s 60-48. I think there is enough evidence now to suggest the time in forward half model, high inside 50 numbers with lots of reentries into a crowded forward line (ie our 2021-23 game plan) contributes to inaccuracy. The other interesting stat from last nights game, also relevant to the midfield discussion (given the key role mids play in terms of winning contested possessions), is the dogs smashed the swans for contested possessions 138 to 105.

Perhaps it's just part of being a fan, but it seems many dees fans, for all manner of things, don't apply the same logic to the dees as they do to other clubs. Flags are hard to win. Yes we won a flag under goody, but somehow one flag in 7 season for us is a fail. We are consistently a contender and give ourselves a chance to win a flag. Underachieved. The cats and swans are a well run clubs that are always in the frame. Wouldn't it be be great to be a fan of those clubs. Other contenders get beaten when favorites, a blip. We get beaten as favorites and it's time to rebuild and 'play the kids'. Other teams struggle for a block of time but they have key players out injured. We have a rough patch for the same reason and we lack depth. And on, and on and on.

I think he's a judge on the UK voice or some such.

A case could be made that it did work, for the club at least. Grundy was terrific in that block of games he rucked solo when Max was out injured. Not that it mattered in the end, but there's a good chance we don't end up top 4 if we didn't have an elite ruck to replace Max. As you say we got Grundy for a bargain - not bad insurance.

Luck has always been a massive factor, and maybe I'm imagining it, but it seems to be an even bigger factor these days.

It's a good question. Tracc and clarry certainly absorb alot of our salary cap. Max too But that would the same for all teams ie 2 or 3 gun mids take up a big chunks of the cap. And perhaps I should have said midfields are not as important as they once were - until the finals. Come finals, the game often devolves into rugby like brutal combat - teams still dont need the 6 or 7 mids they needed 6-7 years go but they need bulls like tracc, jack and clarry up and firing.

Lions lost to the hawks in round 10. The pies were in struggle town when the hawks beat them - hit by injury and their key metrics had cratered (most notably scores from turnover and the back half).

No. Getting their asses kicked by the 16th placed hawks probably wasn't part of last seasons two grand finalists grand plan either. Perhaps we can strip the pies of their flag.

99 problems, and the mids ain't one.

@titan_uranus No, I do agree our midfield is down on previous years, at least in terms of looking at them individually. But we lost gus on the eve of the season. And clarry, whilst performing remarkably well given his interrupted preseason, is not yet back to his best. And it didn't help losing Bowser in round one, which meant salo had to go back. Nor did it help salo also getting injured. Against that viney has been terrific, ditto tracc and Max. What I have been arguing is that the midfield isn't really a significant issue for us. The forward line is a much better issue. Midfields are simply not as important as they were even two seasons ago. Scores from clearances were something 60-70% of total score when goody took over as coach. It's now only 20-30%, with scores from turnover being the main score source. I mean you only have to look at the game we just played. Seven years ago if we were plus 21 for scores from stoppages we win most games. Not now, particularly when our opponents absolutely smash us on scores from turnover. Yes mids play a role in creating turnovers and scoring from them, but no more than the high half forwards and wingers and less than intercepting defenders and half back flankers.

Agree. Though of course every strategy has risk. We were cooked come finals in 2022. I actually think they were in good shape condition wise last year, but were cruelled by injury.

Yes, that's my take. We will largely revert to 'our' tried and true method, but hopefully retaining some of the elements of our current method, eg hitting some high risk corridor kicks, using the lions style 20 metre foreard kicks on rhe 45, and some run and dare off the hb. Those elements are important I think in terms of reducing the frequency of rentries back into a crazy crowded inside 50 (which had historically been a big driver of our low score to inside 50 ratio - or inefficiency as it is oft described) Which, as much as I hate to say it, almost 100% describes the method the pies used come finals. On the quote, it was no doubt deliberatety used out of context in the text to rile dees fans and create a false narrative about where we are at. Instructive it was then quoted on here.

Statistically, bugger all. For one thing, whoever replaced him, whilst not covering the same territory or same speeds etc, would still have done their share (eg the gap might be 2kms less distance covered). And secondly, they are total numbers, ie 23 players.

I haven't listened to his slot yet (but will), but if that's what he said i wholeheartedly agree. In fact it is basically the same thing I have posted on a number of occasions- ie implement a less bruising, less physically taxing method during the home and away season and transition back to our normal forward half model come finals (which is basically what the pies did last year). The key learning fron 2022 and 2023 is that playing the brutal model we have used since the start of 2020 is not sustainable for 23 rounds plus finals as evidenced by the contact and other injuries that decimated us come finals the last 2 seasons. It's funny, many posters made that exact argument inthe last 2 seasons (ie an unstainable model for a fill season). And they were proven right. Anyone who made that argument should be well pleased that their advice has been heeded. The downside to goody having done so is we are going to lose more games this home and away season than in the ladt three seasons.

Its almost as if goody was not joking when he has repeatedly said our goal is to be playing our best footy come September or that the team who improves the most during the season are the ones contending at the pointy end of the season. I mean, I guess he might have some evidence to support that supposition. Like the blues and swans last year. And the lions too for that matter, who were 6-4 after 10 games and were flogged by thr hawks, who finished the season in 16th (and beat the pies in round 21), in round 10. It's almost as if goody has done some analysis of why we went out of the finals in straight sets the last two years and what other clubs that have done well have done.

Six weeks for a shepperd? What's the world coming to?

Ouch, Dame Nellie Melba standard comeback right there. An iconoclast with a rapier wit. That's a dangerous combination -

Such an iconoclast....

Be careful. Very triggering topic for some on here. By the by, I'm def of the view load related fatigue was a factor in the performance. Not an excuse for it, but a factor nonetheless. Much the same way as I believe our woeful kicking was a factor in the performance. Not an excuse for it, but a factor nonetheless.

Ta. Right you are then (i was going off the champion data Player ratings)

Agree with all (except he was our 2nd highest rated player behind maxy).

Our numbers for centre clearances and stoppage clearances are almost exactly the same as the swans. And we are averageing 2.5 cps a game more than the Swans. I use them as a reference point because we are trying to implement a similar method. And the Swans success this season highlight how clearances and cps are simply not as important as they used to be. What is important? Scores from turnover. Who is number one for scores from turnover? No surprise, it's the Swans (suns, giants, cats next). Our issue is not that we are winning too few clearances or contested possessions. Our issue is that we are not scoring enough from turnover. The swans are #1, averaging 61.5 points per game from turnover. We are 14th for average scores from turnover (behind freo of all teams) on 40.1 point per game.

Click bait headline I assumed it was going to be an update on Smithy's WADA case.

Yep, Goody's focus was our contest. But that it no way a reflection on the mids. Clarry had 20 contested possessions - the most of any player, six more than Kelly, who had the second most cps And clarry had twice as many cps than the wunerkind Reid. Our next most was Max, who like Reid had 10 cps, salo and tracc next with 9 each and viney had 8. Head to head, the aggregate cp count of our three best mids (Tracc, Clarry and Jack) versus theirs (Reid, Kelly and Gimbey) was 37-35 - our way. Our drop in ground ball numbers is in direct correlation to our change in method. For the same reason, as evidenced by data wheelo put in the transition thread, our post clearance contested possessions numbers have similarly cratered. Ditto clearance numbers. Which makes sense given the method we are trying to implement is nowhere near as contest focused, their are less stoppages and fewer rentries into a packed forward line.

Agree that form fluctuates for a multitude of reasons. Of course it does. And one of those multitude of reasons is the program the high performance team puts in place. It's why clubs spend a fortune on them. And fatigue is another of those multitude of reasons form fluctuates And agreee its extremely difficult to quantify it or determine how much a factor it is. Impossible for fans actually. But you don't need to be a sports scientist to realise when a team is fatigued. You can see it. Look at the performance by the Cats against the suns. Whatever the reason - the heat, the humidity, their high performance program, load management- blind Freddy could see they were spent 10 minutes into that game.