Jump to content

binman

Life Member

  • Joined

  • Last visited

View Profile Find content

Posts posted by binman

    ·

    Edited by binman

    1 hour ago, Demonland said:

     

     

    It's actually a really measured analysis by King.

    Cornes on the other hand is just flat out embarrassing for a bloke paid to discuss footy.

    I mean, his lack of knowledge is mind blowing. Just so lazy 

    I don't mind he picked us to win less than 11 games in and of itself. But, honestly who could respect or take that analysis seriously?

    He asks a reasonable question - where will the improvement come from?

    And he's right that we didn’t strengthen our side in any major way with our trading.

    But he doesn't mention we added two first round draft picks, one being a a top 5 pick who will almost certainly play round one - and improve us.

    He doesn't mention the natural improvement of young players like Windsor, Turner and Kolt.

    He mentions gus and notes we didn't have him last year. But doesn't note we were down 4 senior players (smith, spargo, gus and brown) all last season, so basically played with a list of 40 not 44 (and didn't have melk for more than half the season or McAdam for much of it, or as King noted tracc from round 13).

    At this stage we are starting the season with a list of 44, which is a big improvement right there.

    And most of all he doesn't mention the two obvious areas of potential improvement- a much better situation in terms of injuries and a preseason that is miles better than last year in terms of the percentage of players doing most sessions and a much smaller rehab group.

    His comment about us having a 'brand new' game plan this year reflects his laziness - just two days ago the Hun had a huge interview with goody who said that we implemented a new game LAST SEASON, only reverting to the old method at the butt end of the season.

    I get cornes is all about clicks and controversy but that discussion was nominally supposed to be some sort of analysis. Just pathetic.

    • Like 8
    • Thanks 1
    • Haha 1

    ·

    Edited by binman

    2 hours ago, ex52k2 said:

    One thing touched on, injuries. We had a few, some major, but they were made worse by us having a short list,

    Missing two , Brayshaw and Smith with Spargo going down ten minutes into the first game.

    These had the effect of restricting our response to in season injuries.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Spot on.

    And you can add Benny Brown to that list- and probably McAdams too given how few games he was available for.

    Four (5 if you count McAdam) seasoned, hardened AFL players with mutiple preseasons under the belt not available for a season. Very hard to cover.

    • Like 5
    • Thanks 1

    2 minutes ago, whatwhat say what said:

    the more options we have to transition the ball at speed into the forward 50, the better

    At speed is the key.

     Goody didn't invent defnsive zoning, but he arguably perfected it.

    Now all teams, bar port (which is bizarre) zone super well.

    Most (all?) team's defensive lines push up high now.

    But still zone (getting back hard after turnovers) - meaning forward lines are often clagged up and have no space.

    Fast ball movement from the back half is the only way to beat the zone.

    I think that's the key reason Windsor will play off the half back

    We have to get that right. If we do JVR, Turner, Fritter and Jefferson (assuming he gets selected in the ines), will get good looks and some space to lead into.

    All are good one on one too and will get more one out opportunities.

    Our kicking still worries me. 

    It's not as if every player has to be elite kicks - every team has their butchers. And even the best kicks miss plenty of targets.

    But the players who are frequently involved in transition chains need to  reliably hit targets otherwise teams,  as happened to us last season, get smashed on turnover.

    I think a key factor this season is whether Salem and Bowey play most games. Mcvee is also key and Billings might also be important.

    And hopefully spargs can get back into the team (we really missed him last year I reckon).

    I wonder if part of the thinking of langers playing as a mid and half forward is his kicking.

    Wingers play an important role in transitioning the bal from the back half and the last kick inside 50.

    Whilst langers running power and smarts makes him one of the best wingers in the AFL, his kicking, which admittedley has improved, is still very hit and miss. Moving him off the wing means they can use better kicks on the wing, say Billings and XL

     

    • Like 13
    • Thanks 1

    2 hours ago, bing181 said:

    Important to acknowledge all that, rather than start blaming the fitness team.

    Equally, there do seem to have been changes in that area this season - not that any of us would really know, and not to mention that it also comes down to the individual e.g. putting in the work when away from the club.

    That's right..

    I wasn't meaning all team Fitness in the sense of fitness aggregated  across the board - well, that's a part of it I guess (for example, the sort of heaviness and angst that goody describes is not really conducive for a high performance environment and culture)

    Poor phrase. 

    The factors you rightly highlight are all part of the mix, the biggest part really.

    So, whilst they shouldn't be immune from criticism, I'm not blaming the fitness team for last year's fitness issues.

    As you suggest there's too little data (frustrating) and too many variables and unknowns (inevitable) to fairly assess their performance over a single season.

    • Like 3

    1 hour ago, bing181 said:

    All-team fitness will be undone not just by a lack of fitness across the board, but by a lack of fitness in even a handful of players. If you're playing players without full pre-seasons (Petty and Oliver), younger players who don't have the fitness depth (as discussed already in this thread), and players who are kind of fit enough to be out there but are carrying injuries or coming back from injury (Lever, probably May, Bowie etc. etc.) ... it's enough to seriously compromise "all team" fitness.

    Yep - and as you say we had mutiple players who for one reason or another were either never at optimal fitness or were, but got injured.

    • Like 2
    • Thanks 1

    43 minutes ago, Roost it far said:

    I guess that’s when the injection of youth can bite you. For most players it takes several preseasons to gain elite AFL fitness. Windsor appeared to cope well before succumbing to injury. If Langford can make the transition and Lindsay can work towards it then that’s going to factor in to how our season pans out.

    Yep, the youth of the team was definitely a factor - as of course were injuries to senior players as they forced us to play young players that otherwise might not have played senior footy (eg kolt, brown, AMW).

    But even without the injuries to senior plsyers we had young guns who were best 22 locks like Windsor, JVR and Turner who started to hit the wall in the second half of the season.

     

    • Like 6
    • Thanks 1

    ·

    Edited by binman

    2 hours ago, Grr-owl said:

    ... now wondering what chance ANY team has of maintaining a critical core of elite personnel when playing an extremely taxing game style for an extremely long season... ? 

    Indeed.

    That is precisely why all team fitness is such a critical success determinant now.

    I've long been amazed how little the impact of injury is factored into how the game is analysed and discussed. It's nuts given it has always been the key determinant of success. 

    So it should be no surprise that fitness levels barely register as a factor in how the media and fans assess a team's performances and likelihood of success.

    No surprise, but very frustrating given its significance.

    For example, any assessment of our capacity to implement the fast transition method last year is of no value if it doesn't consider our fitness level.

    A good example of the importance of all team fitness to successfully implementing the transition method is the pies' 2024 season.

    The pies won the flag in 2023 on the back of the transition method they started using in 2022.

    Yes, like us, they had lots of injury issues and missed key personnel. But they never looked fit enough in 2024 and simply couldn't effectively implement the method they were previously the benchmark for.

    A key reason the lions won the flag was their fitness.

    We saw first hand the impact of the fitness gap between us and them in our second meeting - we blitzed them in the first half, but ran out of gas in the second half.

    Conversely they had plenty left in the tank in the second half and completely ran over the top of us.

    • Like 4
    • Thanks 3
    • Clap 1

    55 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

    On the gameplan:

    But it won’t be the same long-down-the-line tactics that drove Melbourne in 2021-23, and returned for the second half of last year.

    In the most candid interview of his coaching career, Goodwin said he made an error zigzagging in game style last year, leaving the team “confused”. 

    At the start of last season, the Demons changed up their ball movement in a bid to find the forward-half efficiency it needed to be successful in September. 

    In the 2023 finals series, the Demons had 32 more inside-50s than Collingwood and eight more scoring shots than Carlton and lost both games in heartbreaking fashion.

    “We would have more inside-50s but lose. That was the consistent theme at Melbourne, which is frustrating because we did a lot right,” Goodwin said.

    “So you start to scratch for the five per cent extra.”

    So the Demons changed the game plan for 2024 and enjoyed a strong start, winning seven of their first nine games. But they were belted by a combined 127 points by West Coast and Fremantle in rounds 11 and 13.

    And that is when the Melbourne coaching staff blinked.

    To stop the bleeding on the scoreboard, Goodwin brought back key parts of the old 2021 premiership game style after the round 15 mid-season bye. In hindsight, it was a mistake.

    “In the middle part of the year we got a little bit wonky,” he said. 

    “We lost some personnel and we lost a few games really badly and we were totally uncompetitive and it was un-Melbourne-like.

    “Belted by Fremantle by 92 points, lost to West Coast in Perth by 35 points.

    “Similar to players, coaches are no different, we get nervous. We lose confidence.

    “At that point we asked ourselves, how do we help this team become more competitive?

    “So we went back to a little bit of what we knew. And in hindsight that (old method) probably wasn’t the best way to go.

    “We were more competitive yes, but we were still losing games. We don’t evolve. We don’t improve and we don’t get better. We don’t grow as a team, as a group, as a club.

    “If I had my time again, I would have continued down the path of exploring that different way of playing and that is the learning. And that is really what our summer has been about. Keep exploring, keep looking at different ways, for better ways.”

    Thanks TU.

     I hope that puts the whole we are implementing a new game plan this season myth to bed once and for all.

    What goody says above is almost the same as what I wrote a few weeks ago - we implemented a transition game lastseason, struggled to get it right - particularly defensively - got opened up several times as a result and went back to our old model to stem the bleeding.

    Goody notes our injuries, but not what i think what was our biggest challenge implementing the transition model - our fitness in the second half of the year was miles off. 

    That model is incredibly taxing and requires elite all team fitness and running power.

    To be fair to goody, we would have been pulverised if we hadn't reverted to our down the line style in the last third of the season. 

    And would have copped it big time on here - even more than we did.

    2024 was very similar to 2019 in terms of trying to implement a new method- the big difference being we didn't revert in 2019. 

    • Like 13
    • Thanks 1

    26 minutes ago, MrFreeze said:

    Marty is in seriously good shape this year as well. He looks exceptionally lean and is moving very well. Makes the occasional brain fade on game day but he is great depth.

    He look unbelievably fit doesn't he.

    He's in the mix with tmac and Howes for a defensive position i reckon.

    • Like 6

    3 hours ago, DistrACTION Jackson said:

    Don’t forget Billings was coming back from two injury riddled seasons, so was probably lacking confidence in his body.  His last three games playing off a wing were actually fairly solid.

    He looks super fit now and has done a full preseason, which I’m guessing he hasn’t done for a while.

    He looks like he's bulked up in the upper body too.

    • Like 2

    4 hours ago, DistrACTION Jackson said:

    Bone stress seems to be pretty common in younger players. I assume for a lot of them their bodies aren’t fully ready for the increased training loads etc.

    And I reckon a factor would be how much the game is based on running now - every player has to cover 10+ kms per game in footy now - a fair bit of it at a good clip 

    I'd be guessing 10 years ago only half the team would clock up those sort of distances.

    To cover that sort of territory they must also have to do heaps more running in preseason than say even five years ago.

    • Like 4
    • Love 1

    1 hour ago, Demonland said:

    This is what ChatGPT had to say about todays session.

    On Friday, January 31, 2025, the Melbourne Football Club conducted a pre-season training session at Casey Fields, with a focus on match simulation and skill refinement. The session was well-attended by both players and coaching staff, all demonstrating a high level of commitment as the season's commencement approaches.

    Training Activities:

    • Match Simulation: The team engaged in extensive match simulation drills, emphasizing strategic plays and in-game decision-making. This allowed players to practice under game-like conditions, enhancing their readiness for the upcoming season.

    • Skill Development: Players participated in drills aimed at improving ball handling, kicking accuracy, and defensive maneuvers. These exercises are crucial for maintaining and elevating the team's overall performance standards.

    Player Updates:

    • Max Gawn: The team captain, recovering from a fractured larynx sustained in December, continued his rehabilitation. He is currently in a non-contact training phase and is expected to rejoin full training in the coming weeks.

    • Jake Lever: The defender, who underwent knee and shoulder surgeries in the off-season, has been focusing on running exercises and shoulder mobility. He is anticipated to return to full contact training by the end of January.

    • Charlie Spargo: After being sidelined for most of 2024 due to an Achilles injury, Spargo has been reintegrating into skills training with the group. He is on track to participate fully in training sessions post-Christmas

    Coaching Remarks:

    The coaching staff expressed satisfaction with the players' efforts and progress during the session. They highlighted the importance of these pre-season activities in building team cohesion and fine-tuning strategies ahead of the competitive season.

    Next Steps:

    The team will continue its rigorous training schedule, with upcoming sessions focusing on tactical drills and physical conditioning. The coaching staff plans to monitor player workloads to ensure optimal performance and injury prevention as the season approaches.

    Overall, the Melbourne Football Club's pre-season preparations are progressing well, with players demonstrating dedication and a strong work ethic in anticipation of a successful 2025 season.

    This is what DeepSeek had to say about todays session:

    Journey to the West: The Demons Strike Back (Chinese: 西遊伏妖篇) is a 2017 Chinese fantasy adventure comedy film directed by Tsui Hark.

    A sequel to Stephen Chow's 2013 film Journey to the West: Conquering the Demons, it was produced and co-written by both Tsui and Chow.

    The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) would like to thank you for your query and agreeing to share all your data and confidential information on your smart phone and networked devices.  

    • Like 2
    • Haha 12
    • Clap 1

    1 hour ago, Nietaphart said:

    Not a snipe Binman, but 14 key position players were drafted in the first 2 rounds in the 2024 draft. Admittedly most were  picked in the second round. 
     

    JT and the club talk about drafting for talent first and I would think if Allen was gettable they would trade in talent just as keenly as they draft. Particularly if it improves the list. 
     

    FWIW, I’m not keen on Allen myself due to his dodgy knee and think it’s a risk too high. 
     

    Kozzie leaving to go west opens up the possibility of the club trading with WC and Freeo in this case

    As a generalisation, clubs draft for talent and trade for needs.

    You only need to look at who we've traded in under goody for evidence of that 

    I think Roost it far makes a good point about mids often being afl ready, and talls not, being factors in the focus on mids in the draft.

    Which points to another reason for not trading in Allan.

    There's always the risk of the sunk cost fallacy, but as rooster notes talls can take several years to be AFL standard. That represents a significant investment by clubs in the talls they draft in terms of time and resources- not to mention list spots.

    Take Jefferson- two full years on the list and yet to make his debut. Verral is likely another year of development before he'll get a senior game. Turner took time to make his debut, as a defender, then nearly another 12 months before his next game.

    Let's say they traded Allan in. JVR's position in the ones would be safe but Jefferson (assuming he debuts tgis year) and Turner's wouldn't.  F

    And what about AJ and Verral?

    If those players don't play senior footy in 2026 or beyond, or we choose to trade them, we get Bo return on our considerable investment in them

    All that said, Jefferson might not make the grade and Turner might not go up a level. In that scenario, Allan becomes a viable option if available (ie trading out jeffo and/turner)

     

    • Like 2

    1 hour ago, Roost it far said:

    Firstly I think I was very careful not to snipe, even adding humour to my reply, which even made me laugh but laughing at my own jokes has long been a habit. I’d  take Allan as I’d take any A grader for any key position. The best players make the team better. I agree regarding JVR as I also see him becoming a top liner. 
    Key position players are the hardest to come by, always have been. Allan is  a 75 + a year goal kicker and I just can’t see how he wouldn’t make us a better team. I’m also looking around for a May replacement and there’s a couple running around for GC and GWS who surely want to play for a real 

    All good, I didn't think you were sniping. 

    Assumimg he plays to his previous level, Allan might make us better - might being the operative word.

    It's not really possible to be categoric about it, particularly 12 months our of any possible trade, as we don't know what the opportunity cost would be if invested in Allan.

    For example, if we traded in Allan perhaps it means Jefferson can't get senior minutes, or JVR who is currently our number one key forward doesn't play aa well with Allan in the team.

    Other opportunity cost questions I'd we traded in Allan include:

    - Who would we have to give up in any trade

    - who would we not be able to trade in (ie who might we miss out on?- perhaps another gun who better meets our needs, a Serong or Brayshaw for example)

    - what would the impact be on TPP and our ability to meet the contract demands of our young guns like (particularly relevant with tassie on the horizon)

    We saw an example of some of those opportunity costs (and others) when we traded in an A grader in Grundy. 

    Whilst not a key position player, his example is relevant because the initial idea was Grundy and Maxy woukd share the ruck role.

    That didn't work, in part because it didn't fill a need. Our need was a key forward who could give maxy a chop out (the role they have AJ pencilled in for) not another number one ruck.

    There's also another interesting piece of the puzzle as it relates to key position players.

    One of the most notable things about last year's draft is how few genuine key position players were drafted in the first two rounds. The focus for most clubs was mid size runners with good skills.

    Several key forwards and defenders went way later than predicted, perhaps suggesting that such players are not as important for clubs the way the game is played at the moment (ie fast ball movement and focus on transition).

    Which is not say key position players are not important, just that when a club has a surfeit of such players they are less likely to chase new ones.

    Allan to the Lions makes sense because they don't have a surfeit of talls.

    But as evidence of the reduced focus on talls, even then they used their second pick (25 - they were always going to use their first pick on Ashcroft) to select a mid (Sam Marshall). And like the dees, only selected a tall with their last pick - Ty Gallop described in one post draft analysis as 'a project tall forward with time to grow'.

    • Like 4