binman

He was excellent on the weekend. Had a crazy amount of score involvements, pretty sure comfortably the most of any player. In terms of monitoring his form vis vis his value as a trade, did we make tge right call to trade him etc etc, i find the whole clarry discussion a bit strange to be honest. Bottom line is he almost certainly won't ever get back to his AA best - in large part because its very unlikely he'll get back his break away speed (he was not quick per se, but at his very best his acceleration from a standing start was explosive). But just as he was for us last year, he will be a very reliable, meat and potato inside ball winner with great hands. The Giants would have been under zero illusions about what they were going to get with claz, on field and off field. Because we are covering a big chunk of his salary, the Giants are paying for an above average AFL player, not an A grader - and that's way they've got. For a bunch of reasonns, we made the right call to trade him, even with having to cover part of his salary. Leaving aside any cultural issues we need players with leg speed. And he doesn't have it I sincerely hope he plays well for the Giants and enjoys the rest of career.

Out a ball use has been our biggest issue for at least 20 years i reckon

Spot on. Whether you think we are in full rebuild mode, mini rebuild or a reboot/reset phase matters little - we all agree it's one of those three (and really its just semantics away). And in all three scenarios history tell us young players performance level fluctuates and improvement is never linear. The Roos, chock full of young guns, are the perfect example of that - lauded last week for their stirring win over Port they came into the game as 1.50 favorites, which is pretty remarkable given where they finished last season and the fact the game was in Perth. Those odds looked spot on after the first quarter with the Roos kicking 7 goals and leading by 4 goals at quarter's end. They could only manage another 8 goals for the game and ended up losing to a team that had not won since round 10 2025. The Roos' young players, so good last week, fluffed their lines in a game that was the probably the shortest they had started to win for perhaps 7 or 8 seasons.

Way too early to make that call.

Thanks @WheeloRatings I'll let wheelo give the proper answer, but if I understand a previous post od his about about equity points, the answer to your question is different. The reason being is, if I understand it correctly, the probability of scoring from a given position (because of pressure, spot on the ground etc) is factored into the equity points allocated for each involvement (and in your example, each involvement in a successful scoring chain).

Thanks wheelo. Apologies for all the questions, reall5 appreciate your responses. Another curious question - am I right in thinking you chose ball use and ball winning because they are critical determinants in winning games and they are a better, more nuanced measure than disposal efficiency (which is a pretty useless measure) and contested possessions?

Ticketmaster - woeful. I've had a GUTFULL!

Start as you mean to go on.

True. But they've got as many cups as the dees in my lifetime.

Didn't have any, so can't comment But the venue and footy facilities are great - they've done a realy good job with the redevelopment. It's got a great feeling of being the doggies home grounds (they've got a tiny museum with their premiership cups and photos ans memorabilia of various eras which is worth checking out). Amd it feels really integrated into the surrounding community. Oh, and the surface us immaculate.

How good? Berry good.

It's funny you should say that as i exact same thought. I discounted the idea that he might have cracked the sads because he wasn't picked last week because, well, surely he didn't.

I went and kept a close eye on our listed players. AMW was excellent all day and looked a cut above. Looked fit too. he'll be in the ones next week or the week after i reckon. I thought Paddy Cross was pretty good, and Laurie was good too. Agee on Taylor - i was disappointed with his game, though was better in the second half. Agree he needs to get AFL fit and strong, but i was more concerned with his body language, which i thought was poor at times. And I'm hoping perhaps he was under the weather or some such as his intensity and competitiveness was not what i expected it to be, both from the perspective of it being his first game and that competitiveness was supposed to be his one wood. Mathews worked hard and is a natural crumbing small forward. A lot to like. Ricky Mentha was poor. Had a couple of bad fumbles and looked little lost a times. I thought Heath played well - a big unit for young guy. Seemed to dominate the tap outs but was not on the same page with our mids and the Dogs just sharked him all game.

Both I would assume

Yep. And not a bad spot for a beer. Also if visiting Melbourne, good location given its near Fed square and Flinders Street

Agree on both counts. Though I could see crows opening up the dog's defence I reckon crows are good value @1.91 the win. And 5.80 for over 50 is good value too.

I think you'll find I've answered that very question (though I wish I hadn't bothered): https://demonland.com/forums/topic/66994-postgame-rd-01-vs-st-kilda/?do=findComment&comment=2759903

No it's absolutely not (defendimg goodwn). And respectfully I think you've misunderstood the point I was makimg in those posts. The first one for instance, i was simply answering your question why I thought 3kzs post was inaccurate. My reply didn't contain any assessment of how well he implemented a transition and turnover game, just that he was trying to implement that method. Which he was. My use of #Goodwin myths is shorthand pushback on the frequent misrepresentation of his game plan and methods. Such myths have a tendenchy, thru sheer weight of repetition, to become accepted fact. I dislike the modern tendency to rewrite history. Getting history wrong drives misinformation, and in this example colours any analysis and assessment of the incumbent coach’s performance. An obvious example is the suggestion that King is implementing a completely different game an to Goody. It's different yes, but not radically different in the way, for example, Mcrae's game plan was radically different the defence first method Buckley used. And that fact informs my assessment King's performance.

Not sure how.

I'll take that as a compliment.

As I suggested, I agree Goody, despite his best efforts, didn't successfully implement the transition, turnover game. Agree one of the biggest issues was the way we entered 50, though the method was exacerbated by having three of our starting mids being some of the worst kicks inside 50 in terms retention rate in the AFL (tracc was the worst in the AFL I think). Disagree completely his efforts to implement a new style of playing were 'tweaks'. No better evidence of that than Goody's last game of his tenure at the dees where we demolished the Eagles on transition and turnover and scored 139 points, our highest score of the season. That game looked diametrically different to the one that won us a flag. Disagree, the game plan was still largely a 'territory, hug the boundary style, low risk, kicking into a congested fwd line' style. It just wasn't The eyes and data tell the story. For example, despite the myth we continued to be a long bomb team in 2025 we were in fact mid table for metres gained from kicks - Freo and the Hawks, two teams playing fast transition footy were well above us for metres gained from kicks, with the suns comfortably number one. Ironically, King has repeatedly emphasised we will play a territory game. And I suspect under King we will in fact be more a long bomb team than we were in 2025 and be in top 5 for metres gained per kick. There is a bunch of other data points that evidence us not being a territory, hug the boundary style taking on low risks - eg our woefully high number of turnovers and scores from turnover (because we were taking on more high risk kicks), the increased number of both kicks and handballs (a manifestation of our change style, ie less territory first footy), the kick out patterns (we almost completely stopped kicking long to a contest, instead usually kicking short to a free player in the pocket) and the massive drop in the number of times we kicked long to Maxy, or any contest for that matter. Agree many players were confused about their roles. Agree King has done a good job of implementing a method that has meant we are moving the ball freely and have a good connection with the forward line. And to be clear, I'm not defending Goody, or suggesting we erred in going another direction. I could not be more impressed with King and on the evidence thus far think the club has made an excellent decision. Disagree that even claz, may and tracc were still with us King would have succeeded in achieving the results we saw on Sunday. I mean for starters, he got rid of them in large part because they don't have the skills we need to implement his game plan, namely leg speed and ability to hit targets. And they were also part of a group of senior players who clearly struggled to adapt to the transtion game plan Goody tried to implement All that said, agree to disagree.

'Seriously his Gameplan was done at the end of 2023, nothing changed after that for 2 Seasons. Tweaks were made apparently, but the same game was played' The bolded bits are simply not true Can't be bothered relitigating why, suffice to say there is a difference between trying to implement a new game plan, which Goody unquestionably tried to do in the first two thirds of 2024 and all of 2025, and successfully doing so My intel suggests the struggle to implement the new transtion game the best teams were using was a signficant source of tension between the younger players and some senior players who struggled, or refused, to adapt. The importantance of not rewriting history and amplyfying myths is, unlike say Mcrae at the Pies, King is not trying to implement a brand new game plan, one completely foreign to the team. He is building on an existing base of knowledge and practice. For example a notable element of King's game plan is long forward handballs (a big factor in our 220 plus metres gained by handball against the Saints). Goody tried to implement long handballs in 2024 and 2025. Meaning any current players who were on our list in 2024 and 2025 have spent considerable time already practising and training using long forward handballs. Kings efforts to implement an effective transition and turnover game plan has also been supported by the decision to exit senior players in Tracc, May and Oliver who clearly were struggling to adapt to the transtion and turnover based game plan Goody was trying to implement.