binman

Lloyd might be a flip flopper, but he's got nothing on King. Just on us this season so far King: pumped us up - don't sleep on the dees days later on the season preview of first crack (before a game had been played) he picks us to miss finals he then puts us back in his eight on the next first crack (which was after our round win over the dogs) Don't worry, he's jump off the saints soon enough.

If you plays this backwards you get a one word descriptor of the pies start to the the 2024 season: Unravel

Apologies to Demonstone, but this came to mind:

I just listened to McRae's presser. Rohan Connelly explicitly asked about the shorter preseason and whether they are behind the 8 ball fitness wise. McRae categorically denied that was the case. In fact he went further and said they were the fittest they had been in his time at the club and lauded the high performance team and the work rate of the players. If you take McRae at his word then that points to even bigger issues (their reliance on players over 30 being just one). They simply did not work hard enough last night, you could see it - particularly in terms of all team defensive running and covering the Sant's spread. If that is attitude not fitness they are in big trouble. It was a weird presser. McRae was speaking in metaphors and struggling to maintain his positive vibe schtick. Asked about being the first premier in years to have started 0-3, Mcrae was quick to correctly point out that the cats lost their first 3 games last year. To which the reporter (Connelly?) quickly responded to note the Cats didn't make the finals last year. Nice little drive by from McRae that i'm sure Scott will highlight when the Cats play the Pies. On Connelly, its great he has been gong to the pressers for the last season and a bit, he asks excellent qs and isn't dismissed by the coaches like the less experienced reporters often are.

I can't see hore being sub. Not flexible enough. Was thinking petty, swapping out for bbb, but perhaps you're right and he starts. Thinking about it, petts could play the melksham role and run with Sicily to negate his influence. We have missed such a player. Stretches the hawks defence and means fritter, who had the dogs best defender for company, and/or bbb get the next best key defender. Might free up fritter too to play his own game. Leaving Windsor as sub to come on in the third to inject some run and dash, with petts coming off if need be. Good management of a young player. If petts did come off, the forward line would then be the same group as against the Dogs. Goody said before the season last year they planned to use the sub in two ways - tactically or as part of their load management strategy. That jags with their use of it thus far. Playing the longer game for sure, and there is no doubt it is a calculated risk. But it's all about winning the war not the battles. The game has undergone a massive transformation in the last 10 years. It is so much more aerobically challenging for the whole list its crazy. And every team now needs 10 plus elite runners of the nibbla ilk. It's why Lyon loaded up on athletes and runners (by the by, seems crazy to have let billings walk given he is also a great kick, which Lyon has also targeted). Leaving aside injuries, the fittest of the real contenders (IMV dees, giants, swans, lions, pies) come finals will win the flag.

I'm considering lifting my media ban for the next little while to revel in what's sure to be 'what's going on with the pies' tsunami. What goes up, must come down.

There was also a bit of chat about BBB's selection. Fair enough too as it was left field selection given he had surgery only a few weeks ago, had been in rehab before that and he had only one VFL practice game (maybe 2?) under his belt. But it was a good selection. Hore wasn't as left field, but his selection was still somewhat unexpected given he was replacing bowser, with many thinkng Laurie might come in and/or salo goes back. And his selection meant three players new to our baclkine - hore, tmac and howes. So I"s argue tmac was not the only selection questioned.

Totally agree. It is so clear they are not fit enough, that's the story. Yes, the month less preseason has an impact but they look miles off being fit. The cats struggled too last year but didn't look anywhere near a unfit. Culture? The way the game is now played, if teams can't cover the ground they're toast. It's particularly true of the pies because they press up so high that need to be super fit, and quick, to get back on defence when they turn the ball over. The can't atm and are getting walk in goals against them. It's why I picked the saints and the swans.

I thought so, just wasn't sure Fits with the idea they might be managing him? Starting as a sub, or coming off for the sub, would support that theory. Would be smart given he is only playing his third game in his first season of afl footy.

Who got subbed off against the Dogs?

Pies struggling to cover the spread.

I tipped the swans last week, and the saints this week. It's just so crazy it might work.

Like jazz, when you're experimenting , ya gonna hit some bum notes man.

Might be fairer to grade his management after the game. As BDA notes his selections last week, much ridiculed on here, turned out to be very good decisions.

Maybe Goody is going through an experimental phase.

Agree. Brown starts, swaps mid way through the third with Petts. Good management of both players. The risk is if we get a ln injury to a small or a runner, but if petty is fit enough to be a sub he's fit enough to come on when needed. He can play back or forward, so they can shuffle players. And if a medium or tall, at either end, has to come off he's the perfect sub. Good call, worth the risk of being down a runner, to get him up to AFL speed. And goody was good to his word about petts coming back round 2. But, who knows goody might start him and say have windsor as the sub as part of managing his program and making sure we don't burn him out (he's played all of the 4 games thus far).

Yep, I can see what your brother means about a Healy, a good comparison. I was gutted when Healy left, a star who like Windsor was a terrific runner, though Healy was perhaps not as quick. Great kick too. The comparison will be even more apt when Windsor is 24-25 and bigger and stronger.

Great post. Total agreement on all points DD. Agree on the likely impact of the Swans press on our struggles to transition and be clean. I'd add that the SCG would have helped that cause considerably. One of the things written on the message board for the players at the quarte time breaks on Sunday was 'defensive density'. I presume that is reminder to for players to get back and clog up our defensive area - something we did to great effect i thought. But it might also refer to density though the middle of the ground to hinder the dogs' transition. The Swans press, combined with the ridiculous dimensions of the SCG, would have created density further up the ground that made it hard for us to get through. Its worth noting that they also struggled with transition too, with lots of turnovers. The scores were level at three quarter time after all. We looked gassed in tjhe last quarter which would have mad it hard for us to maintain that density and all team defence, which is probably a big factor in why the Swans improved their transition in the last quarter - that and the brilliant kicks they have.

They are playing in Ballarat, where the weather can be diabolical and so game can be a lottery. But i just checked and its looks perfect - 20 degrees, no rain and light winds. The bookies have the dogs 1,64 favorites which i reckon is about right. The dogs couldn't run our the game last week, and i suspect the heat was a big factor as Bevo was surprised they didn't (implying he's happy with their fitness). But they were pretty good i thought and would have been well in the match if not for their inaccuracy when they were on top (though we missed our fair share too). The margin was a bit flattering for us i thought. The difference was our defence was so much better - and is well suited to their three tall set up given how well organsied we are and how well we zone off to impact aerial contests. But as someone else noted their forward line will test a lot teams. Has Hardwick been able to sort the Suns d yet? Maybe, but i'm expecting the dogs to win.

Watching him, Flower didn't really come to mind. Not as elegant or as smooth a mover (robbie is my all time favorite player by so far its not funny, covered the ground beautifully but never looked like he was exerting any energy). And doesn't really have the same way of feinting and avoiding contact that Robbie had where he looked like he wasn't actually moving. But as soon as i saw him play a proper game, Alan Johnson DID come to mind How about Alan Johnson gator?

Agree metres gained isn't in of itself a definite measure of a good game (I don't think any individual stat in isolation, except for perhaps goals kicked, are a good measure to assess overall performance. Triangulating multiple stats provides a much better picture of a players performance). For example, if one player does all the kick outs, as May has done in the previous 3 seasons his metres gained stats are of little value. For example in the 2021, 2023 and 2023 seasons May took 90% of our kicks outs, and most of them were sixty metre bombs to the half back flank. Meaning, given he usually played on, he'd be credited with 75 metres gained for each kick out. (by the by, we started tinkering with our kick out strategies late last year, but this year have moved from tinkering to radical change. I'd be guessing May has only taken something like 30% of kicks outs, with the rest shared by other defenders, the kick outs are no longer always going to the HB and we are not kicking to Maxy very often - which incidentally is great in terms off Maxy not getting smashed as much). And as you suggest, if say a long kick comes straight back because it went straight to an opposition player than those metres gained are of little value either - which is why as Andy suggests Effective Metres Gained data would be useful. So i agree that metres gained in of itself is that not that useful. Which is why i'd love to have access to the Metres Gained Assisted stats as it would address the issue you flag about weighting long kicks over handballs. Metres Gained Assisted is the total metres gained by a teammate that receives an uncontested possession from that players disposal. So, in your example Clarry had 14 handballs. Not much metres gained in those. But if many of those handballs set up good transition and/or helped us gain territory (eg Clarry handballs to Rivers who then runs and carries and kicks it 60 metres), as i suspect they did, his Metres Gained Assisted numbers would be very strong. Clarry had 589 metres gained. Impressive - and second only to Maysie (whose numbers were padded a bit by his kick outs). But if say he also had the most assisted Metres Gained (which wouldn't surprise me) then suddenly his game looks even stronger. And perhaps maysie also had great Metres gained assisted numbers. The coaches of course have access to all of Champion Data's data, and all would drill down on it. Clarry got the most coaches votes for against the dogs with 9 and maysie was second with 8. In all likelihood those votes were informed by an analysis of the full range of Champion Data and internal stats. But I'll bet my bottom dollar may doesn't get a Brownlow vote for this game because i doubt the the umpires drill down on the data at all and so go on what they have seen and perhaps the old school possession numbers. Just on Lever, and my point about using multiple data points to assess a players performance, he only had 170 metres gained (he had almost twice that against the Swans). From memory i highlighted on the pod his 8 score involvements and 17 possessions not his metres gained (though my memory ain't what it was, so i might have muddled that up) as evidence of him having a good game. Lever's score involvements suggest to me that his possessions were effective because to be involved in 8 scoring chains at least half of his possessions helped us move the ball forward and score. But drilling down a bit further, which is really easy to to on @WheeloRatings excellent website, you can triangulate other data to get a fuller picture of Lever's game. His Champion Data player's ratings (which i think is an excellent measure) for the Swan's game was 5.4, but in the dogs game it was 8.9. He had an equal match high 10 intercept possessions (rivers also had 10), which is excellent as intercept possessions are no doubt one of his KPIs (he only had 4 against the Swans). His disposal efficiency in the Dogs game was 82.4, suggesting he didn't miss many targets by foot. But he also had six clangers (an error made by a player resulting in a negative result for his side), the second most behind Clarry, which surprised me but probably not @Damo as those clangers jumped out for him watching the game, whereas i didn't really notice them. (note: clangers are different to 'disposal clangers', which are defined as 'any kick or handball that directly turns the ball over' to an opponent). I cant see what his turnovers were for the game, but in his two games thus far he has averaged 3 turnovers, so unless he had none against the Swans he wasn't too bad for this stat against the dogs. A definite negative was he gave away 9 free kicks - the most by any player on the ground (Harmes and McNeil each away 3 and Salo and chandler gave away 2). That surprised me. He had 9 contested possessions (and weirdly 11 uncontested possessions - i say weird becuase he was only credited with 17 possessions in total) after only having one against the Swans. Perhaps my rating of 'terrific' was too positive given his clangers and frees he gave away but taken together those numbers still add up to a really good game i reckon. https://www.wheeloratings.com/afl_match_stats_player.html?ID=2311a9&Season=2024

This is from the champion data glossary. I assume it applys to all stoppages, including centre bounce clearances (there is no definition for cbc) Clearance: Credited to the player who has the first effective disposal in a chain that clears the stoppage area, or an ineffective kick or clanger kick that clears the stoppage area. So, for example wuth our first goal against the Dogs, the one viney kicked, I assumed the clearance would have been credited to tracc. But I checked the replay and maxy actually gets the clearance as he won a contested possession and handballed it out to tracc.

Ah yes, right you are. That's like a weird version of dyslexia - FCD (football coach dyslexia). I hope for Fagan"s sake they have been flogging them on the track because twice now they have come our hard, got a lead and been swamped. By the by, 'm looking forward to seeing how goody matches up tactically against clarkson on Saturday.

Funny you should mention bails. He came to my mind too. I was thinking about the irony of roos saying, after the dees, coached by bails, ran up a cricket score against the swans at the g (iirc, Roos' biggest losing margin as coach?) that we were going to be a power team. I think I'm right in saying that roos sad that game was a factor in his decision to coach us. And roos gave us goody. So we have bails to thank for our flag! Bails was so unlucky to get sacked. I understand the impact of the 164 game, but that was 100% on the players and was a manifestation of our woeful, shambolic governance. And also a manifestation of our toxic culture in the playing group (anyone seriously knocking our culture now only need to think about that period to understand what a poor culture really looks like - and it's corrosive impact). Under bails, when on, we played exciting, attacking footy. Great to watch. But as you suggest the defensive issues (that bails would have addressed if given time) we also got opened up But we still had an outside chance of making finals when bails got sacked. Bails was the classic scapegoat an was treated appallingly by the club. And his players hung him out to dry with their pathetic display agains the cats. Still makes me furious.

Mysterious.