binman

Last week i made the case that dees at 2.10 were overs and therefore represented value. I also made the point that thinking we were value is not the same as thinking we would win, but that in fact i did think we would win. Putting my punting hat on again for our game against the Saints it's sort of the opposite scenario. I do think we'll win but the current odds of 1.49 is unders (ie under the true odds) IMO - and therefore the 2.64 you can get for the Saints is overs (but i still wouldn't back them because a good rule of thumb is not backing flakey teams you can't trust - and the saints are well and truly in that camp). All things being equal, the plus 11 points Is better value. But all things aren't equal. As I noted last week, I don't bet on dees games, but if i did I would stay well away from this match (for any bet) because there's just too many variables, which taken together make this the very definition of a danger game. Despite being in much, much better form than the saints I'm actually less confident this week than i was against because of these variables: Lyon will coach to nullify and negate - no chance he goes with a fast ball movement game plan that would advantage us Further to that point, Lyon will be focused on disrupting our method (look for us to have a huge number of uncontested kicks and marks accross our half back line as I reckon Lyon will flood back and not press up on the ball carrier) This creates a problem for us as, unlike say the Pies, our method is a woekk in progress and we don't have much experience dealing with scenarios where our opponents are hyper focused on disrupting our method as opposed to focusing first and foremost on their own method The game is at the Alice - unique ground, unique environment, both teams travelling etc I wonder if our high performance program is geared towards being in optimal shape on Kings birthday at the potential expense of this game (ie bigger block of training into this game then taking advantage of the 8 day break to taper into the pies game) After three huge matches in a row, and one coming up next game, Is there any risk of players subconsciously not being fully switched on? One variable I was really worried about was the weather. Heavy rain was predicted in the lead up which risked making surface really spongy as it doesn't drain well apparently. And of course rain on game day would not help our cause and conversely help the Saints. Bur fortunately i dont think there's been any hige downpours this week and apart from 1mm forecast today it's dry up to, and including, match day. This is a huge game for us given how important the 4 points are to any chance we have of making finals. Bur I'm really nervous about it. Key will be taking our chances early and putting scoreboard pressure on them. If we do i could see us opening them up and putting a big score padt them. If we don't, and the Saints stay there,vor thereabouts, i fesr we are in for a very anxious watch.

I was thinking something very similar this arvo. Like all dees fans I hated the thought after our loss to the bombers that finals were our of the question. Uggh Of course i hope we make finals, but just being in the frame for finals now creates an energy and buzz.

Actually there was one interesting tweak, one that is perhaps a little counter intuitive given the improvement in our scoring. In the last six games we are using the corridor a lot less.

Just watched the Wednesday night First Crack. At the top of the show, Montagna's 'first crack' was the Demons and pushing back on the ridiculous notion that something magic happened after our loss to the bombers to turn our season around. (@Demonland any chance you could put the clip in this thread?) He showed a bunch of key stats comparing round 1-6 and 6-11 to make the point the game plan and method has not changed and that our wins are a result of more successfully implementing the game plan (a game plan David King correctly noted we began developing in 2024). He noted what has changed is our pressure and contest which has resulted in increased turnovers, which in turn has driven higher scores (he said we averaged 60 points per game rounds 1 to 6 and from round 6-12, 97 points)

Exactly. Does my head in - particularly when such ignorance is the starting point for criticisms of goody and the club. Just one tiny example of how long it takes to implement new strategies is our use of long handballs and handball chains. I noted on the 2024 preseason pod that in our practice match against the tigers at Casey we seemed to be practising using really long forward handballs and handball chains. We used both a little bit in the 2024 season but they weren't a feature of our method. Track watchers noted we were practising long forward handballs and handball chains this preseason, which I noticed too in the 2 preseason sessions i went to. And now, after 2 full preseasons of practice, long forward handballs and high risk handball chains have become a key feature of our method.

Which makes AJ's player rating of -2.7 even worse given it includes 2 score involvements (both goal assists i think) that im pretty sure were both from tap ons - one to set up a Sharp goal and the other Salem's goal. Not wanting to bag AJ, but I noted in another thread that he only had one kick. I watched the replay again last night (such a fun game to watch) - AJ's one kick was on the full (so therefore a turnover and clanger).

Two of which, Melk and Koz, just shaved the inside of the post (which by the by if i was AFL CEO for a day would count as a goal).

That, and in their junior footy career they were probably playing in teams using a transition-based method, one that puts a premium on kicking skills (which is a factor i reckon in how many of the high-end draft picks in the last 2 seasons are elite kicks).

Great call - i completely overlooked that. Having Koz in particular, but also Mcvee, Lever and Windsor back in the team, and having so few injuries atm, is probably the single biggest factor in both our capacity to implement our method and our improved performance. Rome wasn't built with second string architects and engineers.

100% agree about our recruitment - and we probably still need to bring in at least one more gun runner with elite foot skills (trade one in?). And as you suggest, the improved ability to implement the game plan is also a function of time and practice. Rome wasn't built in a day.

Ta. On a semi related topic, that article comes close to echoing an irritating narrative that some in the media are running with, one i hope dees fans push back on when it's parroted to them by football nuffies. Sure, we've made some tweaks, most notably with selection, and we have adapted our tactics in individual games to negate oppo strengths (something goody has been criticised in the past for NOT doing yet is getting zero kudos for doing so this season). But we didn't change our method after our first 5 losses. I mean, that's just dumb - as if we are going to change a game plan and method that has been 2 years in the making (I maintain we began the process of moving to a more transition based game plan in the 2024 preseason) five games into a season. What we've done is improved how well we are implementing the game plan, and key to that has been two interrelated factors: Improved capacity to run out quarters and games Massive increase in our pressure and contest (which has driven an increase in scores from turnover, particularly forward half turnovers which in turn has driven higher scoring)

Would you believe.... home away

Never made enough scoreboard pressure? You're a hard marker given the 131 points we put past the Swans is our highest score since 2018.

I think I heard that in the last six weeks we are top 3 for scores per inside 50.

Two weeks ia a long time in football.

True story. One of the very first game I went to was dees v pies at Victoria park with an adult cousin. I was 9 or 10 , so perhaps it 1976 or 1977. I was sitting, so not in the outer I can't remember much about the game, including whether we won or lost. But i vividly remember an older lady sitting in front of me turning around and telling me to tone down my language. Haven't sworn at the footy since.

As ive said, I'm happy for AJ to get a block of games in the ones, and like everyone i love his energy and competitiveness. But let's not carried away - it's a big stretch, even with his energy, to say he is playing better than JVR has this season. Take the game just gone. Let's accept AJ played his role, but it's hard to argue he had anywhere near a good game. These were his numbers: Six pressure acts and 13 pressure points (against his average of 30) - only Sharp (who was sub) and May applied less pressure on a day our pressure was through the roof He had 15 ruck contests and had the grand total of 1 hit out (not to advantage) 6 disposals - 5 handballs and 1 kick I tackle 0 marks 5 contested possessions (Fritter had more!) 2 score involvements 2 goal assists (his best comparative number as 2 assists was an equal game high) The lowest player rating of any player on the ground with -2.7 (i know that doesn't tell the whole story)

I actually agree with you SB - ultimately JVR comes back in. Kid is a total gun whose numbers in his first two seasons stack up to the very best tall forwards in the modern era, and better than his peers in the AFL (eg JUH, Amiss, Amartey, Logan McDonald, Cadman). I have zero doubt he will make it. But like you I'm happy for JVR to cool his jets at Casey for say 2 to 3 weeks and allow AJ to play a block of games so he can settle and play with some freedom (so perhaps I'm catching the Picket train for one stop). A benefit of taking that approach is it helps fast track AJ's development, which in addition to improving his game will help ensure he's better prepared if he gets a call up at future point and will give the coaching staff a better sense of where his ceiling is.

I really think a challenge for JVR had been adapting to this shift for our key forwards towards being more focused, as a starting point, on ensuring their direct opponent does not intercept mark. I wonder if that helps explain why he kept on getting in wrestling matches with his opponent, something that must be a real challenge for a 22 year old key forward battling with bigger, stronger opponents. And for a bloke that has played all his footy as a pure key forward (I think that's right) it's probably counter intuitive and unatural to be defence first, not to mention frustrating. If I'm correct and goody is implementing a method that involves denying oppo intercept marks combined with manic inside 50 pressure (as evidenced by our off the charts inside 50 tackle differentials in the last six weeks - with an increased average pressure rating arguably the most dramatic statistical change since our first 5 losses) the key metrics for tall forwards are not goals and contested marks they are things like one percenters, spoils, pressure, tackles and above all denying intercept marks and bringing the ball to ground. All of which points to one of things I most love about footy - the speed at which the game evolves tactically. Having gone out ans targeted Lever to play the intercept role, we won a flag in large part because of ability to pressure the ball carrier to dump kick and then take intercept marks (a strategy we adapted from Hardwick's tigers and to a lesser eectent the crows) All teams subsequently implemented variationa of that method to maximise intercept marks in the back half and use them to launch attacks. Alir, Sicily, McGovern x 2, Vlaustin, Mcartin, Andrews etc etc etc all teams now have the equivalent of a Lever. So now all teams are going to work on limiting such player's influence - which would in part explain why so few contested marks are being taken by forwards inside 50 atm. It feels like goody might be going next level with denying intercept marks.

In another thread @DEE fence noted Chandler's use of low flat passes. I responded with this post, which i reckon fits in this thread given it's about tactics: Its interesting you should note that. It's clearly something they have been working on, ie low, flat passes inside 50 -often from near the boundary and kicked into the corridor on the 45. Langdon does several each game, ditto melk. And its more than just kicking back into the corridor - the kicks are being kept deliberately low, are often scrappy (particularly langdons) and often bounce before getting to the target. I'm guessing the idea is four fold: Get it to the hotspot quickly, ie not floaters to reduce the time for the oppo to get numbers to the target and by doing Ideally hit a target dead in front of the goal, 20-25 metres out. But if not marked, either because it's spoiled or because it bounces, it becomes a predictable ground ball which we fight to win or tackle the oppo if they win it. Reducing intercept marks In regard to the last point, all teams look to reduce oppo intercept marks inside D50, but we look hyper focused on doing so. Watching petty on Sunday from ground level in the pocket you could see his sole focus was blunting mcartin. Barely left his side or looked to get separation. AJ was similarly defensive. Even Friiter was pretty defensive- am I right in thinking he waxed with melksham to defend Blakley? Ironically, of our medium and tall forwards, Melksham who has been playing the defensive forward role, was probably our most offensive forward (McCartin too big for melk I reckon).

Its interesting you should note that. It's clearly something they have been working on, ie low, flat passes inside 50 -often from near the boundary and kicked into the corridor on the 45. Langdon does several each game, ditto melk. And its more than just kicking back into the corridor - the kicks are being kept deliberately low, are often scrappy (particularly langdons) and often bounce before getting to the target. I'm guessing the idea is four fold: Get it to the hotspot quickly, ie not floaters to reduce the time for the oppo to get numbers to the target and by doing Ideally hit a target dead in front of the goal, 20-25 metres out. But if not marked, either because it's spoiled or because it bounces, it becomes a predictable ground ball which we fight to win or tackle the oppo if they win it. Reducing intercept marks In regard to the last point, all teams look to reduce oppo intercept marks inside D50, but we look hyper focused on doing so. Watching petty on Sunday from ground level in the pocket you could see his sole focus was blunting mcartin. Barely left his side or looked to get separation. AJ was similarly defensive. Even Friiter was pretty defensive- am I right in thinking he waxed with melksham to defend Blakley? Ironically, of our medium and tall forwards, Melksham who has been playing the defensive forward role, was probably our most offensive forward (McCartin too big fir melk I reckon).

Picket, I think your train left long ago - and there's no one else on board but you.

Sure, but they have to drop someone. Tmac has arguably been our best tall defender tgus year, certainly the most consistent and he got dropped.

Good question. Probably sharp or spargo.

Still a chance apparently.