surprising stats

[bigcarl]

Make of these what you will. My personal interpretation is at the bottom.

TOTAL INSIDE 50s
(To Round 10)

Coll 600
Bris 578
Geel 569
Freo 532
Dons 524
Dogs 518
WCE 507
Hawks 502
Carl 500
Melb 500
StK 490
Port 488
Syd 485
Adel 463
North 457
Rich 457

My interpretation: I'm surprised we're that low on this ladder.

The loss of Riewoldt and absence of a reliable inside 50 marking target and goal-kicking key forward has forced us to go slow, wide and indirect.

This style of play is much easier to counter and repel.


PERCENTAGE OF GOALS SCORED
PER INSIDE 50 ENTRY

Geel = 31%
Freo = 30%
Carl = 29%
Syd = 27%
StK = 26%
Dogs = 26%
Coll = 25%
Dons = 25%
Hawks = 24%
Port = 24%
North = 24%
Melb = 23%
Bris = 22%
WCE = 22%
Adel = 22%
Rich = 21%

My interpretation: I'm surprised we're that high.

I am not surprised to see some of our main premiership rivals, Geelong, Fremantle and Carlton (who walloped us), at or near the top. This is a very important stat.

We're not doing too badly, but we need to move it in quicker, deliver it better and for our key forwards to start taking marks and kicking goals.

Many thanks to SainterK who supplied the stats.

[rexy]

Ross said at quarter time of our WC game that we were trying to be too precise, needed to just get it in quicker to a contest and then compete for the ball. This stat would suggest that he is spot on, Geelongs lack of precision movement inside 50 can often wrong foot opponents and make Mooney look like a good player IMO.

[saint3d]

I would be interested to see the number of inside 50s conceded, and the percentage of goals conceded per inside 50.

At a guess I would say the former would look bad, but the latter would look good.

[Wrote for Luck]

Ross said at quarter time of our WC game that we were trying to be too precise, needed to just get it in quicker to a contest and then compete for the ball. This stat would suggest that he is spot on, Geelongs lack of precision movement inside 50 can often wrong foot opponents and make Mooney look like a good player IMO.

This.

Could help make Kosi look better as well.

[plugger66]

Probably upset the theory that the forward line is struggling. Just proves to me that the backs arent teaming as well due to being moved around so much earlier this year so the mids have gone deeper in the backline which means less forward entries.[/list][/b][/list]

[bigcarl]

Probably upset the theory that the forward line is struggling. Just proves to me that the backs arent teaming as well due to being moved around so much earlier this year so the mids have gone deeper in the backline which means less forward entries.[/list][/b][/list]

like i said, make of it what you will. i've given my interpretation and you've given yours.

[Foz]

The AFL average for the first 7 rounds for Goals from Inside 50's was 25.1%. So we are roundabout.

However the first 3 rounds with Roo, we scored at over 33% efficiency.

Also, the stats show the Geelongs, Freos, Carlton etc do very well once its in the 50 arc. Much can be put down to the classy mids in those sides. Its an area we were down in - clearances, tackling, contested ball - so a fair importance goes onto the strength of a teams mids.

I think especially rounds 4 to 8 we tended to get behind the ball too much and have slow build ups. We seemed to have turned the corner somewhat in the past 2 weeks in this area.

[bigcarl]

However the first 3 rounds with Roo, we scored at over 33% efficiency.

him not being there has made a hell of a difference, hasn't it.

[SainterK]

My take on it, is that people don't seem to give Freo enough credit, and we don't seem to give ourselves enough credit for beating them.

Seriously though, I lean towards the P66 theory that players like Fisher and Goddard were shuffled around too much, and it unsettled everything.

The ball is just not going in there much.

[bigcarl]

The ball is just not going in there much.

so why is it that it goes in a lot more often with riewoldt up and running?

[Mr Magic]

The ball is just not going in there much.

so why is it that it goes in a lot more often with riewoldt up and running?

I'd be curious to see his stat for F50 entries.
His style of play in 'long searching leads' makes me think he often was the player to kick it into our F50?

[bigcarl]

The ball is just not going in there much.

so why is it that it goes in a lot more often with riewoldt up and running?

I'd be curious to see his stat for F50 entries.
His style of play in 'long searching leads' makes me think he often was the player to kick it into our F50?

i think he was often the go to man inside 50. having a match-winner on the end of it encourages them to bang it in there quickly and directly.

kosi, despite his best efforts, doesn't inspire the same confidence. hopefully stanley will in time, but let's not expect miracles from a third-gamer.

[markp]

I think it's a chicken or the egg scenario... players are less confident and second guess themselves slightly going forward when the result is the ball bouncing straight back out again....

I also think it would be interesting to see entries into just outside the 50 (say 50-60)... and maybe the forward 50's conceded stats, as we have been playing in lower scoring style games.

[Moods]

My take is that our mids were out of form for a few weeks there after the Freo game. WE couldn't get it in there to score. THe last couple of weeks we've played great in the midfield and our inside 50's have gone through the roof. I agree that we need to get it in there quicker. Give Kos a one out chance to contest and Milne and schneider space to work in when it hits the ground.

[ThePunter]

I'd still suggest the problems with our forward play were from Round 5-7. And Round 5 was played in the wet, at night, in the open.

In Round 8 we just didn't convert, and Essendon did going the other way.

Round 9 and 10 were fine.

I always think we're built for 25 scoring shots per game.

Round 1 @ Sydney - 23 (won by 8 points)
Round 2 v North Melbourne - 28 (won by 104 points)
Round 3 v Collingwood - 19 (won by 28 points)
Round 4 v Fremantle - 28 (won by 15 points)
Round 5 @ Port Adelaide - 14 (lost by 10 points)
Round 6 @ Western Bulldogs - 14 (lost by 3 points)
Round 7 v Carlton - 23 (lost by 61 points)
Round 8 v Essendon - 26 (lost by 12 points)
Round 9 @ West Coast - 26 (won by 35 points)
Round 10 v Adelaide - 28 (won by 47 points)

So we've won with 14 and lost with 26. We've also conceded over 90 points three times, for one win and two losses. 13 goals and 12 behinds gives you 25 scoring shots and 90 points.

[samoht]

A quick long ball like Heyne's that resulted in the big Kosi mark was also well placed and to his advantage - it doesn't need to be indiscriminate.

It would help (our forward efficiency and boost our scoring shots) if tall forwards complete their marks, instead of doing all the hard work only to drop most of them .. maybe Kosi needs to build up his upper arms and shoulders - as you need a lot of strength around the shoulder area to get a vice like grip to hold those marks ... and Kosi has no upper arm definition and relatively small arms - you wonder if he does weights at all.

If you look at Walsh's arms and shoulders in comparison .. and that's a guy who came from an amateur sport where marking is not a big deal .. there's a big difference there.

[SainterK]

Here are the I50 by each round.

45, 54, 43, 56, 41, 41, 42, 54, 51, 55

For those curious about Roo, he averages 4.5 I50 a week on the site I looked at.

[gringo]

Missing Gram and having Goddard forward mean there is not as many link up players in there. They are that nice steady spot up kick to our forwards.
Gram is also a line breaker and sets up a heap of inside 50s with his long kicking. We need those guys back to where they were last year.

Lenny has really stepped it up the last couple of weeks and looks to have re discovered his manic attack on the ball., I think the whole team are about to start ramping it up a bit. Don't mind starting slow if we come home strong.

[joffaboy]

Our forward 50's have started to go up again now we have two marking talls up forward on a constant basis.

Kosi and Stanley are the chosen tall forwards with gardiner and McEvoy going forward with Kosi occasionally on ball.

This has given up two fowards to aim at resulting in more contests and balls to ground than when Kosi was the onlt (nominally) marking forward.

The mids have been pumping longer balls into the fifty. Also our zoning structure seems to be not as full on defensive as it was against Port and the Bulldogs.

This leads me to believe that we play our defensive structure according to the team we are up against. Against Freo, Essendon, WCE and Adelaide, we tended not to shut down the run (against Carlton we just couldn't), against the Bulldogs and Collingwood (out of necessity) we changed our gameplan to nullify their run.

With Stanley in the team and the rotating forwards, you would expect our kicking to be longer. If teams allow Joey and Dal and bj a free reign the ball will be coming in a lot quicker also.

[SainterK]

Nice to think that a couple of those goals on the weekend were probably just outside 50 as well

[markp]

Nice to think that a couple of those goals on the weekend were probably just outside 50 as well

Yup!

More of that from Joey, BJ, and Dal please....

[ThomasR]

I would be interested to see the number of inside 50s conceded, and the percentage of goals conceded per inside 50.

At a guess I would say the former would look bad, but the latter would look good.

I would go the opposite of this - thinking back to the Carlton and Essendon games, we were not that far behind on I50s but got comparatively smashed on the scoreboard

[samoht]

We need to be more successful in future in stopping/restricting quick running players like Milburn, O'Brien, Heath Shaw, Harbrow from rebounding the ball 30 times each and so easily out of our forward 50.

Wouldn't it be great if Milne or Schneider got the ball 30 times each in our forward 50 in space - but that's not going to happen - and yet we're letting the opposition rebounding players to do just that.

If we can restrict the rebounding we can improve both our forward efficiency (by keeping the ball in our forward line) and also the inside 50's we concede the other way.

Collingwood have at least 2 fast running rebounding players - and they didn't have to tamper with their structures like we have - so it's not surprising that they lead the inside F50's.

We need fast medium sized half forward flankers - Heyne etc.. to put the pressure and chase on these rebounders ... as they seem to get career best stats against us - it suggests we're slow on the the forward flanks.

[BAM! (shhhh)]

I would be interested to see the number of inside 50s conceded, and the percentage of goals conceded per inside 50.

At a guess I would say the former would look bad, but the latter would look good.

I would go the opposite of this - thinking back to the Carlton and Essendon games, we were not that far behind on I50s but got comparatively smashed on the scoreboard

V Essendon, St Kilda won the I50 54-43, won the contested ball 139-115, won the clearances 35 31... and lost by 2 goals. 11.15 vs 14.9 not a surprising losing scoreline with those key indicators. For all the hype, that game was winnable, certainly nobody was smashed on the scoreboard.

Against Carlton, the Saints lost everything. I50 47-42, contested ball 132-120, clearances 39-35, and tackles to boot. Innacurate as well, but that hardly helps a 9.14 v 20.9 scoreline.

[Moods]

I would be interested to see the number of inside 50s conceded, and the percentage of goals conceded per inside 50.

At a guess I would say the former would look bad, but the latter would look good.

I would go the opposite of this - thinking back to the Carlton and Essendon games, we were not that far behind on I50s but got comparatively smashed on the scoreboard

V Essendon, St Kilda won the I50 54-43, won the contested ball 139-115, won the clearances 35 31... and lost by 2 goals. 11.15 vs 14.9 not a surprising losing scoreline with those key indicators. For all the hype, that game was winnable, certainly nobody was smashed on the scoreboard.

Against Carlton, the Saints lost everything. I50 47-42, contested ball 132-120, clearances 39-35, and tackles to boot. Innacurate as well, but that hardly helps a 9.14 v 20.9 scoreline.

Essendon game our fwds were awful. Couldn't convert and couldn't hold the ball in and create pressure, hence the ball came out too quickly and didn't give our mids a chance to zone back and clog up the backline. Our mids were great and our backs were average as well. When they got it in they invariably scored!

I reckon we've addressed our fwd deficiencies to a certain extent (it will never be as fluid until Roo returns and is in form) Let's be honest - we really only had one bad quarter last week, we won the 3 others. 2 of them very convincingly. Just hope the players are focussed on this week and not the week after like many of us seem to be