Saintsational Fan Forum - A passionate community of St Kilda Football Club fans discussing news, history, players, trade rumours, results, AFL stats and more.
Bernard Shakey wrote:Too many stats are just rubbish
The words often muttered by those who have no idea about the depth of statistical analysis that goes on at club level in modern football.
I can guarantee you that clubs spend hundreds of thousands of dollars a year for such "rubbish". No surprise that the two benchmark teams of 2010 were also the two that spent the most time, money and resources on heavy statistical analysis. One of the main reasons why much more money was poured into the Football Department over the past few years, compared to those before it.
From what I know, most coaches actually build their game plan and their list pretty much solely on stats.
They analyse the stats that are synonymous with winning teams, and try to replicate it themselves.
They recruit players and adapt their training around trying to improve in these areas, with the belief that being the best in the key statistical areas equates to the being the best on the ladder.
SainterK, here's another look building on your excellent stats. Added percentages and a sense of how many inside 50s didn't go direct to a player.
Reinforces your theory that we look better when we don't go to Riewoldt - the Dogs game the first one where we got a result going most to him. The stats show a 65% negative correlation with percentage of entries to Riewoldt, for those that care.
Western Bulldogs: 53 inside 50's, 24 point win
60.4% undirected; 9.4% Riewoldt; 5.7% Gamble, Milne; 3.8% McEvoy, Ray; 1.9% Armitage, Clarke, Dal Santo, Gilbert, Gram, Jones, Schneider
Collingwood: 38 inside 50's, 57 point loss
63.2% undirected; 10.5% Riewoldt; 7.9% Milne, Peake; 2.6% Gilbert, Goddard
Great, if you wouldn't mind updating this regularly, I for one am interested.
An increase in undirected, perhaps also reinforces the trend that is seeing our mids/runners pushing forward inside 50, and contributing to the scoreboard rather than always looking to find a target?
Statistics can be made to show anything but it is interesting to me that we have not won any game when the F50 entries have been directed at Roo on 10+% of the time.
Whether hte entries are directed to others or nobody in particular seems to give us a better result.
Surely this is just confirming what many have already noted - the opposition expect us to attack via Roo and are waiting for the footy to go towards him.
By kicking it elsewhere it actually gives us a better chance of scoring.
Also it may well be a refelction of a change of gameplan for Roo by the coaching panel that he is running further up the ground (towards the wing) adn becoming a 'link player' rather than the 'F50 target'.
I think this is where the boys could win the game to be honest.
One of our best ever performances against the Cats was when Roo missed last year, it was one of the most even performances we've seen from the Saints in recent times.
That's not a knock on Roo, I just reckon the Cats put ALOT of time into him in recent years, and have pretty much perfected their strategy for limiting his impact.
If the boys can keep up the trend in recent weeks, of being less predictable and keeping that variety in their entries, we are a good chance.
The blanket coverage of Roo is a well known occurence.
Surely it's not too difficult for others to "think" a little more and position themselves as another option, which will force defenders to fall of the leading man (Nick). It seems a simple solution, but "kick to the best opprtunity."
Better delivery into the forward line would also be of some minor assistance.
great idea to want to have players that play in the forward zone......but no our game plan is having them anywhere but the forward line....yes roo drops marks but are there small forwards at his feet to crumb NO NO NO there somewhere up the ground helping the backline or centres and so roo just gets bash by all and sundry...at this rate weve got 1 more yr in him. change the game plan RL for f`s sake
I think there is something to it. Certainly not Roos fault. Issue is when players are under pressure they just chuck it on their boots to the big blonde bloke. The other teams plan for him and have 2 guys covering him for the spoil. So its more the midfielders problem. And also the fwd movement and the fwd structure.
Junction Oval wrote:The blanket coverage of Roo is a well known occurence.
I agree entirely, it's a message Geelong seemed to have sussed out 2 years ago. It's a pity the coaching staff don't seem to have quite got the message, because they seem to persist in trying to reinvent a champion of the game, potentially the most devastating MOBILE CHF the game has ever seen as a bash and crash hit-up forward, a game style at which he is average, at best.
Why not get the other forward genius coach Barker back to help Berbakov? These two tactical geniuses could surely impress upon Ross the validity of destroying the team's lynchpin in the next few months so we can take advantage of better draft picks. Sound strategies abound in Seaford.
"Winning's not everything, it's the ONLY thing!" Vince Lombardi.
Sam Gilbert #1 booster - always on the attack!!!
Win more for Winmar
After studing the targets and our results i have come to the conclusion that they mean bugger all. What we need is a stat on how our midfield went in games because if it comes in quickly they could kick it to Rooy 20 times and we would kill them but if it comes in slowly it wouldnt matter who they kick it to, we are stuffed.
Con Gorozidis wrote:I think there is something to it. Certainly not Roos fault. Issue is when players are under pressure they just chuck it on their boots to the big blonde bloke. The other teams plan for him and have 2 guys covering him for the spoil. So its more the midfielders problem. And also the fwd movement and the fwd structure.
Agree. We need to win the midfield AND move it quicker and cleaner AND make sure we have more than one genuine strong marking target. Preferably one who can kick.
SainterK wrote:Carlton
51 inside 50's
Milne 7, Roo 6, Schneider 4, Kosi 2, Dawson McEvoy Steven Peake all with 1
just one for dawson? i remember him taking three marks in the forward half, and i thought they were all inside 50. surely he had a couple more than just one?
I say again and again, it's a question of getting good delivery into the forward line, which we don't have consistently enough. Our backline holds things together.
On the smaller Etihad ground, I think that Gamble will give us an additional mid-size quick leading/marking option, to complement Rooey and Kosi.
