Analysis Team Goals for 2015

Remove this Banner Ad

Mar 6, 2014
41,562
39,805
AFL Club
Geelong
I've been playing around with the idea of making up a table of our goal kicking from the past few years (2007-2014), with the view of finding out what has changed over this period- whether we are kicking as many goals, whether we're as accurate, who's doing the scoring (is it big forwards, crumbers, ruckmen, midfielders?), etc. etc.

With these questions in mind, I've made up a table of our major goal kickers for the past 8 seasons, including the top 8 goal kickers in some calculations.

Screen Shot 2015-01-24 at 11.19.03 pm.png

One thing that is niggling at me but I have yet to work on it, is the fact that I recall that we used to have a lot of goal kickers in each game a few years ago but this doesn't seem to happen anymore- I think we've become so Hawkins-focussed that the other forwards haven't been leading up and presenting in and around the 50 as they used to and the goal assists from teammates, with their shorter passes closer to goal, have also diminished.

There are a lot of factors that influence our goal kicking - ranging from how good our ruckmen and midfielders are, how many goals the opposition are kicking against us (we can't be kicking goals if the ball's constantly down the other end of the ground, obviously), how accurate our goal kickers are- which depends on the type of shot they're taking, etc.

The goals dried up in 2012 and 2014 in particular- we kicked about 3-4 goals less per game than we had kicked in previous years. In 2011, Mooney disappeared from the front line, kicking only 9 goals for the year, while Podsiadly became the main goal kicker. In 2012, Hawkins continued his good form from the 2011 GF and became the prime focus of his teammates, with Pods as the second big forward. In 2013, Hawkins played restricted for most of the season but still topped the goal kicking list and, in 2013 and 2014, we had a cobbled-together ruck division.

Where will the goals come from in 2015? What areas can we improve on, to increase our output?

We're doing OK at getting the ball inside 50- we've been champions at doing this well over the past 8 years, being either the best or 2nd best team getting the ball inside 50 for 6 of these 8 years. Last year, we dropped to 6th. :eek: That needs to improve this season.

How do we compare with other teams at converting our shots on goal into 6 points? Our accuracy has been reasonable over the past 8 years apart from 2009 and 2012, when we were 9th most accurate, and 2014 when we were the 15th most accurate team - or perhaps I should say we were the 4th least accurate team.

Screen Shot 2015-01-25 at 1.31.41 am.png

If we intend to keep wasting our shots on goal, then we need to increase our I50s so we can have more kicks in the direction of the big posts. If that's too difficult due to lack of manpower in the rucks, midfield, etc.- then we will just have to learn to be a lot cleverer and more economical with setting up our goal kickers so they aren't just peppering the goals and stop wasting the opportunities that their teammates have given them. Hawthorn improved their goal accuracy by 3% last season- there's no reason that we can't improve ours by that amount.
We need to be more accurate with our entries and our targets need to be in better position to receive, so that means the ball has to come in faster, before the opposition defence has time to set up 2 on 1 on a goal kicker- and we need to put a clever player or two (like Stokes, Bartel or Johnson) in the area, so they can get to the fall of the ball or direct a young fast teammate to be in the right place. Motlop would be handy here, too, with his speed. I'm sure there will be 20 players capable of rotating through here.
 
Nice job.

I look at these as stats that interest me.

Position Team Played Win Loss Draw % Won Points For Against Percentage
1 Sydney Swans 22 17 5 0 77.27% 68 2126 1488 142.88%
2 Hawthorn Hawks 22 17 5 0 77.27% 68 2458 1746 140.78%
3 Geelong Cats 22 17 5 0 77.27% 68 2033 1787 113.77%
4 Fremantle Dockers 22 16 6 0 72.73% 64 2029 1556 130.40%

Without studying it too deeply , I suspect the whole comp is more defensive , for eg us in 2008 scored 2672 , thats 214 points more than the Hawks the highest scoring team in 2014 , so looking too much to the past can be a bit deceiving.

Simply , we scored similar to Freo last year and defended similar to the Hawks. Sounds reasonable but Freo conceded 231 points less , and Hawks scored 425 more. I doubt we want to follow the Freo model , so we do need to score more. 425 equals just over 3 goals a game. If the Swans game was anomaly , 110 points ..I feel if we can manage 2 goals better it puts us right in the mix.

To do that we need to spread the load in the forwardline , we need to have more control in the midfield to prevent the backline being so punished and to give better chances to our forwards.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

2013 2409 , 1776
2014 2033 , 1787 yes that a good start
i don't get what you're trying to say, although i do believe i screwed up my first post which would make no difference because we kicked 75.23 less than last year (473 points) which would make it a 19.7 point difference per game not the 16..

Will take away the following match because we didn't make it that far in 2014. So taking away our 15.7 (97) from the 2013 Preliminary Final to make the past two seasons 24 matches a piece and that would mean we kicked 60.16 less in 2014 (376 points). 15.66 points less.
 
i don't get what you're trying to say, although i do believe i screwed up my first post which would make no difference because we kicked 75.23 less than last year (473 points) which would make it a 19.7 point difference per game not the 16..

Will take away the following match because we didn't make it that far in 2014. So taking away our 15.7 (97) from the 2013 Preliminary Final to make the past two seasons 24 matches a piece and that would mean we kicked 60.16 less in 2014 (376 points). 15.66 points less.

It's stating the bleeding obvious, but we missed Podsiadly , especially with no small forward either.
 
It's stating the bleeding obvious, but we missed Podsiadly , especially with no small forward either.
He wouldn't of even kicked the 26 at our club he did at Adelaide last year, but I guess 20 would still be good ... it's all I'm going to be expecting of Clark
 
He wouldn't of even kicked the 26 at our club he did at Adelaide last year, but I guess 20 would still be good ... it's all I'm going to be expecting of Clark

He probably would have kicked more.
We also missed the drive we got from half-back the previous year, with an inadequate replacement for Bartel as spare defender and a poor season from Mackie. In addition, we missed Motlop's run and scoring from the wing for a large part of the season, and he was often limited when he did play. The same for Christensen.
 
something that stands out is that in the years 2007-2013, from the top eight goal kickers, 2-3 each year were KPF or a Ruck/Forward.

last year we only had Hawkins.

Adding at different times the likes of Clark, Stanley, Vardy should change that. I am also bullish on Kersten being able to cement a role as the 3rd or 4th forward, especially given the reports on him being a lot leaner this pre-season already. This would also allow Murdoch to push a little bit further up the ground onto a wing, I still think this is where he looks most dangerous.

F: Clark Hawkins Stokes
HF: Johnson Vardy Kersten
C: Murdoch Selwood Motlop
HB: Guthrie Taylor Mackie
B: Rivers Lonergan Enright
R: Stanley Duncan Caddy

Inter: Bartel Kelly Blicavs
Sub: Lang/Cockatoo/McCarthy/Bease

Emerg: Horlin-Smith Thurlow Bews

Looking at the team above, we certainly have a lot of players capable of scoring multiple goals in a match. I am not sure if we can play all four of Hawkins/Stanley/Vardy/Clark as KPF/Rotating Ruckmen, as well as Blicavs (and Kersten), but I would like to see it tried. The issue could be more about not having enough speed and agility on the interchange and flanks more so than the fact that we are playing 4 potential ruck options. I can see the above set up working in the not too distant future when the likes of Kelly, Johnson, Stokes and Bartel are replaced in the best 22 by Lang, Cockatoo, Jansen and Gore.
 
Nice job.

I look at these as stats that interest me.

Position Team Played Win Loss Draw % Won Points For Against Percentage
1 Sydney Swans 22 17 5 0 77.27% 68 2126 1488 142.88%
2 Hawthorn Hawks 22 17 5 0 77.27% 68 2458 1746 140.78%
3 Geelong Cats 22 17 5 0 77.27% 68 2033 1787 113.77%
4 Fremantle Dockers 22 16 6 0 72.73% 64 2029 1556 130.40%

Without studying it too deeply , I suspect the whole comp is more defensive , for eg us in 2008 scored 2672 , thats 214 points more than the Hawks the highest scoring team in 2014 , so looking too much to the past can be a bit deceiving.

Simply , we scored similar to Freo last year and defended similar to the Hawks. Sounds reasonable but Freo conceded 231 points less , and Hawks scored 425 more. I doubt we want to follow the Freo model , so we do need to score more. 425 equals just over 3 goals a game. If the Swans game was anomaly , 110 points ..I feel if we can manage 2 goals better it puts us right in the mix.

To do that we need to spread the load in the forwardline , we need to have more control in the midfield to prevent the backline being so punished and to give better chances to our forwards.
The Cats and Hawks definitely play a more attractive brand of footy, Turbo- but it brings high risk with the rewards. i.e. there are always the goals that our opponents are going to get on the rebound. I definitely agree that we do NOT want to follow the Sydney/Freo stifling defensive brand of footy so the objective of this year would be to kick more goals, as you've said, rather than try and focus on tightening up around the ground, though opposition teams will not be scoring so much if we've kept the ball down our own end of town, kicking goals.
 
i don't get what you're trying to say, although i do believe i screwed up my first post which would make no difference because we kicked 75.23 less than last year (473 points) which would make it a 19.7 point difference per game not the 16..

Will take away the following match because we didn't make it that far in 2014. So taking away our 15.7 (97) from the 2013 Preliminary Final to make the past two seasons 24 matches a piece and that would mean we kicked 60.16 less in 2014 (376 points). 15.66 points less.
Turbo was originally comparing our score to Hawthorn's in 2014, not comparing Geelong 2014 to Geelong 2013. I don't think you've screwed anything up.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

It's stating the bleeding obvious, but we missed Podsiadly , especially with no small forward either.

The best laid schemes o' Mice an' Men,
Gang aft agley,
An' lea'e us nought but grief an' pain,
For promis'd joy!
ROBERT BURNS



Vardy was meant to be Pods replacement with, I suppose, support from resting ruckmen. In hindsight, the club should've kept several big players as insurance (West, Pods...)
Mots would've been handy- but broke down- Caddy and Christensen could've kicked 1.5 goals a game between them... but weren't available for much of the season...

Lots of 'ifs' and 'buts'. We just have to move forward and work out how it's all going to happen. I agree with another poster in a different thread, who said he thought the boys would be kicking the ball in long to the forwards, although I'm not sure if that is the cleverest way to do it. We'll have to wait and see what happens.

Roll on Round 1!!!



 
Nice work Teriyakicat.

Sometimes I think it can be hard to say with certainty whether stats like this are evidence of symptom or cause.
Seeing as the scores etc. are the culmination of the team's efforts during a game, it would have to be a symptom. ;) All we have to do is work out where the extra goals are going to come from- and I reckon increasing accuracy would be the least labour-intensive of all the methods that I can think of but it does require extra work all around the field to make it happen. A team like Geelong should NEVER be the 15th team in comparative accuracy.

I feel another table coming on... but it'll have to wait for me to find a bit of spare time. :D
 
He probably would have kicked more.
We also missed the drive we got from half-back the previous year, with an inadequate replacement for Bartel as spare defender and a poor season from Mackie. In addition, we missed Motlop's run and scoring from the wing for a large part of the season, and he was often limited when he did play. The same for Christensen.
Yes, Fred- there were so many contributing causes - it's a matter of teasing each one out of the mess that was 2014 and rectifying them one by one.
General fitness and keeping pivotal players on the field are important. We also need to be able to extend the expiration date of our older players like Enright, Bartel, Johnson and Kelly, who are so important to us in both the way they play and the way they instruct the young players to play on-field. You can tell these boys whatever you like off-field but, during the game, it's the on-field instruction that is important, as it will fast track their development.
 
who are so important to us in both the way they play and the way they instruct the young players to play on-field. You can tell these boys whatever you like off-field but, during the game, it's the on-field instruction that is important, as it will fast track their development.

id instruct the younger players by saying to them, see ball, get ball, kick ball

its simply but it works
 
30 Goals against the Hawks in Round 1 is a good team goal :D
Yep. Let's keep it simple. 30 goals, then the rest of the season will take care of itself!

id instruct the younger players by saying to them, see ball, get ball, kick ball

its simply but it works
True- a classic example of the above. KISS!
(with the rider of 'accurately' being applied to 'kick ball')

I don't care if we transition back to being a fast running, high possession, hand balling team again. We got worked out a few years ago but the game has changed so much that bringing in that game style again at call, just might work again! I thought it worked very well in recent years when we've used it.
 
something that stands out is that in the years 2007-2013, from the top eight goal kickers, 2-3 each year were KPF or a Ruck/Forward.

last year we only had Hawkins.

Adding at different times the likes of Clark, Stanley, Vardy should change that. I am also bullish on Kersten being able to cement a role as the 3rd or 4th forward, especially given the reports on him being a lot leaner this pre-season already. This would also allow Murdoch to push a little bit further up the ground onto a wing, I still think this is where he looks most dangerous.

F: Clark Hawkins Stokes
HF: Johnson Vardy Kersten
C: Murdoch Selwood Motlop
HB: Guthrie Taylor Mackie
B: Rivers Lonergan Enright
R: Stanley Duncan Caddy

Inter: Bartel Kelly Blicavs
Sub: Lang/Cockatoo/McCarthy/Bease

Emerg: Horlin-Smith Thurlow Bews

Looking at the team above, we certainly have a lot of players capable of scoring multiple goals in a match. I am not sure if we can play all four of Hawkins/Stanley/Vardy/Clark as KPF/Rotating Ruckmen, as well as Blicavs (and Kersten), but I would like to see it tried. The issue could be more about not having enough speed and agility on the interchange and flanks more so than the fact that we are playing 4 potential ruck options. I can see the above set up working in the not too distant future when the likes of Kelly, Johnson, Stokes and Bartel are replaced in the best 22 by Lang, Cockatoo, Jansen and Gore.
I was waiting for someone to analyse the personnel- thanks, tenderwarrior. I kept getting sidetracked with stats. We do seem to have relied on several part-timers coming through and kicking goals where, I think, dedicated forwards can do a better job (1.5 goals per game)- e.g. Bartel did a great job when he was played forward- and a top up of maybe 0.5+ goal per game from a few midfielders.
I can't wait for Johnson to relinquish the midfield reins and play HF as you've listed. ;) He'd be good for an average of 2 goals per game again.
 
how can anyone but hawkins kick goals when the other forwards are pushing up the ground past the centre square
Yep I agree. There is nothing more frustrating than when a Geelong player wins the ball back off the opposition only to look up and have no one to kick it to. If we want to kick more goals next year we need our forwards to hold their positions a bit more so that we have someone to kick it to who can then get the ball into our forward 50 alot quicker than what we did last year.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top