Um not so sure about Bowes. Nice guy but the crowd where I was certainly thought he shirked a few hard contests.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Review Geelong exorcise the Demons by 15 points.
- Thread starter cats_09
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Um not so sure about Bowes. Nice guy but the crowd where I was certainly thought he shirked a few hard contests.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Bruhn was very good, his shimy and quick reverse turns were crucial. Gawn was trying to run into him for about 10-15mins at one point.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
He was injured but was neutralised by Stanley especially in ground work. But he’s a very big unit.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Stanley was huge. Much more influential than the vision suggests. He did allot after half time with these little toe pokes to advantage.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Interesting how May gave up. Still could have pressured Rohan into a mistake.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Agree. At the game he shirked a couple of contests so the crowd thought. I didn’t have my glasses but I just don’t trust him, hopefully yet. He’s a nice guy though. Just reminds me a touch of Bruce lindner, and how he shirked a contest in ‘89 GF and stamped his passport to Adelaide not long after. Blightey couldn’t look at him.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Agree with most of this except on Smith and Holmes. Smith looked rooted most of the night and made some inexplicable errors the obvious one not going for goal and short passing it to Melb. Holmes was huge all night and was one often still going when we were under the pump he was still chasing. Stengle looks a bit unfit as do a number and I’m wondering if the late preseason is playing a role. The hanging in there was epic with dees making repeated thwarted entries.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
- Sep 19, 2017
- 191
- 299
- AFL Club
- Geelong
So maybe there is a role in the side for Parfitt after all?Spot on. I said when watching him after the incident this will either put him right off his game and he'll be a spare wheel, or it'll fire him up, luckily it was the latter and he produced one of his best games in the hoops.
Maybe we should get him to knock someone out each week.
Mattttty
Senior List
- Jun 25, 2022
- 208
- 580
- AFL Club
- Geelong
People keep saying Knevitt shouldn't have been omitted. I reckon it's fair to assume the club knows more about what he needs than we do and that it's about managing his load by rotating him between AFL and VFL as he develops (or something like that). Everyone knows he played a great game against the Dogs. I think we can afford to have a little faith in the club's skill with this stuff - we've had some decent success over the past couple of decades.
Mattttty
Senior List
- Jun 25, 2022
- 208
- 580
- AFL Club
- Geelong
I agree that they'll want to bring Sav back in but no chance that Henry would be the one to make way. Not only is he an extremely talented player with more experience, he's got great flexibility that the club and coach loves, and he's just building back fitness from a major injury. He had his best game this week and will keep getting better from here. He was interviewed on KRock and said he's getting match fitness back and starting to be able to run out the game.
fpm84
Brownlow Medallist
Seems a no brainer to me that J Henry will play forward to replace JC, and Esava will slot in down back v Swans.
I wish I could find my comment from about 8-9 years ago when he was one of our 'whipping boys" and I said given all his attributes he could be another Koutafides. I reckon he's gone past Kouta.
Oh that's awesome - really happy to hear there's actually been something up, rather than just a downturn in form.
Reckon it might be what another poster here said, in that Sav might just come in for Jez, and Jack goes forward in his place.
From there (provided we stay relatively healthy), we'll start resting players to allow gametimes for others - like Sav.
Lindner was one of our best players that day.
Vdubs
Hall of Famer
Lindner had freakish ability though- I don't see that in Bowes at all. Plus he was one of our GF best in 89.
Vdubs
Hall of Famer
Sav slots straight into CHB, Henry CHF this week, if Sav is back.
Vdubs
Hall of Famer
Totally agree now and then, on all points.
Vdubs
Hall of Famer
I thought the same about Duncan for the 2nd and 3rd quarters, but all players redeemed themselves in that awesome last quarter.
- Sep 26, 2017
- 26,721
- 44,024
- AFL Club
- Geelong
Played more games I reckon too at least Blitz knees has held up
Blitz is amazingly versatile. I reckon he can, and has, played literally every position on the ground. If the AA team had a tactical sub there'd be nobody else even remotely in contention.
Vdubs
Hall of Famer
OH shows every week he has IT. Might take a while to play 4 great quarters, but even greats like Varcoe received flak on this board. Expecting him to amass big stats at this stage as a very young HFF is premature. He can influence results spectacularly and has done so frequently enough to not only persevere with him, but to enjoy him. Could be a perfect sub in finals this year too.
- Aug 2, 2012
- 34,820
- 56,390
- AFL Club
- Geelong
You what?
Few replies like this, so now that its the weekend and our teams have played, I'll expand/explain in case anyone is interested in recruitment, became bit more of an essay than I intended.
Moneyball: the use analytics in baseball recruitment to identify under valued players relative to their cost.
In sports like Baseball or European Soccer, there is often a wide gap in financial terms between the top team. Oakland A's spending 39 Million USD on wages competing with the richer teams spending 130 million USD on wages. Or Leicester City winning the Premier League team, some games they'd play matches were their starting 11 cost around 33 million pounds to buy their players against Manchester City that spent cost of 500 million pounds to buy theirs. Since those teams can't compete in raw talent, they have to be creative in how they recruit and be more open to player development.
I don't know about if analytics side fits in well for AFL, but for me the more useful part is the concept of identifying under valued players, rather than purely chasing the "best players" possible.
AFL has a tight salary cap, so spending isn't a measure of a teams ability to recruit raw talent. Historically, draft pick has been considered the leagues only "currency". If you are a poor performing team, you go to the bottom of the ladder, get a few priority picks, then slingshot up with a group of a players lead by those recruited with high value draft picks.
Regardless on how you value picks, eg average games or the AFL's Draft Value Index, almost anything related to talent pool starts looks like the edge of a bell curve. That as you move to the extremes of talent the number of players decreases faster than the increases in output.
In (hopefully) more plain terms there on average there is a larger gap in talent between the 1st player drafted and 50th players drafted, than there is between the last player drafted, and the 50th best player who was overlooked.
Understanding this, clubs try to through what ever they have into bringing in talent, however it is easy to overspend relative to the advantage gained.
Compare the match up for Petracca vs Atkins, Petracca is a much better player than Atkins by any measure, but he cost Melbourne pick 2 and Atkins cost us a rookie spot which is essentially free, Petracca could be on a 800k contract p.a, Atkins is probably on less than an average wage. AFL player rating system valued Petracca's game at 19.6 points in 84 gametime vs Atkins game valued at 14.8 points in 76 game time. From this perspective Petracca's output was roughly 20% higher than Atkins. But Petracca cost significantly more than the benefit they received in that match up.
Since 2011 we have constantly bled talented players, while still finishing close to the top of the ladder which restricted our access to top end draft picks. The few top picks we had mostly flopped, the ones that didn't were traded away for players like Dangerfield, Cameron, Henderson. Geelong was really head of the curve of the changing recruitment meta brought on by free agency, future trading and then increased acceptability of mature age recruiting (Menegola/Stewart/Close/Kelly/Atkins/Stengle) and Category B rookies (Blicavs/O'Connor). Which gave us a big advantage in our player recruitment and kept us competing despite our diminishing resources.
So how can we value players? It is a bit arbitrary, each list management team would have their own system. At its simplest, it isn't too far different from supercoach, were you aim to maximise Supercoach points within a salary cap with minimal trades available. In AFL list management, clubs have three main restrictions, Salary cap, tradeable assets (draft picks/current players) and list spots and a trying to maximise their chances for winning football games.
The arbitrary parts are
How you quantify "maximise their chances for winning football games", I used AFL player rating to compare Atkins and Petracca, as a post game point of value. But honestly there areas many valid systems as on can conceptualise. It is why you can have people disagree on how good Z.Guthrie played last week with his 20+ disposals. This is also where the efficiency of recruitment starts to matter. Spending too much to recruit can put you in a worse place.
How do you quantify "tradeable assets (draft picks/current players)". I'm sure that there be at a least few accountants, on the board.
Clubs are starting to get a lot more "sophisticated", they can now consider some players at net liabilities separate from their playing output eg Bowes and Grundy due to their contract terms. The treatment of pre-agents is not dissimilar to European Soccer. Where they're willing to consider trading players out a year early for picks then let them walk 12 months later under FA. Club aren't under any requirement to have a consistent valuation method of their players, they can jump from Market Value (what are we being offered, what did similar players cost) to Purchase price less depreciation (yes, this is a thing in European Soccer, divide the purchase price by the length of the contract) at their convenience. The clubs that value their players more accurately than the others are likely to get better deals from their trades) What seems like a fair deal from one method of player valuation could be lopsided in another.
Given that we can choose any player valuation method, I chose DVI or Draft Value Index as our stand in for "spending". it isn't the best method but it is easy to calculate.
DVI is a regression based off average player wages at the different draft picks calculated back in 2015. https://s.afl.com.au/staticfile/AFL Tenant/Training/biddingsystemfeedback.pdf
Each player on a list has an acquisition event, where they are drafted, traded or listed. These events can all be described in terms of a draft picks.
Drafted: The draft pick
Traded: The draft pick used to acquire a player, or if it is a player trade, then the cost the other club used to acquire said (I'm ignoring depreciation for convenience)
Listed: Regardless if it is FA, or Rookie, Cat B, SPP, it cost no draft picks
That's the background done.
Why was Thursday such a crazy win. From a cost perspective. They outspent us almost 3 to 1, with their most expensive players still being in their prime.
On the Thursday, we were without Dangerfield and then Cameron got knocked out in the first quarter. They are our two most expensive players to recruit. Those two alone cost around 3500 DVI. Just an aside they were both absolute bargains.
Without them, the team we fielded had a total DVI of 6639, the equivalent to two pick 1s and a pick 30
Their team fielded a total DVI of 19118, the equivalent to six pick 1s and a pick 15
10 of our players were recruited without incurring a DVI cost. As in those 10 players were effectively free for us to recruit. And in more than one case we were actually paid us to take them (Net spend, as in player purchases less player sales, is bigger concept in premier league football)
Our most expensive players was De koning, who cost us pick 19. They had 7 players that cost pick 19 or less. Their 4 most expensive players cost more than our entire team.
Yet despite the uneven playing field we still won, which is a huge credit to the players, coaches, recruitment team and other staff that made it happen.
