Analysis The Matt Taberner effect

[scon]

I'm working on my "intelligent- looking typing"
Tabs has burnt his defender on the lead a number of times that I've noticed.At times 35 m out straight in front only to watch the ball be delivered to a double teamed Pav in the pocket.
Pav's no dumby,absolutely unselfish and team oriented.It's hard to think that he's not making a legitimate but decoy lead,but regardless of that the ball has gone to the wrong lead,some would say for years.
Apart from the most simplistic assessment the consensus seems to be that Tab's progress has been reasonably consistent and there is every reason to continue with patient expectation.

 

[mike91]

Brown actually rates him. He was commentating a few weeks back (probably against Brisbane) and heard him a few other times give him kudos. He says a lot of good about Tabs but usually mentions he needs stickier hands (obviously). Brown is actually fairly lenient on Freo commentary, must have a soft spot for us.

I noticed that too, but all he kept saying (along these lines) was 'is coming along but needs to complete his marks'. Tabs had been completing his marks prior to that, to me it was Brown showing he doesn't watch Tabs, been saying the same thing about him all year without saying how his marking and input has gone up.

 

[FreoRicci]

I'm working on my "intelligent- looking typing"
Tabs has burnt his defender on the lead a number of times that I've noticed.At times 35 m out straight in front only to watch the ball be delivered to a double teamed Pav in the pocket.
Pav's no dumby,absolutely unselfish and team oriented.It's hard to think that he's not making a legitimate but decoy lead,but regardless of that the ball has gone to the wrong lead,some would say for years.
Apart from the most simplistic assessment the consensus seems to be that Tab's progress has been reasonably consistent and there is every reason to continue with patient expectation.

Funny how with Pavlich out, the team seems to play short and hit players such as Mayne, Tabs, Walters on the lead. Pav not being there means that any good option will do, regardless of who it is. Happened in 2012 when Pav was a late withdrawal against North. Walters, Ballas had 4 and Mayne got 2 from memory. 20 goals at the end.

 

[mike91]

Funny how with Pavlich out, the team seems to play short and hit players such as Mayne, Tabs, Walters on the lead. Pav not being there means that any good option will do, regardless of who it is. Happened in 2012 when Pav was a late withdrawal against North. Walters, Ballas had 4 and Mayne got 2 from memory. 20 goals at the end.

It shows incredible stupidity within the team really, that we can't do that with him in the team. Watch Hawthorn share it around, then watch our predictable entries, poor coaching and poor decision making from the players.

 

[scon]

Nice bump.
12th in the entire league for contested marks as a rookie selection!!
2016 AFL League Contested Marks Per Game Leaders -

 

[Allikat]

Nice bump.
12th in the entire league for contested marks as a rookie selection!!
2016 AFL League Contested Marks Per Game Leaders -

Who'd have ever guessed Tabs would be on the list! He's really lifted his game

 

[Arcassius]

Doesn't that say a lot - marking was his one perceived weakness, the ball bouncing off his hands. And yet he's improved out of sight.

The question becomes - was he actually a poor mark, has delivery to him improved (and by that - his chemistry with the players), or has he just been working on it?

 

[Cobbler]

Doesn't that say a lot - marking was his one perceived weakness, the ball bouncing off his hands. And yet he's improved out of sight.

The question becomes - was he actually a poor mark, has delivery to him improved (and by that - his chemistry with the players), or has he just been working on it?

It's simply a combination of everything.

What would be interesting (they don't have stats kept for this) is a percentage of contested marks taken versus outmarked, 50-50, free given away, free awarded etc.

I know that's quite complex, but are we simply going to him more? The answer is no doubt. Now the next question is, is that because he has truly improved or do we not have any other tall options?

Here's a simplistic (hypothetical) breakdown by me:

Let's say we went to him as a target 10 times in a game in 2014/15.
Out of that 10 his averages are:
Contested marks 1
Uncontested 2
Outmarked 1
50-50 4
Free given away 1
Free awarded 1

Now let's say we're going to him 20 times a game in 2016:
Contested marks 2
Uncontested 4
Outmarked 2
50-50 12
Free given away 2
Free awarded 2

My argument is he hasn't really improved in the above hypothetical. His numbers have increased, but he hasn't actually improved.

I'm not saying he hasn't improved. I genuinely think he has, but it is interesting to ponder because we have certainly been looking for him more and more. One thing that has really surprised me is his field kicking. He is looking inboard and hitting targets and pulling off risky kicks. He's had 2 complete shanks that I can recall this year (poster from 5m out and his set shot v Melbourne) other then that he has been incredibly reliable.

He had a break out game v Brisbane and built towards that, hence the running commentary on this thread. I'd really like to see a block of 2-3 goals a game as his next step forward in his progress. Maybe that requires Pav out in order for it to happen.

His development has been a shining light this year.

 

[imperial_oz]

It's simply a combination of everything.

What would be interesting (they don't have stats kept for this) is a percentage of contested marks taken versus outmarked, 50-50, free given away, free awarded etc.

I know that's quite complex, but are we simply going to him more? The answer is no doubt. Now the next question is, is that because he has truly improved or do we not have any other tall options?

Here's a simplistic (hypothetical) breakdown by me:

Let's say we went to him as a target 10 times in a game in 2014/15.
Out of that 10 his averages are:
Contested marks 1
Uncontested 2
Outmarked 1
50-50 4
Free given away 1
Free awarded 1

Now let's say we're going to him 20 times a game in 2016:
Contested marks 2
Uncontested 4
Outmarked 2
50-50 12
Free given away 2
Free awarded 2

My argument is he hasn't really improved in the above hypothetical. His numbers have increased, but he hasn't actually improved.

I'm not saying he hasn't improved. I genuinely think he has, but it is interesting to ponder because we have certainly been looking for him more and more. One thing that has really surprised me is his field kicking. He is looking inboard and hitting targets and pulling off risky kicks. He's had 2 complete shanks that I can recall this year (poster from 5m out and his set shot v Melbourne) other then that he has been incredibly reliable.

He had a break out game v Brisbane and built towards that, hence the running commentary on this thread. I'd really like to see a block of 2-3 goals a game as his next step forward in his progress. Maybe that requires Pav out in order for it to happen.

His development has been a shining light this year.

I think your hypothetical is somewhat self defeating.

Tabs has improved and he's improved because he's ben given a regular run of games and broken the cycle of one game in 3 games out. That cycle held his development up for a long time.

Additionally, if we were less Pav-centric he would have far better numbers again. All too often I've seen his leads ignored and the ball goes to a double or tripled teamed Pav instead. Its poor by our midfield...and yes I know that Pav is easily the best player we have ever had but he's not always the best option. Our midfield coach needs to get our blokes to make better decisions when entering the forward 50. Tabs is plenty mobile and he actually marks very well.

Adding to Pav's remarks in the morning's paper, we need to get regular games into Apeness when he returns from injury. Structurally, having two big marking forwards will see our offense improve markedly.....something for next year i think.

 

[Unique Name]

He has more contested marks than plenty of A grade/primary forwards that would be getting a lot more kicks in their direction.

Kennedy
Riewoldt x2
Dixon
Waite
Franklin
Walker
Bruce

 

[Steinfreo]

can we have his contested marks inside 50 comparison. im enjoying the tabs koolaid by the way i just want to see more analysis.

 

[wayToGo_]

can we have his contested marks inside 50 comparison. im enjoying the tabs koolaid by the way i just want to see more analysis.

Yeah he's got stuff all inside 50 but I'd argue that's not his fault. If we played him as a primary stay at home forward he'd be able to change this. As much as I get playing Pav as stay-at-home and Tabs as mobile I personally think Tabs would benefit from being our key target inside 50 even whilst Pav is playing. Once he starts marking inside 50 he'll start getting the scoring output of the better forwards in the comp, not just the contested marks stat. Even if the plan is to have Apeness/McCarthy as stay-at-home next year, I still think Tabs needs more experience with his body work closer to goals asap.

 

[Cobbler]

I think your hypothetical is somewhat self defeating.

Tabs has improved and he's improved because he's ben given a regular run of games and broken the cycle of one game in 3 games out. That cycle held his development up for a long time.

Additionally, if we were less Pav-centric he would have far better numbers again. All too often I've seen his leads ignored and the ball goes to a double or tripled teamed Pav instead. Its poor by our midfield...and yes I know that Pav is easily the best player we have ever had but he's not always the best option. Our midfield coach needs to get our blokes to make better decisions when entering the forward 50. Tabs is plenty mobile and he actually marks very well.

Adding to Pav's remarks in the morning's paper, we need to get regular games into Apeness when he returns from injury. Structurally, having two big marking forwards will see our offense improve markedly.....something for next year i think.

I'm a big Taberner advocate and was well before this season. I'm in no means questioning his development, but we are simply going to him more. That naturally suggests there has been improvement.

I guess what I'm asking and didn't do it well. If were were to get McCarthy and say Apeness developed quickly, would Taberner stall (as a result of other forward targets) or would we see him thrive. It's all hypotheticals. I'm honestly not overly sold, but think what he's doing is very good albeit in a forward line bereft of talls.

 

[meima]

Still not convinced about Tab, the game he play well so far , essendon, brisbane and some not so good team. Lets see how he actually go next season. But this season i will give him maybe b or b-

 

[Ysaye]

I'm a big Taberner advocate and was well before this season. I'm in no means questioning his development, but we are simply going to him more. That naturally suggests there has been improvement.

I guess what I'm asking and didn't do it well. If were were to get McCarthy and say Apeness developed quickly, would Taberner stall (as a result of other forward targets) or would we see him thrive. It's all hypotheticals. I'm honestly not overly sold, but think what he's doing is very good albeit in a forward line bereft of talls.

I think Apeness plays a complimentary style to Taberner and ultimately if Apeness can make it as a full forward (I still think there are ? about that) then both will benefit from each other. McCarthy though I am not so sure - potentially he has a lot of overlap.

 

[imperial_oz]

I'm a big Taberner advocate and was well before this season. I'm in no means questioning his development, but we are simply going to him more. That naturally suggests there has been improvement.

I guess what I'm asking and didn't do it well. If were were to get McCarthy and say Apeness developed quickly, would Taberner stall (as a result of other forward targets) or would we see him thrive. It's all hypotheticals. I'm honestly not overly sold, but think what he's doing is very good albeit in a forward line bereft of talls.

I think Tabs will thrive in time but as I said before, he will do better without Pav in the side as his repeated leads won't be ignored so much.

If it pans out that way, then that will take some of the pressure of Apeness and allow him to develop in a less stressful environment...IF.

McCarthy may or may not work out. He's mobile and a good mark but not really capable of leading an attack like Pav or indeed Tabs. Apeness too looks to be capable of being the big bloke in attack. If we had all three, a tall order pardon the pun, the logic dictates that Apeness would be the stay at home full forward and switching off that role with Tabs while McCarthy would remain as the mobile tall...and again switching off that role with Tabs.

Lots of speculation and we would really need to train the hell out of our forwards so they can function along side each other ie two talls leading into different spaces and smalls / midfielders feeding off the crumbs (Walters, Ballantyne and Crozier could be deadly in that role) If we don't get the forward line functioning as a coherent unit then none of them will live up to their potential except maybe Apeness who is big enough to shove defender around.

Overall, as a forward, I see Tabs having the most flexibility, provided he lives up to his potential and provided he is allowed to operate where he is best suited. No guarantees for any of that though is there.

 

[Cobbler]

I think Tabs will thrive in time but as I said before, he will do better without Pav in the side as his repeated leads won't be ignored so much.

If it pans out that way, then that will take some of the pressure of Apeness and allow him to develop in a less stressful environment...IF.

McCarthy may or may not work out. He's mobile and a good mark but not really capable of leading an attack like Pav or indeed Tabs. Apeness too looks to be capable of being the big bloke in attack. If we had all three, a tall order pardon the pun, the logic dictates that Apeness would be the stay at home full forward and switching off that role with Tabs while McCarthy would remain as the mobile tall...and again switching off that role with Tabs.

Lots of speculation and we would really need to train the hell out of our forwards so they can function along side each other ie two talls leading into different spaces and smalls / midfielders feeding off the crumbs (Walters, Ballantyne and Crozier could be deadly in that role) If we don't get the forward line functioning as a coherent unit then none of them will live up to their potential except maybe Apeness who is big enough to shove defender around.

Overall, as a forward, I see Tabs having the most flexibility, provided he lives up to his potential and provided he is allowed to operate where he is best suited. No guarantees for any of that though is there.

Speculative post, but do you think we could function with Hogan, Apeness, McCarthy and Tabs? Stack of unknowns in that, but would we be too top heavy?

 

[mightydockers]

Brown actually rates him. He was commentating a few weeks back (probably against Brisbane) and heard him a few other times give him kudos. He says a lot of good about Tabs but usually mentions he needs stickier hands (obviously). Brown is actually fairly lenient on Freo commentary, must have a soft spot for us.

I get that vibe too. He seems to have a lot of man love for the Pav. Probably why he has a soft spot for us.

 

[imperial_oz]

Speculative post, but do you think we could function with Hogan, Apeness, McCarthy and Tabs? Stack of unknowns in that, but would we be too top heavy?

In my view, yes. (disclaimer: I'm not an AFL coach )

3 talls, 2 mobile and 1 stay at home could be made to work with the correct organisation and gameplan. 4 tall forwards would see us chopped to bits if the ball came down low. Of course it would be nice having the depth but who wants to trade in under those circumstances?

Either way, I think Hogan is a dream that won't ever be realised. Apeness will be looked at for that role and lets hope he works out

 

[Kunna17]

Speculative post, but do you think we could function with Hogan, Apeness, McCarthy and Tabs? Stack of unknowns in that, but would we be too top heavy?

only say i could see it working would be if Ape were to play the main ruck role. Drifiting forward he'd be a nightmare ... and this could be very, very dangerous. However I don't no (haven't seen enough to make a judgement) If he's ever likely to make it as a ruck.

 

[Rob]

Doesn't that say a lot - marking was his one perceived weakness, the ball bouncing off his hands. And yet he's improved out of sight.

The question becomes - was he actually a poor mark, has delivery to him improved (and by that - his chemistry with the players), or has he just been working on it?

He's still a poor mark, that he takes as many contested marks as he does is because he's very good at getting clean hands to the ball in contested situations. If he was a good mark he'd be averaging 4-5 CM a game. And that is no exaggeration - I know that would be comfortably the league leader.

 

[youmewe]

He's still a poor mark, that he takes as many contested marks as he does is because he's very good at getting clean hands to the ball in contested situations. If he was a good mark he'd be averaging 4-5 CM a game. And that is no exaggeration - I know that would be comfortably the league leader.

Setting a very high bar there.

No player in (recorded) history has ever achieved those numbers.

Season record (15+ games): Loewe (St K) 3.94 per game (2000); Cloke (Coll) 3.80 (2011) and Richardson (Rich) 3.75 (1999).

Career record (50+ games): Richardson 2.77 per game; Loewe 2.52 and Carey (North) 2.22.

 

[imperial_oz]

He's still a poor mark, that he takes as many contested marks as he does is because he's very good at getting clean hands to the ball in contested situations. If he was a good mark he'd be averaging 4-5 CM a game. And that is no exaggeration - I know that would be comfortably the league leader.

So, he's a poor mark because he's good at contested marks???

Your logic is somewhat improbable at best. He's Freo's leader in contested marks by some margin this year. That includes a pretty handy lead over 'good' marks like Pav, who has had more ball sent his way over the course of the season.

He's Freo's leading contested marker because he's a good mark. He uses his sized and mobility to good effect and I think he will continue to improve in that area. To say he's a poor mark when the stats clearly show the opposite...well somebody has completely missed the point

 

[youmewe]

can we have his contested marks inside 50 comparison. im enjoying the tabs koolaid by the way i just want to see more analysis.

Our marks inside 50 stats are dominated by the obvious suspects.

Mayne 1.69 per game / Pav 1.57 / Ballantyne 1.44 / Fyfe 1.40 / Tabs 1.29 / Walters 1.22. No one else has more than 3 for the season.

When it comes to contested marks inside forward 50 we have a new leader...Tabs.

Tabs has 13 / Pav 12 / Walters 7 / Mayne 5 / Ballas 4 / Fyfe 4 (Tabs and Pav have only played 14 games each. Fyfe 5).

The actual breakdown is: Mayne 27 (5 contested / 22 uncontested); Ballas 23 (4 / 19); Pavlich 22 (12 / 10); Walters 21 (7 / 14); Tabs 18 (13 / 5); Fyfe 7 (4 / 3).

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tabs' 18 marks inside 50 is good for only equal 49th in the league.

The league leaders are: Lynch (GC) 60 (34 contested / 26 uncontested); Kennedy (WC) 56 (20 / 36); Hawkins (G) 50 (20 / 30); Hogan (M) 49 (23 / 26); J. Riewoldt (R) 49 (16 / 33); Franklin (S) 45 (16 / 29); Jenkins (A) 41 (16 / 25); Darling (WC) 40 (16 / 24); Gunston (H) 38 (16 / 22); Membrey (ST K) 35 (10 / 25); Walker 35 (15 / 20); Waite 34 (16 / 18); Dixon 33 (22 / 11) and N. Riewoldt 33 (12 / 21).

Looking only at contested marks inside 50 per game: Lynch 2.12; Hogan 1.44; Dixon 1.38; Hawkins 1.33; Kennedy 1.25; Waite 1.23; J. Riewoldt 1.00; Franklin 1.00; Jenkins 1.00; Darling 1.00; Gunston 1.00; Walker 0.94; Tabs 0.93; Membrey 0.91 and N. Riewoldt 0.75.

Applying my 'flat track adjuster' (only considering games v top 8 teams) the figures look like this: Lynch 1.62; Hawkins 1.57; Waite 1.50; Hogan 1.33; Franklin 1.22; Dixon 1.14; N. Riewoldt 1.14; Gunston 1.00; Walker 1.00; Tabs 1.00; Jenkins 0.88; Kennedy 0.83; Darling 0.83; J. Riewoldt 0.83 and Membrey 0.75.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tabs is tracking along very nicely.

One curious trait re Tabs' marks inside 50...they tend to come early (first half of first quarter) or late (second half of fourth quarter)...8 out of 18.

 

[Steinfreo]

Our marks inside 50 stats are dominated by the obvious suspects.

Mayne 1.69 per game / Pav 1.57 / Ballantyne 1.44 / Fyfe 1.40 / Tabs 1.29 / Walters 1.22. No one else has more than 3 for the season.

When it comes to contested marks inside forward 50 we have a new leader...Tabs.

Tabs has 13 / Pav 12 / Walters 7 / Mayne 5 / Ballas 4 / Fyfe 4 (Tabs and Pav have only played 14 games each. Fyfe 5).

The actual breakdown is: Mayne 27 (5 contested / 22 uncontested); Ballas 23 (4 / 19); Pavlich 22 (12 / 10); Walters 21 (7 / 14); Tabs 18 (13 / 5); Fyfe 7 (4 / 3).

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tabs' 18 marks inside 50 is good for only equal 49th in the league.

The league leaders are: Lynch (GC) 60 (34 contested / 26 uncontested); Kennedy (WC) 56 (20 / 36); Hawkins (G) 50 (20 / 30); Hogan (M) 49 (23 / 26); J. Riewoldt (R) 49 (16 / 33); Franklin (S) 45 (16 / 29); Jenkins (A) 41 (16 / 25); Darling (WC) 40 (16 / 24); Gunston (H) 38 (16 / 22); Membrey (ST K) 35 (10 / 25); Walker 35 (15 / 20); Waite 34 (16 / 18); Dixon 33 (22 / 11) and N. Riewoldt 33 (12 / 21).

Looking only at contested marks inside 50 per game: Lynch 2.12; Hogan 1.44; Dixon 1.38; Hawkins 1.33; Kennedy 1.25; Waite 1.23; J. Riewoldt 1.00; Franklin 1.00; Jenkins 1.00; Darling 1.00; Gunston 1.00; Walker 0.94; Tabs 0.93; Membrey 0.91 and N. Riewoldt 0.75.

Applying my 'flat track adjuster' (only considering games v top 8 teams) the figures look like this: Lynch 1.62; Hawkins 1.57; Waite 1.50; Hogan 1.33; Franklin 1.22; Dixon 1.14; N. Riewoldt 1.14; Gunston 1.00; Walker 1.00; Tabs 1.00; Jenkins 0.88; Kennedy 0.83; Darling 0.83; J. Riewoldt 0.83 and Membrey 0.75.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tabs is tracking along very nicely.

One curious trait re Tabs' marks inside 50...they tend to come early (first half of first quarter) or late (second half of fourth quarter)...8 out of 18.

fantastic work man.