Analysis 2019 List, Game Plan and Best 22?

[RUNVS]

Not really. Did find a whole lot of that stuff for a while but Champion Data tightened their security. Don't know how the site I accessed got it but no more


On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app

The AFL owns a large chunk of Champion Data. They should release all the stats to the fans.

 

[momentbymoment]

I would like to see Rampe in the midfield. He has the body, the passion, the leadership and a penetrating kick. Could easily see him teaming up with Kennedy, Parker and Hewett as our midfield core.

 

[Grand Uncle Horace]

Time for Parker to lead the midfield and release pressure on JPK. Time for Mills, Heeney and Hewett to deliver in the clearances and Dawson to throw his weight around.

I think we play too nice. A more aggressive attitude is needed across the ground, particularly in the mids. Not saying we need 21 other Jonesies out there. Far from it, however this year we too often played in a passive negative manner.

Chippetty chip symbolised this passivity, emboldening only the opposition.

 

[robbieando]

I would love to find the stat of time spent in forward half as I think it would be really interesting. Do you know where it can be found?

Its given as a percentage of possession and split between forward half and defensive half

Here is a break down of our year and how our opposition did each match against us

Round 1 - Swans 40% Eagles 44%
Round 2 - Swans 42% Power 40%
Round 3 - Swans 36% Giants 45%
Round 4 - Swans 33% Bulldogs 51%
Round 5 - Swans 41% Crows 40%
Round 6 - Swans 41% Cats 51%
Round 7 - Swans 43% North 46%
Round 8 - Swans 31% Hawks 45%
Round 9 - Swans 34% Freo 35%
Round 10 - Swans 35% Lions 42%
Round 11 - Swans 44% Blues 36%
Round 12 - Swans 36% Saints 46%
Round 13 - Swans 33% Eagles 51%
Round 15 - Swans 29% Tigers 49%
Round 16 - Swans 35% Cats 50%
Round 17 - Swans 40% North 41%
Round 18 - Swans 34% Suns 44%
Round 19 - Swans 25% Bombers 52%
Round 20 - Swans 32% Magpies 43%
Round 21 - Swans 39% Demons 49%
Round 22 - Swans 41% Giants 45%
Round 23 - Swans 41% Hawks 49%
EF - Swans 28% Giants 44%

 

[RUNVS]

Its given as a percentage of possession and split between forward half and defensive half

Here is a break down of our year and how our opposition did each match against us

Round 1 - Swans 40% Eagles 44%
Round 2 - Swans 42% Power 40%
Round 3 - Swans 36% Giants 45%
Round 4 - Swans 33% Bulldogs 51%
Round 5 - Swans 41% Crows 40%
Round 6 - Swans 41% Cats 51%
Round 7 - Swans 43% North 46%
Round 8 - Swans 31% Hawks 45%
Round 9 - Swans 34% Freo 35%
Round 10 - Swans 35% Lions 42%
Round 11 - Swans 44% Blues 36%
Round 12 - Swans 36% Saints 46%
Round 13 - Swans 33% Eagles 51%
Round 15 - Swans 29% Tigers 49%
Round 16 - Swans 35% Cats 50%
Round 17 - Swans 40% North 41%
Round 18 - Swans 34% Suns 44%
Round 19 - Swans 25% Bombers 52%
Round 20 - Swans 32% Magpies 43%
Round 21 - Swans 39% Demons 49%
Round 22 - Swans 41% Giants 45%
Round 23 - Swans 41% Hawks 49%
EF - Swans 28% Giants 44%

Those stats are super interesting. We only won the play in 3 of 23 matches, even getting pantsed by Gold Coast, Brisbane (before they became good) and the Bulldogs. This stat shows just how truly awful our midfield was in 2018, and how good our defence and forward line needed to be to make up for that.

 

[Heeney2Franklin]

Round 19 against the Bombers 25% :O

 

[Jimbo OZ]

Round 12 - Swans 36% Saints 46%

Thanks for the stats mate but I'm not convinced that they tell the full story. For example, the stat that I've quoted suggests that the Swans struggled all day but we smashed the Saints by 71 points.

 

[RUNVS]

Thanks for the stats mate but I'm not convinced that they tell the full story. For example, the stat that I've quoted suggests that the Swans struggled all day but we smashed the Saints by 71 points.

Yes but odds are we did what we always do, have the ball live in our defence until we slowly moved it forward. A team with a better forward line would have killed us.

 

[caesar88]

I think Horse is still stuck in 2016 a little. I remember that year when we were pretty clearly the best side in the comp at the time, David King did an analysis (or an audit?) on our team and how we play, and even though he's a fat twat, he made some good points that were backed up by others as well. That we actually didn't mind losing the territory battle and we absorbed large defensive 50 entries on the back of our solid defence, then used chaos balls to clear it out to our dominant midfield.

It was a less refined version of the slingshot footy that won us a flag in 2012 and got us close again in 2013, but it had to be less refined and more unpredictable because we didn't have either Malceski or Shaw on either HB flanks to clear it out with any sort of order. But at least we had a midfield that could win enough 50/50s and get first hands to it to still produce winning scores on the back of those chaos balls.

Now we still don't have that Mal/Shaw replacement, and that's been compounded by the fact we no longer have the dominant midfield either, so we're struggling in both areas. This is why I think it's crucial that H&C get us playing a more fast-paced brand that places an emphasis on trying to get it forward at all costs. We don't have the half back flankers to get it out of the defensive 50 with any authority, and we don't even have the strong midfielders to make the most out of chaos balls either. All we can do is do whatever it takes to prevent it from getting inside our defensive 50, and if it does get in there, do whatever it takes to get it out as quickly as possible. We can't afford to be dilly-dallying around the back half because if we do, it will just stay there until a goal is inevitably kicked against us.

Our players need to be encouraged to run. Lloyd needs to be encouraged to take the middle more. Aliir needs to be encouraged to play on more (he's more rounded than he was in 2016/2017 when his playing on had us looking through our fingers!) Our faster mids (Jones, Florent, Cunningham) should be encouraged to run and keep running to link up further down the play. Our mids should be encouraged to just find the first and best target inside 50, not just the best spot inside 50 for Buddy to lead into. These are all things that I think Horse hasn't drilled into our boys, because the transitioning of our team has meant he's in this limbo state where he's bringing in new and dynamic players but still trying to cling on to the things that worked for him a few years ago with a different looking Swans team. That's fair enough and makes him human, but time to wakey wakey now John!!

 

[connolly]

I think Horse is still stuck in 2016 a little. I remember that year when we were pretty clearly the best side in the comp at the time, David King did an analysis (or an audit?) on our team and how we play, and even though he's a fat twat, he made some good points that were backed up by others as well. That we actually didn't mind losing the territory battle and we absorbed large defensive 50 entries on the back of our solid defence, then used chaos balls to clear it out to our dominant midfield.

It was a less refined version of the slingshot footy that won us a flag in 2012 and got us close again in 2013, but it had to be less refined and more unpredictable because we didn't have either Malceski or Shaw on either HB flanks to clear it out with any sort of order. But at least we had a midfield that could win enough 50/50s and get first hands to it to still produce winning scores on the back of those chaos balls.

Now we still don't have that Mal/Shaw replacement, and that's been compounded by the fact we no longer have the dominant midfield either, so we're struggling in both areas. This is why I think it's crucial that H&C get us playing a more fast-paced brand that places an emphasis on trying to get it forward at all costs. We don't have the half back flankers to get it out of the defensive 50 with any authority, and we don't even have the strong midfielders to make the most out of chaos balls either. All we can do is do whatever it takes to prevent it from getting inside our defensive 50, and if it does get in there, do whatever it takes to get it out as quickly as possible. We can't afford to be dilly-dallying around the back half because if we do, it will just stay there until a goal is inevitably kicked against us.

Our players need to be encouraged to run. Lloyd needs to be encouraged to take the middle more. Aliir needs to be encouraged to play on more (he's more rounded than he was in 2016/2017 when his playing on had us looking through our fingers!) Our faster mids (Jones, Florent, Cunningham) should be encouraged to run and keep running to link up further down the play. Our mids should be encouraged to just find the first and best target inside 50, not just the best spot inside 50 for Buddy to lead into. These are all things that I think Horse hasn't drilled into our boys, because the transitioning of our team has meant he's in this limbo state where he's bringing in new and dynamic players but still trying to cling on to the things that worked for him a few years ago with a different looking Swans team. That's fair enough and makes him human, but time to wakey wakey now John!!

Or to sum up under Longmire we are the deepest defending team in the comp. Its by design. And it will never win a premiership in the contemporary game. Its not a weakness in the midfield. The midfield are pulled back deep into defense.

 

[connolly]

Yes but odds are we did what we always do, have the ball live in our defence until we slowly moved it forward. A team with a better forward line would have killed us.

Its not a weakness in the midfield. Its how they are expected to play. Longmire clogs the opposition forward line by playing a very deep defensive game. Our midfielders are expected to defend much deeper than any other midfield. And woe betide any mid that fails to fall back into a deep defensive pattern. No names or pack drill. Too soon.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Or to sum up under Longmire we are the deepest defending team in the comp. Its by design. And it will never win a premiership in the contemporary game. Its not a weakness in the midfield. The midfield are pulled back deep into defense.

It's a huge issue. Hopefully but heading to the draft and going midfield heavy wev'e identified the need to refresh our midfield. The game nowadays are won and lost in the middle. You lose there you generally lose games.

 

[Vin Rogue]

Its not a weakness in the midfield. Its how they are expected to play. Longmire clogs the opposition forward line by playing a very deep defensive game. Our midfielders are expected to defend much deeper than any other midfield. And woe betide any mid that fails to fall back into a deep defensive pattern. No names or pack drill. Too soon.

Reid going down for the season exposed our lack of a critical link man coming out of defence. Reid has often presented the safest pair of hands to a defender whose kick could easily become a turnover. Lack of confidence slows the pace of delivery and decision making becomes the art of multiple second guesses - further slowing the game.

 

[McRobie]

To put it simply the game plan is outdated, it’s good enough to knock off middle of the road sides and every now and then a better team that might be off.
The fact is this game style is not sustainable for 3 - 4 finals games.
The lack of ability to keep the foot on the throat and put teams away kills us and keeps the opposition in the game on most occasions right until the end.
I don’t know what the answer is but Longmire has shown his hand time and time again over the last few years and come up short.

 

[Grand Uncle Horace]

To put it simply the game plan is outdated, it’s good enough to knock off middle of the road sides and every now and then a better team that might be off.
The fact is this game style is not sustainable for 3 - 4 finals games.
The lack of ability to keep the foot on the throat and put teams away kills us and keeps the opposition in the game on most occasions right until the end.
I don’t know what the answer is but Longmire has shown his hand time and time again over the last few years and come up short.

Oh well, it seems the Horse has heard the players and Club and is seeking a change up.

My view remains give him 2019 and if there is no improvement move him on.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Oh well, it seems the Horse has heard the players and Club and is seeking a change up.

My view remains give him 2019 and if there is no improvement move him on.

That's fair, I'm in the boot him now camp but I'd be happy to wait a year and see what happens.

 

[McRobie]

Oh well, it seems the Horse has heard the players and Club and is seeking a change up.

My view remains give him 2019 and if there is no improvement move him on.

Yeah I’m all for him staying if he can show he can evolve. If it’s same same he might as well leave ASAP.

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

What is our game plan? That is, Plan A. We beat the eventual premiers comfortably on their turf in Round 1, winning the clearances, not quite the inside 50s, without Reid and Naismith (and Tippett). It seems to me that was as close as we could get to Plan A all year. With Buddy hurt, we were down to Plan B or Plan C. The more attacking footy everyone seems to want requires us not to have our 3 most important talls watching. You have to be able to get first use. I honestly think it's bloody amazing we got to where we got given the injuries we endured and the players who got them.

 

[stew42]

Might as well chuck in my best 22 for next year.

Melican, Grundy, Smith
Rampe, Aliir, Lloyd
Heeney, Mills, Jones
Hayward, Franklin, Florent
Papley, Sinclair, Menzel
Naismith, Kennedy, Parker

Hewett, Reid, Ronke, McVeigh

Blakey will get in there no doubt, Clarke and Thurlow will be decent chances too. Hope that Ling and Maibaum get debuts as well, and that Dawson actually gets a go in his strongest role. Decent depth options as well I haven't mentioned in Jack, Cunningham, O'Riordan, Stoddart, Cameron.

In terms of who might be our rookie bolter, ala Papley, Lloyd, Rampe, I'm going with Tucker. Runs a sub 3 second 20m sprint, can play on talls and smalls, and was rated one of the best defenders in this draft class before he did an ACL. With any luck, he'll make us forget about Tom Langdon veeeeeery quickly.

 

[Grand Uncle Horace]

What is our game plan? That is, Plan A. We beat the eventual premiers comfortably on their turf in Round 1, winning the clearances, not quite the inside 50s, without Reid and Naismith (and Tippett). It seems to me that was as close as we could get to Plan A all year. With Buddy hurt, we were down to Plan B or Plan C. The more attacking footy everyone seems to want requires us not to have our 3 most important talls watching. You have to be able to get first use. I honestly think it's bloody amazing we got to where we got given the injuries we endured and the players who got them.

C'mon BfB. Just about every team suffered injuries to key players.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

C'mon BfB. Just about every team suffered injuries to key players.

Look at West Coast who had their best ruck out for a long period

 

[McRobie]

The injury argument is loser talk.

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

C'mon BfB. Just about every team suffered injuries to key players.

Not every team had such a cluster of season ending injuries in the ruck/forward area. That is the point.

We can stand to lose 1 ruck. We lost 2.

We can stand to lose 1 tall forward. We lost 2 (3 if you count Sinclair having to ruck, 4 if you count Buddy being on 1 leg for the year).

I have posted this before, but if the "game plan" whingers are allowed to be repetitive then I am also allowed to respond repetitively.

The cumulative effect of losing that cluster of talls meant our onballers and defenders were worn down over the season by never getting first use out of stoppages and rarely getting the break that comes with contested marks forward of the contest. Winning back the footy is more physically taxing than getting clean first use. Chasing and tackling is more physically taxing than receiving and running. And that's before we start on the mental aspect. These are simple football facts. Unlike the "it's our boring game plan" crap.

Hawthorn wouldn't have won any of their 3 flags if Roughead/McEvoy/Hale had all been missing.

 

[The King!]

Reid going down for the season exposed our lack of a critical link man coming out of defence. Reid has often presented the safest pair of hands to a defender whose kick could easily become a turnover. Lack of confidence slows the pace of delivery and decision making becomes the art of multiple second guesses - further slowing the game.

I think pre injury Reid cured cancer as well as dominated in the AFL

 

[connolly]

Might as well chuck in my best 22 for next year.

Melican, Grundy, Smith
Rampe, Aliir, Lloyd
Heeney, Mills, Jones
Hayward, Franklin, Florent
Papley, Sinclair, Menzel
Naismith, Kennedy, Parker

Hewett, Reid, Ronke, McVeigh

Blakey will get in there no doubt, Clarke and Thurlow will be decent chances too. Hope that Ling and Maibaum get debuts as well, and that Dawson actually gets a go in his strongest role. Decent depth options as well I haven't mentioned in Jack, Cunningham, O'Riordan, Stoddart, Cameron.

In terms of who might be our rookie bolter, ala Papley, Lloyd, Rampe, I'm going with Tucker. Runs a sub 3 second 20m sprint, can play on talls and smalls, and was rated one of the best defenders in this draft class before he did an ACL. With any luck, he'll make us forget about Tom Langdon veeeeeery quickly.

That's a good selection. Just one question who exactly is a 32 year old half back flanker supposed to be interchanging for? Unless he plays through the middle why have him in the team/interchange. Surely Clarke fits the bill (provided he has decent form) in that he can play off a half back flank and in the middle? Spare me the generalship line - generals don't lead armies off the flanks.