Analysis The Disciples of Daniel the Diminutive, elite footballer

[AFDogs]

Caleb is great. Anyone who says otherwise is wrong.

However I'd like to see him tried on the wing, in a Lachie Hunter type role where his defensive deficiencies aren't going to cost us.

 

[Munnez]

Agreed. If he's contesting 1on1, something has gone wrong somewhere else down the line. I would imagine that would piss Bev off more than him losing half a contest a game.

Good point on the tackles/pressure acts.

Another point is that I think he's been somewhat found out in other positions. Yes he can move forward/wing and be ok, but you need to actually be able to mark the ball in a contest playing up the ground. If he's up there you're essentially removing one player you can move the ball through. He just cannot compete aerially like McLean or Dale or even Dickson who has a strong base/low centre of gravity which lets him compete pretty well with a long ball. At least in the backline Daniel's deficiency in the air can be mitigated by the defensive system in place.

And potentially even more effective if we can recruit a ready made KPD to feed off or pick up the scraps from with his ground ball ability

 

[Libba39]

I have a couple of problems with Caleb down back, however I think one of the main issues is about how the coaches were using him.

When there were stoppages down back we'd mess around until the ball ended up in Calebs hands. He would then become the designated kicker. There were a few problems with this:

1. It reduced the chance for a quick transition to attack
2. Caleb's kicks were mostly accurate but usually lacked penetration.
3. It was predictable and the opposition appeared to be expecting it and were able to zone off.

I also agree with some of the other observations above, namely that there were too many bad kick outs from full back and that Caleb's direct opponent often turned into a temporary centre half forward and additional marking target.

I think he's a utility or run-with player and should not be used as a regular defender.

 

[Boyd oh Boyd]

Bevo keeps saying he was in AA form before his injury so it sounds like he's locked as a defender for a while. But I get the feeling even the coaches would rather him further up the ground where he's ending he chain instead of starting it. He's just to easy to stop everywhere else whereas in defence he has time and space to get a lot more touches. Won't be surprised if there's a bit more experimentation with his role next year as we work out our best defensive combination (Young's form + the possible inclusion of Keath provide some problems but they're good problems to have).

 

[LondonBulldog]

Daniel doesn't belong in the backline. Its becoming clearer each week. A couple of key points against.

1. Daniel prefers to stop and prop, assess the situation and then kick. Most of the time he is a good user, but by slowing it up we lose our biggest advantage fast transition from defence to attack.
2. He takes the risky short option more so then Duryea or Crozier. Turnovers costs goals, especially so with our push up high defence.
3. He is shorter and slower than the others is defence meaning he can be caught out by height and if opposition get goal side of him.

There is a spot for him in our side yet for me, its not in defence, there are better options.

 

[Yojimbo]

Can explain it quite easily....lack of sample size.

True fpcookie it is a small sample size, but the four games were not in a row they were part of a seven
game stretch that spanned round 16 to round 22.

Round 16: versus Geelong, 55 Points Conceded.
Round 17: versus Melbourne, 66 Points Conceded.

Round 18: versus St Kilda, 116 Points Conceded.
Round 19: versus Fremantle, 66 Points Conceded.
Round 20: versus Brisbane, 98 Points Conceded.

Round 21: versus Essendon, 33 Points Conceded.
Round 22: versus GWS, 65 Points Conceded.

That is a smaller overall sample size and consecutive and comes up with the numbers of:
Without CD, Conceded 219 Points or 54.75 Per Game (4 x games, 4 x W)
With CD, Conceded 280 Points or 93.33 Per Game (3 x games, 2 x L, 1 x W)

Now I agree there could be other factors at play here such as the voracity of the opponent or even the
time spent in forward half or the very need to defend in the first place, but I cannot work it out as I
don't have the necessary footage. The game is not played on a lifeless page of statistics. (Gold Jerry)

 

[stefoid]

However I'd like to see him tried on the wing, in a Lachie Hunter type role where his defensive deficiencies aren't going to cost us.

He has been hasnt he? Bev is no dummy, he is not played there for a reason.

I suspect its because he is probably the slowest player at the club to run 50m - I cant back that up with hard evidence, but he isnt quick over any distance, and his stature means he will struggle to keep pace. A painfully slow winger with no overhead ability who struggles in a 1:1 contest? it doesnt sound great no matter how good his disposal is. He needs to be played in the part of the ground with less room, and where the entire point of the game plan is to have as few aerial contests (for him) and 1:1 contests as possible.

I feel like Im taking bait here, but laying the credit for our recent defensive form at his absence? (other posts). Agreed we have decided to go quicker + longer as a team. Its not like caleb makes it back into the side and everyone goes 'oh well, back to slowly chipping the ball around I suppose'. He would kick long and quickly as much as anyone, as instructed.

We are also settling into a groove. The puny opposition scores are a result of our midfield dominance, team defence, keeping the ball in the forward line and actually kicking goals - the ball is hardly in our defensive area and when it does come in, it comes in poorly - thats the difference. If the team allows the opposition to move the ball quickly and precisely and give their forwards a chance, they score quickly like GWS in the first half. How do we blame caleb for conceding 9 first half goals against GWS?

 

[Charlie Bucket]

True fpcookie it is a small sample size, but the four games were not in a row they were part of a seven
game stretch that spanned round 16 to round 22.

Round 16: versus Geelong, 55 Points Conceded.
Round 17: versus Melbourne, 66 Points Conceded.

Round 18: versus St Kilda, 116 Points Conceded.
Round 19: versus Fremantle, 66 Points Conceded.
Round 20: versus Brisbane, 98 Points Conceded.

Round 21: versus Essendon, 33 Points Conceded.
Round 22: versus GWS, 65 Points Conceded.

That is a smaller overall sample size and consecutive and comes up with the numbers of:
Without CD, Conceded 219 Points or 54.75 Per Game (4 x games, 4 x W)
With CD, Conceded 280 Points or 93.33 Per Game (3 x games, 2 x L, 1 x W)

Now I agree there could be other factors at play here such as the voracity of the opponent or even the
time spent in forward half or the very need to defend in the first place, but I cannot work it out as I
don't have the necessary footage. The game is not played on a lifeless page of statistics. (Gold Jerry)

Could probably put it down to our whole 22 being pretty ordinary for large parts against Saints and the fact Brisbane are one of the most offensive teams in the comp who are in a 9 game win streak.

Or we could ignore that and just look at the scores ?

 

[Yojimbo]

Could probably put it down to our whole 22 being pretty ordinary for large parts against Saints and the fact Brisbane are one of the most offensive teams in the comp who are in a 9 game win streak.

Or we could ignore that and just look at the scores ?

Did you bother reading the last three lines of the post, or were you blinded by outrage.

 

[BEaston]

Some things in here are genuinely baffling and makes me wonder how much has been viewed at the games or on the TV screen where the whole scene cannot be adequately viewed.

Bev stated yesterday he was on track to All-Aust playing in the backline before his injury. A lot of the commentary at the time was similar. I agree. I also think Bev is best judged to determine root cause of defensive failures, rather than judging on a final outcome. I would rather have my money on Caleb playing down back for as long as Bev is coach than him not.

 

[BEaston]

There is a spot for him in our side yet for me, its not in defence, there are better options.

Past history would indicate otherwise

 

[BEaston]

The game is not played on a lifeless page of statistics. (Gold Jerry)

Is this irony by you Yoj?

 

[Doggy Dan]

Thread needs poll

 

[LondonBulldog]

Past history would indicate otherwise

I do go every week, so my views are based on what I see rather than stats. I would say past history indicates the backline is functioning that best it has since 2016 and that is without CD in defence. Bevo is coming around his last game CD play high defence and even started on the wing at times during the game.

 

[lachy]

Past history would indicate otherwise

This is illogical from a player development point of view.

Yes he struggled up forward for a while, though in 2016 there were quite a few games he provided good impetus down there.

In part development and also opportunity he has been moved down back in a role where he has developed his ball winning skills, including ground skills, developed his kicking under pressure, developed his defensive skills all of which with his accurate and price kicking would make him one of the most dangerous small forwards in the competition if he can translate these developed skills back in the forward line. And if it does our forward line mix that was a weakness would potentially develop into one of the most lethal in the competition.

 

[immortalmike]

Caleb has made quite a few really good spoils this year, mostly on the wing when the opposition is coming out of our 50. He’s no worse than Hunter with his defensive aerial work imo. He’s got a good leap on him and times it well.

Quite a few is putting a fair bit of mayo on it.
You're right he's no worse than Hunter in that aspect. And I would hate for Lachie to play in defense for that reason.
His leap is fine as is his timing however his body work is still a work in progress and his leap still doesn't make up for his height in my opinion.
I guess it depends on what you want out of a rebounding defender. And your tolerance for his shortcomings. Personally I'd be more comfortable with him playing wing/hf.

 

[lachy]

I do go every week, so my views are based on what I see rather than stats. I would say past history indicates the backline is functioning that best it has since 2016 and that is without CD in defence. Bevo is coming around his last game CD play high defence and even started on the wing at times during the game.

Its not only what you see LB. Stats form less than 10% of a line coaches review with a player. 90% is vision and it is what comes out of this vision that is coached and developed as both a team and individuals.

Stats are one component of a review, usually as proof of what has taken place and always to be effective must be supported by vision. Coaching moves on match day are rarely if ever made on stats alone, it is what the line and assistant coaches are seeing and passing on to the senior coach. They are critical though to coaches in Supercoach

 

[dogwatch]

Sorry Dogwatch, but you’ve created another opportunity for WB BF posters to s**t stain their credibility. This thread should be shelved with the 10 Bevo out threads that have been created this year.

At least it's not happening in the match review thread.

 

[Charlie Bucket]

At least it's not happening in the match review thread.

Touché

 

[BEaston]

This is illogical from a player development point of view.

Yes he struggled up forward for a while, though in 2016 there were quite a few games he provided good impetus down there.

In part development and also opportunity he has been moved down back in a role where he has developed his ball winning skills, including ground skills, developed his kicking under pressure, developed his defensive skills all of which with his accurate and price kicking would make him one of the most dangerous small forwards in the competition if he can translate these developed skills back in the forward line. And if it does our forward line mix that was a weakness would potentially develop into one of the most lethal in the competition.

He struggled for all of 2018 before moving back. He was seemingly on the verge of being dropped on a weekly basis in that time (go back and read the threads if you like). Since moving back he's played at close to AA level.
What's illogical about that? Just facts.

(player development would also apply to his time back btw)

 

[lachy]

Thread nee

He struggled for all of 2018 before moving back. He was seemingly on the verge of being dropped on a weekly basis in that time (go back and read the threads if you like). Since moving back he's played at close to AA level.
What's illogical about that? Just facts.

(player development would also apply to his time back btw)

I did read the threads and like all threads contained alot of opinions, not facts. There were parts of his game that needed development, mainly contests and defensive pressure.

Playing close to AA level again is peoples opinions, in these threads you will find many who disagree, they are not wrong either just because they disagree with you. Btw I am not one of them.

History only represents what has happened, he has developed significantly since he last played forward in a skill set that would make him significantly more valuable to the team in a more dangerous area, history does not prove he will be better value to the team playing back than forward at all. And yes surprisingly time played down back is a valuable method in developing a forward

 

[BEaston]

Its not only what you see LB. Stats form less than 10% of a line coaches review with a player. 90% is vision and it is what comes out of this vision that is coached and developed as both a team and individuals.

Stats are one component of a review, usually as proof of what has taken place and always to be effective must be supported by vision. Coaching moves on match day are rarely if ever made on stats alone, it is what the line and assistant coaches are seeing and passing on to the senior coach. They are critical though to coaches in Supercoach

Haha. I think you're misinformed on the use of data in modern day sport, AFL included (even though it lags others quite severely). Suggest you listen to the back Trends and ESPN footy podcasts to give you an actual indication of how they are used at club level. There is a specific employee from Champion Data at every single game whose job it is to provide line coaches with statistical and analytic reporting at every break.

You can s**t on stats all you like but at the end of the day they are only indicating what is actually happening on the field.
Any data I have provided is done so to simply back up what I'm seeing on the field. It just has a lot more weight behind it as it's an unbiased account. I could simply say what I see with the eye test (just like others have done) but at the end of the day we're all biased or clouded by judgement or just have limited understanding. Providing at least some evidence to my views gives it credence and I think the lack of any evidence for some of the opposing points here is telling.

 

[lachy]

Haha. I think you're misinformed on the use of data in modern day sport, AFL included (even though it lags others quite severely). Suggest you listen to the back Trends and ESPN footy podcasts to give you an actual indication of how they are used at club level. There is a specific employee from Champion Data at every single game whose job it is to provide line coaches with statistical and analytic reporting at every break.

You can s**t on stats all you like but at the end of the day they are only indicating what is actually happening on the field.
Any data I have provided is done so to simply back up what I'm seeing on the field. It just has a lot more weight behind it as it's an unbiased account. I could simply say what I see with the eye test (just like others have done) but at the end of the day we're all biased or clouded by judgement or just have limited understanding. Providing at least some evidence to my views gives it credence and I think the lack of any evidence for some of the opposing points here is telling.

I am not shitting on stats just pointing out they are highly over rated in isolation and in case you did miss it being so irate I did say they are used to support vision. And also I did say they are used to support what the line coaches believe they are seeing during the games and on game day, but rarely are they used to make adjustments in isolation.

And instead of listening to footy podcasts I will just stick to talking with line coaches, strategic analysts (form a couple of clubs) and those involved in the coaching side of football to determine the best use of data in AFL which you are quite rightly saying lags quite severely in the AFL as interpretations of what stats mean is actually quite difficult to quantify in our game due to the nature of our game

 

[BEaston]

I did read the threads and like all threads contained alot of opinions, not facts. There were parts of his game that needed development, mainly contests and defensive pressure.

Playing close to AA level again is peoples opinions, in these threads you will find many who disagree, they are not wrong either just because they disagree with you. Btw I am not one of them.

History only represents what has happened, he has developed significantly since he last played forward in a skill set that would make him significantly more valuable to the team in a more dangerous area, history does not prove he will be better value to the team playing back than forward at all. And yes surprisingly time played down back is a valuable method in developing a forward

Fair point. I'll say then that a lot of people had the opinion he should be dropped while playing forward in 2018. Luke Beveridge has the opinion he was playing at an AA level before his injury this year.

History represents what happened, yep and it was an instantaneous turnaround in form once he moved position. You could say he's developed and would be better now as a forward but his development as a player also applies to him playing back in the same time. We have true instance of him moving position and the immediate impact that made in his output though. You could hang hopes on his development since then but it makes no sense so think it wouldn't apply across the board.

 

[BEaston]

I am not s**tting on stats just pointing out they are highly over rated in isolation and in case you did miss it being so irate I did say they are used to support vision. And also I did say they are used to support what the line coaches believe they are seeing during the games and on game day, but rarely are they used to make adjustments in isolation.

And instead of listening to footy podcasts I will just stick to talking with line coaches, strategic analysts (form a couple of clubs) and those involved in the coaching side of football to determine the best use of data in AFL which you are quite rightly saying lags quite severely in the AFL as interpretations of what stats mean is actually quite difficult to quantify in our game due to the nature of our game

Yep and as I said they're there to support what I've seen. On a forum however when 10 people say they all saw different things, the data gives an indication of what likely really happened as it's objective.