2017 Ladder Predictions

[Lsta062]

I feel like people are missing some signs on Port Adelaide.

The last 2 years they had this feel about them like a place in the 8 was guaranteed for them. They obviously failed, so surely that has changed as 2014 is quite a while ago now. This year, they have access to all of their players and have a decent draw. I remind you that they have finished only 2 games out of the top 8 last year (with a couple of close losses) and had a percentage of 105.98%. The year before they finished outside of the 8 by only 1 game with a percentage of 106.83%.

Don't think they are far off as it is, so the addition of Ryder + a couple of depth players puts them in a good place to contest for a finals spot.

 

[Dons4days]

I feel like people are missing some signs on Port Adelaide.

The last 2 years they had this feel about them like a place in the 8 was guaranteed for them. They obviously failed, so surely that has changed as 2014 is quite a while ago now. This year, they have access to all of their players and have a decent draw. I remind you that they have finished only 2 games out of the top 8 last year (with a couple of close losses) and had a percentage of 105.98%. The year before they finished outside of the 8 by only 1 game with a percentage of 106.83%.

Don't think they are far off as it is, so the addition of Ryder + a couple of depth players puts them in a good place to contest for a finals spot.

There will be a lot of teams on the improve this year and apart from the return of some of their mid tier players (Ryder, Monfries, White Etc) it's hard to see where the big improvement will come from. Gold Coast have bought in Hordes of talent, the saints have recruited really well the bombers will be on the up for obvious reasons and apart from North, the top 8 teams from last year will all still be very hard to beat. I could be very wrong but that's how I see it.

 

[Young]

1. GWS
2. Sydney
3. Bulldogs
4. Geelong
5. Fremantle
6. West Coast
7. Gold Coast
8. Collingwood

9. Adelaide
10. Hawthorn
11. Melbourne
12. St. Kilda
13. Richmond
14. Port Adelaide
15. Essendon
16. North Melbourne
17. Carlton
18. Brisbane

 

[LittleG]

1. GWS
2. Sydney
3. Bulldogs
4. Geelong
5. Fremantle
6. West Coast
7. Gold Coast
8. Collingwood

9. Adelaide
10. Hawthorn
11. Melbourne
12. St. Kilda
13. Richmond
14. Port Adelaide
15. Essendon
16. North Melbourne
17. Carlton
18. Brisbane

Interesting ladder. Freo & GC the big improvers and North the big fallers. This could easily happen!

 

[ManOfClay]

Are you insinuating that the Bulldogs 'offensive unpredictability' is based solely on the third man up rule? So now that has been changed every other team will be able to read the doggies like a book? You are basically saying that now the Bont can't jump third man up, he will be slow and predictable and easy to account for, like the rest of the team. You can throw in as many big words as you want and claim to understand all these intricate strategies, but all in all that is a shocking post.

This. a baffling argument that has been repeated ad hoc by someone who deals in fantasy.

Apparently Bont is now negated and port will dominate because Ryder is back.

Expect Bont to become an Ollie Wines style plodding workhorse rather than one of the best players in the competition now he can't go third man up.

 

[Super Hans]

Is there a site that has an active ladder predictor? For some reason the AFL only do theirs at the half way point of a season.

 

[TheRoo32]

Always entertaining watching Janus venture outside of his/her natural habitat and post away from the Port board. Your gullible power groupies and disciples aren’t here to lap up all the delusion ‘Powa are awesome because I say so’ rubbish. As usual when countered by posters with reasonable and intelligent football understanding your posts are shown up for the delusional and baseless rubbish they are!

 

[Janus]

This. a baffling argument that has been repeated ad hoc by someone who deals in fantasy.

Apparently Bont is now negated and port will dominate because Ryder is back.

Expect Bont to become an Ollie Wines style plodding workhorse rather than one of the best players in the competition now he can't go third man up.

Where did I say Bont would be negated? Your words, not mine.

All *I* am saying is that his ability to contest the ruck was the driving force behind your *other* mids being able to perform to a higher level than they otherwise would have. Bontempelli will be a star no matter what happens and get his 20+ touches and 2 goals a game or whatever.

It's your other mids - the ones that relied on their opponents not knowing if Bont was going to be the one to go up for the hitout and directing the ball somewhere unexpected - that will be affected by it.

If it didn't make a difference, I'll ask the same question: Why bother doing it at all? Why would you take your best player out of the contest by making him take ruck duties?

When you can answer that, you'll understand what I'm talking about. And I think you DO understand, which is why you're trying to twist what I'm saying.

Also, I'm not even talking about Port Adelaide, so why do you keep bringing it back to them?

 

[Janus]

Always entertaining watching Janus venture outside of his/her natural habitat and post away from the Port board. Your gullible power groupies and disciples aren’t here to lap up all the delusion ‘Powa are awesome because I say so’ rubbish. As usual when countered by posters with reasonable and intelligent football understanding your posts are shown up for the delusional and baseless rubbish they are!

Awww. So cute. You've come here to be cheered up after the news that your organic growth has turned into compost with the setback of yet another hamstring injury due to increasing your training load, have you? There there, it will be alright.

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

Can the west-Horsham shitfight stop already.

 

[matey]

Many are predicting a Hawks decline due to the recent departure of some quality players and the immenant departure of some others. I like to assess a team which is running out onto the park and with other positives which are taking place. I reckon the Hawks can still be up there over the next couple of years!

Not saying that the Hawks have players that will replace Mitchell, Hodge, Burgoyne etc but more importantly the Hawks will have a team that beats most other teams.

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

Is there a site that has an active ladder predictor? For some reason the AFL only do theirs at the half way point of a season.

Fair question, but it doesn't seem so.

AFL website as uselesss as ever.

 

[LittleG]

All *I* am saying is that his ability to contest the ruck was the driving force behind your *other* mids being able to perform to a higher level than they otherwise would have. Bontempelli will be a star no matter what happens and get his 20+ touches and 2 goals a game or whatever.

It's your other mids - the ones that relied on their opponents not knowing if Bont was going to be the one to go up for the hitout and directing the ball somewhere unexpected - that will be affected by it.

A driving force that averaged 2.5 hitouts a game? That is less than 1 per quarter. You think less than 1 hitout per quarter makes a huge difference to how teams defend the bulldogs?

You sir, have no idea.

 

[ManOfClay]

It's your other mids - the ones that relied on their opponents not knowing if Bont was going to be the one to go up for the hitout and directing the ball somewhere unexpected - that will be affected by it.

If it didn't make a difference, I'll ask the same question: Why bother doing it at all? Why would you take your best player out of the contest by making him take ruck duties?

It's like you watched port needing to do that with Wines and just assume that's why the bulldogs did it. We have a very diverse midfield set up and a coach with the ability to utilise that. Unlike port.

So no third man up means we don't have that to use, but do you think that will stop liberatore from winning the ball? I know you get a hard-in for stats so go look at his clearance numbers from his best and fairest year (Bont's debut season where he was an 18 year old bit part player). Do you think elite ball winners like jack macrae and Luke Dahlhaus won't be able to get the ball just because now their opponents aren't wondering what Bont is doing? That's just fanciful rubbish.

We're still going to have a handy ruckman in Roughead at the bounce most times who will then continue to beat his man in general play. And even if he's not winning the taps then our midfield- one of the best in the comp, will just have to continue to beat their men time and time again.

You've basically applied the limitations port had in 2016 to the bulldogs. Like you think we are as rubbish as port.

 

[Janus]

A driving force that averaged 2.5 hitouts a game? That is less than 1 per quarter. You think less than 1 hitout per quarter makes a huge difference to how teams defend the bulldogs?

You sir, have no idea.

Sigh.

I'm not looking at the end result. I'm looking at the fact that sides need to be aware it's a possibility.

The more possibilities you have to cover, the more stretched your defence has to be. Allowing the offensive side to exploit it.

Is this so hard to understand?

It's like with us - as soon as Trengove came into the ruck over Lobbe, we started winning clearances. Why? Because suddenly there was a variable thrown into the equation - Trengove would concede the ruck contest but his second efforts and clearance work threw a spanner in the works until the rigors of the season wore him down.

The more options you create, the better your chances will be. It's the same with every single sport where ball movement is required to score.

 

[AusTerran]

Can the west-Horsham shitfight stop already.

but we are in awe of the East-Horsham shitfighting skills, we need the practice!

 

[ManOfClay]

It's like with us - as soon as Trengove came into the ruck over Lobbe, we started winning clearances. Why? Because suddenly there was a variable thrown into the equation - Trengove would concede the ruck contest but his second efforts and clearance work threw a spanner in the works until the rigors of the season wore him down.

The main difference is the huge chasm in quality between the bulldogs players and port's

 

[Janus]

It's like you watched port needing to do that with Wines and just assume that's why the bulldogs did it. We have a very diverse midfield set up and a coach with the ability to utilise that. Unlike port.

So no third man up means we don't have that to use, but if you think that will stop liberatore from winning the ball? Go look at his clearance numbers from his best and fairest year (Bont's debut season where he was an 18 year old bit part player). Do you think elite ball winners like jack macrae and Luke Dahlhaus won't be able to get the ball just because now their opponents aren't wondering what Bont is doing? That's just fanciful rubbish.

We're still going to have a handy ruckman in Roughead at the bounce most times who will then continue to beat his man in general play. And even if he's not winning the taps then our midfield- one of the best in the comp, will just have to continue to beat their men time and time again.

You've basically applied the limitations port had in 2016 to the bulldogs. Like you think we are as rubbish as port.

They will be able to get the ball. I'm not saying they won't. But the amount of time and space they have will be reduced, which will reduce their efficiency.

That is ALL I'm saying. It doesn't mean they are going to crumble, it doesn't meant they won't find out a way to deal with it - it just means that what happened last year isn't going to work THIS year.

The main difference is the huge chasm in quality between the bulldogs players and port's

And that's why you got over the line by 3 points.

 

[DelRe]

Sigh.

I'm not looking at the end result. I'm looking at the fact that sides need to be aware it's a possibility.

The more possibilities you have to cover, the more stretched your defence has to be. Allowing the offensive side to exploit it.

Is this so hard to understand?

It's like with us - as soon as Trengove came into the ruck over Lobbe, we started winning clearances. Why? Because suddenly there was a variable thrown into the equation - Trengove would concede the ruck contest but his second efforts and clearance work threw a spanner in the works until the rigors of the season wore him down.

The more options you create, the better your chances will be. It's the same with every single sport where ball movement is required to score.

I don't think it's not understanding it, it's challenging whether it was as dramatic a factor as you're suggesting it was. I agree with one of the earlier posts as well in that you're assessing it as if the Dogs won't respond to the rule change; as if they won't change strategy from 16 to 17; and even more curiously that the team won't improve with better players available (whereas Port will). It's OK to say a rule change will have an impact but you need to balance it against all those other factors. Just like saying Port will improve may not actually gain any ground if all sides equally improve.

 

[stefoid]

I know exactly how you play. Which is why I know your lack of a decent ruck is a bigger disadvantage than you care to admit.

Your entire style is based on the idea of both defensive accountability and offensive unpredictability. Not in style, but in who plays what role. Which mid is going to go into the contest this time? Will they go third man up? Who is going to go to Stringer if he moves up onto a wing? What if Bont drops forward?

The thing is, when the AFL brings in a rule change which basically says "this is fixed now" in terms of ruck, you lose half of that unpredictability because now opposition mids know exactly who is playing what role. Bont can't turn himself into a ruck anymore. Boyd can't simply negate the opposition ruck. So that half a second of doubt that your mids were so adept at exploiting in the phone box is now gone. Suddenly, your runners can't spread quickly because they need to wait to see if the congestion around the ball is going to pay off. Because there's no more third man up hitting the ball out into space to change up what you are doing.

Then you become a slow grinding team rather than this supposedly fast side that relies on quick ball movement to exploit the space opened up by your own contested style.

What you're going to find this year is sides will now be able to drop players just outside stoppages and use them to either exploit the slowness of your mids by catching them holding the ball, or pressure them into clanger kicks...and that's if you somehow manage to win a clearance. If the other team does, they will flick the ball out to these peripheral players, avoiding the congestion.

In conclusion, your ultra defensive style that generates all of your attacking play needs to be supplemented by a good attacking style that isn't just counter all the time. And that comes from having a decent ruck...which you don't have.

What a load of complete bollocks!

 

[ManOfClay]

And that's why you got over the line by 3 points.

I'll bite.


That was a game port threw everything at us on their home deck.

A game where we were already missing our eventual premiership captain, the eventual norm smith medallist, our best young key forward/ruck and one of our best mids went down before quarter time in Dahlhaus. And those are just the premiership players.

That is not including the players like our captain in Murphy and the competition's best first year defender in marcus Adams who were already out (Adams a late withdrawal).


We had kids like mitch honeychurch and bailey Williams in the side who have about 10 games experience between them.

But clasp onto that three point loss like it's a finals win.

 

[gangsta deluxe]

And here he'll come saying how many players they had missing that day... FWIW both teams played well yet we won away from home against a hostile crowd and your team playing their best. It was one of our best wins of the H/A season.

However, Janus, your analysis is reductionist to the point of idiocy. We know there has been a rule change, and yes, it will have an impact. To base your entire analysis on it, and exclude any agency to players or coaches is really quite odd.

 

[Pappagallo]

And here he'll come saying how many players they had missing that day...

Janus, it doesnt make your analysis any less reductionist to the point of idiocy. We know there has been a rule change, and yes, it will have an impact. To base your entire analysis on it, and exclude any agency to players or coaches is stupid though. Surely you see that?

Well in fairness we practically had no defence that day. Carlile, Hombsch, Jonas all out and Trengove had to ruck all day because we didn't have Ryder or Lobbe available.

Our full back was Logan Austin who was in 5th game or there abouts and our next tallest defender was Cam O'Shea (FMD). Anyway it's not surprising that the likes of Redpath and Package were able to jag a few.

 

[gangsta deluxe]

Well in fairness we practically had no defence that day. Carlile, Hombsch, Jonas all out and Trengove had to ruck all day because we didn't have Ryder or Lobbe available.

Our full back was Logan Austin who was in 5th game or there abouts and our next tallest defender was Cam O'Shea (FMD). Anyway it's not surprising that the likes of Redpath and Package were able to jag a few.

That's true - the point is that particular game isn't a point for one upping anyone or demonstrating who will or wont do well next year.

Both teams played to their potential and adapted to some serious injury concerns. It was an absolutely cracking contest and for me one of the best H&A games of 2016. Us 'only' beating you by 3 points was nothing to be ashamed about, but something to be proud of. It certainly isn't any example to show that we or you will not do well this year. The greater sample needs consideration for coming to any conclusions about that.

Both teams were so stuffed from the game that we both played s**t the next week, us with out worst game of 2016 against the Cats and you guys against Freo.

 

[Janus]

And here he'll come saying how many players they had missing that day...

Janus, it doesnt make your analysis any less reductionist to the point of idiocy. We know there has been a rule change, and yes, it will have an impact. To base your entire analysis on it, and exclude any agency to players or coaches is stupid though. Surely you see that?

I've already said way earlier that Beveridge has probably sorted it out and that you'll be fine. It's not like I have the Dogs not making finals or anything stupid like that. All I'm saying is that when you change something, it changes other things as well. That's it.