A Worrying Trend

[Ray Button]

The following table illustrates what I see as a very worrying trend in the Lions' team disposals for the past few years, and continuing on this year:

Year Disposals Ranking Top_Team
2001 310.5 4 320
2002 299.6 5 310
2003 302.8 3 309
2004 311.7 3 315
2005 302.9 12 351
2006 334.9 12 364
2007 328.9 13 383
2008 299.4 16 409
(figures from footywire.com)

In our glory years (2001-2004), not surprisingly we were consistently in the top few teams. Subsequently, and especially as more handballs prevailed, we have fallen down the list and so far this year are stone-motherless-last with the top team getting some 33% more disposals than us.

You can make an argument for both backs and forwards to still play efficient footy without getting a ton of disposals, although increasingly a re-bounding backman should get more than a purely defensive one. But for a good mid-fielder, getting at least 20 disposals a game is becoming the pass-mark (look at the stats for the top few teams - they invariably have 6 - 8 midfielders getting 20 or more). The Lions are lucky to have 2 or 3 midfielders achieving this on a weekly basis. We desperately need a few more of our second stringers to step up here - I'm not talking only about centre clearances, but providing the running links that get the ball from our backline and deliver it up front.

Leigh must be tearing out what little hair he has left trying to find midfielders that can come up with more that 12 disposals. Hence his recent comments about players not playing up to their abilities. Hope this happens soon - Black can't be expected to do it on his own every week.

 

[Grimreepah]

Interesting that our numbers have not changed all that much over the years, it's more that the other teams are possessing the ball a lot more.

 

[dlanod]

I tend to think possession counts are an overrated metric. When you have situations like a team taking six or seven possessions to get through the centre square versus a team taking two, why is the former rated better than the latter (all things being equal, including no turnovers, etc)? That's essentially what viewing a higher number of possessions as better is doing. The initial example isn't a particularly contrived example - it's essentially short hand passes versus two kicks.

I can see its usefulness as a very broad brush metric within a single team as they are all playing the same style (in general), but in terms of comparisons between teams it tends to fall down a bit. Inside 50s, efficiency in terms of finding a teammate at the end of a kick/handball, even time in possession of the ball tend to be more valid in my eyes.

 

[Cousin Jed]

We only had about 100 possessions in total against Sydney which is deflating that average too.

(ok - 250)

 

[xplo]

The following table illustrates what I see as a very worrying trend in the Lions' team disposals for the past few years, and continuing on this year:

Year Disposals Ranking Top_Team
2001 310.5 4 320
2002 299.6 5 310
2003 302.8 3 309
2004 311.7 3 315
2005 302.9 12 351
2006 334.9 12 364
2007 328.9 13 383
2008 299.4 16 409
(figures from footywire.com)

In our glory years (2001-2004), not surprisingly we were consistently in the top few teams. Subsequently, and especially as more handballs prevailed, we have fallen down the list and so far this year are stone-motherless-last with the top team getting some 33% more disposals than us.

You can make an argument for both backs and forwards to still play efficient footy without getting a ton of disposals, although increasingly a re-bounding backman should get more than a purely defensive one. But for a good mid-fielder, getting at least 20 disposals a game is becoming the pass-mark (look at the stats for the top few teams - they invariably have 6 - 8 midfielders getting 20 or more). The Lions are lucky to have 2 or 3 midfielders achieving this on a weekly basis. We desperately need a few more of our second stringers to step up here - I'm not talking only about centre clearances, but providing the running links that get the ball from our backline and deliver it up front.

Leigh must be tearing out what little hair he has left trying to find midfielders that can come up with more that 12 disposals. Hence his recent comments about players not playing up to their abilities. Hope this happens soon - Black can't be expected to do it on his own every week.

A straight league ladder of disposals isn't quite a snapshot of success. Sure, the Cats and Hawks are up the top, but Tiges and Carlton are up in the top half too, so it's not quite that simple.

Most sides do outpossess us, but our pressure means most sides loose their disposal efficiency against us. We lead the league from Hawthorn and the Cats in effective tackles and that, paired with our ability to counterattack off that pressure, is what keeps us competitive. Playing a low possession game tends to means your forward line is less crowded with through-traffic.

That said, we do need to get more of the pill and hold it, and I think it's less about pure disposal numbers and more about lack of field marking.

Our marks per game is about 20 below the league average and 40 below the Dogs. We don't get enough easy, uncontested marks where can just keep the footy safe for a while.

Drummond helps because he can hit a bloke running like he's playing poison ball with them. Mills helps when he plays, but we need guys like Notting, Lappin and Corrie to add more of a marking dimension to their game.

 

[blynd_freddie]

A straight league ladder of disposals isn't quite a snapshot of success. Sure, the Cats and Hawks are up the top, but Tiges and Carlton are up in the top half too, so it's not quite that simple.

Most sides do outpossess us, but our pressure means most sides loose their disposal efficiency against us. We lead the league from Hawthorn and the Cats in effective tackles and that's, and our ability to counterattack off that pressure, is what keeps competitive. Playing a low possession game tends to means your forward line is less crowded with through-traffic.

Some great observations as usual xplo, might I add some might say the season stats of ’01, ’02, ’03 are now almost ancient history.

For me the current key indicators are getting the ball, contested possessions, when you have the ball the effective use or percentage of disposal errors and when they have the ball, tackles.

I don’t think a graph of Losses vs % of disposal errors is really required for our 1st five games, what do you reckon?

[FONT=Arial]           C/Poss  [/FONT][FONT=Arial]%DispErr   T[/FONT][FONT=Arial]ackles  vs    [/FONT][FONT=Arial]C/Poss  [FONT=Arial]%DispErr   T[/FONT][FONT=Arial]ackles  [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Arial]Win/Loss[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial]Rnd-01           [/FONT][FONT=Arial]28      [/FONT][FONT=Arial][COLOR=red]20.4[/COLOR]      [/FONT][FONT=Arial]77      [/FONT][FONT=Arial]WCE      [/FONT][FONT=Arial]34      [/FONT][FONT=Arial][COLOR=blue]11.4[/COLOR]      [/FONT][FONT=Arial]71      [COLOR=red]L[/COLOR][/FONT][FONT=Arial][COLOR=red]oss [/COLOR][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial]Rnd-02           [/FONT][FONT=Arial]38      [/FONT][FONT=Arial][COLOR=blue]20.0[/COLOR]      [/FONT][FONT=Arial]62      [/FONT][FONT=Arial]COL       [/FONT][FONT=Arial]33      [/FONT][FONT=Arial][COLOR=red]27.0[/COLOR]      [/FONT][FONT=Arial]73      [/FONT][FONT=Arial]Win[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial]Rnd-03           [/FONT][FONT=Arial]43      [/FONT][FONT=Arial][COLOR=red]27.0 [/COLOR]   [/FONT][FONT=Arial]80      [/FONT][FONT=Arial]SYD       [/FONT][FONT=Arial]43       [/FONT][FONT=Arial][COLOR=blue]22.3[/COLOR]      [/FONT][FONT=Arial]60     [/FONT][FONT=Arial][COLOR=red]Loss[/COLOR][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial]Rnd-04           [/FONT][FONT=Arial]39      [/FONT][FONT=Arial][COLOR=red]26.9[/COLOR]      [/FONT][FONT=Arial]74      [/FONT][FONT=Arial]PTA       [/FONT][FONT=Arial]34      [/FONT][FONT=Arial][COLOR=blue]24.2[/COLOR]      [/FONT][FONT=Arial]48      [/FONT][FONT=Arial]Win[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial]Rnd-05           [/FONT][FONT=Arial]45      [/FONT][FONT=Arial][COLOR=red]25.0[/COLOR]      [/FONT][FONT=Arial]78      [/FONT][FONT=Arial]HAW      [/FONT][FONT=Arial]39      [/FONT][FONT=Arial][COLOR=blue]18.2[/COLOR]      [/FONT][FONT=Arial]72      [/FONT][FONT=Arial][COLOR=red]Loss[/COLOR][/FONT]

 

[Cousin Jed]

West Coast had 88.6% Disposal effectiveness in Round 1?? Bloody Hell, I doubt many teams will even approach that the rest of the year.

 

[blackpowerlappin]

A straight league ladder of disposals isn't quite a snapshot of success. Sure, the Cats and Hawks are up the top, but Tiges and Carlton are up in the top half too, so it's not quite that simple.

Most sides do outpossess us, but our pressure means most sides loose their disposal efficiency against us. We lead the league from Hawthorn and the Cats in effective tackles and that, paired with our ability to counterattack off that pressure, is what keeps us competitive. Playing a low possession game tends to means your forward line is less crowded with through-traffic.

That said, we do need to get more of the pill and hold it, and I think it's less about pure disposal numbers and more about lack of field marking.

Our marks per game is about 20 below the league average and 40 below the Dogs. We don't get enough easy, uncontested marks where can just keep the footy safe for a while.

Drummond helps because he can hit a bloke running like he's playing poison ball with them. Mills helps when he plays, but we need guys like Notting, Lappin and Corrie to add more of a marking dimension to their game.

I think the stat that is most important for us is uncontested possession. Contested possession means you are winning one on ones, tackles means you are pressuring the opposition, but uncontested possessions means you are making the play, running the lines and either scoring from play or hitting inside 50 targets. Against Sydney, we were shocking, against port and collingwood we got the uncontested possessions in the last quarter, against West Coast we did well in the second half.

I thought we we re good on Sat night- just not polished enough to capitalise- Hawthorn pressured us a bit more than we did them. Thats why we need lead up forwards who present high- Mills, Copeland- for the runners to work hard and set up inside 50 marks

 

[blynd_freddie]

I think the stat that is most important for us is uncontested possession. Contested possession means you are winning one on ones, tackles means you are pressuring the opposition, but uncontested possessions means you are making the play, running the lines and either scoring from play or hitting inside 50 targets.

I agree bpl, most times but more often than not insert the Joel Bowden theory of kick it to me, I'll kick it to you if you kick it back to me, footy. Multiply by 2 or 3 minutes, 4 times a game, 8 games a round, 22 rounds a year and they can be distorted figures.

 

[blackpowerlappin]

I agree bpl, most times but more often than not insert the Joel Bowden theory of kick it to me, I'll kick it to you if you kick it back to me, footy. Multiply by 2 or 3 minutes, 4 times a game, 8 games a round, 22 rounds a year and they can be distorted figures.

I should of included - with the exception of the running down the clock minutes as displayed by Adelaide and Port Adelaide on the weekend- and the Joel Bowden style of uncontested

 

[chopperduck]

Some great observations as usual xplo, might I add some might say the season stats of ’01, ’02, ’03 are now almost ancient history.

For me the current key indicators are getting the ball, contested possessions, when you have the ball the effective use or percentage of disposal errors and when they have the ball, tackles.

I don’t think a graph of Losses vs % of disposal errors is really required for our 1st five games, what do you reckon?

totally agree with this blynd_freddie. contested possessions and hard ball gets are always up there for importance. tackles and effective use are probably a bit of a measuring stick for our team.

it doesn't matter how many possessions the team has, as long as your not turning the ball over. last year the roos played very straight forward kick down the ground type footy and it worked for them. not everyone has to handball thru the middle and have 400 pos a game.

teams like geelong have more possies than most teams a game, and still have the best effective disposal rating. thats why they win games. choose the right options and hit their targets. simple footy basics

 

[FFC + BBFC = BBFFC]

I liken it to the game strategy of an old school soccer manager. While many teams pass the ball around trying to unlock the defence, we are playing a 4-5-1 formation and hoofing it long to our lone striker up front.

In footy terms, i think those stats provide evidence to the fact that the game in general has been so dynamic in the last few years and we seem to be lagging behind. The best teams in the AFL, Geelong and Hawthorn (on this years form) are great exponents of the handballing link up play through the midfield and have proven that its a successful strategy to employ if done well. Most teams seem to be trying to replicate this quick moving, link-up style of play but for some reason Lethal is refusing to adopt it. Either that, or our players are unable to display the skill level required for this strategy to be effective.

If it rains every week, then we'll be fine but until that happens i believe we are in a fair amount of strife. Every time we start linking handballs together through the guts, we look threatening, but for some reason we often fall back into the habit of kicking it long to a forward (often browny), who has to sit under the ball, while trying to fend off multiple opponents.

 

[blynd_freddie]

I liken it to the game strategy of an old school soccer manager. While many teams pass the ball around trying to unlock the defence, we are playing a 4-5-1 formation and hoofing it long to our lone striker up front.

In footy terms, i think those stats provide evidence to the fact that the game in general has been so dynamic in the last few years and we seem to be lagging behind. The best teams in the AFL, Geelong and Hawthorn (on this years form) are great exponents of the handballing link up play through the midfield and have proven that its a successful strategy to employ if done well. Most teams seem to be trying to replicate this quick moving, link-up style of play but for some reason Lethal is refusing to adopt it. Either that, or our players are unable to display the skill level required for this strategy to be effective.

I’m imitating one of those dogs you might have won dropping balls down the throat of a clown in an old time penny arcade or traveling carnival, sitting on a crocheted mat placed along the back shelf of a 70’s Valliant; sorry cutting the crap, I’m nodding.

Strange how it has been suggested that some of the first changes to the Must Draft athletes was where Hawthorns emphasis was directed more towards the ball handling and disposal skill level of the new inductee.

Even blynd_freddie looking from the outside in can see the changes in coaching, strategies and game plans that have occurred over what seems such a short period time.

And then what of the future? First we might see coaches who have never played a game at AFL’s highest level. Then don’t be surprised if within a decade the employing of a coach who has never played the game BUT has the phenomenal ability to analyse on the run the strengths and weaknesses of their opponents plays, moves, strategies which I might add with the introduction of so many permutations and combinations due to rotations has increased tenfold.

But even if your coach had the combined skills of Ben Franklin, Albert Einstein and Nostradamus it aint worth a pinch of the proverbial if you don’t have the soldiers, not only in physical ability but yep you guessed it, a decent head on the shoulders.

Over the next decade we’ll be hearing more squeals from AFLPA due to the requests for extensive DNA samples and in-depth psychological profiling by the new breed of scientific recruiters.

As John Chaney (long time and occasionally controversial coach of Temple University basketball team) has said “one of the most important things is trying to discern the difference between meaning and effect. Knowing that both can be very elusive, the meaning of what you do and the effect of what you do”

My point? Trends are just short term changes to the current, wait long enough and it will head the other way.

 

[dlanod]

To serve as an example for my point earlier, Melbourne had 394 possessions to our 351.