Review Dees v Freo: the Good, Bad & the Fugly - Rd 16, 2018

[mrmonkey]

apart from the gawn and co in the middle dominating, there is barely anything we could take from that game.
it was like playing a vfl side - and yet they still waltzed in for a few goals with ease when they managed to get the ball forwards.

Def and Fwd lines still a shambles, but I still have hope it come come together and we can make a dent come finals time.

It's weird we seem to try move it forward at a blistering pace, almost too quickly I feel sometimes yet the forward line is always so congested. I feel the only time I've seen it work well was against Adelaide particularly in the first quarter. We can never seem to break down the best defending teams in the comp. We did well against Collingwood but got exposed badly the other way

 

[harry000]

It's weird we seem to try move it forward at a blistering pace, almost too quickly I feel sometimes yet the forward line is always so congested. I feel the only time I've seen it work well was against Adelaide particularly in the first quarter. We can never seem to break down the best defending teams in the comp. We did well against Collingwood but got exposed badly the other way

Still the only team in the comp averaging over 100 points a game. Something must be working!

 

[mrmonkey]

Still the only team in the comp averaging over 100 points a game. Something must be working!

Maybe it's harder to see because I'm seeing it from a my point of view rather than a neutral. I just feel our goals are always hard work, maybe it's just the fact we generate so many inside 50s so eventually we have to score. We probably do get a lot more goals from quick breaks but to me I feel our goals are always hard work. 3 of our losses usually are good enough to win 94, 91 and 117 I dunno we give opposition teams too much luxury particularly the saints and geelong games.

 

[KickLongTackleHard]

Maybe it's harder to see because I'm seeing it from a my point of view rather than a neutral. I just feel our goals are always hard work, maybe it's just the fact we generate so many inside 50s so eventually we have to score. We probably do get a lot more goals from quick breaks but to me I feel our goals are always hard work. 3 of our losses usually are good enough to win 94, 91 and 117 I dunno we give opposition teams too much luxury particularly the saints and geelong games.

No, you’re right. We flood our own forward line in order to lock the ball in and score. Problem is that too often we get it right but it doesn’t convert into goals and we get opened up when teams get out. It hasn’t worked against good sides and even the 1st qtr against Freo was an example.

If marks inside 50 per entry is a stat out there I’d be interested to see it. I’d guess we’d be low down the list.

 

[MarcMaverick]

I think that we need to seriously improve on our defensive work in order to stand a chance. Having a high score is great and all so long as you can restrict your opposition to a lowish score.

 

[Ablett2Garland]

 

[Topkent]

Pretty simply I'd love to know how many goals the tigers kick from within 10m compared to us. Their press is aggressive while still leaving space deep. Plus while they leave Dusty Riewoldt or Caddy 1 out we leave Garlett/Hannan Hogan or Melk.

 

[Tempy Tiger]

Oh well, at least I'm not a racist pigeon holer.

What's a pigeon holer?!

 

[Grimesy87]

No, you’re right. We flood our own forward line in order to lock the ball in and score. Problem is that too often we get it right but it doesn’t convert into goals and we get opened up when teams get out. It hasn’t worked against good sides and even the 1st qtr against Freo was an example.

If marks inside 50 per entry is a stat out there I’d be interested to see it. I’d guess we’d be low down the list.

Incorrect,we are first. 213. Next is Richmond on 195. So we average over 14 a game, Richmond 13, then back to 11 with hawthorn.

 

[DemonJim]

Incorrect,we are first. 213. Next is Richmond on 195. So we average over 14 a game, Richmond 13, then back to 11 with hawthorn.

It's the converting that we seem to have the trouble with!
If the ball is with some of our smaller forwards and our midfielders you can't count on a goal.
(hell you can't count on a goal with Hoges either sometimes!)

 

[KickLongTackleHard]

Incorrect,we are first. 213. Next is Richmond on 195. So we average over 14 a game, Richmond 13, then back to 11 with hawthorn.

That’s the raw marks inside 50 stat but checking, it doesn’t change much when divided by inside 50 count. Which I guess marries up with our high scoring against the bottom 8 sides. So it’s probably more that we can’t defend when it comes out.

 

[Cannon82]

What's a pigeon holer?!

There are two ways we can approach this...

 

[TheCount]

There are two ways we can approach this...

Probably two ways to approach the pidgeon as well

 

[Marc_Remillard]

Midfield frequency stats for the match.

There were 23 bounces

Viney 20
Jones 19 (18w, 1i)
Brayshaw 18
Stretch 17 wing
Oliver 16
Fritsch 9 wing
Petracca 9
Harmes 5 (4i, 1w)
Lewis 1 wing

Rucks:
Gawn 21
T.McDonald 2

Notes:
- For one bounce, you only started with 2 inside mids.
- The least amount of midfield time for Fristch in an analysed match (8 games) since Rd 5
- Second fewest starts for Harmes in the midfield (in an analysed game) after Rd 5
- Tom McDonald's first appearance as the back-up ruck in an analysed game since Rd 18, 2017

That's some great stats, where do you get it from?

 

[Billy Bob65]

where do you get it from?

Through my own hard work mate - they're completely self-produced. I would think Champion Data would produce something similar but they're not freely available.

 

[Marc_Remillard]

Through my own hard work mate - they're completely self-produced. I would think Champion Data would produce something similar but they're not freely available.

That's really impressive, how many games a week do you do?