Analysis Geelong 2017 Defence

[Willo_]

I

It's a myth Willo carried over from his early years.
Some 2016 figures I found.The best of the best.At the half way mark 2016

1. Tom Lonergan (Geel) – Disposal efficiency: 92.5% – Games: 7
2. Scott Thompson (NM) – Disposal efficiency: 89.3% – Games: 8
3. Eric Mackenzie (WCE) – Disposal efficiency: 88.7% – Games: 9
4. Dale Morris (WB) – Disposal efficiency: 88.4% – Games: 9
5. Tim O’Brien (Haw) – Disposal efficiency: 87.9% – Games: 6
6. Harry Taylor (Geel) – Disposal efficiency: 87.9% – Games: 9
7. Kyle Cheney (Adel) – Disposal efficiency: 87.7% – Games: 9
8. Lynden Dunn (Melb) – Disposal efficiency: 87.3% – Games: 4
9. Alex Rance (Rich) – Disposal efficiency: 86.8% – Games: 7
10. Michael Johnson (Fre) – Disposal efficiency: 86.5% – Games: 5
11. Neville Jetta (Melb) – Disposal efficiency: 86.2% – Games: 8
12. Kade Simpson (Carl) – Disposal efficiency: 85.8% – Games: 9
13. Jason Johannisen (WB) – Disposal efficiency: 85.7% – Games: 4
14. Jake Kolodjashnij (Geel) – Disposal efficiency: 85.7% – Games: 6
15. Shane Mumford (GWS) – Disposal efficiency: 85.6% – Games: 9
16. James Frawley (Haw) – Disposal efficiency: 85.6% – Games: 8
17. Lachie Henderson (Geel) – Disposal efficiency: 85.6% – Games: 8
18. Michael Johnson (Fre) – Disposal efficiency: 85.5% – Games: 4
19. Grant Birchall (Haw) – Disposal efficiency: 85.4% – Games: 9
20. Michael Hartley (Ess) – Disposal efficiency: 85.4 – Games: 8

I base it off my own impressions mate.. I'm not and have never been a stats guy, but disposal efficiency is not an accurate measurement for me.

I'm talking almost misses, kicks over heads that we still get but are under the pump etc

It is of course just my opinion

 

[you pick one]

I

I base it off my own impressions mate.. I'm not and have never been a stats guy, but disposal efficiency is not an accurate measurement for me.

I'm talking almost misses, kicks over heads that we still get but are under the pump etc

It is of course just my opinion

Jesus three quarters of the current side are guilty of that.

 

[catempire]

I'm with Willo_ on Doms as a kick. The silver lining is he knows his limitations very well so never does anything other than kick sideways to an unmarked opponent or long down the line (which is always counted as an efficient disposal by the way). But it stifles our ball movement because he is incapable of taking a risk or kicking to a dangerous target.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

I'm with Willo_ on Doms as a kick. The silver lining is he knows his limitations very well so never does anything other than kick sideways to an unmarked opponent or long down the line (which is always counted as an efficient disposal by the way). But it stifles our ball movement because he is incapable of taking a risk or kicking to a dangerous target.

Like a central defender in football. High DE% due to never taking the risky options.
Misleading to say the least.

 

[Turbocat]

On Lonergans kicking .. I have thought that with ball in hand and with time he is a technically good kick.. When he played forward in 08 , he had a good run of goals/behinds... but im not sure he is a great kick under duress or limited time to hit up a team mate. A bit like Kolo..I think he is a good technical kick but has made some clangers when a bit rushed.

 

[you pick one]

I'm with Willo_ on Doms as a kick. The silver lining is he knows his limitations very well so never does anything other than kick sideways to an unmarked opponent or long down the line (which is always counted as an efficient disposal by the way). But it stifles our ball movement because he is incapable of taking a risk or kicking to a dangerous target.

Are you seriously suggesting players should be taking risks and kicking to dangerous targets at that end of the ground?

 

[catempire]

Are you seriously suggesting players should be taking risks and kicking to dangerous targets at that end of the ground?

Absolutely necessary to move the ball with any speed out of the backline.

 

[nohairandfair]

Look, these are all fair points but for me it comes back to Hawkins needing another tall to support him. So putting our smalls and mediums to one side who is going to be that other tall to support Hawkins?

To me it seems pretty clear that Stanley isn't up to it on a permanent basis so that only really leaves Black or House that might be capable of filling that role. There is definite doubt as to whether either of these two guys will be able to provide enough support to Hawkins on a regular basis aswell. If one of these two guys can fill that role then great. That changes things. But if not we're going to see more of the same that happened in 2016 unless we move one of Taylor or Henderson forward and I don't want to see the same things happening again in 2017 cos it will drive me crazy.

We don't have the talent in smalls and mediums that Hawthorn do and we need to accept that rather than relying on inferior players to get the job done on a regular basis.

It will also help to provide better balance to our backline which needs addressing aswell so to me it just makes sense to flip one of those two defenders forward.

It's a difficult one. I rate HarryT and Henderson highly and both are very capable of playing cameo forward roles when the situation demands. However based on what we have seen they are unlikely to be miraculously imbued with the leg speed, agility and general forward smarts that you associate with an effective key forward.

Ask any Carlton supporter on how they rated Henderson as a forward and you're unlikely to hear much praise. Natural defender is how Chris Judd described him.

HarryT can take a great grab as we all know but below his knees he is a bit fumbly and unlikely to win too many contested ball situations. He's a veteran now and moves a bit like the Queen Mary at times and combined with Hawkins we would be susceptible to quick opposition transitions out of our forward area.

There a pros/cons in all of this and it kind of screwed us over particularly in the finals as it was never sorted out in 2016 and Sydney made us pay for that lack of structure and cohesive game play.

IMHO Stanley, Black, House and even possibly Blicavs would be the better options to develop in this role for 2017 and beyond.

 

[Lana]

Are you seriously suggesting players should be taking risks and kicking to dangerous targets at that end of the ground?

Some players especially if our guys up the ground are expecting it but not Lonergan, should be either a safe switch or long down the line from himhim

 

[David the Cat]

Some players especially if our guys up the ground are expecting it but not Lonergan, should be either a safe switch or long down the line from himhim

I need a little more time to work out exactly what your saying here.......

 

[Lana]

I need a little more time to work out exactly what your saying here.......

I really shouldn't post while I'm on a walk

YPO was suggesting that we shouldn't take risks when we have the ball deep in our defence in response to Catempire criticising Lonergan's tendency to attempt safe disposals that don't really improve our position.

My position is that you can take risks from deep defence under the right circumstances, a key requirement being that the team was planning to move the ball in a risky manner in the "gameplan". If the players who are being targeted in the risky action are expecting it to be kicked to them in those types of situations they are more likely to position themselves in the right places to win any ball in dispute then their opponents who are reacting to the kick as it happens.

However I don't want Lonergan taking the risky option in any circumstance

 

[cynical]

The lack of risk taking from the backline is a serious problem, just makes forward entries a lot harder.

With a 1 on 1 beast like Hawkins we should be moving the ball as quick as possible.

We just cant do it when we play such a tall backline.

Chipping it around only works for teams like Hawthorn who have multiple options who lead up the ground and the skills to hit them on the chest.

 

[you pick one]

I really shouldn't post while I'm on a walk

YPO was suggesting that we shouldn't take risks when we have the ball deep in our defence in response to Catempire criticising Lonergan's tendency to attempt safe disposals that don't really improve our position.

My position is that you can take risks from deep defence under the right circumstances, a key requirement being that the team was planning to move the ball in a risky manner in the "gameplan". If the players who are being targeted in the risky action are expecting it to be kicked to them in those types of situations they are more likely to position themselves in the right places to win any ball in dispute then their opponents who are reacting to the kick as it happens.

However I don't want Lonergan taking the risky option in any circumstance

A key, that's the key and not in Scotts game plan right now,coming out of the backline particularly deep most time we will either have to stop and prop, go sideways or kick backwards at some stage to give our players time to get forward of the ball after they have all pushed inside the oppositions forward line.
Early in games and quarters we will use the switch across the ground to buy the time but when the legs leaden the spread stops and it's back to the above,we need some new ideas.To many talls and to many players with with either to many preseason(although getting better)or not enough preseason to play the run and gun high risk high reward footy we all love just yet.

 

[you pick one]

The lack of risk taking from the backline is a serious problem, just makes forward entries a lot harder.

With a 1 on 1 beast like Hawkins we should be moving the ball as quick as possible.

We just cant do it when we play such a tall backline.

Chipping it around only works for teams like Hawthorn who have multiple options who lead up the ground and the skills to hit them on the chest.

Take the risk run and gun the ball out of deep back and you will see nothing in front of you as you cruise past Hawkins at half back who has pushed up the ground for the kick in.We might as well not have Tom with our game plan.

 

[Willo_]

Absolutely necessary to move the ball with any speed out of the backline.

Spot on, calculated risks are the key.
The best users/players know when to pull the trigger and do it, and it can open up a side of the ground or mile of clear water to work in

 

[you pick one]

Spot on, calculated risks are the key.
The best users/players know when to pull the trigger and do it, and it can open up a side of the ground or mile of clear water to work in

The down side is you can gift Rohan the easiest couple of goals he will ever kick.Enright and Duncan the culprits I think.

 

[you pick one]

Absolutely necessary to move the ball with any speed out of the backline.

First priority clear the 50 and then attack off half back you don't want the pill coming back over your head..

 

[catempire]

First priority clear the 50 and then attack off half back you don't want the pill coming back over your head..

It's more complicated than that. It's risk-reward. Take it slow and low-risk and you will likely retain possession but allow the opposition to setup ahead of you and make scoring hard (or impossible). Take a risk and try to hit a more difficult option and you can break open the opposition and create easier scoring options.

 

[cynical]

It's more complicated than that. It's risk-reward. Take it slow and low-risk and you will likely retain possession but allow the opposition to setup ahead of you and make scoring hard (or impossible). Take a risk and try to hit a more difficult option and you can break open the opposition and create easier scoring options.

It is also better to improve on risky plays by practicing them.

Low risk football just results in players running out of options as zones get implemented. It breaks down eventually especially against higher skilled teams.

You have to make the most optimum plays most of the time and the most optimum play from defence is to move the ball quickly to the forwardline.

We should be playing 70-80% quick ball movement from defence instead of the 80%+ slow ball movement we currently have.

Break the lines and you have a lot more attacking options, chip it around and you get trapped by a zone.

 

[Lana]

A key, that's the key and not in Scotts game plan right now,coming out of the backline particularly deep most time we will either have to stop and prop, go sideways or kick backwards at some stage to give our players time to get forward of the ball after they have all pushed inside the oppositions forward line.
Early in games and quarters we will use the switch across the ground to buy the time but when the legs leaden the spread stops and it's back to the above,we need some new ideas.To many talls and to many players with with either to many preseason(although getting better)or not enough preseason to play the run and gun high risk high reward footy we all love just yet.

I don't think height is the issue, We always had a tall defense and it didn't stop us from playing on quickly from defense from 2007 to 2013. Fitness is certainly an issue but I don't think it from a lack of effort, just a reflection of two things, our age profile in the 22 and injuries, some of them have limited players temporarily but others prevent them from reaching a certain level of fitness (guys like Menzel and Hawkins will always be fighting to be on the pitch at 80% of their ability while our guys who missed last years pre-season or had long injruies during the year will most likely be able to get fitter than they were). Our slow ball movement is one of those things protects our defense, when the other team gets quick and direct I50 our defense falls apart so by being deliberate with our ball use we are less likely to turn the ball over in our defensive half or in a position that allows the other side an opportunity for a quick counter attack . What happened last year is that our midfield protected our defense, it limited the other teams ability to get the ball in their F50 and did a decent job in preventing the other team from getting quality I50s. In most of the games we lost our midfield was off in the early quarters which gave the other team a window to gain ascendancy and some mental breathing room. In general it didn't matter if we gave the other team a 3rd quarter rally since we were already in a strong enough position to outlast them. I'd also contend that our small ball movement was why our 4th quarters were so strong this year.

I think for the most part our ball movement will remain slow but there will be times where our players will have more licence to be more aggressive. Last year when our midfield wasn't working we tendered to bench our ruckmen more and have Blicavs go third man up more around the ball. It's had to say how effective this particular move was since we just don't have the detail of stats to determine it but from memory in the games we gave up an early lead or than the two against Sydney we generally won the last three quarters. Not that I'm attributing the fight backs that that switch but it was something we did to mix something up in the midfield battle that could go on to help which would not have too many risks. With the removal of the 3rd man up, we'll have to find another way to change the momentum of the game it will probably be us changing the tempo of the game. Which comes with the risk that it opens the flood gates.

 

[Ricketz]

Agree with Daz nice work,two points, Bartel they were always going to get him to 300 games and from then on it was to late to change things up.

"Given that I think our midfield delivery to our forwards was more the cause of the forward line dysfunction last year than lack of quality forwards,"

Far to simplistic in my opinion,potential A graders Hawkins and Menzel operating at B+ and no one else, and very difficult for midfielder to hit forwards on the chest with bullet like passes if they are not there to lead because they have pushed to far up the ground.
The forward line needs a complete over haul including game plan.

Agree re Bartel.

You are right about my comment on the forward line dysfunction - too simplistic, I'll have another crack.

Running patterns and positional awareness seemed a bit haphazard at times which would make it difficult to kick to a lead.
Also the methodically slow transition from the backline made it difficult for the midfielders to get it through to the forwards before the opp defence was set. And when we did spill it forward, our zone defence saw pretty much the whole team forward of centre, producing lots of inside 50's to a heavily congested forward line.
Lastly, our conversion was average, when we had ball in hand.

All of these issues should be able to be corrected, and if they aren't fixed I just can't see how a defender will operate better in a dysfunctional forwardline than career forwards.

I think we definitely need Stanley to have an injury free year and Black to step up, but would rather they be given the chance to provide consistent targets and goals rather than Taylor or Henderson.

 

[speedybundy]

Spot on, calculated risks are the key.
The best users/players know when to pull the trigger and do it, and it can open up a side of the ground or mile of clear water to work in

That's something that Andrew Mackies been very good at (especailly in that centre square - defensive 30 type range), but seemed to lack a little bit this year.

I think our ball movement out of the back 50 hasn't been too bad, it's more so been that movement from defensive 50 to the wing. When we try to execute the switch it's either too short/slow, when we (rarely) try and come into the middle there's no run and carry coming from behind. Both probably characteristics of a taller backline.

 

[dazbroncos]

I'm with Willo_ on Doms as a kick. The silver lining is he knows his limitations very well so never does anything other than kick sideways to an unmarked opponent or long down the line (which is always counted as an efficient disposal by the way). But it stifles our ball movement because he is incapable of taking a risk or kicking to a dangerous target.

No doubt he's looking for a smaller better skilled player as first option - and I reckon the skills requirement over the duration of his career has increased too.

KPD's could get away with not being great kicks - as they were only getting 10 touches a game. The game has changed - perhaps over longer than his career tbh - and now elite skills or at least better than average - are the norm.

Every touch counts.

And IMO the time Kolo gets done playing it will have evolved further.
Point being, what Domsy could get away with 8 years ago now is less acceptable from a skills perspective.

And IMO, Kolo, Thurls, 2E et al are being trained to be more and more precise with their skills accordingly - meaning the kids coming thru are having to be more skilled to make the junior grades.

Tenace was top 10 pick that could not really kick. Now he'd be lucky to be Top 50.

GO Catters

 

[Willo_]

That's something that Andrew Mackies been very good at (especailly in that centre square - defensive 30 type range), but seemed to lack a little bit this year.

I think our ball movement out of the back 50 hasn't been too bad, it's more so been that movement from defensive 50 to the wing. When we try to execute the switch it's either too short/slow, when we (rarely) try and come into the middle there's no run and carry coming from behind. Both probably characteristics of a taller backline.

Yep i absolutely agree.. especially Re: Mackie

His kicking dropped off this year, dramatically in the 2nd half of the year... and it hurts his and our game big time

 

[dazbroncos]

Yep i absolutely agree.. especially Re: Mackie

His kicking dropped off this year, dramatically in the 2nd half of the year... and it hurts his and our game big time

So did he and Duncan have OP?

Both have been mooted as suffering from poor disposal % and KE last year...

I have no info to suggest that is the case, but once a reasonable kick becoming a poor kick... there usually has to be reason - the obvious fitness ( as in endurance etc ) aside.

Go Catters