Analysis Making the Top 4 and building to a flag. 4TH is IRRELEVANT, MAKE IT TOP 3

[Shaucob_Burjan]

Conceded 81 inside-50's and a zillion scoring shots to a team that was 50 points down to an also-ran the week before.

But we only finished a game and half behind them!

Lol.

Have to take a step back and think for a second that we are the worst team in the finals. Considering how weak teams are this season we have to be one of the worst 5th ladder placed sides in AFL history.

So **** any progress we've made this year in all honesty, it means nothing. This season means nothing.

 

[tribey]

Have to take a step back and think for a second that we are the worst team in the finals.

So **** any progress we've made this year in all honesty, it means nothing. This season means nothing.

Yep.

Reality is, every time we came up against a team of any quality we were scored on relatively easily - Essendon beat us by 12 goals ffs -and our vaunted repeat-entry and TIFH% metrics counted for nothing.

To be hanging our hat on numbers extracted from belting Brisbane,
Gold Coast, North, Freo, Carlton and Collingwood is so Facebook I can't even.

 

[OneGreatClub]

Dusty does meditation to stay calm on the filed. Come on get our boys on to it,

 

[Macca19]

yawn

 

[OneGreatClub]

It's not that bad

 

[tribey]

18-9th (Home For): 145W, 137W, 98W, 121W, 127W, 63W, 98W, 135W - 115.5pg
18-9th (Away For): 150W, 110W, 93W, 65L, 96W - 102.8pg

Total: 12-1-0, 110.6pg

8th-1st (Home For): 83L, 87L, 63L, 76L - 77.2pg
8th-1st (Away For): 110W, 81L, 79L, 61L, 120W, 46L - 82.8pg

Total: 2-8-0, 80.6pg

•••••

18-9th (Home Aga): 56W, 47W, 38W, 47W, 81W, 57W, 61W, 71W, 20W - 53.1pg
18-9th (Away Aga): 67W, 62W, 88L, 79W - 74.0pg

Total: 12-1-0, 59.3pg

8th-1st (Home Aga): 100L, 97L, 76L, 78L - 87.7pg
8th-1st (Away Aga): 82W, 112L, 81L, 131L, 88W, 130L - 104.0pg

Total: 2-8-0, 97.5pg

•••••

So, 5 goals worse off against sides in the top 8 in attack, and almost 40 points worse off in defence.

An average 70 points worse off. Yikes.

 

[Andre]

One that we've mentioned before, but I don't think we give enough credit (or rather detriment to) is how poor we've been as a club (going way to to our premiership defense) is keeping players 30+ fit enough to continue to contribute. We mock/rage against Hawks senior players playing for less, but they've had multiple contributing 30 plus players across their 3 flags. North barely had players under 30 contributing the last 5 years.

When was the last time we had multiple 30+ players still first 18? We may get the 4-5 years of players at their peak, but are missing the extra 3-4 years of still good performance other clubs seem to be able to extract. If you were a betting man/woman, you wouldn't be putting money on both of Boak and Gray still solid at 32 the likes of Hodge, Mitchell, Burgoyne.

Another year and add White, Monfries and Krak as where the 'haha you can't play with good form past 30 with Port!' cliff has claimed victims.

 

[Janus]

http://figuringfooty.com/2017/08/10/the-quality-and-quantity-of-shots-created-by-each-club/

Hmmmm.

 

[MrChow]

Continued list building is key. And a mixup in the midfield. Hopefully Atley/billy F and Marshall are regulars. Rocky & Motlop free agents would be gold.

But We had no injuries this year. You throw 6-10 into the mix and we are back in the 9-14 teams. Must have some cheap depth. Would keep Arch, young, Krak for this. Unless good draft prices were offered.

 

[TeeKray]

18-9th (Home For): 145W, 137W, 98W, 121W, 127W, 63W, 98W, 135W - 115.5pg
18-9th (Away For): 150W, 110W, 93W, 65L, 96W - 102.8pg

Total: 12-1-0, 110.6pg

8th-1st (Home For): 83L, 87L, 63L, 76L - 77.2pg
8th-1st (Away For): 110W, 81L, 79L, 61L, 120W, 46L - 82.8pg

Total: 2-8-0, 80.6pg

•••••

18-9th (Home Aga): 56W, 47W, 38W, 47W, 81W, 57W, 61W, 71W, 20W - 53.1pg
18-9th (Away Aga): 67W, 62W, 88L, 79W - 74.0pg

Total: 12-1-0, 59.3pg

8th-1st (Home Aga): 100L, 97L, 76L, 78L - 87.7pg
8th-1st (Away Aga): 82W, 112L, 81L, 131L, 88W, 130L - 104.0pg

Total: 2-8-0, 97.5pg

•••••

So, 5 goals worse off against sides in the top 8 in attack, and almost 40 points worse off in defence.

An average 70 points worse off. Yikes.

It stands to reason that our performance should be better against 9th-18th placed teams than against 1st-8th placed teams. The extent to which that is the case is the real issue.

Stats aside, I think the whole 'Port can't play against top 8 teams' thing is overstated.

Adelaide - Played twice. Could have beaten them on the first occasion with better finishing in the last quarter. Smashed on the second attempt.
Geelong - Would have beaten them at their fortress if not for disgracefully biased umpiring.
Richmond - Could have beaten them with better finishing.
GWS - Played well for three quarters, well beaten in the last quarter. Ryder and playing an extra tall defender may have made the difference.
Sydney - Beat them in our only meeting (admittedly they started the season poorly but it's still our only sample size).
Essendon - Destroyed in our only meeting.
West Coast - Beat them away, outplayed them at home twice but kicked for goal poorly and lost narrowly on both occasions.

So basically, it's more a case of missing opportunities and being our own worst enemy than actually performing poorly. The Essendon game and the second Showdown were our only outright poor performances against top 8 teams. And surely every team is allowed a mulligan or two?

For us, it's more about the marginal gains that REH talks about. We are not that far off but we need to polish our game up around the edges and make small tweaks to game style and personnel to make sure that we're on the right end of these close results rather than the wrong end.

 

[tribey]

It stands to reason that our performance should be better against 9th-18th placed teams than against 1st-8th placed teams. The extent to which that is the case is the real issue.

Stats aside, I think the whole 'Port can't play against top 8 teams' thing is overstated.

Adelaide - Played twice. Could have beaten them on the first occasion with better finishing in the last quarter. Smashed on the second attempt.
Geelong - Would have beaten them at their fortress if not for disgracefully biased umpiring.
Richmond - Could have beaten them with better finishing.
GWS - Played well for three quarters, well beaten in the last quarter. Ryder and playing an extra tall defender may have made the difference.
Sydney - Beat them in our only meeting (admittedly they started the season poorly but it's still our only sample size).
Essendon - Destroyed in our only meeting.
West Coast - Beat them away, outplayed them at home twice but kicked for goal poorly and lost narrowly on both occasions.

So basically, it's more a case of missing opportunities and being our own worst enemy than actually performing poorly. The Essendon game and the second Showdown were our only outright poor performances against top 8 teams. And surely every team is allowed a mulligan or two?

For us, it's more about the marginal gains that REH talks about. We are not that far off but we need to polish our game up around the edges and make small tweaks to game style and personnel to make sure that we're on the right end of these close results rather than the wrong end.

Beyond raw win/loss, an average 68-point negative turnaround against fellow finalists is deplorable and doesn't vouch for the mythology we're on the right track with our systems whatsoever.

 

[TeeKray]

Beyond raw win/loss, an average 68-point negative turnaround against fellow finalists is deplorable and doesn't vouch for the mythology we're on the right track with our systems whatsoever.

I think that says more about the wins than the losses. Our wins against the bottom teams were absurdly huge. This was probably aided by the fact that 8 of our 10 non Showdown home games were against teams from the bottom 9, giving us ample opportunity to run the score up and have huge wins against poor teams.

 

[tribey]

I think that says more about the wins than the losses. Our wins against the bottom teams were absurdly huge. This was probably aided by the fact that 8 of our 10 non Showdown home games were against teams from the bottom 9, giving us ample opportunity to run the score up and have huge wins against poor teams.

That's exactly the crux of it for me.

Our wins have been so dominant, so imposing, so effortless, with all our metrics such as TIFH%/repeat entries/tackles inside50 in the stratosphere, we've been seduced into believing what we're doing is bang on. Be it the improvised Dixon+midget forward line, or the undersized backline thing, when it works there's nothing about it that on the surface, suggests it's a blind alley.

But when we play anyone good, the scoring dries up, each goal feels like it was mined out of a quarry by hand, and the defence is on a hiding to nothing, often buckling and giving up strings of goals in succession with barely a whimper. It's like night and day. Harlem Globetrotters against the Brisbanes, Gold Coasts and Freos, purified also-rans against the Melbournes and Essendons, let alone Adelaide.

But all the while we keep hearing things like '2nd best attack, 2nd best defence, 14 wins', as if we're on the up-and-up regardless.

It's a fool's errand, but because we are so wildly effective against poordinary teams, it's encouraging us to pursue, refine and perfect systems that demonstrably do not work against good teams to our longer-term detriment. Which I think is why the coaches are often perplexed by our failures and repeat the mantra of "we've just got to work harder". We didn't hit our usual TIFH numbers today. We didn't hit our usual number of repeat entries. Well yeah, we weren't playing a team of numpties from Queensland or Carlton sans Kreuzer today. GWS can, you know, play.

Are we even coming at the fact that what we're doing isn't effective beyond a certain point? We're mowing down swordsmen with a machine gun, but can't understand why our bullets are bouncing off tanks.

tl;dr #postmidnightramble

 

[Nemisis]

Another year and add White, Monfries and Krak as where the 'haha you can't play with good form past 30 with Port!' cliff has claimed victims.

Yeah was is this all about? Although Westhoff looks like breaking this drought.

 

[PA88]

That's exactly the crux of it for me.

Our wins have been so dominant, so imposing, so effortless, with all our metrics such as TIFH%/repeat entries/tackles inside50 in the stratosphere, we've been seduced into believing what we're doing is bang on. Be it the improvised Dixon+midget forward line, or the undersized backline thing, when it works there's nothing about it that on the surface, suggests it's a blind alley.

But when we play anyone good, the scoring dries up, each goal feels like it was mined out of a quarry by hand, and the defence is on a hiding to nothing, often buckling and giving up strings of goals in succession with barely a whimper. It's like night and day. Harlem Globetrotters against the Brisbanes, Gold Coasts and Freos, purified also-rans against the Melbournes and Essendons, let alone Adelaide.

But all the while we keep hearing things like '2nd best attack, 2nd best defence, 14 wins', as if we're on the up-and-up regardless.

It's a fool's errand, but because we are so wildly effective against poordinary teams, it's encouraging us to pursue, refine and perfect systems that demonstrably do not work against good teams to our longer-term detriment. Which I think is why the coaches are often perplexed by our failures and repeat the mantra of "we've just got to work harder". We didn't hit our usual TIFH numbers today. We didn't hit our usual number of repeat entries. Well yeah, we weren't playing a team of numpties from Queensland or Carlton sans Kreuzer today. GWS can, you know, play.

Are we even coming at the fact that what we're doing isn't effective beyond a certain point? We're mowing down swordsmen with a machine gun, but can't understand why our bullets are bouncing off tanks.

tl;dr #postmidnightramble

Yep. Can believe this summary. Stats driven these coaches are. This statement "... each goal feels like it was mined out of a quarry by hand ..." is spot on. My mate says it feels like we choose to use the shovel instead of the bobcat. Of course Hinkley's mantra is that everything has to be hard and tough.

 

[Janus]

That's exactly the crux of it for me.

Our wins have been so dominant, so imposing, so effortless, with all our metrics such as TIFH%/repeat entries/tackles inside50 in the stratosphere, we've been seduced into believing what we're doing is bang on. Be it the improvised Dixon+midget forward line, or the undersized backline thing, when it works there's nothing about it that on the surface, suggests it's a blind alley.

But when we play anyone good, the scoring dries up, each goal feels like it was mined out of a quarry by hand, and the defence is on a hiding to nothing, often buckling and giving up strings of goals in succession with barely a whimper. It's like night and day. Harlem Globetrotters against the Brisbanes, Gold Coasts and Freos, purified also-rans against the Melbournes and Essendons, let alone Adelaide.

But all the while we keep hearing things like '2nd best attack, 2nd best defence, 14 wins', as if we're on the up-and-up regardless.

It's a fool's errand, but because we are so wildly effective against poordinary teams, it's encouraging us to pursue, refine and perfect systems that demonstrably do not work against good teams to our longer-term detriment. Which I think is why the coaches are often perplexed by our failures and repeat the mantra of "we've just got to work harder". We didn't hit our usual TIFH numbers today. We didn't hit our usual number of repeat entries. Well yeah, we weren't playing a team of numpties from Queensland or Carlton sans Kreuzer today. GWS can, you know, play.

Are we even coming at the fact that what we're doing isn't effective beyond a certain point? We're mowing down swordsmen with a machine gun, but can't understand why our bullets are bouncing off tanks.

tl;dr #postmidnightramble

Why don't you go through our scoring efficiency against the top eight sides vs the bottom eight and see what the real issue is?

Actually, I've done it for you - against top eight sides it's something like 49% from 23 scoring shots from 55 inside 50s per game.

In other words - 42% of our inside 50 entries are converted into scoring shots (which is average)...but less than half of those are goals. And that comes from the fact that when we turn the ball over, we don't have an ability to convert a counter attack into a goal 80% of the time like the top sides do. Which is nothing more than conversion under pressure.

In short, our goals look harder against quality opposition because we don't convert the easy goal opportunities that we create from defence. We are relying on turning the ball over in the front half and through the midfield for our score and not getting those fast break goals where we have players streaming into an undermanned 50.

Look at West Coast in the EF - 18 scoring shots from 46 inside 50s (39%) at a conversion of 66.7%. Us? 26 scoring shots from 63 inside 50s (41%) at a conversion of 38.5%.

It's only not effective because we aren't being efficient and hitting the scoreboard when we've got lay down goals 30m in front. Nothing more.

Fix the delivery inside 50 when we turn the ball over in the front half, and fix the conversion rate when we turn the ball over through midfield/defence and we're fine.

 

[Macca19]

Our forward movement is a mess and has been for a couple of years. Made worse this year with Lades re-creation of the Motlop/Ebert ball inside 50. But, our defensive work for the large part was fine.

Even in losses against West Coast twice, Richmond and to a lesser extent Melbourne and Geelong, we kept them to what should have been losing scores. In each of those games we dominated large periods of the game but couldnt get it on the scoreboard.

I'm not going to spend the next 6 months crying in the corner and acting like all is lost and we are completely helpless because I dont believe that is the case at all. As i've said, I think we took steps forward this year. Were we great? No. Did it fail often? Yes. Did we create some systems that can work long term and be part of a successful side? Yes.

- Fix the midfield structures by bringing in more personnel that excel in stoppages and stop the early game leakage
- Get the skill level up to AFL standard, even if it means more favourites playing reserves if they can't hit targets
- Fix the forward structure to ensure that we are having shots at goal from the best possible angles to kick goals more often than not

We fix those three things and I think we can make top 4. Not just make top 4 but be a genuine legitimate premiership threat next year.

 

[Sewer de Lance]

Unless statistics are viewed and understood in there correct context, they are meaningless. Let's use horse racing as an example of how statistics can be so misleading.

Bookies never formulate a horses winning chances (odds) on loosely critiqued data. For instance, you can have a horse that has won 3 races in a row start at odds of 25/1, and in that same race have a horse start at 3/1 who has been unplaced in all its recent runs.

Winning form is good form right? Not necessarily. When you put the winning form in proper context you notice that all it's wins have been in mid week company, run at average times, carrying a light weight etc. When you dissect the horse at 3/1 you notice it has run all its races in open class, carrying big weights, decent times etc.

We were fortunate this year to have a dream run with both the fixture and injuries. Next season in terms of the fixture, we will be going up in class.

Having said that, I haven't been this excited by a group of youngsters at our club since our inception into the AFL. They have enormous potential and upside, and will form the nucleus of a very good side in the coming years.

What this side now needs is:

1) getting much needed experience and games into our next generation.
2) formulating a more direct forward entry plan. Playing Frampton alongside Charlie and Marshall should allow us to straighten up.
3) Find a pure crumbling forward who is reliable in front of the sticks.
4) Find a genuine half forward with good foot skills.

 

[Macca19]

We finished in the same fixture tier we did last year

 

[Andre]

We finished in the same fixture tier we did last year

Yep. You can pencil it in next year, we're getting the two rather than one top 6 double ups. There's no way the AFL isn't scheduling us to play West Coast twice. How hard our draw is comes down then to whether they let the remaining games fall at random from the middle and bottom six or they want to screw us. Screw us and we get Melbourne and Essendon from the middle six. And Carlton (away) from the bottom six (because you just know we'll have the umpires trying to get that over the line for them yet again).

Assuming it's not a 'let's roger Port' directed draw, the difficulty next year goes up or down depending whether we get more of our top 8 games at home. We had most away (Adelaide obviously excluded) this year. GWS, Essendon, Geelong of the top 8, if we'd had at home we'd have won IMO. Our skewed more top 8 games away was worth one more loss.

 

[Pedro59]

Our forward movement is a mess and has been for a couple of years. Made worse this year with Lades re-creation of the Motlop/Ebert ball inside 50. But, our defensive work for the large part was fine.

Even in losses against West Coast twice, Richmond and to a lesser extent Melbourne and Geelong, we kept them to what should have been losing scores. In each of those games we dominated large periods of the game but couldnt get it on the scoreboard.

I'm not going to spend the next 6 months crying in the corner and acting like all is lost and we are completely helpless because I dont believe that is the case at all. As i've said, I think we took steps forward this year. Were we great? No. Did it fail often? Yes. Did we create some systems that can work long term and be part of a successful side? Yes.

- Fix the midfield structures by bringing in more personnel that excel in stoppages and stop the early game leakage
- Get the skill level up to AFL standard, even if it means more favourites playing reserves if they can't hit targets
- Fix the forward structure to ensure that we are having shots at goal from the best possible angles to kick goals more often than not

We fix those three things and I think we can make top 4. Not just make top 4 but be a genuine legitimate premiership threat next year.

Excellent post
Agree with all parts of it

Last year we have improved our kick ins and defence
We also have unearthed some new players

 

[FishingRick04]

I think that says more about the wins than the losses. Our wins against the bottom teams were absurdly huge. This was probably aided by the fact that 8 of our 10 non Showdown home games were against teams from the bottom 9, giving us ample opportunity to run the score up and have huge wins against poor teams.

I've been harping on for years our players lack composure and make poor decisions.

I just feel our experienced players will keep doing this until they are churned. Is Jackson the right player to churn? I'm not sure on that one.

My MAIN composure culprits are:
Broadbent
Hartlett
Westhoff
Boak

 

[TeeKray]

Yeah was is this all about? Although Westhoff looks like breaking this drought.

Lol of course he will. Justin Westhoff, contravening all natural laws of football since 2007.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

3) Find a pure crumbling forward who is reliable in front of the sticks.....

I reckon Ken wants a small forward who positions himself for defensive pressure rather than sets himself up to crumb. Neade should be that player and should have kicked about 200 goals in his career by now.

 

[PAFC66]

I hope we get a tough fixture and see where we are really at. No point coasting through to the finals anymore.