Analysis Post match Discussion

[Big Bryza]

Just watched the game and I thought it was a really poor game to watch.

Can't say there were any stand outs. I was impressed by Degoey and Crisp but apart from them it really was a meh game for me. Fasolo also played well and if I see him played in the backline again I will spew up!

I thought Adams would play good because he has been talking himself up but he was terrible and so was Greenwood. Varcoe and Freeman had shockers as well.

I don't really care because it's a NAB Cup game and this win doesn't mean much. Hawthorn had over dozen premiership payers out tonight we had like four genuine good players out but I hate them so much I am happy with any win against them.

Wowee... And that is why you shouldn't take drugs.

 

[Mkcaptain]

I'm a huge fan of Adams but when he gets the ball you can't help but feel nervous. I think his poor disposal is definitely amplified by poor decision making. He definitely needs to learn his limits when coming out of the back half.

 

[Apex36]

Ball had adequate disposal.

Taylor Adams does not.

Comprehend?

I would argue that Adams has adequate disposal, but his decision making needs to improve when he's kicking.

Balls disposal was no better than Adams in reality, but he was a very good decision maker with ball in hand.

 

[Sloth]

I wondered, whilst I read your post if the term "**** Smokers" would be auto corrected by the auto thought police...
We shall see I suppose.
Rhymes with "Dock Chokers".

What I wrote rhymes with HuttBurt

 

[Boris the Contradiction]

Ball had adequate disposal.

Taylor Adams does not.

Comprehend?

I think I now know who it is that is accepting of mediocrity.

This is the last I will say, because this is becoming very boring and I do not want to derail the thread. You stated that Adams is held to a different standard to Kennedy and Thomas with respect to his disposal, because he is seen as Luke Ball's replacement. This suggests that Luke Ball's disposal was of a quality we would hope our players possessed, or that players would aspire to have. Whether you think Ball's disposal was poor or simply adequate as you say is irrelevant, because "adequate" is not an aspirational quality or something sporting fans wish for their team's players to be. Your post was not logical, but you will not comprehend that.

 

[TradeDraft]

I think I now know who it is that is accepting of mediocrity.

This is the last I will say, because this is becoming very boring and I do not want to derail the thread. You stated that Adams is held to a different standard to Kennedy and Thomas with respect to his disposal, because he is seen as Luke Ball's replacement. This suggests that Luke Ball's disposal was of a quality we would hope our players possessed, or that players would aspire to have. Whether you think Ball's disposal was poor or simply adequate as you say is irrelevant, because "adequate" is not an aspirational quality or something sporting fans wish for their team's players to be. Your post was not logical, but you will not comprehend that.

Adams is a Clearance Specialist and not all of them have good Disposal

 

[Implanttheseed]

I will give him one thing, he usually gets the players names right. Something Brian Taylor cannot fathom.

Like Heath Grundy

 

[Boris the Contradiction]

Adams is a Clearance Specialist and not all of them have good Disposal

Yes absolutely. Then again, it's still good if they do. For what it's worth I like all three of Thomas, Adams and Kennedy. At the moment Thomas is the best of the three in my opinion.

 

[TradeDraft]

Yes absolutely. Then again, it's still good if they do. For what it's worth I like all three of Thomas, Adams and Kennedy. At the moment Thomas is the best of the three in my opinion.

I think Adams was better. Had most Touches and put his body on the Line. Thomas and Kennedy be fighting for a Spot in the Best 22

 

[Implanttheseed]

Not sure if serious. A fantastic footballer, but I will struggle to listen to Foxtel when he is commentating games. What about his performance impressed you? I find his voice grating, and his 'banter' with his fellow commentators sounded like he was in a bar with his mates. No problem with that if he actually is in a bar with his mates, but he was broadcasting on television. I expect insights and analysis from the footy commentators, not blokey jokes. How many times did he mention how good Patty K was? About 20 times? I appreciate that he values PK, but didn't need to hear it so often. Also didnt appreciate his jibe at Eddie about the Beams trade. Not professional at all.

I'll get off my high horse now.

I would rather listen to browny which I found refreshing than having to put up with Bruce 'I just ask rhetorical questions macaveney (don't know how to spell it) and the other channel 7 nuffies

 

[Big Bryza]

Ball had adequate disposal.

Taylor Adams does not.

Comprehend?

Adams disposal is no worse than Balls.

 

[Laurie Holden]

Kinda off topic, but watching the blues v eagles and would love to know how their skin folds compare to the pies and hawks. Couldn't believe how fit they (pies and hawks) looked last night. Looked very lean. Maybe the blue and navy blue aren't slimming colours? Maybe I've had one too many [emoji12] anyone else notice?

 

[speedytiger]

Kinda off topic, but watching the blues v eagles and would love to know how their skin folds compare to the pies and hawks. Couldn't believe how fit they (pies and hawks) looked last night. Looked very lean. Maybe the blue and navy blue aren't slimming colours? Maybe I've had one too many [emoji12] anyone else notice?

I only noticed Carlton lost. That's all i need

 

[Laurie Holden]

I only noticed Carlton lost. That's all i need

Hahaha.....classic!

 

[doppleganger]

Just reading the main board, jeez there's a lot of crap on there about us having close to best 22 against box hill Hawks.

I know the average age of the hawks was slightly younger, but I'd be interested to see the average games played between both teams. That would probably shed a bit more light on the strength of the respective sides.

The Hawks had 11 blokes 23 or over and 13 blokes 22 or younger. They played more teenagers, but guys like Ceglar and Grimley are 24 the same age as Sidebottom.

Pies had 11 blokes 23 or over (two of those Dwyer and Toovey were subbed) and 15 blokes 22 or younger.

Hawks have 5 blokes 30 or older who didn't play and were walk up starts over the last few years, we only have Swan. They were missing a glut of senior premiership players, we have traded most of ours out for kids.

The difference is that Hawthorn will be a much older side come H&A with plenty of their kids miles off senior footy. Where we are already relying on guys who are 22 or under like Grundy, Langdon, Elliott, Adams, Fasolo, Witts, Williams to play key roles and have a glut of further prospective talent (4 top10 picks) DeGoey, Freeman, S.Berg, Moore, and other first rounders in Broomhead and BenKen who may establish themselves as best 22 sooner rather than later.

 

[Pedro]

Adams disposal is no worse than Balls.

Same DE% as Sidey last night. Adams made a couple errors but some of his disposal was sublime. Of course he can get better but he's not as bad as a lot make out

 

[Flibside]

Regardless of sides put out there, from your perspective as a whole I would be pleased with the attack on the ball carrier. Pies players didn't let it out easy, and kept tackle pressure the whole game (good for kids to learn when trying to get into the team). Its nab cup and unless you are stkilda, melbourne, or gws... dont care about result. Nothing to prove for either club. Fasolo was good down forward, and kind of wondering why he wasnt playing forward last season with cloke as FF and elliot and fasolo playing crumbers? From defensive pov... McEvoy taking those early marks, might be something for the coaching staff to look at as he just took them too easily.
I think alot of people forget for the last 5-6 rounds last year, you were missing a big chunk of your first 22. Think you will make the 8, will be interesting to see how the buckley game plan plays out.

Just my perspective.

From a hawks pov... anderson, and woodward good, sicily showed he can kick but needed more chances.

 

[Ricky90]

Just rewatched the first quarter. Will get to the rest of the game over the weekend.

Aside from Dermie's man love for Sam Mitchell it's not bad viewing.

Pretty excited by what I've seen (I watched the full game live too, not just the first quarter). Trying to figure out our game plan is a task though. With Malthouse (good riddance), it was obvious and predictable on both offence and defense - which wasn't a bad thing because it was also very effective when the pieces were put together through 2010 and 2011. With Bucks it's not so obvious just yet. But I love that he's got the team up and playing daring footy. They were taking the game on a lot last night, and to hear that in the fourth quarter, our disposal efficiency by foot was at about 80% is just delightful. That doesn't just tell me our footskills are coming together, it tells me we're fit. I've long believed that footskills can be a byproduct of your fitness, but I won't go into that here unless anyone wants the breakdown.

De Goey looks a nice type. His tackles are ferocious which was refreshing. Other than Goldsack we don't have any of those types. Plus he's got some nice skills and a good size to boot.

Crisp looks like he could be handy. I know he's fit and quick, so it was good to see a bit of that last night. And good to see his disposal wasn't too much of an issue either, looked pretty clean to me. But will rewatch the rest of the game to take a closer inspection.

I have a bit of a man crush on Adams. He's a bull. His disposal is slowly getting better, but I agree with the folk saying it's a decision making issue. Sometimes he seems rushed and is therefore ineffective. I'm okay with that at this point, because seeing him dive into packs and come out with the footy really warms my heart.

Varcoe wasn't bad. Quiet but not bad. Don't want to say too much just yet though, so I'll watch more before I do.

I love Greenwood! Very happy to have him at the Pies!

Corey Gault. Well, we might have something to work with finally! It's what, his fifth year on the list? Making him 23 this year? That's fair, I think, for a guy who's 200cm. They take a bit longer to come on, so I'm happy to see him get a few games this year because if he can crash some packs, clunk some marks and kick some goals, he might just be another piece of the puzzle. My issue is his ruck work. We like to play a 2nd or 3rd tall in the ruck for 5-10% of the game and he just won't cut it. Not now, and it doesn't look like ever. So I'm hoping we can fit him and Grundy as well as Witts in the team at some point. That'd be ideal, and probably if that were to happen, Jesse White would be irrelevant.

That's it for now, I'll check back in when I can think of more to talk about. Very excited now though!

Also, I hate Breust and Langford. Even Hartung. Cocky pricks they are.

 

[sirene]

Sometimes I wonder if I watch a different game to many on BF. Anyway, there is nothing to take from this game regarding winning or losing to our opponent. What is interesting and pertinent is how we played, and gosh darn it, I think we played as a quick, cohesive, hard team. Skills were up. Speed was high. We looked like a team I am happy to drive to the G many weeks and watch.

 

[Ulahoopski]

Just reading the main board, jeez there's a lot of crap on there about us having close to best 22 against box hill Hawks.

I know the average age of the hawks was slightly younger, but I'd be interested to see the average games played between both teams. That would probably shed a bit more light on the strength of the respective sides.

Average games last night - Pies 46 v Haws 42

 

[Ulahoopski]

Ball had adequate disposal.

Taylor Adams does not.

Comprehend?

Let's go to the numbers:
Luke Ball's Disposal Efficiency - 2009: 68%, 2010: 66%, 2011: 70%, 2012: 52%, 2013: 65% = ave of 64%
Taylor Adam's - 2012: 65%, 2013: 62%, 2014: 66% = ave of 64%
Obviously Bally's 64% efficiency was much more adequate than Adam's 64% hey?
64=64 .......... understand?

 

[TheFreshBanana]

I wonder how long until people realise the disposal efficency numbers are a crock of shit

 

[Ulahoopski]

I wonder how long until people realise the disposal efficency numbers are a crock of shit

Hope Bucks has your number - he'll no doubt be referring to you when he starts questioning a player's adequacy.

 

[TheFreshBanana]

Hope Bucks has your number - he'll no doubt be referring to you when he starts questioning a player's adequacy.

You don't take criticism well, do you?

 

[mckenna6575]

I will give him one thing, he usually gets the players names right. Something Brian Taylor cannot fathom.

Leave BT alone. I'll even watch Dogs play the Saints if he's commentating