Preview Rnd 8 - Carlton v Port Sunday 15th May 1.10PM @ Etihad

[LanceRomance]

Funny you should say that, just watching the game again, Cripps was given a free run at the contest at nearly every stoppage, no one body to body on him, zero pressure. Will be a different ball game on Sunday.

Fine, then let Gibbs or Murph go free,

 

[thylacine60]

and that he killed the last known thylacine

thylacine60

he's like that.....

 

[Coobk001]

The Port Adelaide Crucible:

The Power play hard, they lead the comp in one percenters and tackles and rank 5th in contested posessions and clearances. It is clear that their key aim is to win the hard ball first, but their conversion into uncontested ball seems to be a potential weakness, with not only low numbers in uncontested ball (16th) but also in marks inside 50 (16th) despite their high inside 50 ratio (4th).

Nice post, however when you actually analyse our performance against the opposition we've played, ie. the 'differential stats', you'll see that Port until last week were 18th in clearances. That happens because teams try to stifle our run by creating a clearance/contested footy game, that creates a lot of stoppages and makes our raw clearance numbers look good, but in reality V our opposition that's where we fail.

When using Differential stats some interesting ones I see:

Clearances:
Port (16th) - Carlton (14th)

So both teams are pretty ordinary in the clearances and this probably overflows into the contested ball stats and also the uncontested ball.

Inside 50's:
Port (8th) - Carlton (10th)

Port are still pretty good at generating inside 50 entries regardless of our inability to win the ball at the coal face, probably indicating our ball movement or defensive structures are pretty reasonable. On the other hand Carlton also aren't too bad at this given their position relative to clearances.

Effective Disposals:
Port (13th) - Carlton (11th)

Interestingly, even though the I50 count indicates Port may be good at moving the ball, we still have a lot less effective disposals than our opposition. Either Ports pressure is poor, or we spend a lot more time trying to move the forward compared to other teams who may possess the ball more. Either way, Carlton again appear to have maintained a pretty steady level here as well.

Tackles:
Port (4th) - Carlton (14th)

Dispelling the issue of pressure for Port is the tackles stat, which has Port in the top 4 in the league, again Carlton appear to hover around that middle of the bottom 8 mark. This also dispells the ridiculous concept that has been thrown around on the Port board that Port's issues are due to effort. This stat clearly indicates it is most likely due to other deficiencies we have.

Disposals (total):
Port (14th) - Carlton (13th)

So Carlton again persisting around the same mark are able to win more ball than Port do, however both teams again appear to be lower level teams in winning the footy.

Last one......

Hitouts:
Port (18th) - Carlton (3rd)

Port will go in again without a ruckman, however the temp ruckman, Trengove, we played last week had a convincing 13 clearances and 25 disposals himself. This is an area teams will eventually exploit, will it be this week against a top 3 side in the hitouts? Port are obviously looking to rove to a losing ruck, and trying to be more agile around the stoppages so this battle will be huge.

This is also one area where statistically the Blues break that 10th to 14th mould along with the Marks inside 50 where you rank 7th, Port rank 13th, and the contested marks where Carlton rank 3rd and Port rank 10th.

Personally I see this game as extremely even. Port are battling a lot of 1st 22 injuries/suspension (Ryder, Monfries, Gray, Carlile, Schulz, White, Lobbe) and some real issues with consistency in the clearances/contested ball, however if we can break even in this area we've shown an ability to score fast and heavily. On the other hand if our defence is exposed to sustained pressure from losing clearances we will struggle to get our ball movement up and going and can start to bleed scores to the opposition heavily.

 

[Show_Me_The_Money]

Fine, then let Gibbs or Murph go free,

I think you completely missed my point.

 

[LanceRomance]

I think you completely missed my point.

Cripps is too hard to tag anyway better off stifling those with finishing skills like Gibbs and Murph.

 

[mike ockerts]

Cripps is too hard to tag anyway better off stifling those with finishing skills like Gibbs and Murph.

Exactly, he relishes the close contact, its where he does his best work, the coal face.

 

[Show_Me_The_Money]

Cripps is too hard to tag anyway better off stifling those with finishing skills like Gibbs and Murph.

He was allowed to just run and pluck the ball out of the air from the ruck duels. You do not have to tag him to stop him from doing this, just need to stand in front, does not require a tag or a run with role. My point is that Port will make things much more difficult for him, not saying he can't overcome it. Look at the Sydney game when they gang tackled him at every stoppage, that is what he can expect this week IMO.

 

[LanceRomance]

He was allowed to just run and pluck the ball out of the air from the ruck duels. You do not have to tag him to stop him from doing this, just need to stand in front, does not require a tag or a run with role. My point is that Port will make things much more difficult for him, not saying he can't overcome it. Look at the Sydney game when they gang tackled him at every stoppage, that is what he can expect this week IMO.

I agree with most of that. lets not forget he was coming off no preseason too.

will be interesting to see what Port do to stop our midfield. we have stronger midfield depth esp if R Grey misses.

With Port it is usually westhoff and Schultz the trouble us.... Dixon also causes issues.

If we quell broadbents influence we will go a long way to winning.

Also, they might need trengove as a defender to stop cas marking.

 

[Tony Lynn 15]

Exactly, he relishes the close contact, its where he does his best work, the coal face.

Sounds like me back in my nightclub days!

 

[LanceRomance]

Sounds like me back in my nightclub days!

or on a peak hour train now

 

[Blue and Silver]

Nice post, however when you actually analyse our performance against the opposition we've played, ie. the 'differential stats', you'll see that Port until last week were 18th in clearances. That happens because teams try to stifle our run by creating a clearance/contested footy game, that creates a lot of stoppages and makes our raw clearance numbers look good, but in reality V our opposition that's where we fail.

When using Differential stats some interesting ones I see:

Clearances:
Port (16th) - Carlton (14th)

So both teams are pretty ordinary in the clearances and this probably overflows into the contested ball stats and also the uncontested ball.

Inside 50's:
Port (8th) - Carlton (10th)

Port are still pretty good at generating inside 50 entries regardless of our inability to win the ball at the coal face, probably indicating our ball movement or defensive structures are pretty reasonable. On the other hand Carlton also aren't too bad at this given their position relative to clearances.

Effective Disposals:
Port (13th) - Carlton (11th)

Interestingly, even though the I50 count indicates Port may be good at moving the ball, we still have a lot less effective disposals than our opposition. Either Ports pressure is poor, or we spend a lot more time trying to move the forward compared to other teams who may possess the ball more. Either way, Carlton again appear to have maintained a pretty steady level here as well.

Tackles:
Port (4th) - Carlton (14th)

Dispelling the issue of pressure for Port is the tackles stat, which has Port in the top 4 in the league, again Carlton appear to hover around that middle of the bottom 8 mark. This also dispells the ridiculous concept that has been thrown around on the Port board that Port's issues are due to effort. This stat clearly indicates it is most likely due to other deficiencies we have.

Disposals (total):
Port (14th) - Carlton (13th)

So Carlton again persisting around the same mark are able to win more ball than Port do, however both teams again appear to be lower level teams in winning the footy.

Last one......

Hitouts:
Port (18th) - Carlton (3rd)

Port will go in again without a ruckman, however the temp ruckman, Trengove, we played last week had a convincing 13 clearances and 25 disposals himself. This is an area teams will eventually exploit, will it be this week against a top 3 side in the hitouts? Port are obviously looking to rove to a losing ruck, and trying to be more agile around the stoppages so this battle will be huge.

This is also one area where statistically the Blues break that 10th to 14th mould along with the Marks inside 50 where you rank 7th, Port rank 13th, and the contested marks where Carlton rank 3rd and Port rank 10th.

Personally I see this game as extremely even. Port are battling a lot of 1st 22 injuries/suspension (Ryder, Monfries, Gray, Carlile, Schulz, White, Lobbe) and some real issues with consistency in the clearances/contested ball, however if we can break even in this area we've shown an ability to score fast and heavily. On the other hand if our defence is exposed to sustained pressure from losing clearances we will struggle to get our ball movement up and going and can start to bleed scores to the opposition heavily.

Where can I get a hold of the differential numbers?

Or do I need to do the legwork on compilation?

 

[zeeCFC]

Funny you should say that, just watching the game again, Cripps was given a free run at the contest at nearly every stoppage, no one body to body on him, zero pressure. Will be a different ball game on Sunday.

Had someone scragging him every stoppage I saw.

 

[jimsta10]

Just watched the game against the Pies...weak links from last weeks match: Jamo, Everett and Walker.

Out of the three one would think Walker will be safe

 

[passmark]

Had someone scragging him every stoppage I saw.

Sometimes it's hard to tell. They look a macaque riding a pony.

 

[marcmurphy#3]

Just watched the game against the Pies...weak links from last weeks match: Jamo, Everett and Walker.

Out of the three one would think Walker will be safe

Can't include Dre in that group. Yes he dropped a few sitters but there's no way we will drop a guy who had 20 disposals, 8 marks and 3 goals. That type of production can't be ignored, particularly when there is no one in the 2s in a similar position who is pushing for a spot.

 

[wackle69]

Just watched the game against the Pies...weak links from last weeks match: Jamo, Everett and Walker.

Out of the three one would think Walker will be safe

With all due respect who are you replacing them with? I reckon a few of the posters around here have got to get realistic about our depth.

Sent from my SM-P600 using Tapatalk

 

[wackle69]

Can't include Dre in that group. Yes he dropped a few sitters but there's no way we will drop a guy who had 20 disposals, 8 marks and 3 goals. That type of production can't be ignored, particularly when there is no one in the 2s in a similar position who is pushing for a spot.

10 score assists for god sake.

Sent from my SM-P600 using Tapatalk

 

[LanceRomance]

With all due respect who are you replacing them with? I reckon a few of the posters around here have got to get realistic about our depth.

Sent from my SM-P600 using Tapatalk

we could cover walker maybe.

Couldnt really cover jamo esp with Ports talls

 

[wackle69]

we could cover walker maybe.

Couldnt really cover jamo esp with Ports talls

Except that Walker was deemed safe.

Sent from my SM-P600 using Tapatalk

 

[marcmurphy#3]

we could cover walker maybe.

Couldnt really cover jamo esp with Ports talls

Another factor to consider with Walker is that he at least forces a somewhat difficult matchup for them given his marking ability.

 

[FlowersByIrene]

Another factor to consider with Walker is that he at least forces a somewhat difficult matchup for them given his marking ability.

Walker = Charlie Curnow but cooked, unfortunately Charlie is injured though

I dont want to carry both of Walker and Everitt; the way I see it, with Charlie out is to play Jaksch.

Otherwise, just play Lamb in Walkers role and play another midfielder

We dont need Everitt and Walker in our forward line.

 

[wackle69]

Walker = Charlie Curnow but cooked, unfortunately Charlie is injured though

I dont want to carry both of Walker and Everitt; the way I see it, with Charlie out is to play Jaksch.

Otherwise, just play Lamb in Walkers role and play another midfielder

We dont need Everitt and Walker in our forward line.

Will be interesting to see if they give Jaksch his call up. I didn't go to Casey but his stats aren't great.

 

[FlowersByIrene]

Will be interesting to see if they give Jaksch his call up. I didn't go to Casey but his stats aren't great.

We did get smashed by 107 so im sure he musnt of had much opportunity

He deserved the call up over either Walker or Everitt last week tho, so who knows.

 

[marcmurphy#3]

Walker = Charlie Curnow but cooked, unfortunately Charlie is injured though

I dont want to carry both of Walker and Everitt; the way I see it, with Charlie out is to play Jaksch.

Otherwise, just play Lamb in Walkers role and play another midfielder

We dont need Everitt and Walker in our forward line.

I completely agree that if Curnow was fit, he's a perfect candidate to play in Walker's position. Walker may well be "cooked", but deserves at least another week or 2 to get some playing time under his belt, given that he hasn't played at all since round one. Also, I hardly think that Everitt is being carried in our forward line. You just don't drop a guy who kicked 3 goals, especially when our forward line consistently struggles to score. I think we played him way to far up the ground in the first few weeks of the season, which resulted in him struggling for form. Up forward he presents a tough matchup for the opposition, and consistently finds the goals.

 

[The Smoking Gun]

We may only need 2 x KPD when we play Port. I believe at the moment they are only playing Westhoff and Dixon as talls (with one of them playing as a relief ruckman). I'd have Plowman on Westhoff and Rowe on Dixon, not sure there is a match up for Jamison.

One thing that was noticeable with Plowman last week is that he's not big enough or heavy enough to be a KPD. Best suited in a 3rd tall role which he'll excel at.

And thus the Protestant faith is born.

.....and you know what they do with their chooks don't you???

OK, I've got it.
Trade Gibbs and Plowman for 3 slabs and a kebab.

You forgot Everitt. If you're going to join the rest of us in gutting the club, then please have the courtesy of doing it properly FFS!!!

no changes i reckon

What's with all the amphibians coming out of the water???