Preview Round 19 - Sydney v Geelong, Sunday @ SCG

[STPer18]

The utensil is starting to firm? Great news.

 

[gypsy_1]

Alright, just a heads up - this is going to be a long post. Feel free to skip.

So I was having a chat last night with foxdog50 regarding the ruck situation - fair to say we mostly disagree! Anyway, I'm bored at work so I thought I'd try put my thoughts down properly.

STANLEY'S FORM

First of all, regarding Stanley's current form - it has certainly dropped off over the past few months. There is a very simple (and surprisingly accurate) metric by which his performances can be gauged; clearances. If Stanley is getting around 3 or 4 (or more) clearances, he's playing well; if not, he's not. That's it. Here's the proof:

For the first 7 games of last year Stanley was generally OK, but far from great - a lot of posters wanted him dropped. His clearance numbers for that period:
2, 2, 3, 5, 3, 1, 1. Average: 2.4

The second half of last year he was great - one of the top 2 or 3 ruckmen over that period according to a lot of the rankings thrown around. Clearances:
6, 4, 6, 4, 4, 2, 8. Average: 4.8

Then his first 6 weeks this year he continued his excellent form from last year. Clearances:
6, 3, 3, 6, 4, 5. Average: 4.5

Since then, his form has dropped off and a lot of people now want him omitted. Clearances:
1, 2, 2, 2, 5, 1, 6, 2, 0. Average 2.3

The zero at the end was this past weekend against Hawthorn - easily his worst game for the year; the 6 a few weeks ago was against the Bulldogs where he was our best player. The only real outlier is the game against Port Adelaide a month or so ago where he got 5 clearances despite playing poorly.

Overall it's a pretty accurate representation of his form over the past 2 years, and it makes sense - he's not a very good ruckman in terms of winning hitouts, that much is obvious. And during the second half of last year and the first half of this year he didn't suddenly get better at it - his hitout numbers are fairly consistent across the entire 2 years. So it was something else during that period that took him from scapegoat, to being accepted as our clear best option in the ruck, and now back to having his position questioned again. It wasn't goals either - he kicked more in the first half of last year than the second half; ditto with marks. I think it's the clearances.

It makes sense to me, particularly when you think of the type of clearance Stanley generally produces. I've seen a bit of discussion around Guthrie's clearance numbers and how they need to be put into context i.e. that they're generally worthless if you consider the actual result of the clearance (I'm not saying I agree or disagree with that by the way, I haven't taken enough notice to comment), but when Stanley wins a clearance he will more often than not take the ball from a stoppage situation, sprint 15 metres, then kick the ball 55; he's similar to Dangerfield in terms of his ability to explode from congestion and pump the ball long (often aimlessly, it must be said!), which in the age of 6-6-6 can be very handy, especially given our stagnant ball movement since the bye.

STANLEY VS SMITH

Now, it seems most people that want Stanley dropped want Smith to come in for him. For those people I'm wondering what exactly are you expecting from Smith? As in, what is it that you expect Smith to provide that outweighs what Stanley can provide?

In my opinion, the only real advantage Smith has is in the actual ruck contests where he is more competitive that Stanley. The main advantage of this isn't that Smith palms the ball down our midfielders' throats - he's no better than Stanley at doing that. Proof: In Smith's last year where he played as our number one ruckman (2017) his hitouts to advantage percentage was 26.4%; Stanley's this year is 25.6%, which puts Stanley as the 50th best player in the league this year in terms of hitouts to advantage i.e. he's no good at it. 26.4% would have Smith way further up at 48th best this year... i.e. he's no good at it either. Smith also doesn't win many more hitouts in general than Stanley, if any at all - in Smith's career best year for hitout numbers (2017) he averaged 32.1 per game (not including his one game this year, where he had 33); Stanley over the past 2 years has averaged 28.1 & 28.7

So in my view Smith isn't better in the ruck contests because he wins more hitouts, I think he is simply better in that area because he nullifies the opposition ruckman more i.e. he is more competitive, even when losing the hitouts. My biggest criticism of Stanley is that he can be too easy to play against at times - McEvoy this year and early last year, Lycett a month ago, Sinclair in the last quarter early last year etc. When an opposition ruckman is on top against Stanley they seem to be able to really dominate and become very damaging with their hitouts, less so with Smith.

So there's that, but is that it? What other advantages are there in playing Smith over Stanley? I genuinely can't see them. Stanley is a far better mark (people were rightfully criticizing Fort earlier in the year for not having strong enough hands - are we forgetting that Smith is almost as bad?); is more of a forward threat (set shot kicking aside*); is more damaging around the ground; is better at getting back and helping the defence; and is more damaging with his clearances (to be fair to Smith here, he is also quite good at winning clearances but this is where the context comes in - in general I don't think Smith's are anywhere near as effective as Stanley's).

* Actually that's another thing Smith is better at - set shot kicking. I don't even really know if Smith is any good in front of goal to be honest, but he has to be better by default... Stanley is a better field kick though - how good was that lace out pass to Hawkins on the weekend!

So essentially, does Smith's ability to better nullify the influence of the opposition ruckman outweigh Stanley's strengths around the ground? Not for me.

Quite a few have brought up Smith's performance against Sydney earlier this year; Smith was good, but I think his performance in that game is being overrated in order to justify bringing him in for Stanley. Smith's stats against Sydney:

11 disposals, 4 marks, 33 hitouts (8 to advantage), 3 clearances, 0 goals, 0 behinds

Stanley's averages for this year:

13.6 disposals, 3.1 marks, 28.7 hitouts (7.3 to advantage), 3.3 clearances, 0.4 goals, 0.5 behinds

So Smith's game against Sydney was about equal to (or perhaps even slightly worse than) Stanley's averages for the year. Sure, stats don't tell the full story; so how about this - only 2 out of the 24 people that posted in the MVP thread for the Sydney game felt Smith's game was worthy of votes (2 votes from one poster; 1 vote from the other). So he was good, but he certainly wasn't great.

Stanley's best is better than Smith's best, I think we should all be able to agree on that (Smith has never been one of the best ruckmen in the league over any extended period of time; Stanley has shown he can be). Both are prone to inconsistency, though I think Stanley is better in this regard as well - let's not forget that this is only the second year in his career that Stanley has played as a full time number one ruckman, and for a lot of that time he has been considered one of the better ruckmen in the league.

With finals around the corner I don't think now is the time to try anything drastically new unless we're forced to (switching the number one ruck this late in the year would qualify as drastic, in my view), so I think our best option is to back Stanley in and hope that he finds form - he's at least as likely as Smith to do so, and if he does he offers greater improvement to the side.

CODA

I'll finish this with an admission - I am very much biased on this topic, Stanley is one of my favourite players to watch so of course I want him in the side. As above, I do genuinely think Stanley is the better option, but I also (selfishly) want him in the side for the sake of my own interest. He can be exciting, unpredictable and incredibly frustrating; a real roller coaster, even from quarter to quarter. And I love it! We are a boring team with a boring game plan - some of the games this year have been dreadful to watch, even including some of the wins. Bringing in Smith for Stanley just makes us even more boring, without even making us a better side.

Great analysis. Detailed and considered.

 

[Pollywaffle]

The utensil is starting to firm? Great news.

Hoping he can insert himself into the team and increase our forward entries...

 

[OddYears]

Alright, just a heads up - this is going to be a long post. Feel free to skip.

So I was having a chat last night with foxdog50 regarding the ruck situation - fair to say we mostly disagree! Anyway, I'm bored at work so I thought I'd try put my thoughts down properly.

STANLEY'S FORM

First of all, regarding Stanley's current form - it has certainly dropped off over the past few months. There is a very simple (and surprisingly accurate) metric by which his performances can be gauged; clearances. If Stanley is getting around 3 or 4 (or more) clearances, he's playing well; if not, he's not. That's it. Here's the proof:

For the first 7 games of last year Stanley was generally OK, but far from great - a lot of posters wanted him dropped. His clearance numbers for that period:
2, 2, 3, 5, 3, 1, 1. Average: 2.4

The second half of last year he was great - one of the top 2 or 3 ruckmen over that period according to a lot of the rankings thrown around. Clearances:
6, 4, 6, 4, 4, 2, 8. Average: 4.8

Then his first 6 weeks this year he continued his excellent form from last year. Clearances:
6, 3, 3, 6, 4, 5. Average: 4.5

Since then, his form has dropped off and a lot of people now want him omitted. Clearances:
1, 2, 2, 2, 5, 1, 6, 2, 0. Average 2.3

The zero at the end was this past weekend against Hawthorn - easily his worst game for the year; the 6 a few weeks ago was against the Bulldogs where he was our best player. The only real outlier is the game against Port Adelaide a month or so ago where he got 5 clearances despite playing poorly.

Overall it's a pretty accurate representation of his form over the past 2 years, and it makes sense - he's not a very good ruckman in terms of winning hitouts, that much is obvious. And during the second half of last year and the first half of this year he didn't suddenly get better at it - his hitout numbers are fairly consistent across the entire 2 years. So it was something else during that period that took him from scapegoat, to being accepted as our clear best option in the ruck, and now back to having his position questioned again. It wasn't goals either - he kicked more in the first half of last year than the second half; ditto with marks. I think it's the clearances.

It makes sense to me, particularly when you think of the type of clearance Stanley generally produces. I've seen a bit of discussion around Guthrie's clearance numbers and how they need to be put into context i.e. that they're generally worthless if you consider the actual result of the clearance (I'm not saying I agree or disagree with that by the way, I haven't taken enough notice to comment), but when Stanley wins a clearance he will more often than not take the ball from a stoppage situation, sprint 15 metres, then kick the ball 55; he's similar to Dangerfield in terms of his ability to explode from congestion and pump the ball long (often aimlessly, it must be said!), which in the age of 6-6-6 can be very handy, especially given our stagnant ball movement since the bye.

STANLEY VS SMITH

Now, it seems most people that want Stanley dropped want Smith to come in for him. For those people I'm wondering what exactly are you expecting from Smith? As in, what is it that you expect Smith to provide that outweighs what Stanley can provide?

In my opinion, the only real advantage Smith has is in the actual ruck contests where he is more competitive that Stanley. The main advantage of this isn't that Smith palms the ball down our midfielders' throats - he's no better than Stanley at doing that. Proof: In Smith's last year where he played as our number one ruckman (2017) his hitouts to advantage percentage was 26.4%; Stanley's this year is 25.6%, which puts Stanley as the 50th best player in the league this year in terms of hitouts to advantage i.e. he's no good at it. 26.4% would have Smith way further up at 48th best this year... i.e. he's no good at it either. Smith also doesn't win many more hitouts in general than Stanley, if any at all - in Smith's career best year for hitout numbers (2017) he averaged 32.1 per game (not including his one game this year, where he had 33); Stanley over the past 2 years has averaged 28.1 & 28.7

So in my view Smith isn't better in the ruck contests because he wins more hitouts, I think he is simply better in that area because he nullifies the opposition ruckman more i.e. he is more competitive, even when losing the hitouts. My biggest criticism of Stanley is that he can be too easy to play against at times - McEvoy this year and early last year, Lycett a month ago, Sinclair in the last quarter early last year etc. When an opposition ruckman is on top against Stanley they seem to be able to really dominate and become very damaging with their hitouts, less so with Smith.

So there's that, but is that it? What other advantages are there in playing Smith over Stanley? I genuinely can't see them. Stanley is a far better mark (people were rightfully criticizing Fort earlier in the year for not having strong enough hands - are we forgetting that Smith is almost as bad?); is more of a forward threat (set shot kicking aside*); is more damaging around the ground; is better at getting back and helping the defence; and is more damaging with his clearances (to be fair to Smith here, he is also quite good at winning clearances but this is where the context comes in - in general I don't think Smith's are anywhere near as effective as Stanley's).

* Actually that's another thing Smith is better at - set shot kicking. I don't even really know if Smith is any good in front of goal to be honest, but he has to be better by default... Stanley is a better field kick though - how good was that lace out pass to Hawkins on the weekend!

So essentially, does Smith's ability to better nullify the influence of the opposition ruckman outweigh Stanley's strengths around the ground? Not for me.

Quite a few have brought up Smith's performance against Sydney earlier this year; Smith was good, but I think his performance in that game is being overrated in order to justify bringing him in for Stanley. Smith's stats against Sydney:

11 disposals, 4 marks, 33 hitouts (8 to advantage), 3 clearances, 0 goals, 0 behinds

Stanley's averages for this year:

13.6 disposals, 3.1 marks, 28.7 hitouts (7.3 to advantage), 3.3 clearances, 0.4 goals, 0.5 behinds

So Smith's game against Sydney was about equal to (or perhaps even slightly worse than) Stanley's averages for the year. Sure, stats don't tell the full story; so how about this - only 2 out of the 24 people that posted in the MVP thread for the Sydney game felt Smith's game was worthy of votes (2 votes from one poster; 1 vote from the other). So he was good, but he certainly wasn't great.

Stanley's best is better than Smith's best, I think we should all be able to agree on that (Smith has never been one of the best ruckmen in the league over any extended period of time; Stanley has shown he can be). Both are prone to inconsistency, though I think Stanley is better in this regard as well - let's not forget that this is only the second year in his career that Stanley has played as a full time number one ruckman, and for a lot of that time he has been considered one of the better ruckmen in the league.

With finals around the corner I don't think now is the time to try anything drastically new unless we're forced to (switching the number one ruck this late in the year would qualify as drastic, in my view), so I think our best option is to back Stanley in and hope that he finds form - he's at least as likely as Smith to do so, and if he does he offers greater improvement to the side.

CODA

I'll finish this with an admission - I am very much biased on this topic, Stanley is one of my favourite players to watch so of course I want him in the side. As above, I do genuinely think Stanley is the better option, but I also (selfishly) want him in the side for the sake of my own interest. He can be exciting, unpredictable and incredibly frustrating; a real roller coaster, even from quarter to quarter. And I love it! We are a boring team with a boring game plan - some of the games this year have been dreadful to watch, even including some of the wins. Bringing in Smith for Stanley just makes us even more boring, without even making us a better side.

Good stuff. Very interesting regarding his clearance work and something I hadn’t noticed regarding his form. I have always enjoyed watching him burst out of the middle.

 

[Strange Cat]

The utensil is starting to firm? Great news.

Hoping he can insert himself into the team and increase our forward entries...

And so it begins ...before it deflates

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Ins: Smith, Henry, Constable, Narkle

Outs: Stanley, Atkins, Parsons, Bews

Menegola one more game in the VFL.

VFL bye. He's either in now or we have to wait 3 weeks.
They'll pull the trigger.

No to constable.

 

[cats_09]

What did I say about Cockatoo... Looks like VFL this weekend a very big chance.

He will be in the senior team in Round 22-23... They preserved him for Finals.

I'd suggest it's doubtful he plays VFL this weekend and the best chance of seeing him in the hoops will be in August*, and that would give him 4 weeks until finals

Do we risk him in the seniors this year or better to see how he goes in the VFL & have him right for the start of pre-season



*We have the VFL bye this weekend

 

[CatRiot]

I'd suggest it's doubtful he plays VFL this weekend and the best chance of seeing him in the hoops will be in August*, and that would give him 4 weeks until finals

Do we risk him in the seniors this year or better to see how he goes in the VFL & have him right for the start of pre-season



*We have the VFL bye this weekend

Yeah okay.

He has to play a game or two in the VFL, but I'd be careful of some of these VFL grounds, only on a decent surface.

I wouldn't put him straight into the Seniors, so that's why I think around Round 22, which is Mid August. Still 3 weeks away, which gives him 2 weeks of VFL with increased match time.

 

[Whiskers]

Swans are in some ordinary form, so we have another chance for a soft kill.

We have had a very fortunate year this year. Every team we have beaten has been horribly out of form to begin with aside from Collingwood round 1 when there was no form.

The Dees, crows, hawks, eagles and bombers were all horrendous at that point so our tough 7 opening games weren’t so tough.
Dogs at home, a north side about to sack it’s coach and they were in it for a long time, GC leading at 3QT, Richmond injury depleted.
Our wins this year have been extremely soft kills to say the least and whilst we should be playing better atm we aren’t a top side, only on paper.
However we have got ourselves in a good position, we need to take advantage of games like these. Hopefully get a bit of luck throughout finals and who knows. We’ve had a lot of luck this year and most importantly through injury.
Fingers crossed!

 

[longtimecat]

Great opportunity to play Smith this week and get some hit outs to advantage

 

[frggr]

Because he scares the crap out of the oppo backman. Great hands, great kick, and great closing speed.

And even if he doesn't mark it, they *know* he's going to come through the pack like a cannonball.

 

[00VicWard001]

He's the old scapegoat if anything.

Been poor for 8 weeks now.
Absolutely horrible since the bye.

Apologies if this has already been posted-

Stats Files: Have the Cats' rivals figured them out?

The reason for worry in the past five games – all since the bye – goes beyond the three losses

m.afl.com.au

Shows how Stanley, amongst other players, has really dropped off.

Not sure what measurements they are using, but it does confirm what we’re seeing.

 

[TheWoodenSlug]

Apologies if this has already been posted-

Stats Files: Have the Cats' rivals figured them out?

The reason for worry in the past five games – all since the bye – goes beyond the three losses

m.afl.com.au

Shows how Stanley, amongst other players, has really dropped off.

Not sure what measurements they are using, but it does confirm what we’re seeing.

Yeah I'd be interested to know what metrics they use to determine those rankings, but hard to disagree with the outcomes there. The players that have dropped off the most, according to those rating are (in order):

Rohan
Hawkins
Parfitt
Dahlhaus
Stanley
Miers

That's pretty close to how I've seen it as well. Atkins has really dropped off too I think, but the role he was playing well earlier in the year probably wasn't conducive to high ranking points anyway.

So if you include Atkins, that's pretty much all our forward pressure players well down on their early season form, which is quite concerning since that was such a large part of our early season results. Hopefully just the training load!...

To be fair to Miers, I think his drop in ratings is largely due to missing a few shots/targets lately that he was kicking/hitting earlier in the year, so I'm not too worried about his form.

Rohan is the biggest worry for me - his pressure is still great, but we need him to get his hands on the pill! His high marking and accurate kicking were huge for us earlier in the year.

 

[bulletproof]

I don’t feel like Rohan is playing that poorly, he is just getting very limited opportunity. Hawkins is also struggling, so I think the problems are starting higher up the field.

The ball is not coming in like it was early in the season.

 

[candiehappy]

for the meat tray:

Out - Parsons, Stanley
In - Parfitt, Smith

Supplementary draw - Menegola for Atkins

 

[TheWoodenSlug]

I don’t feel like Rohan is playing that poorly, he is just getting very limited opportunity. Hawkins is also struggling, so I think the problems are starting higher up the field.

The ball is not coming in like it was early in the season.

That's a fair call - the ball movement has been shocking for a forward of late. Slow and predictable.

Still, Rohan was taking every opportunity he was given earlier in the year, but a few missed chances of late. The first play on Sunday was a quick kick inside 50 - Rohan got there with a dive but spilt a pretty easy chest mark in the end. He was taking those a few months ago, then kicking it straight over the goal umpire's head.

 

[bulletproof]

That's a fair call - the ball movement has been shocking for a forward of late. Slow and predictable.

Still, Rohan was taking every opportunity he was given earlier in the year, but a few missed chances of late. The first play on Sunday was a quick kick inside 50 - Rohan got there with a dive but spilt a pretty easy chest mark in the end. He was taking those a few months ago, then kicking it straight over the goal umpire's head.

Yes good point, and the goal kicking has dropped off.

 

[Down at K Park]

for the meat tray:

Out - Parsons, Stanley
In - Parfitt, Smith

Supplementary draw - Menegola for Atkins

From all reports it’s most likely parfitt will miss again.

I’d say narkle and menegola are locks though.

 

[fpm84]

Parfitt ruled out. Makes it all the more important to get Menegola back in given VFL has a bye this week. The puff pieces about Narkle's VFL form look likely to point to his inclusion too IMO.

Not sure what we do with Henry, perhaps this is a week to rest Taylor?

IN: Menegola, Narkle
OUT: Parsons, Atkins

 

[winty]

The utensil is starting to firm? Great news.

Hoping he can insert himself into the team and increase our forward entries...

Just hope we're not getting our hopes up prematurely....

 

[Grimoz]

He needs some tuition from Danger.......

Oh

Or Sav...oh wait

 

[Grimoz]

I don’t feel like Rohan is playing that poorly, he is just getting very limited opportunity. Hawkins is also struggling, so I think the problems are starting higher up the field.

The ball is not coming in like it was early in the season.

Hawkins is back to moving like a 90 year old, doesn't look good with finals around the corner considering how important he is to our structure.

 

[00VicWard001]

Yeah I'd be interested to know what metrics they use to determine those rankings, but hard to disagree with the outcomes there. The players that have dropped off the most, according to those rating are (in order):

Rohan
Hawkins
Parfitt
Dahlhaus
Stanley
Miers

That's pretty close to how I've seen it as well. Atkins has really dropped off too I think, but the role he was playing well earlier in the year probably wasn't conducive to high ranking points anyway.

So if you include Atkins, that's pretty much all our forward pressure players well down on their early season form, which is quite concerning since that was such a large part of our early season results. Hopefully just the training load!...

To be fair to Miers, I think his drop in ratings is largely due to missing a few shots/targets lately that he was kicking/hitting earlier in the year, so I'm not too worried about his form.

Rohan is the biggest worry for me - his pressure is still great, but we need him to get his hands on the pill! His high marking and accurate kicking were huge for us earlier in the year.

It’s an interesting situation we find ourselves in. To me, it’s not actually physical performance, but mental that is creating these issues.

From game 1, CS kept repeating the mantra “we’ve been training to rise to the big moments in games”.

The players most recently have not been taking these chances. Essentially, if 2 of those 5 behinds were goals, the game changes, the Hawks players get some doubt, the Cats players get some confidence etc and then the game and metrics change accordingly.

The replacement of the players is not really the way to get the performance we are after. Rather it is the players engagement with these key moments in games. Take the mark, kick the goal etc etc.

 

[catempire]

Hawkins is back to moving like a 90 year old, doesn't look good with finals around the corner considering how important he is to our structure.

Moving pretty well here...

 

[Warhorse]

Can't believe the drop in performance in dalhaus. He is playing worse than he was at the dogs last year