Analysis Sliding Doors: the 3 games that swang our season

[Capital Power]

IF... we won these games
THEN... we would have played finals

Careful, you'll get us a copyright strike...

 

[Ian Jackson]

This season, in the AFL, Port scored:
- more shots than its opponents in 12 games for a 11-1 record;
- fewer shots than its opponents 8 times for a 0-8 record; and
- equal shots than its opponents 2 times for a 0-2 record.

There was a high correlation between scoring more shots and winning. Out of the 22 games, only three games have failed to follow the script. In all three, the result went against Port.

If the correlation had been perfect, our final record would have been 12-8-2, good enough for a seventh place overall. If we had won both "ties," our record would have been 14-8 (6th).

Those three games were:

Rou nd 8, at home: Port 9.14:68 - 13.10:88 W. Lakes
Round 15, at home: Port 5.11:41 - 10.6:66 Footscray
Round 19, at home: Port 7.13:55 - 8.8:56 G.W.S.

The simplest reason why we haven't qualified for the Elimination Finals is our accuracy, of lack thereof, in those three home games.

Do you know what the frees for and against were in these games?

 

[Andre]

So what's 'prototypical'?
Each loss was different. Brisbane at the Gabba hit us with an astonishing scoring blitz with about 15 minutes to go. Almost impossible for the coaches to restructure then, if the players can't sort it out it's over. Richmond at AO we had the appearance of a forward structure but in the final quarter pretty well every mark kicked in was intercepted in the air, especially by Grimes. The minimalist/absent forward structure against the Giants at AO made me think the Mafia had money on GWS and had left the coaching staff pictures of their kids walking to school.

Port prototypical loss is we get beaten by the Intercepticons. We’ve seen the show many times - ‘Intercepticons, Port don’t have key forwards to fly.’

 

[Stryke]

Port prototypical loss is we get beaten by the Intercepticons. We’ve seen the show many times - ‘Intercepticons, Port don’t have key forwards to fly.’

Yes this is the answer.

For me it's getting killed by intercept marks due to blazing away, generating ample opportunities to score but failing to capitalise, being close enough to win after a comeback but not being able to.

 

[ctpower]

Hey hey hey buddy don’t be so hasty. He is the guy that is going to lead us to our next premiership.. or not

It’s gonna end in tears power girl. I’m sorry.
I’ve seen this script before.
We’ll be given a tough draw that results in a bad start. The media will then focus in on Hinkley’s contract and every second question will be about him and his future.
By June all the talk will be about whether he survives the season.
The 150 celebrations will be a side show.

 

[GremioPower]

Do you know what the frees for and against were in these games?

It seems we had the advantage in all three:

Round 8: 18-16 (+2)
Round 15: 23-15 (+8)
Round 19: 18-14 (+4)

 

[GremioPower]

No it's not. Well certainly not the 1st two.
Sometimes a behind is a fair crack at a goal that goes awry. And sometimes it is a stronger opposition swatting a few through for an easy kick-out. Or the result of a desperate team having a low percentage shot at goal because it is just not allowed close enough for a proper shot.
R8 the Crows were just better than us for the 1st three quarters and it looked like being a slaughter. But Howard up forward late meant we actually scored a few goals in junk time. There was never a point where I thought 'a bit more accurate and we'll win'.
R15 I see the logic in looking at that score now and saying it was simple inaccuracy but it wasn't, it was a contrast in motivation and professionalism in the two teams in horrific cold and wet conditions. That game alone defines why the Bulldogs deserve the last finals spot and we didn't.
R19 I guess your viewpoint cannot be argued against as one of about 3 standard shots on goal late would have won the game if it had gone through. But I can't leave it alone because for me it was such a mystifying and unnecessary loss. And if we had actually played some sort of forward structure instead of Robbie Gray v several taller defenders we'd have had several more goals and accuracy could go ^&*% itself.

I haven't talked about the reasons of our inaccuracy.

We were more inaccurate than our opposition 14 times for a 6-8 record.
We were more accurate than our opponents 8 times for a 5-3 record.

Accuracy didn't correlate well with the results. Scoring shots, however, did.

I just pointed out that we ususally win when we have more scoring shots and we usually lose when we have fewer. There were three exceptions; those three that I have stressed above.

Now, if you want to talk about WHY they were exceptions, I am all ears. Just don't believe that you would be contesting the opening post. You wouldn't. On the contrary, you would be complementing it.

 

[Sleezy]

So what's 'prototypical'?
Each loss was different. Brisbane at the Gabba hit us with an astonishing scoring blitz with about 15 minutes to go. Almost impossible for the coaches to restructure then, if the players can't sort it out it's over. Richmond at AO we had the appearance of a forward structure but in the final quarter pretty well every mark kicked in was intercepted in the air, especially by Grimes. The minimalist/absent forward structure against the Giants at AO made me think the Mafia had money on GWS and had left the coaching staff pictures of their kids walking to school.

Prototypical being:
- playing Ryder + Westhoff/Dougal and the short people as the forwardline
- dominating posession as we mount a comeback in the last quarter
- conceding record numbers of intercept marks in the last quarter as we fail to capitalise on our dominance (Walker 16 marks, Grimes/Stack 8 intercepts marks for the last quarter alone, Davis/Haynes 23 marks combined)
- predicting in advance that the playing of one of our two/three available key forwards in addition to the ruckman/tall wingmen/key defenders as marking targets, we would have a) taken more marks and b) scored enough to win at least two of those games
- doing the opposite and choking

Note: Brisbane's 'scoring blitz' occured with 4 minutes of game time left on the clock. We were 10 points up at this point. If Josh Walker had not been left as the merry old loose interceptor, perhaps we would have been further in front and been able to withstand the unstoppable 4 minute onslaught.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

I started doing this at the start of the year from info from the Champion Data tables I posted in the Review threads. But I gave up after China game. Became to depressing seeing us dominate quarters with a s**t load of inside 50's - yes some had plenty of shallow entries - but we just kept wasting the ball and not scoring.

 

[Macca19]

The first Brisbane game signified that there were problems. 10 points up at the 20 minute mark of the last quarter, you should be able to hold on, even though Brisbane are a very good team this year. You shouldn't give up 4 goals in 6 minutes to end the game.

The Collingwood game where we were 7 goals down at 1/4 time was when I knew we weren't making finals and that things hadn't changed.

 

[Powerstufff]

... The Collingwood game where we were 7 goals down at 1/4 time ....

One of a whole series of games where we were blown away early. I'd start a thread on it now if I wan't going out soon. It was as significant a trait of our 2019 season as the lose a winnable one /win a difficult one pattern.

 

[Alberton Proud]

Well, swangin' on the front porch, swangin' on the lawn
Swangin' where we want 'cause there ain't nobody home
Swangin' to the left and swangin' to the right
If I think about baseball, I'll swang all night, yeah
Yeah, yeah

Swangin' in the living room, swangin' in the kitchen
Most folks don't 'cause they're too busy bitchin'
Swangin' in there 'cause she wanted me to feed her
So I mixed up the batter and she licked the beater

 

[ctpower]

One of a whole series of games where we were blown away early. I'd start a thread on it now if I wan't going out soon. It was as significant a trait of our 2019 season as the lose a winnable one /win a difficult one pattern.

Lifestyle footballers.

Happy to take the $$ but aren’t fussed about success.
They’re lack of effort in first qtrs says a lot about their true ambitions.
That #### simply doesn’t happen on a regular basis to a genuine football team.

 

[tribey]

Yes this is the answer.

For me it's getting killed by intercept marks due to blazing away, generating ample opportunities to score but failing to capitalise, being close enough to win after a comeback but not being able to.

Imagine conceding 9 Brownlow Votes and a Showdown Medal to Dylan Grimes, Phil Davis and Alex Keath.

And Josh Walker (23 dsp/16 marks) was robbed in Round 3.

In the one season!

 

[VineValerian]

Swang dang doodle.