Where are we at?

[Arcassius]

Let it go PurpleEyes, this place will give you sleep disorders. You have made some good points. Just let it run its course now. There is no need to respond to everyone. This Danyle Son issue has gone on since he was drafted, and it will not go away until he leaves. Anyone that gets drafted from another team will cop it for their career. Only some of us have the memories of the champions such as the Bell's, the McPhee's, the Modra's, Headland's, the Farmer's.. the many more that provided many memories and yes the Danyle Pearce's - and I think his story is not finished.

I'm not sure whether Purple needs a white knight right now? (S)he seems to be quite fine responding to posts and pursuing their line of argument.

By the way - your assertion about recruits is flawed. Most recently with Brad Hill. Sure he had doubters when he was recruited (I was one of them) but I don't think anyone is doubting his value now. To reverse the argument - do you believe that criticism of Sylvia, Anthony, etc was unwarranted?

Likewise - what was your point in bringing up memories of previous champions? Are you suggesting that people don't 'get it' because they haven't been supporting the team as long as you? Confusing.

 

[PurpleEyes]

But you can stop McGovern taking intercept marks. Lower your eyes and don't kick it to the hotspot. Did you watch what Essendon did to Eagles this weekend? Lowered their eyes and looked first for the short kick.

Sorry but you are wrong and you're slowly trying to change your argument to suit, before you were saying it's all about how good your forwards are and how many inside 50's you kick.

More inside 50's does not always equal more goals. Why do teams lose games when they kick lots more inside 50's than their opponent then? The Eagles v Port game? Why are you continuing to avoid my point with the Geelong game - in the last qtr - 16 inside 50's to Geelong's 8 and we still lost the qtr.



So now we're back to hoping that our inside 50's result in free kicks for our forwards. That's back to the kick and hope strategy you going on about, just get it in there and somehow 25% of the time it'll result in a goal. If Carlton defended correctly none of his inside 50's result in goals.

No successful coach is pinning their premership aspirations on 'kick and hope for a 25% return'.

Question to end the night:
Danyle Pearce is averaging 4.8 inside 50's while Brad only 3.9 i50's. If you were one of Freo's forwards would you prefer 4.8 inside 50's from D Pearce or 3.9 inside 50's from Brad Hill?

Frigate this has nothing to do with wanting D Pearce out. I certainly haven't said he should be dropped and looking over the changes thread I don't think there are many people asking for that change.

This discussion is based on PurpleEyes point that quantity of inside 50's trumps quality.

No, my point is that, currently, by picking D.Pearce you can improve the quantity of your i50s. What I don't get is how you can improve the number of effective i50s (quality) by not selecting D.Pearce.

 

[PurpleEyes]

Through all this criticism of D.Pearce and me defending his selections, I have yet to see any knockers suggest who should replace him and how that player will improve Freo's scoring efficiency.

 

[Unique Name]

Through all this criticism of D.Pearce and me defending his selections, I have yet to see any knockers suggest who should replace him and how that player will improve Freo's scoring efficiency.

We kicked more inside 50's in the Essendon game without D Pearce than in either of our last two games with D Pearce so someone obviously kicked them.

I think you need to consider context more when looking at stats.

 

[Purple Jesus]

No one here, except you, is arguing for or against D Pearce. We're discussing your assertion that the quantity of i50s is important and the quality is not.

 

[PurpleEyes]

No one here, except you, is arguing for or against D Pearce. We're discussing your assertion that the quantity of i50s is important and the quality is not.

This discussion degenerated as soon as I defended D.Pearce and his i50 stats.
I have never asserted the quantity of i50s is important and the quality is not.
I have tried to show how Freo can influence the quantity of i50s by their selection of D.Pearce over younger options. I don't know how Freo can select any of their current youth alternatives to improve the quality of the i50s.

When efforts have been made to show the importance of quality of i50s I have easily been able to show how the quality of the forwards and quantity of i50s could be an alternative explanation for those goals (eg. last derby 1st qtr, not one of West Coasts 7 goals came from a "quality i50").

Irrelevant of all your subjective thoughts about quality i50s, the facts are, there is a strong statistical correlation between i50s, goals and winning games. Go look at the history and the ranking of teams for i50 differentials. That relationship can be statistically proven. Arguing against it is very ignorant of the facts.
2016 Premiers: Western Bulldogs +260, Wooden Spooners: Essendon -256
2015 Hawthorn +320, Carlton -253
2014 Hawthorn +211, St Kilda -223
2013 Hawthorn +215, GWS -440

 

[Purple Jesus]

the derby is a perfect example of why i50s are so important and the quality of them is not.

I have never asserted the quantity of i50s is important and the quality is not.

 

[PurpleEyes]

The quote in my post was actually "If anything, the derby is a perfect example of why i50s are so important and the quality of them is not."

But no, you couldn't show my actual quote could you?

"If anything" ... meaning ... if you were going to take a stance of quantity or quality from that one isolated example, it would be quantity.

That is not the same as generally saying I believe quality is not important.
I have categorically already stated in a previous post that quality is important.

So stop lying and making pathetic straw man arguments.

 

[FreoMonocle]

Over half our midfield are both excellent and quick decision makers and good have good disposal. But it doesn't equate into lot's of balls kicked to forward chests. Our scores show that we are poor at it even with what should be a dominant midfield.

I think there is more to it than "Oh noes, Danyle has bombed it long". Our forwards can't capitalise on what should be good service to them, a mix of 1. we can't get the ball there at all (q1 last round) 2. we don't give enough quality and 3. Our 2017 forward line on results to date aren't in danger of getting an AA nomination this year. If they can't capitalise on what should be a lot of good passes due to structure and/or personnel, they aint going to capitalise on long bombs.

I just don't think we have a forward line that cut's the mustard, it never did in the last handful of years, this current lineup may get a collective pass mark eventually. There is scope to improve on the personnel with drafts and trading over time, but it's probably a coaching issue as well over the years. Haunted by a Suma legacy still? Our forwards lead into each other rather than making space for each other, I see Crozier in packs trying to mark instead of crumb (great when he successfully flies from behind, ordinary when he's a midget in a pack of giants and leaving us without a crumber).

Danyle's long bombs should not be an automatic disaster, they should be an opportunity, but we don't have the ability to capitalise on it as much as we should.

 

[Tazmania]

I think you're all arguing about different sides of the same coin but trying to break it down into absolutes.

Of course more inside 50's gives the opportunity to get more goals. If it never gets into the 50 it will never score (even a bomb from outside that sails through is passing through the 50 )

But...with a quality delivery to inside 50 then the chance of scoring goes up

and...with a quality target waiting there inside the 50 the the chance of scoring is even higher.

all of the bolded factors alone will improve the chance of scoring but combined is what every team wants.

I think PurpleEyes is saying simply that Danyle gives the opportunity more often than junior players and that shouldn't be sniffed at.

Everyone else though is saying that his delivery is lacking and therefore that negates his opportunities. I tend to agree as his buddy a couple of years ago I watched him a bit obsessively at games and couldn't help notice the amount of time his kicks inside 50 came straight back out and lost faith in his ability to deliver a quality ball. Should we not be trying to find someone who can deliver with quality more often than not and therefore be an upgrade on Danyle? Of course we should eg Bennell and BHill have come into the team.

Targets are something we've struggles with for a few years but seems to be on the improve.

 

[Yato]

1 inside 50s at 100% or 10 inside 50s at 10% ...

I will take 5 inside 50s at 20% ...

Maybe more inside 50s means less inside 50s for them?

 

[rgauci]

1 inside 50s at 100% or 10 inside 50s at 10% ...

I will take 5 inside 50s at 20% ...

Maybe more inside 50s means less inside 50s for them?

You wanna be better than average in most stats but not exceptional in one and poor in others. Coaches will work out a plan against Exceptional in one.

We should be aiming to be above average for the number of inside 50s and above average for quality.

 

[FIFO Footy]

Anyone know if and what time freo are training this morning at ARC Cockburn?

 

[dockerfemme]

Anyone know if and what time freo are training this morning at ARC Cockburn?

They will be training approx. 9:30 to 11:00.

 

[FIFO Footy]

They will be training approx. 9:30 to 11:00.

Thank you!!

 

[Steinfreo]

I want to see us minus Sandi, Mundy and Johnson. Realistically they arent there for our next tilt but they are still so important. All are in excellent form as well so maybe our true form for a next go at it hasnt been revealed. I think trading for established 24 -28 year olds is a good strategy because weve missed out on so many that would be that age now, I would even sacrifice early picks for good 24 year olds in the next trade period.

 

[wild side]

I want to see us minus Sandi, Mundy and Johnson. Realistically they arent there for our next tilt but they are still so important. All are in excellent form as well so maybe our true form for a next go at it hasnt been revealed. I think trading for established 24 -28 year olds is a good strategy because weve missed out on so many that would be that age now, I would even sacrifice early picks for good 24 year olds in the next trade period.

Mundy is 31. The way he is playing, he will be around for our next tilt.

 

[wayToGo_]

No, my point is that, currently, by picking D.Pearce you can improve the quantity of your i50s. What I don't get is how you can improve the number of effective i50s (quality) by not selecting D.Pearce.

Power to you for standing strong on this. But do you really believe we increase the quantity of i50s (in total) by having him in the team? Aren't i50 opportunities more the result of hard work by the team, and not just the one player that ends up kicking it? As a whole team do we average more i50s overall with Danyle in the team? No.

Our most i50s this year have been against Melbourne (58) and then Essendon (56) and our best i50 efficiency was against the Western Bulldogs (60%) all of which were games he didn't play. We've averaged 47.7 i50s in games with him and 51.8 without him. Our i50 efficiency has been 46.0% with him and 48.8% without him. I think the reality is that Danyle is a fringe role-player for us - we are neither greatly better or worse with or without him. I am fine with him being in the mix but we need to be developing others that have a higher ceiling in the long run.

 

[Purpletown]

Where are we at? Excluding the first 2 games of 2017 we have strung together a good run of games apart from one really bad quarter against the Egos that took us out of the game. We have been playing well enough in all our wins to cover some poor periods of play in each of those games. A win is a win so we are getting results against sides that have been going ok and not just knocking up wins against out of form or lower sides.

The rebuild is gaining traction and the results are very good for less than half a year into a four year rebuild. I expect there will be ups and downs for us again before this season is over however we have managed to stop the floggings we received in rounds 1 & 2 with a lot of younger players and the new to the team trades in BHill, Hammling, Kersten and Cam Mac all doing well in patches.

The likes of Mundy, Jonno, Fyfe, Neale and Sandy are all in better form with the younger team we are now fielding than they were with the older brigade we started the year with so overall it's fair to say the young guys are contributing and improving, the players we have traded in are proving their worth and the best of the more experienced players seem to have been rejuvenated. All those things are positives going forward.

I had us down as and 8th to 12th finish in 2017 and still see that as in the ball park but with more upside than down.

After round 2 it looked like a wooden spoon so well done to Ross, the club and the players for turning the season around in such a short time.

 

[Fat Nyfe]

Through all this criticism of D.Pearce and me defending his selections, I have yet to see any knockers suggest who should replace him and how that player will improve Freo's scoring efficiency.

Weller to Pearce's role. I'd love him to have the I50 numbers that Pearce has. And it would potentially improve us in 2 areas, his time in defence has been a learning curve I hope but he's not a natural defender.

 

[scon]

Our 'natural' defenders are either injured,developing or needing replacement;so that's why we have to trial blokes back there in our hunt for rebound.
Sonny,Billy,Silly,Barra,Lachie with an improving Cleaver and Danyle the bomb should provide us with the quantity and quality of pill I50.
We're still a little light in the forward half but if Ballas and Apeness had turned up perhaps not so.
Maybe the answer to our back half distributor search will be answered from Peel,that looks promising.
Got no doubt the club know better than us all the trend of the game our plan within that and the personnel required to acquit it.
Lachie has surprised me on occasion with how spectacularly he's burn the ball.I'd say he's been told to go the high risk exocet into the corridor and even when you're a great kick it's still high risk.

 

[Outshined]

I have never asserted the quantity of i50s is important and the quality is not.

If anything, the derby is a perfect example of why i50s are so important and the quality of them is not.

Nah fair play PurpleEyes for sticking to your guns and defending a confirmed escapee goat.

The problem with Pearce is that our game's changed. He was useful a few years ago when the primary objective of our ball movement forward was to trigger stoppages and win the contest with the likes of Fyfe, Barlow and Mundy. We could often afford to just get the ball into our 50 without too much thought because we had the personnel and the gameplan to keep it locked in there if need be. Plus Pav was such a good player that even as an undersized KPF he could often split a 2 on 1 contest and make something out of a poor entry.

He's still good to have on the list as a squad player, but given his age it's fair this he's slipped down the pecking order in place of our younger mids/wingers. As long as he comes in and performs when required (as he has done this year), he's useful.

 

[Arcassius]

Weller to Pearce's role. I'd love him to have the I50 numbers that Pearce has. And it would potentially improve us in 2 areas, his time in defence has been a learning curve I hope but he's not a natural defender.

Shilly went out and was replaced with Balic. Balic went out and was replaced with Pearce. Everything aside, the best person to replace Pearce in that role is the guy that started off the chain that led to Pearce being included. I'd rather Bhilly, Walters, and Shilly be the 3 guys delivering i50 as the final kickers in

 

[youmewe]

Tell you who I'm loving seeing with the ball in his hand at the moment...Brady Grey.

Only had 3 kicks on Sunday. Three inside 50's, 3 goals. Plus a very good intercept mark which finished with a Walters miss in the 4th quarter.
Q2: 15.30 to go.
http://203.36.101.148/Telstra/AFL-W...-05-21_06-24-21-5394/output_2400kbps_720p.mp4
Q4: 9.36; 4.09 and 3.16 to go.
http://203.36.101.148/Telstra/AFL-W...-05-21_08-42-47-5051/output_2400kbps_720p.mp4

The week before he had two inside 50's which both ended up as scores (Crozier and Walters both missed). Not to mention that brilliant chase (put Rance under duress and then wrapped up Cotchin in a bear hug). Grey-Neale-Kersten goal (6.58 to go).
http://203.36.101.148/Telstra/AFL-W...-05-14_03-51-19-5960/output_2400kbps_720p.mp4

Would love him to rack up a lot more possessions, good things happen when he touches the ball.

Weren't we told his poor disposal was the reason he was overlooked for so long?

 

[eastfreo75]

Isolated stats can lie.