Analysis Why are we 1-4? A snapshot of our last 5 off seasons...

[JimBob10]

I like many here am frustrated at our start to the season. I hear a lot of people saying Buckley cant coach and he has lost the players however I don't believe this to be the case and there are in fact a lot of other more boring reasons why we are in our current predicament.

IMO the no.1 reason why we watch our team play every week with no clear gamplan and chemistry is because we have made too many changes to our list each year. You cant just grab a whole bunch of talented players, throw them in a side together and expect that they will play with fluency and cohesion. We have made 4-5 changes every year to our best 22 with only a handful of players who have been allowed to play together for any significant amount of time.

Take a look at our list changes over the last 5 years and its impact to our best 22:

**Note I have listed players who were best 22 or close to. Also year of debut and year of last game

2012

In - Seedsman, Elliott, M. Williams
Out - Dawes, Wellingham

2013

In - Dwyer, Frost, Lynch, Thomas, Kennedy, Witts, Oxley, Young, Grundy
Out - Jolly, Krakouer, Thomas, Shaw

2014

In - Adams, Langdon, White, Broomhead, Ramsay, Marsh
Out - Ball, Keeffe, Lynch, Thomas, Beams, Lumumba, Maxwell

2015

In - Crisp, De Goey, Varcoe, Maynard, Moore, Greenwood
Out - Seedsman, Dwyer, Kennedy, Young

2016

In - Treloar, Aish, Howe, Cox, Smith, Crocker, Phillips
Out - M. Williams, Frost, Witts, Marsh, Macaffer, Toovey, N.Brown, Cloke, Swan

2017
In - Hoskin Elliott, Schade, Wells, Mayne
Out - TBC at end of season

I firmly believe to have success, the core of your group (11-16 players) should have played 4-5 years together.

So in our current best 22, the following qualify:

Pendlebury
Reid
Blair*
Goldsack
Sidebottom
Elliott
Fasolo
Grundy

So only 8 players who would have genuine chemistry with each other. Not to mention that Reid has missed virtually 2 full seasons, Blair is now not best 22, Goldsack like Reid has missed 2 full seasons, Elliott missed last year and Fasolo has only established himself as best 22 over the last 2 years.

Compare that list with the Western Bulldogs and GWS who have relatively young lists in experience but combined experience is through the roof

Western Bulldogs (16)

M. Boyd
Murphy
Wood
Johannisen
Dahlhaus
Hunter
C.Smith*
Picken
Liberatore
Campbell
Macrae
Stringer
Dickson
Morris
Roughead
Wallis

GWS (16)

Cameron
Coniglio
Davis
Greene
Haynes
Kennedy
Mohr
Patton
Scully
Shiel
D. Smith
Tomlinson
Ward
Z. Williams
Whitfield
Wilson

**These lists were compiled of players who started playing for their current club during or before the 2013 season.

Clearly both GWS and the Western Bulldogs are entering very successful periods and combined experience has played a big part in this. The first question I ask as a supporter is when are Collingwood going to get to similar numbers in order to be more successful??

Well going back to our list changes - Grundy is the only current best 22 player who debuted in 2013. In 2014, 5 best 22 players debuted for the club (Adams, Langdon, White, Broomhead, Ramsay). So assuming no leaves the club, my conclusion would be that by next year (2018) we should have 13 players with enough combined experience to make us more successful and make the top 8.

The concern is of that 13 - White, Blair and Goldsack may be no longer at the club. For this reason, when making decisions on these players at the end of the year, I would prefer to keep them for one more year as none as especially old and are still somewhat contributing.

FWIW I think we have traded well over the last 5 years. The only questionable decisions IMO are Mayne and Aish but I haven't given up on either. Lynch and Young IMO were free hits as we'd already received Grundy for Wellingham and Broomhead for Dawes.

At the end of the year the club will be tempted to make wholesale changes to our playing list but I would advise the opposite. After exciting/busy trade periods over the last 5 years, I would like to see us with very few changes in and out. Most of our players are signed up so retaining Grundy (who is off contract) is crucial to our future planning. Lets attack the draft with our a round 1 pick (the first we've had for 3 years).

Lastly, we as supporters were spoilt from 2002 - 2013 after a terrible decade beforehand. The club will most likely miss finals for the fourth year in a row but we have been spared bottom four finishes and rebuilt our list at the same time. It is not all doom and gloom and I think our list is talented enough to contend as soon as they have had time to play long enough together.

 

[Frank Gallagher]

Great post, chemistry takes time, but, Buckley has continually made unnecessary changes week in week out, so he only has his self to blame for that IMO.

 

[Sir_Loin]

I like many here am frustrated at our start to the season. I hear a lot of people saying Buckley cant coach and he has lost the players however I don't believe this to be the case and there are in fact a lot of other more boring reasons why we are in our current predicament.

IMO the no.1 reason why we watch our team play every week with no clear gamplan and chemistry is because we have made too many changes to our list each year. You cant just grab a whole bunch of talented players, throw them in a side together and expect that they will play with fluency and cohesion. We have made 4-5 changes every year to our best 22 with only a handful of players who have been allowed to play together for any significant amount of time.

Take a look at our list changes over the last 5 years and its impact to our best 22:

**Note I have listed players who were best 22 or close to. Also year of debut and year of last game

2012

In - Seedsman, Elliott, M. Williams
Out - Dawes, Wellingham

2013

In - Dwyer, Frost, Lynch, Thomas, Kennedy, Witts, Oxley, Young, Grundy
Out - Jolly, Krakouer, Thomas, Shaw

2014

In - Adams, Langdon, White, Broomhead, Ramsay, Marsh
Out - Ball, Keeffe, Lynch, Thomas, Beams, Lumumba, Maxwell

2015

In - Crisp, De Goey, Varcoe, Maynard, Moore, Greenwood
Out - Seedsman, Dwyer, Kennedy, Young

2016

In - Treloar, Aish, Howe, Cox, Smith, Crocker, Phillips
Out - M. Williams, Frost, Witts, Marsh, Macaffer, Toovey, N.Brown, Cloke, Swan

2017
In - Hoskin Elliott, Schade, Wells, Mayne
Out - TBC at end of season

I firmly believe to have success, the core of your group (11-16 players) should have played 4-5 years together.

So in our current best 22, the following qualify:

Pendlebury
Reid
Blair*
Goldsack
Sidebottom
Elliott
Fasolo
Grundy

So only 8 players who would have genuine chemistry with each other. Not to mention that Reid has missed virtually 2 full seasons, Blair is now not best 22, Goldsack like Reid has missed 2 full seasons, Elliott missed last year and Fasolo has only established himself as best 22 over the last 2 years.

Compare that list with the Western Bulldogs and GWS who have relatively young lists in experience but combined experience is through the roof

Western Bulldogs (16)

M. Boyd
Murphy
Wood
Johannisen
Dahlhaus
Hunter
C.Smith*
Picken
Liberatore
Campbell
Macrae
Stringer
Dickson
Morris
Roughead
Wallis

GWS (16)

Cameron
Coniglio
Davis
Greene
Haynes
Kennedy
Mohr
Patton
Scully
Shiel
D. Smith
Tomlinson
Ward
Z. Williams
Whitfield
Wilson

**These lists were compiled of players who started playing for their current club during or before the 2013 season.

Clearly both GWS and the Western Bulldogs are entering very successful periods and combined experience has played a big part in this. The first question I ask as a supporter is when are Collingwood going to get to similar numbers in order to be more successful??

Well going back to our list changes - Grundy is the only current best 22 player who debuted in 2013. In 2014, 5 best 22 players debuted for the club (Adams, Langdon, White, Broomhead, Ramsay). So assuming no leaves the club, my conclusion would be that by next year (2018) we should have 13 players with enough combined experience to make us more successful and make the top 8.

The concern is of that 13 - White, Blair and Goldsack may be no longer at the club. For this reason, when making decisions on these players at the end of the year, I would prefer to keep them for one more year as none as especially old and are still somewhat contributing.

FWIW I think we have traded well over the last 5 years. The only questionable decisions IMO are Mayne and Aish but I haven't given up on either. Lynch and Young IMO were free hits as we'd already received Grundy for Wellingham and Broomhead for Dawes.

At the end of the year the club will be tempted to make wholesale changes to our playing list but I would advise the opposite. After exciting/busy trade periods over the last 5 years, I would like to see us with very few changes in and out. Most of our players are signed up so retaining Grundy (who is off contract) is crucial to our future planning. Lets attack the draft with our a round 1 pick (the first we've had for 3 years).

Lastly, we as supporters were spoilt from 2002 - 2013 after a terrible decade beforehand. The club will most likely miss finals for the fourth year in a row but we have been spared bottom four finishes and rebuilt our list at the same time. It is not all doom and gloom and I think our list is talented enough to contend as soon as they have had time to play long enough together.

Good point. Very similar to Ben Darwin from Gain Line views on SEN earlier in the year

 

[CFC2010]

Good point. Very similar to Ben Darwin from Gain Line views on SEN earlier in the year

I heard that yesterday also........he was very bullish on you guys Sir_Lion. Maybe there is method to his madness?

Apparently he does it on all sports codes around the world...........it was very interesting!

It still doesn't excuse the fact Bucks cant coach but it was interesting all the same.

Just found an article on it.........

Analytics point to a long year for the Magpies
By SEN 2 months ago

A sports data analytics company headed by a former Wallaby has forecast a gloomy year ahead for Collingwood fans.

Ben Darwin, who played 28 tests for the Wallabies between 2001 to 2003, heads up GAIN LINE, who have developed a metric – the Team Work Index (TWI), that can help predict the future fortunes of sporting teams all over the world.


“It’s the long-term philosophy of a club. Are they a club that buys, or are they a club that creates?” Darwin explained.

“What we find is, with clubs that create their own players, or draft young players through the system, is that those players with the stability the clubs have, they learn much faster.

“Whereas when players are coming in from other clubs, they try to influence other guys into the way to play, and often at times that could be quite disruptive.”

“The biggest thing that we’ve found is that the talent coming into the system is nowhere near as important as how the system is built,

“Its not so much about the who, it’s the house and how they build the house.”

The metric successfully predicted the rise of the Western Bulldogs – who they rated in the top two in each of the past three seasons, and has forecast that Collingwood will drop away the most this season.

“There is a huge amount of excitement around Collingwood about what they can produce – and we’ve seen that excitement with a lot of other clubs,” he said.

“The difficultly that comes here is that can’t find any coach in the world that can function above TWI – we’ve never found anyone that can be so good that they can overcome it.

“Wayne Bennett went to the Newcastle Knights and they underperformed dramatically, but we actually thought he did a brilliant job given what he had.

“The hard part with a club like Collingwood is that there is so much pressure from their fans for them to be successful, that sometimes they take answers in different ways and there is a lack of patience there.

“When you have that lack of patience there, you get churn, and when you have churn you get a lack of stability, and a lack of stability tends to creates a fault.”

Of the clubs down the ladder, Darwin said that Melbourne is the club who the metric favors most to rise up the table.

“We aren’t talking about winning titles, we are talking about coming up two or three places,” he said.

Collingwood

 

[Sir_Loin]

I heard that yesterday also........he was very bullish on you guys Sir_Lion. Maybe there is method to his madness?

Apparently he does it on all sports codes around the world...........it was very interesting!

It still doesn't excuse the fact Bucks cant coach but it was interesting all the same.

Just found an article on it.........

Analytics point to a long year for the Magpies
By SEN 2 months ago

A sports data analytics company headed by a former Wallaby has forecast a gloomy year ahead for Collingwood fans.

Ben Darwin, who played 28 tests for the Wallabies between 2001 to 2003, heads up GAIN LINE, who have developed a metric – the Team Work Index (TWI), that can help predict the future fortunes of sporting teams all over the world.


“It’s the long-term philosophy of a club. Are they a club that buys, or are they a club that creates?” Darwin explained.

“What we find is, with clubs that create their own players, or draft young players through the system, is that those players with the stability the clubs have, they learn much faster.

“Whereas when players are coming in from other clubs, they try to influence other guys into the way to play, and often at times that could be quite disruptive.”

“The biggest thing that we’ve found is that the talent coming into the system is nowhere near as important as how the system is built,

“Its not so much about the who, it’s the house and how they build the house.”

The metric successfully predicted the rise of the Western Bulldogs – who they rated in the top two in each of the past three seasons, and has forecast that Collingwood will drop away the most this season.

“There is a huge amount of excitement around Collingwood about what they can produce – and we’ve seen that excitement with a lot of other clubs,” he said.

“The difficultly that comes here is that can’t find any coach in the world that can function above TWI – we’ve never found anyone that can be so good that they can overcome it.

“Wayne Bennett went to the Newcastle Knights and they underperformed dramatically, but we actually thought he did a brilliant job given what he had.

“The hard part with a club like Collingwood is that there is so much pressure from their fans for them to be successful, that sometimes they take answers in different ways and there is a lack of patience there.

“When you have that lack of patience there, you get churn, and when you have churn you get a lack of stability, and a lack of stability tends to creates a fault.”

Of the clubs down the ladder, Darwin said that Melbourne is the club who the metric favors most to rise up the table.

“We aren’t talking about winning titles, we are talking about coming up two or three places,” he said.

Collingwood

It does explain a lot. And adds some quantitative basis to the cohesion argument. All things being equal you could understand the argument to keep Buckley on as coach if you place value on this analysis.

The big question is how long will it take and how many more players do you need to add to the mix? And depends on how patient the club is prepared to be - doesn't help when the club and coach make statements about making finals in this context. Take Dimma - most tiges supporters wanted him gone last year. Still time in the season to completely fall of the perch and conversely still time for pies to get their mojo

 

[The Dawes]

My personal view is that we've brought in too many players from other clubs in the last 3 years, 10 in total - 8 of whom played on Tuesday - i wonder how much damage this does to the fabric of the club. Do young players see themselves and their development as less of a priority for the club? Does the club become less "Collingwood' for the lack of a better term with all these recycled names? To some degree I think it does and for me as a supporter I would prefer to watch us lose with 'home grown' players rather than a hodge-podge of blokes from elsewhere.
I like the idea of young players being drafted here and developed into "Collingwood' people.
Our player development used to be the envy of the league not that many years back, now it's crap. Only Grundy and to a lesser extent Maynard have really come on in the last 2-3 years.
sorry, bit of a disjointed response....

 

[barrackers]

I like many here am frustrated at our start to the season. I hear a lot of people saying Buckley cant coach and he has lost the players however I don't believe this to be the case and there are in fact a lot of other more boring reasons why we are in our current predicament.

IMO the no.1 reason why we watch our team play every week with no clear gamplan and chemistry is because we have made too many changes to our list each year. You cant just grab a whole bunch of talented players, throw them in a side together and expect that they will play with fluency and cohesion. We have made 4-5 changes every year to our best 22 with only a handful of players who have been allowed to play together for any significant amount of time.

Take a look at our list changes over the last 5 years and its impact to our best 22:

**Note I have listed players who were best 22 or close to. Also year of debut and year of last game

2012

In - Seedsman, Elliott, M. Williams
Out - Dawes, Wellingham

2013

In - Dwyer, Frost, Lynch, Thomas, Kennedy, Witts, Oxley, Young, Grundy
Out - Jolly, Krakouer, Thomas, Shaw

2014

In - Adams, Langdon, White, Broomhead, Ramsay, Marsh
Out - Ball, Keeffe, Lynch, Thomas, Beams, Lumumba, Maxwell

2015

In - Crisp, De Goey, Varcoe, Maynard, Moore, Greenwood
Out - Seedsman, Dwyer, Kennedy, Young

2016

In - Treloar, Aish, Howe, Cox, Smith, Crocker, Phillips
Out - M. Williams, Frost, Witts, Marsh, Macaffer, Toovey, N.Brown, Cloke, Swan

2017
In - Hoskin Elliott, Schade, Wells, Mayne
Out - TBC at end of season

I firmly believe to have success, the core of your group (11-16 players) should have played 4-5 years together.

So in our current best 22, the following qualify:

Pendlebury
Reid
Blair*
Goldsack
Sidebottom
Elliott
Fasolo
Grundy

So only 8 players who would have genuine chemistry with each other. Not to mention that Reid has missed virtually 2 full seasons, Blair is now not best 22, Goldsack like Reid has missed 2 full seasons, Elliott missed last year and Fasolo has only established himself as best 22 over the last 2 years.

Compare that list with the Western Bulldogs and GWS who have relatively young lists in experience but combined experience is through the roof

Western Bulldogs (16)

M. Boyd
Murphy
Wood
Johannisen
Dahlhaus
Hunter
C.Smith*
Picken
Liberatore
Campbell
Macrae
Stringer
Dickson
Morris
Roughead
Wallis

GWS (16)

Cameron
Coniglio
Davis
Greene
Haynes
Kennedy
Mohr
Patton
Scully
Shiel
D. Smith
Tomlinson
Ward
Z. Williams
Whitfield
Wilson

**These lists were compiled of players who started playing for their current club during or before the 2013 season.

Clearly both GWS and the Western Bulldogs are entering very successful periods and combined experience has played a big part in this. The first question I ask as a supporter is when are Collingwood going to get to similar numbers in order to be more successful??

Well going back to our list changes - Grundy is the only current best 22 player who debuted in 2013. In 2014, 5 best 22 players debuted for the club (Adams, Langdon, White, Broomhead, Ramsay). So assuming no leaves the club, my conclusion would be that by next year (2018) we should have 13 players with enough combined experience to make us more successful and make the top 8.

The concern is of that 13 - White, Blair and Goldsack may be no longer at the club. For this reason, when making decisions on these players at the end of the year, I would prefer to keep them for one more year as none as especially old and are still somewhat contributing.

FWIW I think we have traded well over the last 5 years. The only questionable decisions IMO are Mayne and Aish but I haven't given up on either. Lynch and Young IMO were free hits as we'd already received Grundy for Wellingham and Broomhead for Dawes.

At the end of the year the club will be tempted to make wholesale changes to our playing list but I would advise the opposite. After exciting/busy trade periods over the last 5 years, I would like to see us with very few changes in and out. Most of our players are signed up so retaining Grundy (who is off contract) is crucial to our future planning. Lets attack the draft with our a round 1 pick (the first we've had for 3 years).

Lastly, we as supporters were spoilt from 2002 - 2013 after a terrible decade beforehand. The club will most likely miss finals for the fourth year in a row but we have been spared bottom four finishes and rebuilt our list at the same time. It is not all doom and gloom and I think our list is talented enough to contend as soon as they have had time to play long enough together.

Terrific assessment, at least a few of us on here wanted more list stability and less turnover last offseason.

Further to the why:

• Collingwood has never been great at having players extend their careers deep into their 30s. Just two 300 game players is testament to that.
• We traded out of the 2009-11 drafts to build or sustain a premiership list, while undoubtedly it was the correct decision the cost is being paid now. We've potentially lost 3-4 current best 22 players (more detail here) as a result.
• As jackcass stated in that thread our strength previously was drafting players late, looking over the rookie drafts around that time there is certainly some quality we left on the table
• To fill the void of losing top end talent during the 2009-11 drafts we then traded players (Dawes and Wellingham) out for early picks, albeit pushed back 4 selections due to compensation selections.
• We also traded out players for more young talent, see Shaw.
• An injury plagued Thomas left and we chose not to match the contract offered by Carlton instead electing for a high pick again to bring in youth
• Beams left not of our choice, resulting another high pick and players. Injury stopped Greenwood from establishing himself in his first year.
• We also chose to adjust our list trading out players for players
• As Maggie5 pointed out injuries to Scharenberg and Freeman stopped them from establishing themselves in our best 22 and others like Kennedy and Broomhead didn't come on quickly
• An argument could be made that because Scharenberg, Freeman, Kennedy and Broomhead didn't establish themselves in the 22 we looked to shore up our young core via trades for Aish and Treloar.

To highlight the effects of the 2009-2011 drafts:

From the list of 16 bulldogs you gave 7 were selected during that period: Johannisen (rookie), Dahlhaus (rookie), Liberatore (f/s), Campbell (rookie), C.Smith*, Dickson, Wallis (f/s). While Macrae, Stringer were drafted before our first pick in 2012 with Hunter a father son in the same year.

From the 16 giants 11 were selected during that period: Coniglio, Greene, Haynes, Mohr (2011 pre-selection, previously nominated for a draft), Kennedy (2011 pre-selection, previously nominated for a draft), Patton, Shiel (2010 17 year old selection), Cameron (2010 17 year old selection), D. Smith, Tomlinson, Wilson (2010 17 year old selection). With Whitfield drafted before our first pick in 2012.

 

[jackcass]

My personal view is that we've brought in too many players from other clubs in the last 3 years, 10 in total - 8 of whom played on Tuesday - i wonder how much damage this does to the fabric of the club. Do young players see themselves and their development as less of a priority for the club? Does the club become less "Collingwood' for the lack of a better term with all these recycled names? To some degree I think it does and for me as a supporter I would prefer to watch us lose with 'home grown' players rather than a hodge-podge of blokes from elsewhere.
I like the idea of young players being drafted here and developed into "Collingwood' people.
Our player development used to be the envy of the league not that many years back, now it's crap. Only Grundy and to a lesser extent Maynard have really come on in the last 2-3 years.
sorry, bit of a disjointed response....

I'm not so sure it's about the quantum as the who you bring in and what they (could) bring to the team longer term.

Similar 3 year period leading into 2010 we added 6 (Wood, Corrie, Brown, Jolly, Ball, and Buckley) but only 3 of them managed to impact the senior side and none of them remain, Ball lasting the longest but gone in 2014 (5 seasons).

Of the more recent recruits from other clubs players like Treloar, Adams, WHE, Aish, Schade, Howe, and Crisp could all play 5+ years, Patty K was sadly a bust. We have deliberately targeted younger longer term prospects who should augment the drafted list.

 

[THATSGOLD]

So who has Buckley developed in his time at the club? Not bloody great!

 

[Kilmo]

Great post.

Although I'm not sure what qualifies exiting players to be on your list, as you've listed Krakouer and Jolly as delisted players but not Didak, and retired players like Maxwell and Ball but not Tarrant or Johnson.


It's clear that synergy is important for success and we haven't been able to have it through constant line up changes and injury. Hawks, Cats and Swans have been great at it. Swans this year with a few changes and a few injuries have fallen apart because the players, even though immensely talented, haven't played together before.

Swanny also suggested something similar in an interview with Fox sports about how he and Pendlebury had a great synergy as they knew each other's playing style so well and had played 200 games together.

 

[Kilmo]

So who has Buckley developed in his time at the club? Not bloody great!

Thought that at Tuesday's game.

The best players have been guys like Howe, Varcoe, Wells, Treloar and Adams, all recruits and not draftees.

 

[THATSGOLD]

Thought that at Tuesday's game.

The best players have been guys like Howe, Varcoe, Wells, Treloar and Adams, all recruits and not draftees.

Other teams crap. He's developed Grundy, one player in 5 years.

 

[Scodog10]

For anyone that remembers we trumpeted our list changes in last year's member forum as if it were a badge of honour. From 2011-2015 we made the most list changes league wide and we continue to underestimate the effect of list chemistry.

It's simply another nail in the coffin of those in charge.

 

[Rorzza]

We have kicked 18 goals and 33 points this year according to pick a winner and Fas has kicked 4 goals and 11 points. This is obviously not the primary cause but it doesn't help the situation.

 

[Kilmo]

I'd like to see a similar comparison for the 2010 premiership side.

Just off the top of my head we had players like Blair (debut 2010), Beams Sidebottom & Caff (debut 2009), Dawes & Wellingham (debut 2008), Reid Brown & Goldy (debut 2007) on top of new recruits Jolly & Ball.

 

[The Dawes]

We have kicked 18 goals and 33 points this year according to pick a winner and Fas has kicked 4 goals and 11 points. This is obviously not the primary cause but it doesn't help the situation.

From set shots alone that is

 

[4#Didak#4]

This is why we are 1-4

http://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/co...s/news-story/b6b9da7b75074312e9cddf11192d69c2


Champion Data, Australia’s leading provider of sports statistics, revealed the Magpies’ “expected scores rating” is the worst of all sides this year.

The “expected scores rating” is a form of calculating the difficulty of a shot based on a number of factors such as the angle, distance and preferred boot of the kicker.

“You’ve got to ask the question if it’s the midfielders and their delivery or what’s in front of them, and the easy answer is a bit of both,” Luff said on SEN radio.

“They’re going at an expected scores rate of -8.7 per cent, which is worst in the competition. Their expected accuracy is 48 per cent and they’re going at 39.4 per cent.

“We got them as a 3-2 team rather than 1-4, so the accuracy, despite the fact it’s a ‘poo-poo’ excuse, is actually a genuine excuse.”

From there, Collingwood’s kicking stats got worse.

Collingwood’s inside-50 conversion rate is the worst recorded in 20 years.

Luff revealed Collingwood’s inside-50s conversion rate as the worst recorded in 20 years.

“They’re got problems one-on-one in the forward 50, clearly the worst in the competition. For 58 inside 50s a game they should be getting more scoring shots, but when they’re having the shots their accuracy is just horrendous.”



So mystery solved.

 

[jmac70]

I heard that yesterday also........he was very bullish on you guys Sir_Lion. Maybe there is method to his madness?

Apparently he does it on all sports codes around the world...........it was very interesting!

It still doesn't excuse the fact Bucks cant coach but it was interesting all the same.

Just found an article on it.........

Analytics point to a long year for the Magpies
By SEN 2 months ago

A sports data analytics company headed by a former Wallaby has forecast a gloomy year ahead for Collingwood fans.

Ben Darwin, who played 28 tests for the Wallabies between 2001 to 2003, heads up GAIN LINE, who have developed a metric – the Team Work Index (TWI), that can help predict the future fortunes of sporting teams all over the world.


“It’s the long-term philosophy of a club. Are they a club that buys, or are they a club that creates?” Darwin explained.

“What we find is, with clubs that create their own players, or draft young players through the system, is that those players with the stability the clubs have, they learn much faster.

“Whereas when players are coming in from other clubs, they try to influence other guys into the way to play, and often at times that could be quite disruptive.”

“The biggest thing that we’ve found is that the talent coming into the system is nowhere near as important as how the system is built,

“Its not so much about the who, it’s the house and how they build the house.”

The metric successfully predicted the rise of the Western Bulldogs – who they rated in the top two in each of the past three seasons, and has forecast that Collingwood will drop away the most this season.

“There is a huge amount of excitement around Collingwood about what they can produce – and we’ve seen that excitement with a lot of other clubs,” he said.

“The difficultly that comes here is that can’t find any coach in the world that can function above TWI – we’ve never found anyone that can be so good that they can overcome it.

“Wayne Bennett went to the Newcastle Knights and they underperformed dramatically, but we actually thought he did a brilliant job given what he had.

“The hard part with a club like Collingwood is that there is so much pressure from their fans for them to be successful, that sometimes they take answers in different ways and there is a lack of patience there.

“When you have that lack of patience there, you get churn, and when you have churn you get a lack of stability, and a lack of stability tends to creates a fault.”

Of the clubs down the ladder, Darwin said that Melbourne is the club who the metric favors most to rise up the table.

“We aren’t talking about winning titles, we are talking about coming up two or three places,” he said.

Collingwood

Did the metric predict the Hawthorn three peat?

 

[CFC2010]

Did the metric predict the Hawthorn three peat?

No idea to be honest jmac re the Hawks.

I just caught the replay of the interview on SEN the other day. He did make the call two months ago re the Pies. He did also say the Tigers on his scale would improve.

The last line is significant from that interview I think..........“We aren’t talking about winning titles, we are talking about coming up two or three places,” he said.

Found this from his website..........interesting theory.........worth a read IMO.

Conclusion:

It takes a significant philosophical shift within an organisation to change recruiting strategy. Only one of these 6 clubs has made that significant shift, but for them it will still be a few more seasons before they reap the rewards. From a long term perspective the worst thing that can happen for a low TWI® club is for a season of success - as counter intuitive as it seems. This short-term success masks the inherent faults within an organisation and creates unrealistic expectations on the organisation and its individual members. This has played out at some level in the recent sacking of Leicester City's Claudio Ranieri.

While TWI® most obviously manifests itself on the playing arena, it is also a measure of an organisation as a whole. Best case scenario for low TWI® teams is sporadic success, worst case is failure of the organisation. This has played out with the unfortunate and sad demise of London Wels

 

[Horaceg]

So who has Buckley developed in his time at the club? Not bloody great!

He turned Blair into a near on 150 gamer, when he was looking at two or three seasons at best

 

[Finnishpie]

Great post, chemistry takes time, but, Buckley has continually made unnecessary changes week in week out, so he only has his self to blame for that IMO.

I dunno, mostly it's been injury I think.

 

[Finnishpie]

So who has Buckley developed in his time at the club? Not bloody great!

Fasolo
Adams
Phillips
Grundy
Howe - as a backman
Elliot
De Goey

Seems an alright bunch of players.

 

[magpies42]

I like many here am frustrated at our start to the season. I hear a lot of people saying Buckley cant coach and he has lost the players however I don't believe this to be the case and there are in fact a lot of other more boring reasons why we are in our current predicament.

IMO the no.1 reason why we watch our team play every week with no clear gamplan and chemistry is because we have made too many changes to our list each year. You cant just grab a whole bunch of talented players, throw them in a side together and expect that they will play with fluency and cohesion. We have made 4-5 changes every year to our best 22 with only a handful of players who have been allowed to play together for any significant amount of time.

Take a look at our list changes over the last 5 years and its impact to our best 22:

**Note I have listed players who were best 22 or close to. Also year of debut and year of last game

2012

In - Seedsman, Elliott, M. Williams
Out - Dawes, Wellingham

2013

In - Dwyer, Frost, Lynch, Thomas, Kennedy, Witts, Oxley, Young, Grundy
Out - Jolly, Krakouer, Thomas, Shaw

2014

In - Adams, Langdon, White, Broomhead, Ramsay, Marsh
Out - Ball, Keeffe, Lynch, Thomas, Beams, Lumumba, Maxwell

2015

In - Crisp, De Goey, Varcoe, Maynard, Moore, Greenwood
Out - Seedsman, Dwyer, Kennedy, Young

2016

In - Treloar, Aish, Howe, Cox, Smith, Crocker, Phillips
Out - M. Williams, Frost, Witts, Marsh, Macaffer, Toovey, N.Brown, Cloke, Swan

2017
In - Hoskin Elliott, Schade, Wells, Mayne
Out - TBC at end of season

I firmly believe to have success, the core of your group (11-16 players) should have played 4-5 years together.

So in our current best 22, the following qualify:

Pendlebury
Reid
Blair*
Goldsack
Sidebottom
Elliott
Fasolo
Grundy

So only 8 players who would have genuine chemistry with each other. Not to mention that Reid has missed virtually 2 full seasons, Blair is now not best 22, Goldsack like Reid has missed 2 full seasons, Elliott missed last year and Fasolo has only established himself as best 22 over the last 2 years.

Compare that list with the Western Bulldogs and GWS who have relatively young lists in experience but combined experience is through the roof

Western Bulldogs (16)

M. Boyd
Murphy
Wood
Johannisen
Dahlhaus
Hunter
C.Smith*
Picken
Liberatore
Campbell
Macrae
Stringer
Dickson
Morris
Roughead
Wallis

GWS (16)

Cameron
Coniglio
Davis
Greene
Haynes
Kennedy
Mohr
Patton
Scully
Shiel
D. Smith
Tomlinson
Ward
Z. Williams
Whitfield
Wilson

**These lists were compiled of players who started playing for their current club during or before the 2013 season.

Clearly both GWS and the Western Bulldogs are entering very successful periods and combined experience has played a big part in this. The first question I ask as a supporter is when are Collingwood going to get to similar numbers in order to be more successful??

Well going back to our list changes - Grundy is the only current best 22 player who debuted in 2013. In 2014, 5 best 22 players debuted for the club (Adams, Langdon, White, Broomhead, Ramsay). So assuming no leaves the club, my conclusion would be that by next year (2018) we should have 13 players with enough combined experience to make us more successful and make the top 8.

The concern is of that 13 - White, Blair and Goldsack may be no longer at the club. For this reason, when making decisions on these players at the end of the year, I would prefer to keep them for one more year as none as especially old and are still somewhat contributing.

FWIW I think we have traded well over the last 5 years. The only questionable decisions IMO are Mayne and Aish but I haven't given up on either. Lynch and Young IMO were free hits as we'd already received Grundy for Wellingham and Broomhead for Dawes.

At the end of the year the club will be tempted to make wholesale changes to our playing list but I would advise the opposite. After exciting/busy trade periods over the last 5 years, I would like to see us with very few changes in and out. Most of our players are signed up so retaining Grundy (who is off contract) is crucial to our future planning. Lets attack the draft with our a round 1 pick (the first we've had for 3 years).

Lastly, we as supporters were spoilt from 2002 - 2013 after a terrible decade beforehand. The club will most likely miss finals for the fourth year in a row but we have been spared bottom four finishes and rebuilt our list at the same time. It is not all doom and gloom and I think our list is talented enough to contend as soon as they have had time to play long enough together.

Couple with that our injury toll over the last three years and it's a difficult position to be in. Good point

 

[DWil6]

We're 1-4 because we missed a s**t ton of gettable goals.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[THATSGOLD]

Fasolo
Adams
Phillips
Grundy
Howe - as a backman
Elliot
De Goey

Seems an alright bunch of players.

But who is developed from that group? Not one of an A grader.
Only Grundy, Grundy is the only player he has developed. The rest are from other teams already or haven't developed yet.