Strategy Why do we have poor starts?

[Catfish Alley]

I think there is something very interesting going on behind closed doors. That insight into the Richmond game was intriguing. It seems they are being more methodical in applying pressure and realizing the breaking point of other teams. We don't quite have the weapons that we had a few years ago so it seems this has been introduced in order to give younger players a strict, rigid structure that they can follow easily and keep grinding away at. Then, hopefully, the research pays off and they time their run to the final siren like Makybe Diva.

 

[FredLeDeux]

Our poor 1st quarters have much to do with the age of our best players.
Of our 12 best-performed players this season, 2 - Motlop/Christensen - are young and fast.
The other 10 are aged 25 (Selwood) and over (the other 9).
On average, our best 12 are (always have been) noticeably slower than the opposition's best 12.
This gives the opposition an advantage early on, when pace is at a premium.
But our best 12 are on average heavier, stronger, smarter and better than the opposition's best 12.
These factors take more effect after the first 30-40 minutes of the game.
As a result, we have won most 2nd quarters, dominated the 3rd quarters and (except when our 2nd/3rd quarters haven't been conclusive) eased off in the 4th quarters as our better players switch into maintenance mode.

 

[4quarter_cat]

Our poor 1st quarters have much to do with the age of our best players.
Of our 12 best-performed players this season, 2 - Motlop/Christensen - are young and fast.
The other 10 are aged 25 (Selwood) and over (the other 9).
On average, our best 12 are (always have been) noticeably slower than the opposition's best 12.
This gives the opposition an advantage early on, when pace is at a premium.
But our best 12 are on average heavier, stronger, smarter and better than the opposition's best 12.
These factors take more effect after the first 30-40 minutes of the game.
As a result, we have won most 2nd quarters, dominated the 3rd quarters and (except when our 2nd/3rd quarters haven't been conclusive) eased off in the 4th quarters as our better players switch into maintenance mode.

Could be onto something there Fred. I'm inclined to believe that these are all parts of the reason, and we are working on changing the things that can be changed without sacrificing our over game plan.

 

[Partridge]

Our poor 1st quarters have much to do with the age of our best players.
Of our 12 best-performed players this season, 2 - Motlop/Christensen - are young and fast.
The other 10 are aged 25 (Selwood) and over (the other 9).
On average, our best 12 are (always have been) noticeably slower than the opposition's best 12.
This gives the opposition an advantage early on, when pace is at a premium.
But our best 12 are on average heavier, stronger, smarter and better than the opposition's best 12.
These factors take more effect after the first 30-40 minutes of the game.
As a result, we have won most 2nd quarters, dominated the 3rd quarters and (except when our 2nd/3rd quarters haven't been conclusive) eased off in the 4th quarters as our better players switch into maintenance mode.

Sorry Fred, who are the 12 players? I'd be very reluctant to not have Christensen or Motlop in a top 12 of ours this season, and neither of them are 25.

 

[FredLeDeux]

Sorry Fred, who are the 12 players? I'd be very reluctant to not have Christensen or Motlop in a top 12 of ours this season, and neither of them are 25.

Yes, I mentioned them in the 2nd sentence as the 2 of the top 12 who are young and fast.

PS, I purposely didn't list the other 10 (except for mentioning Selwood) because I didn't want to distract from the main point.