Preview Finals Week 1 • Brisbane Lions v Port Adelaide • Saturday 9 September 2023 • 7:25 PM

[dlanod]

Bartel- Giants flag, player of the finals, Brent Daniels.

Wow. I guess that's the advantage of board members in the media.

 

[Tom14]

I've spent the last couple of days devouring (but also critiquing) the gospel of Hoyne/King/Montagna, so you wouldn't have to. You're welcome.

In summary, and in conjunction with Tom14's post, none of it makes a whole lot of sense.

Hoyne made the general comment that generally in finals, uncontested possession numbers drop, and so do uncontested marks.

So I thought it worth reviewing our contested/uncontested numbers compared with Port. AFL website is helpful but only to the extent it shows the FOR numbers. It doesn't show the AGAINST numbers. Grasshopper Data to the rescue.

	BRISBANE		PORT ADELAIDE
	For	Against	For	Against
Contested possessions per game	136.3	131.5	135.7	139.9
Uncontested possessions per game	201.1	220.1	196.9	202.3
Contested/uncontested ratio	67.8%	59.7%	68.9%	69.2%
Marks per game	98.9	88.2	84.0	77.2
Contested marks per game	11.6	9.4	10.6	10.4
Uncontested marks per game	87.3	78.8	73.4	66.8

So essentially these numbers make arguments for each team. On our side:

• We generally beat our opponent in contested ball
• Port generally concede more contested ball
• Our opponents generally beat us on the spread (i.e. our ratio against is only 59.7%). If Hoyne is correct, this is less likely to occur in a final, particularly given Port's own high ratio, notwithstanding what happened in Round 1.
• We take more contested marks on average.
• We also concede less contested marks on average

Whereas on Port's side:

• They have a slightly higher ratio of contested ball, and a much higher ratio against, indicating they are more accustomed to playing a "finals brand" than we are.
• Their matches also generally involve less uncontested marks than our games, both for and against. Again, this indicates they are more accustomed to playing a "finals brand" than we are.

Hoyne and King went on to label the main strengths and weaknesses of the two teams:
View attachment 1795850View attachment 1795851

And this is rather odd, when comparing the above to the raw numbers:

	Brisbane	Port Adelaide
Clearances won per game	42.2	38.5
Clearances lost per game	35.6	36.7
Net clearance wins	+6.6	+1.8
Total stoppages per game	77.8	75.3
Intercepts per game	67.1	69.3

So we are better at the turnover game, yet we generate less intercepts than Port. Meanwhile Port are better at the stoppage game, yet have (a) less total stoppages per game and (b) an inferior clearance differential. It's like both teams have spent the season playing with one arm tied behind their backs.

The general perception though is that finals is more about the turnover game than the stoppage game, so if that holds true it bodes well for us, apparently. The numbers I don't have access to must indicate we are more efficient at converting our turnovers into scores, and vice versa for Port.

Hoyne also had a nice little drive by for Starce, Cam and Bez:
View attachment 1795848View attachment 1795849

Lastly, Montagna had his say:
View attachment 1795852

So it looks like it will be very much a battle of territory, with both teams susceptible on the counter attack. To me, this is hardly surprising - when you play a high press (to use a soccer term) you are always vulnerable to a swift counter attack. Exhibit A would be our game against Adelaide in Adelaide.

In summary then, there's arguments for both teams. Port play more a "finals brand" if you read into the historical numbers, while we are better at scoring from turnovers, which apparently is also what stands up in finals. So, 6 of one, half a dozen of the other. In the end it's probably going to become a territory battle, meaning "death by a thousand cuts" is more likely to appear on the coroner's report than "Oppenheimer".

Agree with all the above, but will observe that the 'strength and weakenesses' thing from 360 was purely based on a team's scoring profile - so while we win slightly more clearances than port, we are mid-table for scoring direct from clearance whereas Port is #1 for scoring from centre bounce, for example.

 

[McIvor]

Wow. I guess that's the advantage of board members in the media.

The boys on Classified were ribbing him about his time as a recruiter at the Lions a few years ago. Literally had no clue Bartel worked at the Lions.

 

[dlanod]

The boys on Classified were ribbing him about his time as a recruiter at the Lions a few years ago. Literally had no clue Bartel worked at the Lions.

Me neither.

 

[Dalions]

The boys on Classified were ribbing him about his time as a recruiter at the Lions a few years ago. Literally had no clue Bartel worked at the Lions.

It was very brief.
I remember reading about him lining up a South Australian to come to us at the time.
It was never mentioned who, but it may have been Lincoln McCarthy considering he was from Geelong where Jimmy had just moved/retired from as a player.

 

[Dalions]

Getting pumped!

 

[McIvor]

It was very brief.
I remember reading about him lining up a South Australian to come to us at the time.
It was never mentioned who, but it may have been Lincoln McCarthy considering he was from Geelong where Jimmy had just moved/retired from as a player.

The ribbing was actually about Bartel being the reason Lachie joined Brisbane if I’m not mistaken.

 

[StevoJenkins]

The boys on Classified were ribbing him about his time as a recruiter at the Lions a few years ago. Literally had no clue Bartel worked at the Lions.

I remember reading something about it at the time.

Think he was watching Melbourne based draft prospects/players.
Didn't last long.

 

[50Lions]

Just a short clip of Dunks talking about his mindset and the leadership roll he wants to take into finals.

What a great pick up!

 

[moncon]

St.Kilda v GWS is a bit of a nothing game. You would have to think Port Adelaide beats whoever wins that one.

I'm sure the AFL would love the Saints or the Giants to win a flag...2016, anyone?

 

[MSB ROYS]

For what it's worth, I'd genuinely prefer we don't play Gunston, but don't think him playing or not will lose us a game and I can see him having a big impact in a final, especially given the weak third tall defenders of some of who we'd likely play in the prelim assuming we win on Saturday.

Still, I think our current structure is best but not the be all and end all.

There is always next year for Gunners...

 

[Elixuh]

For what it's worth, I'd genuinely prefer we don't play Gunston, but don't think him playing or not will lose us a game and I can see him having a big impact in a final, especially given the weak third tall defenders of some of who we'd likely play in the prelim assuming we win on Saturday.

Still, I think our current structure is best but not the be all and end all.

 

[Nunez]

 

[harvester]

Just a short clip of Dunks talking about his mindset and the leadership roll he wants to take into finals.

What a great pick up!

Thanks for the video mate!! I think Dunkley will be a big player for us this Saturday night

 

[Nathan Barley]

Linc for Lyons

They dropped Boak to sub

Wonder if that effects our sub choice

 

[Elixuh]

I’d be surprised is lyons isn’t sub

 

[Nathan Barley]

I’d be surprised is lyons isn’t sub

Just thinking Fort in case of an injury to a tall

 

[buttermuffs]

Linc for Lyons

They dropped Boak to sub

Wonder if that effects our sub choice

Fort, Lohmann, Lyons or Gardiner for sub so I doubt it changes our most likely first preference of Lyons.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[martinson]

Linc for Lyons

They dropped Boak to sub

Wonder if that effects our sub choice

Geez . I haven't seen enough of them to know but what I've seen of Boak this year he's still a good player.

He'd be an awesome sub to swing in for a half.

 

[pulpdriver]

I’d be surprised is lyons isn’t sub

I think Fort. We can cover most areas by shuffling but if Oscar or Joe goes down it could hurt. Tall sub okay when we're playing the two tall forward line imo.

 

[Elixuh]

Just thinking Fort in case of an injury to a tall

My concern is Boak coming on in a tight game as fresh legs in midfield and giving them a huge momentum boost.

But equally what do you do if a tall goes down. This is why they like gunners in. So much more flexibility.

Lycett is pretty shit. But is a dawg.

 

[Nunez]

My concern is Boak coming on in a tight game as fresh legs in midfield and giving them a huge momentum boost.

But equally what do you do if a tall goes down. This is why they like gunners in. So much more flexibility.

Lycett is pretty s**t.

Bring back the !

 

[martinson]

My concern is Boak coming on in a tight game as fresh legs in midfield and giving them a huge momentum boost.

But equally what do you do if a tall goes down. This is why they like gunners in. So much more flexibility.

Lycett is pretty s**t.

I agree except for the Gunners part.

Boak as sub really worries me if the game is tight.

Still seen him turn it on a couple of times this year.

 

[martinson]

In fact I'm surprised Boak is out.

Obviously they've come up with a plan with an extra week for Kenny to think about it.

 

[Nunez]

In fact I'm surprised Boak is out.

Obviously they've come up with a plan with an extra week for Kenny to think about it.

Maybe Boak is the Trinity test to be detonated in the fourth quarter.