Analysis Inside 50s into goals

[El_Scorcho]

Goal kicking has been an issue for the last decade - way too simplistic to say all the problems with the forward line are because of inept kicking for goal.

Even with bad goal kicking you should be scoring a lot more than 89 points with 66 inside 50 entries.

Yep, the goal kicking is bad, but it's partially a symptoms of a wider problem.

We don't generate high percentage scoring opportunities. We generate shots from the boundary. We can't find a key forward on the lead, basically ever. We blaze away hospital balls into the F50 and hope it works out.

10 years of this shit.

 

[HinkleysHeroes]

Its been like this for 252 games

 

[ClintEastwood]

Chad Cornes: "We've done everthing we could to work on this"

Yeah, nah. That mindset alone, should be enough to be sacked, Chad. There are always other ways to work on things.

 

[johnnysix]

I wonder what our average possessions per goal is? Certainly feels like we burn a tonne of possession before we have a shot. We stuff around a lot and get the ball very wide. I'm assuming this is risk mitigation to limit them intercepting in the corridor, but when guys like Butters are on song, it's his centering kicks that slice teams apart.

 

[HinkleysHeroes]

Yeah, nah. That mindset alone, should be enough to be sacked, Chad. There are always other ways to work on things.

Just like finals, goal kicking is hard

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

Here are the 3 games played so far and where shots are taken from, and what the conversion is and what the AFL average points is for that shot, by the AFLXScore guys at https://twitter.com/AFLxScore.

Rather than paste the full tweet I have posted their comment and the main graphic and ignored the actual vs expected and home team chance to win graph that goes with the individual tweet.

Shots include those that don't score and rushed behinds include those may have come from a shot that didn't make the distance is punched thru and recorded as a rushed behind as well as ones the defenders under pressure at ground level rush thru.


Rd 1 v WCE at AO Port 57 x I50 and 40 shots on goal for 70.2% vs WCE 40 x I50 and 22 shots for 55.0%
16.24 vs 10.10
All of Port's 40 shots scored and no rushed behinds

#AFLPowerEagles Final xScores:
PORT 120 from expected 126.4 (+0 rushed)
WCE 69 from expected 73.5 (+1 rushed)

We had a lot of long bombs against the WCE that didn't score goals, that are low percentage scoring opportunities.








Rd 2 v Rich at MCG Port 63 x I50 and 40 shots on goal for 63.5% vs Rich 52 x I50 and 28 shots for 53.8%
18.14 vs 13.14
8 of Port's 40 shots didn't make the distance/score and no rushed behinds

#AFLTigersPower Final xScores:
RICH 91 from expected 82.3 (+1 rushed)
PORT 122 from expected 128.3 (+0 rushed)









Rd 3 v Melb at AO Port 66 x I50 and 28 shots on goal for 42.4% vs Melb 45 x I50 and 22 shots for 48.9%
13.11 vs 15.6
5 of Port's 28 shots didn't make the distance/score and there was 1 rushed behind. Only 1 of Melbourne's shots didn't score.

#AFLPowerDees Final xScores:
PORT 88 from expected 99.1 (+1 rushed)
MELB 96 from expected 65.5 (+0 rushed)

 

[Powerade 08]

This is how our main set shot takers rate against expected score in 2022 and 2023 (number on the right is their rating). Basically a + number is above average and a - number is below average



Rioli and Marshall are generally above average set shot takers, Dixon average but missed a lot of games, and then a whole lot of piss blasting underneath

Finlayson with 60 set shots in 2023 and Georgiades with 44 set shots in 2022 converting way below the AFL average

and this is Collingwood last year

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

This is how our main set shot takers rate against expected score in 2022 and 2023 (the number on the right). Basically a + number is above average and a - number is below average

View attachment 1947661

Rioli and Marshall are generally above average set shot takers, Dixon average but missed a lot of games, and then a whole lot of piss blasting underneath

Finlayson with 60 set shots in 2023 and Georgiades with 44 set shots in 2022 converting way below the AFL average

and this is Collingwood last year

View attachment 1947662

Why is the collingwood data different to Port's?

 

[Powerade 08]

Why is the collingwood data different to Port's?

The ratings are right but i copied the rest over into the wrong columns, check again now.

 

[Peninsula Boy]

Yep, the goal kicking is bad, but it's partially a symptoms of a wider problem.

We don't generate high percentage scoring opportunities. We generate shots from the boundary. We can't find a key forward on the lead, basically ever. We blaze away hospital balls into the F50 and hope it works out.

10 years of this s**t.

100%.

It is rare for us to get a leading mark down the guts for an easy shot. We kick to the pockets and some times that is on but when you kick to the pockets, your set shot goal scoring is going to suffer.

 

[VineValerian]

100%.

It is rare for us to get a leading mark down the guts for an easy shot. We kick to the pockets and some times that is on but when you kick to the pockets, your set shot goal scoring is going to suffer.

Youse oafs have no idea.

The magic of Ken's game plan is that, if we continue to bombard the F50 with multiple times more entries than the oppo, the law of averages works to our advantage in that, inevitably, chaos theory will reign supreme, and enough of our guys will manufacture goals out of nothing in sufficient numbers to win the game.

Straightforward mathematics in action!

 

[Powerade 08]

I wonder what our average possessions per goal is? Certainly feels like we burn a tonne of possession before we have a shot. We stuff around a lot and get the ball very wide.

It is rare for us to get a leading mark down the guts for an easy shot.

That was with Boak, Wines, Rockliff in the middle

We had the least disposals of any team last year, top 5 for goals, use corridor kicks the most of any team

 

[The Hobo]

We can't do it. Especially not against top 4 teams.

Haven't been able to for a decade.

66-45 our way and we lose again. But no, it's the supporters who are idiots.

On SM-G975F using BigFooty.com mobile app

It's not the inside 50's that's the issue. It's the shot conversion. We had more scoring shots from easier positions. They took their tougher opportunities, we missed our easier ones.

Expected Score metric had us winning by 35 odd (which is based on the position of shots).

It really is as simple as kicking straight.

 

[Enviable Tradition]

It's not the inside 50's that's the issue. It's the shot conversion. We had more scoring shots from easier positions. They took their tougher opportunities, we missed our easier ones.

Expected Score metric had us winning by 35 odd (which is based on the position of shots).

It really is as simple as kicking straight.

If you look at individual games in isolation maybe. if you look at it as a trend across many games with many different players it tells a different story.

 

[The Hobo]

If you look at individual games in isolation maybe. if you look at it as a trend across many games with many different players it tells a different story.

We have the highest xSc of all teams this season, of 113.1. The next highest is GWS at 99.9 and the AFL avg is 79.

Last season, our xSc was the highest as well at 91.

Our forward entries/gameplan from an attacking perspective is not the issue.

 

[Enviable Tradition]

We have the highest xSc of all teams this season, of 113.1. The next highest is GWS at 99.9 and the AFL avg is 79.

Last season, our xSc was the highest as well at 91.

Our forward entries/gameplan from an attacking perspective is not the issue.

xSc just like i50s don't win you games. Nor do they tell the whole story.

We repeatedly introduce players to our system and see their goal kicking efficiency go down.

We repeatedly fail to turn i50s and xSc into goals.

At some stage we will have to realise that it isn't just bad luck or bad kicking.

Clearly Ken will never realise this so we need to move him on.

 

[Janus]

 

[The Hobo]

xSc just like i50s don't win you games. Nor do they tell the whole story.

We repeatedly introduce players to our system and see their goal kicking efficiency go down.

We repeatedly fail to turn i50s and xSc into goals.

At some stage we will have to realise that it isn't just bad luck or bad kicking.

Clearly Ken will never realise this so we need to move him on.

You're right, it doesn't tell the whole story. It tells the entire story of our attacking gameplan up until conversion of shot.

It is bad kicking - 100%. But so many of the posts in this thread are talking about our forward entries, kicking the ball long and high in the air, forwards not moving etc etc etc. What i'm saying is that none of that is the reason we're losing. We are losing because we cannot convert these shots into goals.

We are creating more opportunities than any other team in 2023 and in 2024 so far - bar converting the final kick at goals.

I totally agree with the bolded sections - but re-iterate to the other posts, that it's not about our forward entries/forward movement/gameplan etc etc. It is as simple as not being able to kick at goals after the opportunity is created.

 

[The Hobo]

View attachment 1949310
View attachment 1949311

This is exactly what I'm saying. Our gameplan overall stacks up, and we're executing a lot of things correctly. We obviously cannot control the oppositions goalkicking accuracy - we are conceding harder shots than most, which is all we can do.

What we can do, and what has drove me nuts for years and years is our ability to convert our own shots. I find it unbelievable that we haven't been able to address this after so many years.

 

[afl2004]

View attachment 1949310
View attachment 1949311

 

[1954]

Re Chadbro as the forwards coach, my memory of him as a key forward in his very early days on the Power list are that he was a strong mark but he was an unreliable set shot for goal, which may have been the reason why he was moved to defence, where to his credit he often excelled.

Not too sure that his credentials as a forward equate to coaching that role at the highest level.

 

[Powerade 08]

new and improved twitter graphics thingy

Set shots were piss blasted once again. 5 goals 9 misses. But in play we were freaklishly accurate with 12 goals and 4

 

[Enoch Blaze]

But it's also kicking it low and fast into space and not lobbing it

The one knock I have on Rozee is those long kicks inside 50 that hang on heads sometimes.

JHF, Butters constantly lower the eyes.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

We have a lot of shots from 40 to 60m out, but had a lot better conversion.

5 shots that didn't score including one from 60m out and one from about 48m on an angle.

Another was the 5.13 Set shot miss was Finlayson first quarter mark 15m out on an angle, in left pocket but completely missed the ball going for a checkie and put it out on the full.

Rd 4 v Ess at AO Port 63 x I50 and 30 shots on goal for 47.6% vs Ess 43 x I50 and 14 shots for 32.6%
17.9 vs 6.6
5 of Port's 30 shots didn't make the distance/score and 1 rushed behinds

#AFLPowerDons Final xScores:
PORT 110 from expected 89.8 (+1 rushed)
ESS 41 from expected 40.2 (+1 rushed)

 

[Peninsula Boy]

One thing I noticed in the Essendon game was that some guys seemed a bit selfish but good selfish. Rozee and Rioli seemed to go for the sticks most of the time.