Team Mgmt. Makeup of our team II - Strengths & deficiencies, player development

[boncer34]

Is that why he's doing it, or is he doing it as a development tool?

Doesn't matter to me. Not all players have to be all things.

 

[ant555]

Doesn't matter to me. Not all players have to be all things.

When Martin goes back to playing wing / half forward next year he will be a better player as he will have a better idea of the defensive side of the game.

 

[Zach Package]

He went backwards because the opposition worked out his one trick . They tried to find him another role . Perkins himself wanted to play midfield. Maybe it is a tour de force in overrating. Not like he has been elite in many areas. As much as he was doing okay at half forward he leaked like a rusty gutter and made Stringer look like a genuine pressure forward. They drafted him to play midfield. Scott has given him a crack.

He and we started the year strongly when he and Caldwell were the half forwards that came up to the footy, it also allowed him to play to one of his nice traits which is finding the footy on the lead. In the first 8 or so weeks his CBA % was probably in the teens.

Now his CBA’s have basically more than doubled, his goals, score involvements and general confidence look absolutely dead and not only is he in the middle, he’s the round up man at the back of the stoppage, it’s almost as if Scott is drawing it up deliberately for him to get picked off by the opposition.

It’s just absolute crap and has really killed his and probably tangentially our season, and I said this months ago so this is not hindsight heroes stuff.

The strength of the side early in the year was the waves we could send at the footy, Merrett, Setterfield, Parish and Durham, then Caldwell, Hobbs and Perkins, then Stringer pinches a tiny bit sometimes. The ground ball in the front half was much better and the whole thing really sang. Scott’s basically blown up the apple cart by not having that second and third wave to go around the ball which is great if you’ve got Caldwell in your SuperCoach team but we’re playing like an absolute busted arse.

Makes the decision not to go to Shiel 2 months ago even more baffling, even if he’s just going you preserve the second wave of midfielders.

 

[joey_jo_jo]

He and we started the year strongly when he and Caldwell were the half forwards that came up to the footy, it also allowed him to play to one of his nice traits which is finding the footy on the lead. In the first 8 or so weeks his CBA % was probably in the teens.

Now his CBA’s have basically more than doubled, his goals, score involvements and general confidence look absolutely dead and not only is he in the middle, he’s the round up man at the back of the stoppage, it’s almost as if Scott is drawing it up deliberately for him to get picked off by the opposition.

It’s just absolute crap and has really killed his and probably tangentially our season, and I said this months ago so this is not hindsight heroes stuff.

The strength of the side early in the year was the waves we could send at the footy, Merrett, Setterfield, Parish and Durham, then Caldwell, Hobbs and Perkins, then Stringer pinches a tiny bit sometimes. The ground ball in the front half was much better and the whole thing really sang. Scott’s basically blown up the apple cart by not having that second and third wave to go around the ball which is great if you’ve got Caldwell in your SuperCoach team but we’re playing like an absolute busted arse.

Makes the decision not to go to Shiel 2 months ago even more baffling, even if he’s just going you preserve the second wave of midfielders.

He had the 2nd most CBAs in rd 1 and 3rd most CBAs in rd2. And his heat maps tell a similar story, he was playing midfield before his injury. Similarly Caldwell has been playing mainly midfield since dogs game, replacing setterfield as a defensive/contested mid.

You are completely disregarding injuries/personnel available. These moves don't happen in isolation, do you think the midfield minutes stay the same for duz/caldwell/merrett/perkins if setterfield doesn't get injured against port or parish goes down after gws game?
And I agree we looked better with hobbs playing half forward, but are you forgetting he got injured? He's had his first decent hit out in 2s since coming back and from all reports will be back in the 1's this weekend.

 

[yodellinhank]

Doesn't matter to me. Not all players have to be all things.

True, they don't. But if they can improve their deficiencies wouldn't that be a good thing? (see ant555's post above)

 

[boncer34]

True, they don't. But if they can improve their deficiencies wouldn't that be a good thing? (see ant555's post above)

Not if it stalls their development trying to make them into something they aren't.

 

[yodellinhank]

Not if it stalls their development trying to make them into something they aren't.

Which part of their development is stalling if they are free wheelers with good skills being asked to knuckle down more defensively? Are they going to forget how to kick or run?

It's like giving a young mid a run with role, you aren't necessarily trying to turn them into a tagger for their entire career.

Everyone is lamenting Martin's season, and remembering a rose coloured past where they now think he was one of our best players. Last season his wing was like a freeway, and the traffic flowed both directions.

 

[boncer34]

Which part of their development is stalling if they are free wheelers with good skills being asked to knuckle down more defensively? It's like giving a young mid a run with role, you aren't necessarily trying to turn them into a tagger for their entire career.

Everyone is lamenting Martin's season, and remembering a rose coloured past where they now think he was one of our best players. Last season his wing was like a freeway, and the traffic flowed both directions.

Agree to disagree Hank.

 

[ant555]

He and we started the year strongly when he and Caldwell were the half forwards that came up to the footy, it also allowed him to play to one of his nice traits which is finding the footy on the lead. In the first 8 or so weeks his CBA % was probably in the teens.

Now his CBA’s have basically more than doubled, his goals, score involvements and general confidence look absolutely dead and not only is he in the middle, he’s the round up man at the back of the stoppage, it’s almost as if Scott is drawing it up deliberately for him to get picked off by the opposition.

It’s just absolute crap and has really killed his and probably tangentially our season, and I said this months ago so this is not hindsight heroes stuff.

The strength of the side early in the year was the waves we could send at the footy, Merrett, Setterfield, Parish and Durham, then Caldwell, Hobbs and Perkins, then Stringer pinches a tiny bit sometimes. The ground ball in the front half was much better and the whole thing really sang. Scott’s basically blown up the apple cart by not having that second and third wave to go around the ball which is great if you’ve got Caldwell in your SuperCoach team but we’re playing like an absolute busted arse.

Makes the decision not to go to Shiel 2 months ago even more baffling, even if he’s just going you preserve the second wave of midfielders.

Well we are not going to share the same view on this .

 

[Zach Package]

He had the 2nd most CBAs in rd 1 and 3rd most CBAs in rd2. And his heat maps tell a similar story, he was playing midfield before his injury. Similarly Caldwell has been playing mainly midfield since dogs game, replacing setterfield as a defensive/contested mid.

You are completely disregarding injuries/personnel available. These moves don't happen in isolation, do you think the midfield minutes stay the same for duz/caldwell/merrett/perkins if setterfield doesn't get injured against port or parish goes down after gws game?
And I agree we looked better with hobbs playing half forward, but are you forgetting he got injured? He's had his first decent hit out in 2s since coming back and from all reports will be back in the 1's this weekend.

I suspect we have had the means to pick the extra midfielder basically every week if we wanted to. I think if we track who was sub, emergency and in the twos every week one or more of Shiel, Tsatas, Hobbs or Setterfield has been available every week.

I also hold the parallel viewpoint that we’re a tall too heavy in the front half so I would have liked to see us go that way.

 

[Yoda_]

• A crumbling, goal-kicking small forward.
• A mature age tall/medium defender.
• A skilful half-back with a penetrating kick.

I don't care where they come from, National Draft, Free Agency, Langwarrin u18s, whatever. This is what we need.

Let me message Josh Beard and find out

 

[boncer34]

One of the things that Hawthorn have done well, especially during their premiership era is focus on specific needs and recruiting players and developing them to fill a role. One of the phrases they used was, "Master your craft" and I love that idea, because it doesn't imply being the best at everything. It means taking the thing that is your specialty, and mastering it, and being the best in the AFL at that thing. "Master your craft." It's a thing of beauty.

Now take Essendon. With the Bombers, you often hear things like, "we want to improve across the board"...."we just want to be more professional at all aspects of the game" Sounds good right? It's not really. Whilst there is nothing wrong inherently with trying to improve everything, you end up being jack of all trades, and master of none. All the major statistical indicators of success, the Bombers end up ranking 7-12, which is where we always finish.

Let's look at a specific example. There is a stat from Champion data measuring "post clearance." In this particular stat, the number one team of all time as Essendon of 2000 - Perhaps not surprising. Other exceptional teams from the last 25 years occupy other spots in the top-10 like Collingwood of 2011, Geelong 2008 etc etc. You know who ranks second of all time in that stat? Hawthorn of THIS year. Post Clearance Hawthorn of 2024 are the best team in the history of the game with the exception of Essendon 2000 at that stat

And this shows you how the Hawks approach the game. Instead of trying to improve across the board and be okay at everything but exceptional at nothing, they have decided to put MORE focus on specific stats that are relevant to premiership success. Master your craft. Their philosophy seems to be that if we can't be the best at everything at least be exceptional at something. At least that gives you an identity - it gives you a particular strength. It doesn't matter if they rank lower in other statistical categories because once they have mastered the ones that are important and become exceptional at those, they can then work at the other stuff.

It's one of the reasons they recruited Massimo D'Ambrosio. He's not that great a player but one thing he can do is kick. So they play to his strengths. One of the key indicators of premiership success is scores from defensive 50. All premiership teams in the last 10 years rank first or second in that stat. So, they recruit players who can transition the ball from back to forward who can kick. Who do Essendon play across half back? Andrew McGrath, who is a better player than Massimo D'Ambrosio, but McGrath tends to spray the ball when kicking from half back. Nick Martin, also a much better player than Massimo, but across half back he tends to turn the ball over. Essendon is so focused on trying to improve across the board that they don't excel at specific needs. Hawthorn focus on specific needs and master those things. Martin for example ALWAYS kicks goals when he is moved forward. So play him there. Maybe Zac Merrett who is the best kick in the team could be used across half back? Sounds like a wild suggestion, but play to his strengths. Hawthorn play to their strengths and are always exceptional at "some" part of the game.

Meanwhile we will attempt to "improve across the board" and fail every step of the way.

Dan this post is excellent. Deserves more eyes on it than what it will get on the main board.

 

[Mercurial89]

Brilliant post and articulates what many have tried to point out.

 

[boncer34]

Brilliant post and articulates what many have tried to point out.

Doesn't matter to me. Not all players have to be all things.

 

[Lore]

It's an interesting contrast with the Richmond-esque manic pressure team of role players +1 star approach

 

[Mercurial89]

It's an interesting contrast with the Richmond-esque manic pressure team of role players +1 star approach

Richmond built their game off that shorter forwardline with ridiculous pressure and realistically had Riewoldt/Martin/Rance as stars holding each area of the ground together. Stupid high press and repeat I50s. Pace papered over any perceived talent gap when all that was asked was 100% effort and intensity.

We do the same with the Ents from Lord of the Rings as our forwardline and wonder why we have no pressure and can't stop teams running it out.
With the added bonus of asking a team of average ball users to be perfect so as to not lose posession of the ball.

 

[faible]

It's an interesting contrast with the Richmond-esque manic pressure team of role players +1 star approach

Richmond built a gameplan for the players they had - or drafted players for the gameplan they had, or both - so it's a similar ethos in some ways.

I don't think there's anything wrong with trying to improve weaknesses - e.g. Martin being better defensively - but there still needs to be some kind of coherent and cohesive style of play, player, and coaching setup that they're working towards. It's not clear atm what that is with Essendon. Maybe Scott has a plan and needs more cattle to make it work, maybe the cattle are still learning and only showing glimpses of what it will be.

We seem to be trying to play a high-press defence with good intercept marking defenders, but lack fast pressure forwards to actually stop the ball flying over / through the press and taking those intercept players out of it. We seem to like to take it out of defence via uncontested marking chains but don't have a plan b for when teams go man-on-man to shut that pathway down. We also lack reliable contested marking players - and again, ground level representation when they do bring the ball to ground - to offer an 'out'.

 

[Lore]

Richmond built their game off that shorter forwardline with ridiculous pressure and realistically had Riewoldt/Martin/Rance as stars holding each area of the ground together. Stupid high press and repeat I50s. Pace papered over any perceived talent gap when all that was asked was 100% effort and intensity.

We do the same with the Ents from Lord of the Rings as our forwardline and wonder why we have no pressure and can't stop teams running it out.
With the added bonus of asking a team of average ball users to be perfect so as to not lose posession of the ball.

Richmond built a gameplan for the players they had - or drafted players for the gameplan they had, or both - so it's a similar ethos in some ways.

I don't think there's anything wrong with trying to improve weaknesses - e.g. Martin being better defensively - but there still needs to be some kind of coherent and cohesive style of play, player, and coaching setup that they're working towards. It's not clear atm what that is with Essendon. Maybe Scott has a plan and needs more cattle to make it work, maybe the cattle are still learning and only showing glimpses of what it will be.

We seem to be trying to play a high-press defence with good intercept marking defenders, but lack fast pressure forwards to actually stop the ball flying over / through the press and taking those intercept players out of it. We seem to like to take it out of defence via uncontested marking chains but don't have a plan b for when teams go man-on-man to shut that pathway down. We also lack reliable contested marking players - and again, ground level representation when they do bring the ball to ground - to offer an 'out'.

Ya that's what I mean, they started with that one star and that forward line they had and that became the basis of the game plan, which then drove the list build accordingly.


It would be interesting to get some insight into what the overall 5-8 year plan is in terms of team development. Like where are we really at? Are we realistically thinking of ourselves as a finals chance, is that the driving goal of every season at the moment?

Because I reckon playing Martin at half back is, as you said, more of a developmental thing than his long-term playing position.

The other question might be why he can't learn that in the pre-season and play his best position on the day.


But then, if we're planning to do a 1 year assessment of the whole footy department and everything in it (Brad's first year) followed by a 3 year development cycle investing in areas of identified weakness (with the expensive psychologist and strategist brought in to support that trajectory, and a "new" list strategy)... like we only have so many dollars in our footy department cap, only so many hours of pre-season, only so many hours of training, only so many games in a year.

If you're really wanting to develop, then you put all of your resources into development, and you want as many good picks as you can get (assuming you know what to do with them to get the actual players you need).

Once you turn your attention to actually making a tilt at finals, you're not after good picks or trading out senior players anymore. You want them already developed, so you start trading out those picks to bring in players that already fit what you want to do.

 

[Lore]

Mercurial89 I was replying to you as well but initially forgot to quote you above so you wouldn't have got the notification^

 

[jdstorm]

i don’t think there’s that much of a plan. Thinks Brad just picks the team of the 22 guys who make him say FFS the least in match sim

 

[ant555]

i don’t think there’s that much of a plan. Thinks Brad just picks the team of the 22 guys who make him say FFS the least in match sim

To play good footy you actually have to have blokes who can run and not get overtaken by their own shadow.
Hard to have a game plan when you have no one who can mark. A bunch of snails as small forwards and half backs and 1 leader .

 

[jdstorm]

To play good footy you actually have to have blokes who can run and not get overtaken by their own shadow.
Hard to have a game plan when you have no one who can mark. A bunch of snails as small forwards and half backs and 1 leader .

I think leaders tend to develop organically in power vacuums. If there’s only 1 good leader on the team it’s because poor leaders are empowered by coaches to have those positions. (Think that statement is pretty unfair to Caldwell and Durham who have been good leaders this year alongside Merrett)

Other players could have been picked. Maybe it makes a difference, maybe it doesn’t. They weren’t. A few more losses and we get another top pick.

Not the season we wanted 2 months ago but a decent outcome nevertheless

 

[Cold Sober]

I tend to look at how many of our best 20 would get a game with the consistently better teams.
Taking into account we were top 4 for a while, Durham, Merrett, we are where we deserve to be.

 

[ant555]

I think leaders tend to develop organically in power vacuums. If there’s only 1 good leader on the team it’s because poor leaders are empowered by coaches to have those positions. (Think that statement is pretty unfair to Caldwell and Durham who have been good leaders this year alongside Merrett)

Other players could have been picked. Maybe it makes a difference, maybe it doesn’t. They weren’t. A few more losses and we get another top pick.

Not the season we wanted 2 months ago but a decent outcome nevertheless

Do not agree.
The saying leaders are born not made is true. You can take someone so far but the genuine leaders always have it in them.

 

[AnGus BurgerFries]

I think leaders tend to develop organically in power vacuums.

How so? How does a power vacuum / poorly led environment develop good leaders? By that logic every essendon player should be an on field general by now because our leadership group has been poor for a while (excluding those you've mentioned who hopefully turned the ship this year).