Analysis Swans General Performance 2024

[wills2g]

its better than gulden, heeney and warner all having quiet games at the same time happened now than in the finals

collingwood having to come back in q4 for 2-3 years straight maybe isn't being arsey but literally every other team throwing the kitchen sink to try beat you

 

[GoTheSwannies]

Last 6 weeks:
Carlton kicked the first 4, and 5 of the first 6.
Dogs kicked the first 2
Cats kicked the first 5
Crows kicked the first 2, 4 of the first 5. Then kicked 3 of the first 4 in the 2nd quarter.
Giants - only game in the last 6 weeks we dominated from the start. But let the Giants finish 8 goals to 3, including a 7 - 1 run.
Dockers kicked the first 3, and 7 of the first 9 to lead 7-2 at the end of the 1st quarter.

And prior to that:
Pies kicked 3 of the first 4
Bombers kicked 4 of the first 5
Tigers kicked 3 of the first 4
Giants kicked 3 of the first 4

There have been a handful of games that were fairly even, and a few we were slightly ahead after the 1st quarter, or dominated. But for the most part, we've let other teams jump out of the blocks. That's acceptable on occasion, sure, it happens, but to me it's a bit of a systemic issue.

The Blues, cats and Dockers games were particularly alarming because we let all 3 get out to significant leads. Against the Dockers we learned that we're not going to be able to peg back every lead we give a team.

The concern for me, if we gave away starts like we did to the Blues and cats, in a final, it's going to be much harder to pull those leads back in because it's a high stakes game. Our opponents are going to work hard to prevent it from happening, and the threat of our season potentially ending will have a different psychological impact on the players than a regular H&A match would.

To me, the slow starts MUST be addressed if we're any chance of winning the flag.

 

[The King!]

View attachment 2035488
View attachment 2035491
View attachment 2035489

Last 6 weeks:
Carlton kicked the first 4, and 5 of the first 6.
Dogs kicked the first 2
Cats kicked the first 5
Crows kicked the first 2, 4 of the first 5. Then kicked 3 of the first 4 in the 2nd quarter.
Giants - only game in the last 6 weeks we dominated from the start. But let the Giants finish 8 goals to 3, including a 7 - 1 run.
Dockers kicked the first 3, and 7 of the first 9 to lead 7-2 at the end of the 1st quarter.

And prior to that:
Pies kicked 3 of the first 4
Bombers kicked 4 of the first 5
Tigers kicked 3 of the first 4
Giants kicked 3 of the first 4

There have been a handful of games that were fairly even, and a few we were slightly ahead after the 1st quarter, or dominated. But for the most part, we've let other teams jump out of the blocks. That's acceptable on occasion, sure, it happens, but to me it's a bit of a systemic issue.

The Blues, cats and Dockers games were particularly alarming because we let all 3 get out to significant leads. Against the Dockers we learned that we're not going to be able to peg back every lead we give a team.

The concern for me, if we gave away starts like we did to the Blues and cats, in a final, it's going to be much harder to pull those leads back in because it's a high stakes game. Our opponents are going to work hard to prevent it from happening, and the threat of our season potentially ending will have a different psychological impact on the players than a regular H&A match would.

To me, the slow starts MUST be addressed if we're any chance of winning the flag.

They are something they are clearly addressing, just wasn't an issue early in the year.

Its a fair point re a final and yes ideally you have a game like Gws compared to the crows, similar result, but we didnt give GWS much of a sniff.



What I would like to think we see the next 2 weeks are wins- convincingly. But also strong determined starts. with a bit of fire.


On the flip side, teams know we are never done, so thats a big postive, just need to tighten it a bit, wouldn't get as worked up as some are.

 

[Banyo Bloods]

We could address the slow starts a bit by the first shot being a goal not a point. Pattern seems to be concede a goal kick a point then. Then concede another.

Address that things might change

 

[The King!]

Because I'm a a glutton for punishment and wondering where our next loss might come from, I went back and watched the Richmond game. One thing that was really clear to me was that our back 6 struggle in patches against quick and crafty small forwards, especially early on when the speed of the game is high -

This was similar yesterday I felt, Rampe looked flustered early for instance,

Can you rewatch

 

[Ehswan]

View attachment 2035488
View attachment 2035491
View attachment 2035489

Last 6 weeks:
Carlton kicked the first 4, and 5 of the first 6.
Dogs kicked the first 2
Cats kicked the first 5
Crows kicked the first 2, 4 of the first 5. Then kicked 3 of the first 4 in the 2nd quarter.
Giants - only game in the last 6 weeks we dominated from the start. But let the Giants finish 8 goals to 3, including a 7 - 1 run.
Dockers kicked the first 3, and 7 of the first 9 to lead 7-2 at the end of the 1st quarter.

And prior to that:
Pies kicked 3 of the first 4
Bombers kicked 4 of the first 5
Tigers kicked 3 of the first 4
Giants kicked 3 of the first 4

There have been a handful of games that were fairly even, and a few we were slightly ahead after the 1st quarter, or dominated. But for the most part, we've let other teams jump out of the blocks. That's acceptable on occasion, sure, it happens, but to me it's a bit of a systemic issue.

The Blues, cats and Dockers games were particularly alarming because we let all 3 get out to significant leads. Against the Dockers we learned that we're not going to be able to peg back every lead we give a team.

The concern for me, if we gave away starts like we did to the Blues and cats, in a final, it's going to be much harder to pull those leads back in because it's a high stakes game. Our opponents are going to work hard to prevent it from happening, and the threat of our season potentially ending will have a different psychological impact on the players than a regular H&A match would.

To me, the slow starts MUST be addressed if we're any chance of winning the flag.

Far from ideal but better than last year getting good starts and being run down

 

[RilesMacca]

I agree that the slow starts have been an issue, but on the other side of the coin our second halves been a massive improvement this year. Won the second half by 4 goals against freo yesterday.

We've been able to find extra gears to run over the top of opponents, unlike last year when we just crashed and burned. Think this needs some major acknowledgment too. Should've we executed better we might've pinched the tiges and dockers game.

But yeah can't be conceding the majority of the first 5-10 goals come finals, like we've been doing most games.

 

[Adnico26Parker]

Re slow starts, brief discussion about it on SEN this morning (from just before 9min mark)

 

[caesar88]

Just had a few thoughts:

1. I've seen a lot of "This is why we need Mills back" and "This wouldn't have happened if Parker was out there" on the back of our first loss in 3 months. To which I say... huh?? Both Parker and Mills are quality players, I'm certainly in favour of Mills coming straight back into the 22 when he's ready, and would not be against giving Parker a go if someone else needs managing on the run home. But has everything from the last, I don't know, six or seven years just gone out the window? Parker was the most regular face in a midfield that got its arse kicked fairly often in that time, whilst Mills in defence (which again, I am in favour of) also failed to prevent many close losses in that time, either. Short term memory loss seems rampant amongst Swans fans. Which brings me to my second point...

2. If it's not Parker who some see as a "fix" to our midfield's "problem", it's Sheldrick, or Florent, or Campbell. To which I again say... huh?? Go back and watch how we bullied Melbourne or Gold Coast's midfield at the coalface. How we demolished Carlton and Adelaide's midfield with some of the best centre bounce work you'll ever see. How we got on top in the contest against GWS just eight days ago. Plenty of other games where we might not've been so dominant in the mids but managed to break even. This group - Grundy, Heeney, Rowbottom, Warner and Gulden - did that. Not Sheldrick, as promising as he may be. Not Parker or Mills, as great as their reputations are. Not Campbell, as much as his potential as a mid may be untapped at present.

Our current mix aren't perfect yet and are still building their chemistry, so there will be ups and downs, but by golly the ups have been good. We shouldn't let one of the few downs divert us from the really positive direction they're heading in as a group.

 

[kneecapper]

This was similar yesterday I felt, Rampe looked flustered early for instance,

Can you rewatch

I posted my thoughts in the autopsy. I think in this case it was our midfield that let us down with sloppy unforced turnovers which allowed quick rebounds with our defence out of position.

 

[The King!]

I posted my thoughts in the autopsy. I think in this case it was our midfield that let us down with sloppy unforced turnovers which allowed quick rebounds with our defence out of position.

Oh I missed it sorry. I agree with this , and a lot of it was repeat entries, but still thought when it hit the deck there were some issues .

 

[Dubai Quacker]

Just had a few thoughts:

1. I've seen a lot of "This is why we need Mills back" and "This wouldn't have happened if Parker was out there" on the back of our first loss in 3 months. To which I say... huh?? Both Parker and Mills are quality players, I'm certainly in favour of Mills coming straight back into the 22 when he's ready, and would not be against giving Parker a go if someone else needs managing on the run home. But has everything from the last, I don't know, six or seven years just gone out the window? Parker was the most regular face in a midfield that got its arse kicked fairly often in that time, whilst Mills in defence (which again, I am in favour of) also failed to prevent many close losses in that time, either. Short term memory loss seems rampant amongst Swans fans. Which brings me to my second point...

2. If it's not Parker who some see as a "fix" to our midfield's "problem", it's Sheldrick, or Florent, or Campbell. To which I again say... huh?? Go back and watch how we bullied Melbourne or Gold Coast's midfield at the coalface. How we demolished Carlton and Adelaide's midfield with some of the best centre bounce work you'll ever see. How we got on top in the contest against GWS just eight days ago. Plenty of other games where we might not've been so dominant in the mids but managed to break even. This group - Grundy, Heeney, Rowbottom, Warner and Gulden - did that. Not Sheldrick, as promising as he may be. Not Parker or Mills, as great as their reputations are. Not Campbell, as much as his potential as a mid may be untapped at present.

Our current mix aren't perfect yet and are still building their chemistry, so there will be ups and downs, but by golly the ups have been good. We shouldn't let one of the few downs divert us from the really positive direction they're heading in as a group.

There’s a common saying in the NFL: the reserve quarterback is the most popular guy in town.

 

[SeanM]

I wonder how sustainable our style of play is for 4 quarters for 23 weeks. It is high pressure at the contest all around the ground. Every player making high effort runs to support the attack and defence.

In 2022 we went on a successful run at the end of the season. We started games strongly, blew teams away with our pressure and then faded towards the end of the game. And we also seemed to tire in the finals series.

 

[Voice of the G]

Would I be correct in saying Parker has 1 more match to go and he will again be back on the park?

 

[monopoly19]

Would I be correct in saying Parker has 1 more match to go and he will again be back on the park?

Yes, I believe he’s available for the North Melbourne game.

 

[wills2g]

Our current mix aren't perfect yet and are still building their chemistry, so there will be ups and downs, but by golly the ups have been good. We shouldn't let one of the few downs divert us from the really positive direction they're heading in as a group.

Imo it simply comes down to no Rowy no midfield. If he doesnt fire, we look completely off because he covers so much of everyone else’s aggressive forward looking play

 

[SGBeach]

I wonder how sustainable our style of play is for 4 quarters for 23 weeks.

Unless you're a bottom 4 team, there is no style of play that is sustainable over 4 quarters and 23 weeks.
We see momentum shifts within every game,, just as we see teams get on a roll for periods of every season.
I wouldn't be surprised if the Swans take their foot off the pedal for a few weeks and start to ramp up again a few games before finals. How they do this? I dont know.. Rest players? lessen the pressure or GPS numbers etc within games??
Mills and Parker are big to have come in.

Lots of concern about our 1st quarters.. yes they are pretty average..
but the 3rd & 4th quarters
We've won 25, The next best is Geelong with 19
or, the 2nd halves
I think we've won them all!

 

[GoTheSwannies]

Imo it simply comes down to no Rowy no midfield. If he doesnt fire, we look completely off because he covers so much of everyone else’s aggressive forward looking play

Rowy is definitely the glue, likewise Adams plays that sacrificial role well.

 

[caesar88]

Imo it simply comes down to no Rowy no midfield. If he doesnt fire, we look completely off because he covers so much of everyone else’s aggressive forward looking play

I just don't think we have anyone else who can be incredibly damaging both sides of the ball like Rowbottom so often is. If he has a game where he tackles heaps but doesn't win much of the ball, or he wins heaps of the ball but doesn't tackle much, then either way it sticks out like a sore thumb and we find ourselves lacking in either area.

I think that's a testament to how often he delivers in both areas, but doesn't get recognition for it. A case of not knowing what you've got til you're suddenly without it.