Jon Pierik's article in today's Age contains some interesting analysis and comments:
At Carlton, hopes of kicking a big score would again appear to lay with veteran forward Jarrad Waite. He was considered above average last season, despite managing only 14 games, but has been tipped by Champion Data to slip this season. So important was Waite that he contributed to 23 per cent of scores – ranked second at the club behind Chris Judd – despite being moved into defence against Richmond and Essendon late in the campaign. Waite returned to the forward line for the finals.
Lachie Henderson endured a strong year at either end of the ground and was the only player in the league to defend 50 one-on-one contests and be an attacking target on 50 occasions.
Carlton director of coaching Robert Wiley said coach Mick Malthouse would adopt a “horses for courses” approach with the pair.
“He [Henderson] proved last year that he is the modern-day swingman and he can play at both ends, and very successfully,” Wiley said. “I think it's horses for courses. Mick really coaches that way. He likes to see the opposition and where they are vulnerable.
“Jarrad Waite kicked seven goals in the one game [against Essendon], a couple of weeks later he was playing down back. The most important thing is they know their roles, they can play at both ends.”
Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/who-will-step-forward-20140131-31sfm.html#ixzz2s2mDXzwA
However, I think Champion Data's methodology is seriously flawed in that relying on a statistical analysis fails to take into account the intangible factors that win games and make players champions. For example, while I'm happy to accept that Roughead and Franklin were elite forwards in 2013, including Rioli and Gunston seems to be a stretch. Meanwhile, Cloke is considered to be above average because his goal kicking was inaccurate.
Jon Pierik's article in today's Age contains some interesting analysis and comments:
At Carlton, hopes of kicking a big score would again appear to lay with veteran forward Jarrad Waite. He was considered above average last season, despite managing only 14 games, but has been tipped by Champion Data to slip this season. So important was Waite that he contributed to 23 per cent of scores – ranked second at the club behind Chris Judd – despite being moved into defence against Richmond and Essendon late in the campaign. Waite returned to the forward line for the finals.
Lachie Henderson endured a strong year at either end of the ground and was the only player in the league to defend 50 one-on-one contests and be an attacking target on 50 occasions.
Carlton director of coaching Robert Wiley said coach Mick Malthouse would adopt a “horses for courses” approach with the pair.
“He [Henderson] proved last year that he is the modern-day swingman and he can play at both ends, and very successfully,” Wiley said. “I think it's horses for courses. Mick really coaches that way. He likes to see the opposition and where they are vulnerable.
“Jarrad Waite kicked seven goals in the one game [against Essendon], a couple of weeks later he was playing down back. The most important thing is they know their roles, they can play at both ends.”
Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/who-will-step-forward-20140131-31sfm.html#ixzz2s2mDXzwA
However, I think Champion Data's methodology is seriously flawed in that relying on a statistical analysis fails to take into account the intangible factors that win games and make players champions. For example, while I'm happy to accept that Roughead and Franklin were elite forwards in 2013, including Rioli and Gunston seems to be a stretch. Meanwhile, Cloke is considered to be above average because his goal kicking was inaccurate.
Must admit that I don't regard the Champion Data's stuff as the Holy Grail. Nor stats / KPIs, they are an aid, and when assigned that level of relevance - are useful. BUT, as you write... it's when the intangibles and other unquantifiables (together with stats and many other factors) are all brought together that we get a far clearer and more balanced picture. For example a small forward may have poor stats for a game... 5 kicks, 1 handball, 2 tackles - but kicks 4 goals with 1 assist. The side kicks 13 goals and wins, he has made a significant contribution... especially that two of the goals were inspiring in some way or another which 'lifted' team mates... etc etc.
Gunston definitely deserves to be there he was unstoppable late in the year.
Gunston is over rated.
Gunston is over rated.
I reckon old Norman will step it up another level this year with Mr.Mercenary gone.
Gunston is over rated.
He will have to work harder without Franklin around. He is good though from what I have seen. Lets see if he gets a better defender, how he will play. Hawthorns forward structure made it difficult for any side to defend. You basically needed 2 or 3 elite tall and fast defenders to stop them. Then you have Rioli running riot too.
Stood up in the Grand Final kicking a few very important goals. Biggest stage there is to prove yourself on. Not sure how he could do any better than that at staking his claim as a quality forward. We've seen many go missing over the years in Grand Finals. Gunston turned up on the biggest day possible. If anything, I reckon he's been a bit underrated.
Gunston is a decent size now and would be much bigger than the majority of third tall defenders, he also kicks very straight so with very few possies can make it ugly for his opponent on the scoreboard....he also seems to get a fair few Joe the goose goals being on his own in the goalsquare.
I'll be interested to see if Gunston is used as the 2nd tall forward now that Buddy is gone or the Hawks go with Hale, Roughy and continue to let Gunston bully smaller defenders...
We all know Jarrod Waite alone wont work and Henderson will spend plenty of time down back so it means players like Casboult and Rowe have to step up this year and give us something or we wont kick enough goals to win the big games...
He will have to work harder without Franklin around. He is good though from what I have seen. Lets see if he gets a better defender, how he will play. Hawthorns forward structure made it difficult for any side to defend. You basically needed 2 or 3 elite tall and fast defenders to stop them. Then you have Rioli running riot too.
Agreed, most clubs struggled to match up on Franklin and Roughead let alone the extras. Now Gunston will probably get the guys who used to run with Franklin, I do not expect him to dominate. He is good, but I cannot see him doing an Ablett who stared without the superstar support.
Stood up in the Grand Final kicking a few very important goals. Biggest stage there is to prove yourself on. Not sure how he could do any better than that at staking his claim as a quality forward. We've seen many go missing over the years in Grand Finals. Gunston turned up on the biggest day possible. If anything, I reckon he's been a bit underrated.
Hate to be seen agreeing with Gozza :P but yes there's no better place to stake your claim than on the biggest day of all. LP get your eyes checked mate.
Gunston benefitted from '3rd tall syndrome!' When you've allocated your best tall defenders to cover Roughy and Bud, the opposition then finds itself stretched and a third tall can find himself the beneficiary (of having an opponent not quite up to scratch). Not my words but those of commentators on the day.
Seems to me that Gunston is a 'good' tall forward, but just how good we'll probably find out this year when he has to combat, probably, the 2nd best tall defender. And should Roughy go down... it'll be your show, kid!
He had the second best tall defender in the GF.....until the defender was beaten and moved off him.
He had the second best tall defender in the GF.....until the defender was beaten and moved off him.
If Zac Dawson playing on Jack Gunston isn't a mis-match I don't know what is, a guy who is clearly best as a stay at home full back playing on a deep running HF who can score from outside 50.
As for standing up maybe he did, but I think without doubt Freo would admit Dawson choked on GF day not for the first time and probably not for the last!
Gunston is good and we would take him without doubt, but lets not get carried away with Gunston, he isn't yet AFL elite.
Over the last few seasons clubs had to deal with Franklin first and foremost who attracted the type of defenders needed for Gunston. Most clubs only have one or two suitable defenders, and Hawthorn have three tallish deep running forwards without counting Smith and then clubs have to cover Hale who also pushes forward. Gunston benefits from this, and also from having a smart team that make good decisions. If Gunston had been in our team last season we'd have bombed the ball over his head to a Betts, Yarran or Garlett marking contest in the square!
The coming season is the test for Gunston, if he persists then he is starting to look like AFL elite.
PS: Dawson was moved onto Roughead after Roughead started clunking a few, not off Gunston. IMHO a much better match up than the starting line up.
Gunston is definitely proof that the Angry Dwarf is one heck of a coach.
Gunston is definitely proof that the Angry Dwarf is one heck of a coach.
Agreed, 110%
He had the second best tall defender in the GF.....until the defender was beaten and moved off him.
If Zac Dawson playing on Jack Gunston isn't a mis-match I don't know what is, a guy who is clearly best as a stay at home full back playing on a deep running HF who can score from outside 50.
No Gunston scored his goals in the GF deep inside 50m which is where he was positioned.
PS: Dawson was moved onto Roughead after Roughead started clunking a few, not off Gunston. IMHO a much better match up than the starting line up.
Nope wrong again. Ross Lyon slammed his phone down and moved Dawson off Gunston directly after Gunston kicked his third. You could see he was clearly annoyed with Dawson being beaten. The move was made for that reason.
No Gunston scored his goals in the GF deep inside 50m which is where he was positioned.
You are being mischievous in generalizing, not all his goals were scored deep as you well know.
I suppose if you looked at it from a supporters point of view you would be correct in that Gunston kicked two from within 15m. I prefer to look at it from a tactical point of view and watch the few hundred meters of running that come ahead of Gunston turning of Dawson inside out and the free kicks or marks that resulted. Gunston's marks are closer in analogy to Garlett starting at FF and marking in the goal square running back with the flight rather than say Roughead marking on the lead out of the square.
Nope wrong again. Ross Lyon slammed his phone down and moved Dawson off Gunston directly after Gunston kicked his third. You could see he was clearly annoyed with Dawson being beaten. The move was made for that reason.
As for speculating about Lyon's phone demeanor. Lyon could have easily have been unhappy about Dawson's team-mates failing to cover Gunston who twice managed to stream back towards goal while Dawson ended up following Hale and/or Roughead out of F50 through the corridor. Of course if you just wanted to crucify Dawson you could ignore him trying to stream back onto Gunston, but I won't draw any such conclusion! ;)
However as a fan, Dawson cannot be totally forgiven for the weak body on body efforts when he did manage to get back. Although Lyon refused to blame anybody in the post match presser and in fairness to Dawson once out of position you are cooked at AFL level, only Sandilands seems to defy this rule of thumb.
The tactic was to take Dawson back to the square and expose him. The angry midget obviously identified him as the weak link.
The tactic was to take Dawson back to the square and expose him. The angry midget obviously identified him as the weak link.
You mean a mismatch???
True the angry ant coached well. Dawson does not have the agility to keep pace with Gunston in anything other than a straight line, this was part of an issue discussed in the media for the full week prior to the game, that Freo's defensive match up on the Dawks looked pretty meager and slow compared to the Dawks forward line. Yet despite that had Freo kicked straight things might be very different.
Freo had spent the whole season initiating a group defense, and in the GF it failed because the Dawks made good decisions and not the predictable decisions.
The tactic was to take Dawson back to the square and expose him. The angry midget obviously identified him as the weak link.
You mean a mismatch???
True the angry ant coached well. Dawson does not have the agility to keep pace with Gunston in anything other than a straight line, this was part of an issue discussed in the media for the full week prior to the game, that Freo's defensive match up on the Dawks looked pretty meager and slow compared to the Dawks forward line. Yet despite that had Freo kicked straight things might be very different.
Freo had spent the whole season initiating a group defense, and in the GF it failed because the Dawks made good decisions and not the predictable decisions.
Ill fix your part in bold with the following:
Most AFL Key position defenders do not have the agility to keep pace with Key Position Forwards in anything other than a straight line because they are always having to be reactive. The only thing that they can do to combat this, is to try and read the ball coming into the 50, rather than keeping up with their opponent. Only problem there is, that you cant afford for all your defenders to do that, so the result is to try and get the "wrong" defender going up to spoil the ball coming. The only way they can win if they are reactive, is if they are 1. Faster and can close in on the forward who has the jump on them, or 2, better at reading the flight of the ball than their opponent.
That does depend on game plan somewhat, but thats what I see happening in football.
I partially agree, more so if there were more one on one contests.
Most modern football is about numbers, especially Ross Lyon game plans. Which was exposed as having a fatal flaw when him come up against a side that was not so predictable. The weakness of the individual defender is hidden by numbers, but that only succeeds because most sides are full of dumbarse robots drilled into repetition. The Dawks are smart ball users, led by the likes of Hodge, Mitchell and Sewell.
Dawson does not have the agility of a Gunston type, it was a mismatch born out of necessity. When Gunston got goal side of Dawson on more than one occasion Lyon would have wanted to react, but as a coach his cupboard was bare. That was the general consensus before the first bounce and that is how it played out!
The Dawks won't have such a surplus in 2014, it will be interesting to see how the Angry Ant adjusts.
Dawson has failed in Grand Finals .....when the heat was on he couldnt handle it and no matter what spin Ross Lyon puts on it he is a failure.
Clarkson delisted Dawson and recruited Gunston....he is a little prick of man but he knows how to build a list and weed out the duds...
Dawson has failed in Grand Finals .....when the heat was on he couldnt handle it and no matter what spin Ross Lyon puts on it he is a failure.
Clarkson delisted Dawson and recruited Gunston....he is a little prick of man but he knows how to build a list and weed out the duds...
He has found a way to top up every season, even if they don't win a flag. Why ? It is simple. He has managed to watch the side build a solid core group and develop them all into leaders, and champion elite players. Geelong and Sydney have been the same. Hence this is why they play or win flags over the last 10 years. We need to learn to do the same and it means getting the best out of players and moving them on when they are considered drift wood, or dead weight. No more passengers and it all starts from having it between the ears and having the right attitude. Top up with freaks that can bring it on is just a bonus. Even if it is just for a season or two. Get the mix just where the side needs it to be. Competitive at the highest level. Leaves the window open for so many years. Its isn't a radical formula. Its just common sense. ;)
Dawson has failed in Grand Finals .....when the heat was on he couldnt handle it and no matter what spin Ross Lyon puts on it he is a failure.
I thought he was okay in the drawn final...but my memory is hazy.
Clarkson delisted Dawson and recruited Gunston....he is a little prick of man but he knows how to build a list and weed out the duds...
Had a lot of luck too.
Roughy and Buddy in the same draft!!!
Brian Lake decides to resurrect his career on song!
Stuart Dew Steps up for a couple of minutes!!
Every player out of contract seems to nominate Hawthorn FFS!!
They even score Dayle Garlett!!
Clarkson delisted Dawson and recruited Gunston....he is a little prick of man but he knows how to build a list and weed out the duds...
Had a lot of luck too.
Roughy and Buddy in the same draft!!!
Brian Lake decides to resurrect his career on song!
Stuart Dew Steps up for a couple of minutes!!
Every player out of contract seems to nominate Hawthorn FFS!!
They even score Dayle Garlett!!
TBF, any number of clubs could have had Garlett last year.
Had a lot of luck too.
Roughy and Buddy in the same draft!!!
Brian Lake decides to resurrect his career on song!
Stuart Dew Steps up for a couple of minutes!!
Every player out of contract seems to nominate Hawthorn FFS!!
They even score Dayle Garlett!!
Lets not forget a bunch of those Dawks came courtesy of AFL priority picks, there are a lot of AFL revisionists try to claim some sort of Dawks draft / list management genius well after the fact. But they basically got help multiple years running.
Had a lot of luck too.
Roughy and Buddy in the same draft!!!
Brian Lake decides to resurrect his career on song!
Stuart Dew Steps up for a couple of minutes!!
Every player out of contract seems to nominate Hawthorn FFS!!
They even score Dayle Garlett!!
Lets not forget a bunch of those Dawks came courtesy of AFL priority picks, there are a lot of AFL revisionists try to claim some sort of Dawks draft / list management genius well after the fact. But they basically got help multiple years running.
The Franklin, Roughead, Lewis draft was where they cleaned up....three A graders in the one draft is like winning tattslotto..
I thought he was okay in the drawn final...but my memory is hazy.
Actually he did OK in the draw but was among the best in the replay.
Dawson is their version of Rusty, terrific one week and piss weak the next for no apparent reason!
The Franklin, Roughead, Lewis draft was where they cleaned up....three A graders in the one draft is like winning tattslotto..
Priority Picks; Hodge, Ellis and Roughead.
2001: Five picks in the first two rounds.
2002: Four picks in first two rounds(Traded three away for Everitt and Hunter)
2003: Four picks first two rounds (Three traded)
2004: Six picks in the first two rounds, three under 10.
2005: Six picks first two rounds.
Not draft genius, almost draft tampering thanks to Kennett crying poor while rolling in Tasmanian and Waverley cash!
Almost unprecedented for an established club with access to F&S picks as well.
How the feck did they qualify for priority picks as well???
The AFL community was stooged by the Angry Ant and "The Leader."
This is why you never hear the Dawks come out too strongly about draft concessions, if they did their heads would explode from the hypocrisy!
Yet I still don't hate them as much as EFC!!!
The Franklin, Roughead, Lewis draft was where they cleaned up....three A graders in the one draft is like winning tattslotto..
Priority Picks; Hodge, Ellis and Roughead.
2001: Five picks in the first two rounds.
2002: Four picks in first two rounds(Traded three away for Everitt and Hunter)
2003: Four picks first two rounds (Three traded)
2004: Six picks in the first two rounds, three under 10.
2005: Six picks first two rounds.
Not draft genius, almost draft tampering thanks to Kennett crying poor while rolling in Tasmanian and Waverley cash!
How the feck did they qualify for priority picks as well???
You need to maximise your opportunities. We weren't willing to trade our better players like Hawthorn were.
They weren't crippled like us though, trading away our best players back then may have destroyed the club. They had leaders like Crawford and Vandenburg at the club, we had Whitnall and Stevens. Big difference.
The Franklin, Roughead, Lewis draft was where they cleaned up....three A graders in the one draft is like winning tattslotto..
Priority Picks; Hodge, Ellis and Roughead.
2001: Five picks in the first two rounds.
2002: Four picks in first two rounds(Traded three away for Everitt and Hunter)
2003: Four picks first two rounds (Three traded)
2004: Six picks in the first two rounds, three under 10.
2005: Six picks first two rounds.
Not draft genius, almost draft tampering thanks to Kennett crying poor while rolling in Tasmanian and Waverley cash!
Almost unprecedented for an established club with access to F&S picks as well.
How the feck did they qualify for priority picks as well???
The AFL community was stooged by the Angry Ant and "The Leader."
This is why you never hear the Dawks come out too strongly about draft concessions, if they did their heads would explode from the hypocrisy!
Yet I still don't hate them as much as EFC!!!
Go back to 2000, we had 5 decent picks and couldnt nail one player of note.......another poor recruiting club in Richmond picked Tambling over Franklin...Clarkson said he wanted a Brisbane team, bigger stronger etc etc..
I'd have money on the fact we would have done a Richmond and taken Tambling......I mentioned Jordan Lewis on TC to the resident Carlton recruiter and was told he was just an U18 bully boy who was slow unathletic and had no upside being already developed....in other words we wouldnt be interested.
In short even if we had the benefit of Hawthorns early picks we would have stuffed them up anyway...Clarkson and crew had a plan and chose the right players.
You need to maximise your opportunities. We weren't willing to trade our better players like Hawthorn were.
They didn't trade the good stuff away, Chick, McPharlin and Croad went home. Hay, Harford and Lonie were past it, Thompson had a break down and Johnston went nowhere.
If not for the priority picks giving them some leverage they would not have been half as active.
They turned over nearly a full list in the period we were not open to trade in!
Their trade genius is a myth.
Go back to 2000, we had 5 decent picks and couldnt nail one player of note..
We only had 4 inside the first two rounds, Dawks had 4, 5 or 6 picks to use or trade within the first two rounds in the 5 consecutive years.
If not for the penalites we may have been in a much better position, but that is a separate issue.