Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board Forum Index
 The RulesThe Rules FAQFAQ
   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   CalendarCalendar   SearchSearch 
Log inLog in RegisterRegister
 
Scoring power

Users browsing this topic:0 Registered, 0 Hidden and 0 Guests
Registered Users: None

Post new topic   Reply to topic    Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board Forum Index -> General Discussion
 
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
AN_Inkling 



Joined: 06 Oct 2007


PostPosted: Fri Oct 17, 2014 7:50 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Defender wrote:
AN_Inkling wrote:
Broken record I know, but it's lack of running power. I seriously think it's the one flaw that needed to be addressed, pretty much everything else flows from it in the modern game. It's running power first, winning the contested ball second (something else which needs improvement) and the rest is mostly icing.


Lack of skills is a bigger concern IMO, we're forced to work our asses off for every goal while the likes of Hawthorn just do it so easily due to their skill level.


I disagree on both counts. Hawthorn were one of the worst ranked sides for delivery into the 50 this season, they just get it there more than most. And Hawthorn is an example, but not of skills, their improved running ability is why they have become a better team over the last few years. Skills are important, but hardly of prime importance and ours are not as bad as they seem nor Hawthorn's as good as they seem. To function as a team all over the ground and have each line interconnect, your players need to be able to run from end to end. It's the basis for everything else that happens. It improves your scoring power, defensive power and yes your skills. Get that right and everything else falls into place.

_________________
Well done boys!
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
HAL 

Please don't shout at me - I can't help it.


Joined: 17 Mar 2003


PostPosted: Fri Oct 17, 2014 7:51 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Aren't all example but not of skills their improved running ability is why they became a better team over the last few years Hawthorn ?
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website  
John Wren Virgo

"Look after the game. It means so much to so many."


Joined: 15 Jul 2007


PostPosted: Fri Oct 17, 2014 8:02 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

AN_Inkling wrote:
Defender wrote:
AN_Inkling wrote:
Broken record I know, but it's lack of running power. I seriously think it's the one flaw that needed to be addressed, pretty much everything else flows from it in the modern game. It's running power first, winning the contested ball second (something else which needs improvement) and the rest is mostly icing.


Lack of skills is a bigger concern IMO, we're forced to work our asses off for every goal while the likes of Hawthorn just do it so easily due to their skill level.


I disagree on both counts. Hawthorn were one of the worst ranked sides for delivery into the 50 this season, they just get it there more than most. And Hawthorn is an example, but not of skills, their improved running ability is why they have become a better team over the last few years. Skills are important, but hardly of prime importance and ours are not as bad as they seem nor Hawthorn's as good as they seem. To function as a team all over the ground and have each line interconnect, your players need to be able to run from end to end. It's the basis for everything else that happens. It improves your scoring power, defensive power and yes your skills. Get that right and everything else falls into place.


the hawks present an impression of having or creating more space than others. they also run the lines remarkably well. they are incredibly well drilled with their running patterns.

_________________
Purveyor of sanctimonious twaddle.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Bob Sugar 



Joined: 11 Feb 2010
Location: Benalla

PostPosted: Fri Oct 17, 2014 8:37 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

AN_Inkling wrote:
Defender wrote:
AN_Inkling wrote:
Broken record I know, but it's lack of running power. I seriously think it's the one flaw that needed to be addressed, pretty much everything else flows from it in the modern game. It's running power first, winning the contested ball second (something else which needs improvement) and the rest is mostly icing.


Lack of skills is a bigger concern IMO, we're forced to work our asses off for every goal while the likes of Hawthorn just do it so easily due to their skill level.


I disagree on both counts. Hawthorn were one of the worst ranked sides for delivery into the 50 this season, they just get it there more than most. And Hawthorn is an example, but not of skills, their improved running ability is why they have become a better team over the last few years. Skills are important, but hardly of prime importance and ours are not as bad as they seem nor Hawthorn's as good as they seem. To function as a team all over the ground and have each line interconnect, your players need to be able to run from end to end. It's the basis for everything else that happens. It improves your scoring power, defensive power and yes your skills. Get that right and everything else falls into place.


The Hawks score per I50% is a bit irrelevant when you consider most teams put 2 back against them, especially the lower ranked sides, their skill level is as elite as I've seen.

_________________
Defender...........

On the day before the first, Daicos created God.

You like this.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Magpietothemax Taurus

magpietothemax


Joined: 28 Apr 2013


PostPosted: Fri Oct 17, 2014 8:37 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

I think an_Inkling's analysis of Beams is very interesting and encouraging. I think that it is correct to say that running power is the basis of modern football, and the concept that perhaps Greenwood fits into a renewed structure with more running power than Beams did makes sense to me. I also agree it was crucial to get a replacement for H, since his loss means that we lose another aggressive running player.
However, I am a little worried about Varcoe. I have just read Geelong supporters saying that Varcoe has lost his pace over the last year, and Geelong was trying to offload him in 2012. Could be just Geelong supporters attempting to unnerve us. Just wondering, has anyone seen Varcoe play this year?
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
MatthewBoydFanClub 



Joined: 12 Feb 2007
Location: Elwood

PostPosted: Fri Oct 17, 2014 9:55 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Magpietothemax wrote:
I think an_Inkling's analysis of Beams is very interesting and encouraging. I think that it is correct to say that running power is the basis of modern football, and the concept that perhaps Greenwood fits into a renewed structure with more running power than Beams did makes sense to me. I also agree it was crucial to get a replacement for H, since his loss means that we lose another aggressive running player.
However, I am a little worried about Varcoe. I have just read Geelong supporters saying that Varcoe has lost his pace over the last year, and Geelong was trying to offload him in 2012. Could be just Geelong supporters attempting to unnerve us. Just wondering, has anyone seen Varcoe play this year?


I watched a fair bit of him this year. Geelong were playing him off the half back line. He played most games for the year, but was coming off an injured season the year before. It's hard to say whether he's lost a yard or two of pace because he's playing in a different position than we're used to seeing. Hine said we would use him as an outside player running down the wing. I guess we'll find out then whether he's lost any pace.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
jackcass Cancer



Joined: 01 Mar 2005
Location: Bendigo

PostPosted: Fri Oct 17, 2014 11:54 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

AN_Inkling wrote:
Defender wrote:
AN_Inkling wrote:
Broken record I know, but it's lack of running power. I seriously think it's the one flaw that needed to be addressed, pretty much everything else flows from it in the modern game. It's running power first, winning the contested ball second (something else which needs improvement) and the rest is mostly icing.


Lack of skills is a bigger concern IMO, we're forced to work our asses off for every goal while the likes of Hawthorn just do it so easily due to their skill level.


I disagree on both counts. Hawthorn were one of the worst ranked sides for delivery into the 50 this season, they just get it there more than most. And Hawthorn is an example, but not of skills, their improved running ability is why they have become a better team over the last few years. Skills are important, but hardly of prime importance and ours are not as bad as they seem nor Hawthorn's as good as they seem. To function as a team all over the ground and have each line interconnect, your players need to be able to run from end to end. It's the basis for everything else that happens. It improves your scoring power, defensive power and yes your skills. Get that right and everything else falls into place.


Yep, agree. Hawks tend to recruit good users of the footy but it's their capacity to find space on the spread that gives them the time to execute.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Bob Sugar 



Joined: 11 Feb 2010
Location: Benalla

PostPosted: Sat Oct 18, 2014 12:46 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

jackcass wrote:
AN_Inkling wrote:
Defender wrote:
AN_Inkling wrote:
Broken record I know, but it's lack of running power. I seriously think it's the one flaw that needed to be addressed, pretty much everything else flows from it in the modern game. It's running power first, winning the contested ball second (something else which needs improvement) and the rest is mostly icing.


Lack of skills is a bigger concern IMO, we're forced to work our asses off for every goal while the likes of Hawthorn just do it so easily due to their skill level.


I disagree on both counts. Hawthorn were one of the worst ranked sides for delivery into the 50 this season, they just get it there more than most. And Hawthorn is an example, but not of skills, their improved running ability is why they have become a better team over the last few years. Skills are important, but hardly of prime importance and ours are not as bad as they seem nor Hawthorn's as good as they seem. To function as a team all over the ground and have each line interconnect, your players need to be able to run from end to end. It's the basis for everything else that happens. It improves your scoring power, defensive power and yes your skills. Get that right and everything else falls into place.


Yep, agree. Hawks tend to recruit good users of the footy but it's their capacity to find space on the spread that gives them the time to execute.


They also pretty much have full time forwards making training drills much more efficient, our forward Line is a cluster ****, using resting mids as forwards isn't working.

_________________
Defender...........

On the day before the first, Daicos created God.

You like this.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Pies4shaw Leo

pies4shaw


Joined: 08 Oct 2007


PostPosted: Thu Mar 31, 2016 8:52 pm
Post subject: Re: Scoring powerReply with quote

Pies4shaw wrote:
In 2008, Malcolm Blight described Collingwood (immediately before a 100 point demolition of the Wiggles) as having the best four small forwards in the Game (then Didak, Davis, Medhurst and Thomas). That day, the 4 kicked 14 of 27 Collingwood goals.

In more recent times, I have been wondering what happened to the big spread of goalkickers Collingwood usually had in 2010 and 2011.

Going back over some stats, I noticed the following:

1. In the first 8 rounds of 2010, between one-half and two-thirds of the goals in each game came from players who have left or have been largely unavailable in 2012 or 2013 (Medhurst, Lockyer, Fraser Davis, Didak, O'Bree etc).

2. Looking at the 2010 finals (by which time, Medders, Tarks, Fraser and OB were not in the team), in the 3 wins (ie, ignoring the draw, when Collingwood only managed 9 goals), about a third of the goals in each game were contributed by players who have left or have been largely unavailable in 2013.

3. Looking at the 2011 finals, the position was that at least half of all Collingwood's finals goals came from such players (Krak was the biggest of those contributors, of course).

4. Looking at the side which took the park against Freo last week, only 2 players (Cloke, average a whisker under 1.7) and the Krak (Collingwood average of about 1.5) kick more than 1 goal per game. Lynch has a good career average but hasn't yet delivered anything like it at Collingwood.

5. None of the new small forwards in last week's match (Kennedy, Mooney, Dwyer, Elliott) has a goal per game average significantly over three-quarters of a goal per game.

6. By contrast, the Hawthorn team which flogged us earlier this year had Franklin (3.24 average), Breust (1.96), Roughead (1.85) and Gunston (1.69 - but even better at Hawthorn) with goal averages as good as or better than our best on the park last week. There are then other players (Hale, Hawthorn average of 1) and Rioli (1.33) and Smith (0.95) who do, roughly speaking, a goal per game or better.

Of course, such comparisons are of limited utility - one might, for example, point out that Hawthorn has a higher-scoring style of game (although that may also be a chicken and egg question). But, they do, perhaps, offer at least a part of the explanation for why Collingwood has found it very difficult to kick a winning score against the best opposition this year. If Hawthorn has its best 7 goal-kickers from round 2 on the park, it can reasonably expect 12 goals from them on average each game before worrying about what the other 15 players can contribute. By contrast, if Collingwood puts its best 7 goal-kickers from the Freo game on the park, it can expect about 6 or 7 goals from them.

Food for thought.

Looking at the team picked for round 2, 2016, I can't help but think that nothing much has changed since I expressed concern about the decline in Collingwood's scoring options in early 2013.

In fact, the entire forward-line we apparently intend to put on the park tomorrow night goes at less than 6 goals per game over their careers. And that's despite Travis Cloke improving his goal-kicking output per game since that time. Razz Razz Razz

Where is the help (or, if you prefer, replacement) for Cloke?

Who is going to kick a winning score for Collingwood's current team?

Do we just have to wait for Elliott and Howe to get up and going and be miserable in the meantime?

Is it really true that the only way Collingwood players are going to be responsible for more goals is if we play Jesse White at full-back?

Thoughts?
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
thompsoc 



Joined: 21 Sep 2009


PostPosted: Thu Mar 31, 2016 9:00 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Great analysis.
A permanent forward in Swan is now gone, we were probably hoping to get up to 2 goals a game from him.
The mids might run forward and kick a few goals but they don't run back enough to block forward thrusts from the opposition.

_________________
we don't eat our own at collingwood we just allow them to foul our nest.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
stui magpie Gemini

Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.


Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto

PostPosted: Thu Mar 31, 2016 9:09 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Very inexperienced forward line in terms of games played so no wonder they have a pretty poor goal per game average.

No argument that we need a wide spread of goal kickers, I'm hoping that 40+% of our goal come from the midfield

_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Bob Sugar 



Joined: 11 Feb 2010
Location: Benalla

PostPosted: Thu Mar 31, 2016 9:22 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

One thing I've noticed over the last 2 years is our ability to go long periods without a goal, many times we've been held goalless for entire qtrs, think we had one game last year when we went 50 minutes of game time without a goal.
_________________
Defender...........

On the day before the first, Daicos created God.

You like this.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Pies4shaw Leo

pies4shaw


Joined: 08 Oct 2007


PostPosted: Thu Mar 31, 2016 9:42 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Well, last week, we went about 50 minutes without getting a kick. Just sayin'. Wink
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
RudeBoy 



Joined: 28 Nov 2005


PostPosted: Thu Mar 31, 2016 10:02 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Losing Swanny is a big blow to our forward line potential. Perhaps we'll need to have Sidey and/or Pendles spending a lot of time up forward, at least until Elliott returns.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Pies4shaw Leo

pies4shaw


Joined: 08 Oct 2007


PostPosted: Thu Mar 31, 2016 10:06 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes, Swan kicked 35 goals in 2011 and I think they were probably hoping for that sort of output in 2016. Perhaps Varcoe could also play more forward of centre, when he returns - he has a massive kick, is otherwise also a good user of the football and, unlike Sidey and Pendles, has the speed to get himself in the clear to steady for the shot?
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board Forum Index -> General Discussion All times are GMT + 11 Hours

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 3 of 5   

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum



Privacy Policy

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group