Analysis Inside 50s into goals

[Janus]

We are:

Equal 1st for total goal scorers (17)
1st for average goal scorers per game (9.3)
2nd for goals scored per game (16)
1st for behinds scored per game (14.5)
18th for rushed behinds pre game (0.8)
1st for shots on goal per game (34.5)
3rd for goal assists per game (11)
3rd for goals per inside 50 (25.7)
2nd for scoring shots per inside 50 (49)
1st for shots at goal per inside 50 (55.4)
1st for score involvements (122.5)
1st for score launches (30.5)
2nd for offensive 1v1 contests
1st for offensive 1v1 win percentage (41.7%)
1st for marks inside 50
1st for marks inside 50 per inside 50 (27.3%)

The only thing that you could possibly be critical about with regards to our gameplan is:

13th for accuracy at 46.4%. If we were going at the clip of a GWS (57.5%), Geelong (53.9%), Melbourne (52%) or Carlton (51.4%) this thread wouldn't even exist, because we'd be scoring 18+ goals a game instead of 16 and be 4-0 with a ridiculous percentage.

 

[Enviable Tradition]

We are:

Equal 1st for total goal scorers (17)
1st for average goal scorers per game (9.3)
2nd for goals scored per game (16)
1st for behinds scored per game (14.5)
18th for rushed behinds pre game (0.8)
1st for shots on goal per game (34.5)
3rd for goal assists per game (11)
3rd for goals per inside 50 (25.7)
2nd for scoring shots per inside 50 (49)
1st for shots at goal per inside 50 (55.4)
1st for score involvements (122.5)
1st for score launches (30.5)
2nd for offensive 1v1 contests
1st for offensive 1v1 win percentage (41.7%)
1st for marks inside 50
1st for marks inside 50 per inside 50 (27.3%)

The only thing that you could possibly be critical about with regards to our gameplan is:

13th for accuracy at 46.4%. If we were going at the clip of a GWS (57.5%), Geelong (53.9%), Melbourne (52%) or Carlton (51.4%) this thread wouldn't even exist, because we'd be scoring 18+ goals a game instead of 16 and be 4-0 with a ridiculous percentage.

Or you could realise we have played three ordinary teams (especially defensively) and that most of our problems are exposed against good teams like Melbourne.

If we extrapolate the stats we got against Essendon, long recognised as one of the laziest defensively teams for the year then I will be the first to admit we have rectified our past issues

But that's a massive IF.

On SM-G975F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Peninsula Boy]

We are:

Equal 1st for total goal scorers (17)
1st for average goal scorers per game (9.3)
2nd for goals scored per game (16)
1st for behinds scored per game (14.5)
18th for rushed behinds pre game (0.8)
1st for shots on goal per game (34.5)
3rd for goal assists per game (11)
3rd for goals per inside 50 (25.7)
2nd for scoring shots per inside 50 (49)
1st for shots at goal per inside 50 (55.4)
1st for score involvements (122.5)
1st for score launches (30.5)
2nd for offensive 1v1 contests
1st for offensive 1v1 win percentage (41.7%)
1st for marks inside 50
1st for marks inside 50 per inside 50 (27.3%)

The only thing that you could possibly be critical about with regards to our gameplan is:

13th for accuracy at 46.4%. If we were going at the clip of a GWS (57.5%), Geelong (53.9%), Melbourne (52%) or Carlton (51.4%) this thread wouldn't even exist, because we'd be scoring 18+ goals a game instead of 16 and be 4-0 with a ridiculous percentage.

I'm with ET on this one.

I feel it is a bit too early to make broad statements but there are some very good signs.

Melbourne is a quality team but Essendon, 2 wins, Richmond 1 win and West Coat with the goose egg does skew the sample size a little bit. As ET said, defensively they are all not the best with Melbourne lower than expected too.

Also, there are a lot of nice stats there but I would just focus on the two major stats, shots on goals a game which according to your data we are first and then accuracy which we are 13th and needs some improvement. The other stats are a bit of fluff. And there are usually other circumstances as well.

 

[Enoch Blaze]

We are:

Equal 1st for total goal scorers (17)
1st for average goal scorers per game (9.3)
2nd for goals scored per game (16)
1st for behinds scored per game (14.5)
18th for rushed behinds pre game (0.8)
1st for shots on goal per game (34.5)
3rd for goal assists per game (11)
3rd for goals per inside 50 (25.7)
2nd for scoring shots per inside 50 (49)
1st for shots at goal per inside 50 (55.4)
1st for score involvements (122.5)
1st for score launches (30.5)
2nd for offensive 1v1 contests
1st for offensive 1v1 win percentage (41.7%)
1st for marks inside 50
1st for marks inside 50 per inside 50 (27.3%)

The only thing that you could possibly be critical about with regards to our gameplan is:

13th for accuracy at 46.4%. If we were going at the clip of a GWS (57.5%), Geelong (53.9%), Melbourne (52%) or Carlton (51.4%) this thread wouldn't even exist, because we'd be scoring 18+ goals a game instead of 16 and be 4-0 with a ridiculous percentage.

4 weeks data against:

Eagles (poor)
Tigers (mid-rung)
Demons (excellent)
Dons (mid-rung)

Probably not enough to get excited just yet about these stats.

 

[Amarula]

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

JHF, Butters constantly lower the eyes.

Good point. Perhaps it’s just because Butters & JHF are sublime at working inside a phone booth and using short kicks, while Rozee’s thing is getting from congestion into space (although the other 2 are no slouches here either).

And many of Rozee’s long kicks are on a fast break and have a hard and low trajectory (unlike Wines or Boak who always bomb it). Same with Butters & JHF and also Drew who has really improved his i50 delivery this season. They kick long on a fast break, not so much on a slow build.

 

[Janus]

4 weeks data against:

Eagles (poor)
Tigers (mid-rung)
Demons (excellent)
Dons (mid-rung)

Probably not enough to get excited just yet about these stats.

Sydney has played those exact same teams + Collingwood.

 

[The Hobo]

Or you could realise we have played three ordinary teams (especially defensively) and that most of our problems are exposed against good teams like Melbourne.

Except the stats are still favourable when looking at the Melb game as well (again, minus accuracy)

 

[Enviable Tradition]

It's fine except against top 4 teams could be the first line of Ken's resume.

On SM-G975F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Andre]

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

In play players don't have time to think, with set shots the mental fragility of our players comes to the fore.

 

[Enoch Blaze]

Sydney has played those exact same teams + Collingwood.

Does this change anything though? Still only 4 weeks.

 

[Janus]

Does this change anything though? Still only 4 weeks.

It allows us to directly compare Port Adelaide to Sydney, specifically team to opponent differential, which illustrates any strengths or weaknesses in our gameplan compared to the Swans - who most would say are travelling pretty well. Our gameplan is what this thread is bitching about, because everyone would admit that we have an issue with goal kicking accuracy.

This is how much better (or worse) we are than Sydney.

Positive stats:

Kicks per game: +26.1
Handballs per game: -2.6
Disposals per game: +23.6
Inside 50s per game: +14.3
Meters gained per game: +281.1
Clangers per game: -2 (2 less clangers per game)
Turnovers per game: -2.4 (2.4 less turnovers per game)
Contested possessions per game: +4.2
Uncontested possessions per game: +17.1
Possessions per game: +21.3
Intercept possessions: +2.6
Ground Ball Gets: +6.9
Centre Clearances: +7.4
Total Clearances: +4.9
Marks: +19.9
Contested Marks: +6.8
Marks Inside 50: +5.9
Intercept Marks: +5.1
Goals: +1.8
Behinds: +3.5
Shots: +8.2
Goal Assists: +0.3
Score Involvements: +5.5
Score Launches: +8.1
Tackles: +2.3
Tackles Inside 50: +4.2
Hitouts to Advantage: +1.9

Negative stats:

Rebound 50s: -11.1 (who ******* cares)
Stoppage Clearances: -2.5 (influence of Grundy)
Marks on Lead: +2.1 (what this thread is bitching about, yes?)
Pressure Acts: -6.3 (I find this amusing)
Spoils: -11.3 (not enough intercept marking talent)
Hitouts: -6.1 (Grundy again)

 

[El_Scorcho]

We are:

Equal 1st for total goal scorers (17)
1st for average goal scorers per game (9.3)
2nd for goals scored per game (16)
1st for behinds scored per game (14.5)
18th for rushed behinds pre game (0.8)
1st for shots on goal per game (34.5)
3rd for goal assists per game (11)
3rd for goals per inside 50 (25.7)
2nd for scoring shots per inside 50 (49)
1st for shots at goal per inside 50 (55.4)
1st for score involvements (122.5)
1st for score launches (30.5)
2nd for offensive 1v1 contests
1st for offensive 1v1 win percentage (41.7%)
1st for marks inside 50
1st for marks inside 50 per inside 50 (27.3%)

The only thing that you could possibly be critical about with regards to our gameplan is:

13th for accuracy at 46.4%. If we were going at the clip of a GWS (57.5%), Geelong (53.9%), Melbourne (52%) or Carlton (51.4%) this thread wouldn't even exist, because we'd be scoring 18+ goals a game instead of 16 and be 4-0 with a ridiculous percentage.

lmao never change. A sample size of 4 games demonstrating that once again we can beat up on poor teams, of which we've played 3 out of our 4 games.

Our accuracy is so poor because we generate low percentage scoring opportunities. Shallow entries or marks on the boundary. Snaps out of packs when the ball hits the deck. Almost never from a clean lead and mark 35m out straight in front. We know this is our biggest issue, we've known it since Schulz and Wingard disappeared from our forward line and suddenly taking every other shot from the boundary didn't work anymore.

Accuracy doesn't matter against bad teams because you can just overwhelm them with sheer volume of entries and class, but we've known for almost a decade now that a high volume of entries at the cost of quality doesn't work when you play good teams.

The Melbourne game is quintessential Ken Hinkley football. Dominate the stats but be completely unable to put your dominance on the board.

 

[El_Scorcho]

Our gameplan is what this thread is bitching about, because everyone would admit that we have an issue with goal kicking accuracy.

Our goal accuracy issues are twofold.

Firstly, our gameplan doesn't generate high percentage shots, it generates a lot of low percentage shots.

Secondly, we are mentally weak because we have a mentally weak coach who has instilled a mentally weak culture, and set shots have a significant mental component.

 

[Enviable Tradition]

lmao never change. A sample size of 4 games demonstrating that once again we can beat up on poor teams, of which we've played 3 out of our 4 games.

Our accuracy is so poor because we generate low percentage scoring opportunities. Shallow entries or marks on the boundary. Snaps out of packs when the ball hits the deck. Almost never from a clean lead and mark 35m out straight in front. We know this is our biggest issue, we've known it since Schulz and Wingard disappeared from our forward line and suddenly taking every other shot from the boundary didn't work anymore.

Accuracy doesn't matter against bad teams because you can just overwhelm them with sheer volume of entries and class, but we've known for almost a decade now that a high volume of entries at the cost of quality doesn't work when you play good teams.

The Melbourne game is quintessential Ken Hinkley football. Dominate the stats but be completely unable to put your dominance on the board.

Exactly. And this is why the thread is clearly labelled as i50s into goals and not...

i50s into...

Scores
Behinds
Shots on goal
Scoring shots
Score involvements
Score launches
Offensive 1v1 contests
Offensive 1v1 wins
Marks inside 50


On SM-G975F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Janus]

Our goal accuracy issues are twofold.

Firstly, our gameplan doesn't generate high percentage shots, it generates a lot of low percentage shots.

This is not factual. All scoring charts, including the Melbourne game, show that we are generating no more difficult shots than any other team in the competition.

Melbourne won against us for no other reason than they kicked goals they statistically wouldn’t have. Anyone who suggests otherwise has an agenda. You whinged for years about not having enough tall targets and how they would straighten us up, but as soon as you get them you move onto another hobby horse because none of them are Tony Lockett when it comes to goal kicking - which is kind of why our style relies on quantity of supply to give our forwards multiple chances.

Secondly, we are mentally weak because we have a mentally weak coach who has instilled a mentally weak culture, and set shots have a significant mental component.

You believe that what the coach says to his team in public is what he says in private? I quote Sun Tzu: “All warfare is based on deception. Hence, when we are able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must appear inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy bekieve we are far away; when far away, we must make him believe we are near.”

Consider this when thinking about the bravado of 2013 and 2014 and the realistic state of a list where Hinkley said he could kick better on his left than most of our squad with their preferred.

P.S. We are third in the competition for goals per inside 50 at 25.7%, behind GWS (27.7%) and the Bulldogs (27%).

 

[TeeKray]

I quote Sun Tzu: "Sack Hinkley"

 

[Enviable Tradition]

This is not factual. All scoring charts, including the Melbourne game, show that we are generating no more difficult shots than any other team in the competition.

Melbourne won against us for no other reason than they kicked goals they statistically wouldn’t have. Anyone who suggests otherwise has an agenda. You whinged for years about not having enough tall targets and how they would straighten us up, but as soon as you get them you move onto another hobby horse because none of them are Tony Lockett when it comes to goal kicking - which is kind of why our style relies on quantity of supply to give our forwards multiple chances.

You believe that what the coach says to his team in public is what he says in private? I quote Sun Tzu: “All warfare is based on deception. Hence, when we are able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must appear inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy bekieve we are far away; when far away, we must make him believe we are near.”

Consider this when thinking about the bravado of 2013 and 2014 and the realistic state of a list where Hinkley said he could kick better on his left than most of our squad with their preferred.

P.S. We are third in the competition for goals per inside 50 at 25.7%, behind GWS (27.7%) and the Bulldogs (27%).

Over 4 games.

And with a big discrepancy against good teams.

What about over the last 5 years?

On SM-G975F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Chrizzt]

Four games is clearly not enough to have confidence that the stats are telling a true story, but people criticising our opposition are off the mark.

• West Coast are crap, but we absolutely belted them which is the surest sign of a strong team
• Richmond will be not as bad as people think - they've knocked off Sydney and only narrowly lost to Carlton.
• Melbourne will be hovering around top 4 - we only lost due to a huge discrepancy in expected score (not saying it's not a problem that will cost us in finals, but it's reasonable enough to consider this an outlier at this stage)
• Essendon aren't a great team, but middle of the road - they'll have some big wins against good oppo this year

 

[Peninsula Boy]

It allows us to directly compare Port Adelaide to Sydney, specifically team to opponent differential, which illustrates any strengths or weaknesses in our gameplan compared to the Swans - who most would say are travelling pretty well. Our gameplan is what this thread is bitching about, because everyone would admit that we have an issue with goal kicking accuracy.

This is how much better (or worse) we are than Sydney.

Positive stats:

Kicks per game: +26.1
Handballs per game: -2.6
Disposals per game: +23.6
Inside 50s per game: +14.3
Meters gained per game: +281.1
Clangers per game: -2 (2 less clangers per game)
Turnovers per game: -2.4 (2.4 less turnovers per game)
Contested possessions per game: +4.2
Uncontested possessions per game: +17.1
Possessions per game: +21.3
Intercept possessions: +2.6
Ground Ball Gets: +6.9
Centre Clearances: +7.4
Total Clearances: +4.9
Marks: +19.9
Contested Marks: +6.8
Marks Inside 50: +5.9
Intercept Marks: +5.1
Goals: +1.8
Behinds: +3.5
Shots: +8.2
Goal Assists: +0.3
Score Involvements: +5.5
Score Launches: +8.1
Tackles: +2.3
Tackles Inside 50: +4.2
Hitouts to Advantage: +1.9

Negative stats:

Rebound 50s: -11.1 (who ******* cares)
Stoppage Clearances: -2.5 (influence of Grundy)
Marks on Lead: +2.1 (what this thread is bitching about, yes?)
Pressure Acts: -6.3 (I find this amusing)
Spoils: -11.3 (not enough intercept marking talent)
Hitouts: -6.1 (Grundy again)

They are nice stats but I would prefer to see how we go up against them, preferably at the SCG but home would be fine.

They have a pretty hot midfield and have a few players to come back in and they are well coached.

 

[Janus]

Over 4 games.

And with a big discrepancy against good teams.

What about over the last 5 years?

On SM-G975F using BigFooty.com mobile app

What about them?

Most would say 2020 was our best shot at a premiership.

Shots:

2020 - 2nd
2021 - 4th
2022 - 9th
2023 - 4th

2024 - 1st

Hitouts to advantage differential:

2020 - 8th
2021 - 5th
2022 - 17th
2023 - 16th

2024 - 2nd

Intercept marks differential:

2020 - 12th
2021 - 6th
2022 - 15th
2023 - 5th

2024 - 6th

Score launch differential:

2020 - 1st
2021 - 4th
2022 - 10th
2023 - 3rd

2024 - 1st

Score involvement differential:

2020 - 2nd
2021 - 6th
2022 - 7th
2023 - 10th

2024 - 1st

 

[Enviable Tradition]

What about them?

Most would say 2020 was our best shot at a premiership.

Shots:

2020 - 2nd
2021 - 4th
2022 - 9th
2023 - 4th

2024 - 1st

Hitouts to advantage differential:

2020 - 8th
2021 - 5th
2022 - 17th
2023 - 16th

2024 - 2nd

Intercept marks differential:

2020 - 12th
2021 - 6th
2022 - 15th
2023 - 5th

2024 - 6th

Score launch differential:

2020 - 1st
2021 - 4th
2022 - 10th
2023 - 3rd

2024 - 1st

Score involvement differential:

2020 - 2nd
2021 - 6th
2022 - 7th
2023 - 10th

2024 - 1st

Are you deliberately avoiding the actual topic of this thread?

I know you usually get away with incoherent ramblings and data dumps to distract from the actual topic.

Inside 50s into goals is what I am talking about.

 

[El_Scorcho]

This is not factual. All scoring charts, including the Melbourne game, show that we are generating no more difficult shots than any other team in the competition.

If you've got those charts i'd love to see them.

Melbourne won against us for no other reason than they kicked goals they statistically wouldn’t have. Anyone who suggests otherwise has an agenda.

I'm really not worried about what Melbourne did with their set shots. It's not even about winning or losing at this point, it's about seeing us go inside 50 with something that resembles a plan. As usual, we failed to turn our dominance into high quality set shots. We had 13-5 centre clearances with 3 of the best ball users in the league in there where Melbourne couldn't have an extra number in defence and couldn't turn them into a winning score. Losing with +8 centre clearances is criminal.

You whinged for years about not having enough tall targets and how they would straighten us up, but as soon as you get them you move onto another hobby horse because none of them are Tony Lockett when it comes to goal kicking - which is kind of why our style relies on quantity of supply to give our forwards multiple chances.

All 4 of our key forwards have spent parts of their careers lauded as among the best in the league for their set shot goal kicking. Wonder what happened to them. Strange that 4 key forwards at one club could all regress so significantly in a skill that relies on mentality.

You believe that what the coach says to his team in public is what he says in private? I quote Sun Tzu: “All warfare is based on deception. Hence, when we are able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must appear inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy bekieve we are far away; when far away, we must make him believe we are near.”

I would rather s**t in my hands and clap than watch a Ken Hinkley press conference. I don't care what he says to his team, I can see our mental weakness in our performances, and you can as well. Everyone can. Opposition teams know they can get a hold of us in big games and it keeps them in games early where a team we had a mental advantage over might go to water.

We've done a GREAT job of appearing inactive in our last 3 finals.

Consider this when thinking about the bravado of 2013 and 2014 and the realistic state of a list where Hinkley said he could kick better on his left than most of our squad with their preferred.

And that team got the closest we've gotten in the Hinkley era to a GF. What was Hinkley's mentality like then compared to now? In 2013 he said you get what you deserve, and in 2024 he says you don't always get what you deserve.

This is just further proof that the cattle isn't and has never been the issue.

P.S. We are third in the competition for goals per inside 50 at 25.7%, behind GWS (27.7%) and the Bulldogs (27%).

Stats are meaningless after 4 games. We've played 3 completely irrelevant sides. Against the one good team, we lost despite having +21 inside 50s.

 

[Janus]

Are you deliberately avoiding the actual topic of this thread?

I know you usually get away with incoherent ramblings and data dumps to distract from the actual topic.

Inside 50s into goals is what I am talking about.

Your thread states that we somehow have a failure of converting inside 50s into goals compared to other teams in the competition, and that its a failure of our gameplan because we don't hit up forwards on a lead when its really just a matter of set shot accuracy from places that we should be scoring from.

I would get making this thread if we'd be super poor with generating expected scores and taking shots from the boundary and deep in pockets like we did for a time, but we've led the league for expected score for the past two years. We are getting the ball in good positions, we are just not converting.

Goals per inside 50

2020 - 9th
2021 - 8th
2022 - 10th
2023 - 7th

2024 - 3rd

 

[Enviable Tradition]

Your thread states that we somehow have a failure of converting inside 50s into goals compared to other teams in the competition, and that its a failure of our gameplan because we don't hit up forwards on a lead when its really just a matter of set shot accuracy from places that we should be scoring from.

I would get making this thread if we'd be super poor with generating expected scores and taking shots from the boundary and deep in pockets like we did for a time, but we've led the league for expected score for the past two years. We are getting the ball in good positions, we are just not converting.

Goals per inside 50

2020 - 9th
2021 - 8th
2022 - 10th
2023 - 7th

2024 - 3rd

In other words we are average to below average for goals per inside 50.

And particularly so against top 4 teams.

We have been consistently so over many different years and players and we have several players who have gotten worse on the conversion front since getting to Port.

It isn't just kicking.

 

[Powerade 08]

Good thread while it lasted. Next page will be about how everyone including John Butcher

John Butcher

Age

32

Ht

197cm

Wt

94kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

8.7

2star

K

5.1

2star

HB

3.6

3star

M

3.3

3star

T

1.6

4star

G

1.3

5star

No current season stats available

D

7.8

2star

K

4.8

2star

HB

3.0

3star

M

4.0

4star

T

2.4

4star

G

2.6

5star

was a sharpshooter, and if you focus on this one particular stat Marshall is actually just as good a player as Eric Hipwood

30

Eric Hipwood

Age

26

Ht

203cm

Wt

94kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

10.0

3star

K

7.4

3star

HB

2.6

2star

M

3.9

4star

T

1.3

3star

G

1.5

5star

D

11.1

3star

K

8.4

3star

HB

2.7

2star

M

4.1

4star

T

1.1

2star

G

1.1

5star

D

10.6

3star

K

8.4

4star

HB

2.2

2star

M

3.6

4star

T

1.6

4star

G

2.4

5star

or Levi Casboult

30

Levi Casboult

Age

34

Ht

199cm

Wt

104kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

9.9

3star

K

6.5

3star

HB

3.4

3star

M

5.3

5star

T

1.7

4star

G

1.1

4star

D

10.1

3star

K

7.6

3star

HB

2.6

2star

M

5.9

5star

T

1.3

2star

G

1.3

5star

D

9.2

3star

K

6.2

3star

HB

3.0

3star

M

5.2

5star

T

2.2

4star

G

1.4

5star

.