TalkingCarlton
http://talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/

Season 2006: Before we move on....Season Review
http://talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=12848		 Page 1 of 2
Author:  molsey [ Tue Oct 03, 2006 2:32 pm ]
Post subject:  Season 2006: Before we move on....Season Review
Now that we've had a good month to digest our second successive wooden spoon, with a few Board / Club issues as a nice diversion, are there any lasting memories / thoughts on 2006 that you think are key points or worthy of discussion. I'm thinking stats / season reviews / player placements and genuine critiques.

Overall, we had fewer wins and the same old crap percentage. Yet one of the stories of 2006 was the John Coleman Medallist, Brendan Fevola, who would become the first Blue in 45 years to take the medal (since Tom Carroll in 1961). Take out the impact of Fev and let us tell you a different story:

Season - Goals Scored - Behinds Scored - Points Scored
2005 - 293 - 258 - 2016
2006 257 249 1791
Difference -36 -9 -225

Overall, the Blues kicked 36 goals less in 2006 than in 2005, and 225 points less were scored by Carlton in the year just finished. Not only did our scoring shots fall but our goal kicking efficiency fell from 53.1% to 50.8%. So how does that work given Fevola’s breakout year?

Season Goals Scored Fev's Goals Goals by Others Fev as a % of total Goals
2005 293 49 244 17%
2006 257 84 173 33%

Basically, Fev went from kicking 1 in every 6 goals in 2005 to 1 in every 3!
Author:  waitey [ Tue Oct 03, 2006 2:41 pm ]
Post subject: 
mostly from waite and fish being injured, last year waitey kicked 36 goals compared to 13 or so this year from injury. Fev just didn't have as much support, but had a better year than last year. Hopefully with more support from waite, fish, and kennedy next year Fev will be able to produce even more goals.
Author:  molsey [ Tue Oct 03, 2006 2:45 pm ]
Post subject: 
Not necessarily...

Player - 2005 - 2006 - Difference - 2006 Games
Fevola - 49 - 84 - 35 - 21
Waite - 36 - 18 - -18 - 13
Lappin - 25 - 5 - -20 - 19
Whitnall - 24 - 15 - -9 - 22
Betts - 19 - 20 - 1 - 21
Fisher - 13 - 7 - -6 - 13
Koutoufides - 13 - 12 - -1 - 18

Fevola's increase overcomes the loss of Waite and Lappin. The ball was getting sucked out of our forward line taking the forwards with them. Alternatively Fev worked so much better as a 1 man forward line the rest were moved out.
Author:  molsey [ Tue Oct 03, 2006 2:56 pm ]
Post subject: 
Probably another thing that I think is worth remembering is, for what its worth, a change in pagan's game plan from 2005 to 2006. It was clear from Round 1 that something was changing....whether we needed to make further changes, adjustments, additions i'll leave to others.

But overall, the change in game plan and / or our ability to lcoate the ball led to an explosion in possessions at Carlton whilst we moved from Pagan’s old long-kicking strategies to our new game plan involving more defensive flooding and hopefully more care and patience in setting up forward entries. Year on year, the Blues on average had 54 more possessions per week than in 2005, a massive increase from 281 stats each game to 335 in 2006. That's 20% YOY.
Author:  The Duke [ Tue Oct 03, 2006 2:57 pm ]
Post subject: 
WE PLAYED THE KIDS!!

If you look at the youngsters as follows;
Betts
Simmo
AW
AB
Carrazzo
Murph
Blackers
Setanta
Russell
Kennedy
Smith
Bower
Jackson

They played a total of 173 games in 2006 as opposed to just 83 in 2005. That's a hell of a lot of experience lost and a lot of new talent blooded.

We also missed Campo delivering the ball to the forwards.......no, seriously, we did :lol:
Author:  molsey [ Tue Oct 03, 2006 3:01 pm ]
Post subject: 
Good point Duke.

63% of Carlton games in 2006 were played by those aged 23 or younger (as at 1 January 2006). This represents about 50 more games from those under 23 than in 2005, and remember, we all get older by 1 year every year so to move the statistic downwards year-on-year shows a real progression. Further, 147 games were played by Blues 21 or younger in 2006; 10 better than in 2005. The transition in the list has begun, but as they say, sometimes you have to wait until they (the players) have hit 40 to 50 games before you notice. On the flip-side, but to confirm the point, 152 games were played by Blues 25 or over in 2006, down from 181 in 2005 in a great sign of transition.
Author:  Sniff Wilson [ Tue Oct 03, 2006 3:08 pm ]
Post subject: 
we were more shit than the other 15 teams.
Author:  The Duke [ Tue Oct 03, 2006 3:09 pm ]
Post subject: 
No worries Molsey,
You got me thinking, if you look at the old crusties we didn't play in 2006 you'll find from

Teague
Campo
Prenda
Diggers
Johnno
longmuire
Chambers
Davies
Bowyer
Clarke

Their totals dropped from 125 in 2005 to just 18 in 2006 :o

We all know thay hard bodies run games out better than young kids, and we found in many cases (at Subi :evil: ) that this was the case.
Author:  molsey [ Tue Oct 03, 2006 3:11 pm ]
Post subject: 
The Duke wrote:
Their totals dropped from 125 in 2005 to just 18 in 2006 :o



Should have been 0!
Author:  The Duke [ Tue Oct 03, 2006 3:14 pm ]
Post subject: 
The Duke wrote:
No worries Molsey,
You got me thinking, if you look at the old crusties we didn't play in 2006 you'll find from

Teague
Campo
Prenda
Diggers
Johnno
longmuire
Chambers
Davies
Bowyer
Clarke

Their totals dropped from 125 in 2005 to just 18 in 2006 :o

We all know thay hard bodies run games out better than young kids, and we found in many cases (at Subi :evil: ) that this was the case.


Sorry, that includes Livo's 9 games.

How could I forget Luke Warm Livingston :wink:
Author:  bondiblue [ Tue Oct 03, 2006 3:35 pm ]
Post subject: 
Good thread Molsey, and good discussion points generated.

Molsey wrote

Quote:
Overall, the Blues kicked 36 goals less in 2006 than in 2005, and 225 points less were scored by Carlton in the year just finished. Not only did our scoring shots fall but our goal kicking efficiency fell from 53.1% to 50.8%. So how does that work given Fevola’s breakout year?


In 2005 our main forwards with Fev were:

Waite, Fisher, Whitnall, Betts and DeLuca, (and obviously Lappin was down there a few times in his All Australian year, as well as Kouta but from a midfield 'surge'). The first 3 give us a decline in output of 33 goals (mainly through injury), and that says a lot.

IMO we were Fev focussed, and even with Kennedy and DeLuca in the mix, they didn't generate much goal output as you would expect from a CHF and FP. As mentioned the increase in the flood sucked out our forwardline, and left Fev with 2-3 oppponents. We had one avenue to goal; Fev.

The question I have, is how many times did the ball go into our forwardline with Fev being beaten by 2-3 opponents? Heaps, and in a 1 on 1 situation his output may have actually improved; maybe not, if we were multi dimensional, as well as the turnover kings.

We needed a better structure in the forwardline, and I think we robbed the forwardline by playing Whitnall in the back half. He has smarts, leadership and direction, as well as taking a good defender away from Fev.

Fev in the goalsqare works for us, Fish needs to be closer to goal to be effective on the scoreboard (unless Edwards overtakes him; and he can kick), Waite and Kennedy (who will improve mammothly) need to work with Whitnall in mixing it up; become a multi dimensional attack. Hopefully the disposal into the forwardline improves by 30% in 2007.

Gibbs (if?) will be an interesting acquisition if he plays in the forwardline, because as far as crumbing is concerned I thought that many opportunitis were missed because Betts was nowhere in sight of the crumbs when Fev was bringing the ball to the ground, and when he was his accuracy was not that of a goal sneak, but more of a 'snapper'. Gibbs at 188cm marks well, kicks well (and goals at that), reads the game well and has clean hands...watch out Bettsy...unless Gibbs plays at HBF.

I thought we looked a better team this year, but yet we managed to kick 36 less goal goals than 2005. Clangers and turnovers didn't help our cause at all.

I hate to say this, but the more I look at it, apart from injury and the fact we played the kids (surely contributed to decline in goals), I think that Betts and DeLuca let us down, and other than Simmo, the midfield (Stevens, Houlihan, Bentick) didn't contribute goals either.

We've got to stop the ball from getting out of our forwardline so easily, and be accountable. Do not let the opposition run the ball out in 3's and 4's.
Author:  molsey [ Tue Oct 03, 2006 3:40 pm ]
Post subject: 
How can you possibly argue Betts let us down with the same goal output and more time on-ball? I think he did really well BB.

You have indicated 33 goals less from that group - but that is less than Fevola increased. We also have to consider a significant fallaway in goals from other sources - the midfield...who were so stuck in the backline, chipping away, rotating the ball, that we lost their damage in the forward line. eg. Scotland. Think of who on our list for the whole year took a bounce or two, ran through the lines and kicked goals from the midfield...I'd say Simmo for 2 or 3, 1 or 2 from Stevens and 1 from Bannister!
Author:  camel [ Tue Oct 03, 2006 3:50 pm ]
Post subject: 
I'll remember 2006 for…

Fevola.
Murphy.
Simpson.
Walker.

And Eddie's goal. Oh, and Simmo's goal. Kouta's goal. Fevola's goal.
Author:  AIRCAV [ Tue Oct 03, 2006 3:56 pm ]
Post subject: 
I'll not want to remember 2006 for the joke it revealed my club to be off the field.

I'll not want to remember 2006 because that joke is not going away in the short term.
Author:  timetodeliver2004 [ Tue Oct 03, 2006 4:14 pm ]
Post subject: 
Things to remember 2006 by:

- An increased competitiveness across the board. Doesn't show in the wins column but our blowouts were fewer and far between and we also showed a willingness and desire to fight games out. The flip side was that we also showed an inability to close tight games out when we were in winning positions (though this can almost wholly be attributed to a lack of confidence and a young group).

- The beginning of a defensive structure. Something we've been lacking for ages and hasn't really looked like improving. T-Bird gave us an outstanding second half of the year that prompted Garry Lyon to claim he was the All-Australian Full Back for the second half of the year. Carlos showed some promising glimpses, none moreso than the last game of the year when he outpointed Barry Hall. The debut of TC's own Bower gave the backline an injection of youth and looked like a nice attacking, running, creative half back flanker. Heath Scotland had a break-out year and showed poise and skill in the sweeping role all season.

- The beginning of a young midfield to rival the best in the league. Murphy exceeded the expectations of every Carlton supporter! Absolutely dripped class on and off the field. Add to that the big strides forward taken by Simmo and AW, the glimpses of Blackers (the game against Brizzy was a blinder), Russell and Smith and you have an exciting future. Mix in Gibbs to that mix and we're drooling.

- The forward line - well this year was the Year of the Shag. Without a doubt the shining light of the club all season. On the opposite side, we had disappointing outputs from Fish and SoV (having them both injured at the same time was not good!). JK gave us something to smile about with hints of something special at senior level and some dominant displays for the 'Ants. Eddie improved - maintained his goal output and showed promise when rotating through the midfield. Also, goal of the year just to top it off. Again, the nucleus of a very successful forward line capable of kicking big scores is there!

So while 2006 may be seen as another year of doom and gloom, I'm going to remember it as the beginning. The beginning of a very special period for my beloved Blues. The year when pieces began to fall into place and a dynasty was created. Am I overly optimistic? Only time will tell, but I can't wait for 2007!
Author:  The Duke [ Tue Oct 03, 2006 4:18 pm ]
Post subject: 
bondiblue wrote:
I think that Betts and DeLuca let us down


I don't think Betts "Let us down" he is only 19 after all. I do agree that unless he can increase his average to over 1.5 per game he may be in danger of being pushed out. Fev's great year may have been detrimental to Betts' goal tally as he often beat his opponent 1 on 1.

A stronger midfield holds the key to 2007 - if every pre-season is like puberty to a young player, then it must be like dementia for the older blokes.

Luckily we have an abundance of youth and very few fossils.
Author:  Pickle [ Tue Oct 03, 2006 4:33 pm ]
Post subject: 
It's worth noting that our defense improved by 255 points.
Author:  dane [ Tue Oct 03, 2006 7:11 pm ]
Post subject: 
its all ok, we are rebuilding, just cant accept it for too many more year years.
lets hope 2006 can be seen as the year when things got real bad, but out of the rubble, we started to rebuild.
Author:  bondiblue [ Tue Oct 03, 2006 7:34 pm ]
Post subject: 
Molsey wrote the following quotes

Quote:
How can you possibly argue Betts let us down with the same goal output and more time on-ball? I think he did really well BB.


I didn't just write one sentence, or focus on one player. Well put it this way, and subtly, Bettsy didn't star.

But with reference to Betts, I was focussing on the forwardline, and I mentioned and referred to all our forwards. Fev did great. Fish and Waite were injured. Kennedy too overwhelmed, and brand new, DeLuca couldn't catch them and Betts was lost.

Your thread is trying to determine why such a high % of the team's goals were kicked by one player; why Fev had increased number of goals when the trend was the other way around for the team. That's what I did. You want me to be brutal, that's easy, but I wont. Let me just say that Betts did some brilliant individual things this year, and showed the team how to put pressure on the opposition...and his effort in the last against Bumbers was great to see.

Was I impressed in his season? Regardless of age, frankly, No! I thought he went missing, missed easy shots, wasn't strong in the shepherd, was a bit selfish at times, and got brushed off too easily...and when he was the forward target in the goal square against a bloke bigger than him, well, I thought that was dumb, just standing there as the target; sitting duck. Move around son...present yourself. He has an upside and potential, but I'm just giving my honest opinion. Easy to blame Pagan, but some of the weak parts of Betts' game were his doing. Sorry if it hurts, but I thought DeLuca and Betts have an upside, but they were our weakest links in the forwardline in 2006; with Kennedy excused.


Quote:
You have indicated 33 goals less from that group - but that is less than Fevola increased.


Am I missing something with my math? How many goals is the diff between the 2 years, then what's the diff between their output in 2006 and Fev's output? Sorry, don't get it.


Quote:
We also have to consider a significant fallaway in goals from other sources - the midfield...who were so stuck in the backline, chipping away, rotating the ball, that we lost their damage in the forward line


That was the game plan, not necassarily just the individuals in the midfield. Nevertheless, there wasn't a concerted effort to attack the goals too much. I thought that this is where there is an big void to fill with goals. In addition, the midfield are on the field to provide run and link, and you can't do that when you're flooding with everyone in the backline, unless they are trained to do so. The flood was a Pagan ad hoc exercise. Wasn't convinced the players were drilled in this game plan; coaches fault probably.
Author:  molsey [ Tue Oct 03, 2006 8:18 pm ]
Post subject: 
Pickle wrote:
It's worth noting that our defense improved by 255 points.


Yes it is. So even though our forward line fell away to some extent, our percentage didn't deteriorate from its already low level.

2006 to 2005 - our defence took just about all of Whitnall, Lappin and Scotland, and toward the end of the year all of Houlihan as well.

Add flooding...and I wonder what the 255 point improvement actually means...if anything?
Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC + 10 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/