The only limit to our realisation of tomorrow is our doubts of today." — Franklin D. Roosevelt
One last time.
As Essendon heads into the last game of the season, the sense of freedom should encourage a more carefree approach in these final 80 minutes. While the game might seem inconsequential, a positive finish can provide a mental boost that carries into the offseason and builds momentum for 2025.
Defence versus attack.
While Essendon does a lot of things right in denying the opposition the opportunity to get closer to goal and generate a shot, once the first “wall” put in place to stop this is “broken through,” there hasn’t been much left to hold up behind it.
They rank 6th best in denying inside 50 entries, trailing only Western Bulldogs, Brisbane, Hawthorn, Port Adelaide, and Fremantle—four of which are set to play finals, with the other still in contention. This is a significant improvement from last year when they ranked 15th.
Unfortunately, once it’s inside the back third, it’s going on the scoreboard. Being grouped this season with Richmond, North Melbourne, and West Coast isn’t a good sign, but they’re the only teams beneath Essendon in being able to rebound the opposition’s entries once they’re within 50 metres of goal.
The opposition hits a marking target almost 24% of the time in this area, the 5th worst rate in the competition. Considering Brisbane is the third-best team for taking marks inside their forward 50, much will depend on the pressure applied to their ball movement and a significant uptick in performance from the Essendon backline.
I’ve recently reviewed some horrific stats about individual performances in the defensive half, and I’d rather not revisit those here. My expectation is that each defender focuses on locking down their matchup rather than prioritising intercepts.
Brisbane isn’t a team known for fast ball movement or slingshot transitions. They lead the league in kick-to-handball ratio, with over 64% of their disposals by foot. When they do speed up, it’s usually once they reach the halfway point of the ground, where they are then comfortable going to contests in their front third. They rely on aerial targets and a forward 50 groundball fleet to win the ball and capitalise on opportunities.
If Essendon can slow down Brisbane further up the ground and force them to kick longer to contests before reaching the halfway line, it will allow time for support to come back and assist both in the air and at ground level.
While Essendon’s one-on-one work has been poor all season, another concern is their ability to defend contests once the ball hits the ground. Here, Brisbane boasts five players ranked in the top 55 for groundball gets: Lohmann, Rayner, Ah Chee, Cameron, and Morris, so containing these threats through matchups and assistance is crucial.
Due to Brisbane’s style of ball movement, the team doesn’t generate many one-on-one contests in its front half. Daniher is the only Brisbane player ranked in the top 50 for one-on-one contests per game, coming in at 35th, with Cameron being the only other player in the top 100.
Attack versus defence.
Unfortunately, I’ll need to address Essendon’s inside 50 efficiency once again.
We all know from the vision, the coaches, and the numbers that Essendon’s main issue isn’t getting the ball inside the front third; it’s converting those entries into maximum points on the scoreboard. Can this change against Brisbane in the final game of the season? Well, there’s both good and bad news.
Bad: Brisbane is the 3rd best team in denying opposition inside 50 entries, with their opponents averaging only 46.9 entries per game this season.
Good: Brisbane is below average in allowing their opponents to turn an entry into a mark inside that area. They rank 12th in allowing an entry to become a shot at goal, with only the Western Bulldogs ranking lower among teams currently in the top eight.
Bad: Brisbane allows the 3rd hardest shots at goal based on expected score accuracy. This measurement analyses every shot at goal, considering where on the ground it was taken and the pressure the player was under, using data from the last decade of games.
Essendon’s first challenge will be generating enough entries through clearances, contest wins, and ball movement. Once that hard work is done, they need to make the right decisions on who to target, execute better than in recent times, and ensure accuracy to turn those efforts into deserved points on the scoreboard.
The Bombers average 56.1 inside 50s this season, the 4th most of all teams, behind only Western Bulldogs, Brisbane, and Gold Coast. However, only 22% of these entries are turned into a mark, and this rate has dropped to under 19% since round 18.
To improve, Essendon must lower their eyes and target shorter options instead of predictably bombing to the same spots. Keeping the ball low and in front of leading targets gives teammates a chance to capitalise if a mark isn’t taken, allowing them to find handball options to teammates are then “front facing” towards goal.
There are two methods to have a shot for goal: through a set shot from a mark or free kick, or from general play, which is on the run or off the ground. In 2023, Essendon had 264 shots from general play, making up 48.19% of total shots. However, in 2024, this has dropped to 226, accounting for just 41.57% of shots on goal.
Perfection isn’t always necessary; sometimes, spontaneity can be a valuable asset, especially against the opposition.
Down back, the Lions’ height is with Andrews and Joyce, while Lester and Starcevich are more medium-sized defenders. Outside of Andrews, the others are traditional defenders who take a more passive position, standing “back shoulder” to their direct matchup and prioritising spoiling over marking.
The important job this week is to nullify Andrews’ impact in intercept marking. Andrews leads the competition for intercept marks this year, averaging four a game. His preference is to not be locked down to a matchup in order to support his teammates in the air. Whatever forward mix Scott selects this week will require a sacrificial role to be played on Andrews.
Draper or a returning Wright could be used as a forward who plays as a defender, focusing on nullifying Andrews first and relying on the second-tier mix of defenders to pick up the slack in winning the ball back.
Essendon’s weakness in groundball wins in the forward 50 has been evident for much of the second half of the season. Interestingly, Brisbane also struggles with winning ground balls in their defensive 50. One way to put pressure on their defenders is by increasing the speed at which the ball comes at them.
Ball movement.
This is a critical area that will need attention in the offseason, both in terms of coaching ideology and method, as well as list decisions to support these changes.
Essendon’s uncontested game affects all aspects of transition, from how they choose to move the ball forward to the players’ ability to execute this method through their disposal skills. The flow-on effect is seen in the attacking half, where finding a marking option for a set shot at goal or creating a dangerous ground-level option to score through general play becomes crucial.
The current approach is breaking down, failing to maximise players’ abilities to win one-on-one or even-numbered contests and utilise their skills as natural forwards.
More speed and urgency will be required in the future, and player selection will be key to making this change work consistently.
This week, Brisbane shows some vulnerabilities in allowing opposition scores through transition. If you thought Essendon gave up scores from its front half in rebounding, you’d be right—they rank just above the three teams at the bottom of the ladder. But Brisbane is only one spot ahead of Essendon in 14th place, with over half of the 33 points they concede from their front half starting from their own forward 50 and going the length of the field.
While it may be risky, given Brisbane’s high scoring ability when intercepting in their forward 50, when the opportunity arises, it may be time for Essendon to just go, go, go.
Clearance.
Three weeks ago, Essendon faced the best clearance differential team of the year in Fremantle. This week, they come up against the second-best in Brisbane. While Essendon only lost the clearance count against Fremantle by three, it was their centre bounce effectiveness that masked the numbers (everyone remembers the last centre bounce of the game).
The real issue was stoppages around the ground, and this week presents the same challenge.
The Lions are +3.9 in stoppage clearances around the ground, which significantly contributes to their average of almost 37 points a game from this source, making them the 4th best team in this regard. They can turn a clearance win into a shot at goal just under 27% of the time, ranking 3rd behind Port Adelaide and Sydney.
A large part of this dominance is due to Neale, who leads the entire competition for clearances around the ground.
It’s impossible to preview Brisbane without mentioning the damage he can create.
Remarkably, this is Neale’s 13th season, and it’s the most impactful on his team’s scoring, with an average of 6.6 score involvements per game, primarily through handballs out of congestion. However, I believe this is a challenge Caldwell can rise to.
While Neale is ranked 9th for winning contested possessions inside the contest, his physical size is not the same as Rowell, who had the better of Caldwell two weeks ago in a similar role. I think Caldwell will be up for the challenge of going head-to-head with last year’s Brownlow Medalist.
Almost every week, Merrett is targeted by the opposition’s preferred “tagger.” This game, it will be interesting to see who Brisbane chooses for this role, as their usual option, Berry, is under an injury cloud. This leaves Dunkley or a returning Robertson as likely candidates.
The default starting midfield mix for Brisbane includes Neale, Dunkley, and McCluggage, with bursts from Ashcroft, Rayner, and Bailey.
Of this group, Dunkley is more defensively minded once the ball is in motion, which could provide an opportunity for the Essendon midfielders to exploit, especially against Rayner and Bailey, who are not always known for their defensive running compared to their attacking efforts.
If Scott opts for two dedicated rucks once again, which seems likely given his team selection history, both Bryan and Draper will need to contend with two very different ruck types in McInerney and Daniher. Despite their differences, both rucks share a common trait: grabbing the ball out of the ruck and bombing it forward, will need both Bryan and Draper constantly aware of this, as well as teammates behind the ball ready and set up.
Another reason to expect Scott to select two dedicated rucks is that Brisbane games this season average the second most stoppages.
Score source.
The main concern around clearances is not just losing initial territory but also the points Essendon is conceding from clearances since round 19.
During this period, no team has given up more points from this source, with an average of 49 points coming from clearance losses. Earlier in the season, this was a scoring source for Essendon, so a return to form in the last game would be a positive way to finish the year.
Rebound.
Does Essendon have a second player who can sacrifice their game for an important role this week? Specifically, the role of stopping the Lions preferred rebounder down back, Zorko.
Zorko is the main defender who brings run, carry and dare, to move the ball with speed from the backline, as well as foot skills to bite off targets in dangerous positions.
He is Brisbane‘s number one rebounder from defensive 50.
If denied run and creativity, Zorko will look for a short pass so he can run past for a handball receive to generate “bounce” from their defensive half.
Outside of Zorko, Wilmot is the only other player who can challenge down back with his run. However, his foot skills are not on the same level as his teammate, so Essendon should prefer him to be the one disposing of the ball by foot.
Can Gresham be tasked with shutting down Zorko’s effectiveness while also challenging him defensively when required?
The end to 2024.
Another season ends early for Essendon, bringing disappointment to the players, coaches, and most supporters I’m sure. Although the season didn’t go as planned, it answered many pre-season questions and raised new ones along the way.
At first glance, the raw numbers of wins, losses, and ladder position might suggest a familiar outcome. However, in my view, those are the only similarities. The metrics that matter most, reflecting the weekly process, are vastly different and much more positive overall.
Once Essendon’s season officially concludes, I will highlight the major improvements that demonstrate why this year is different from what seems like a familiar pattern to many.
Go Dons !
Comments