Stats-file 2018

[jnrmac 18,913]

6 hours ago, Skuit said:

 

This would appear the most logical deduction. Our kick to handball ratio has improved and we're probably clearing it a bit quicker from the breakdowns with less handballs around the pack - two of the biggest gripes on here last season.

It may be the Goody quietly addressed the tackled numbers in the off-season - which would certainly add to fatigue within a game and additional wear across the season - and while it's difficult to quantify among other measures, we seem to be closing out games fairly well.

Goody also strikes me as a man of deep statistics. I made the point in the post-match thread of Lewis's curious post-match on-field interview, where he somehow already knew the match stats for contested and centre-clearance differentials. Obviously a focus to win these numbers to the point where our leaders are being constantly updated.    

At the breaks the assistants hold up boards with the stats on them..

[Dr. Gonzo 22,384]

50 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

Using physical contact to prevent an opponent in possession of the ball from getting an effective disposal. ie a stoppage or the ball spilling free.

Every stat definition here. 

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-12-28/stats-glossary-every-stat-explained

That's what I thought - so the fact we are getting the arms up in tackles to get a handball away means even when we are "tackled" on those occasions it does not count towards the tackle count as we are able to get away an effective disposal.

[jnrmac 18,913]

2 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

That's what I thought - so the fact we are getting the arms up in tackles to get a handball away means even when we are "tackled" on those occasions it does not count towards the tackle count as we are able to get away an effective disposal.

Yes

[Skuit 9,108]

7 hours ago, Cards13 said:

I don’t know Dr but it has really stood out to me this year players ability to break a tackle or at least hold off an effective tackle to get an effective disposal away.

@Skuit point about rugby plans is an interesting one, I noticed at the game and in replay a couple of times at stoppages where it looked like we were lined up like a rugby defensive line, all on one side of the stoppage with North on the other side. I was wondering were I’d seen it before, Rebels game. Are we trying to play in phases, box kicks and putting the ball out inside the 22? One to watch.

 

I'm usually too absorbed in the ruck contest to register our ground set-up on TV or who's even present at our breakdowns - like the umpire is some magician distracting me with the ball - but I did notice this a couple times last year. Usually it spelled trouble though. A vast paddock opening up after a tight contest - Geelong and Hawthorn in the last quarters spring to mind.

[Skuit 9,108]

I was meaning to update a couple weeks back so it's not just a fair-weather bump - but I do hope others can help to keep the numbers fresh and add their own bits and pieces when they come across them. Anyway, at the end of Round 9:

Scoring:

1^st Scoring

1^st Inside-50s

1^st Inside-50 (Differential)

Intensity

1^st Contested

1^st Contested Differential (by a huge margin)

2^nd Clearances (1st Center - 3rd Differential)

3^rd Tackles (3^rd Most Tackles Against)

5^th Tackles i50

4^th poorest D/E% against/most Turnovers Against/most Clangers Against

3^rd (!) Contested Marks! (6^th least Contested Marks Against)

Space/Territory

1^st Least Kicks Against

1^st Least Marks Against

1^st Marks i50

3^rd Metres Gained (2^nd Differential)

4^th Intercepts (2^nd Differential)

2^nd Least i50s Against

17^th Rebound-50s

18^th Bounces

Notes -

again, most of the stats are telling us exactly what we're seeing - although I don't think we're entirely appreciating the extent of our various multiple areas of dominance (possibly because we're still not consistently and fully capitalising on-field).

We're top-notch at the coal-face stuff but we're also forcing the opposition to play our close-in game - i.e high tackles against. We're also putting a lot of pressure on the carrier and it's telling in the opposition turnover/DE%/clanger stats as well as the least kicks against figure. And we're smashing the territorial battle.

The big surprise for me is in our continued contested marks statistics - a huge improvement on last year, and we've also properly balanced our kick/handball disposal ratios - another common grizzle from last year.

The most pleasing thing for me - we're doing all the hard stuff and proving a dynamic forward threat.

If I had to build a team game from scratch from a fan perspective, and could choose aspects of dominance by compromising in other areas, I would probably take contested/high-scoring/forward territory over high possessions and DE%.

The Roos to Goody transition may have been an unintended masterstroke.

We're both a hard and attacking football team in an aggressive and pressurised modern era. But disregarding my own personal footy fan-boy preferences - is this the formula for success? Manic, contested footy, a high-press, and thrusting the ball forward as the first priority?

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Skuit 9,108]

Could probably just copy & paste one of the responses from the Changes vs Bulldogs thread this week: no changes.

But there's no harm in a brief reminder of the following:

1^st Contested

1^st Contested Differential  

1^st Centre Clearances

1^st Scoring

1^st Inside-50s

1^st Marks Inside-50

1^st Goal Assists

1^st Least Opponent Marks

1^st Least Opponent Kicks

1^st Least Opponent Inside 50s

The areas where we are still letting ourselves down

2^nd Clearances

2^nd Metres Gained

2^nd Turnover Differential

2^nd Intercept Differential

2^nd Goal Accuracy

3^rd Contested Marks

3^rd Total Tackles

[Josh 1,420]

4 hours ago, Skuit said:

Could probably just copy & paste one of the responses from the Changes vs Bulldogs thread this week: no changes.

 

But there's no harm in a brief reminder of the following:

 

1^st Contested

 

1^st Contested Differential  

 

1^st Centre Clearances

 

1^st Scoring

 

1^st Inside-50s

 

1^st Marks Inside-50

 

1^st Goal Assists

 

1^st Least Opponent Marks

 

1^st Least Opponent Kicks

 

1^st Least Opponent Inside 50s

 

 

 

The areas where we are still letting ourselves down

 

 

 

2^nd Clearances

 

2^nd Metres Gained

 

2^nd Turnover Differential

 

2^nd Intercept Differential

 

2^nd Goal Accuracy

 

3^rd Contested Marks

 

3^rd Total Tackles

 

Thanks skuit they are some dominant statistics. Is there anything that we are actually struggling with?

[Skuit 9,108]

54 minutes ago, Josh said:

Thanks skuit they are some dominant statistics. Is there anything that we are actually struggling with?

It's a good question. Nothing that I can see that isn't a reflection of our intended game-style - i.e the most rebound-50s against and last for bounces. I would say that the area we would most probably like to improve is our inside-50 tackles ranking, which currently sits at an abysmal 4th.

The thing that's most noticeable is that certain game-styles are evident through stats groupings - Richmond good in some areas for example and Adelaide good in others. We're around the top of almost every measure. They're quite staggering numbers altogether.

Edited May 27, 2018 by Skuit

[Skuit 9,108]

And we're such an outlier when it comes to contested differential - such that 17 teams range from +8.4 (North) down to -9.3 (Lions) while we sit on +19.3 - that I thought I'd take a quick look back through the years. There hasn't been anywhere near such a gap between best and next best this decade, and the closest in absolute terms was the Bulldogs 2016.

Greatest Contested Differential / Closest Competitor (grand-finalists in bold)

2010: Collingwood 11.7 / Geelong 6.7

2011: Collingwood 14.6 / Carlton 13.1

2012: Adelaide 11.6 / Hawthorn 8.1

2013: Bulldogs 12.4 / North 7.8

2014: Fremantle 8.9 / Adelaide 5.8

2015: Fremantle 9.8 / West Coast 9.7

2016: Bulldogs 16.5 / Geelong 14.0  

2017: Collingwood 7.7 / Geelong 7.5 

[Josh 1,420]

5 minutes ago, Skuit said:

And we're such an outlier when it comes to contested differential - such that 17 teams range from +8.4 (North) down to -9.3 (Lions) while we sit on +19.3 - that I thought I'd take a quick look back through the years. There hasn't been anywhere near such a gap between best and next best this decade, and the closest in absolute terms was the Bulldogs 2016.

Greatest Contested Differential / Closest Competitor (grand-finalists in bold)

2010: Collingwood 11.7 / Geelong 6.7

2011: Collingwood 14.6 / Carlton 13.1

2012: Adelaide 11.6 / Hawthorn 8.1

2013: Bulldogs 12.4 / North 7.8

2014: Fremantle 8.9 / Adelaide 5.8

2015: Fremantle 9.8 / West Coast 9.7

2016: Bulldogs 16.5 / Geelong 14.0  

2017: Collingwood 7.7 / Geelong 7.5 

Considering how far in front we are in all other areas it's amazing we are able to have such a differential. I assume we have the most amount of hit outs and hit outs to advantage, which means half the time we don't get an opportunity to have a contested possession because it's a clean possession.

Where do you get your information?

[What 18,810]

5 hours ago, Skuit said:

Could probably just copy & paste one of the responses from the Changes vs Bulldogs thread this week: no changes.

 

But there's no harm in a brief reminder of the following:

 

1^st Contested

 

1^st Contested Differential  

 

1^st Centre Clearances

 

1^st Scoring

 

1^st Inside-50s

 

1^st Marks Inside-50

 

1^st Goal Assists

 

1^st Least Opponent Marks

 

1^st Least Opponent Kicks

 

1^st Least Opponent Inside 50s

 

 

 

The areas where we are still letting ourselves down

 

 

 

2^nd Clearances

 

2^nd Metres Gained

 

2^nd Turnover Differential

 

2^nd Intercept Differential

 

2^nd Goal Accuracy

 

3^rd Contested Marks

 

3^rd Total Tackles

 

Thats incredible.

I notice we are 18th in the league in bounces. We have had 34 bounces all season compared to Esenedon with a league leading 109.  St Kilda and the Doggies are in the top 5.

Again proving that speed is largely irrelevant in the AFL.   Ball movement is king.

 

[Skuit 9,108]

We've also gone from the second worst contested marking differential last year to the best.

[Dee Zephyr 17,294]

2 hours ago, Josh said:

Thanks skuit they are some dominant statistics. Is there anything that we are actually struggling with?

We are 17th for Rebound 50s but that doesn’t indicate a struggle, quite the opposite really. 

The bottom five clubs for this stat also includes West Coast and Richmond. 

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,380]

3 hours ago, Petraccattack said:

Thats incredible.

I notice we are 18th in the league in bounces. We have had 34 bounces all season compared to Esenedon with a league leading 109.  St Kilda and the Doggies are in the top 5.

Again proving that speed is largely irrelevant in the AFL.   Ball movement is king.

 

Two things come to mind. Firstly, I assume the team chooses to dispose the ball by hand or foot as quickly as possible to generate the fast ball movement. A player bouncing the ball is (usually) running with it, but essentially no faster than the opposition players flooding back at the same time, so bouncing the ball helps by giving the opposition time to block space. Secondly, I assume it's a team rule to dispose the ball if at all possible, rather than running with it. I could imagine a possible exception is the player who's kick will be the shot at goal.  

[What 18,810]

3 hours ago, Skuit said:

We've also gone from the second worst contested marking differential last year to the best.

Gawn and Hogan missing half the season each was the reason for that.

They lead us contested marks per game this season again.  (T Mac third).

[DEE fence 4,414]

@Skuit

Am with you on the contested high scoring stuff, what staggers me, and my question to you, are the fantasy ratings, either version. What stats aren't being weighted properly for impact on a game, in your humble opinion? With the modern style of footy I am going to say kicks and handballs don't mean much anymore. 5 disposals that defeat the defensive set up of an opposition are worth 20+ disposals to a contest. And our presence in AFL fantasy  - 7 players in the top 100, 3 (including smith, easy to get stats in sides winning by 15+goals) in the top 50 and Hogan at 52??? beggars belief, I can't be bothered with fantasy teams anymore because I think the metrics are BS, but I like the idea of selecting a side that would have the most impact and the whole money ball thing. Bailey F for instance has impact (IMHO) with his efforts for almost no visible presence statistically. If you could break down the players that are contributing to the below, I think that would be a fair reflection for fantasy teams.

Also I think the fantasy stuff glorifies individuals, when our team is crushing others by doing the team things, so maybe am being unrealistic to ask for the stats to reflect team acts/roles - i.e. BV did a number on Lynch.

Lastly this is Goodwin's coaching genius 1^st Goal Assists - this is the best demonstration of a team attitude and the hardest thing for an opposition to guard against. I predict looking at the fixture another 5 (minimum) 10 goal wins this year. (might have to look up the stat for most 10 goal wins in a season - we could get there.... 

 

7 hours ago, Josh said:

1^st Contested

 

1^st Contested Differential  

 

1^st Centre Clearances

 

1^st Scoring

 

1^st Inside-50s

 

1^st Marks Inside-50

 

1^st Goal Assists

 

1^st Least Opponent Marks

 

1^st Least Opponent Kicks

 

1^st Least Opponent Inside 50s

 

 

 

[Josh 1,420]

3 hours ago, DaisyDeeciple said:

@Skuit

Am with you on the contested high scoring stuff, what staggers me, and my question to you, are the fantasy ratings, either version. What stats aren't being weighted properly for impact on a game, in your humble opinion? With the modern style of footy I am going to say kicks and handballs don't mean much anymore. 5 disposals that defeat the defensive set up of an opposition are worth 20+ disposals to a contest. And our presence in AFL fantasy  - 7 players in the top 100, 3 (including smith, easy to get stats in sides winning by 15+goals) in the top 50 and Hogan at 52??? beggars belief, I can't be bothered with fantasy teams anymore because I think the metrics are BS, but I like the idea of selecting a side that would have the most impact and the whole money ball thing. Bailey F for instance has impact (IMHO) with his efforts for almost no visible presence statistically. If you could break down the players that are contributing to the below, I think that would be a fair reflection for fantasy teams.

Also I think the fantasy stuff glorifies individuals, when our team is crushing others by doing the team things, so maybe am being unrealistic to ask for the stats to reflect team acts/roles - i.e. BV did a number on Lynch.

Lastly this is Goodwin's coaching genius 1^st Goal Assists - this is the best demonstration of a team attitude and the hardest thing for an opposition to guard against. I predict looking at the fixture another 5 (minimum) 10 goal wins this year. (might have to look up the stat for most 10 goal wins in a season - we could get there.... 

 

 

I think champion data try and do the best unbiased statistical analysis possible but when Belchambers can have 3 disposals and still score over 100 you have to question how it works

[Dee Zephyr 17,294]

Over the last 5 weeks we are number 1 in 16 categories. 

The statistics Melbourne ranks No.1 in from rounds six to 10

STATISTIC	MELBOURNE	NEXT-BEST
Kicking efficiency	69.8%	Brisbane 67.8%
Kicking efficiency differential	+6.5%	Brisbane +3.8%
Disposal efficiency	74.8%	Collingwood 74.7%
Marks inside 50	18.8	Richmond 13.6
Marks inside 50 differential	+10.4	Port Adelaide +4.2
Contested possession differential	+21.6	West Coast +13.4
Clearance differential	+9	Fremantle +6
Inside 50s	65.2	Richmond 61.2
Scores per inside 50	49.1%	West Coast 48.2%
Goals per inside 50	31%	West Coast 28.5%
Points for	133	Richmond 98.6
Intercept points	84	Richmond 68.8
Clearance points	44.6	West Coast 32.6
Defensive half to score	19%	Richmond 14.7%
Consecutive quarters won	18	West Coast 15
Offensive one-on-one win	39%	GWS 35.7%

[jackaub 1,402]

1 hour ago, Dee Zephyr said:

Over the last 5 weeks we are number 1 in 16 categories. 

The statistics Melbourne ranks No.1 in from rounds six to 10

STATISTIC	MELBOURNE	NEXT-BEST
Kicking efficiency	69.8%	Brisbane 67.8%
Kicking efficiency differential	+6.5%	Brisbane +3.8%
Disposal efficiency	74.8%	Collingwood 74.7%
Marks inside 50	18.8	Richmond 13.6
Marks inside 50 differential	+10.4	Port Adelaide +4.2
Contested possession differential	+21.6	West Coast +13.4
Clearance differential	+9	Fremantle +6
Inside 50s	65.2	Richmond 61.2
Scores per inside 50	49.1%	West Coast 48.2%
Goals per inside 50	31%	West Coast 28.5%
Points for	133	Richmond 98.6
Intercept points	84	Richmond 68.8
Clearance points	44.6	West Coast 32.6
Defensive half to score	19%	Richmond 14.7%
Consecutive quarters won	18	West Coast 15
Offensive one-on-one win	39%	GWS 35.7%

Wow we are a very even team across all stats and  more even than  

I feel the  lid loosening ?

[Dee Zephyr 17,294]

10 minutes ago, jackaub said:

Wow we are a very even team across all stats and  more even than  

I feel the  lid loosening ?

I wasn’t aware and it might have been posted already but we are actually undefeated in 19 consecutive quarters. We drew the quarter prior to commencing the run of 18 winning ones.

[Redleg 37,441]

2 hours ago, Dee Zephyr said:

I wasn’t aware and it might have been posted already but we are actually undefeated in 19 consecutive quarters. We drew the quarter prior to commencing the run of 18 winning ones.

Would be happy to see us take the record this week with 23 winning quarters.

[Skuit 9,108]

Thought I'd take a quick statistical look at our opposition leading up to the bye. Was going to post something similar in the lead-up to the Hawthorn  match, because a few comparative areas had me slightly concerned, but alas, life got in the way. It's worth noting now though that it's difficult to get a fix on our appropriate game-style grouping, because we cross over at the top in just about every category. 

Bulldogs:

4th in Marks, Handballs and Disposals.

3rd in Clearance Differential

5th in Inside-50s

Melbourne are first in least Marks, Kicks and Inside-50s against, as well as 2nd in Clearances and Differential.

Armchair Summary: We match up quite well in some areas. The Demons restrict space for the kick, but the Dogs like to handball - and both teams are clearance and inside-50 machines. That said, the Demons are the T1000 to the Dog's 800 Series, and we significantly outrank them in every other category. The Dogs are 16th for Contested for starters, and drop to 8th for Centre Clearances. They're also 17th for hit-outs, against the Dees as #1. Another area of note is a Dogs ranking of 14th for rebound-50s, while we would be ordinarily open as the number one for rebounds against.

Conclusion: Cake-walk. The stats suggest similar elements to the game-style, particularly as to close in work and forward territorial ascendancy. Yet, we're better than them at their best points, and smash them at the core of ours, while having them covered across all other categories. Expect a scrag, because the Wallace superflood legacy won't work, as we basically bring it on ourselves every week through our own centre set-up. 

 

 

 

[jackaub 1,402]

19 minutes ago, Skuit said:

Thought I'd take a quick statistical look at our opposition leading up to the bye. Was going to post something similar in the lead-up to the Hawthorn  match, because a few comparative areas had me slightly concerned, but alas, life got in the way. It's worth noting now though that it's difficult to get a fix on our appropriate game-style grouping, because we cross over at the top in just about every category. 

Bulldogs:

4th in Marks, Handballs and Disposals.

3rd in Clearance Differential

5th in Inside-50s

Melbourne are first in least Marks, Kicks and Inside-50s against, as well as 2nd in Clearances and Differential.

Armchair Summary: We match up quite well in some areas. The Demons restrict space for the kick, but the Dogs like to handball - and both teams are clearance and inside-50 machines. That said, the Demons are the T1000 to the Dog's 800 Series, and we significantly outrank them in every other category. The Dogs are 16th for Contested for starters, and drop to 8th for Centre Clearances. They're also 17th for hit-outs, against the Dees as #1. Another area of note is a Dogs ranking of 14th for rebound-50s, while we would be ordinarily open as the number one for rebounds against.

Conclusion: Cake-walk. The stats suggest similar elements to the game-style, particularly as to close in work and forward territorial ascendancy. Yet, we're better than them at their best points, and smash them at the core of ours, while having them covered across all other categories. Expect a scrag, because the Wallace superflood legacy won't work, as we basically bring it on ourselves every week through our own centre set-up. 

 

 

 

Wonderful analysis Skuit Thanks for that.

We bring our A game and it should be a good win

 

[Skuit 9,108]

This was another statistical exercise I've been meaning to conduct, but thankfully someone at AFL media house took care of the leg-work themselves. Essentially, the convergence of three key stats as a predictive model for winning this year: contested, DE% and pressure acts. While we're noted for at least two of those three, I suggested before that our dominant run has coincided with an uncanny apparent uptick in clean disposal - suggested in turn by a poster as a result of omitting those of questionable foot-skills. 

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2018-06-05/the-stats-files-the-three-keys-to-winning-games-in-2018

In brief: "Only one team – Geelong against West Coast in round three – out of 30 this year has lost when it won contested possessions, disposal efficiency and pressure factor in the same game. "

"That equates to 96.7 per cent of the time, the highest winning percentage from the stats three-pack in six years."

Also, something to consider: "The three categories also stand strong in isolation this season: contested possessions (65.6 per cent success rate), disposal efficiency (69 per cent) and pressure factor (62.2 per cent). Sides win 90.9 per cent of matches when they win contested possessions and disposal efficiency; 81.8 per cent with contested possessions and pressure factor; and 73.5 per cent from disposal efficiency and pressure factor."

And a quick finally: "Queen's Birthday combatants Collingwood and Melbourne are the only top-eight teams to rank in the top 10 in all three categories in 2018." 

[Demon Dynasty 15,150]

A quick stats form guide looking at the first 8 rounds compared to the last 5 if anyone's interested.

There are some surprising and not so surprising movers as well as some big falls from grace.

How the hec does Clarry do it!!   '+' means no change in rank but an improved score eg.,., Clarry & Jones.   Fritchskreig has had quite a month or so!   Does the Hibb drop off coincide somewhat with Lever's departure?  Hogan off the charts, but unfortunately in the wrong direction.

 

# Missed 3 match minimum for ranking / comparative purposes in this block.

* Did not play in first 8 rounds for comparative purposes.

Note:  Max would rank higher if 'hit outs to advantage' were included in weightings.

Edited June 26, 2018 by Rusty Nails