rpfc's Measurement of 2011

[rpfc 28,736]

KPI

Contested Possession Differential

2010 > -1.2

2011 > -5.5

Syd: +34; Haw: -31; BL: +4; GC: +15; WCE: -15; Adel: 24; NM: -18; St K: 6; Carl: -26; Ess: 15; Coll: -45; Freo: 17; Rich: 9; WB: -5; PA: -13; Haw: -37; Gee: -48; Carl: -20; WCE: 17; Rich: 2; GC: -5; PA: 0.

Inside 50 Differential

2010 > -7.2

2011 > -6.2

Syd: -4; Haw: -40; BL: +3; GC: +26; WCE: -29; Adel: 31; NM: -6; St K: -6; Carl: -15; Ess: -15; Coll: -40; Freo: 12; Rich: 16; WB: -10; PA: 9; Haw: -20; Gee: -37; Carl: -5; WCE: -16; Rich: -5; GC: 4; PA: 11.

Clearance Differential

2010 > -2

2011 > -2.8

Syd: -6; Haw: -10; BL: +11; GC: +7; WCE: -6; Adel: 14; NM: +8; St K: 10; Carl: -9; Ess: 0; Coll: -11; Freo: 1; Rich: 4; WB: -3; PA: -8; Haw: -4; Gee: -21; Carl: -19; WCE: -3; Rich: -4; GC:-10; PA: -2.

Turnover (Clanger) Differential

2010 >

2011 > 2.1

Syd: +3; Haw: +4; BL: +4; GC: -1; WCE:19; Adel: -2; NM: 0; St K: 6; Carl: -3; Ess: -10; Coll: 6; Freo: -14; Rich: 0; WB: 6; PA: 5; Haw: -9; Gee: 7; Carl: 0; WCE: 18; Rich: 9; GC: -12; PA: 10.

Scores Against average

2010 > 89.6

2011 > 105

Syd: 84; Haw: 122; BL: 71; GC: 69; WCE: 106; Adel: 53; NM: 124; St K: 106; Carl: 93; Ess: 68; Coll: 129; Freo: 60;Rich: 91; WB: 127; PA: 92; Haw: 132; Gee: 233; Carl: 134; WCE: 110; Rich: 117; GC: 82; PA: 112.

Percentage

2010 > 94.5

2011 > 85.3

Average Flag Core © players per game

2010 > 7.4

2011 > 8.1

Syd: 6; Haw: 7; BL: 9; GC: 9; WCE: 9; Adel: 8; NM: 6; St K: 7; Carl: 7; Ess: 9; Coll: 9; Freo: 9; Rich: 10; WB: 10; PA: 10; Haw: 7; Gee: 8; Carl: 7; WCE: 8

This KPI has been corrupted over the course of the season and it's usefulness is very little. Morton can't be considered Flag Core, and Scully has left.

I still feel it is valuable to track how many games we are getting into our talent but this can be considered a failed measurement from my perspective.

Green KPIs means that we are maintaining or improving in that area, red will indicate any slippage.

Edited September 18, 2011 by rpfc

[Nasher 33,617]

You've been on the verge of forum greatness for months - time to shine.

Looking forward to the results.

[nutbean 8,838]

With another year on a long journey to a flag I thought it necessary to have a thread that tracked the progress of the club toward that goal. The ladder and wins/losses are popular and legislatively important KPIs but in this season, where we are not a chance to win the flag, I thought it would be best to look at other KPIs that would be more relevant to our position in the league, and our improvement, or lack thereof, from 2010.

Nah - if we don't make the top 2 - sack Bailey

( btw - good job - you have defined "improvement")

Edited March 29, 2011 by Rogue
No need to quote massive slabs of text - just enough to indicate what you're replying to is fine

[Jaded No More 68,972]

Omg stat heaven for us nerds. Love it!!!

How sad

[DemonWA 3,936]

Flag Core © players per game??

what a load of garbage. Opinions on who is or isnt in the core of the team will change with every passing year as we see new players potential and others not reach heights we had hoped, not to mention GWS poachings etc

[Thrice 216]

Love it!

Apparently the club have identified 14 players as flag core. There was some discussion on this over at 'ology with the names you have; plus Wona, Tankscott (both identified by a club source, along with the Gys) and Jamar being the other names suggested.

Dunno if you want to add those players to your KPIs?

[Thrice 216]

Flag Core © players per game??

what a load of garbage. Opinions on who is or isnt in the core of the team will change with every passing year as we see new players potential and others not reach heights we had hoped, not to mention GWS poachings etc

Au contraire, this is a vital stat. Every club will have identified players it thinks are good enough to take it deep into September, and for a club still in a development cycle getting games into those players is more important than a couple of extra marks in the W column.

You may have a point regarding which players are in and out; but I reckon rpfc has made a pretty good fist of identifying those players. Care to offer up other names?

[Nasher 33,617]

Flag Core © players per game??

what a load of garbage. Opinions on who is or isnt in the core of the team will change with every passing year as we see new players potential and others not reach heights we had hoped, not to mention GWS poachings etc

If 'flag core' list changes then so to will the number of matches played by flag core. We could argue and nitpick for all eternity as to who is "flag core" - but the undeniable fact is that every side who has won a flag has a core side that holds the bulk of the team's experience; therefore it's a KPI that needs to be measured. The measurement might not be perfect (in this case it can never be perfect) but it's still a critical KPI so it still must somehow be measured.

[DemonWA 3,936]

i think the stats that are more worthwhile (although some what inter connected) would be how many changes to side we make per week (ie continuity in selected team) or average games per player at the end of the season?

OP nominated;

Scully, Trengove, Watts, Morton, Grimes, Sylvia, Frawley, Garland, Jurrah, McKenzie, and Gysberts.

For me i find it laugable that Gysberts is nominated as "core" after two (great) games yet Tapscott didnt make the list afetr one?, Watts and Morton make the cut based on their draft rank / "potential", and Jamie Bennell doesnt although he's showing similar or greater class/promise. I also find it harsh that Aaron Davey and Jamar/Moloney dont make the cut, becasue i have no doubts that if they continue to back up their consistant performances they'll hold their spots in the coming seasons. My point is that its such a subjective stat that i dont find it as worthwhile as the others

[Guest 36DD]

With another year on a long journey to a flag I thought it necessary to have a thread that tracked the progress of the club toward that goal. The ladder and wins/losses are popular and legislatively important KPIs but in this season, where we are not a chance to win the flag, I thought it would be best to look at other KPIs that would be more relevant to our position in the league, and our improvement, or lack thereof, from 2010...

Good work rpfc, do we have a quantifiable measurement of MFCSS yet???

Edited March 29, 2011 by Nasher
Removed large quote

[rpfc 28,736]

i think the stats that are more worthwhile (although some what inter connected) would be how many changes to side we make per week (ie continuity in selected team) or average games per player at the end of the season?

OP nominated;

Scully, Trengove, Watts, Morton, Grimes, Sylvia, Frawley, Garland, Jurrah, McKenzie, and Gysberts.

For me i find it laugable that Gysberts is nominated as "core" after two (great) games yet Tapscott didnt make the list afetr one?, Watts and Morton make the cut based on their draft rank / "potential", and Jamie Bennell doesnt although he's showing similar or greater class/promise. I also find it harsh that Aaron Davey and Jamar/Moloney dont make the cut, becasue i have no doubts that if they continue to back up their consistant performances they'll hold their spots in the coming seasons. My point is that its such a subjective stat that i dont find it as worthwhile as the others

Laughable?

I am going off of that list at this point in time.

And aside from McKenzie, Garland and Jurrah, I have gone off of investment through the draft. Which I am using as a defacto 'rankings' system (happens to be one formed by people paid to know this stuff). If I put Tapscott in there then I would have to put Blease and Strauss and Maric in there, and I wasn't comfortable doing that.

[rpfc 28,736]

Still need someone with a 2010 AFL prospectus...

[DemonWA 3,936]

Laughable?

I am going off of that list at this point in time.

And aside from McKenzie, Garland and Jurrah, I have gone off of investment through the draft. Which I am using as a defacto 'rankings' system (happens to be one formed by people paid to know this stuff). If I put Tapscott in there then I would have to put Blease and Strauss and Maric in there, and I wasn't comfortable doing that.

yep, laughable, its crystal ball stuff - while your at it why not have Jack Viney in there too hehe

[Mad_Melbourne 877]

i like it, it is pretty similar to what dean bailey said on a whiteboard wednesday i think, but the idea is definately good

1st edit

oh and i agree, i can see us functioning and playing in a grandfinal without gysberts, i see dunn of more importance, hopefully he can kill it this season, as i reckon he is vital to our forward set up

2nd edit

its obviously different opinions have different views so im not to worried about the core player thing as people will argue different players will be core

3rd edit

this potential grandfinal core players would have to have either spencer, gawn or martin in it surely, as in 3-4 years jamar 31 or 32, spencer and/or gawn will need to stand up

Edited March 29, 2011 by Mad_Melbourne

[old55 23,687]

Let me say I have a great deal of sympathy for your approach but ...

Who says they are "K" KPIs? I want to see some reasoning why these are the important ones.

That flag core list will play pretty much every week anyway if they are fit so it's not really a coaching progress meter. Maybe it measures the ability of our conditioning and medical team? Of more interest to me is how many games we get into the potential flag core: Bennell, Jetta, Gysberts, Blease, Strauss, Tapscott, Spencer, Cook, Howe, Maric etc - they're the guys we need to find out about. I reckon Jamar, Davey, Moloney and Sylvia are locks in the experienced camp and there's about 8-10 young players who are very likely - most of them in your flag core list, it's where the other 8-10 are coming from that I'm interested in.

[rpfc 28,736]

Let me say I have a great deal of sympathy for your approach but ...

Who says they are "K" KPIs? I want to see some reasoning why these are the important ones.

That flag core list will play pretty much every week anyway if they are fit so it's not really a coaching progress meter. Maybe it measures the ability of our conditioning and medical team? Of more interest to me is how many games we get into the potential flag core: Bennell, Jetta, Gysberts, Blease, Strauss, Tapscott, Spencer, Cook, Howe, Maric etc - they're the guys we need to find out about. I reckon Jamar, Davey, Moloney and Sylvia are locks in the experienced camp and there's about 8-10 young players who are very likely - most of them in your flag core list, it's where the other 8-10 are coming from that I'm interested in.

You have asked quite a bit...

Flag core KPI

This is to make sure that we are getting games into our talent.

You are right in that it is more a measurement of injuries as most of the players on that list pick themselves.

It isn't a measurement of Bailey's coaching.

Although one could argue that playing Bate might be better for the team right now instead of Watts, but one is clearly going to be around when we challenge and the other's future is hazy. In this example Bailey is implored to play talent rather than concentrate solely on wins.

I don't believe that flag teams are made up of 22 very good players.

I think there are positions for role players.

I am not interested in them at this stage.

I am looking for the 'frontline' (to add another meaningless term) or A grade or star, players that will be expected to shoulder much of the forward, back and midfield burden in 2013 and beyond.

Contested Possies and Clearances

This is a measurement of our midfield that is extremely relevant as I believe the midfield is the last piece of the puzzle. Yes, we need a big tall forward, but we consistently get punished in the midfield and that is where our experience is - Davey, Moloney, Jamar, Jones, and Sylvia all play in the middle and have struggled. This has been disappointing.

Inside 50s

This is a no-brainer - we have been thumped in the I50s for a while now and while our backline has been brave and quite adept at counter-attacking, they need to get more help from all over the ground - starting in the forward line. An inside 50 differential is a good benchmark to see how our team is defending and stopping the opposition's run as opposed to teams stopping our run.

Scores against

As a flow on from the I50 argument - as we stifle supply we should see scores dwindling. This has come down by 5 goals since 2008.

Percentage

Scores against on its own means very little if we are still not scoring enough. This is a very broad KPI and can be misleading.

Happy to argue the point with anyone, and I can always add some if people can carry a decent argument.

[Guest Rojik of the Arctic]

Petterd, Petterd, Petterd!

Good idea for a thread. I've tried to explain to mates why this sort of thing is more important to me this year then final position on the ladder but they don't seem to get it.

I've bookmarked this thread and will watch it with interest.

[PaulRB 6,411]

To my mind the key KPI is building experience in our "Flag core". I would define the Flag core as

• the 10 top 20 draft picks of the past four years, from Morton to Cook.
  
• the gems we've picked up elsewhere (Jurrah, Mackenzie, Wona)
  
• those project player(s) we shall need to complete the picture come 2013 (Gawn)
  

These player plus the good old hands will be the ones to do the business for us in 2013 and beyond. Their development should be our Number one Priority.

[rpfc 28,736]

To my mind the key KPI is building experience in our "Flag core". I would define the Flag core as

• the 10 top 20 draft picks of the past four years, from Morton to Cook.
  
• the gems we've picked up elsewhere (Jurrah, Mackenzie, Wona)
  
• those project player(s) we shall need to complete the picture come 2013 (Gawn)
  

These player plus the good old hands will be the ones to do the business for us in 2013 and beyond. Their development should be our Number one Priority.

I think you have named too many.

I have selected top 12 in the draft since 2007 plus Garland, Jurrah, and McKenzie. I didn't add Cook because he wasn't there last year (it is a measure against 2010 ideal).

I get what you are saying though.

Development is a subjective science.

[old55 23,687]

I'm unconvinced that clearances and I50s are absolute markers - it depends on our game-style. A clearance is often a bomb forward - we can set-up behind the ball to negate this. We might allow a lot of I50s but prevent conversion whereas we may have fewer I50s and convert at a much higher rate depending on the way we set-up and play. We could lose both these and still be on a winning model. I like relative contested possession more. I don't think it's sufficient to correlate these KPIs to wins across the league to prove their worth - as I say it depends on OUR game-style.

Average score against and percentage - yeah I'd like to see a positive trend obviously but I think we arrested % last year and both of these are now very nearly proxies for winning.

[DemonWA 3,936]

I'm unconvinced that clearances and I50s are absolute markers - it depends on our game-style. A clearance is often a bomb forward - we can set-up behind the ball to negate this. We might allow a lot of I50s but prevent conversion whereas we may have fewer I50s and convert at a much higher rate depending on the way we set-up and play. We could lose both these and still be on a winning model. I like relative contested possession more. I don't think it's sufficient to correlate these KPIs to wins across the league to prove their worth - as I say it depends on OUR game-style.

Average score against and percentage - yeah I'd like to see a positive trend obviously but I think we arrested % last year and both of these are now very nearly proxies for winning.

i think all of the KPI's which have been suggested will generally trend towards the positive if we're playing well and beating oppositions. The only one i wasnt/arent keen on is the core group stat becasue its trying to confine such a variable concept.

[Dappa Dan 2,188]

Aaah the season's started... and so have the good threads.

Just quietly... I am going to keep an eye on the clearances stat. I don't expect us to be world beaters, outdoing our opposition every week... I don't expect us to ever even get to that point as I thought we are a bulldogs-like rebound side at times, and THAT'S where we'll kick bigger scores and win games...

But what I'd like to see is us break even one day, or at least get ourselves on the way to that point. Why? Because Jamar is there, Moloney and Sylvia can set up well... and because now with Scully, Gys and Trengove in there that should be an area we look to improve GREATLY... and improve in the early days, as these players won't take as long as a Watts/Gawn/Fitzpatrick type.

The other stats are good fun too, but clearances... that's the mark of a serious football side, and a finals contender. Let's get that dealt with.

[Akum 2,660]

Rpfc, just asking the question of whether percentages - i.e. "for" divided by "against" multiplied by 100 - might be more useful than differentials for clearances, i50s etc? Mainly because they could be compared with our score percentage in a meaningful way.

For example, if our percentage on the ladder was 110 but our i50 percentage was 90, they can be compared. This of course would mean that we're not getting it in enough, but we're efficient when we do. But perhaps our greater efficiency is because we're scoring more off turnovers & breakaways (which I think we do) or we're doing it with more purpose rather than bombing aimlessly, which just reflects our style of game, so that getting it inside 50 more often may not make much difference.

On the other hand, if our i50 differential was -10, it's hard to know what it means, other than we need to do better.

Not sure if I'm explaining this well, but what's your thoughts?

[45HG 1,559]

Three cheers.

[old dee 23,870]

Good luck rpfc much too hard for an old guy like me I will just keep an eye on the win loss ratio.

Hopefully I can enjoy the wins.

Let me know in September how we went!