Like I said rpfc - I've got a lot of sympathy for your idea. It's a legitimate question I reckon you should e-mail to Dean Bailey and Cam Schwab and ask them what metrics they and therefore we should be looking at. Don't guess - go to the source.

Like I said rpfc - I've got a lot of sympathy for your idea. It's a legitimate question I reckon you should e-mail to Dean Bailey and Cam Schwab and ask them what metrics they and therefore we should be looking at. Don't guess - go to the source.

Great idea - could be a question for Cam next time he's on ustream, assuming he's privy and he'll divulge.

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?

I know where you are coming from and I will have a look at it.

Might be hard for the majority to grasp...

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.

Contested Possession Differential - How we compete for contested ball against the opposition.

Inside 50 Differential - How often we can get the ball forward compared to the opposition.

Clearance Differential - How we are travelling at the stoppages compared to the opposition.

Scores against Average - Our defence has steadily pushed the scores against down, will the trend continue, stabilise, or become worse?

Percentage - Are we holding our own? Or are we getting blown out of the water on occasion?

Ave Flag Core Players - How many of our Flag Core © play each week? This stat is a measure of how many games we are getting into our young talent. Flag Core © at this stage consists of: Scully, Trengove, Watts, Morton, Grimes, Sylvia, Frawley, Garland, Jurrah, McKenzie, and Gysberts.

I will have a comparison from 2010 under the following theme:

KPI

Contested Possession Differential

2010 >

2011 > +34

Inside 50 Differential

2010 >

2011 > -4

Clearance Differential

2010 >

2011 > -6

Scores Against average

2010 > 89.6

2011 > 84

Percentage

2010 > 94.52

2011 > 100

Average Flag Core © players per game

2010 > 7.4

2011 > 7

I am going to need help from someone with the AFL Prospectus or something to find out our Contested Possession differential, Inside 50 differential, and clearance differential from last season. I can guesstimate around -15 for CP, -10 for Inside 50s and -8 for clearances but would love hard figures.

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

"It's not easy being Green...."

Like I said rpfc - I've got a lot of sympathy for your idea. It's a legitimate question I reckon you should e-mail to Dean Bailey and Cam Schwab and ask them what metrics they and therefore we should be looking at. Don't guess - go to the source.

Yeah, I 'll send something.

But I don't know if they would divulge.

Congrats RPFC. This is one of the best threads I've seen on here for a while.

It's interesting that on the weekend we were clearly outpointed for tackles inside 50 (meaning the Swans were able to lock the ball in for longer - where it tended to rebound straight out again from our forward line) I think this in part is due to the more open nature of our forward line, but it's also supports what Old was saying about the interpretations that can be placed on what stats mean. Last year our F50 entries were pretty much the lowest in the comp, but we had one of the highest % of scores from those entries. Clearly the differential is an issue (as identified many times by our own coaching staff) but that's also assuming we can continue to score at the same rate. The amount of time a ball enters the fifty is more an indication of the effectiveness of the midfield not necessarily their efficiency - particularly if those entries don't produce scores.

I've always looked at tackles as being a measure of work-rate and pressure, but the more time you have the ball in your hands the less time you have to worry about chasing the opposition, so whilst I'm not predicting a massive reduction in tackles this year, I think over time if we are to be as successful as everyone hopes we will, our trend will be a reduction not only in tackles but probably towards the overall number of possessions needed to kick over 100 points a game. (which is just an arbitrary figure I plucked out given few sides that kick more than a 100 points a game lose - but I'm sure some more mathematically inclined person can come up with a more definitive "winning score' bench mark.)

Edited March 29, 201114 yr by grazman

I know our inside 50 differential was -7.2. Can't for the life of me find anything else. Hope this helps a bit

Really good thread.

Keep going, rpfc. You might well come up against roadblocks and get the benefit from some good criticism. Just keep going.

Like many, I'll just be trying to keep up.

I know where you are coming from and I will have a look at it.

Might be hard for the majority to grasp...

Maybe put in both the percentage and difference? Show some of the workings?

whiteboard wednesday 24, bailey goes over the rpfc measurement of 2010

haha

his difference is quarters won as opposed to i50 and %

rpfc, I've got some stats for you to include in the opening post from Champion Data (ie. AFL Prospectus). I don't have a link - spoke to them.

2010 Stats

• Contested Possession Differential = -1.4 (Ranked 8th)
  
• Inside 50 Differential = -7.2 (Ranked 16th/last)
  
• Clearance Differential = -2 (Ranked 12th)
  

Well done. Will be interesting to follow.

PS. I would have thought the contested possession and clearance numbers would have been higher (as in more in the negative), but this is what I was given from Champion Data so...it must be right. The rankings are where I thought we would be.

rpfc, I've got some stats for you to include in the opening post from Champion Data (ie. AFL Prospectus). I don't have a link - spoke to them.

2010 Stats

• Contested Possession Differential = -1.4 (Ranked 8th)
  
• Inside 50 Differential = -7.2 (Ranked 16th/last)
  
• Clearance Differential = -2 (Ranked 12th)
  

Well done. Will be interesting to follow.

PS. I would have thought the contested possession and clearance numbers would have been higher (as in more in the negative), but this is what I was given from Champion Data so...it must be right. The rankings are where I thought we would be.

They are the stat kings, but, yeah, they are a little better than I thought they would be...

They are the stat kings, but, yeah, they are a little better than I thought they would be...

Junior & McKenzie would have a significant input into the Clearance differential 2010 figure. The i50's I knew we were well behind in; however our conversion rate from i50 entries was favourable in comparison. I don't have these figures (conversion), but I'll see if I can get it for you. Just out of interest.

Junior & McKenzie would have a significant input into the Clearance Differential 2010 figure. The i50's I knew we were well behind in; however our conversion rate from i50 entries was favourable in comparison. I don't have these figures (conversion), but I'll see if I can get it for you. Just out of interest.

From stats I've got (not from Champion Data, and I forget the source - but it was week 2 of finals last year)

Goals per i50 - 0.255 (10th)

Scores per i50 - 0.429 (13th)

Turnover Differential would be worth considering

Spiffing thread.

Gysberts is not Flag Core © though.

whiteboard wednesday 24, bailey goes over the rpfc measurement of 2010

haha

his difference is quarters won as opposed to i50 and %

Based on average from the video, we increased our inside 50's for the match and held the opposition number steady, while continuing to decrease the number of points scored against us.

Onwards and upwards, one step at a time.

Turnover Differential would be worth considering

This one on its own can be misleading as the teams that get the most balls can have more turnovers.

But I will include it because no KPI should be taken in isolation to the others.

Rich tapestry.

Now someone needs to get me the turnover differential from last year...

Can we survey opposition fans after each game to determine how much we are loathed? Surely the higher the rating, the more we've progressed. I crave Collingwood-like levels of hatred!

Can we survey opposition fans after each game to determine how much we are loathed? Surely the higher the rating, the more we've progressed. I crave Collingwood-like levels of hatred!

The snide comments about Watts and about Scully leaving are always said with a scared look in the eye...

Because they know what's coming...

Can we survey opposition fans after each game to determine how much we are loathed? Surely the higher the rating, the more we've progressed. I crave Collingwood-like levels of hatred!

Gold, absolute gold. And so is this thread rpfc, will be looking forward to how it tracks.

Updated and, ahem, holy frack...

Smashed everywhere.

Looks like the Hawks are up and about...

Updated and, ahem, holy frack...

Smashed everywhere.

Looks like the Hawks are up and about...

It's pretty much all your fault.

You jinxed us with your pretty green stats. GTFO!

Just have a look at the stats people...

I thought we (tacitly) agreed that we would still have games (or quarters) like the one on the weekend?

I don't give me this "we shouldn't accept that, rpfc rah rah" because I agree with you - but it still doesn't mean we are not going to have these games where our senior players flounder and our young players go to water.

19 months ago we won our second wooden spoon in a row.

And we all said "it's a long road from here" but we are impatient and unforgiving.

I'm pretty sure they will bounce back this Sunday.

Well the stats have bounced back...

Less the convincing display lets you know that statistics tell the occasional white lie...

But the effort is there and that is what's important at this stage of our development.

Smashed a good midfield in clearances is always welcome, as is having 56 I50s.