If anyone with limited understanding would like to become informed, here is the fantastic Grantland with some recent articles:

http://www.grantland...g-new-moneyball

http://www.grantland...win-unfair-game

If anyone doesn't care - good BECAUSE IT HARDLY APPLIES TO THE AFL.

If anyone would prefer to redefine what MB is to suit their uninformed opinion of what it 'should' mean because 'money' is in the name - please continue.

Edited August 21, 201212 yr by rpfc

By your definition every player you trade for is a moneyball signing. Because I'd never trade for any player without a role in mind.

Thanks, I think I've got it.

Well, maybe not.

Instead of taking pot shots at everyone that you dont agree with on this subject why dont you go and read the book or even just watch the movie as a starting point?

Instead of taking pot shots at everyone that you dont agree with on this subject why dont you go and read the book or even just watch the movie as a starting point?

Pot shots ? You call that a pot shot ?

There's not even uniform consensus that Mitch Clark is a moneyball signing, but I'm taking potshots ?

I should read the book and watch the movie and then I'd be able to provide the definitive answer.

Can we give up on endorsing these flavor of the month style strategies to turn our club around? Turning around the MFC will only come about when we stop using 'the all we have to do' mentality i.e. all we have to do is bottom out to get draft picks, all we have to do is get Joe Gutnick's money, all we have to do is use moneyball recruiting methods.

Pot shots ? You call that a pot shot ?

There's not even uniform consensus that Mitch Clark is a moneyball signing, but I'm taking potshots ?

I should read the book and watch the movie and then I'd be able to provide the definitive answer.

Or you should just not bother because it is barely relateable to the game of AFL.

But we could all use The Definitive Answer ©...

Is "moneyball tactics" aquiring wins on the cheap?

Swans and North would probably be the biggest users of this sysrem at the momet.

We've been frugal-but we haven't bought many wins.

Morton and Scully are two guys who have cost us time-something we have very little of .

Edited August 22, 201212 yr by Biffen

we could all use The Definitive Answer ©...

I'd just settle for a better one.

Actually, Fan gave it to me.

I'd just settle for a better one.

Actually, Fan gave it to me.

No he didn't.

If you don't care that is fine. It really only applies to baseball, and other team sports played individually that reinforce the purity of the measurements that drive the 'theory' for lack of a better word.

If you do care about Moneyball then Grantland is a great online magazine that touches on it.

There is nothing wrong with having little idea about a notion that is designed for a completely different sport, is complicated, and does not translate well to AFL footy.

My only qualm is with posters who readily admit that they are not familar with the subject:

As I said, I won't waste much time on a concept with which I'm not overly familiar

Then become incredibly defensive when those that are attempt to express their thoughts.

No he didn't.

I

I didn't say he gave me a "definitive" answer, I said he gave a "better" answer.

Look, I know it's not in your nature, but I'm happy to leave this boring discussion there.

I

I didn't say he gave me a "definitive" answer, I said he gave a "better" answer.

Look, I know it's not in your nature, but I'm happy to leave this boring discussion there.

That's what I have been saying!

Not only is it boring, it is barely translateable.

We shouldn't be wasting time on it in a AFL forum.

I dont concur that the notiopnm of moneyball cant or shouldnt be applied to footy.

The essence of MB is that one historically valued set of indicators was given the rturf in favour of a new set based upon very fiferent slant on things.

Players were then sought on the basis of fulfilling the new parameters.

Similar can be done with footy.

Ok...I don't believe its possible, so lets break it down. If you believe football can be broken down this way....

Lets say we look at tackles. You analyse all the premiership teams over the last 10 years. You find out how many tackles their midfielders got. You average them, then you go and make sure you find your midfield for any match combine tackle average matches that of the premiership sides...

Or if you go by average goals kicked a game. You say, on average to win a game of afl, you need to kick 15 goals per game on average. You go and find 22 players who's goals per game average that of 15.

The issue you have is AFL has too many factors, dimensions. You run in all directions, you jump in all directions. Its more or less immeasurable.

With baseball, they analysed each players batting averages. But not only that. They measured it against left handed pitchers, right handed pitchers. When it was a fast ball, curve ball, slider. When it was inside plate, outside plate. And they were able to work out specific players strengths and weaknesses. And they coached their players to that.

Similar can be done with footy.

Whats your parameter? Tackles? Kicks? Smothers? Goals? Handballs? Contested Possessions? Contested Marks? Goals outside 50? Hit outs to advantage?

What about if the game is played at a different stadium? In different weather conditions? Specific umpires umpiring a game? AFL is grey is soooo many aspects.

Baseball as an example is very black and white in comparison. Hit the ball into space, run a certain distance. Do this more times than the opposition.

notiopnm

rturf

fiferent .

I googled these 'words' to make sure they were typo's, not words which belzebub59 uses on a daily basis but dont exist in my lexicon!!

Whats your parameter? Tackles? Kicks? Smothers? Goals? Handballs? Contested Possessions? Contested Marks? Goals outside 50? Hit outs to advantage?

What about if the game is played at a different stadium? In different weather conditions? Specific umpires umpiring a game? AFL is grey is soooo many aspects.

Baseball as an example is very black and white in comparison. Hit the ball into space, run a certain distance. Do this more times than the opposition.

idhappily leave that to someone whos probably got more time and experience to sort out.Plus thyd be being paid to do it.

Theres been a number of ideas already put forward on the thread. Thered likely be consideration for time with ball without turning over. Possibly more definitin and qualifyingo f some existing stats disposals are uselss unless you quantify them and assess their outcome.

Some of what you sugest would very likely work if specific values and ajudication were attributed.

A lot of people seem to think the game's a lot more complicated than it really is

I googled these 'words' to make sure they were typo's, not words which belzebub59 uses on a daily basis but dont exist in my lexicon!!

they would be notion, turf and different... all courtesy of a sticky kyebaord !!

There really is a serious amount of shite posted on this site. The sooner Melb. starts winning games and we can talk positive footy stuff the better.

There really is a serious amount of shite posted on this site. The sooner Melb. starts winning games and we can talk positive footy stuff the better.

I agree, this is so boring to read about.

you guys all jabbering about rubbish.

Not wrong bbo.

if you have no interest in the subject...dont read it.

Further more, dont bother commenting upon it it just makes you look stupid.

This is a dumb thread. We are anything but a MB club, We have money to spend and will match any club with serious offers for players we want. The OPPOSITE of MB.

Its not what we are...its how Neeld has inferred he might progress us.

This is a dumb thread. We are anything but a MB club, We have money to spend and will match any club with serious offers for players we want. The OPPOSITE of MB.

No it is not; It's one of the best threads this board has had.

And why?

Because it makes you think.

The notion of 'moneyball' being applied to our game is impossible to some in just the same way that it was impossible to baseball traditional base ball people when it was first mooted.

Just think about that.

Talk about forests and trees; geeesh!

You guys are taking this moneyball thing too seriously...Don't waste your time on stats.

The talk about moneyball players clearly means find and recruit undervalued players that will fill a roll for our team.

For example, Sydney:-

Josh Kennedy

Ben McGlynn

Rhys Shaw

Marty Mattiner

Shane Mumford

Ted Richards etc.

This doesn't mean x amount of tackels per game or picking players because of their stats.

Just recruit players that will improve our team.

I'm pretty sure StKilda did the same thing by aquiring Dempster and Schnieder and gave up very little.

It's all about value for money really.

If we are to pay 100% of the cap let's make it work.

Whats your parameter? Tackles? Kicks? Smothers? Goals? Handballs? Contested Possessions? Contested Marks? Goals outside 50? Hit outs to advantage?

What about if the game is played at a different stadium? In different weather conditions? Specific umpires umpiring a game? AFL is grey is soooo many aspects.

Baseball as an example is very black and white in comparison. Hit the ball into space, run a certain distance. Do this more times than the opposition.

I am afraid this indicates lack of understanding about baseball. Baseball is very statistic driven but its all based upon playing the percentages and applying discipline over and over again. It's strategic and long term. A necessity when playing a 162 game season, all over a massive country.

Variables you have mentioned such as weather and ground sizes are just as much a factor in baseball as they are in Football. There are big grounds, small grounds. Grounds significantly above sea level, under sea level. Suffer from Sun glare. Natual Turf, synthetic turf...it goes on and on.