Increase % KPI

[Grimes Times 1,278]

What KPIs should Melb be looking at to being a genuine competitive outfit in 2013 on wards?

I see % as a primary KPI.

Although we only have the one year of date under the Neeld reign to consider, you can see that we still have considerable way to go.

.................%.............PF.............PA

Melb........67.5 .......1580..........2341

Nth(8th)....112.5.......2359.........2097

Syd (1st)...140.........2290........ 1629

Therefore before looking to play finals footy, we have to:

1. Cut the opposition down by 244 points per season, over 22 games, which is 2 goals every game. 1 goal a half seems easy enough!!

2. Increase our scoring by at least 779 points per season, over 22 games, which is 6 goals every game. 2 goals a quarter. Theres a problem?

Some key factors for this improvement could be:

1. Decrease defensive inside 50s Stronger/better midfield increasing around the ground/centre stoppages won

2. Increasing Marks Taken in Forward 50 Recruitment of Dawes, Pederson and a return of Clark. More midfield goals.

In simple terms, we should be looking to score 107 points every game, up from an ave of 72

And keep the opposition score to 95 points every game, down from an ave of 106

To go to the next step and become a genuine premiership contender we really almost need to swap our PF and PA over as shown by syd this year

Edited January 23, 2013 by Grimes Times

[CBDees 3,162]

What KPIs should Melb be looking at to being a genuine competitive outfit in 2013 on wards?

I see % as a primary KPI.

Although we only have the one year of date under the Neeld reign to consider, you can see that we still have considerable way to go.

.................%.............PF.............PA

Melb........67.5 .......1580..........2341

Nth(8th)....112.5.......2359.........2097

Syd (1st)...140.........2290........ 1629

Therefore before looking to play finals footy, we have to:

1. Cut the opposition down by 244 points per season, over 22 games, which is 2 goals every game. 1 goal a half seems easy enough!!

2. Increase our scoring by at least 779 points per season, over 22 games, which is 6 goals every game. 2 goals a quarter. Theres a problem?

Some key factors for this improvement could be:

1. Decrease defensive inside 50s Stronger/better midfield increasing around the ground/centre stoppages won

2. Increasing Marks Taken in Forward 50 Recruitment of Dawes, Pederson and a return of Clark. More midfield goals.

In simple terms, we should be looking to score 107 points every game, up from an ave of 72

And keep the opposition score to 95 points every game, down from an ave of 106

To go to the next step and become a genuine premiership contender we really almost need to swap our PF and PA over as shown by syd this year

I got a bit lost with the figures at first but I subscribe to the logic and agree that it is doeable with our re-vamped list!

[demon-4-life 467]

I've got a better KPI.

Score more points than the opposition on the day, and the points for and against take care of themselves.

[daisycutter 28,727]

just keep winning - the % will look after itself

[Jesse Christ 2,884]

Jezus, I'm going to have to start going to the footy with a calculator.

How boring lol.

[DemonWA 3,655]

I agree that we should be looking to score over 100 points per game. the rest of the OP is basically just a roundabout way of saying we need to beat our oposition

[45HG 1,539]

On %, our first 11 games yielded a % of 55.92 whereas the last 11 games % was 80.7.

Clearly we got better as the year went on and, had we retained Clark, would've been even better IMO.

I'm expecting quite an improvement this season across the board.

[Rogue 585]

On %, our first 11 games yielded a % of 55.92 whereas the last 11 games % was 80.7.

Clearly we got better as the year went on and, had we retained Clark, would've been even better IMO.

Given Clark was a massive loss, that's quite a difference.

[Biffen 12,564]

just keep winning - the % will look after itself

By "keep" winning I assume you mean in the Charlie Sheen interpretation of the word.

[daisycutter 28,727]

By "keep" winning I assume you mean in the Charlie Sheen interpretation of the word.

no dummy, i mean win as many keeps as possible - like this

[jnrmac 19,508]

How about we win the midfield, the rest will take care of itself (kindof)

[Moonshadow 16,619]

Talking of stats, an article in today's Age compares Carlton in 2013 with Geelong in 2006. Uses Champion Data stats to claim that Maltouse could take the Blues to a flag, but doesn't go into much detail as to what these stats are. Perhaps the CD stats person is a Carlton fan.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/analysis-finds-blues-similar-to-2006-cats-20130123-2d7hy.html

At what point will we ba able to take the next step to be a real contender?

[Scoop Junior 3,127]

On %, our first 11 games yielded a % of 55.92 whereas the last 11 games % was 80.7.

Clearly we got better as the year went on and, had we retained Clark, would've been even better IMO.

I'm expecting quite an improvement this season across the board.

Yeah but how much of this was due to our draw being far easier in the second half of the season as opposed to the first? We played Collingwood, Hawthorn, Geelong at Geelong, WCE in Perth, Sydney in Sydney and Carlton in our first 11 games, while the back half of the year included GWS home and away, Gold Coast at home, Port, and Freo at Etihad.

For what it's worth, I think we did improve after the mid way point, but relying on statistical analysis is flawed to the draw.

It's why I don't think the comment "if we win x games, it's a good year" is all that relevant. It all depends on who you play and how you play against them.

[CBDees 3,162]

Yeah but how much of this was due to our draw being far easier in the second half of the season as opposed to the first? We played Collingwood, Hawthorn, Geelong at Geelong, WCE in Perth, Sydney in Sydney and Carlton in our first 11 games, while the back half of the year included GWS home and away, Gold Coast at home, Port, and Freo at Etihad.

For what it's worth, I think we did improve after the mid way point, but relying on statistical analysis is flawed to the draw.

It's why I don't think the comment "if we win x games, it's a good year" is all that relevant. It all depends on who you play and how you play against them.

It is a wonderful thing statistics and comparisons. In 2009 (the year we are alleged to have tanked) we won four games and we were ahead in five at the final siren, whereas, last year we only won one game when playing against the same teams (as GWS and the Suns were not there in 2009). This is the stat that we should be quoting in our 'tanking' inquiry and our yardstick when assessing this year's performance against last year's. Frankly I cannot see us having a worse year than last which statistically is possibly our worst ever!

[angrydee 842]

1981?