Champion Data

[Satyriconhome 9,986]

I am just stating the obvious Satriconhome.

These are predictions based last years results.

We were pitiful as our results show.

I have said Jones is an error, not sure what more you want.

This has nothing to do with what we might do in 2013.

I just get annoyed with MFC supporters constantly over rating our players.

When they produce the desired results the general football community will acknowledge that.

Until that ignore this sort of stuff.

There seems to be a misconception on this board that myself and a couple of the other more 'optimistic' posters on this board overrate MFC players

I (we) don't, I go along to games and as long as the players give it everything they have got, that's all I ask for, I know some of the players we have (have had) couldn't cut it, and even though they gave it their best it wasn't good enough, but what is the point going on and on about it, what does it achieve? apart from making the person miserable.....as I have stated before I wear nr 39 on my guernsey, because of Nev Jetta, he has given it everyting but his body keeps letting him down, a lot of posters on here were down on him, but he hasn't turned up his toes, he has rehabbed and rehabbed and now he is finally showing what he can do

Sometime (hopefully in the near future) we have will a team that when it gives it all, it will be good enough to win the Holy Grail

Edited March 6, 2013 by Satyriconhome

[Sir Why You Little 34,615]

Nathan Jones deserves a top rating. He carried that whole midfield as Moloney had cracked the [censored] and didn't care any more. But who cares it's 2012 figures.

A year i have bulk erased from my head as far as footy goes.

We know how good Jones was.

[rpfc 27,539]

WGAF.

This is just staticians playing expert.

Hence, Grimes being an 'elite' defender because the 'bar' for an elite defender is easier to reach than for a 'mid'...

It just annoys me because there is no decent analysis anymore.

Make an argument and back it up if you want to to. But don't make the numbers the story. That's just lazy.

[Curry & Beer 5,444]

Houli >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Clark, Jones, Howe obviously

[jnrmac 19,088]

Houli >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Clark, Jones, Howe obviously

Houli averaged 79 DT points vs Howe 76.6 v Clark 74.5 vs Jones 88.6

Hmmmm....clearly some subjective analysis there rather than a stats based measure

[rpfc 27,539]

Houli averaged 79 DT points vs Howe 76.6 v Clark 74.5 vs Jones 88.6

Hmmmm....clearly some subjective analysis there rather than a stats based measure

Dreamteam is just adding up kicks and marks and handballs.

Supercoach has the Champion Data rating system which is at least somewhat more complex.

But again, stats are misleading and statisticians shouldn't be using words like 'elite' or attempting to find an subjective read on data. It's just pointless.

But, hey, Chief Footy Writer Robinson just wants to grunt and mumble and snort rather than think so regurgitating numbers is what we get.

[Grimes Times 1,278]

Houli averaged 79 DT points vs Howe 76.6 v Clark 74.5 vs Jones 88.6

Hmmmm....clearly some subjective analysis there rather than a stats based measure

Its all about champion data rankings and being in the top 10% of ranking points in your position to be classed as elite.

Is Jones in the top 10% of midfielders on his champion data points? NO.

You could ave more points in midfield compared to somebody else in defense but not be classed as elite compared to the defender who is.

Is Jones in the top 10% mids full stop. NO. Out of 100 mids can you pick him in the best 10 mids in the game??

Pendles

Swan

Kennedy

Mitchell

Ablett

Judd

Murphy

Black

Watson

Thompson

dangerfeild

Bartel

selwood

Cotchin

Hayes

.....

[H_T 2,941]

This is the Key, The (new) little paper uses to categorise based on Champion Data stats for "2011-2012".

Elite = Top 10% of position in league

Below Average = Bottom 35% of position in league

Poor = Bottom 10% of position in league

Thought it might be useful for those not having visited the link.

[rpfc 27,539]

This is the Key, The (new) little paper uses to categorise based on Champion Data stats for "2011-2012".

Elite = Top 10% of position in league

Below Average = Bottom 35% of position in league

Poor = Bottom 10% of position in league

Thought it might be useful for those not having visited the link.

What a ridiculous dilenation of talent.

Champion Data: Hey, you, 20th best backman in the league according to our stats - you are as good as Deledio.

Grimes: I play midfield.

CD: You are the 20th best backman!

[Dan Fantastik 50]

This list is purely based on statistics gathered by champion data nothing else. It does take into account variables such how you kick your goals, how fast you run, how many 1%s you do etc. additionally It does not take into account other players supporting particular players in a good midfield (EG. no bonuses for jones due to the lack of support)

Players are awarded points for particular statistics such as tackles, kicks marks etc. they are awarded an average score each year which is where this list is taken from. As GRIMES TIMES stated earlier the players are compared to others in there relitive positions. FWDS, MIDS, RUCKS, DEF.

To be classified as elite you must be in the top 10% of your position, which for a midfielder is extremely difficult and for a defender it is far easier. That is why the highest scoring defenders (according to CD) are the defenders who spend a large amount of time in the midfield EG. Grimes, Goddard, Deledio etc.

Its disappointing that we have only one elite but we have not been hard done by in this article. Its just stating the statistical facts.

Edited March 7, 2013 by Dan Fantastik

[old dee 22,930]

This list is purely based on statistics gathered by champion data nothing else. It does take into account variables such how you kick your goals, how fast you run, how many 1%s you do etc. additionally It does not take into account other players supporting particular players in a good midfield (EG. no bonuses for jones due to the lack of support)

Players are awarded points for particular statistics such as tackles, kicks marks etc. they are awarded an average score each year which is were this list is taken from. As GRIMES TIMES stated earlier the players are compared to others in there relitive positions. FWDS, MIDS, RUCKS, DEF.

To be classified as elite you must be in the top 10% of your position, which for a midfielder is extremely difficult and for a defender it is far easier. That is why the highest scoring defenders (according to CD) are the defenders who spend a large amount of time in the midfield EG. Grimes, Goddard, Deledio etc.

Its disappointing that we have only one elite but we have not be hard done by in this article. Its just stating the statistical facts.

Yep

[rjay 23,929]

I think I've said something like this before but if you picked teams using the old school method of lining everyone up against the shelter shed and the captains selecting their teams one at a time does anyone think they would care too much about what champion data has to say?

[Dan Fantastik 50]

I think I've said something like this before but if you picked teams using the old school method of lining everyone up against the shelter shed and the captains selecting their teams one at a time does anyone think they would care too much about what champion data has to say?

If you mean lining every AFL listed player up in a line then this is true. However I don't think id pick all that many Demons for my team doing it that way.

[old dee 22,930]

If you mean lining every AFL listed player up in a line then this is true. However I don't think id pick all that many Demons for my team doing it that way.

My long gone father used to say the best way of judging the worth of your teams players was to say who would the GF teams take from your side.

Now how many would Hawthorn or Sydney take from the Dees.

My guess Jones, Grimes, Clark and Watts and in the case of Hawthorn perhaps Jamar.

[rpfc 27,539]

Its disappointing that we have only one elite but we have not been hard done by in this article. Its just stating the statistical facts.

...and those statisticians are defining what 'elite' is.

We are crap I know that.

But don't tell me stats are experts on footy. They ain't.

[Chook 14,594]

...and those statisticians are defining what 'elite' is.

We are crap I know that.

But don't tell me stats are experts on footy. They ain't.

Stats are like people. Some will tell you one thing, and some will tell you another. Get the right people in the same room and you can fix any problem.

[Josh 1,420]

Clark played half a season and has had a injury that will delay his start to 2013.I said Jones is an error.Remember these are peoples opinions.And remember a lot of these people would have seen a lot more Richmond games that MFC games.

It's not opinions it's data. Champion data uses just about everything you do on a football ground and ranks you on it. About the only thins I can think of that champion data fails to take into account is "voice" and "making space"

We are this far behind the eightball. How we can have 20 odd top twenty picks in 6 or so years including number 1 TWICE and still have the worst midfield by a MILE is a JOKE

No more excuses

[Je Roos Salem 661]

It says the criteria is performance over the past 2 seasons. Jones has been miles ahead of Grimes in that time, I seriously don't get how Grimes is elite

[Dr. Gonzo 22,522]

It's not peoples opinions, it's based on Champion Data's analysis (apparently).

Correct - if you look at their AFL Prospectus they explain how they come to these conclusions. It's based on 135 different stats from what I can gather including things like unforced turnovers, forced turnovers, intercept marks, rebound 50's, inside 50's etc etc

[rjay 23,929]

If you mean lining every AFL listed player up in a line then this is true. However I don't think id pick all that many Demons for my team doing it that way.

That's exactly what I mean, and I wouldn't be picking too many if any of our guys based form either.

I also struggle with the idea of Grimes as an elite HB when he played last season as a mid.

[Courtney_Fish 183]

Tuck slaughters Melbourne every time we play the Tiges.

No one wants to go near him - you could catch something.

[Winners at last 4,753]

How could Cale Morton fall into the "Below Average" category when there is a "Poor" category?

[Brian Wilson 331]

I think I've said something like this before but if you picked teams using the old school method of lining everyone up against the shelter shed and the captains selecting their teams one at a time does anyone think they would care too much about what champion data has to say?

Do you think Neeld and Craig ignore statistical analysis? Does Longmire? What about Clarkson?

I think you will find that every coach is interested in statistical analysis. Of course, some put more weight in it than others, and different coaches are interested in different measures. But the point is that every club uses statistical measures as a means of helping analysis. And yes, Champion Data is relevant here.

I think we need to separate the data from the analysis. The data itself is very useful. In fact, it's a necessity in modern footy. However, the analysis is what is really important.

Assessing the players without statistical analysis would be like David Misson assessing their running fitness without a stopwatch. He would still have a pretty good idea but I'm sure he'd like the insight that can be gained from the data.

[rjay 23,929]

Do you think Neeld and Craig ignore statistical analysis? Does Longmire? What about Clarkson?

I think you will find that every coach is interested in statistical analysis. Of course, some put more weight in it than others, and different coaches are interested in different measures. But the point is that every club uses statistical measures as a means of helping analysis. And yes, Champion Data is relevant here.

I think we need to separate the data from the analysis. The data itself is very useful. In fact, it's a necessity in modern footy. However, the analysis is what is really important.

Assessing the players without statistical analysis would be like David Misson assessing their running fitness without a stopwatch. He would still have a pretty good idea but I'm sure he'd like the insight that can be gained from the data.

I think I could pick a pretty decent first 22 without looking at the stats as any football observer with their salt would. Having said that of course coach's look at the stats but stats alone don't really tell the story and along with a little faulty analysis give some of the anomalous results that posters are complaining about.

[Bitter but optimistic 21,332]

I nearly choked on my bar b qued alpaca when I read this article. The omission of Nathan Jones is a shocker. I 've got no problems with statistical analysis but it is generally best understood in a context. The context here is that Jones was one out in a weak midfield which was part of a poor team. FFS the possessions he gets should score double points.