Bingo.

Our disposal is atrocious, has been for years and is killing us.

Yes some good mids would make us a fair side, if we improve our disposal.

The Lions had an ordinary side in yesterday, but beat us, why, because of our poor ball use.

you mean get players that can kick ??

Groundbreaking stuff.

Am tired of stating this.

Our skills are vfl at best often.

Mind boggles

The only stats that count are the scoreboard. Our midfield is getting killed week in week out by every other team. Yes they get their 20 touches a game unfortunately their opponents are racking up 30-50 touches a game. How many midfield players for melbourne have racked up 30 possessions this year? Just because the ball goes into the forward 50 does not mean the midfield is delivering it, a lot of time our forwards have to go back to try to get it down field when they do Dawes or Fitzy are outnumbered. Of the inside 50's how many actually went to our team members advantage as opposed to kicking it blindly straight down the oppositions players throats. lastly as pointed out so ably by others our turn overs which often is the midfield are killing us. Yesterday Trengrove for example got his 20 touches and a lot of tackles, but he turned it over multiple times he was credited with 5 clangers by the Heraldsun, i think they may have been generous to him, Dunn had 4 clangers out of 16 possessions. If you compared each midfielder to their opposition yesterday did any of our midfielders actually win out?

statistics are like bikinis. what they reveal is suggestive but what they conceal is vital

That is awful. Please no more.

The only stats that count are the scoreboard. Our midfield is getting killed week in week out by every other team. Yes they get their 20 touches a game unfortunately their opponents are racking up 30-50 touches a game. How many midfield players for melbourne have racked up 30 possessions this year? Just because the ball goes into the forward 50 does not mean the midfield is delivering it, a lot of time our forwards have to go back to try to get it down field when they do Dawes or Fitzy are outnumbered. Of the inside 50's how many actually went to our team members advantage as opposed to kicking it blindly straight down the oppositions players throats. lastly as pointed out so ably by others our turn overs which often is the midfield are killing us. Yesterday Trengrove for example got his 20 touches and a lot of tackles, but he turned it over multiple times he was credited with 5 clangers by the Heraldsun, i think they may have been generous to him, Dunn had 4 clangers out of 16 possessions. If you compared each midfielder to their opposition yesterday did any of our midfielders actually win out?

I like that you start off saying that the only stats that matter are the scoreboard and then argued a few points using stats to support your argument.

If you'd finished that off by confirming that 'stats are useless', i think it would have been the perfect post - where the introduction and the conclusion were passionately ignored by the majority of content.

It's hardly groundbreaking to hear that if you get the ball in the forward line more you score more goals.

you wouldn't think so but clearly there are many on this board who need to have the point hammered home and supported with data, yet they still argue

Silly OP.

If you're unable to match the average, that's NOT a good thing.

Also, it's all out of context: what's the average score and inside-50 count from the opposition in that period? That would be a better determining factor than the team's output, which is only as good as its capacity to counter the opposition.

You must be joking. The entire point of this thread is to demonstrate our IMPROVEMENT.

I think everyone seems to have forgotten we lost 8 of the first 11 by 10 goals or more, including beltings of 90,94,95 and 148! We were genuinely considered the worst side in the comp!

yes.... below average = not good. Thanks for pointing that out. But slightly below average is a whole lot better than worst in the comp. Surely you can understand that.

Secondly, what are you talking about.. context? The word AVERAGE means that you boil down every team on every ground in every weather. Go ahead and look, you will find every match is close to a game total of 28 goals and 102 i50s. It is just a matter of which side has the majority and minority of them. Generally speaking if a side wins by 4 goals that means it was 16 goals to 12, with 58 i50 to 44. That is what the term AVERAGE means.

I like it.

You wouldn't be able to do an inside 50s differential stat would you? I'd expect it to match up even more closely.

Good call, you are correct.

Bingo.

Our disposal is atrocious, has been for years and is killing us.

Yes some good mids would make us a fair side, if we improve our disposal.

The Lions had an ordinary side in yesterday, but beat us, why, because of our poor ball use.

Clearly the QUALITY of the inside 50s is another factor. Two points though:

1) if we are so atrocious why is that we convert roughly 4 inside50s per goal vs the league average of roughly 3.5? It has to be considered also that Clark averaged nearly 3 goals a match last year. That was the 7th highest goal per game average of anyone in the comp. His presence alone would theoretically bump that conversion stat up massively.

2) Quality is definitely a factor, but the above ladders prove beyond any doubt that QUANTITY is more important. Just look how closely it translates.

I believe the increase in inside 50s is due to the amazing change in our uncontested possessions since Craig took over.

The improvement is marked, but again, I think the ceiling we are seeing is our skills and decision making, and they are tough to improve full stop, but tougher during he season when all you care about is play, recovery, and preparation.

Hopefully the next head coach can take a few limited footballers and get more out of them.

There is no one statistic that says a lot on its own. Bundles of statistics together can be suggestive, but even then, it's watching the source of the statistics (i.e. the games) that tells you most.

Inside 50s are obviously vital, as is the inside 50 differential. But the figure tells you nothing about the quality of the inside 50. Many of our inside 50s are kicks that miss the target, or are direct turnovers, or are wide to the boundary, or are shallow (i.e. 40-50), or are deep without purpose (i.e. to the goalsquare meaninglessly).

The improvement in the straight number of inside 50s, with other indicators (handball received, uncontested possessions, uncontested marks, tackles) is clearly a positive. But our awful midfield needs to improve so that those inside 50s become more dangerous.

There is no one statistic that says a lot on its own. Bundles of statistics together can be suggestive, but even then, it's watching the source of the statistics (i.e. the games) that tells you most.

Inside 50s are obviously vital, as is the inside 50 differential. But the figure tells you nothing about the quality of the inside 50. Many of our inside 50s are kicks that miss the target, or are direct turnovers, or are wide to the boundary, or are shallow (i.e. 40-50), or are deep without purpose (i.e. to the goalsquare meaninglessly).

The improvement in the straight number of inside 50s, with other indicators (handball received, uncontested possessions, uncontested marks, tackles) is clearly a positive. But our awful midfield needs to improve so that those inside 50s become more dangerous.

yes others already said that and i already responded to it

yes others already said that and i already responded to it

I wasn't having a go at you in particular. Just a comment on people's use of statistics.

I wasn't having a go at you in particular. Just a comment on people's use of statistics.

yes I realise that, I'm just saying I already commented on the quality vs quantity issue but nobody has addressed that response

desperate attempt to provide some sort of positive:

r19 - 48 - 12.15

r18 - 30 - 4.4

r17 - 50 - 11.9
r16 - 19 - 4.6
r15 - 36 - 13.7
r14 - 56 - 15.13
r13 - 45 - 10.9

not inc. 2 debacles

ave: 47 inside 50.. 12.11.83

so what does that mean..umm.. in 5 of the last 7 we've scored 47 vs the league ave of 51 inside 50s.. 12 goals vs 14.. and 11 points to 10