On 16/01/2014 at 06:03, Curry & Beer said:

so, we get the ball inside an 12.3 times a game for and extra 4.3 goals a week and we're in the finals

if that seems like an oversimplification look at the table again and realise these stats are incapable of lying

Someone add 4.3 goals to each round's scoreline last year and see how many more games we'd have won? Don't think it'd have us close to finals.

  On 16/01/2014 at 12:12, The Red Fox said:

Someone add 4.3 goals to each round's scoreline last year and see how many more games we'd have won? Don't think it'd have us close to finals

You also must have missed "grade 3 stats 101" - for every goal we kick, our opponents lose a goal.

That's why it only takes 4.3 goals to balance a -8.4 goal differential.

EDIT: Oh dear me, this thread is so bizarre I feel a need to clarify that I was actually agreeing with The Red Fox and noting the absurdity of the OP proposition.

So if we have about 13/14 inside 50's each quarter and kick about 25 points then we should be competitive.....will remember that for next year, thanks C&B. but that's just one of many statistics that we struggle in our possession differential to our opponents would have been huge compared teams in the top 8. Basically we are at rock bottom and we can only get better with all statistics.

  On 16/01/2014 at 06:31, daisycutter said:

next you will be telling us that if you kick more goals you increase your chance of winning

He actually did do that, in the OP.

Over the course of a season, increasing a team's inside 50 count by 12.3 entries a game would constitute a simply massive turnaround.

I'm not saying it's not possible, or that we're incapable of doing it, but I don't think one can simply say, based on those stats, that 'we're not that far off'.

We were less than one inside 50 entry a game above GWS last year who took the spoon - far closer to them than to every team that finished above us (ie, every other team in the competition).

In golf they say "It's not how it's how many".

With I 50s it's more "It's not how many (so much) as how".

Our I 50s over the past few seasons have not only been relatively-few they have also generally been poor.

They are a reflection of the quality of play upfield. Fix how we play and the I 50s will take care of themselves.

I'm pretty sure the club still holds the defensive I 50 disposal record from a game against Brisbane (when Bell and Bartram were still with us).

The number is 126 but it isn't good to be playing the game in the back half. The Lions had 35 more I 50s.

The big yardstick...The Scoreboard.

  On 16/01/2014 at 09:01, Curry & Beer said:

umm no, if the average side scores 14 goals then the average game has a total of 28. If our average is 10 then our opponent's average is 18. If we increase our average to our 14 then it stands to reason that our opponent drops to 14, meaning the average total remains at 28. Unless you are suggesting that for some reason every game we play is going to somehow go up from a total average of 28 to 32 next year, which is of course silly. Stats 101. Actually grade 3 maths 101.

Not sure I can understand this it seems to be stated on the basis that if my head is in the oven and my feet are in the stove on average I am comfortable.

An average is an expression of a range of data calculated to an average.

For some analysis outliers are excluded as they incorrectly affect an average. Averages are indicators and do not reflect actuality. It does not stand to reason that if we increase our average to 14 then our opponent drops to 14 we may increase our average by one game where we increase our total by 20. Our opponents may drop their average by one game where they lose by 2.

while the average may have some relativity over the total season which was where you started it does not have any impact on the games won and lost.

  On 16/01/2014 at 10:07, stuie said:

You're missing the point. It's NOT about averages, it's about differentials.

Our inside 50s may double this year, but if every other team triples theirs then is that considered a win? No. Because it's about DIFFERENTIALS.

remember stuie, your differential is only as good as your mainshaft

  On 16/01/2014 at 11:05, Little Goffy said:

She's American. Professionally.

Is that like being a paid septic?

Never mind Miley Cyrus, what's a yardstick?

  On 17/01/2014 at 16:40, Courtney_Fish said:

Never mind Miley Cyrus, what's a yardstick?

approx .9 of a metrestick

  On 16/01/2014 at 22:19, rjay said:

The big yardstick...The Scoreboard.

yep.. the only real stat. Doesnt matter how you are in front as long as you are....strangely it gives you the win....also only outcome of choice.

Funny that

Funny though that a yardstick can be a metric !

  On 17/01/2014 at 16:40, Courtney_Fish said:

Never mind Miley Cyrus, what's a yardstick?

I was fairly pizzed at the time I visited but I think the standard measure of a yard can be found at the The Royal Ob in London. There was a great pub right at the park gates - can't recall its name but ............

Is anyone else confused?

We will win more games if we get drunk at a bar in London.

  On 18/01/2014 at 11:01, Lordweaver said:

Is anyone else confused?

Not really. The stats are telling me that in 2013, we struggled to get the ball inside fifty metres from goal as often as our opponents and, as a result, we lost most of our matches. It suggests to me that the people responsible for getting the ball into that area were failing in their task or, to put it another way, our midfield sucked.

I think most people including our football department have recognised this and have done something to turn this around. Most of our recruiting concentrated on strengthening the midfield and one the major focusses of our preseason has been on seeing that this dysfunctional area improves it act so that we can get the ball to our forwards better and more efficiently.

They also show there are many ways to skin a cat because one of the grand finallists finished 15th in the number of inside 50s and scored less heavily than the 11th placed side, so it also helps if you're good at stopping your opposition from scoring and efficient when you get the ball near goal. I believe our people are working on that as well.

I look forward to seeing the 2014 equivalent of these statistics and hope that they show us in a more favourable light, in particular the extreme left hand column.

Tackles in our attacking 50 statistic......? Just putting it out there....

  On 18/01/2014 at 09:16, beelzebub said:

Funny though that a yardstick can be a metric !

Only to us oldies, BB, "Give them an inch and they take a mile" makes no sense in metric ....

  On 16/01/2014 at 09:03, Little Goffy said:

Take a closer look at Adelaide, Fremantle, and North Melbourne. The stats are up and down and sometimes half a ladder from the club's position.

I'm not even going to bother picking it apart much further.

you've illustrated that 15 of the 18 clubs are extremely close in their positions which is of course a high correlation..

  On 16/01/2014 at 09:17, Little Goffy said:

Oh dear me.

It's the 'Zero-sum game' interpretation of football scoring.

oh dear me what? answer this, yes or no, are our football matches likely to remain at around 28 goals total per game or are they going to increase to 32 for some reason? and if our portion of those goals goes up from 10-14, how many will our opponent get? How is this a difficult mathematical problem to grasp?

  On 16/01/2014 at 10:06, Little Goffy said:

The use of this statistics in this thread went from 'whatever' to 'wtf' faster than Miley Cyrus' career.

good one seinfeld shame you dont know wtf youre talking about

  On 16/01/2014 at 10:07, stuie said:

You're missing the point. It's NOT about averages, it's about differentials.

Our inside 50s may double this year, but if every other team triples theirs then is that considered a win? No. Because it's about DIFFERENTIALS.

think about what you have written - youve proposed a scenario where the average total inside 50s goes up 250% for some reason. How would this happen, by the length of the football ground being reduced to about 80 metres? One thing that is certain is that the average game next year WILL record around 103 inside-50s for the match. If our PORTION of those increase by 12 then our opponents WILL ALSO DECREASE by 12, there are 103 to go around so every extra one you get is ALSO one less than your opponent gets, therefore differential is roughly DOUBLE the difference. Obviously there will be exceptions to this rule but over 198 games this is the equation, that is what the word 'AVERAGE' means. Am I taking crazy pills or is there is one person with a grasp on basic mathematics that will be back me up here?

  On 16/01/2014 at 11:12, Left Field said:

Why is I50 a key stat? Why not I40 or I30 or I25 or any other arbitrary number?

Stats are what they are but I50 only exists because there is a line painted on the ground.

I'd guess most of our I50's were shallower than the stat leaders.

And less well directed in terms of proximity to the coridor.

And there were also more contested possessions when they landed.

And unfortunately, we probably lost most of those contests on average.

that's a decent point, and helps explain why we get less goals for our inside 50s than the average. What also contributes to this is the fact we didnt have a forward line most of the year obv.