Statistical Analysis of 2015

[deanox 8,795]

If anyone doesn't realise the importance of UP after that graph (and last year's graph) then they aren't worth talking footy with!

If be very interested to see if it holds up for all matches with all teams (I expect it would) and I'd also be interested to know if any other stat correlated that well.

Have you identified what other stats that get published publicly tend to go hand in hand with UP? I assume UP marks, and DE% is related, but obviously not critical. I have a gut feeling that the GPS numbers (i.e. km run by midfielders) would be a direct correlation to UP.

[Breggsy 123]

If anyone doesn't realise the importance of UP after that graph (and last year's graph) then they aren't worth talking footy with!

If be very interested to see if it holds up for all matches with all teams (I expect it would) and I'd also be interested to know if any other stat correlated that well.

Have you identified what other stats that get published publicly tend to go hand in hand with UP? I assume UP marks, and DE% is related, but obviously not critical. I have a gut feeling that the GPS numbers (i.e. km run by midfielders) would be a direct correlation to UP.

correlation does not imply causation. I think you will find this is coincidence rather than causality

[deanox 8,795]

correlation does not imply causation. I think you will find this is coincidence rather than causality

I disagree strongly. This correlation existed for 22 games last year as well.

The stat shows which team is able to pay the game on their terms, to their plan.

The Big Question is: does UP differential drive the score, or does the score drive UP? Well it is safe to safe the second isn't correct. Kicking a score ends you UP chain either giving the opposition the ball or moving to a CP at the bounce.

There may be other ways to increase score (i.e. constant kicking to contest, contesting marking etc. ) but these don't correlate with score anywhere nearly as well.

The are other ways of increasing UP i.e. chipping around in the backline back and forth but in the average game that only accounts for a small % of UPs and when you eventually cough it up the opposition will have a chain of UPs as they score, evening it out.

[rpfc 27,646]

correlation does not imply causation. I think you will find this is coincidence rather than causality

The higher the number of UPs the better the team. The higher number of UPs relative to your opponent, the better chance you have of winning.

The modern game revolves around run and spread and transition - that is what UPs make up.

The relationship between winning and running, spreading and getting 'cheap' footy is not coincidence.

[Breggsy 123]

I disagree strongly. This correlation existed for 22 games last year as well.

The stat shows which team is able to pay the game on their terms, to their plan.

The Big Question is: does UP differential drive the score, or does the score drive UP? Well it is safe to safe the second isn't correct. Kicking a score ends you UP chain either giving the opposition the ball or moving to a CP at the bounce.

There may be other ways to increase score (i.e. constant kicking to contest, contesting marking etc. ) but these don't correlate with score anywhere nearly as well.

The are other ways of increasing UP i.e. chipping around in the backline back and forth but in the average game that only accounts for a small % of UPs and when you eventually cough it up the opposition will have a chain of UPs as they score, evening it out.

The higher the number of UPs the better the team. The higher number of UPs relative to your opponent, the better chance you have of winning.

The modern game revolves around run and spread and transition - that is what UPs make up.

The relationship between winning and running, spreading and getting 'cheap' footy is not coincidence.

afl is a pretty involved sport with a lot of indicators and it is too simple to say that winning is a result of a UP differential. In your chart the two are vaguely correlated but I would say that that it is a spurious relationship at best, with the lurking variable an accumulation of other KPI ie CP, de%

Perhaps a granger test would be appropriate to this situation; although it's not really my area so I may have my tests mixed up haha

[deanox 8,795]

Breggsy that variable could be as obscure as weather, number of days between matches, home ground advantage etc.

But I don't believe any stat (except goals scored) would correlated so well with margin.

CP is a joke stat. People think of contested as tough and hard and uncontested as loose and soft. It is anything but.

Gut running 150 m to make space and beat your opponent and their zone to win 30 m gain by making it is an uncontested possession.

Picking up a loose bouncing ball inside your defensive 50 that was bombed long, while no opposition player is within 25 m is a contested possession.

There are plenty of anomalies in statistics but at its core uncontested possession is a measure of how well you keep possession of the ball once you have won it. And that is the main driver in the modern game.

[Gator 16,921]

Five of the top 6 teams on the ladder lead the UP ladder. It's no coincidence.

Five of the top 6 teams on the ladder lead the disposal count ladder. It's no coincidence.

More UP's lead to more disposals, which means more "time in possession" and the opportunity to score.

Unlike Deanox, I don't dismiss CP's out of hand. Being strong in the contest and around the stoppages is also important, however, they're not as important as UP's.

Edited June 4, 2015 by ProDee

[rpfc 27,646]

If anyone is interested - We are last in average UPs a game with 188. GC are just infront of us, Carlton are 8 ahead of us and the only other team under 200 a game.

The median is 226 UPs a game.

The Hawks average 266.

This will become less of a causality when we push toward the AFL median but at the moment - the trace of our performance is centred around our spread and desire to transition the footy and that is best illustrated by UPs.

[Breggsy 123]

I'm not saying that UP's are unimportant because they are. I'm more saying that the use of the above perceived correlation, which over a longer period of time is even weaker, cannot be used for prediction, ie: you cannot say that we will win the game, if we in the UP. This is referred to as causality and I'm happy to apply the appropriate tests once I get some free time, however; just by looking at the correlation it remains highly unlikely that there will be anything significant

If anyone has a large dataset of any football statistics ( Champion data have cut me off) in an appropriate file, I would love to have a play around

Also, I'm happy to be proven wrong on my above point, so please let the discussion continue

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

Are we more likely to play well because we have increased uncontested possessions or are increased uncontested possessions a result of playing well?

[dpositive 1,564]

given the above details of definition of UP perhaps the UP and CP total combined would be the most accurate measure.

A wayward kick to a UP against a pinpoint pass to a Contest are both equally valuable.

[rpfc 27,646]

I'm not saying that UP's are unimportant because they are. I'm more saying that the use of the above perceived correlation, which over a longer period of time is even weaker, cannot be used for prediction, ie: you cannot say that we will win the game, if we in the UP. This is referred to as causality and I'm happy to apply the appropriate tests once I get some free time, however; just by looking at the correlation it remains highly unlikely that there will be anything significant

If anyone has a large dataset of any football statistics ( Champion data have cut me off) in an appropriate file, I would love to have a play around

Also, I'm happy to be proven wrong on my above point, so please let the discussion continue

I am not saying that 'if we win the UP count, we will win the game.'

I am trying to explain to people why it is so important for this current Demons team; our fortunes are defined by our willingness to run, spread, and get 'cheap' footy.

The way those fortunes turn on a dime is the sudden lack to do those things - to get UPs.

If we were around the AFL median of 226 (ie found another 40 easy touches a game) then other KPIs would become important in explaining why we are winning or still losing - but right now, our fortunes in games are directly related to the times in games we escape our inertia and run and be bold and the times we worry about what our opponent is doing with the footy and ignore our desire to go and get that footy.

This is why we have been so up and down in 2015.

[robbiefrom13 877]

The "he goes where the ball ain't" criticism used once to be applicable to what we would today see as a player who gut-runs/spreads. The game has changed, and "he goes where the ball ain't" is no longer a circumstance in vacuo - football has become a team game in a way it never used to be. Now "he goes where the ball ain't" can be a comment more critical of his team-mates. I know there are dumb places to lead to, but still, with our low UP stats, not honouring a lead into space seems particularly dumb.

Watts has been recognised as one whose leads do not get honoured. He has been criticised for not demanding the ball. What is it we want - a display of testosterone, or a viable lead that could give us another UP? And of course, he is not the only one. MFC was drilled by Neeld to instinctively look for the 5 metres nearest the boundaryline - not the free player. Dumb, dumb, dumb - in effect, prioritising throw-ins over UP's! And now, we don't instinctively lead into open space, and we have low UP stats...

If i could make up a new stat it would be "time spent alone". Ebert killed us last week on this stat, and greats of the past excelled at it - Robbie Flower comes to mind - as does Vagg, Jimmy Jess and a host of half forwards. The floaters and drifters, who made everyone on the other team just a little less sure of themselves - and who scored. I once saw Vagg kick 5 in a half, against Essendon. He got a couple, and Norm Smith opened up the forward line so Vagg had about a third of the MCG to himself. I don't remember who was on him, but Vagg just kept losing him and getting the ball. After half time Essendon pushed their other defenders into the space out there and crowded us out of the tactic. Robbie Flower in the 87 finals is an object lesson in losing your opponent - getting a bit flimsy right at the end of his career, and not as fast as he had been, yet he got alone again and again, and repeatedly racked up UP's and goals.

Until we learn to pick out the guy making a break into space, we are not going to rack up the UP's. Encourage that player to keep doing it, by using his spread - never mind how aggro he looks - if he's out there clear, go for him! Until our players start picking out the player racking up "time spent alone", in context of our style of play we supporters will be missing the essential point when we condemn a player for not getting a lot of possessions.

You can bag Watts out for not being a gorilla if you like, but there used to be this highly valued quality of being "elusive", and our players (and supporters) seem to have forgotten how important it was. It is one very important UP accumulator. I think it might well be the role in which Watts would finally deliver on his promise. At Melbourne, please...

[Breggsy 123]

Hi everyone, I thought in stead of peppering this thread I should try and contribute..

I remember on footy classified they were talking about average age of teams who played on the weekend, and some melbourne supporters were angered to hear that our team had a relatively high average age. It is usually assumed that a high average age should equal some form of success, however; it goes without saying, we are not a good team.

therefore I think it is important to look at the simple age distributions of our team. for a form of comparison ive also posted the simple freo age distribution (seeing as they are the current benchmark), as well as the games played.

at the bottom I've also posted a simple scatterplot of age, vs games played for both sides. Melb are red, freo blue..

from this I think you can take away a few points.

• The freo age distribution has a noticeably longer tail of 29 and over (12 to 3). this can also suggest that we are lacking a huge amount of experience that these players are able to give to their teams.
• We have a large number of players aged in the 25-28 who have yet to play 50 games. I blame the recruiting of three-four years ago when the club chose to pick up several stop-gaps; jones, terlich, pedo etc. Not that I am saying it was a good move or a bad move, it was an attempt by the club to fill the needed age group on the list.

[titan_uranus 22,805]

I think a key point about the stat rpfc provided is that it is UP differential. It doesn't necessarily mean you are getting a stack of UPs (and says nothing about the ratio of UPs to CPs), but if you are exceeding your opponent in UPs you are, generally, spreading more, making more space, and controlling the ball more (in the context of that game). It's no surprise, then, that it correlates with better results.

There is more to football than UPs, but our inability to generate enough UPs (because we don't run and spread hard enough) and more importantly the way in which other sides generate huge UPs and we do not, is contributing to our losses, hugely.

[Binmans PA 26,512]

If anyone doesn't realise the importance of UP after that graph (and last year's graph) then they aren't worth talking footy with!

If be very interested to see if it holds up for all matches with all teams (I expect it would) and I'd also be interested to know if any other stat correlated that well.

Have you identified what other stats that get published publicly tend to go hand in hand with UP? I assume UP marks, and DE% is related, but obviously not critical. I have a gut feeling that the GPS numbers (i.e. km run by midfielders) would be a direct correlation to UP.

DE% is one of the most useless stats going around. Rubbish, rubbish, rubbish stat. There certainly seems to be a correlation between uncontested possessions and kicking winning scores though.

[rpfc 27,646]

10 games in

Collingwood:

Clearances: 4 (-5.5)

I50s: -6 (-13.5)

UPs: 1 (-19.10)

CPs: -4 (-1.7)

Margin: -25 (-27)

Quarters Won: 2 (16 over 10 games)

If I was to remove the Preliminary Finalists from last year these would be our averages:

Clearances: (-3.7)

I50s: (-8.8)

UPs: (5.2)

CPs: (5)

Margin: (0.3)

Quarters Won: (14 over 6 games)

Updated.

[dpositive 1,564]

Delivery is affected by pressure on kicker. Possession is improved when player delivering has time to be balanced and be composed with their delivery. This also affects the receivers UP

I noted again against Collingwood the number of times their players were under no pressure.

Without wanting to start a JAck Watts thread I also noted again that he puts pressure on by coralling and smothering the ball or the passage of the ball. I would like him to effect more tackles and the one he received the goal for was an indication of what is possible. however the pressure he often applies is almost subliminal forcing poor delivery or receipt.

Our players also too often hold the ball too long allowing themselves to be put under pressure which creates a poor disposal and then a poor receive.

Confidence is one of the key aspects which I hope the coaches are working on as well as the ability to apply and perform under pressure

[nutbean 8,837]

RPFC - the importance of UP is as obvious as the nose on anyone's face.

I suggested at the end of Neeld's tenure - our overall disposal count was well down but our Contested possession vs Uncontested possession count was way too high. It meant we were almost playing schoolyard footy. All the players chasing the ball in the contest and then when we got possession there was no one on the outside to give it to.

That oft quoted word "spreading" is the key. We talk about how hard players work in the contest but it is almost more important to work hard to make space to take the ball - the uncontested possession.

We looked our best on Monday with Brayshaw being on the end of the handball in space - kicking his uncontested possession long and quickly to a running Gartlett. I am impressed with Brayshaw's work in the contest - I am more impressed with his work ethic to work in the contest and then keep working to get uncontested footy as well.

Obviously one of the keys to getting uncontested footy is the ability to deliver it.

Edited June 10, 2015 by nutbean

[Webber 10,181]

RPFC - the importance of UP is as obvious as the nose on anyone's face.

I suggested at the end of Neeld's tenure - our overall disposal count was well down but our Contested possession vs Uncontested possession count was way too high. It meant we were almost playing schoolyard footy. All the players chasing the ball in the contest and then when we got possession there was no one on the outside to give it to.

That oft quoted word "spreading" is the key. We talk about how hard players work in the contest but it is almost more important to work hard to make space to take the ball - the uncontested possession.

We looked our best on Monday with Brayshaw being on the end of the handball in space - kicking his uncontested possession long and quickly to a running Gartlett. I am impressed with Brayshaw's work in the contest - I am more impressed with his work ethic to work in the contest and then keep working to get uncontested footy as well.

Obviously one of the keys to getting uncontested footy is the ability to deliver it.

What I'm noticing about Brayshaw as well. Apart from being a two footed, one touch handler who reads the play sublimely and doesn't hear footsteps, he's clearly enormously coachable. The balance of his stats week to week between contested acts and uncontested possessions is probably exactly what coaches want from all their players. At 18, he already seems to be the ultimate modern footballer. I think when Roos talks about players on our list who bear the burdens of the past, it's the resistance to changing habits and developing that balance that he is talking about. Some can, some can't, the newbies are thankfully a blank canvas.

[grazman 6,653]

We looked our best on Monday with Brayshaw being on the end of the handball in space - kicking his uncontested possession long and quickly to a running Gartlett. I am impressed with Brayshaw's work in the contest - I am more impressed with his work ethic to work in the contest and then keep working to get uncontested footy as well.

Obviously one of the keys to getting uncontested footy is the ability to deliver it.

This is why I think we should seriously look at Yarran. A) he has speed, B) he has sublime skills, C) he's gettable given Carlton are going into rebuild mode and he'll be one of the few players that actually have currency. Normally I'm reticent to take on other clubs problems, but I actually think he'd be a good fit.

Edited June 10, 2015 by grazman

[Demon Dynasty 16,000]

I think a key point about the stat rpfc provided is that it is UP differential. It doesn't necessarily mean you are getting a stack of UPs (and says nothing about the ratio of UPs to CPs), but if you are exceeding your opponent in UPs you are, generally, spreading more, making more space, and controlling the ball more (in the context of that game). It's no surprise, then, that it correlates with better results.

There is more to football than UPs, but our inability to generate enough UPs (because we don't run and spread hard enough) and more importantly the way in which other sides generate huge UPs and we do not, is contributing to our losses, hugely.

THE HAWTHORN EFFECT!

I believe it's the Hawthorn factor at play here guys (Note: not an original concept... see extract from The Roar below). Since Hawthorn won the premiership in 2008, and have been quite dominant since with their back to back, other teams (Freeo, Port & to some extent GWS) are at work trying to capture the essence that is the Hawthorn way and of course maybe even better it/tweak it. Using run/spread and precision kicking (through the press off HB and in general around the ground when defensive structures/pressure is working) to lethal effect.

Stats can't play football but if used sparingly and carefuly we can utilise them to paint a comparitive picture of what the latest trends in the game are, but more specifically, which teams are able to get their mojo going and changing their game style more towards the latest trending game style.

RPFC & Titan are spot on with the UP differential being a strong indicator of who is able to spread, distrubute the ball and maintain possession effectively and efficiently. The more a team can do this the easier it is for them to improve their disposal efficiency as they have more time/space to effect their next disposal.

But you still need extractors (clearances/first possession), you still need to pressure, kill the ball/intercept mark, initiate effective presses, etc and force turnovers, especially in critical parts of the ground....then score from them (eg., scoring efficiency%...no point getting the ball inside 50 if horrid in front of goal or even worse hardly having any shots at all with ball rebounding out easily/very few marks i50 etc).

So in the end i would be placing more emphasis on UP differentials when seeing how we are progressing vs other teams than contested but we also need to include contested, clearances, pressure acts, intercept marks (Oxley!!) etc into the mix to put together what is a complex tapestry of what is taking place on the field both offensively, defensively and pressure wise. Unfortunately we only have basic (publicly available) stats to do this with as we have no access to things like intercept marks, pressure acts, pressure acts inside 50, "effective" tackles, "effective" tackles inside 50 (Watts on Varcoe & the conversion!).

UP differential is a solid stat though and does give us a rough guide as to how well we are progressing, or otherwise, towards getting our boys to play the style of footy that is having solid success right now. Based on this we are miles away from acheiving what the likes of the Dockers and Port have managed in the last 18 months or so and may well be stone motherless last right now. Fast tracking needed big time on our spread, run/carry and ability to share/retain the footy.

Many D'landers of course are already well aware of this issue. A very obvious problem foreseen and spoken about for years i realise so apologies for repeating a broken story in advance. Nutbeans post above is a solid contribution towards this side.

In addition to what he said about school yard footy under Neeld, I also felt that under MN we not only played that way but it was doubly worse than Nutbean's version!. We would have 2 to 3 players too many, hunting the footy as Nut said, and 2 or 3 others on the outside always sweating on their man, playing from behind and WAITING for their opponent to get the ball first....then trying to suddenly "swoop" in with a quick tackle to hopefully effect yet another stoppage. Unfortunately when you "allow" your opponent first use of the ball and it's a quality opponent (for us that's roughly anyone in the top 12), plus then have that opponent generally beat us on the UP (spread/run & carry, possession etc)....a recipe for a complete disaster (under MN). And it was.

I believe Roosey has gone a long way to rectifying this....but.... i still see some of our boys "switch" into "watching their opponent" mode and always playing/sweating on "him" and being reactive from behind, rather than hunting the ball, for certain periods during a game. A hangover and habitual issue from the MN years maybe? Happy to give up front position and given we generally don't spread/run/carry and maintain possession as well as others, well you can guess what the outcome is going to be. To me this is as damaging to us during a match (when it's happening) just as much as the UP/spread/possession side.

So in a nutshell we have a fair way to go to improve our run/spread/possession type play AND we sometimes regress into the ugly part of the MN era where some selective players revert back to "man" watching and sweating on their opponent from behind, instead of ball watching while maintaining "touch" on their direct opponent and instinctively going after the ball if it's within their area "first", then recognising that if a fellow player gets his hands on it first or is likely too.... spread quickly to receive. Some are STILL stuck in a time warp here, too fixated and worried about what will happen if they don't sweat on their direct opponent and tackle him IF he happens to get it. I don't believe this happens for an entire match but it is still happening during parts of a match by some.

I've included a few interesting articles here that go into aspects of the Uncontested/Contested side of statistics for those interested....

An extract from one of those artciles paints a nice picture of the UP differential vs CP differential argument that RP is highlighting.....

Are uncontested possessions becoming more important?

Id like to end with a bit of a thought provoker: having a positive UP differential is, increasingly, a marker of success. Check out the below chart, which shows the 200 game moving average winning percentage of teams with a positive CP and positive UP.

In economics, this is what we call structural change. Since 2008, the expected winning percentage of teams with a positive UP differential has moved higher by around about five percentage points, while the winning percentage for a positive CP differential have moved lower by around eight percentage points.

Are sides finally cottoning on to the notion that ball use is more important than toughness, and the ability to win the ball in contested situations? Perhaps.

Id call this The Hawthorn Effect': after Hawthorn won the 2008 flag, largely on the back of elite skills and smart offensive and defensive structures, the ability to possess the ball more often in situations that allow for the execution of skills appears to be having a strong impact on winning percentage. Thats not to say contested possessions arent important but we may be moving further into a new era in the AFL where skills and execution are placed at a premium over the ability to bullock through packs and find a way out with the ball.

The full article here.... http://www.theroar.com.au/2014/07/09/missing-tablescontested-possessions-important/

Hawthorn & Freo leading the UP charge (have posted this before but still worth a read for those who may have missed.... http://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/afl-premiership/hawthorn-and-fremantle-success-driven-by-winning-uncontested-possessions/story-e6frf3e3-1227315390602

Edited June 10, 2015 by Rusty Nails

[deanox 8,795]

RN love your post and the reference, good addition to the discussion. But the blue text misses what I was trying to say before. The ability to bullock thriving packs and find a way out with the ball is NOT a contested possession. If done right is results in an uncontested possession, as you bullock through then fire out a handball to an outside runner going past. Perhaps more important is "hard ball get"?

The overall contested possession count from team to team does not vary wildly.

For the season, Collingwood is leaking with an average of 147 CPs per game, ahead of Geelong at 127 per game. Melbourne is roughly at the average with 136 per game. Take our the best team for CPs (Collingwood 147) and the bottom 3 teams (Geelong 127, GWS and Brisbane 128) and the remaining 14 team are spread between 134 and 144. Hardly a big difference. There is also only rough correlation between the CP ladder and the actual ladder, with a number of teams well out of position.

Uncontested possessions however, vary wildly between teams. Hawthorn average 261, GC 189.

The main thing I see if that, of course CP are important. They are how you win the ball and the possession. But even if a team wins in CP, if they lose the UP, they are constantly handing it back to the opposition, so unless they are dominating every stoppage and contested ball situation by a bigger margin than the numbers above suggest they are in trouble.

Edited June 10, 2015 by deanox

[Demon Dynasty 16,000]

RN love your post and the reference, good addition to the discussion. But the blue text misses what I was trying to say before. The ability to bullock thriving packs and find a way out with the ball is NOT a contested possession. If done right is results in an uncontested possession, as you bullock through then fire out a handball to an outside runner going past. Perhaps more important is "hard ball get"?

The overall contested possession count from team to team does not vary wildly.

For the season, Collingwood is leaking with an average of 147 CPs per game, ahead of Geelong at 127 per game. Melbourne is roughly at the average with 136 per game. Take our the best team for CPs (Collingwood 147) and the bottom 3 teams (Geelong 127, GWS and Brisbane 128) and the remaining 14 team are spread between 134 and 144. Hardly a big difference. There is also only rough correlation between the CP ladder and the actual ladder, with a number of teams well out of position.

Uncontested possessions however, vary wildly between teams. Hawthorn average 261, GC 189.

The main thing I see if that, of course CP are important. They are how you win the ball and the possession. But even if a team wins in CP, if they lose the UP, they are constantly handing it back to the opposition, so unless they are dominating every stoppage and contested ball situation by a bigger margin than the numbers above suggest they are in trouble.

Thanks Deanox.

Please note that "Hard ball gets" are included as part of the contested possession stat.

Yes i am in general agreement that more emphasis should be placed on UP differentials as, in the majority of cases, a positive differential is more likely to relate to winning vs CP differentials apparantly. Unless of course as you say, the CP differential blows out and gets extremely ugly (for your team) then you're in trouble even if winning the UP diff but it would need to be consistantly ugly as well (a la us during the MN years!). No argument from me there. But, to know in what general areas we are doing well (eg., inside/outside etc), not so well or just tracking square, you still need to watch both (along with other stats IF meaningful). Focussing solely on UP diff alone would be an unwise move is all i'm saying, as would focussing too much on any one stat differential of course.

Edited June 10, 2015 by Rusty Nails

[rpfc 27,646]

Round 11 St Kilda

Clearances: 3 (-4.7)

Inside 50s: -16 (-13.73)

UPs: 92 (-9)

CPs: 16 (-0.1)

Margin: -2 (-24.7)

Quarters Won: 1 (17)

Aside from the Inside 50s and the Margin - it was a very good game...

It has to be noted that 415 touches for 42 Inside 50s is around 1 Inside 50 for every 10 touches. The Saints play that ground (and our mistakes) really well and got 1 Inside 50 for every 5 touches.

We spread well, but we were not daring and bold and we feel claustrophobic at Etihad.

Removing Haw, Freo and Syd:

Clearances: (-3.25)

Inside 50s: (-9.8)

UPs: (10.25)

CPs: (4.38)

Margin: (-7.6)

Quarters Won: (16)