http://www.afl.com.au/stats/player-ratings/overall-standings

I haven't checked these for ages as the rating system confused me.  Last time I looked at them was a few years ago and there were no Demons in the top 100. 

Its a different story now.  Five players in the top 50 is equal most of any club (alongside Adelaide).

Max Gawn 23

Clayton Oliver 32

Nathan Jones 41

Tom McDonald 44

Christian Petracca 50

Jake Lever 94

 

For the record Jesse Hogan, who is now a superstar dominating games and has always been a gun , is ranked 269th.. so yeah I still have no idea how the thing works.   (Maybe all his missed games last season?)...  maybe the reason Viney is ranked way too low at 121.

 

Edited May 8, 20186 yr by Petraccattack

It’s calculated on their last 40 games over a rolling 2 year period. 

That is why Maxy, Viney and Hoges are lower than they should be as they all would’ve played less than 40 games in the last two year period and why Oliver has jumped up so high now that he has played over 40 games. 

Edited May 8, 20186 yr by Domgus Petrogan

On 5/8/2018 at 6:16 PM, Domgus Petrogan said:

It’s calculated on their last 40 games over a rolling 2 year period. 

That is why Maxy, Viney and Hoges are lower than they should be as they all would’ve played less than 40 games in the last two year period and why Oliver has jumped up so high now that he has played over 40 games. 

 

Our players are moving up

Oliver 12

Gawn 18

T McDonald 34

 

Still cant work out why Hogan is so low (245 and rising), when Gawn also missed a lot of games last season.

Hibberd also very low, but his suspension might have covered part of that 40 game period,

Also, Fritsch is 2nd among first year players.

3 hours ago, Petraccattack said:

 

Our players are moving up

Oliver 12

Gawn 18

T McDonald 34

 

Still cant work out why Hogan is so low (245 and rising), when Gawn also missed a lot of games last season.

Hibberd also very low, but his suspension might have covered part of that 40 game period,

Also, Fritsch is 2nd among first year players.

It's impossible to know how many games out of the 40 are being rated, but occasionally on the AFL Player Ratings twitter they post some tables which include those kind of numbers for the most improved, leading players in position etc.

For example, Oliver is actually rated in 38 of his last 40 games so he has a great chance of moving into the top 10 rated players in the next few weeks. I'm guessing that Hogan and Hibberd are rated low because they have played just 21 and 29 games respectively in the last 2 years. We have plenty of players in the top scoring for the last few rounds

 

Edited June 4, 20186 yr by TheCurseisBroken

On 5/8/2018 at 6:01 PM, Petraccattack said:

 

For the record Jesse Hogan, who is now a superstar dominating games and has always been a gun , is ranked 269th.. so yeah I still have no idea how the thing works.   (Maybe all his missed games last season?)...  maybe the reason Viney is ranked way too low at 121.

 

Hogan doesn't tackle, doesn't apply great pressure, doesn't get 1%ers such as spoils when caught out of position and has a number of clanger turnover kicks per game. 

There's a number of stats that these rankings seem to really favour. They really like efficiency which is where Oliver stands out. They've always loved Tommy Mc's 1%ers and work rate. They reward explosive players like Petracca who turn contests in to clean possession. 

Hogan's up to 67th overall and right up with the best key forwards not named Lance this year but clearly his form in '16 and '17 left some room for improvement. 

 

 

Edited June 4, 20186 yr by DeeSpencer

FWIW here is an house ranking to Rnd 11 for all players who have played 3 games or more so far based on a fairly wide ranging compilation of selective average stats for basic / rough comparative purposes.

Note there are no hit outs to advantage included for any ruckman.  But if we allow for this by adding say between 0.5 to 0.75 for Big M (as the main example obviously) it puts him easily in our top 5, as one would expect.

Low average games played eg., Tim Smith with only 3 games, but where he was right off his game early on Saturday with a neck injury,  will severely skew a player's comparative ranking.  Whereas looking at Melk, who was also injured early on Saturday with a severe effect to his score on the day, would not see his overall ranking score impacted as badly due to a more evening out of the averages, Melk having played many more games.

Another good example of where stats can be very misleading is Oscar.  Had a fabulous season shutting down most of his opponents so far but the stat ranking doesn't show this.  I would argue that is because he is playing his role to perfection.  The coaches looking for a close checking shut down game first and foremost with only a little bit of attacking / intercept (3rd man up chop out) expected off his man where possible.  Nothing too crazy away from his man in order to get back to his opponent ASAP.  The aim being to mostly minimise the direct opponent's impact rather than say, trying to minimise a little less and damage more often the other way with attacking run (such as Hibb).

Other factors, like slow starts to the season for say Lever and Melk, should also be considered in the numbers which take into account the whole season.  If you only took into account their last 5 to 6 games then their ranking would no doubt be a different matter all together.  You also can't really compare Maxy to anyone else (unless their was another genuine ruckman getting consistent games).  Key forwards should really only be compared in a more serious sense to other key forwards.  Medium defenders to other medium defenders etc.

These factors need to be taken into account obviously and are just a few examples of where stats on there own can go totally pear shaped when looked at in complete isolation and without any background knowledge / input and, most importantly, viewing of the games themselves on TV and/or live.  Obviously a thorough understanding of what roles are required / being played helps and on it goes.

 

- an in* house

- there / their *

Edit:  Cant edit after a bit ?

7 hours ago, Rusty Nails said:

-Edit:  Cant edit after a bit ?

completely understandable. we are all the same 'after a bit'

6 hours ago, daisycutter said:

completely understandable. we are all the same 'after a bit'

Lol DC.  A very 'rarebit' for me now!

Oliver has moved up to 6th  http://www.afl.com.au/stats/player-ratings/overall-standings