Age Ladder

[Demonland 73,216]

We're no longer the babies. Are we toddlers? 

AFL Age Ladder - Round 1, 2019

Club	Average Age	Rank	Average Games	Rank
Hawthorn	24.86	1	80.53	1
Collingwood	24.80	2	78.87	2
Port Adelaide	24.09	7	71.98	3
Adelaide Crows	24.76	3	71.39	4
Geelong Cats	24.34	4	71.13	5
Richmond	23.92	13	70.00	6
Sydney Swans	23.86	15	68.18	7
West Coast	24.00	9	67.82	8
North Melbourne	24.09	6	65.07	9
GWS Giants	23.94	12	61.18	10
Western Bulldogs	24.02	8	60.26	11
Fremantle	23.97	11	59.66	12
Melbourne	23.99	10	59.00	13
St Kilda	23.90	14	56.67	14
Carlton	23.55	16	56.66	15
Brisbane Lions	23.43	17	56.59	16
Essendon	24.11	5	55.38	17
Gold Coast	23.24	18	50.15	18

[Diamond_Jim 12,629]

one of those tables where averages are easily skewed. Just like total games where Lewis skews the figures for ourselves.

Median ages of players selected with weighting for games played in 2018 season would probably be a far more revealing statistic.

[DistrACTION Jackson 9,312]

Take out Lewis and Jones and suddenly we would be a similar age to Carlton (that is a scary thought for them).

We will have manyyyyy years in the finals based on our current side. Plus we can just use free agency to top up with experienced players as we need.

[Engorged Onion 10,223]

Thanks @Collar-Jazz-Knee - Mmm, as I've got sfa to do this afternoon i thought i'd alter the table - Lewis, Jones and Garlett had their ages dropped to a mid table 25.

Which drops the team to 23.64 - a comfortable 15th on the ladder.

Though personally if the gap is 24.86 (Hawthorn) to 23.24 (Gold Coast) - I'd argue it means sfa and that there are far more useful metrics as have been detailed above.

Edited November 29, 2018 by Engorged Onion

[Demon17 5,207]

59 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

one of those tables where averages are easily skewed. Just like total games where Lewis skews the figures for ourselves.

Median ages of players selected with weighting for games played in 2018 season would probably be a far more revealing statistic.

Brilliant comment.  If you take Lewis out of the team, MFC drop to last or second last in games experience.

Every team has outliers, but in Dees case this is more pertinent given Lewis was drafted only a couple of years ago at a late age.

Similar impact on av. age too.  This table then has a scary upside from the Dees for rest of comp.

[FarNorthernD 5,861]

50 minutes ago, Collar-Jazz-Knee said:

Take out Lewis and Jones and suddenly we would be a similar age to Carlton (that is a scary thought for them).

We will have manyyyyy years in the finals based on our current side. Plus we can just use free agency to top up with experienced players as we need.

And then you would have to take out Simpson (34 y.o) and Murphy from Carlton which would drop the ave age too.

Really the whole thing is a bit dumb. The difference between Essendon who are 5th on the age ladder and the Swans who are 15th is less than 3 months which is bugger all in reality. 

As Diamond Jim said the average age of players who actually played AFL for us this year with an allowance for games played would be more interesting but even then it would probably be much of a muchness 

[daisycutter 29,756]

a bit meaningless including the whole list

should be narrowed down to top 25 (maybe top 30)

[DeeSpencer 26,090]

Yeah not too interested in age rankings, the most important this is that the great majority of our best 25-30 players are between 21 and 30, played enough senior footy and after last year had at least a taste of finals.

Spargo is the only really young player who's expected to be in the side and Lewis the only clear veteran type. Jones isn't a spring chicken but he'll only be 31 next year, his challenge is more adapting to a new role than fighting off age.

[tiers 2,849]

The top eight teams for games played are the teams who have been regulars in the finals in recent years including 6 out of the last 7 flags (Footscray the exception at 11).

Experience as measured by games played as a group matters. We are 13. One more year together will see us near the top. Then we  pounce.

2020.

Go dees.

[DistrACTION Jackson 9,312]

16 hours ago, FarNorthernD said:

And then you would have to take out Simpson (34 y.o) and Murphy from Carlton which would drop the ave age too.

Really the whole thing is a bit dumb. The difference between Essendon who are 5th on the age ladder and the Swans who are 15th is less than 3 months which is bugger all in reality. 

As Diamond Jim said the average age of players who actually played AFL for us this year with an allowance for games played would be more interesting but even then it would probably be much of a muchness 

I agree. which is why it's a dumb statistic.

Probably more relevant would be to look at the age demographics of the 'best 22' players as this would better represent where the teams are at.

[ManDee 7,226]

19 hours ago, Demonland said:

We're no longer the babies. Are we toddlers? 

AFL Age Ladder - Round 1, 2019

Club	Average Age	Rank	Average Games	Rank
Hawthorn	24.86	1	80.53	1
Collingwood	24.80	2	78.87	2
Port Adelaide	24.09	7	71.98	3
Adelaide Crows	24.76	3	71.39	4
Geelong Cats	24.34	4	71.13	5
Richmond	23.92	13	70.00	6
Sydney Swans	23.86	15	68.18	7
West Coast	24.00	9	67.82	8
North Melbourne	24.09	6	65.07	9
GWS Giants	23.94	12	61.18	10
Western Bulldogs	24.02	8	60.26	11
Fremantle	23.97	11	59.66	12
Melbourne	23.99	10	59.00	13
St Kilda	23.90	14	56.67	14
Carlton	23.55	16	56.66	15
Brisbane Lions	23.43	17	56.59	16
Essendon	24.11	5	55.38	17
Gold Coast	23.24	18	50.15	18

Sorry, this is an average games ladder, it does show age but it is not in order.

[Demonland 73,216]

Just now, ManDee said:

Sorry, this is an average games ladder, it does show age but it is not in order.

Send all complaints to the Herald Sun.

[Demonland 73,216]