Jump to content

Featured Replies

3 hours ago, dimmy said:

Thanks for the explanation and well done on coming up with a credible rating system.

A long long way from some pot shots at players that appear somtimes.

Cheers Dimmy.  I wish we were talking about a mostly good news year.  Seen so many ugly ones and the negativity does grate at times.

There's been a few positives from particular players this season but as a team performance what a massive fall it's been off the high of last year.  And let's not go near the poor result up forward.

Hopefully the review changes and the break will see a few more wins.  Rooke out for Rawlings might be the circuit breaker needed to finally see some results up forward for all the good work being done elsewhere (outside of too many ordinary entries).

I personally feel Goody will also need to decouple himself from a few rusted on 'out of form' & NQR players (and bring in the likes of Pruess & Lockhart), add a tempo / slow play possession option and a pretty big clean out at year's end for us to have a realistic chance of playing finals in 2020 and beyond.

Edited by Rusty Nails

 

.

Edited by Rusty Nails

Player / Team Stats - Weighted Composite Score

Rnd 14, 2019  - Demons vs Dockers (MCG)

image.png.410cae9aabb0bb20c8a8775b74885752.png

# Hit outs to advantage not accounted for

 

Player / Team Stats Form Guide

To Rnd 14, 2019 vs Season 2018

image.thumb.png.5c77d3a3399d8e23c4be79f498f5942d.png

 

 

Edited by Rusty Nails

Round 15, 2019  Lions vs Demons (GABBA)

Pure Stats Predictor has the Lions winning by 14 points

Team weighted score from last round (including adjustment for Ins/Outs this round)

Lions  62.33     Demons  56.18

Top 6 ranked players (composite weighted averages) last round

                          Lions                                            Demons

image.png.cde3a4f8ad78c321e2721ab73464d811.pngimage.png.9fc1f62eafd412f903322111799d2077.png

                                            Bottom 6

image.png.cfc50b04fa88a2b40a2e26e5c341412a.pngimage.png.64cc9956de2fbc740cfa29228ccf0732.png

* Omitted for this round


Player / Team Stats - Weighted Composite Score

Rnd 15, 2019  - Lions vs Demons (GABBA)

image.png.8fe329cf65b6c78852616aef87dd73a4.png

# Hit outs to advantage not accounted for

Smith's zero is the lowest statistical score by an MFC player all season.  The only worse weighted score by an MFC player since keeping this method from 2018 was Joel Smith with a negative -0.3000 back in Rnd 19, 2018 vs the Crows.

3 effective disposals @ 37.5% efficiency.  1 uncontested mark inside 50, 1 inside 50, 1 tackle, 3 score involvements, 96 meters gained, no goals and 4 turnovers.

Edited by Rusty Nails

Player / Team Stats Form Guide

To Rnd 15, 2019 vs Season 2018

image.thumb.png.b4866deddb162379243ba04340e7a4b8.png

Player / Team Stats - Weighted Composite Score

Rnd 16, 2019  - Blues vs Demons (MCG)

image.png.783bbec7aee5bb0ea81689a758492a1b.png

# Hit outs to advantage not accounted for

Note:  Hore, Petty and T-Mac only 10%, 57% & 67% game time respectively.  Our second highest team weighted score for the season, only bettered in Rnd 11 vs the Crows (67.275).

 

Edited by Rusty Nails

 
10 hours ago, Rusty Nails said:

Player / Team Stats - Weighted Composite Score

Rnd 16, 2019  - Blues vs Demons (MCG)

image.png.783bbec7aee5bb0ea81689a758492a1b.png

# Hit outs to advantage not accounted for

Note:  Hore, Petty and T-Mac only 10%, 57% & 67% game time respectively.  Our second highest team weighted score for the season, only bettered in Rnd 11 vs the Crows (67.275).

 

Thanks Rusty for doing all this 

It gives me some idea of an evidence based assessment

I try to review  the players and teams totals with my visual assessment in comparison and it seems to  fairly accurately correlate

15 hours ago, Kent said:

Thanks Rusty for doing all this 

It gives me some idea of an evidence based assessment

I try to review  the players and teams totals with my visual assessment in comparison and it seems to  fairly accurately correlate

Cheers Kent.

The interesting one for me on the weekend was Harmes at No.2

Personally i didn't think he impacted the game anywhere near to that level but were the stats lying or was it my eyesight?  He might have done it fairly cleanly, quietly and efficiently?   maybe i was seeing a lack of defensive two way work and lack of pressure when we didn't have it...only 2 tackles?

22 effectives running @ 81.50% DE.  Way above AFL average (approx 73%).  10 Score involvements (only 2nd behind T-Mac with 11!), 5 interceptions, 353 meters gained and a goal.  I guess he must have done some things right!  Might need a new set of specs or maybe i should watch the replay :huh:

Edited by Rusty Nails


Player / Team Stats Form Guide

To Rnd 16, 2019 vs Season 2018

image.thumb.png.eb85937acfec49718dcf6c23262dddd3.png

Note:  Did not include Hore's weighted stats score from Rnd 16 in his season score given he only played 10% of the match prior to breaking his collarbone.

The most improved this season so far is Frosty up 17 places and 21% higher than his 2018 season output.  That's a pretty massive gain in anyone's language.

Just as massive but in the opposite direction, Spargo, down 45% on his 2018 season.  The biggest drop in ranking is still Tommy, down a massive 14 places but gaining two places on last week after his best game for the season against the Blues.  Of course we then see him catch the dreaded curse and he's out till 2020.  Can't catch a break this year.

Edited by Rusty Nails

Player / Team Stats Form Guide

Rnds 13 to 16 (includes the bye), 2019  vs  Season 2018

image.png.3d4460dc820756cef29c83865e57eea7.png

A small sample size but some sort of indicator of form from the last block of three matches.

Ignore Petty's amazing percentage as there was only one match last season so no averages to work off and we only have one match from Lewis so that's a potential outlier as well, albeit quite a one off result from the old fella.  Jones boy almost back to his 2018 form and Viney has improved substantially vs pre-buy form.  He was off anything from approx 21% up to 45% vs 2018 for most of this season prior to this block.

Frostmeister the stand out, he's gone balastic and launched into a top 10 ranking!  A few injuries impacting in here including Big M and possibly Bull Smith in his last match.  Tommy getting back to his 2018 best then of course...out grrr.

The biggest worries Gus, Fritschkreig, the Hibb & Weid.  A fair way off 2018 in this block.

Interesting to note we roughly halved the 15% plus gap in our team score for most of the season vs the 2018 season average score, although it was better in the 3 match block just before the buy, only off by about 7% so we have actually regressed a tad since the buy.

Edited by Rusty Nails

https://www.statsinsider.com.au/afl/shot-charting

Given all the talk about our accuracy I thought this might interest some. Thanks to the ever wonderful place that is the internet. People have been compiling a shot chat since the start of 2018. For those interested in seeing who is shooting and from where.

Here's a few of interest (Marty's is my favourite)

Screenshot_20190711-084150.thumb.png.0651da69efacfc22b25bae0bec3248ef.png

Screenshot_20190711-084128.thumb.png.acd4a39739fac36a5acc2a3f3345bb9c.pngScreenshot_20190711-084215.thumb.png.13e9f63192396799410df6089533ca4b.png

Pretty cool @ArtificialWisdom. One could spend a fair bit of time scrolling through all the data. That’s as thorough as it gets. Hogan isn’t too bad from the 50+ range.

Player / Team Stats - Weighted Composite Score

Rnd 17, 2019  - Dogs vs Demons (Marvel)

image.png.f3f9b6d272ff8647cb9196bdaa76702e.png

# Hit outs to advantage not accounted for

Our 2nd worst team score for the season with the only match bettering this one, Rnd 6 vs the Tigers.  Jetta coming in severely under done.  Hannan completely out of form and more than likely a match fitness / zero tank issue, in serious need of a spell at Casey.  Clarry's 2nd lowest score for the season also.  His lowest against the Giants in Rnd 10.  Usually easily in the top 3 to 5 every week however so no shame in having the off week, especially for such a young fella in a bog ordinary season.  Will bounce back next week no doubt.

Scores from the top 6 and bottom 6 (in particular) both pretty abysmal also.

On a positive note this was Viney's best result / output for the season by a fair way, his previous best score 4.200 against the Saints in Rnd 5.  It was also his first time at the No.1 ranking for the season.

Edited by Rusty Nails


Player / Team Stats Form Guide

To Rnd 17, 2019 vs Season 2018

image.thumb.png.e85d04e75f12bdb8a820c221c7487a85.png

All that Red!  Frostmeister, Hunt, Harmes, Salem & Big M the lone beacons in a season to forget!  Maxy i'm including in there as if we were to add a "hit outs to advantage"factor i would estimate his score about 20% higher than his present score (or more), places him in about 3rd position on this scale overall.

Edited by Rusty Nails

15 minutes ago, Rusty Nails said:

Player / Team Stats Form Guide

To Rnd 17, 2019 vs Season 2018

image.thumb.png.e85d04e75f12bdb8a820c221c7487a85.png

All that Red!  Frostmeister, Hunt, Harmes & Salem the lone beacons in a season to forget!

It seems Billy Stretch doesn't exist for you as well as the coach.

9 hours ago, dpositive said:

It seems Billy Stretch doesn't exist for you as well as the coach.

After watching Billy pretty carefully in some of his games DP i've found he isn't willing to pull the trigger much, tends to take the easy lateral or backward short options on disposal and pretty ordinary in front of the sticks when he gets the opp also.  In addition he is yet another poor exponent of overhead/contested marking IMO and we already have enough of those.  Rarely if ever marks inside 50 also although maybe he doesn't go inside all that often.  I would be surprised if that is the case though.

A non-impact but clean (low risk) player who refuses to take the game on and utilise the bit of speed he has.  Works hard to get into space for the easy receive with the leg work but that's about where it ends for mine.

If we are to improve as a club and get anywhere near silverware in our life times i really don't think there's a place for the likes of a B.S. other than as a depth option who mostly playes (quite well) for Casey with the occasional call up when our stocks are very low.

Edited by Rusty Nails

On 7/18/2019 at 8:28 AM, Rusty Nails said:

After watching Billy pretty carefully in some of his games DP i've found he isn't willing to pull the trigger much, tends to take the easy lateral or backward short options on disposal and pretty ordinary in front of the sticks when he gets the opp also.  In addition he is yet another poor exponent of overhead/contested marking IMO and we already have enough of those.  Rarely if ever marks inside 50 also although maybe he doesn't go inside all that often.  I would be surprised if that is the case though.

A non-impact but clean (low risk) player who refuses to take the game on and utilise the bit of speed he has.  Works hard to get into space for the easy receive with the leg work but that's about where it ends for mine.

If we are to improve as a club and get anywhere near silverware in our life times i really don't think there's a place for the likes of a B.S. other than as a depth option who mostly playes (quite well) for Casey with the occasional call up when our stocks are very low.

Thanks Rusty.

id agree from the few occasions I've seen him, I noted he was too hesitant. I put this down to him not adjusting to pace of the game from not enough exposure. I was impressed that he got into space although not always rewarded for that, again saw that as a positive. Haven't noticed the lack of inside50 marking, but could be a consequence of being ignored when in space while we bomb it in to packs.

Not all players are or need to be chaos type players. Yes could be a could depth option but I would be hesitant if not played regularly enough in the ones.

Do you know where he trains? Is it with Casey or the ones?

I have stated before that training may need to concentrate on greater intensity to match the game day situation. Perhaps desperation for a place in the ones may produce that intensity and make instinctive the confidence to take on the game and take better options.


3 hours ago, dpositive said:

Thanks Rusty.

id agree from the few occasions I've seen him, I noted he was too hesitant. I put this down to him not adjusting to pace of the game from not enough exposure. I was impressed that he got into space although not always rewarded for that, again saw that as a positive. Haven't noticed the lack of inside50 marking, but could be a consequence of being ignored when in space while we bomb it in to packs.

Not all players are or need to be chaos type players. Yes could be a could depth option but I would be hesitant if not played regularly enough in the ones.

Do you know where he trains? Is it with Casey or the ones?

I have stated before that training may need to concentrate on greater intensity to match the game day situation. Perhaps desperation for a place in the ones may produce that intensity and make instinctive the confidence to take on the game and take better options.

Only guessing but i assume it would be with Casey when not a regular upstairs DP.

I would be very surprised if that intensity isn't in our training already.

At the end of the day you can train the house down all you like DP,  taking it to another level on game day really comes from within IMHO.

I sometimes wonder how badly some of the fringe players really want it at times.  Probably why they are fringe in many cases.

6 hours ago, Rusty Nails said:

Only guessing but i assume it would be with Casey when not a regular upstairs DP.

I would be very surprised if that intensity isn't in our training already.

At the end of the day you can train the house down all you like DP,  taking it to another level on game day really comes from within IMHO.

I sometimes wonder how badly some of the fringe players really want it at times.  Probably why they are fringe in many cases.

Yeah agree but do not think fringe players want to be fringe players. There arè so many aspects which impact but communication is the most important.

21 hours ago, dpositive said:

Yeah agree but do not think fringe players want to be fringe players. There arè so many aspects which impact but communication is the most important.

Not saying they want to be fringe DP just saying i'm not sure the desire to take it to another level is there with some.  Communication yes....motivation as well.

 

Player / Team Stats - Weighted Composite Score

Rnd 18, 2019  - Demons vs Eagles (TIO)

image.png.80afa30c1ff2d92cac4abf1098c81754.png

# Hit outs to advantage not accounted for

A big step up from last week's super ordinary effort but still couldn't get the chocolates.  Fritschkreig's best match for the year and of course we all know why.  The other usual culprits up top.....Clarry, Salem, Harmes & Big M.

 

Player / Team Stats Form Guide

To Rnd 18, 2019 vs Season 2018

image.thumb.png.13d6c3a23a27ec891488cb685b48d540.png

The biggest improvement ....Fritschkreig...closing the gap on his 2018 form differential by nearly 5% and jumping one place into 9th.

Clarry, Harmes, Gawn (who i would roughly have in 3rd place, or thereabouts, if hit outs to advantage were included) and Salem all improved.  Quite a feet given they were already heading the table.

The biggest drop was the Big P.....dropping a massive 13.7% and 9 places!

We improved our season's team score marginally by approx 0.8% vs 2018.  Not withstanding the fact we still managed to lose both matches, this round was our 2nd best performance statistically (64.925), only beaten by our Rnd 11 performance vs the Crows (67.275).

Edited by Rusty Nails


Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

Featured Content

  • GAMEDAY: Collingwood

    It's Game Day and the Demons face a monumental task as they take on the top-of-the-table Magpies in one of the biggest games on the Dees calendar: the King's Birthday Big Freeze MND match. Can the Demons defy the odds and claim a massive scalp to keep their finals hopes alive?

      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 108 replies
  • CASEY: Collingwood

    It was freezing cold at Mission Whitten Stadium where only the brave came out in the rain to watch a game that turned out to be as miserable as the weather.
    The Casey Demons secured their third consecutive victory, earning the four premiership points and credit for defeating a highly regarded Collingwood side, but achieved little else. Apart perhaps from setting the scene for Monday’s big game at the MCG and the Ice Challenge that precedes it.
    Neither team showcased significant skill in the bleak and greasy conditions, at a location that was far from either’s home territory. Even the field umpires forgot where they were and experienced a challenging evening, but no further comment is necessary.

      • Thanks
    • 4 replies
  • NON-MFC: Round 13

    Follow all the action from every Round 13 clash excluding the Dees as the 2025 AFL Premiership Season rolls on. With Melbourne playing in the final match of the round on King's Birthday, all eyes turn to the rest of the competition. Who are you tipping to win? And more importantly, which results best serve the Demons’ finals aspirations? Join the discussion and keep track of the matches that could shape the ladder and impact our run to September.

      • Thanks
    • 216 replies
  • PREVIEW: Collingwood

    Having convincingly defeated last year’s premier and decisively outplayed the runner-up with 8.2 in the final quarter, nothing epitomized the Melbourne Football Club’s performance more than its 1.12 final half, particularly the eight consecutive behinds in the last term, against a struggling St Kilda team in the midst of a dismal losing streak. Just when stability and consistency were anticipated within the Demon ranks, they delivered a quintessential performance marked by instability and ill-conceived decisions, with the most striking aspect being their inaccuracy in kicking for goal, which suggested a lack of preparation (instead of sleeping in their hotel in Alice, were they having a night on the turps) rather than a well-rested team. Let’s face it - this kicking disease that makes them look like raw amateurs is becoming a millstone around the team’s neck.

      • Thanks
    • 1 reply
  • CASEY: Sydney

    The Casey Demons were always expected to emerge victorious in their matchup against the lowly-ranked Sydney Swans at picturesque Tramway Oval, situated in the shadows of the SCG in Moore Park. They dominated the proceedings in the opening two and a half quarters of the game but had little to show for it. This was primarily due to their own sloppy errors in a low-standard game that produced a number of crowded mauls reminiscent of the rugby game popular in old Sydney Town. However, when the Swans tired, as teams often do when they turn games into ugly defensive contests, Casey lifted the standard of its own play and … it was off to the races. Not to nearby Randwick but to a different race with an objective of piling on goal after goal on the way to a mammoth victory. At the 25-minute mark of the third quarter, the Demons held a slender 14-point lead over the Swans, who are ahead on the ladder of only the previous week's opposition, the ailing Bullants. Forty minutes later, they had more than fully compensated for the sloppiness of their earlier play with a decisive 94-point victory, that culminated in a rousing finish which yielded thirteen unanswered goals. Kicks hit their targets, the ball found itself going through the middle and every player made a contribution.

      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 1 reply
  • REPORT: St. Kilda

    Hands up if you thought, like me, at half-time in yesterday’s game at TIO Traeger Park, Alice Springs that Melbourne’s disposal around the ground and, in particular, its kicking inaccuracy in front of the goals couldn’t get any worse. Well, it did. And what’s even more damning for the Melbourne Football Club is that the game against St Kilda and its resurgence from the bottomless pit of its miserable start to the season wasn’t just lost through poor conversion for goal but rather in the 15 minutes when the entire team went into a slumber and was mugged by the out-of-form Saints. Their six goals two behinds (one goal less than the Demons managed for the whole game) weaved a path of destruction from which they were unable to recover. Ross Lyon’s astute use of pressure to contain the situation once they had asserted their grip on the game, and Melbourne’s self-destructive wastefulness, assured that outcome. The old adage about the insanity of repeatedly doing something and expecting a different result, was out there. Two years ago, the score line in Melbourne’s loss to the Giants at this same ground was 5 goals 15 behinds - a ratio of one goal per four scoring shots - was perfectly replicated with yesterday’s 7 goals 21 behinds. 
    This has been going on for a while and opens up a number of questions. I’ll put forward a few that come to mind from this performance. The obvious first question is whether the club can find a suitable coach to instruct players on proper kicking techniques or is this a skill that can no longer be developed at this stage of the development of our playing group? Another concern is the team's ability to counter an opponent's dominance during a run on as exemplified by the Saints in the first quarter. Did the Demons underestimate their opponents, considering St Kilda's goals during this period were scored by relatively unknown forwards? Furthermore, given the modest attendance of 6,721 at TIO Traeger Park and the team's poor past performances at this venue, is it prudent to prioritize financial gain over potentially sacrificing valuable premiership points by relinquishing home ground advantage, notwithstanding the cultural significance of the team's connection to the Red Centre? 

      • Thanks
    • 4 replies