Great thread @fr_ap, do you happen to have a list of what was seen as the best 22 from each club? Was it Champion data's list or something your contact came up with? I'd be interested to see it expanded out to include the 4 emergencies or even the best 30 from each club. Just because I think, not only have we had injuries to our best 22 but also our depth has been non-existent. 

Regularly at Casey we've had less than 10 AFL list players, including first year players such as Jordan, Bradtke and Bedford etc. who are nowhere near making the AFL side at the moment, Even on the weekend Richmond's VFL side had something like 18 AFL listed players to our 9. 

1 hour ago, Red and Blue realist said:

Great thread @fr_ap, do you happen to have a list of what was seen as the best 22 from each club? Was it Champion data's list or something your contact came up with? I'd be interested to see it expanded out to include the 4 emergencies or even the best 30 from each club. Just because I think, not only have we had injuries to our best 22 but also our depth has been non-existent. 

Regularly at Casey we've had less than 10 AFL list players, including first year players such as Jordan, Bradtke and Bedford etc. who are nowhere near making the AFL side at the moment, Even on the weekend Richmond's VFL side had something like 18 AFL listed players to our 9. 

Yes R&B  our depth is way below par coz we hang onto serial list cloggers far too long and our player development stinks.

18 minutes ago, Kent said:

Yes R&B  our depth is way below par coz we hang onto serial list cloggers far too long and our player development stinks.

Wow, that's exactly the reason we only had 9 playing for Casey on the weekend, our inability to develop players and list cloggers. There isn't a list out there that wouldn't have a few 'cloggers' we've seen Steve Armstrong, Mitch Morton, Shoenmarkers, Townsend, Masten etc from recent times end up with premiership medals when most of their supporters would call them list cloggers. Our depth has been smashed this year with injury, so we've ended up having to play guys who might not have otherwise got a game, sometimes it works out others it doesn't. I was asking a question trying to get down to how far into our list we've had to go this year.

9 minutes ago, Red and Blue realist said:

Wow, that's exactly the reason we only had 9 playing for Casey on the weekend, our inability to develop players and list cloggers. There isn't a list out there that wouldn't have a few 'cloggers' we've seen Steve Armstrong, Mitch Morton, Shoenmarkers, Townsend, Masten etc from recent times end up with premiership medals when most of their supporters would call them list cloggers. Our depth has been smashed this year with injury, so we've ended up having to play guys who might not have otherwise got a game, sometimes it works out others it doesn't. I was asking a question trying to get down to how far into our list we've had to go this year.

Injuries are are another matter IMO all clubs get their share.This club has produced sub par drafting and particularly sub -sub par player development over many years.  Injuries certainly tested our depth and the pool was very shallow. If "they" may not have got a game then they are tending towards list clogging.

10 minutes ago, Kent said:

Injuries are are another matter IMO all clubs get their share.This club has produced sub par drafting and particularly sub -sub par player development over many years.  Injuries certainly tested our depth and the pool was very shallow. If "they" may not have got a game then they are tending towards list clogging.

The OP somewhat debunks this if you care to read it properly ... 

10 minutes ago, Kent said:

Injuries are are another matter IMO all clubs get their share.This club has produced sub par drafting and particularly sub -sub par player development over many years.  Injuries certainly tested our depth and the pool was very shallow. If "they" may not have got a game then they are tending towards list clogging.

Think you're in the wrong thread if you're coming here with all clubs get their share of injuries. Go back and read it again and you'll see we've had more than our fair share. I know a lot on here have somehow completely forgot we made a prelim last year, so clearly our drafting and development hasn't been sub-par. There's 46 players on our list and on the weekend we had a total of 31 to choose from, this includes Jordan, Bradtke, Bedford and Chandler who are yet to make an AFL debut. The cupboard is bare, and it ain't down to drafting or development.

One of the good things about this topic is that it debunks the theory of unhappy parents because their little "Johny" hasn't been given a chance. I'd suggest any player who hasn't had a chance this year is not up to it anyway.

12 hours ago, Red and Blue realist said:

Great thread @fr_ap, do you happen to have a list of what was seen as the best 22 from each club? Was it Champion data's list or something your contact came up with? I'd be interested to see it expanded out to include the 4 emergencies or even the best 30 from each club. Just because I think, not only have we had injuries to our best 22 but also our depth has been non-existent. 

Regularly at Casey we've had less than 10 AFL list players, including first year players such as Jordan, Bradtke and Bedford etc. who are nowhere near making the AFL side at the moment, Even on the weekend Richmond's VFL side had something like 18 AFL listed players to our 9. 

I'll ask the question, but I can't divulge the source because whilst it is the same data set that the club's have...they do have to pay for it (if they choose - every club pays for different levels of data as some consider it more important than others), so its not *meant* to be available to the public. 

8 minutes ago, fr_ap said:

I'll ask the question, but I can't divulge the source because whilst it is the same data set that the club's have...they do have to pay for it (if they choose - every club pays for different levels of data as some consider it more important than others), so its not *meant* to be available to the public. 

A stat i would love - and it is one that does not exist  - is the impact of missed pre season sessions on fitness levels

Great thread

These stats seem to be more on an individual level of performance/output - I'd love to see some stats related to gameplan/team play.

12 hours ago, fr_ap said:

I'll ask the question, but I can't divulge the source because whilst it is the same data set that the club's have...they do have to pay for it (if they choose - every club pays for different levels of data as some consider it more important than others), so its not *meant* to be available to the public. 

Thanks! I'd be hoping the club's go into the same level of detail as what you've got.

On 8/6/2019 at 2:37 PM, fr_ap said:

I am lucky to have a close contact with access to a lot of AFL statistics (the same data set the clubs generally have available to them ). I asked him to do some digging on the Dees' season, in particular looking for anything that would prove useful in helping us all understand where things have gone wrong this year. 

In no particular order, this is what he found:

• There's been a lot of discussion about injuries, and lately, Richmond and Collingwood fans complaining they have it the worst of all. The data says we have averaged 6.5 'best 22' players missing over the first 19 rounds of the season; in total we have missed 117 'best 22' games. 
• Richmond have averaged 5.11 (92 total), while Collingwood have averaged 3.94 (71 total). This highlights Richmond's depth as stronger than both Melbourne or Collingwood  - they've got guys like Caddy running around in the VFL while we have...JKH/Dunkley/Lockhart and Coll have Daicos/Brown etc. 
• Looking at the round by round breakdown of this - you can see that this number (# of best 22 injured) correlates strongly with form. Richmond's injuries have improved markedly since the bye and their form has peaked. Collingwood's have been unlucky with injury since the bye and they have been ordinary. Of course we've been ordinary for the whole year... 
• When you break this down by position it confirms what we know - our midfield has stayed pretty much full strength all year, but the forward and backline have had either 3.77 best 22 players missing on average (fwd line) or 2.6 best 22 players missing on average (backline). The impact on both ends of the grounds shouldn't be underestimated and suits the narrative of our year - unable to score, unable to defend inside 50s, but still ok at generating our own (pre-game plan change in the last couple of weeks). Goodwin keeps trotting out that we've had no continuity at either end of the ground - and he's right. 
• I've attached these two breakdowns to this post. 
• Don't pay much attention to sirswampthing's post highlighting that Collingwood have the most 'games played' on the injuries list. Break that out and 750 of those games are from players outside the best 22 / retiring (e.g Wells, Beams, Goldsack etc.). Misleading and clickbait for the biggest supporter base. 
• Out of players who have played at least 10 games, Frost and OMac are the two who have cost us the most scores as a % of their turnovers. Frost is ranked 12th in the league (1st = a really bad thing), conceding a score 34% of the time he turns it over, resulting in 17 shots at goal (9 goals 8 ) directly from his turnovers. Omac is ranked 15th in the league, conceding a score 33% of the time. 
• Bailey Fritsch has cost us the most amount of points from turnovers this year. His 66 turnovers for the year (ranked equal 94th in the league) have cost us 89 points directly, which is ranked 4th in the comp. We all love his skills; but his turnovers hurt us. We're better with him camped inside 50 and our increased efficiency over the last 3 weeks is in no small part due to having a natural forward like him back in the 50. 
• In order of worst to best, the top 8 players who have hurt us the most and have resulted in an overall negative score from turnovers and intercepts combined are: Fristch, Omac, Frost, Hibberd, Hore, Brayshaw, Salem, J Wagner. Other than Fritsch and Brayshaw this isnt surprising; our defenders can't kick. Salem has had more ball than any of these guys but is 7th on the list; so he is the best kick we have in the D50 (other than Jones when he plays there). 
• Conversely, the players who have generated the most scores from intercepts, while keeping their turnovers to a minimum, and to have played at least 10 games, are: Jones, Petracca, Gawn, Oliver, Viney (Surprising!), Lockhart, Hunt, Tmac, Harmes. 
• James Harmes is the only player at the Dees ranked in the top 50 (49th) for average handball receives per game, which is an indicator of outside run. For context, Richmond have 6 players in the top 50; Collingwood have 8. 
• Petracca is mostly accurate everywhere: he is 10.8 from set shots, 5.1 on the run, 4.3 from snaps, 1.0 from mark play on, 1.0 off the ground. 5.0 from <15m, 4.4 from 15-30m, 2.2 from 31-40m, 7.4 from 41-50m, 3.2 from 50m+. He's above AFL average in all these categories, with exception of 15-30m and 31-40m kicking, which is bang on AFL average. 
• Harmes is not accurate from anywhere. He has 3.3 from <15m, an awful 2.6 from 31-40m and 4.8 from 41-50m. 
• Against Richmond, 14 players had less than one tackle. This was widely discussed. However, it wasn't from lack of effort. We had more tackle attempts than Richmond, but went at 25% efficiency. Poor technique, not strong enough, lazy, mentally checked out, who knows. 
• The loss of Hogan on Tom Mac and Wiedeman should not be understated. Last year, Weideman played 3 good games - vs. West Coast in Rd 22, then Geelong in the EF and Hawks in the SF. His opponents in those games based on most % of gametime were: Brad Sheppard (HBFer, not a KPD), Lachie Henderson and David Mirra. This year, Weideman has had 3 games of 'good' output, 2 pass marks and 6 poor matches. The 3 good games he played on: Jacob Weitering, Aaron Francis, Jack Watts. Decent names but not A grade defenders by any means. The pass mark games, he played on Darcy Moore and Tom Mccartin. The poor games, he played on Harris Andrews, Griffin Logue/Joel Hamling, Alex Keath, David Astbury, Nathan Brown/Josh Battle, Mark Blicavs. Basically, when he played on good or experienced opponents, he's not much chop. 
• Now lets look at who Tom Mac towelled up last year on his way to 50 goals: Patrick Ambrose, Jack Carlisle, Rory Thompson, Sam Rowe, Myles Poholke, Jason Johannisen, Matt Scharenberg, Dougal Howard, Jackson Trengove, Josh Jenkins, Tom Barrass, Lachlan Keefe, James Frawley. This is a who's who of average defenders/mismatches save for Barrass and Frawley (dont ask about Jenkins; perhaps Tom went back that day? I can't remember). 
• This year Tom Mac has had to play on Tom Jonas, Mark Blicavs, Phil Davis, Daniel Talia and so on. The only defender he towelled up was Liam Jones. His best games were against Jones, Oscar Allen, Aliir Aliir. 
• This info is available to the coaching staff. If they haven't looked at this and realised that our two KPF hopes are not capable of playing on top line defenders and that we need a key fwd to take the heat off these guys, then you have to wonder what they are doing. 
• Oscar Mcdonald has only had one 'good' performance this year - against Nick Blakey. He has been beaten by: Josh Jenkins, Shaun McKernan, Tom Papley (mismatch), Paddy Ryder and Josh Corbett. 
• Frost has beaten: Tom Lynch (Rich, early on), Levi Casboult, Josh Bruce, Jarryd Roughead, and Jack Lukosius. Has been beaten by: Lance Franklin, Jeremy Cameron, Jack Darling, Jack Riewoldt, Eric Hipwood. 
• Angus Brayshaw played 90% of his time on ground last year in the midfield. This year, that is down to 60%. He has spent 24% of his time on the wing, 16% in the forward line. 
• Of our top 5 centre bounce attendees, Brayshaw was also our most effective centre square player we had last year across a number of measures: Clearance differential (19.4, ahead of next best Harmes 11.2), Inside 50 differential (18.8, ahead of next best Oliver/Viney both 12.5) and scoring differential (8.1, ahead of next best 6.7 Viney). Brayshaw was involved in 345 centre square clearances last year. This year he is down to 215.  
• Forgetting the top 5 attendees for a moment, our best centre bounce player by a huge margin is....Jake Melksham. His clearance differential is 31.4, next best is Petracca (16.7), then Jones, and then to Brayshaw and the rest of the regular crew. Of course, Melkham's data is perhaps limited by sample size. Melksham ranks 17th in our side for actual centre bounce attendances, whilst Petracca ranks 10th. The two are our most effective centre bounce players. Brayshaw is one of our best; but he is being played out of position.

 

There are of course weaknesses in all of these statistics - they never tell the full story, there are subjective categorisations applied to 'good/pass mark/bad' and 'best 22' - but I found some of the above quite interesting. 

For me, what stands out is that the FD thought Tom Mac & Weid were ready to replace Hogan's output, but the warning signs were there if they were to look at the data. We miss his ability to draw the best defender, his presence all around the ground, and his general offensive skillset. No use crying about it now; but given this data is available to the club I find it disappointing they sat on their hands and thought the forward line was sorted even with his departure. 

Discuss!

 

Gold

On 8/8/2019 at 11:08 AM, loges said:

One of the good things about this topic is that it debunks the theory of unhappy parents because their little "Johny" hasn't been given a chance. I'd suggest any player who hasn't had a chance this year is not up to it anyway.

Bedford, Bradley, Jordan, Neitschke, Walker ???

In years gone past the club was criticized, probably quite rightly, for rushing newly listed players, so perhaps you may be over generalizing.  

Edited September 12, 20195 yr by monoccular