Fantasy Points tell a story

[buck_nekkid 5,857]

On AFL.com, they are dissecting ‘fantasy’ markets for each team.  Personally, I’m not into all of that fantasy stuff, but the article mentioned that apart from our top 3 (who are league leaders), the rest drop away fast in terms of fantasy points performances.  We apparently have the same number of players who average rank under 75 (whatever that means) as North Melbourne.

This tells me that there is significant upside for our ‘next tier’ players to consistently play to a higher standard.  If fantasy points mean anything (and they don’t, really do they?), it shows we too often leave it to too few to do too much.

How do others interpret this?

[whatwhat say what 22,742]

means nothing; afl fantasy points is all about accumulation of stats through possessions; supercoach measures effectiveness of usage at least, as it uses champion data ranking points

gawn is the #1 average scoring player in both games from memory, oliver and trac are right up there in top 10 

but again it means little - richmond for instance has barely any player who averages 100+ points (neck tatts) and only another three who average 90+ ppg, whereas we have the top 3 who average 117+ ppg each, then viney, may, langdon also at 90+

it's not how how possessions you get but how you make em count

[640MD 3,375]

I think I agree,   all this stuff means nothing, unless the accumulation of points influences the way a plyer uses the ball.

However they are or could be interpreted as an idea of how other "football brains" see our list and players ability.

 

Rather than the biased red eye or blue eyes that all on here have, some to a lesser extent and others the other way.

 

Now I am only reading this before doing some work on this laptop,  some of the readers with a bit more time might be able to determine where we sit. "in other peoples views",  I would be interested to know where we sit but too lazy to go into Fantasy or Supercoach  other than a basic look.  But its probably a good tool  for some.  I will look this up later.

[adonski 12,058]

Richmond are a poor fantasy side (not sure about the Supercoach equivalent) 

[Lord Travis 10,728]

Supercoach/Fantasy stuff in itself it means nothing, but it’s a reflection of players output dropping. Guys like Harmes were averaging say 95 in 2018 and now average 75. They’ve had a 20-25% drop in performance and the fantasy points reflect that.

Our experienced middle tier is far better than they’re showing. Players like Harmes, Salem, Brayshaw should all perform better this year and catapult us back into the top 8 easily.

Edited January 14, 2021 by Lord Travis

[DistrACTION Jackson 8,720]

I think SC is a better judge on a players output that Fantasy.

[darkhorse72 1,916]

6 hours ago, Action Jackson said:

I think SC is a better judge on a players output that Fantasy.

Yeah they have a efficiency algorithm, not just dispels count.

But in terms of real world impact very slim connection.

 

[DistrACTION Jackson 8,720]

On 1/15/2021 at 5:29 PM, Darkhorse72 said:

Yeah they have a efficiency algorithm, not just dispels count.

But in terms of real world impact very slim connection.

 

Agreed. The sports world is now so heavily influenced by statistics, it does become a bit tiring.

I've watched games and thought a player was really influential and had a great game and then their SC score is just mediocre.