Stats Files - 2023

[binman 43,003]

1 hour ago, deanox said:

I really think "team pressure" is a weird stat that is named wrong.

The pressure score is not the total amount of pressure applied, but it is the average type of pressure when pressure is applied.

So every pressure act gets a score of 3.75, 2.25, 1.5, 1.2. All pressure acts are averaged. And then multiplied by 100 to give the pressure score.

So 180 means that the average score was 1.8, somewhere between closing and chasing.

I don't believe that "no pressure situations" count as 0 or similar. So the score will always be between 120 and 375.

 

Basically the "team pressure" stat is situational. For example, there are times when corralling is better than commiting to a tackle because it slows the player down and forces them to kick down the line. 

If an opposition plays tight in close we can get lots of tackles and our "team pressure" goes up. If they play wide and uncontested, we are more likely to coral and chase and our "team pressure" goes down 

So "team pressure" is more about game style and game situation. "Team pressure" is a measure of "is the average pressure situation more physical or less?". Not a measure of how much and how often pressure is applied.

 

I do think that "total pressure acts" and "sum of individual player pressure points" gives a better measure of pressure as a function of work rate for the game. But also, if the number of those acts are up versus average, then we probably don't have the ball.

 

 

I agree deanox.

The term pressure is a bit misleading because it means different things to different people as it relates to a game of football.

Few would think of corralling as applying pressure for example.

It is actually called the Pressure factor, I assume to pick up your point deanox. I should start calling it that.

I'm not sure if you are right that the score will always be between 120 and 375 as i think there are scenarios where no player is corralling, closing or chasing. 

But even if that's not the case there  is a big difference between points for closing (2.25) and corralling (1.2) and chasing (1.5).

Closing is a 'higher degree of pressure than corralling, where the pressure player is on the verge of making contact with the ball carrier' and 'the pressure player is forcing the ball carrier to dispose of it immediately'.

So chasing that bit harder, closing space harder, turning a corall into forcing the ball carrier to get rid of it.

That is work rate.

So, in some some ways it is a better measure of work rate than pressure.

For example if players aren't gut running when chasing then it shows up on the pressure factor because that player only gets 1.5 points rather than 2.5 if they got close enough to force a rushed disposal.

In the first quarter their pressure factor was higher, one because they won more contested balls (presumably some of those wins involved 'direct physical contact to a player in the act of disposing of the ball' and so get 3.75 points) and two because I suspect they turned more chases into closing acts.

Which I think partly explains some of our poor entries where we kicked to the defender's advantage and some of their clean entries.

I also suspect not having Gus was a factor because that sort of work - closing, corralling, chasing and tackling is his one wood and he had the fitness to do it.

Laurie only was only 50% time on ground and never did any midfield rotations. His pressure points weren't too bad actually, having the 9th most pressure acts (well ahead of of many senior players like langers, hunger, salo and hibbo).

But Gus averages over 35 pressure points a game and has been incredible for pressure in the last month. For example, against the swans he he had the fourth most pressure acts and 48 pressure points (and has been top 5 for weeks).

Apart from the psychological impact on the team of gus going down, we lost his run, ability to put pressure on the ball carrier and his defensive nous.

And as the game wore on, we also lost tracc as a forward option because he covered  Gus.

By the by, on that latter point, I'm surprised goody didn't put Laurie on ball and put tracc forward at some point. Laurie played as a mid at Casey, so why not?

Edited September 10, 2023 by binman

[binman 43,003]

1 hour ago, titan_uranus said:

It’s not the pressure that gets me, it’s the contest in the first quarter. 

Our “one wood”, as they say. 

We were -9 in CPs in the first quarter. 

Our worst quarter for CPs since the second quarter in Round 8 vs Gold Coast.

That cannot happen again this week.

Minus 10 i think - or at least that was what was on the board they show the players at quarter time.

And 100% agree it can't happen again.

I think this is where we lost the game actually. 

I'm convinced Gus going down was factor in this - the players were in shock. 

Edited September 11, 2023 by binman

[binman 43,003]

@WheeloRatings what estimated player ratings mean?

I had assumed it is their season average, but estimated implies something different. 

[Adam The God 30,261]

1 hour ago, titan_uranus said:

It’s not the pressure that gets me, it’s the contest in the first quarter. 

Our “one wood”, as they say. 

We were -9 in CPs in the first quarter. 

Our worst quarter for CPs since the second quarter in Round 8 vs Gold Coast.

That cannot happen again this week.

Agreed. It can't happen again this year if we want to win anything.

Six weeks in a row we've lost 5 of 6 first quarters and the one win we did have was against a wayward Sydney.

We need to come out with intent, hardness and aggression. Put goals on the board early and everything else will flow from there.

[deanox 9,928]

1 hour ago, binman said:

I agree deanox.

The term pressure is a bit misleading because it means different things to different people as it relates to a game of football.

Few would think of corralling as applying pressure for example.

It is actually called the Pressure factor, I assume to pick up your point deanox. I should start calling it that.

I'm not sure if you are right that the score will always be between 120 and 375 as i think there are scenarios where no player is corralling, closing or chasing. 

But even if that's not the case there  is a big difference between points for closing (2.25) and corralling (1.2) and chasing (1.5).

Closing is a 'higher degree of pressure than corralling, where the pressure player is on the verge of making contact with the ball carrier' and 'the pressure player is forcing the ball carrier to dispose of it immediately'.

So chasing that bit harder, closing space harder, turning a corall into forcing the ball carrier to get rid of it.

That is work rate.

So, in some some ways it is a better measure of work rate than pressure.

For example if players aren't gut running when chasing then it shows up on the pressure factor because that player only gets 1.5 points rather than 2.5 if they got close enough to force a rushed disposal.

In the first quarter their pressure factor was higher, one because they won more contested balls (presumably some of those wins involved 'direct physical contact to a player in the act of disposing of the ball' and so get 3.75 points) and two because I suspect they turned more chases into closing acts.

...

I am pretty sure "Pressure Factor" (the whole team one) is the average of all pressure acts. The lowest pressure act you can do is corralling, so that's why 120 is the lowest possible score.

It seems sensible that if a player has the ball in space with no pressure act applied by an opponent, that doesn't contribute a 0 to the calculation. The team factor would only average the actual recorded pressure acts.

 

If one team plays lots of "contested football" e.g. short chipping to free players, there are no relevant pressure acts during that period. Maybe there is a bit of low pressure acts with some chasing etc before hitting up a lead. But if the ball hits the deck and there is a tackle, then pressure factor is super high, because this game style means there are less opportunities for pressure acts, but they are high value in the points system.

 

We play a scrappy game with lots of contested ball winning, ground ball gets etc. So our opponents pressure will naturally trend upwward because the game is played in tight and there is more physical pressure.

I think this is why the Pressure Factor for both teams tend to track closely: Pressure Factor is more an indicator of game style than actual pressure.

 

[deanox 9,928]

Here is some info:

https://www.championdata.com/glossary/afl/ (check under P)

 

Pressure Factor: Pressure points per pressure chance. Measure only at the team level.

Pressure Chances: The number of opportunities a team had to apply pressure i.e. opposition disposals, including tackles that prevent an opposition disposal.

 

The description seems pretty cloudy, but best interpretation is:

Total pressure points / opposition possessions

Where possessions include every time an opponent gets the ball, whether they dispose of it or not.

 

This implies that if no pressure is applied at all, then potentially it is factored as 0. But the definition of corralling is so lenient that I think someone would always be corralling. I wonder if standing on the mark is corralling for the purpose of this calculation?

Pressure Act (Corralling): The lowest form of pressure a player can apply, where they are simply occupying space in front of the ball carrier to prevent them moving forward, or have a run at them, but not quickly enough to record ‘closing’ pressure.

 

 

[binman 43,003]

18 minutes ago, deanox said:

I think this is why the Pressure Factor for both teams tend to track closely: Pressure Factor is more an indicator of game style than actual pressure.

 

The bolded bit is true.

Partly agree with the non bolded bit, but the pressure factor def gives a sense of how much pressure is applied.

I don't think we closed down space enough and i think a big reason was losing Gus, which robbed us of:

• one of our key pressure players with the gut running he does to apply pressure
• midfield rotations - which impacted our all team defence and ability to cover space and close down space

Together those impacts show up on the pressure factor numbers.

They discuss the pressure rating and how they are defined etc in this ESPN footy podcast episode:

 

Edited September 11, 2023 by binman

[layzie 33,814]

1 hour ago, Binmans PA said:

Agreed. It can't happen again this year if we want to win anything.

Six weeks in a row we've lost 5 of 6 first quarters and the one win we did have was against a wayward Sydney.

We need to come out with intent, hardness and aggression. Put goals on the board early and everything else will flow from there.

It felt like 5 mins before we had an I50. I can't cop that, you need to be at least level in the first quarter of finals footy to have a shot. I also feel this is where the game was likely lost and we spent the whole game chasing it. 

-10 CP to start a game is alarming and even if by design is just handing momentum and psychological advantage on a silver platter, especially when it was pelting down with rain minutes before. 

We need to be physical and want it, if a team that isn't strong in this area did what they did then one that is like Carlton will put us to the sword if we allow that to happen again. 

[Adam The God 30,261]

8 minutes ago, layzie said:

It felt like 5 mins before we had an I50. I can't cop that, you need to be at least level in the first quarter of finals footy to have a shot. I also feel this is where the game was likely lost and we spent the whole game chasing it. 

-10 CP to start a game is alarming and even if by design is just handing momentum and psychological advantage on a silver platter, especially when it was pelting down with rain minutes before. 

We need to be physical and want it, if a team that isn't strong in this area did what they did then one that is like Carlton will put us to the sword if we allow that to happen again. 

Agreed. Our midfield hasn't been good enough in first quarters the last 6 weeks. Ir all starts there.

[Demon Dynasty 17,109]

3 hours ago, dazzledavey36 said:

First time stumbling upon this thread in a while and I have to read this..

How depressing 

Bad timing Dazzle ... hopefully Sunday/Monday will be a bit more up beat

[WheeloRatings 1,163]

3 hours ago, binman said:

@WheeloRatings what estimated player ratings mean?

I had assumed it is their season average, but estimated implies something different. 

It's the player's predicted rating, which is probably clearer than "estimated" so I could rename it! The predicted rating for a player is a weighted average of the player's player rating in previous matches (maximum of last 75 matches, and maximum of last four seasons) weighted towards more recent matches and more recent seasons. A match 75 matches ago or four seasons ago will not contribute much to the predicted rating - it is weighted much more towards matches in the current season.

I'd say the main issue with it is how I deal with subs (players previously subbed off or subbed on, thereby reducing game time, and the named sub in the current game who would be expected to have a lower player rating). I do take into account time on ground in the weighting of past matches, but I could probably improve the way I do it.

[binman 43,003]

54 minutes ago, WheeloRatings said:

It's the player's predicted rating, which is probably clearer than "estimated" so I could rename it! The predicted rating for a player is a weighted average of the player's player rating in previous matches (maximum of last 75 matches, and maximum of last four seasons) weighted towards more recent matches and more recent seasons. A match 75 matches ago or four seasons ago will not contribute much to the predicted rating - it is weighted much more towards matches in the current season.

I'd say the main issue with it is how I deal with subs (players previously subbed off or subbed on, thereby reducing game time, and the named sub in the current game who would be expected to have a lower player rating). I do take into account time on ground in the weighting of past matches, but I could probably improve the way I do it.

Ta. That makes sense. Isn't a million miles away from their average rating so i've been using it in the right way. Sort of.

Geez we had lot of players not meeting their predicted rating. 

Another question @WheeloRatings

In the tables with for and against, (eg points from defensive half) does the SEASON column for our opponent  refer to their season average or the average we concede for that stat

So for example, the match column has the Pies scoring 26 points from their defensive half. The season column has 26 points - is that what the Pies average from the back half or what we concede on average against all teams from the back half? 

[Wrecker46 2,985]

How does JJ normally score on pressure ratings? Would he be comparable to Brayshaw or do we lose alot there if he is the replacement

[WheeloRatings 1,163]

40 minutes ago, binman said:

Ta. That makes sense. Isn't a million miles away from their average rating so i've been using it in the right way. Sort of.

Geez we had lot of players not meeting their predicted rating. 

Another question @WheeloRatings

In the tables with for and against, (eg points from defensive half) does the SEASON column for our opponent  refer to their season average or the average we concede for that stat

So for example, the match column has the Pies scoring 26 points from their defensive half. The season column has 26 points - is that what the Pies average from the back half or what we concede on average against all teams from the back half? 

It's the points we concede on average. I did include a note under the chain start region subheading to that effect but it may not be clear enough.

[binman 43,003]

5 minutes ago, WheeloRatings said:

It's the points we concede on average. I did include a note under the chain start region subheading to that effect but it may not be clear enough.

Ta. No perfectly clear.

I just didn't read it!

So. for example, against all teams we concede on average 41 points from turnover. But in this game we conceded only 40 points

[WheeloRatings 1,163]

3 hours ago, Wrecker46 said:

How does JJ normally score on pressure ratings? Would he be comparable to Brayshaw or do we lose alot there if he is the replacement

Interestingly, when you account for the difference in game time for Brayshaw and Jordon, their average pressure points per 100% game time is very similar.

Player	M	TOG	Pressure Acts	Per 100% TOG	Pressure Points	Per 100% TOG	Highest Pressure
Clayton Oliver	14	83.5	26.6	31.9	59.8	71.7	106
James Harmes	9	52.7	17.8	33.8	37.6	71.3	82
Jack Viney	23	78.8	24.0	30.5	55.5	70.5	98
Alex Neal-Bullen	24	76.7	20.9	27.2	45.8	59.7	64
Tom Sparrow	22	73.9	20.2	27.4	43.6	59.0	71
Christian Petracca	24	83.8	21.8	26.0	45.9	54.8	74
Kysaiah Pickett	22	82.8	19.7	23.8	42.3	51.1	65
Angus Brayshaw	24	76.8	15.5	20.1	34.2	44.5	70
James Jordon	17	54.7	11.9	21.7	24.0	43.8	58
Bailey Laurie	5	39.4	8.2	20.8	16.6	42.2	31
Kade Chandler	22	72.6	14.1	19.4	30.3	41.8	49
Charlie Spargo	13	63.9	11.3	17.7	24.9	39.0	50
Brodie Grundy	17	69.9	11.1	15.8	26.1	37.3	39
Christian Salem	15	83.4	13.5	16.2	31.1	37.3	44
Taj Woewodin	4	66.2	12.2	18.5	23.0	34.7	28
Tom McDonald	7	75.4	12.3	16.3	24.8	32.9	30
Ed Langdon	24	91.0	14.4	15.8	27.9	30.6	50
Trent Rivers	24	77.1	10.5	13.6	23.1	29.9	38
Jake Bowey	22	73.8	9.8	13.2	22.0	29.8	39
Jacob van Rooyen	20	74.0	9.7	13.1	22.1	29.8	37
Joel Smith	13	64.8	8.0	12.4	19.3	29.8	43
Josh Schache	2	46.5	6.0	12.9	13.0	28.0	21
Max Gawn	21	80.8	9.8	12.1	22.1	27.4	37
Lachie Hunter	23	91.1	11.7	12.8	23.1	25.3	35
Harrison Petty	14	77.9	8.9	11.4	19.7	25.3	28
Jake Melksham	13	69.7	7.6	10.9	16.5	23.6	28
Bayley Fritsch	16	81.9	9.2	11.3	19.0	23.2	37
Judd McVee	24	78.2	8.4	10.8	18.0	23.1	32
Daniel Turner	2	81.0	6.0	7.4	18.0	22.2	21
Ben Brown	7	74.4	6.1	8.3	12.3	16.5	19
Adam Tomlinson	8	92.1	5.8	6.2	14.1	15.3	23
Jake Lever	23	98.4	7.6	7.7	14.9	15.1	32
Steven May	22	97.5	6.1	6.3	14.7	15.1	40
Michael Hibberd	12	78.5	4.8	6.2	10.5	13.4	17

[Deelightful Dee 152]

Looking forward to tonight's game with beautful weather and hopefully a possessed Dees side out to atone for last week's loss.

Oppo watch

The Blues are the best defensive and contest team of the 6 remaining teams over the season as well as over last 5 rounds when considering contested possession differential and how well they defend points from opposotion I50s. On the other hand, their forward half game and attacking efficiency is 5th over the season out of the 6 remaining teams. This profile hasn't changed significantly in the last 5 weeks, so I would expect a similar style tonight.  

Keys to the game

These are the #1 and #2 contested possession differential teams in the final 6, so if one team gets on top in this phase of the game it could spell trouble for the other. The Dees are strong at converting this advantage into I50 differential and this is an area we could exploit the Blues if we can at least break even at the contest. But it might come down to both teams' weakness: attacking efficiency. Both teams seem to be going in with relatively small forward lines which could point to a high speed, ground ball game in the forward line to improve the attacking efficiency tonight.

A summary of key stats (green highlight = Dees advantage, no highlight = Blues advantage). It's even 3 to 3 across the season but the Blues have the advantage 4 to 2 over the last 5 games.

[Neil Crompton 5,562]

On 9/11/2023 at 3:57 AM, WheeloRatings said:

Interestingly, when you account for the difference in game time for Brayshaw and Jordon, their average pressure points per 100% game time is very similar.

Player	M	TOG	Pressure Acts	Per 100% TOG	Pressure Points	Per 100% TOG	Highest Pressure
Clayton Oliver	14	83.5	26.6	31.9	59.8	71.7	106
James Harmes	9	52.7	17.8	33.8	37.6	71.3	82
Jack Viney	23	78.8	24.0	30.5	55.5	70.5	98
Alex Neal-Bullen	24	76.7	20.9	27.2	45.8	59.7	64
Tom Sparrow	22	73.9	20.2	27.4	43.6	59.0	71
Christian Petracca	24	83.8	21.8	26.0	45.9	54.8	74
Kysaiah Pickett	22	82.8	19.7	23.8	42.3	51.1	65
Angus Brayshaw	24	76.8	15.5	20.1	34.2	44.5	70
James Jordon	17	54.7	11.9	21.7	24.0	43.8	58
Bailey Laurie	5	39.4	8.2	20.8	16.6	42.2	31
Kade Chandler	22	72.6	14.1	19.4	30.3	41.8	49
Charlie Spargo	13	63.9	11.3	17.7	24.9	39.0	50
Brodie Grundy	17	69.9	11.1	15.8	26.1	37.3	39
Christian Salem	15	83.4	13.5	16.2	31.1	37.3	44
Taj Woewodin	4	66.2	12.2	18.5	23.0	34.7	28
Tom McDonald	7	75.4	12.3	16.3	24.8	32.9	30
Ed Langdon	24	91.0	14.4	15.8	27.9	30.6	50
Trent Rivers	24	77.1	10.5	13.6	23.1	29.9	38
Jake Bowey	22	73.8	9.8	13.2	22.0	29.8	39
Jacob van Rooyen	20	74.0	9.7	13.1	22.1	29.8	37
Joel Smith	13	64.8	8.0	12.4	19.3	29.8	43
Josh Schache	2	46.5	6.0	12.9	13.0	28.0	21
Max Gawn	21	80.8	9.8	12.1	22.1	27.4	37
Lachie Hunter	23	91.1	11.7	12.8	23.1	25.3	35
Harrison Petty	14	77.9	8.9	11.4	19.7	25.3	28
Jake Melksham	13	69.7	7.6	10.9	16.5	23.6	28
Bayley Fritsch	16	81.9	9.2	11.3	19.0	23.2	37
Judd McVee	24	78.2	8.4	10.8	18.0	23.1	32
Daniel Turner	2	81.0	6.0	7.4	18.0	22.2	21
Ben Brown	7	74.4	6.1	8.3	12.3	16.5	19
Adam Tomlinson	8	92.1	5.8	6.2	14.1	15.3	23
Jake Lever	23	98.4	7.6	7.7	14.9	15.1	32
Steven May	22	97.5	6.1	6.3	14.7	15.1	40
Michael Hibberd	12	78.5	4.8	6.2	10.5	13.4	17

Wheelo, if our 4 key backmen are the 4 lowest rated in our team for pressure, what can we deduce from this?

[binman 43,003]

3 minutes ago, Neil Crompton said:

Wheelo, if our 4 key backmen are the 4 lowest rated in our team for pressure, what can we deduce from this?

I presume they have lower pressure numbers because they do less chasing, corralling and closing than mids (which means less pressure acts and therefore less pressure points).

[WheeloRatings 1,163]

Melbourne v Carlton (Semi Finals, 2023)

https://www.wheeloratings.com/afl_match_stats.html?ID=20232601

Key Team Stats

Stats highlighted purple were won by Melbourne.

Stat	For	Against	Diff
Disposal Efficiency	66.3	71.7	-5.4
Kicking Efficiency	57.9	65.4	-7.5
Metres Gained	6013	6226	-213
Inside 50s	53	52	+1
Shots At Goal	28	21	+7
Shots Per Inside 50	52.8	40.4	+12.4
Contested Possessions	153	137	+16
Ground Ball Gets	110	86	+24
Intercepts	92	84	+8
Intercept Marks	27	22	+5
Centre Clearances	8	13	-5
Stoppage Clearances	28	20	+8
Contested Marks	15	12	+3
Marks Inside 50	10	9	+1
Hitouts	38	29	+9
Hitouts To Advantage	7	8	-1
Tackles	49	64	-15
Tackles Inside 50	10	8	+2
Def One On One Loss %	18.2	27.3	-9.1

Pressure

Team pressure

Quarter	For	Against
1	187	195
2	172	204
3	166	158
4	187	196
Match	178	189

Source: Herald Sun

Most Pressure Points

Note: pressure points are the weighed sum of pressure acts. Physical pressure acts are worth 3.75 points, closing acts are worth 2.25 points, chasing acts are 1.5 points and corralling are 1.2. ( https://www.championdata.com/glossary/afl/ )

Player	Pressure Acts	Pressure Points	Season Average*
Clayton Oliver	28	72	60.7
Alex Neal-Bullen	26	64	46.5
Tom Sparrow	25	57	44.2
Christian Salem	17	39	31.6
Charlie Spargo	13	39	26.0
Jack Viney	15	38	54.8
Kade Chandler	12	32	30.4
James Jordon	14	28	24.2
Joel Smith	14	28	19.9
Tom McDonald	13	26	24.9
Christian Petracca	12	23	45.0
Kysaiah Pickett	12	22	41.4
Lachie Hunter	11	22	23.0
Ed Langdon	13	19	27.5
Trent Rivers	12	19	22.9
Adam Tomlinson	8	19	14.7
Max Gawn	10	16	21.8
Bayley Fritsch	7	14	18.7
Judd McVee	7	13	17.8
Jake Bowey	4	9	21.5
Jake Lever	6	8	14.6
Steven May	2	5	14.3
Josh Schache	0	0	8.7

* Pressure points for rounds 4 and 6 have not been able to be sourced from the Herald Sun. Pressure points for these matches have been estimated from the number of pressure acts for each player.

Source: Herald Sun

Time in Forward Half

Quarter	For	Against
1	44%	56%
2	47%	53%
3	63%	37%
4	59%	41%
Match	55%	45%

Source: Match total sourced from the Herald Sun; quarter values are my own calculations.

Score Sources

Summary

Score sources highlighted purple were won by Melbourne.

Category	For			Against			Diff
	G	B	T	G	B	T
Kick-in	0	1	1	0	1	1	+0
Centre Bounce	1	0	6	3	0	18	-12
Stoppage (Other)	4	3	27	2	0	12	+15
Turnover	4	13	37	6	6	42	-5

Category	For		Against
	Match	Season	Match	Season
Kick-in	1	2.4	1	2.2
Centre Bounce	6	10.9	18	9.0
Stoppage (Other)	27	23.6	12	19.4
Turnover	37	51.2	42	41.1

Chain start region

Note: region is from the scoring team's perspective. Against season average represents average points conceded by Melbourne across the season, not average points scored by Carlton.

Category	Region	For		Against
		Match	Season	Match	Season
Kick-in	D50	1	2.4	1	2.2
Centre Bounce	Centre	6	10.9	18	9.0
Stoppage (Other)	D50	0	0.5	0	1.8
Stoppage (Other)	Centre	7	2.8	0	1.1
Stoppage (Other)	Wing	12	12.2	12	6.6
Stoppage (Other)	F50	8	8.0	0	9.9
Turnover	D50	7	11.3	18	7.0
Turnover	Centre	1	7.2	1	6.2
Turnover	Wing	26	26.4	21	20.6
Turnover	F50	3	6.3	2	7.3

Region	For		Against
	Match	Season	Match	Season
D50	8	14.2	19	11.0
Centre	14	21.0	19	16.4
Wing	38	38.6	33	27.2
F50	11	14.4	2	17.2

Points from defensive half

For		Against
Match	Season	Match	Season
24	32.8	38	24.8

Shots at goal

Team	Shots	G	B	T	Acc.
General Play
Melbourne	15	4	9	33	26.7
Carlton	8	3	2	20	37.5
Set Position
Melbourne	13	5	6	36	38.5
Carlton	13	8	4	52	61.5

Centre Bounce Attendances

	CBAs	CBA %	2023 %	2022 %
Clayton Oliver	23	96	81.4	86.5
Max Gawn	21	88	64.9	65.5
Jack Viney	20	83	72.1	74.6
Christian Petracca	13	54	61.1	74.6
Tom Sparrow	11	46	44.9	32.2
James Jordon	3	12	26.9	0.2
Tom McDonald	3	12	5.7	0.0
Kysaiah Pickett	2	8	11.2	1.3
Trent Rivers	0	0	3.0	0.0
Alex Neal-Bullen	0	0	2.1	3.5
Lachie Hunter	0	0	0.2	0.0
Josh Schache	0	0	0.0	13.8
Brodie Grundy			54.4	83.7
Angus Brayshaw			35.3	16.0
James Harmes			26.7	14.6
Jacob van Rooyen			7.6
Harrison Petty			0.7	0.0

Ruck Contests and Hitouts

Ruck Contests

	Ruck Contests	RC %	2023 %	2022 %
Max Gawn	65	81	57.5	57.8
Tom McDonald	10	12	9.3	7.0
Christian Petracca	4	5	0.4	0.1
Joel Smith	1	1	0.9	0.0
Josh Schache	0	0	4.1	13.4
Clayton Oliver	0	0	0.1	0.0
Steven May	0	0	0.0	0.0
Tom Sparrow	0	0	0.0	0.0
Alex Neal-Bullen	0	0	0.0	0.0
Brodie Grundy			47.7	77.4
Jacob van Rooyen			13.1
Ben Brown			2.3	3.6
Harrison Petty			2.0	0.0

Hitouts

	Ruck Contests	Hitouts	To Adv.	To Adv. % (2023)	To Adv. % (2022)
Max Gawn	65	36	6	30.1	33.6
Christian Petracca	4	1	1	100.0
Tom McDonald	10	1	0	20.0	33.3
Alex Neal-Bullen	0	0	0	0.0
Joel Smith	1	0	0	0.0
Josh Schache	0	0	0	0.0	33.3
Jacob van Rooyen				31.1
Brodie Grundy				30.4	30.2
Harrison Petty				25.0
Ben Brown				0.0	14.3

Opposition hitouts

	Ruck Contests	Hitouts	To Adv.
Marc Pittonet	64	21	4
Tom De Koning	20	8	4

 

Expected scores (Champion Data)

82 - 61 😭

[Demon Dynasty 17,109]

Semi Final, 2023 MCG - Demons vs Blues

As i've said a number of times this season... "My kingdom for a decent KPF".

A better effort than the Pies match.  However, it came down to kicking accuracy...again!  That was the difference on the night along with some very questionable umpiring on a couple of occasions.  The Blues just kicked straighter and took their chances as you always need to do in the big ones.

Conversion Rate

vs the Pies 39%

vs the Blues 35%

The Blues nearly doubled our conversion rate at 61%!  Massive for a final.

Still scratching my head over the Schache sub debacle!??

Some solid to great ratings from the boys in the top 8.   Steven May excelling in these two finals.  Lingers not as bad as i felt he was on the night (statistically anyway).

However, the overall team rating was a mile off our average seasonal rating ... by 15%.

No doubt finals pressure and some being a long way off their best on the night.  Statistically that included Tracc, Rivers, Lever, Sparrow, Bowey, Chandler, Jordan and T-Mac (horrid).

Some may have played a run with role though, or may have been tagged, so that needs to be taken into account.

The bottom six did ok vs their season rating (bar T_Mac).  The top 6 still off their seasonal numbers by a fair wack, suffering from the loss of Gus (average rating 3.88) and Rivers dropping out of the mix (average 3.69).

The loss of Gus out of the middle should not be under estimated.  Probably cost us a Prelim at the very least.

You also the injury gods looking over you.  Wasn't our year here i'm afraid.  Couldn't overcome the the loss of Melk and Petty.

Game plan needs some tinkering and must bring some outside speed, skills and a KPF into this team who can kick the air conveyance accurately and from distance.

The KPF might be Petty but seems injury prone.  Do we need a back up or do we use all our draft leverage to go after some outside speed and class?  A classy speedy outside mid who can also kick a few goals.  We don't have any dangerous goal kicking mids unless we move Tracc inside 50 (out of the middle).  A Treloar type as an example.

Demons Scoring Efficiency   Disposals Per Goal  40.89 % In50s Goal 17.00 Conversion % 34.60 Blues Scoring Efficiency   Disposals Per Goal  32.82 % In50s Goal 21.20 Conversion % 61.10 Player Rating Rank Season Rating to Prior Rnd % Change vs Season Rating C Oliver 4.650 1 5.002 -7.04 Jack Viney 4.475 2 3.707 20.72 S May 4.375 3 3.213 36.17 Max Gawn 3.475 4 3.350 3.73 K Pickett 3.375 5 2.101 60.64 L Hunter 3.300 6 2.939 12.28 A Tomlinson  3.150 7 2.915 8.06 C Salem 3.100 8 2.993 3.58 Ed Langdon 2.900 9 3.057 -5.14 B Fritsch 2.725 10 2.324 17.25 A N-Bullen 2.675 11 2.532 5.65 C Petracca 2.625 12 4.707 -44.23 T Rivers 2.450 13 3.696 -33.71 J McVee 2.325 14 2.320 0.22 Jake Lever 2.125 15 3.131 -32.13 Joel Smith 2.025 16 1.863 8.70 T Sparrow 2.025 16 2.811 -27.96 J Bowey 2.000 18 2.820 -29.08 C Spargo 1.950 19 1.886 3.39 K Chandler 1.575 20 2.265 -30.46 J Jordon 1.350 21 3.431 -60.65 T McDonald 0.500 22 2.054 -75.66 Team Rating 59.15   69.86 -15.33 Top 6 23.65   26.25 -9.90 Bottom 6 9.40   9.26 1.51 Stats courtesy of footwire.com & wheeloratings.com

Edited September 16, 2023 by Demon Dynasty

[WheeloRatings 1,163]

Here are the official player ratings with a breakdown by quarter.

 

 

[DeeZone 9,854]

Wow DD some huge lifts and some massive drop offs from critical players we didn’t get an even spread in either final some rose up and a lot didn’t. Footy is such a hard game to play and to watch. A game of huge moments Jake takes a mark and instead of maintaining possession kicks to a pack, Kozzie hits the post. Acres takes a brilliant mark and kicks the winner with a serious shoulder injury.!!!

[old55 23,598]

Looking at our combined finals score of 16.28 to 20.13, it's interesting to look at the overall season defensive accuracy, goals minus behinds, results. Only Collingwood (a stand-out -14), St.Kilda (-2) and GWS (-2) were able to force opponents into the red. Carlton was next best with (+4)

https://finalsiren.com/AFLLadder.asp

Our two opponents were in the top 4 for this measure.

St.Kilda wasn't able to replicate this in their final where GWS kicked 15.11. But GWS were able to do it holding St.Kilda to 11.11 and then Port to 9.16 while kicking 13.15. Carlton held Sydney to 9.14 while kicking 11.8.

In the other final so far both teams were in the black Brisbane 18.9 vs Port 11.9.

There looks to be a trend for teams able to create inaccuracy. But it seemed like we had enough gettable chances in both matches so maybe it's a coincidence.

The other data point that indicates it's meaningful is that 18th West Coast (+77) and 16th Hawthorn (+76) lead the way by a long margin in giving up goals instead of behinds. However North 17th (+48) bucks the trend by coming in somewhere midtable and better than Brisbane at (+49).

But hell if it was universally the effective indicator I'd be a genius and we can close the thread ... but alas!

BTW, we're on the good side of the mean at (+20).

Edited September 17, 2023 by old55

[Demon Dynasty 17,109]

... Erratum, left Hibbo out

Edited September 18, 2023 by Demon Dynasty