1 minute ago, old55 said:

@A F @WheeloRatings - where can I find team stats for scores from turnover, scores from stoppages?

I was just referencing this article for where we were in points from turnover in mid April - https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/afl-2023-key-statistics-for-every-club-this-season-strengths-and-weaknesses-champion-data-state-of-play-analysis-news/news-story/2bf72ecb1043155555b0f18b4ca7b390

@WheeloRatings will be all over it.

I’m useless with stats but would be interesting to see clearances that lead to scores %

3 hours ago, PaulRB said:

It feels like we are much more comfortable having the opposition win stoppages, as long as they are under intense pressure when they dispose, as we trust our ability to create a turnover / transition / score from it. 

While every team is seeking "clean" stoppage clearance, it may be that a "dirty" stoppage clearance is very similar to a "dirty" stoppage opposition clearance, given our ability to win back the ball from an opposition"dirty" clearance, and transition it to our advantage.

If we are happy losing clearances I would seriously question, our strategy! Surely a quick breakaway guantees a solid forward entry and potential seamless goal, than trying to wini t back in your defence?

17 minutes ago, picket fence said:

If we are happy losing clearances I would seriously question, our strategy! Surely a quick breakaway guantees a solid forward entry and potential seamless goal, than trying to wini t back in your defence?

A turnover will usually wrong foot your opponent and lead to a score 

I'd love to see one deep fwd lead out on the 45 when we get a clean centre clearance. 

21 minutes ago, picket fence said:

If we are happy losing clearances I would seriously question, our strategy! Surely a quick breakaway guantees a solid forward entry and potential seamless goal, than trying to wini t back in your defence?

it does sound counter intuitive but there is logic. Traditionally teams have packed our forward line and used it to slingshot forward. We stopped that by playing a backstop backman. Collingwood and others then perfected the swarm forward which overwhelmed the backstop.

This is a tactic but if it becomes a habit like the bomb to the forward pocket we become too predictable.

Must say when watching the continued loss of centre clearances is depressing. I'll start to watch the ensuing possessions more closely

It’s taken me a while to get my head around why we don’t seem concerned about losing clearances, particularly the center clearances. Then I look at how poorly Trac and Clarry generally deliver the ball when rushed at centre clearances, and it helps me understand the logic. Unless it’s in Kossie’s or Tom Sparrow’s hands, I think I’d prefer to see us lose this clearance.

I don't want to lose any clearances, poor delivery or not. At some point our forwards will be able to anticipate where the ball is going and make position.

The name of the game is possession of the ball and territory. Clearances provide both.

GO DEES

On 5/7/2023 at 10:46 AM, Clintosaurus said:

Focus is post clearance possession. 

Indeed.

It really is all about post clearance contested possession - i have heard Hardwick say many times it is tigers' most important stat. Which is yet another frustration of mine - post clearance possession data is not publicly available - yet another critical stat locked up by The Champion data monopoly.

And both offensive AND defensive post clearance contested possession equally important to our game. In fact, arguably defensive ones are even more important.

Lose the clearance and when on we put enough pressure on the oppo to force them to hack kick forward which makes it very difficult for them to score because they struggle to hit a target or kick to the forward's advantage. And it therefore makes a contested ball scenario very likely.

We are very good at winning post clearance contested possessions, and if we do it becomes a turnover.

Our game is based on scoring from turnover and when on we are brutally efficient at doing so.  Trac said as much in his post-match on ground interview (i think it was that one).

So, they win the clearance, go forward, but don't score. We win the post clearance contest and score on turnover. In the abstract, if we stop them scoring a goal and we in turn score one ourselves, that is a 12 point swing.

All of which helps explain why, according to Champion data, teams are statistically twice as likely to score from a turnover than a clearance.

Edited May 9, 20232 yr by binman

41 minutes ago, binman said:

Indeed.

It really is all about post clearance contested possession - i have heard Hardwick say many times it is tigers' most important stat. Which is yet another frustration of mine - post clearance possession data is not publicly available - yet another critical stat locked up by The Champion data monopoly.

And both offensive AND defensive post clearance contested possession equally important to our game. In fact, arguably defensive ones are even more important.

Lose the clearance and when on we put enough pressure on the oppo to force them to hack kick forward which makes it very difficult for them to score because they struggle to hit a target or kick to the forward's advantage. And it therefore makes a contested ball scenario very likely.

We are very good at winning post clearance contested possessions, and if we do it becomes a turnover.

Our game is based on scoring from turnover and when on we are brutally efficient at doing so.  Trac said as much in his post-match on ground interview (i think it was that one).

So, they win the clearance, go forward, but don't score. We win the post clearance contest and score on turnover. In the abstract, if we stop them scoring a goal and we in turn score one ourselves, that is a 12 point swing.

All of which helps explain why, according to Champion data, teams are statistically twice as likely to score from a turnover than a clearance.

Very well said.

I wish there was a way on Kayo to scrub forward to every stoppage like you can with goals. Would at least make it quicker and easier for nerds like us to collate those numbers ourselves 😀

what i love about these discussions is how nuanced our knowledge becomes.

The difference between a) clearances vs b) clean clearances and c) dirty clearances

What effect these have in different portions of the ground and how we set up accordingly. Where we are able to as a team leverage our strengths vs the opposition.

The change that the FD and co have done over the last 18 months is commendable in reading where the game is going and adjusting to what our list management currently is.

1 hour ago, Neil Crompton said:

It’s taken me a while to get my head around why we don’t seem concerned about losing clearances, particularly the center clearances. Then I look at how poorly Trac and Clarry generally deliver the ball when rushed at centre clearances, and it helps me understand the logic. Unless it’s in Kossie’s or Tom Sparrow’s hands, I think I’d prefer to see us lose this clearance.

Hmmm not sure I’d want to lose, our brand is forward half territory and generating scores from forward half turnovers. 

1 hour ago, tiers said:

I don't want to lose any clearances, poor delivery or not. At some point our forwards will be able to anticipate where the ball is going and make position.

The name of the game is possession of the ball and territory. Clearances provide both.

GO DEES

Yeah I'm a little more 'Get it in there and figure out the rest later' by nature but this convo has been good to see different ways of thinking. 

22 minutes ago, Gawndy the Great said:

Hmmm not sure I’d want to lose clearances

That's true. Sort of.

By that i mean we don't set up at clearances to maximise the chances of winning them per se (which we would if the goal was simply to get more clearances than the opposition).

We set up at clearances to maximise the chances of scoring when we do win them (and minimising the likliehood of the oppo scoring when they win them).

Maxy sort of touches on this dynamaic in this interview (cant remember when, but must be in the first few mins coz i stopped listening after that - marty sheargold is like fingers on chalk board!):

 https://omny.fm/shows/marty-sheargold-show/max-gawn-on-how-tasmania-will-go-getting-players-h

15 minutes ago, binman said:

That's true. Sort of.

By that i mean we don't set up at clearances to maximise the chances of winning them per se (which we would if the goal was simply to get more clearances than the opposition).

We set up at clearances to maximise the chances of scoring when we do win them (and minimising the likliehood of the oppo scoring when they win them).

Maxy sort of touches on this dynamaic in this interview (cant remember when, but must be in the first few mins coz i stopped listening after that - marty sheargold is like fingers on chalk board!):

 https://omny.fm/shows/marty-sheargold-show/max-gawn-on-how-tasmania-will-go-getting-players-h

Not sure whether we have the stats on the breakdown of scores from turnover ie D50, wing, Centre, F50, because if it was easier to score from back half turnovers then maybe there is benefit in losing them. Either way it would be interesting to analyse.

7 hours ago, old55 said:

@A F @WheeloRatings - where can I find team stats for scores from turnover, scores from stoppages?

  

7 hours ago, A F said:

I was just referencing this article for where we were in points from turnover in mid April - https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/afl-2023-key-statistics-for-every-club-this-season-strengths-and-weaknesses-champion-data-state-of-play-analysis-news/news-story/2bf72ecb1043155555b0f18b4ca7b390

@WheeloRatings will be all over it.

 

	Scores from Turnovers
Team	For	Against	Diff
St Kilda	438	245	193
Melbourne	512	333	179
Brisbane	483	382	101
Essendon	454	357	97
Geelong	481	408	73
Adelaide	399	354	45
Sydney	440	398	42
Collingwood	362	347	15
Carlton	381	369	12
Western Bulldogs	363	353	10
Fremantle	392	405	-13
Port Adelaide	380	395	-15
Greater Western Sydney	404	435	-31
Richmond	344	376	-32
Gold Coast	336	450	-114
North Melbourne	314	468	-154
West Coast	321	498	-177
Hawthorn	294	525	-231

 

	Scores from Stoppages
Team	For	Against	Diff
Geelong	353	207	146
Collingwood	319	198	121
Port Adelaide	310	234	76
Melbourne	305	263	42
Brisbane	290	252	38
Gold Coast	245	215	30
Carlton	256	234	22
Richmond	247	243	4
Western Bulldogs	218	215	3
Adelaide	280	281	-1
Greater Western Sydney	237	244	-7
St Kilda	192	204	-12
Fremantle	235	252	-17
Essendon	266	308	-42
Sydney	222	277	-55
Hawthorn	166	231	-65
North Melbourne	173	272	-99
West Coast	209	393	-184

 

	Scores from Kick-Ins
Team	For	Against	Diff
West Coast	42	12	30
Gold Coast	37	12	25
Melbourne	42	25	17
Sydney	27	15	12
Carlton	40	29	11
Adelaide	42	32	10
Brisbane	36	28	8
Essendon	46	38	8
Geelong	28	20	8
Richmond	16	15	1
Fremantle	29	31	-2
St Kilda	20	25	-5
Hawthorn	31	41	-10
Collingwood	21	34	-13
Western Bulldogs	35	51	-16
Greater Western Sydney	27	48	-21
North Melbourne	31	53	-22
Port Adelaide	6	47	-41

Edited May 9, 20232 yr by WheeloRatings

13 minutes ago, WheeloRatings said:

  

 

	Scores from Turnovers
Team	For	Against	Diff
St Kilda	438	245	193
Melbourne	512	333	179
Brisbane	483	382	101
Essendon	454	357	97
Geelong	481	408	73
Adelaide	399	354	45
Sydney	440	398	42
Collingwood	362	347	15
Carlton	381	369	12
Western Bulldogs	363	353	10
Fremantle	392	405	-13
Port Adelaide	380	395	-15
Greater Western Sydney	404	435	-31
Richmond	344	376	-32
Gold Coast	336	450	-114
North Melbourne	314	468	-154
West Coast	321	498	-177
Hawthorn	294	525	-231

 

	Scores from Stoppages
Team	For	Against	Diff
Geelong	353	207	146
Collingwood	319	198	121
Port Adelaide	310	234	76
Melbourne	305	263	42
Brisbane	290	252	38
Gold Coast	245	215	30
Carlton	256	234	22
Richmond	247	243	4
Western Bulldogs	218	215	3
Adelaide	280	281	-1
Greater Western Sydney	237	244	-7
St Kilda	192	204	-12
Fremantle	235	252	-17
Essendon	266	308	-42
Sydney	222	277	-55
Hawthorn	166	231	-65
North Melbourne	173	272	-99
West Coast	209	393	-184

 

	Scores from Kick-Ins
Team	For	Against	Diff
West Coast	42	12	30
Gold Coast	37	12	25
Melbourne	42	25	17
Sydney	27	15	12
Carlton	40	29	11
Adelaide	42	32	10
Brisbane	36	28	8
Essendon	46	38	8
Geelong	28	20	8
Richmond	16	15	1
Fremantle	29	31	-2
St Kilda	20	25	-5
Hawthorn	31	41	-10
Collingwood	21	34	-13
Western Bulldogs	35	51	-16
Greater Western Sydney	27	48	-21
North Melbourne	31	53	-22
Port Adelaide	6	47	-41

Thanks very much @WheeloRatings. Is this data available in the public domain or are you buying it specifically off Champion Data?

30 minutes ago, WheeloRatings said:

  

 

	Scores from Turnovers
Team	For	Against	Diff
St Kilda	438	245	193
Melbourne	512	333	179
Brisbane	483	382	101
Essendon	454	357	97
Geelong	481	408	73
Adelaide	399	354	45
Sydney	440	398	42
Collingwood	362	347	15
Carlton	381	369	12
Western Bulldogs	363	353	10
Fremantle	392	405	-13
Port Adelaide	380	395	-15
Greater Western Sydney	404	435	-31
Richmond	344	376	-32
Gold Coast	336	450	-114
North Melbourne	314	468	-154
West Coast	321	498	-177
Hawthorn	294	525	-231

 

	Scores from Stoppages
Team	For	Against	Diff
Geelong	353	207	146
Collingwood	319	198	121
Port Adelaide	310	234	76
Melbourne	305	263	42
Brisbane	290	252	38
Gold Coast	245	215	30
Carlton	256	234	22
Richmond	247	243	4
Western Bulldogs	218	215	3
Adelaide	280	281	-1
Greater Western Sydney	237	244	-7
St Kilda	192	204	-12
Fremantle	235	252	-17
Essendon	266	308	-42
Sydney	222	277	-55
Hawthorn	166	231	-65
North Melbourne	173	272	-99
West Coast	209	393	-184

 

	Scores from Kick-Ins
Team	For	Against	Diff
West Coast	42	12	30
Gold Coast	37	12	25
Melbourne	42	25	17
Sydney	27	15	12
Carlton	40	29	11
Adelaide	42	32	10
Brisbane	36	28	8
Essendon	46	38	8
Geelong	28	20	8
Richmond	16	15	1
Fremantle	29	31	-2
St Kilda	20	25	-5
Hawthorn	31	41	-10
Collingwood	21	34	-13
Western Bulldogs	35	51	-16
Greater Western Sydney	27	48	-21
North Melbourne	31	53	-22
Port Adelaide	6	47	-41

I’m no statistician, but top 4 in all three of those categories is statistically impressive!  

4 hours ago, Neil Crompton said:

It’s taken me a while to get my head around why we don’t seem concerned about losing clearances, particularly the center clearances. Then I look at how poorly Trac and Clarry generally deliver the ball when rushed at centre clearances, and it helps me understand the logic. Unless it’s in Kossie’s or Tom Sparrow’s hands, I think I’d prefer to see us lose this clearance.

Sparrow?! 

He's as bad a ball butcher as both Clarry and Trac. 

As an aside, I think even when Trac and Clarry are in space and under little pressure they still rush into a quick way too quickly. 

And yes, it's a criticism of two players who are obviously unbelievable players but they still need to work on this. It's almost the single most important improvement needed for us imo. 

It doesn't have to be lace out kind of stuff every time, obviously that's unrealistic. But jesus they have the time to kick to the advantage of a forward rather than the disadvantage or on top of a forwards head. 

52 minutes ago, WheeloRatings said:

  

 

	Scores from Turnovers
Team	For	Against	Diff
St Kilda	438	245	193
Melbourne	512	333	179
Brisbane	483	382	101
Essendon	454	357	97
Geelong	481	408	73
Adelaide	399	354	45
Sydney	440	398	42
Collingwood	362	347	15
Carlton	381	369	12
Western Bulldogs	363	353	10
Fremantle	392	405	-13
Port Adelaide	380	395	-15
Greater Western Sydney	404	435	-31
Richmond	344	376	-32
Gold Coast	336	450	-114
North Melbourne	314	468	-154
West Coast	321	498	-177
Hawthorn	294	525	-231

 

	Scores from Stoppages
Team	For	Against	Diff
Geelong	353	207	146
Collingwood	319	198	121
Port Adelaide	310	234	76
Melbourne	305	263	42
Brisbane	290	252	38
Gold Coast	245	215	30
Carlton	256	234	22
Richmond	247	243	4
Western Bulldogs	218	215	3
Adelaide	280	281	-1
Greater Western Sydney	237	244	-7
St Kilda	192	204	-12
Fremantle	235	252	-17
Essendon	266	308	-42
Sydney	222	277	-55
Hawthorn	166	231	-65
North Melbourne	173	272	-99
West Coast	209	393	-184

 

	Scores from Kick-Ins
Team	For	Against	Diff
West Coast	42	12	30
Gold Coast	37	12	25
Melbourne	42	25	17
Sydney	27	15	12
Carlton	40	29	11
Adelaide	42	32	10
Brisbane	36	28	8
Essendon	46	38	8
Geelong	28	20	8
Richmond	16	15	1
Fremantle	29	31	-2
St Kilda	20	25	-5
Hawthorn	31	41	-10
Collingwood	21	34	-13
Western Bulldogs	35	51	-16
Greater Western Sydney	27	48	-21
North Melbourne	31	53	-22
Port Adelaide	6	47	-41

This is excellent and to me shows how reliant Collingwood are on stoppages for scores, which is based on sending +2 to the stoppage.

Wowee, I've always thought they were vulnerable, but if you even just give them only +1 at the stoppage and beat them there or break even, they are going to struggle to beat you.

I'm a bit like @binman, I don't really rate them. Admire what McCrae has been able to do, but it's not sustainable IMV. I feel teams are mostly keeping their powder dry on Collingwood.

Collingwood are all over the place on those charts, but are right up there with stoppage goals.

Conversely, we're high on all scoring methods, making us much harder to play against. 

All duck, no dinner, anyone? 😉

It's no surprise the dees and the saints are at the top of the scores from turnovers table. Goody and Lyon share the same footy DNA - defence, pressure, contest, forward half footy.

Eight rounds is a pretty good sample size so the Saints on top of the turnover table with a 193 differential (14 from us in second) is impressive. 

As notable though is the fact we are 78 points ahead of the Lions in third and clear on top of the total for scores from turnovers with 512, with Brisbane next on 483.

Less impressive for the saints and Lyon's method is being down in 12th for diff scores from stoppages with negative seven. 

We look good by contrast - 4th differential (42) and 4th total for (305).

The Suns are interesting. 

Sixth in scores from stoppages - and directly above some pretty good clearance teams in Blues, Tigers and Bulldogs. 

But way down in 15th for scores from turnovers, above only Roos, Eagles and the Hawks. That aint gonna cut it. 

Edited May 9, 20232 yr by binman

24 minutes ago, binman said:

It's no surprise the dees and the saints are at the top of the scores from turnovers table. Goody and Lyon share the same footy DNA - defence, pressure, contest, forward half footy.

Eight rounds is a pretty good sample size so the Saints on top of the turnover table with a 193 differential (14 from us in second) is impressive. 

As notable though is the fact we are 78 points ahead of the Lions in third and clear on top of the total for scores from turnovers with 512, with Brisbane next on 483.

Less impressive for the saints and Lyon's method is being down in 12th for diff scores from stoppages with negative seven. 

We look good by contrast - 4th differential (42) and 4th total for (305).

The Suns are interesting. 

Sixth in scores from stoppages - and directly above some pretty good clearance teams in Blues, Tigers and Bulldogs. 

But way down in 15th for scores from turnovers, above only Roos, Eagles and the Hawks. That aint gonna cut it. 

If David King was doing proper analysis, he'd be looking at these sorts of stats and saying, who is consistently in the top 4 in all areas? Whoever that is, will be the team who is currently positioned the best for a flag tilt.

Of course, flags require luck on the injury front and in game luck, but you'd have to say that Melbourne are clearly the flag favourites based on our ability to execute our method that sees us scoring in multiple ways at an elite level, and yet still be defensively incredibly strong (top 4 for scores against).

Edited May 9, 20232 yr by A F

The answer is spread over the 3 pages of this thread. Those saying we are a forward half team or slow movement intercept team are drinking Goody's Kool aid and stuck in 2021, fixated on what we once were. I suspect the club hopes many opposition coaches are thinking the same way.

We are now a turnover & transition team that can on it's day, win contest and clearance. But we don't have to. See GC17. 

When the whips are cracking at the end of the year, you may see us revert to type. Or flit between Plan A and Plan B. The FD is coaching flexibility, adaptability and multiple ways to win.

I think they're showing great maturity and reflection after a very dogmatic approach in 22.

In the meantime as the season progresses, we are:

-Rotating more players through the midfield, keeping players fresher for longer (Goody couldn't care less about Rowell/Anderson - he more or less suggested a fresh Clarry & Track won us the game as we rotated when they did not) 

-Deliberately conceding outnumbers at centre clearances (our wings no longer tuck in - even if their opponents join the centre to handball receive, ours rarely follow), stoppage clearances and drop of ball, in so doing training our clearance players (across a broader player cohort) to deal with outnumber situations and punch above their weight whilst also leaving other players open for effective turnover scoring, as we've shown so far

-Relying on our defensive strength, 1v1 ability and nature to limit the impact of conceded clearances on the scoreboard (this is risk/reward - Essendon the example of how it looks when our defenders aren't up to the task) 

I agree it's not entirely comfortable to watch as a supporter, but we all said we needed change to succeed again. 

This is a change that still relies on our ability to win contests - perhaps more so by emphasising winning contests despite outnumbers - whilst also weaponising it into an effective and highly accurate scoring method, rather than a means to keep the ball forward in a predictable, clogged and ultimately ineffective way (It was once effective (21) but has been worked out)

Conceding slightly more scores is a byproduct and there will be weeks that look ugly - but there is always a give to get.

The FD are banking on us winning say 35-40% of the contests we're outnumbered in, for a far greater scoring yield as we can move the ball quicker / less contested post-clearance - instead of 60% contest wins for stagnant field progression and lower scoreboard yield.

There are analogies to financial markets - less trades for bigger wins rather than more trades of smaller value. Every trade comes with a cost & an opportunity cost.

The world is full of subscribers to both schools of thought - the best are the ones who understand which style suits their strengths and weaknesses. 

13 hours ago, old55 said:

Thanks very much @WheeloRatings. Is this data available in the public domain or are you buying it specifically off Champion Data?

No problem @old55. It's calculated from an AFL API that I have access to, so it's not really in the public domain.

@binman in relation to the GPS data that you referred to on the podcast this week, my understanding is that it is actually owned by Telstra, not Champion Data, so there are greater restrictions on what CD can actually do with it.

15 minutes ago, WheeloRatings said:

No problem @old55. It's calculated from an AFL API that I have access to, so it's not really in the public domain.

@binman in relation to the GPS data that you referred to on the podcast this week, my understanding is that it is actually owned by Telstra, not Champion Data, so there are greater restrictions on what CD can actually do with it.

Cheers. I want to look a bit more at numbers of stoppages per game - a quick look gives about 80, vs. number of turnovers received per game - again looks about 80 but I did see a couple of games with 60s (not MFC games). If stoppages and turnovers are roughly equal then as @binman posted, scoring from turnovers looks more fruitful.

I also note that we're playing Hawthorn this week who concede the biggest scores from turnovers. Heaviest scorer vs biggest conceder. That could be interesting.