Riewoldt and Montagna elite - champion data

[BackFromUSA]

oh no!

Oh yes!

BM & P66 are now involved!

Back on topic: BJ won the Golden Needle Award (Essendon B&F) so must be elite. End of story.

Did Cairnsman think I wouldn't notice? If they keep hijacking threads I may just have to warn and then ban all 3 of them and anyone else that joins the boring squabble.

[kosifantutti]

I think I remember being told that Champion Data put a lot of weight on All Australian & Club B&F when deciding who is elite. From memory a players need 3 ticks from these two before being considered elite. Other criteria would also need to be met.

Going on that, Jack would need another B&F AND AA selection before being considered !!

Also explains why BJ (1 b&f) and Dal (0 b&f) were not considered.

I'm pretty sure they do it all on stats. They are a company that works on statistics.

How many AA or B&F has Monfries got?

[plugger66]

oh no!

Oh yes!

BM & P66 are now involved!

Back on topic: BJ won the Golden Needle Award (Essendon B&F) so must be elite. End of story.

Did Cairnsman think I wouldn't notice? If they keep hijacking threads I may just have to warn and then ban all 3 of them and anyone else that joins the boring squabble.

Sorry but i think I made some vaild points about why Joey and Rooy were elite. Does a person now get a response from you if they mention other people for no apparent reason?

[Cairnsman]

I think I remember being told that Champion Data put a lot of weight on All Australian & Club B&F when deciding who is elite. From memory a players need 3 ticks from these two before being considered elite. Other criteria would also need to be met.

Going on that, Jack would need another B&F AND AA selection before being considered !!

As P66 rightly points out, Roo and Joey have been categorised as elite based on Champion Data however what always pricks my interest with regards to the categorisations used by companies like CD is their criteria, measurement or data set used for categories such as "elite player". From what I understand CD has some interesting criteria used to collect stats like contested possession. I'm not sure if this has been changed but as one example CD apparently deemed a free kick awarded for an interchange infringement as a contested possession. From what I understand these types of stats are at odds with how coaches view the statistic and on two counts, firstly the criteria for a contested possession and then also the value of the statistic itself and how it can be used in the modern game. So it would be really interesting to see the criteria behind CD's metrics on elite player status.

Also Eastern I'd be surprised if CD uses a subjective measure such as AA or B&F as part of their elite categorisation. Surely a metrics consultancy is only concerned with mathematical and scientific tools for their data collection, maybe not, it's a commercial world after all. None the less I'd imagine that most clubs have their own requirements for what they want measured.

[BigMart]

Again BFUSA.... Who initiated? Antagonised and baited? ... I suggest you have a look at any hijacked thread and look for the 'source' of the arguments... The first personal comments and the first person to bring in unrelated comments from previous threads because they can't speak on the actual argument

Take this thread for example...where's the issue start... You spotted it first?!

I will not sit by idle and allow wannabe cyberbullies build there ego at my expense, if it causes me to be suspended I have no issue... Just like on the field, if a person likes to play the man, I'm more than happy giving them a clip.... If it costs me so be it .... I won't be dictated to, or told I cannot have an opinion by anonymous nobodies attempting to find some sort of status!!!

[Cairnsman]

Again BFUSA.... Who initiated? Antagonised and baited? ... I suggest you have a look at any hijacked thread and look for the 'source' of the arguments... The first personal comments and the first person to bring in unrelated comments from previous threads because they can't speak on the actual argument

Take this thread for example...where's the issue start... You spotted it first?!

I will not sit by idle and allow wannabe cyberbullies build there ego at my expense, if it causes me to be suspended I have no issue... Just like on the field, if a person likes to play the man, I'm more than happy giving them a clip.... If it costs me so be it .... I won't be dictated to, or told I cannot have an opinion by anonymous nobodies attempting to find some sort of status!!!

Dry your eyes princess, if I had a son that claimed he was being cyber bullied...I'd give him a clip myself and tell him to take off his Mummies skirt.

[plugger66]

Again BFUSA.... Who initiated? Antagonised and baited? ... I suggest you have a look at any hijacked thread and look for the 'source' of the arguments... The first personal comments and the first person to bring in unrelated comments from previous threads because they can't speak on the actual argument

Take this thread for example...where's the issue start... You spotted it first?!

I will not sit by idle and allow wannabe cyberbullies build there ego at my expense, if it causes me to be suspended I have no issue... Just like on the field, if a person likes to play the man, I'm more than happy giving them a clip.... If it costs me so be it .... I won't be dictated to, or told I cannot have an opinion by anonymous nobodies attempting to find some sort of status!!!

I just looked at the whole thread and it seems the first comment at all that suggested baiting came from you as did the first personal comment suggesting boys were crying.

[Cairnsman]

Again BFUSA.... Who initiated? Antagonised and baited? ... I suggest you have a look at any hijacked thread and look for the 'source' of the arguments... The first personal comments and the first person to bring in unrelated comments from previous threads because they can't speak on the actual argument

Take this thread for example...where's the issue start... You spotted it first?!

I will not sit by idle and allow wannabe cyberbullies build there ego at my expense, if it causes me to be suspended I have no issue... Just like on the field, if a person likes to play the man, I'm more than happy giving them a clip.... If it costs me so be it .... I won't be dictated to, or told I cannot have an opinion by anonymous nobodies attempting to find some sort of status!!!

I just looked at the whole thread and it seems the first comment at all that suggested baiting came from you as did the first personal comment suggesting boys were crying.

This is just an oblique to this ever hilarious comedy fest, but am I the only one that would have thoroughly enjoyed being Bigmouths opponent on a footy field.

[dragit]

I think I remember being told that Champion Data put a lot of weight on All Australian & Club B&F when deciding who is elite. From memory a players need 3 ticks from these two before being considered elite. Other criteria would also need to be met.

Going on that, Jack would need another B&F AND AA selection before being considered !!

Also explains why BJ (1 b&f) and Dal (0 b&f) were not considered.

How does Rioli make the elite list then?
19 goals this year, one AA in 2012.
If he is elite but Cloke with 68 goals is not, it's ridiculous.

Joey & Steven had nearly identical years stats wise in 2013, is it measured over multiple seasons?

[plugger66]

I think I remember being told that Champion Data put a lot of weight on All Australian & Club B&F when deciding who is elite. From memory a players need 3 ticks from these two before being considered elite. Other criteria would also need to be met.

Going on that, Jack would need another B&F AND AA selection before being considered !!

Also explains why BJ (1 b&f) and Dal (0 b&f) were not considered.

How does Rioli make the elite list then?
19 goals this year, one AA in 2012.
If he is elite but Cloke with 68 goals is not, it's ridiculous.

Joey & Steven had nearly identical years stats wise in 2013, is it measured over multiple seasons?

Its based on the top 10 in a position by Champion data stats. Rioli and Cloke have nothing to do with each other and Steven wasnt as high in CD stats as Joey.

[Cairnsman]

Also explains why BJ (1 b&f) and Dal (0 b&f) were not considered.

How does Rioli make the elite list then?
19 goals this year, one AA in 2012.
If he is elite but Cloke with 68 goals is not, it's ridiculous.

Joey & Steven had nearly identical years stats wise in 2013, is it measured over multiple seasons?

Its based on the top 10 in a position by Champion data stats. Rioli and Cloke have nothing to do with each other and Steven wasnt as high in CD stats as Joey.

I'd be interested to know what the stats/criteria CD used, I've scratched around briefly in the past but couldn't find anything, do you know what stats are used to categorise elite players and A graders, B graders etc?

[plugger66]

How does Rioli make the elite list then?
19 goals this year, one AA in 2012.
If he is elite but Cloke with 68 goals is not, it's ridiculous.

Joey & Steven had nearly identical years stats wise in 2013, is it measured over multiple seasons?

Its based on the top 10 in a position by Champion data stats. Rioli and Cloke have nothing to do with each other and Steven wasnt as high in CD stats as Joey.

I'd be interested to know what the stats/criteria CD used, I've scratched around briefly in the past but couldn't find anything, do you know what stats are used to categorise elite players and A graders, B graders etc?

No but on the radio they said it was top 10 for each position to be elite.

[dragit]

It's top 10 percent… and if 19 goals and 15 touches per game is in the top 10 percent of small forwards I'd hate to see what the average ones are racking up.

[plugger66]

It's top 10 percent… and if 19 goals and 15 touches per game is in the top 10 percent of small forwards I'd hate to see what the average ones are racking up.

Well its based on fact so he is obviously in.

[gringo]

I reckon Trent Dennis Lane might be able to make an elite player after all. With no Milne he should get 19 goals and 15 possies a game. Watters was on to something all along.

[dragit]

It's top 10 percent… and if 19 goals and 15 touches per game is in the top 10 percent of small forwards I'd hate to see what the average ones are racking up.

Well its based on fact so he is obviously in.

I don't know how the figures are compiled, but the criteria are chosen and weighted by humans.

They must rate highly things like goals caused from turnovers etc... As tackling is the only stat that Cyril really gunned in 2013, the rest of his numbers are pretty average for last season.

[plugger66]

It's top 10 percent… and if 19 goals and 15 touches per game is in the top 10 percent of small forwards I'd hate to see what the average ones are racking up.

Well its based on fact so he is obviously in.

I don't know how the figures are compiled, but the criteria are chosen and weighted by humans.

They must rate highly things like goals caused from turnovers etc... As tackling is the only stat that Cyril really gunned in 2013, the rest of his numbers are pretty average for last season.

But it is the same for every single player in the AFL. I think there just arent many gun small forwards so he is in the top 10%. CD make a decision on complete fact and arent claiming anything else. People can argue about how they give points but they cant argue on who is elite based on the points. Others rate elite on complete opinion.

[Cairnsman]

Well its based on fact so he is obviously in.

I don't know how the figures are compiled, but the criteria are chosen and weighted by humans.

They must rate highly things like goals caused from turnovers etc... As tackling is the only stat that Cyril really gunned in 2013, the rest of his numbers are pretty average for last season.

But it is the same for every single player in the AFL. I think there just arent many gun small forwards so he is in the top 10%. CD make a decision on complete fact and arent claiming anything else. People can argue about how they give points but they cant argue on who is elite based on the points. Others rate elite on complete opinion.

Instead of categorising elite by using the top 10% of figures achieved season-by-season wouldn't a better way be to use benchmark figures that have been derived from figures achieved by some of the greats in each position over their entire career. So for example a small forward would reach elite level when his figures reach figures that are say pretty close to Milnes. If you are a midfielder then your figures would have to be somewhere up near Judd or Abblets, if you are a CHF then they would have to be up near Roos and so on.

To me CD shouldn't be classifying elite players on figures based on one isolated season for the reason(s) already alluded to because you could have a season like last year where the figures for a particular position like small forwards were very low.
The cynic in me thinks it would suit CD though to leave it the way it is because it is desirable to have figures that cause debate and brings discussion and focus on CD.

[bergholt]

Instead of categorising elite by using the top 10% of figures achieved season-by-season wouldn't a better way be to use benchmark figures that have been derived from figures achieved by some of the greats in each position over their entire career.

Then there'd never again be an elite full-forward, because the game has evolved and now no-one can get close even to Peter Sumich's figures, let alone Lockett's.

[Cairnsman]

Instead of categorising elite by using the top 10% of figures achieved season-by-season wouldn't a better way be to use benchmark figures that have been derived from figures achieved by some of the greats in each position over their entire career.

Then there'd never again be an elite full-forward, because the game has evolved and now no-one can get close even to Peter Sumich's figures, let alone Lockett's.

And for that reason, and with all due respect I would have thought that this point was obvious, but a bench mark should surely have to be based on current generation players, with maybe a view or comparison to one generation back at the most and also taking into consideration, trends, rule changes etc.

So for example full-forwards would be bench marked against Roughead, Cloke, Buddy, Kennedy, Jack Riewoldt, Fevola and Gehrig etc, and maybe come up with a formula that only goes back a decade which I suppose is almost an AFL generation, and that's probably up for debate also because you could probably argue it's less than 10 years.

[bergholt]

So for example full-forwards would be bench marked against Roughead, Cloke, Buddy, Kennedy, Jack Riewoldt, Fevola and Gehrig etc, and maybe come up with a formula that only goes back a decade which I suppose is almost an AFL generation, and that's probably up for debate also because you could probably argue it's less than 10 years.

Right. So first you decide who the elite are, then you compare current players with them.

Which raises the same question - how do you decide who the elite are in the first place?

[Cairnsman]

So for example full-forwards would be bench marked against Roughead, Cloke, Buddy, Kennedy, Jack Riewoldt, Fevola and Gehrig etc, and maybe come up with a formula that only goes back a decade which I suppose is almost an AFL generation, and that's probably up for debate also because you could probably argue it's less than 10 years.

Right. So first you decide who the elite are, then you compare current players with them.

Which raises the same question - how do you decide who the elite are in the first place?

You don't decide subjective who is elite which is sort of what I'm accusing Champion Data of doing because they decide the types of stats they used, what I'm talking about is coming up with a presribed standard and formula that is better than just calculating the top 10% of some unknown stats achieved in each position per single season. Champion Data you'd think (if they don't already) should publish the stats and formula they are using to help punters better understand how they specifically decide "elite".

BTW, the names I put forward weren't randomly selected, they are nearly all Coleman medalists, as I would have thought that goals kicked in a season is probably a good starting point as one of the KPIs used to measure a full forward.

Then from that couldn't you also add other relevant KPIs to come up with a complete template for measuring or deciding a full forwards performance.

[plugger66]

I don't know how the figures are compiled, but the criteria are chosen and weighted by humans.

They must rate highly things like goals caused from turnovers etc... As tackling is the only stat that Cyril really gunned in 2013, the rest of his numbers are pretty average for last season.

But it is the same for every single player in the AFL. I think there just arent many gun small forwards so he is in the top 10%. CD make a decision on complete fact and arent claiming anything else. People can argue about how they give points but they cant argue on who is elite based on the points. Others rate elite on complete opinion.

Instead of categorising elite by using the top 10% of figures achieved season-by-season wouldn't a better way be to use benchmark figures that have been derived from figures achieved by some of the greats in each position over their entire career. So for example a small forward would reach elite level when his figures reach figures that are say pretty close to Milnes. If you are a midfielder then your figures would have to be somewhere up near Judd or Abblets, if you are a CHF then they would have to be up near Roos and so on.

To me CD shouldn't be classifying elite players on figures based on one isolated season for the reason(s) already alluded to because you could have a season like last year where the figures for a particular position like small forwards were very low.
The cynic in me thinks it would suit CD though to leave it the way it is because it is desirable to have figures that cause debate and brings discussion and focus on CD.

They could do it anyway they want to but they decided to rank it on last season. Seems the best way to it IMO. The game has changed to much to worry about previous stuff. I have no idea why people even care. CD made players elite if they were in the top 10% in their position last season. People can choose to ignore it or accept it. I choose to ignore it.

[MCG-Unit]

We're not baiting there boys?

You guys are priceless.... Bringing in stuff from another thread to have a dig?!

.....then dishing it out (which is common)

BJ is not soft ... Just a very good footballer with elite skill.

Yep no way is Goddard 'soft' - not what my eyes told me over 200 games - seems like history often gets re-written when a player departs (sometimes before they leave) especially on these boards. No end of baiting on here
Ess B & F winner

Then again it's the same poster(s) almost every time - who were on about Goddard, Riewoldt & Dal Santo being no good.....

[Devilhead]

Sorry but I couldnt give a flying rats tight sphincter that Champion Data think Riewoldt and Montagna are elite.

Means absolutely nothing - to me anyway - its something maybe a 9 year old would get delirious about.