AFL Performance Rating System

[Mr Magic]

In a recent thread a 'new points system' was floated in an attempt to compare the performance of 2 ruckmen.

It got me to thinking about Dream Team and Super Coach points systems.
I don't like them much and take very little notice of them.
BUT that doesn't mean the concept of attributing points to players for what they do in a game is not merit worthy.

So maybe, between us all, we can come up with a better 'points system' than either of DT or SC?

My pet hate is the 'cheap' give/get/give which so many midfielders seem to thrive on these days in amassing unrealistic DT/SC points.
I also don't believe that a 'Joe the goose' handball over the top to an unmarked player in the square for a goal should be worth as much as the Buddy Franklin running goal from the boundary line a couple of years ago.

Also IMHO the only tapouts that should attract points are those that go to advantage.

Can we create a more equitable system that better reflects performances than the ones currently in general use?

[BigMart]

Not allowed to suggest such a thing?! That was made clear by SS experts.

Why would we come up with a better system than Champion Data who employ footy experts and Statisticians to come up with their system.... Which IMO is nowadays actually very accurate in indicating a layers effectiveness... Not just stats

Can I use one of your examples that can be argued?
Hit outs that don't go to advantage are still beneficial, by the fact they have disallowed/denied the opposition Ruckman the opportunity of/for an effective hit out

In fact, the old AJ adage that if you have the ball, the opposition don't .... Is why all possessions have some importance...
Champion Data heavily weight effective disposals, contested disposals and meters gained...

What is your actual problem with the ranking points?

[dragit]

I Guess it depends just how far we want to drill down when judging every possession, it would get infinitely complicated breaking down every kick for analysis.

[plugger66]

I just wish i caught a shark better than something else on here.

[Devilhead]

As long as Mumford beats Hickey I dont care what points system is employed

[samoht]

....
Also IMHO the only tapouts that should attract points are those that go to advantage.

re: the tapouts - points should only be awarded when there's a surplus of hitouts to advantage over the "hitouts to disadvantage" (the ones that go straight to an opposition player).
i.e., if there's more "hitouts to disadvantage" than "hitouts to advantage" - then negative points should be given to the ruckman.

I reckon Sandilands would have had games with 60 hitouts that would have received a negative score, if this system was adopted, and we'd see the real worth of ruckmen.

Also, Cox and Natanui are way over rated, IMO (as far as hitouts go).

If you watch ruck contests carefully, it's amazing how many hitouts you'll notice go straight to the opposition.

[BigMart]

I think Mumford got 156 dream team points....

[samoht]

I think Mumford got 156 dream team points....

According to the current rating system, yes.
He laid 8 tackles - that would have got him a few points.
But re: his hitouts - quite a few of them went to disadvantage (which should have attracted negative points) - Hickey was much more efficient and accurate with his hitouts.

[BigMart]

Is that a fact sahmot?

Because from where I sat .... Mummy killed us in the Ruck ... Some of his clearance work was brutal.

[samoht]

Is that a fact sahmot?

Because from where I sat .... Mummy killed us in the Ruck ... Some of his clearance work was brutal.

Mumford played a great game overall (Sydney should have kept him)... but re: the ruck -
80% plus of his hitouts went nowhere - and quite a few of these went our way, which helped our clearances.

Hickey was more efficient and accurate - probably had about the same hitouts to advantage with his fewer hitouts - and therefore less indiscriminate hitouts to them!!

Hickey more than broke even in the ruck - despite the hitout numbers.

[BigMart]

Mumford and GWS are the number 1 clearance team in the AFL?

That day Stk won the stoppages by 3... Armitage had 9 clearances alone

Mumford had more HO to advantage ..... Our mids were very good at stripping the opposition at clearances... The pressure was excellent around the ball

[gringo]

Mumford and GWS are the number 1 clearance team in the AFL?

That day Stk won the stoppages by 3... Armitage had 9 clearances alone

Mumford had more HO to advantage ..... Our mids were very good at stripping the opposition at clearances... The pressure was excellent around the ball

It could have something to do with the list they have amassed. they have so many potential A grade mids most were forced into playing out of position at times last year. Toby Greene was played back because he couldn't get a run after nearly winning the rising star award the year before. Mumford is a very good ruck too but I didn't think he was outstanding against Hickey given his huge size advantage. Hickey got a hand into most contests at least negating him then leading him around the ground by playing an offensive role exploiting the fact that Mumford's mobility isn't as good. To me it was an example of very astute coaching and perfectly executed by Hickey.

[BigMart]

Mumford also had 18 possessions, 8 tackles, 4 clearances and a Goal. With 46 hit outs.

Statistically that is a dominant game

Not sure why people fail to see that?

If Hickey got those sort of numbers... He'd be the next John Nicholls on SS

[BigMart]

Also... Have a look at our 3 main mids.

Hayes, Armitage, Dustan?!

3 extremely contested clearance specialists. With Steven to come in?

We could lose the HO count every week and still be competitive clearance wise.

[Cairnsman]

In a recent thread a 'new points system' was floated in an attempt to compare the performance of 2 ruckmen.

It got me to thinking about Dream Team and Super Coach points systems.
I don't like them much and take very little notice of them.
BUT that doesn't mean the concept of attributing points to players for what they do in a game is not merit worthy.

So maybe, between us all, we can come up with a better 'points system' than either of DT or SC?

My pet hate is the 'cheap' give/get/give which so many midfielders seem to thrive on these days in amassing unrealistic DT/SC points.
I also don't believe that a 'Joe the goose' handball over the top to an unmarked player in the square for a goal should be worth as much as the Buddy Franklin running goal from the boundary line a couple of years ago.

Also IMHO the only tapouts that should attract points are those that go to advantage.

Can we create a more equitable system that better reflects performances than the ones currently in general use?

I'd like to see a little more transparency in how Champion Data reports it's information, in particular it's classifications for individual statistics such as contested possessions and I'd also like to know more about how it classifies certain things such as "best forward in a season".

[bob__71]

Whilst we all love to watch the slick hitouts to a player in space that lead directly to a clearance, that isn't what the majority of ruckwork is about. The main work in the ruck is about getting the ball to a zone which is advantageous to the teams setup. Quite often in the ruck you may lose the tap but have enough influence to limit the zones where the opposition can tap to. You can then have a setup which has numbers in that space and give the team a better chance of winning the contest.

I believe that the primary role of any good ruckman is to not allow a dominance by the opposition ruckman. And therefore limit the number of easy take aways by the opposition. Hence why I don't really believe that hitout stats really mean much at all. That doesn't mean that ruckmen aren't important, it just means that they are part of an onball brigade, who should be rated as a group, probably best rated by clearances.

[samoht]

Ruckmen neutralize each other most of the time in the ruck contests.
If you look closely at Mumford's 46 hitouts - 20% may have gone to his team's advantage - that's only about 9 times!
And on those 9 occasions his midfielders were still under intense pressure (being chased and harassed) and it doesn't mean something came of those clearances - GWS may have turned it over at some later point.

Mumford also hit it about 6 or so times directly to our midfielders.

So when you examine his ledger - let's say there was a sum gain of 3 hitouts (9-6)

I don't consider this a dominant game.

Hickey, who was limping at the latter part of the 3rd quarter and the last quarter played a fantastic game, and more or less neutralized him in the ruck. His 3 goals were more valuable than anything Mumford did in the ruck.

Hickey tapped one beautiful hitout to Armo (in the centre contest) who kicked it to Riewoldt for a goal.

[BigMart]

You'd be surprised about how complicated/sophisticated...

Whilst it's always going to be difficult to quantify quality and effectiveness of stats... A lot of studies have gone into what are the most damaging possessions... Ie/the ones that correlate to either scores or wins....

[Cairnsman]

You'd be surprised about how complicated/sophisticated...

Whilst it's always going to be difficult to quantify quality and effectiveness of stats... A lot of studies have gone into what are the most damaging possessions... Ie/the ones that correlate to either scores or wins....

I'd imagine that most clubs have their own data collection and management systems. I'd imagine that coaching departments are heavily involved in decisions about what type of data is collected and how it is analysed to suit their game plans, especially the ones that are developing new tactics and strategies. From what I understand Champion Data is very generic and mostly consumed by media outlets and that some of their data is not that useful to coaches.

[BigMart]

Advanced Champion Data stats are used in the coaches box. You'll only see one or two stats people in boxes... With Lap Tops.

They get updated numbers from CD and feed that info to the coaches

Most stat indicators are standard also

Inside 50's vs Opponents (midfield effectiveness)
% scores vs inside 50's (fwd efficiency)
Same with D50 (Backs efficiency)
Tackles or 1% stats ... Measure Defensive pressure
Clearances vs opponents (stoppage performance)

They can easily get these numbers from CD and feed info to line coaches...

Some clubs also
Hand ball receives .... To see if there is run and link carry
Marks in F50 or D50
Kicking to Handball ratio

[HitTheBoundary]

Advanced Champion Data stats are used in the coaches box. You'll only see one or two stats people in boxes... With Lap Tops.

They get updated numbers from CD and feed that info to the coaches

Most stat indicators are standard also

Inside 50's vs Opponents (midfield effectiveness)
% scores vs inside 50's (fwd efficiency)
Same with D50 (Backs efficiency)
Tackles or 1% stats ... Measure Defensive pressure
Clearances vs opponents (stoppage performance)

They can easily get these numbers from CD and feed info to line coaches...

Some clubs also
Hand ball receives .... To see if there is run and link carry
Marks in F50 or D50
Kicking to Handball ratio

Is this an opinion, or do you know these things as fact? i.e someone in the know told you which clubs receive which stats.

And if it is fact, which stats do the Saints get?

[borderbarry]

Ruch work is over rated, especially if you have a clever rover.
Bobby Skilton never had a dominant ruckman in the South Melbourne side, but he won 3 Brownlow medals roving to the opposition ruckman/

[Bernard Shakey]

Ruch work is over rated, especially if you have a clever rover.
Bobby Skilton never had a dominant ruckman in the South Melbourne side, but he won 3 Brownlow medals roving to the opposition ruckman/

Ken Boyd probably helped by knocking out opposition players willynilly!

[Liam_G]

You'd be surprised about how complicated/sophisticated...

Whilst it's always going to be difficult to quantify quality and effectiveness of stats... A lot of studies have gone into what are the most damaging possessions... Ie/the ones that correlate to either scores or wins....

I'd imagine that most clubs have their own data collection and management systems. I'd imagine that coaching departments are heavily involved in decisions about what type of data is collected and how it is analysed to suit their game plans, especially the ones that are developing new tactics and strategies. From what I understand Champion Data is very generic and mostly consumed by media outlets and that some of their data is not that useful to coaches.

All clubs do have their own analytic teams that use data collected by Champion Data to create their own specialised reports. Some clubs also do collect some of their own data. However, Champion Data analysts also provide clubs with specialised reports based on meetings between the two parties. I will categorically state that your final statement is incorrect. It is not generic and coaches/AFL clubs absolutely use both 'Champion Data' data and detailed reports to better themselves. Disclaimer: I work at Champion Data. I do not work in the 'AFL' department and I do not have intimate knowledge of the relationship between Champion Data and the clubs themselves, but I do stand by my statements above as factual.

[dragit]

Do champion feed the afl web stats & all the other fantasy sites Liam?