Share the Load

[bergholt]

We're the worst in the AFL at sharing the load.

Here's a pretty crude measure; it's the number of players who've averaged more than 14 disposals per game for the season:

Fremantle 21
Geelong 20
Adelaide 19
Essendon 19
Melbourne 19
West Coast 19
Richmond 18
Hawthorn 17
Bulldogs 16
Port Adelaide 16
Carlton 15
Sydney 15
Brisbane 14
Collingwood 14
Kangaroos 13
St Kilda 11

Argue about the validity of possessions as a measure if you want, but it's pretty obvious that this leaves us exposed when one or two of our prime-movers are indisposed or out of form. Hence - we're inconsistent and lose games we should win (West Coast, Collingwood).

Interesting also that the five clubs which will finish closest to us on the ladder are all down the bottom here with us. Are we all in the same boat, to some extent? Some class players but not enough depth and help for them?


Here's our state at the moment.

Players averaging more than 14, in order:
Hayes, S Fisher, Goddard, Montagna, Dal Santo, Ball, Harvey, Gram, Jones, Riewoldt, Schneider

Can't really fault any of these - these are the most consistent players at the club. Jones the surprise packet this year, and Schneider could be better but doing ok to get into this group. One of those will definitely be gone next year, which takes us down to 10, so I reckon we need at least five or six to step up to share the load and make us more consistently competitive.

Next in order, averaging more than 12:
X Clarke, Birss, Blake, Milne, R Clarke, Dempster, Gwilt, Gilbert, McQualter

X Clarke, without injuries, should definitely be up there. It's older players like Birss, R Clarke, Dempster, Gilbert and McQualter who have to step up and take a bit more responsibility. Blake, Milne and Gwilt have roles to play elsewhere.

Next in order, averaging more than 10:
C Gardiner, Fiora, Eddy, Geary, King, Koschitzke, Armitage, Hudghton

From this group it's IMPERATIVE that Eddy, Geary and Armitage improve in the next year - these are the midfield kids who the next few years are based on. C Gardiner and Fiora aren't part of a premiership side, while King, Kosi and Max have roles elsewhere.

Next in order: M Gardiner, Maguire, L Fisher, Gehrig

M Gardiner has to improve. Maguire will be better when fit. L Fisher and Gehrig will be gone. (How ridiculous is it that L Fisher is ranked 31st out of 32 in possessions?)


Is it possible that we'll have fifteen consistent performers next year? With the quality of some of these players, if that could happen, we'd be a true finals competitor.

[bergholt]

I should note, this is those who have played over 4 games. The others:

Baker 10.5, Allen 7.7, Ferguson 6.0, McEvoy 6.0, Rix 4.0

All fall into the last group except Bakes, who can hopefully get fit one day and again play a role. Ferguson and Rix will be soon gone, and Allen and McEvoy have a long way to go and are big blokes anyway so aren't so much assessed on possessions.

[Armoooo]

We're the worst in the AFL at sharing the load.

Here's a pretty crude measure; it's the number of players who've averaged more than 14 disposals per game for the season:

Fremantle 21
Geelong 20
Adelaide 19
Essendon 19
Melbourne 19
West Coast 19
Richmond 18
Hawthorn 17
Bulldogs 16
Port Adelaide 16
Carlton 15
Sydney 15
Brisbane 14
Collingwood 14
Kangaroos 13
St Kilda 11

I don't know if i buy into this theory just because of how highly or lowly ranked the bolded teams are...

[Saintschampions08]

We're the worst in the AFL at sharing the load.

Here's a pretty crude measure; it's the number of players who've averaged more than 14 disposals per game for the season:

Fremantle 21
Geelong 20
Adelaide 19
Essendon 19
Melbourne 19
West Coast 19
Richmond 18
Hawthorn 17
Bulldogs 16
Port Adelaide 16
Carlton 15
Sydney 15
Brisbane 14
Collingwood 14
Kangaroos 13
St Kilda 11

I don't know if i buy into this theory just because of how highly or lowly ranked the bolded teams are...

Exactly.

This stat is utter crap.

No use for each player getting it 20 times if they can't do anything with it.

[Bernard Shakey]

You can make stats say what ever you want them to.

That's why they play the game, because if we relied on stats, there would be no point.

[saint66au]

I reckon its a vaild point...made more so by the fact that, with the exception of Jones, all the listed players are seasoned footballers

As stated in the OP, 2009 MUST be the year a few of our crop of 2006/07/08 kids takes the next step and gets in that list regularly.

[Red]

You may not be able to take a lot of notice of the stat, but then again when

ever we lose a game we have a lot of players who get less than 10

possessions.

[WayneJudson42]

Totally useless stat, with respect.

Cats and Crows apart, has no corelation to ladder position or games won.

All it shows is that some teams are more efficient, whilst others over-use the ball.

[bergholt]

I don't think it is a useless stat, but I can't prove it at this stage...

average possessions in a win: 353.64
average possessions in a loss: 333.39

We definitely have more possessions when we win, by 20. The quarters that we do well in are the ones where we have lots of touches. But that doesn't really prove anything.

But what Red says here is pretty smart, I reckon:

You may not be able to take a lot of notice of the stat, but then again whenever we lose a game we have a lot of players who get less than 10 possessions.

Here's the stats - result, margin, average poss, players below 10 poss:

R RES MAR AVG <10
1 W +2 13.86 6
2 W +40 16.45 3
3 L +38 13.95 5
4 L -42 16.86 3
5 W +36 16.23 4
6 L -21 14.64 4
7 W +3 13.41 6
8 L -9 15.73 9
9 L -46 15.14 6
10 W +79 16.86 5
11 L -27 14.36 5
12 L -35 13.23 6
13 W +8 16.73 2
14 W +15 16.55 3
15 W +32 16.14 5
16 W +30 19.00 4
17 L -17 15.86 4
18 W +8 15.77 2
19 L -14 15.41 7
20 W +43 17.95 1

average number below 10 poss in a win: 3.8
average number below 10 poss in a loss: 5.5

Look at the last two weeks for a very specific example.

Against Collingwood too much was left to too few. Lots of possessions for BJ, Len and Harvs, and good numbers for Roo, Gram, Dal, Joey and S Fisher.

But on the other side, Kossie, Milne, Fiora, Eddy, McQualter and Geary had very few possessions. Kos and Milne have roles, but the other four just have to be getting the ball, otherwise Toovey, McCarthy, Cook, Wellingham will be doing far more for their side.

And then against Freo, the opposite. The only player with less than 10 was Maxy, who once again has a specific role. The EXACT SAME names as the week before were the top eight (Len, Joey, Chips, BJ, Roo, Dal, Gram, Harvs). But the difference was that underneath them, getting enough of it to provide good support, were the middle-tier players - Blake 20, Gilbert 18, Schneider and Jones 17, Milne, King, Dempster 16, etc.

This was the main difference between the two weeks - that the OTHER players who aren't superstars got enough of the ball. There are very few teams that our top eight (nine, plus Ball) can beat with no support.

Not even West Coast. Our top nine that afternoon - Len, S Fisher, BJ, Harvs, Ball, Joey, CJ, Dal, Roo. (Gram quiet, but CJ made up for it.) Others pretty quiet. Result - loss.

We NEED eight or nine stars performing pretty well to win. This is necessary but not sufficient. If we don't have another eight players under them doing enough, we're highly unlikely to win.

Surely no-one can disagree with this?