Telling stats
Users browsing this topic:0 Registered, 0 Hidden and 0 Guests
Registered Users: None |
 |
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Piethagoras' Theorem 
the hypotenuse, is always a cakewalk
Joined: 29 May 2006
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
| watt price tully wrote: | | FrankieGoesToCollingwood wrote: | | Duff Soviet Union wrote: | | FrankieGoesToCollingwood wrote: | I try not to read too much into stats but was surprised to find we were last in the hit outs. Which may explain why our clearance and stoppage work is ranked bottom half.
2nd for marks inside 50 and 3rd for rebound 50's suggests to me we are counter attacking well but failing to convert our opportunities.
Our tackles have jumped to top 6 but I find that stat misleading. If you've got the ball, you obviously don't need to tackle. I'd love to see a stat for 'perceived pressure' or 'forced turnovers' but that would be fairly subjective.
Still early days, it could all change abruptly after a couple of games but interesting nonetheless. |
Hit outs are an absolutely, 100% worthless statistic. T....... ........but I'd bet we take way more marks in low percentage areas (48m out on the boundary line) than anyone. |
[b]Like I said, [b]"I try not to read too much into stats". It was merely an observation. [/b]......... |
I disagree. I read the "Complete works of Shakespeare" from our clangers, that end of the world is nigh from our frees against & the inner secrets of Bronwyn Bishop's hair from our desire indictors. |
hmm, you must tell me more about the inner secrets of Bronwyn Bishop's hair? 
_________________
Formally frankiboy and FrankieGoesToCollingwood. |
|
|
|
 |
Albert Parker
Joined: 13 Dec 2012
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| FrankieGoesToCollingwood wrote: | I try not to read too much into stats but was surprised to find we were last in the hit outs. Which may explain why our clearance and stoppage work is ranked bottom half.
2nd for marks inside 50 and 3rd for rebound 50's suggests to me we are counter attacking well but failing to convert our opportunities.
Our tackles have jumped to top 6 but I find that stat misleading. If you've got the ball, you obviously don't need to tackle. I'd love to see a stat for 'perceived pressure' or 'forced turnovers' but that would be fairly subjective.
Still early days, it could all change abruptly after a couple of games but interesting nonetheless. |
Re tackles - we out tackled North on the weekend and had more disposals. Sydney had over 100 tackles against the Dockers and won. It's a misconception that tackle count aligns with the other team winning the possession count and game.
_________________
One team, one dream - the Pies and this year's premiership |
|
|
|
|
Piethagoras' Theorem
the hypotenuse, is always a cakewalk
Joined: 29 May 2006
|
| Post subject: | |
|
^Agreed. Never said it did. re my previous post, the crows having less tackles than GWS would be the exeption to the rule. Again, it's misleading. Only if you read too much into it 
_________________
Formally frankiboy and FrankieGoesToCollingwood. |
|
|
|
|
Duff Soviet Union
Joined: 17 Aug 2010
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| FrankieGoesToCollingwood wrote: | | watt price tully wrote: | | FrankieGoesToCollingwood wrote: | ........
Our tackles have jumped to top 6 but I find that stat misleading. If you've got the ball, you obviously don't need to tackle. ........ |
That was remarkable stat against North. They were truly woeful. |
Yes, they were but I don't take much notice of tackle counts and here's why.
We beat norf by 35 pts and have 13 more tackles. Sounds a likely result, yeah?
But then Adelaide beat GWS by 65 pts yet lay 7 less tackles than their opponent.
Do we now question the crows tackling? They won by 10 goals! Of course we don't. At a guess, I'd say that wouldn't happen very often but goes to show just how misleading stats can be |
I'd say that just shows that only looking at one statistic is stupid. It doesn't show that stats are misleading, it shows that you need to look at all the important stats rather than just cherry picking your preferred indicator.
I remember reading somewhere that the three important stats are disposal efficiency, contested possessions and tackles (as I mentioned upthread). If teams win two of those stats, they win the game about 70% of the time (from memory, but that's pretty close) and if they win all three, they win about 98% of the time.
Even as a "stats fan" myself, I think people sometimes look at stats too much. Those three stats are important. Pretty much every other stat can easily be ignored.
_________________
"We ain't gotta dream no more" |
|
|
|
|
Piethagoras' Theorem
the hypotenuse, is always a cakewalk
Joined: 29 May 2006
|
| Post subject: | |
|
^^
I still think they are misleading but yeah, you're right, it depends on how you read them. Let's have a look at the 3 important stats you mention and use the current 2 top teams as examples. Just as a point of interest, not to prove or disprove any argument.
Contested possessions
Geelong currently ranked 14th
Hawthorn currently ranked 13th
Disposal efficiency
Geelong currently ranked 7th
Hawthorn currently ranked 4th
Tackles
Geelong currently ranked 3rd
Hawthorn currently ranked last
Apart from the Hawks disposal efficiency those stats are hardly indicative of where the 2 teams are at this point in time. There are obviously many more factors at play. Assuming the likely result of top 4 for both teams it'll be interesting to see if those figures change much by the end of the year.
_________________
Formally frankiboy and FrankieGoesToCollingwood. |
|
|
|
|
Duff Soviet Union
Joined: 17 Aug 2010
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| FrankieGoesToCollingwood wrote: | ^^
I still think they are misleading but yeah, you're right, it depends on how you read them. Let's have a look at the 3 important stats you mention and use the current 2 top teams as examples. Just as a point of interest, not to prove or disprove any argument.
Contested possessions
Geelong currently ranked 14th
Hawthorn currently ranked 13th
Disposal efficiency
Geelong currently ranked 7th
Hawthorn currently ranked 4th
Tackles
Geelong currently ranked 3rd
Hawthorn currently ranked last
Apart from the Hawks disposal efficiency those stats are hardly indicative of where the 2 teams are at this point in time. There are obviously many more factors at play. Assuming the likely result of top 4 for both teams it'll be interesting to see if those figures change much by the end of the year. |
Your stats are wrong. I don't think you've updated for yesterday's game.
Also, as I said earlier, you need to include the opposition totals, since differential is what you need to measure, not raw totals.
Hawthorn and Geelong actually rank 1-2 in contested possession differential, not 13th and 14th. Geelong also ranks 2 in tackle differential (no 1? GWS. Seriously), while Hawthorn's is about 14th. I can't find opposition disposal efficiency stats, but I bet Hawthorn leads the league if disposal efficiency differential.
The Pies are above average in both tackle and contested possession differential and probably below average in disposal efficiency differential.
Again, I think on a team level, these three stats tell you most of what you need to know. The rest is over analysis.
_________________
"We ain't gotta dream no more" |
|
|
|
|
watt price tully 
Joined: 15 May 2007
|
|
|
|
|
think positive 
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Location: somewhere
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| stoid wrote: | | think positive wrote: | | Take the Freo game out of that and what's the stats? |
I looked at what you said TP and I thought I'd look at the AFL ladder from round 2 onwards, as if the season started then... this is how it would look before the Geelong v Hawthorn game today... Essendon looks really good! |
Gees thats cool, ta!
_________________
You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
SuperStar Beams 
Joined: 25 Sep 2009
|
| Post subject: | |
|
With tackling it can also come down to how much pressure you can put onto other teams without the need for tackling, take Hawks for example i havent watched much of any of their games so im only guessing but the pressure they put their opponents under can cause them to cough the ball up to them.
With us i think our tackling is an important stat for us as thats how we put them under pressure.
Time and time again i see our players go at the man looking to tackle when they should corral instead as that a bigger % than going hard for the tackle missing it and giving them a clear path which is what i believe hawks might be doing but as i said im not sure as i havent watched many of their games. |
|
|
|
|
Piethagoras' Theorem
the hypotenuse, is always a cakewalk
Joined: 29 May 2006
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Duff Soviet Union wrote: | | FrankieGoesToCollingwood wrote: | ^^
I still think they are misleading but yeah, you're right, it depends on how you read them. Let's have a look at the 3 important stats you mention and use the current 2 top teams as examples. Just as a point of interest, not to prove or disprove any argument.
Contested possessions
Geelong currently ranked 14th
Hawthorn currently ranked 13th
Disposal efficiency
Geelong currently ranked 7th
Hawthorn currently ranked 4th
Tackles
Geelong currently ranked 3rd
Hawthorn currently ranked last
Apart from the Hawks disposal efficiency those stats are hardly indicative of where the 2 teams are at this point in time. There are obviously many more factors at play. Assuming the likely result of top 4 for both teams it'll be interesting to see if those figures change much by the end of the year. |
Your stats are wrong. I don't think you've updated for yesterday's game.
Also, as I said earlier, you need to include the opposition totals, since differential is what you need to measure, not raw totals.
Hawthorn and Geelong actually rank 1-2 in contested possession differential, not 13th and 14th. Geelong also ranks 2 in tackle differential (no 1? GWS. Seriously), while Hawthorn's is about 14th. I can't find opposition disposal efficiency stats, but I bet Hawthorn leads the league if disposal efficiency differential.
The Pies are above average in both tackle and contested possession differential and probably below average in disposal efficiency differential.
Again, I think on a team level, these three stats tell you most of what you need to know. The rest is over analysis. |
Ok, I see what's happened here. I wasn't looking at the differential between team and it's opponent. That would be a more accurate indicator
_________________
Formally frankiboy and FrankieGoesToCollingwood. |
|
|
|
|
35forever
"I feel sick - dada dada dada da"
Joined: 23 Feb 2005
Location: Physical=Sunshine Coast -- Mental=Vic Park
|
| Post subject: | |
|
I tell you what stat really pi$$es me off...
Free Kicks! I don't think we've won that stat this year, no matter how much we win by, yet for the rest of the competition the winning side usually wins the most frees, the bigger the margin the more frees they get.
For us no such correlation exists, and I've noticed this year that the difference is usually greatest in the early part of the game. Last week we were something like 13-5 down halfway through the second despite being dominant over the Tiges.
When is this gonna be taken seriously? Do we not deserve an even playing field?
For those who think it's a fantasy, and that there is no conspiracy...
You're right! There isn't!
However umpires are people, often Melbourne people, and Melbourne people are either Collingwood fans or Collingwood haters, that's something we all know. It only requires the faintest anti-Collingwood feeling in the back of the mind, even a subconscious one, to cause stats like we see each week. Look at the carry on over Cotchin not getting enough frees, he was manhandled by that mean ol' Caff. What about Trav!? Is he or is he not the most man-handled player in the game!? Every time he goes for a ball he has so many arms on him he looks like a hindu goddess!
This ain't no fantasy. I went through the stats at AFL Tables
http://afltables.com/afl/afl_index.html
(Yes, I was bored that day!) and tallied the free kicks awarded over 5 years to get an average season. Unsurprisingly I found that West Coast are the umpires favourites by a long way, followed by daylight, followed by all the other rabble, followed by even bigger daylight, followed by Collingwood.
This during a period where we finished in the 8 each year, played several prelims, 2 Grand Finals, and won a premiership!
For the record, I also found that the most frees went to 2 interstate clubs (WCE & Port), and then Geelong, half of those probably going to the dirty Duckwood.
Those 3 teams averaged scores over a hundred (in frees per season, but don't ask for my exact methodology, it was last year), All the rest fell in the 90's, except us, sticking out the bottom like a hernia with 86!
If this shows anything it is more like a bias rather than a systematic and deliberate program, however, in a game where a single free can decide the issue an anomaly of over 20% is a serious issue, and must be addressed. Let's remember what poor umpiring decisions have cost us over the years, A Premiership in 1979 (Harmes), a night GF the same year (Blight to Goode after the siren), and a 25 odd game winning streak run in 2011 (Pendle's goal).
A level playing field would see us winning more games, it's that simple, and the numbers show very clearly that we do not have that, and haven't for many years. Of course one can't complain about umpiring when your side is losing, it just looks like whining, but now that we've managed to string 2 wins in a row early in a season, someone from CFC should be taking this matter up with the AFL because we most definitely ARE at a disadvantage. We don't want the ridiculous home ground advantage West Coast enjoys, and we don't want to win games because of an umpiring error, but we DO want a level playing field and the numbers demonstrate that we don't have that.
_________________
"If at first you dont succeed...
... oh who cares, we did it!!!!!"
-me, 2010
"The pies are going to the big dance!"-P.Daicos 2010
Visit My Website! |
|
|
|
|
watt price tully
Joined: 15 May 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| FrankieGoesToCollingwood wrote: | | watt price tully wrote: | | FrankieGoesToCollingwood wrote: | | Duff Soviet Union wrote: | | FrankieGoesToCollingwood wrote: | I try not to read too much into stats but was surprised to find we were last in the hit outs. Which may explain why our clearance and stoppage work is ranked bottom half.
2nd for marks inside 50 and 3rd for rebound 50's suggests to me we are counter attacking well but failing to convert our opportunities.
Our tackles have jumped to top 6 but I find that stat misleading. If you've got the ball, you obviously don't need to tackle. I'd love to see a stat for 'perceived pressure' or 'forced turnovers' but that would be fairly subjective.
Still early days, it could all change abruptly after a couple of games but interesting nonetheless. |
Hit outs are an absolutely, 100% worthless statistic. T....... ........but I'd bet we take way more marks in low percentage areas (48m out on the boundary line) than anyone. |
[b]Like I said, [b]"I try not to read too much into stats". It was merely an observation. [/b]......... |
I disagree. I read the "Complete works of Shakespeare" from our clangers, that end of the world is nigh from our frees against & the inner secrets of Bronwyn Bishop's hair from our desire indictors. |
hmm, you must tell me more about the inner secrets of Bronwyn Bishop's hair? |
When the last of the humans disappear from the face of the earth due to Freedonia attacking Sylvania or when The Grand Duchy of Fenwick attacks the USA three things will remain:
1. Cockroaches;
2. Coke a cola bottles; &
3. Bronwyn Bishop's hair.
_________________
“I even went as far as becoming a Southern Baptist until I realised they didn’t keep ‘em under long enough” Kinky Friedman |
|
|
|
|
Piethagoras' Theorem
the hypotenuse, is always a cakewalk
Joined: 29 May 2006
|
| Post subject: | |
|
The hair will evolve and rule the earth.. cockroaches never stood a chance 
_________________
Formally frankiboy and FrankieGoesToCollingwood. |
|
|
|
|
HAL
Please don't shout at me - I can't help it.
Joined: 17 Mar 2003
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Can you remember any time that cockroaches did it? |
|
|
|
|
Piethagoras' Theorem
the hypotenuse, is always a cakewalk
Joined: 29 May 2006
|
| Post subject: | |
|
yeah, I took a video. Wanna see it?
_________________
Formally frankiboy and FrankieGoesToCollingwood. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
