Top 50 players 2017
Users browsing this topic:0 Registered, 0 Hidden and 0 Guests
Registered Users: None |
 |
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
MatthewBoydFanClub
Joined: 12 Feb 2007
Location: Elwood
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
| I don't trust champion data and I don't trust the statisticians. The only people I trust are the clubs themselves who award their own players each week. So if you want to know who the best players are in the AFL go to each club's web site and look up who won their club's b&f award. |
|
|
|
 |
K
Joined: 09 Sep 2011
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Okay, I think this is it (dated 8 May, 2013):
http://www.afl.com.au/staticfile/AFL%20Tenant/AFL/PlayerRatings/PlayerRatings_HOW.pdf
It's 15 pages long --- good Nickster reading material at your kids' next game/concert/play/activity. ("You were wonderful, Johnny.")
number of games
| Quote: |
From the 2011 and 2012 seasons combined, the top-50 players for disposals per game played an average of 39.98 total matches, including finals. This number was used as a guide to build in a buffer for players missing matches – through injury, suspension, omission or by not being involved in finals. Within the moving window of two seasons, a player’s most recent 40 matches are used in the calculation of his rating.
|
total scoreboard contribution
| Quote: | ...
The underlying measurement of a player’s performance within a game is done through Equity Ratings – the total scoreboard contribution of a player’s actions.
Should a goal kicker get the same reward for kicking a goal from two metres out in clear space as he does for a goal after breaking opposition lines, taking a few bounces and kicking from 50m out?
When a team takes the ball the length of the field from full back to kick a goal, six points are added to the scoreboard. EquityRatings address the question of how those six points should be distributed to the players who were involved in the chain of possession. Actions that improve the position of the team will be rewarded with a positive value but those that put teammates under pressure or turn the ball over will be punished with a negative value.
Equity Ratings use the standard statistics collected by Champion Data and build on this information by using the locations of every event and the pressure applied to opposition disposals to give a complete (and accurate) account of a player’s contribution.
... |
|
|
|
|
|
qldmagpie67
Joined: 18 Dec 2008
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| BucksIsFutureCoach wrote: | | I don't trust champion data and I don't trust the statisticians. The only people I trust are the clubs themselves who award their own players each week. So if you want to know who the best players are in the AFL go to each club's web site and look up who won their club's b&f award. |
Bucks that might be true is most cases but not all.
Last year our best player didn't win our best and fairest due to injury.
Pendles would have won yet another Copeland if not for injury.
The eventual winner Sidey IMO still wasn't out next best player maybe our next fairest but defiantly not second best behind Pendles.
In terms of importance to a teams chances of winning stats mean absolutely nothing I agree.
Some players play a very team first role which won't always appear on a stat sheet but will be instrumental in that side winning.
Greenwood's job on Selwood wouldn't get many rating points I'm sure.
As for Collingwood IMO our most important players in order are
Pendles (our best player by miles still)
Grundy (our only true ruckman and 3rd highest clearance winner)
Moore/Cox (need a second tall so either one)
Wells (maybe the most skilful player we have)
Dunn/Howe (need a backline general so either one)
Treloar (his run carry and forward 50 entries are vital)
Adams (highest clearance winner and now a goal kicker and fantastic young leader)
Then you can put in Sidey and whoever else after that it doesn't matter
Stats are just that stats. I mentioned earlier the holes I see in the system but champion data is regardless used by all types of media and commentary people as the guideline or basis in rating players.
When the Herald does it best 50 players this year how many pies players will be in it ? 1 maybe 2 at best (Pendles & Treloar like last 2 seasons) that differs from champion data were we have 5 in the top 50.
For mine any top 50 not including Grundy now is a hoax but that's just my opinion.
Bucks bottom line is no system is 100% going to produce the right result in terms of rankings or ratings there to many unknown or variables in there to be 100% accurate |
|
|
|
|
HAL
Please don't shout at me - I can't help it.
Joined: 17 Mar 2003
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Interesting deduction. Tell me who. |
|
|
|
|
K
Joined: 09 Sep 2011
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| qldmagpie67 wrote: | | BucksIsFutureCoach wrote: | | ... The only people I trust are the clubs themselves who award their own players each week. So if you want to know who the best players are in the AFL go to each club's web site and look up who won their club's b&f award. |
Bucks that might be true is most cases but not all.
... |
I guess the most obvious candidate for a counterexample is Licca vs. Buckley. |
|
|
|
|
K
Joined: 09 Sep 2011
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| BucksIsFutureCoach wrote: | I don't trust champion data and I don't trust the statisticians. The only people I trust are the clubs themselves...
|
Well, it's not clear whether they have any statisticians at all in that company. It was, after all, (co-)founded by an ex-footballer (from 1970, whose very name may still induce Nicksters to choke on their bacon and eggs). In any event, the data is a bit like food. If we get the fresh produce, suitably cultivated, then all is fine; we can cook it up and eat it in whatever ways we see fit. The trouble comes when they insist on creating an AFL food desert, in which all that is available is highly processed McNuggets of data made from bits of the chicken that not even the chicken knew it had. |
|
|
|
|
Pies4shaw 
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| I will be very encouraged about the accuracy of the Champion Data rankings if the AFL players rank Sidebottom in the 400s, instead of in the top 40, as they did in March 2017 (before he won the best and fairest). |
|
|
|
|
qldmagpie67
Joined: 18 Dec 2008
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Pies4shaw wrote: | | I will be very encouraged about the accuracy of the Champion Data rankings if the AFL players rank Sidebottom in the 400s, instead of in the top 40, as they did in March 2017 (before he won the best and fairest). |
At the end of 2016 season champion data had him ranked somewhere in the 40's a well by memory hence why we had at the start of the 2017 season the top ranked midfield according to champion data .
So basically the AFL players had him ranked around the same as champion data so there must be some accuracy in what they do.
The 400's is reserved for players like Langdon 😜😜 |
|
|
|
|
K
Joined: 09 Sep 2011
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| qldmagpie67 wrote: | | Pies4shaw wrote: | | I will be very encouraged about the accuracy of the Champion Data rankings if the AFL players rank Sidebottom in the 400s, instead of in the top 40, as they did in March 2017 (before he won the best and fairest). |
At the end of 2016 season champion data had him ranked somewhere in the 40's a well by memory hence why we had at the start of the 2017 season the top ranked midfield according to champion data .
So basically the AFL players had him ranked around the same as champion data so there must be some accuracy in what they do.
The 400's is reserved for players like Langdon 😜😜 |
Okay, now I need clarification. Say we're using Sidebottom as a test case. P4S, where do you think Sidebottom should be ranked? What do you refer to when you say "CD rankings" & "AFL players"? I assume the former is what QM67 is telling us about, which matches what is in their prospectus. |
|
|
|
|
qldmagpie67
Joined: 18 Dec 2008
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| K wrote: | | qldmagpie67 wrote: | | Pies4shaw wrote: | | I will be very encouraged about the accuracy of the Champion Data rankings if the AFL players rank Sidebottom in the 400s, instead of in the top 40, as they did in March 2017 (before he won the best and fairest). |
At the end of 2016 season champion data had him ranked somewhere in the 40's a well by memory hence why we had at the start of the 2017 season the top ranked midfield according to champion data .
So basically the AFL players had him ranked around the same as champion data so there must be some accuracy in what they do.
The 400's is reserved for players like Langdon 😜😜 |
Okay, now I need clarification. Say we're using Sidebottom as a test case. P4S, where do you think Sidebottom should be ranked? What do you refer to when you say "CD rankings" & "AFL players"? I assume the former is what QM67 is telling us about, which matches what is in their prospectus. |
Geez K that's a loaded question for P4S. Without preemptive his answer he would rank Sidey somewhere between 1 -3 in the history of the game. Heck after his debut P4S was calling for his immediate induction as a AFL legend.
Personally without bias I would say the champion data rankings don't reflect his place in our team (they had him ranked 7th among pies players) I would have thought he was in our top 5 players with Pendles #1 then you can argue the rest from there IMO |
|
|
|
|
MatthewBoydFanClub
Joined: 12 Feb 2007
Location: Elwood
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| My argument with the champion data is not the data itself but how the data is applied. For instance, if we're talking about Sidey, it all comes down to the coach and the player. Did he do what the coach told him to do on the day? Did he effect what his opponent did on the day? Was the coach happy with his performance after the game? How many Copeland trophy votes did he get for his efforts after the game? All else doesn't matter - what we think of him, how many champion points he scored etc. After all this a team sport so the team comes before the individual. |
|
|
|
|
Pies4shaw
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| qldmagpie67 wrote: | | K wrote: | | qldmagpie67 wrote: | | Pies4shaw wrote: | | I will be very encouraged about the accuracy of the Champion Data rankings if the AFL players rank Sidebottom in the 400s, instead of in the top 40, as they did in March 2017 (before he won the best and fairest). |
At the end of 2016 season champion data had him ranked somewhere in the 40's a well by memory hence why we had at the start of the 2017 season the top ranked midfield according to champion data .
So basically the AFL players had him ranked around the same as champion data so there must be some accuracy in what they do.
The 400's is reserved for players like Langdon 😜😜 |
Okay, now I need clarification. Say we're using Sidebottom as a test case. P4S, where do you think Sidebottom should be ranked? What do you refer to when you say "CD rankings" & "AFL players"? I assume the former is what QM67 is telling us about, which matches what is in their prospectus. |
Geez K that's a loaded question for P4S. Without preemptive his answer he would rank Sidey somewhere between 1 -3 in the history of the game. Heck after his debut P4S was calling for his immediate induction as a AFL legend.
Personally without bias I would say the champion data rankings don't reflect his place in our team (they had him ranked 7th among pies players) I would have thought he was in our top 5 players with Pendles #1 then you can argue the rest from there IMO |
According to the AFL site, a questionnaire administered to the players asking them to rank their opponents resulted in Sidebottom being ranked 39th. http://www.afl.com.au/news/features/players-top-50
As to my old mate Qld's question, I don't actually worry much about "ranking" players across clubs - they either play for us or they are dead to me. Looking at the Club, though I would have said Sidebottom is our second-most-skilled footballer (after Pendlebury). Sidey would possibly sneak in to my best Collingwood team since 1995 but I doubt it. He'd certainly be behind Swan, Pendlebury, Buckley, Ball and probably others for a midfield position. My starting 4 would be Grundy, Ball, Buckley and Swan. I don't want to start some fresh controversy by saying that - I don't really care who the starting 4 should be and it's just a way of trying to answer the question. |
|
|
|
|
qldmagpie67
Joined: 18 Dec 2008
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Pies4shaw wrote: | | qldmagpie67 wrote: | | K wrote: | | qldmagpie67 wrote: | | Pies4shaw wrote: | | I will be very encouraged about the accuracy of the Champion Data rankings if the AFL players rank Sidebottom in the 400s, instead of in the top 40, as they did in March 2017 (before he won the best and fairest). |
At the end of 2016 season champion data had him ranked somewhere in the 40's a well by memory hence why we had at the start of the 2017 season the top ranked midfield according to champion data .
So basically the AFL players had him ranked around the same as champion data so there must be some accuracy in what they do.
The 400's is reserved for players like Langdon 😜😜 |
Okay, now I need clarification. Say we're using Sidebottom as a test case. P4S, where do you think Sidebottom should be ranked? What do you refer to when you say "CD rankings" & "AFL players"? I assume the former is what QM67 is telling us about, which matches what is in their prospectus. |
Geez K that's a loaded question for P4S. Without preemptive his answer he would rank Sidey somewhere between 1 -3 in the history of the game. Heck after his debut P4S was calling for his immediate induction as a AFL legend.
Personally without bias I would say the champion data rankings don't reflect his place in our team (they had him ranked 7th among pies players) I would have thought he was in our top 5 players with Pendles #1 then you can argue the rest from there IMO |
According to the AFL site, a questionnaire administered to the players asking them to rank their opponents resulted in Sidebottom being ranked 39th. http://www.afl.com.au/news/features/players-top-50
As to my old mate Qld's question, I don't actually worry much about "ranking" players across clubs - they either play for us or they are dead to me. Looking at the Club, though I would have said Sidebottom is our second-most-skilled footballer (after Pendlebury). Sidey would possibly sneak in to my best Collingwood team since 1995 but I doubt it. He'd certainly be behind Swan, Pendlebury, Buckley, Ball and probably others for a midfield position. My starting 4 would be Grundy, Ball, Buckley and Swan. I don't want to start some fresh controversy by saying that - I don't really care who the starting 4 should be and it's just a way of trying to answer the question. |
Mate I'm really don't care about some sites rankings system honestly. It just seems every AFL related program always leads with the sentence "according to champion data" like its the bible for some weird reason.
I tend to agree with bucksiscoach that if a player fulfils his role well according to the coach then his done his job.
Pages ago I mentioned the hole I see in the data is the changing roles of players from season to season or even game to game.
Use greenwood as a example he doesn't always play the hard tag role.
I said in that same post was Sidey asked over the past Le years to change role for the team and did that have a detrimental effect on the way they view his performance on this rolling 40 game cycle.
I agree Pendles in our best player after that can be debated for various reasons.
Personally for the team I would say we could afford to lose Sidey before Grundy for instance so IMO Grundy is a more important player (didn't better player)
Anyways we've probably debated this topic to death now but it been fun |
|
|
|
|
HAL
Please don't shout at me - I can't help it.
Joined: 17 Mar 2003
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| we're using Sidebottom as a test case |
|
|
|
|
qldmagpie67
Joined: 18 Dec 2008
|
| Post subject: | |
|
That link was for the beginning of the 2017 season will be interesting to see if the likes of Grundy Treloar Adams Sidey Pendles Howe improve there positioning or not.
For mine Grundy Howe & Adams had there best seasons ever last season |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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
