Collingwood Champion Data List Analysis

[Magpie Monopoly]

Just thought id share an interesting article from the magpies website. The article outlines player rankings (based on champion data). An intersting read and i was surprised by the results. Generally the results were:

ELITE
Scott Pendlebury (Mid)

ABOVE AVERAGE
Dane Swan (Mid)
Steele Sidebottom (Mid)
Tyson Goldsack (Gen Def)
Jarryd Blair (Gen Fwd)
Nathan Brown (Key Def)
Jeremy Howe (Key Def)
Adam Treloar (Mid)
Jamie Elliott (Gen Fwd)
Alex Fasolo (Gen Fwd)
Marley Williams (Gen Def)
Tom Langdon (Gen Def)

Probably the most interesting point was that only 3 teams had more players ranked in the top 2 tiers (Hawthorns, Freo and Sydney) and we ranked 4th for defence and 4th for forwards.

Anyone surprised by this? Does it change your expectations for 2016?

Source: http://m.collingwoodfc.com.au/news/2016-02-12/list-analysis-pendlebury-the-elite

 

[TradeDraft]

Surprised to see Blair,Goldsack, Fasolo and Langdon in the Above Average and Where is Crisp and Adams?

 

[suspect footskills]

A little surprised there's no mention of Crisp in either of those categories.

 

[TradeDraft]

A little surprised there's no mention of Treloar in either of those categories.

Treloar is in the Above Average Category

 

[Scodog10]

Magpie Monopoly to answer your two questions. No and no.

When you see the likes of Goldsack and Blair rated as above average and on the same line as Swan, Sidebottom and Treloar you know it's a very uniquely skillset set orientated measurement because those two certainly aren't "above average" AFL footballers. Plus they have always been notoriously harsh on certain areas. A guy like Cloke hasnt got a chance in their ratings due to one element of his game. Post 2013 he wasn't rated elite for KPF's despite missing the Coleman by two goals and taking the most contested marks in the league by a long way...

The second reason for the no is that having an even spread of good talent isn't enough to change my opinion on the teams fortunes. There's a lot more that needs to go into it and unless they can clearly identify that our skill level will lift or that our rebound ability from the back half will grow my perceptions are unlikely to shift. Gameday will be the big test of those elements.

 

[Scodog10]

Surprised to see Blair,Goldsack, Fasolo and Langdon in the Above Average and Where is Crisp and Adams?

On the CD ratings Adams gets slaughtered by his kick rating, but I'm not sure what brings Crisp down I can only assume output.

As for the other 4 they were particularly strong in one area of their game which brings them up to that level. Blair and Goldsack is pressure, Fasolo is based on his finishing by foot and Langdon his ground level intercept ability. Being particularly strong in each of those areas according to CD brings their overall game up to the above average level.

 

[sirlothie]

One Elite player doesn't cut it...

 

[NT.Thunder]

No and no for me also.

I know a few guys at CD and the metrics they use for these classifications and you need to be pretty special to meet the elite criteria in any given position. It's not to say that some, if not most of these guys are elite in certain areas of their individual games but most will have a weaknesses (and that's probably harsh terminology) . I love stats but they don't show everything when combined with the rest of the team, I love the money ball logic tbh.

I'd be surprised or more interested if Hawthorn had more than 2-3 rated elite but wouldn't be surprised if they had plenty more rated above average. Mitchell and Hodge I could accept, Lewis no, Rioli no but both probably are rated higher.

A team of above average rated players would beat a few elite category players with passengers

 

[HeavyPop]

ABOVE AVERAGE
Tyson Goldsack (Gen Def)
Jarryd Blair (Gen Fwd)
Tom Langdon (Gen Def)

Good luck convincing the majority of posters on this forum of that.

 

[sirlothie]

Good luck convincing the majority of posters on this forum of that.

All are a chance of not making the team this year...

 

[NT.Thunder]

All are a chance of not making the team this year...

All are best 22 if 100% fit IMO.

I know what you're saying but maybe Goldsack would be the only one I'd question even if fit.

 

[sirlothie]

All are best 22 if 100% fit IMO.

I know what you're saying but maybe Goldsack would be the only one I'd question even if fit.

Really. I'd say Langdon is a biggest certainty, but if he loses form I could see him dropped. The other 2 I have outside my current best 22.

Goldsack has been on a modified program for ages so will probably start in the 2's to build fitness.

 

[Scodog10]

All are a chance of not making the team this year...

I doubt that because you can lock Langdon in to play every match that he's fit for.

I'm currently one of his bigger critics because his urgency onfield is deplorable and his intercept marking fell away in 2015 after being a huge positive in 2014.

If he fixes those two areas he could be a jet, but without them he's the next Bryce Gibbs (in terms of what could have been not overall quality).

 

[NT.Thunder]

I doubt that because you can lock Langdon in to play every match that he's fit for.

I'm currently one of his bigger critics because his urgency onfield is deplorable and his intercept marking fell away in 2015 after being a huge positive in 2014.

If he fixes those two areas he could be a jet, but without them he's the next Bryce Gibbs (in terms of what could have been not overall quality).

Jesus H Christ - Scodog10 is there any real need for language like that here?

 

[Scodog10]

Jesus H Christ - Scodog10 is there any real need for language like that here?

Off topic, but it's such a shame he didn't end up at a club that could really challenge him! I just hope Langdon realises that with a little urgency onfield he could be top drawer.

The man that immediately springs to mind is Mundy. Similar size, similar laconic style, similar skillset and he started in the role Langdon currently fills. He's struck the perfect balance and I just hope Langdon can to.

FWIW for some general clarification I'm not saying Langdon will reach the same levels as Gibbs or Mundy they're just some comparisons of guys who seem to play with a similarly laidback approach.

 

[NT.Thunder]

Off topic, but it's such a shame he didn't end up at a club that could really challenge him! I just hope Langdon realises that with a little urgency onfield he could be top drawer.

The man that immediately springs to mind is Mundy. Similar size, similar laconic style, similar skillset and he started in the role Langdon currently fills. He's struck the perfect balance and I just hope Langdon can to.

FWIW for some general clarification I'm not saying Langdon will reach the same levels as Gibbs or Mundy they're just some comparisons of guys who seem to play with a similarly laidback approach.

I know I get some funny looks each time I bring this up, and I don't do it often, but Langdon IMO will develop into an honest midfielder at Collingwood in a few years. At the moment we need him playing the role he currently is, but in a few years I expect he'll push further up field. He played some good football in the middle for Sandy and I reckon we kept a pretty close eye on that and it was a big part of him being drafted in his later years as a junior.

 

[Robroy22]

Dunno where we'd be without Champion Data....thank goodness they can show us how to judge what's "elite" and what's not?

 

[Bard]

I doubt that because you can lock Langdon in to play every match that he's fit for.

I'm currently one of his bigger critics because his urgency onfield is deplorable and his intercept marking fell away in 2015 after being a huge positive in 2014.

If he fixes those two areas he could be a jet, but without them he's the next Bryce Gibbs (in terms of what could have been not overall quality).

His intercept marking was fantastic in the second half of the year. He started slowly though which goes against the rest of the teams performance.

 

[mike123]

I know I get some funny looks each time I bring this up, and I don't do it often, but Langdon IMO will develop into an honest midfielder at Collingwood in a few years. At the moment we need him playing the role he currently is, but in a few years I expect he'll push further up field. He played some good football in the middle for Sandy and I reckon we kept a pretty close eye on that and it was a big part of him being drafted in his later years as a junior.

I just don't see where he's getting the midfield time with our depth there.

 

[NT.Thunder]

I just don't see where he's getting the midfield time with our depth there.

I can only see Pendles, Treloar and Adams as pretty much givens. Swan, Levi will be gone, Crisp, DeGoey and Aish hopefully come on and Sidey will more than likely be playing HFF. There will be room.

Have I missed someone.

 

[sirlothie]

I doubt that because you can lock Langdon in to play every match that he's fit for.

I'm currently one of his bigger critics because his urgency onfield is deplorable and his intercept marking fell away in 2015 after being a huge positive in 2014.

If he fixes those two areas he could be a jet, but without them he's the next Bryce Gibbs (in terms of what could have been not overall quality).

Now that Scharenberg has gone down you are probably right but word is Pendlebury could spend a lot of time there. We have a lot of half backs and utilities so he will need to be consistent.

 

[NT.Thunder]

Now that Scharenberg has gone down you are probably right but word is Pendlebury could spend a lot of time there. We have a lot of half backs and utilities so he will need to be consistent.

Really? I know Pendles can play anywhere, but surely we'd rather his delivery inside 50?

 

[sirlothie]

Really? I know Pendles can play anywhere, but surely we'd rather his delivery inside 50?

Well I remember him spending a fair bit off half back when 'resting' last year and I think Bucks likes the idea of him being a bit of a general and quarterback down there.

If you recall he played an awesome game off half back in Round 22 against Geelong. There has been talk that Treloar's addition will allow Pendles to spend more time there.

I think he would be more damaging as a half back than a mid, he had 32 touches against Geelong there and set up many drives.

 

[Ketchup]

Im pretty disappointed by this. It's completely unacceptable that we only realistically have 1, maybe 2 potential supercoach options.

That's what this list is talking about yeah?

 

[Saintly Viewed]

Blair?

Enough said, stupid statistics ruling the bleeding obvious.