AFL Ultimate Team - Player Stats

[Jake2403]

Hi All,
I am currently in the process of developing an AFL Ultimate Team type game. It's nothing big, but it will be a bit of fun for all who decide to play it. Anyway, I need your assistance on the players' stats. There are many different players and I thought I could use your help in getting as many players' stats as possible. The stats include:
- PACE
- SHOOTING
- PASSING (both handball and kick)
- MARKING
- DEFENDING (e.g. spoiling)
- RUCK
Then:
- Overall Rating
- Card Type (e.g. Gold, Silver, Bronze)

If you guys want to tell me what you think each players stat might be, for example:
Lewis Jetta
pace - 93
shooting - 87
passing - 88
marking - 79
defending - 41
ruck - 32

Also let me know if I have missed any stats or if I should leave some out, I need a total of six stats for each card.
Thanks

EDIT: This also includes legends (e.g. lockett, ablett, skilton, etc)

 

[TaylorWalker]

Haha this is so cool, but I think it should be Kicking (includes goal kicking and field kicks) and handball, instead of shooting and passing.

 

[NinjaSwan]

I'd get rid of shooting and replace it with maybe Tackling or something.

 

[TaylorWalker]

I just had a crack at it myself

 

[EagleCanival]

I just had a crack at it myself

Dangerfield should be much higher. He's the third best player in the game.

 

[Gollo]

I just had a crack at it myself

@adelcrowsrdabest ay mate!

 

[Gollo]

I reckon the stats should be:
Physical (athleticism, endurance and strength stats)
Kicking (goal kicking and field kicking)
Handballing
Marking (contested and uncontested)
Defence (tackling, man-marking, one-percenters etc.)
Ruck (hitout accuracy and height)


Here are two examples:

 

[TaylorWalker]

Not bad Gollo! I'd like to see a few more opinions of others

 

[Gollo]

Because it was so much fun, I decided to make some more cards using my personal card stat regime:

I added Heeney to see what a silver card would look like, but when I thought about it, he deserved a 78. Considering there isn't as much range in player ratings in an AFL system, I think that if you were going to colour code the cards then a sliver card could be 70-79 rated, bronze 69- and gold 80+. I reckon they're pretty accurate, and BTW the card stats don't exactly determine the rating of the player, they are just rough ratings of players' different skills. (When I downloaded them, FUThead wouldn't print out the nation logos, but I did have Australian flags for everyone except Nic Nat, who had a Fijian one)

 

[TaylorWalker]

Not bad mate! Would be cool if there was a basic AFL Ultimate Team.

 

[Gollo]

Not bad mate! Would be cool if there was a basic AFL Ultimate Team.

Yeah, I really just created the cards for the fun of it. Still, info like this can be translated to future AFL Live editions, and I wouldn't put it past any game producer to bring in an online/Ultimate Team faction to any existing AFL game. Would be pretty cool.

 

[SSwans2011]

Because it was so much fun, I decided to make some more cards using my personal card stat regime:
View attachment 168235 View attachment 168236 View attachment 168237 View attachment 168238 View attachment 168239 View attachment 168320 View attachment 168240
I added Heeney to see what a silver card would look like, but when I thought about it, he deserved a 78. Considering there isn't as much range in player ratings in an AFL system, I think that if you were going to colour code the cards then a sliver card could be 70-79 rated, bronze 69- and gold 80+. I reckon they're pretty accurate, and BTW the card stats don't exactly determine the rating of the player, they are just rough ratings of players' different skills. (When I downloaded them, FUThead wouldn't print out the nation logos, but I did have Australian flags for everyone except Nic Nat, who had a Fijian one)

Love it and I know this post is old, but surely Buddy has been underrated here? Arguably the best player in the game.

 

[Gollo]

Love it and I know this post is old, but surely Buddy has been underrated here? Arguably the best player in the game.

Not in my books, no way. I had Fyfe and Selwood at 91, Ablett would be around 93, Danger and Pendles could be at 90, 91. I wouldn't put Buddy in that bracket of players, he's just under. It's all just speculation, but Buddy is placing around the top 10 only, so IMO 89 is ample.

 

[SSwans2011]

Not in my books, no way. I had Fyfe and Selwood at 91, Ablett would be around 93, Danger and Pendles could be at 90, 91. I wouldn't put Buddy in that bracket of players, he's just under. It's all just speculation, but Buddy is placing around the top 10 only, so IMO 89 is ample.

Fair enough. Think you're heavily underestimating key forwards and defenders though, and falling into the trap of rating midfielders too highly. I'd have Franklin at least as high as Danger, and probably on par with Fyfe and Selwood. Would take draft a young Buddy over a young Danger any day.

 

[Gollo]

Fair enough. Think you're heavily underestimating key forwards and defenders though, and falling into the trap of rating midfielders too highly. I'd have Franklin at least as high as Danger, and probably on par with Fyfe and Selwood. Would take draft a young Buddy over a young Danger any day.

It can seem like that, but not many would rate Rance as an 86. I just genuinely don't rate Buddy any higher than them. I would be having Buddy around the same mark as Roughead and Kennedy (JJK) simply based on recent form.

 

[SSwans2011]

It can seem like that, but not many would rate Rance as an 86. I just genuinely don't rate Buddy any higher than them. I would be having Buddy around the same mark as Roughead and Kennedy (JJK) simply based on recent form.

Fair enough, but I wouldn't take much out of his recent form. His back was destroyed from carrying us too much. Single-handedly threw the team on his back to win about 3-4 games last season. Not many other players can say that, and Roughead and JJK certainly cannot. Your opinion though, so I'll stop being picky.