Analysis Inexperience watch

Remove this Banner Ad

Reader mode
Milux said:
100% agree. As always i really appreciate your time and effort. You are a legend.
Click to expand...
Definitely. I'd hate to replace him with a less experienced poster - we'd definitely see the difference in his numbers.
 
Thanks Jivlain & LOTR for reminding me every week how far off we are competing. Seriously though, really appreciate you guys updating the numbers every week, I hope somehow this is the last year that we have such a significant gap in experience.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

There is an article on the Herald Sun website questioning the youth issue as a defence for the 138 point loss to Adelaide. I tend to agree that, while it is clearly an issue, it is no excuse for being completely uncompetitive. We also can't shy away from the fact that other very young teams are doing much better than us.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...p/news-story/f27ffc02c8b352e07dd5b040e62a9eff

Here are the stats from the weekend matches at the end of the article:

AVERAGE AGE — ROUND 20

1. North Melbourne 27.34

2. Geelong 26.87

3. Hawthorn 26.62

4. Fremantle 26.05

5. St Kilda 25.79

6. West Coast 25.56

7. Carlton 25.45

8. GWS Giants 25.25

9. Essendon 24.95

10. Richmond 24.80

11. Port Adelaide 24.74

12. Sydney 24.72

13. Adelaide 24.67

14. Collingwood 24.65

15. Western Bulldogs 24.22

16. Melbourne 23.50

17. Gold Coast 23.26

18. Brisbane Lions 23.09

AVERAGE GAMES PLAYED — ROUND 20

1. North Melbourne 143.2

2. Geelong 130.5

3. Hawthorn 129.0

4. West Coast 108.5

5. St Kilda 107.7

6. Fremantle 104.8

7. GWS Giants 102.4

8. Sydney 91.5

9. Collingwood 90.4

10. Carlton 90.2

11. Essendon 86.1

12. Port Adelaide 83.9

13. Richmond 83.8

14. Adelaide 82.6

15. Western Bulldogs 70.0

16. Brisbane Lions 66.0

17. Melbourne 65.3

18. Gold Coast 61.8

PLAYERS UNDER 22 YEARS OF AGE

Brisbane Lions 11

Gold Coast 9

Melbourne 8

Western Bulldogs 7

Essendon 6

Sydney 6

Port Adelaide 5

Fremantle 5

Richmond 4

St Kilda 4

Collingwood 4

Carlton 4

West Coast 3

Adelaide 3

GWS Giants 3

Hawthorn 2

North Melbourne 2

Geelong 1

BRISBANE’S ROUND 20 TEAM AGAINST ADELAIDE

Tom Rockliff (131 games, 26 years): captain, best-and-fairest 2011 and 2014, All-Australian 2014

Ryan Bastinac (140 games, 25 years)

Rhys Mathieson (8 games, 19 years): first year

Daniel Rich (140 games, 26 years): Rising Star 2009, 2nd in 2012 B&F

Mitch Robinson (139 games, 27 years): best-and-fairest 2015 (equal)

Ben Keays (13 games, 19 years): first year

Archie Smith (2 games, 21 years): rookie list

Harris Andrews (33 games, 19 years): second year

Pearce Hanley (126 games, 27 years): 2nd in 2013 B&F, 3rd in 2012 B&F, International Rules (Ireland) 2011 and 2014

Dayne Zorko (98 games, 27 years): best-and-fairest 2015 (equal), 2nd in 2014 B&F

Eric Hipwood (7 games, 18 years): first year

Darcy Gardiner (40 games, 20 years)

Sam Mayes (71 games, 22 years)

Josh Green (81 games, 23 years): Leading goalkicker 2014

Lewis Taylor (60 games, 21 years): Rising Star 2014, third year at club

Daniel Merrett (197 games, 31 years)

Liam Dawson (16 games, 20 years): second year

Matthew Hammelmann (6 games, 20 years): first-year rookie

Ryan Lester (77 games, 23 years)

Josh Walker (46 games, 23 years)

Nick Robertson (26 games, 21 years)

Josh Schache (17 games, 18 years): first year
Click to expand...
 
Averages are one thing, but the spread of ages makes a big difference.
Some of those teams have a much better spread of ages.
If a team was made up entirely of 23 year olds, their average age is younger than ours, but obviously would be a much better team, with all their players likely to have had 4-5 years in the system.

Average games played is a better metric, but can be skewed the other way. Chuck in a few older hands and the average goes up, but that experience could spend much of the game off the ball when it's only 2 or 3 pushing that average up.

These sort of stats can be a guide (as we've seen in this thread) but when looking at reasons for performance, comparing 2 sides is a bit more involved.
 
I was thinking just yesterday how much more competitive we'd be if we were able to hang onto Yeo, Polec, Docherty and Crisp. Yeo in particular was a big loss. I don't regret trading Crisp for DBeams but it would have been nice to be able to keep him in addition to adding DBeams. He was showing some positive signs at the end of 2014. He was gone anyway with Essendon pursuing him.

All 4 of them are in that 60-80 game bracket so they are starting to reach that point where they can consistently produce their best at AFL level plus they are all turning 23 in October except for Polec who is turning 24 so they fit in that age bracket that our side sorely lacks. All 4 are taller, athletic flanker/mid types as well fitting in that 185cm-190cm range with good running ability. Justin Clarke turns 23 in November and would have been in the same games bracket as those above if he'd played this season.

No point thinking about what could have been but it shouldn't be understated just how much the losses of Clarke, Yeo, Docherty, Polec and Crisp have hurt our rebuild. You add those 5 to our side and we are much more experienced and competitive on a weekly basis with a much brighter future, however, if we didn't lose the GH5 we mightn't have been as poor last season and consequently wouldn't have had the opportunity to draft Schache so all we can do now is try to look towards the future with the players we do have.
 
the other thing about averages is that would you rather have Daniel Merritt with 200 games or a Patrick Dangerfield with 200 games?

similarly the average age of our players over 190cm against adelaide aside from merritt was probably 20 and experience 20 games. for adelaide they had Reilly the rookie ruck but then Talia, Jenkins, Walker, 3 very mature talls. so we are bad on the metrics and then when you interrogate those metrics in more detail it potentially makes our situation worse.
 
John_Proctor said:
the other thing about averages is that would you rather have Daniel Merritt with 200 games or a Patrick Dangerfield with 200 games?

similarly the average age of our players over 190cm against adelaide aside from merritt was probably 20 and experience 20 games. for adelaide they had Reilly the rookie ruck but then Talia, Jenkins, Walker, 3 very mature talls. so we are bad on the metrics and then when you interrogate those metrics in more detail it potentially makes our situation worse.
Click to expand...
Agree, games played or age of players the one thing you can't quantify is class.
 
John_Proctor said:
the other thing about averages is that would you rather have Daniel Merritt with 200 games or a Patrick Dangerfield with 200 games?

similarly the average age of our players over 190cm against adelaide aside from merritt was probably 20 and experience 20 games. for adelaide they had Reilly the rookie ruck but then Talia, Jenkins, Walker, 3 very mature talls. so we are bad on the metrics and then when you interrogate those metrics in more detail it potentially makes our situation worse.
Click to expand...
I actually think that makes it slightly better for us - as we know it takes far longer for KPP's but it is much easier to develop a midfield quickly. We already have some talent there (yes we do) as well as some young guys both on the list and with the academy. So hopefully that means in 2-4 years we should have some mature KP talent as well as Beams/Rockliff/Rich in their late 20's plus whoever we draft in the meantime.
 
brl_car.png
That's Cripps up the top of the clearances and CPs. He really is something exceptional.
 
Kevvo said:
It's interesting though, if I'm reading these right, in both stats (clearances and CPs) we have 4 of the top 5 in the game.
Click to expand...

Yup - it helps that Carlton have struggled in those areas for years pre-Cripps. The next-best clearances are Archie, Rocky, Rich and then JJ; while for CPs it's Archie, Rocky, Matho, JJ, Robbo and then Zorko.
 
Round 21, 2016 - Lions vs. Blues at the Gabba
  • (0 to 10 games - Lions 5 vs. Blues 2)
  • 0 to 24 games - Lions 7 vs. Blues 4
  • 25 to 49 games - Lions 4 vs. Blues 5
  • 50 to 99 games - Lions 4 vs. Blues 5
  • 100 to 199 games - Lions 7 vs. Blues 6
  • 200+ games - Lions 0 vs. Blues 2
Extra stats:
  • Average games played - Lions 68.0 vs. Blues 84.5 (= -16.5 games on average)
  • Average age - Lions 23.6 vs. Blues 25.1
  • Average height - Lions 189.6cm vs. Blues 189.1cm
  • Average weight - Lions 88.3kg vs. Blues 88.5kg
Overall fairly similar to last weeks game experience wise. We have 3 more very inexperienced players than Carlton, while they have a couple of 200+ gamers in their team to our none.

One interesting fact is we have selected our tallest team for the season, up 1.6cm on average from last week. Carlton have also selected a tall side, but we already looked too tall and too slow for my liking. In fact even including this week's team, our season average team height is 187.5cm (2.1cm shorter than this week) while our opponents have averaged 187.8cm.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Round 22, 2016 - Lions vs. Cats at the Gabba
  • (0 to 10 games - Lions 4 vs. Cats 2)
  • 0 to 24 games - Lions 6 vs. Cats 4
  • 25 to 49 games - Lions 4 vs. Cats 3
  • 50 to 99 games - Lions 5 vs. Cats 3
  • 100 to 199 games - Lions 7 vs. Cats 8
  • 200+ games - Lions 0 vs. Cats 4
Extra stats:
  • Average games played - Lions 71.4 vs. Cats 116.1 (= -44.7 games on average)
  • Average age - Lions 23.8 vs. Cats 26.4
  • Average height - Lions 188.7cm vs. Cats 190.5cm
  • Average weight - Lions 87.6kg vs. Cats 90.1kg
This week we face the most experienced team we have played since our round 11 game against Hawthorn. We are giving up to Geelong on average 2.6 years per player and 44.7 games experience. Most of that is in the over 200 games category via Mackie, Enright, Selwood and Harry Taylor (it could have been worse since Geelong are resting Bartel). In contrast we have more inexperienced players in each of the categories below the 100 game mark.

Back on the issue of average height - Geelong go in with the second tallest team we have faced all year at 190.5cm. In fact, the only other team to average over 190cm that we have faced this year was the Cats back in round 3 when they averaged 190.7cm. So they are going in much taller than the season average for our opponents. We are still clearly taller than our average for the year, but we are still giving up 1.8cm on average.

I suppose we should hope Geelong are too old, too tall and too slow. Unfortunately it is much more likely they will actually be too good.
 
Last of the Roys said:
Round 22, 2016 - Lions vs. Cats at the Gabba
  • (0 to 10 games - Lions 4 vs. Cats 2)
  • 0 to 24 games - Lions 6 vs. Cats 4
  • 25 to 49 games - Lions 4 vs. Cats 3
  • 50 to 99 games - Lions 5 vs. Cats 3
  • 100 to 199 games - Lions 7 vs. Cats 8
  • 200+ games - Lions 0 vs. Cats 4
Extra stats:
  • Average games played - Lions 71.4 vs. Cats 116.1 (= -44.7 games on average)
  • Average age - Lions 23.8 vs. Cats 26.4
  • Average height - Lions 188.7cm vs. Cats 190.5cm
  • Average weight - Lions 87.6kg vs. Cats 90.1kg
This week we face the most experienced team we have played since our round 11 game against Hawthorn. We are giving up to Geelong on average 2.6 years per player and 44.7 games experience. Most of that is in the over 200 games category via Mackie, Enright, Selwood and Harry Taylor (it could have been worse since Geelong are resting Bartel). In contrast we have more inexperienced players in each of the categories below the 100 game mark.

Back on the issue of average height - Geelong go in with the second tallest team we have faced all year at 190.5cm. In fact, the only other team to average over 190cm that we have faced this year was the Cats back in round 3 when they averaged 190.7cm. So they are going in much taller than the season average for our opponents. We are still clearly taller than our average for the year, but we are still giving up 1.8cm on average.

I suppose we should hope Geelong are too old, too tall and too slow. Unfortunately it is much more likely they will actually be too good.
Click to expand...
Is this our most experienced team this year? 71.4 up from 68 last week.
 
Milux said:
Is this our most experienced team this year? 71.4 up from 68 last week.
Click to expand...

It is our most experienced team since round 13 against the Eagles, but only our 6th most experienced side we have selected all year.

Unfortunately our most experienced side was against Collingwood at home in round 8 when we average 78.3 games per player. That round 8 game against Collingwood and the following week against Melbourne at the MCG were the only two times this year where we had picked a side with more games experience on average than our opponents - it is also why those two losses were so disappointing at the time.
 
Last of the Roys said:
It is our most experienced team since round 13 against the Eagles, but only our 6th most experienced side we have selected all year.

Unfortunately our most experienced side was against Collingwood at home in round 8 when we average 78.3 games per player. That round 8 game against Collingwood and the following week against Melbourne at the MCG were the only two times this year where we had picked a side with more games experience on average than our opponents - it is also why those two losses were so disappointing at the time.
Click to expand...
Geez.
 
feel like this is the most appropriate thread to post this.

basically our best team has only been better than 8 teams 'worst' teams this season and its very marginal with Richmond and Collingwood's 'worst teams'.

I.e. we are a long way off it.

 
oh yeah and our team this week is statistaclaly worse than Essendon's team this week. (and our best team is only better than 2 teams best teams)
 
Round 23, 2016 - Lions vs. Saints at Etihad
  • (0 to 10 games - Lions 3 vs. Saints 2)
  • 0 to 24 games - Lions 6 vs. Saints 2
  • 25 to 49 games - Lions 4 vs. Saints 6
  • 50 to 99 games - Lions 4 vs. Saints 4
  • 100 to 199 games - Lions 8 vs. Saints 6
  • 200+ games - Lions 0 vs. Saints 4
Extra stats:
  • Average games played - Lions 72.4 vs. Saints 106.1 (= -33.7 games on average)
  • Average age - Lions 23.7 vs. Saints 25.8
  • Average height - Lions 188.5cm vs. Saints 187.2cm
  • Average weight - Lions 87.0kg vs. Saints 84.9kg
Our last game of the year and it is a pretty similar story to much of the year. We have 6 very inexperienced players to the Saints 2, although the Saints do have 5 players in their team that have played between 25-29 games. They clearly have a group of very experienced players that we simply don't have in terms of the 200 game plus range.

Interestingly the 'young' Saints have 5 players in their team this week aged over 30. Gilbert has just turned 30 and has played 178 games; Dempster is 32.6 and has played 221; Montagna is 32.8 and has played 270; Riewoldt is 33.9 and has played 318; and Fisher is 34.2 and has played 227 games. In our team we just have Martin 29.8 (edit) and 113 games; and Merrett at 31.7 and 199 games (unfortunately I will never get to count Merrett in my 200+ game category that we have been missing for a while now).
 
Last edited:
In terms of what the average experience of our list might look like next year, early indications are it might be even less experienced than this year.

We started the year with 40 players on our list in total with an average games experience of 49.5. This made us clearly the least experienced list in the League. The only other sides with an average list experience of below 60 at the start of the year were Melbourne 56.6; GWS 57.2; the Bulldogs 57.3; and Gold Coast 59.6. The rest ranged from 60 right up to 94.5 for North Melbourne with the most experienced list in the League (Hawthorn at 87.2 had the second most experienced list).

Anyway, before we get into the delisting / trading / drafting season we have already lost Clarke, West and Merrett to retirement. If those players were replaced by debutants, our average list experience would drop by 7.6 games per player. On the other hand, we are just about to complete a season which in itself should raise our experience by 11.5 games per player on our list (taking into account games played by Merrett and West). So we are currently sitting on 53.4 games experience with delisting, trading and drafting to come.

It is going to be very hard for us to attract experienced players to our team going into next year, so we might even end up going backwards experience wise going into next year. I hope the Club thinks about that carefully before they decide on delisting or trading experienced players.
 
Last of the Roys said:
Round 23, 2016 - Lions vs. Saints at Etihad
  • (0 to 10 games - Lions 3 vs. Saints 2)
  • 0 to 24 games - Lions 6 vs. Saints 2
  • 25 to 49 games - Lions 4 vs. Saints 6
  • 50 to 99 games - Lions 4 vs. Saints 4
  • 100 to 199 games - Lions 8 vs. Saints 6
  • 200+ games - Lions 0 vs. Saints 4
Extra stats:
  • Average games played - Lions 72.4 vs. Saints 106.1 (= -33.7 games on average)
  • Average age - Lions 23.7 vs. Saints 25.8
  • Average height - Lions 188.5cm vs. Saints 187.2cm
  • Average weight - Lions 87.0kg vs. Saints 84.9kg
Our last game of the year and it is a pretty similar story to much of the year. We have 6 very inexperienced players to the Saints 2, although the Saints do have 5 players in their team that have played between 25-29 games. They clearly have a group of very experienced players that we simply don't have in terms of the 200 game plus range.

Interestingly the 'young' Saints have 5 players in their team this week aged over 30. Gilbert has just turned 30 and has played 178 games; Dempster is 32.6 and has played 221; Montagna is 32.8 and has played 270; Riewoldt is 33.9 and has played 318; and Fisher is 34.2 and has played 227 games. In our team we just have Martin 30.6 and 113 games; and Merrett at 31.7 and 199 games (unfortunately I will never get to count Merrett in my 200+ game category that we have been missing for a while now).
Click to expand...

Thank LotR for your work on this every week...one of the very best contributions to the Board.
 
Last of the Roys said:
Interestingly the 'young' Saints have 5 players in their team this week aged over 30. Gilbert has just turned 30 and has played 178 games; Dempster is 32.6 and has played 221; Montagna is 32.8 and has played 270; Riewoldt is 33.9 and has played 318; and Fisher is 34.2 and has played 227 games. In our team we just have Martin 30.6 and 113 games; and Merrett at 31.7 and 199 games (unfortunately I will never get to count Merrett in my 200+ game category that we have been missing for a while now).
Click to expand...

Very interesting indeed. And Martin is only 29 so five to one. Surely they'll be too old and slow tomorrow...
 
Keays2myBeamas said:
Very interesting indeed. And Martin is only 29 so five to one. Surely they'll be too old and slow tomorrow...
Click to expand...

Good pick up, for some reason I had his birth date listed as 17/01/1986 instead of 17/11/1986 in my spreadsheet (I had to manually re-enter the birth dates from the list data into the right format unfortunately so that mistake has been there since the start of the year. Oh well an extra 10 months is only worth 0.04 years extra on average for the team each time he was selected. So we were even younger than I thought!).
 
Reader mode
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Jivlain
Game Day Grand final thread (feat. inexperience watch)
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
143
Views
5K
M Malice
M Malice
S
  • Locked
Unofficial Preview Prelim discussion v Demons/Blues / Gunston watch.
15 16 17 18 19
Replies
466
Views
18K
dlanod
dlanod

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top