AFL Player 21: Archie “The Enforcer” Roberts - Rising Star & Most Improved at the BnF

[VelvetSledge]

Contract Status: Out of contract 2026
My Boy Draft 2024: Pick 29, TheUnicorn

 

[Vindicater]

I agree that champion data is ridiculous.

Last time I heard it had like 8 of its best ten players as half back flankers.

 

[Bipolar Bear]

no because it's champion data and they're an awful company. they hoard the data and then give stories to the media from an authoritarian point of view, with no real way to hold them accountable. they're like political staffers who 'drop' stories to the media. the AFL world should be far more critical of their practices but of course they want their stories too.

it can be implied that they're using some kind of "expected kicks" model. If I had to guess, I'd say Roberts is probably being dinged on not trying dangerous enough kicks. that's just a guess but I think he generally plays it safe and when he tires a riskier kick, isn't hitting them yet. again, that's my guess/gut-feel

This is so refreshing to read, mainly because I am of the same opinion. I have a stats degree and work in the data world. PFF for American Football is so good, access to base level statistics are free and deep stats are cheap, with analysis included.

"Give me data that sound this way please Champion data" - The AFL, probably.

 

[jannissary]

no because it's champion data and they're an awful company. they hoard the data and then give stories to the media from an authoritarian point of view, with no real way to hold them accountable. they're like political staffers who 'drop' stories to the media. the AFL world should be far more critical of their practices but of course they want their stories too.

it can be implied that they're using some kind of "expected kicks" model. If I had to guess, I'd say Roberts is probably being dinged on not trying dangerous enough kicks. that's just a guess but I think he generally plays it safe and when he tires a riskier kick, isn't hitting them yet. again, that's my guess/gut-feel

i was going to write a similar screed about how shit it is but this sums up my perspective well.

 

[Old Campaigner]

So yet another above average player we’ve automatically overrated because ‘above average’ is enough to make most of the side look shit?

 

[dank420_]

more like campaigner data

 

[Old Campaigner]

more like campaigner data

You have to pay me royalties to use that term, sorry

 

[fairbump_playon]

more like campaigner data

Champ Data

 

[Westlo]

If daicos is kicking/toepoking it off the ground 4-6 times a game from centre bounce of course his percentage is going to look shit.

**** he was doing his best tsatas impersonation in the first half last week, had like 2 kicks versus 14 handballs until he got 3 cheap kicks at the end.

 

[TheGreatBarryB]

How can Champion Data compile that top/bottom 10 list, look at it and see some of the names (in particular Dawson & Daicos) ..and yet still decide to publish it?? No qualitative/eye test whatsoever. Embarrassing

 

[faible]

How can Champion Data compile that top/bottom 10 list, look at it and see some of the names (in particular Dawson & Daicos) ..and yet still decide to publish it?? No qualitative/eye test whatsoever. Embarrassing

Clickbait though.

‘Worst kicks in the AFL’

‘Hey it says Nick Daicos is on here, that seems wrong? ’

‘People are going to go WILD commenting on this, post it.’

 

[TheGreatBarryB]

Clickbait though.

‘Worst kicks in the AFL’

‘Hey it says Nick Daicos is on here, that seems wrong? ’

‘People are going to go WILD commenting on this, post it.’

Yeah but at the cost of destroying their credibility even more.

 

[Red Black and Blue]

Yeah but at the cost of destroying their credibility even more.

If you were to ask any football follower if they were to pick a player to hit a target inside 50, 45 metres away on the run with the game on the line both Dawson and Daicos would feature in peoples top 10, arguably top 3-4. That tells you all you need to know about whatever metric they are using to come up with that list.

 

[Old Campaigner]

There’s doubtless a bunch of accompanying stats that build a better picture of the situation but that wouldn’t be anywhere near as clickbaity

 

[Agronomus]

How can Champion Data compile that top/bottom 10 list, look at it and see some of the names (in particular Dawson & Daicos) ..and yet still decide to publish it?? No qualitative/eye test whatsoever. Embarrassing

It's embarrassing because people are so stat obsessed. Nothing beats the eye test. Stats just support it

 

[ant555]

He is not elite but he is a good kick. His issue is in the decisions he makes with his kicks and some of that is him trying to stick to the game plan and create by foot. Problem is he has to try and force it a bit to find the targets.
If we allowed him to run around loose at half back he would hit more targets than Martin did. He has a lot of kicks under pressure well in the back half.

 

[ant555]

Yeah but at the cost of destroying their credibility even more.

AFL and the clubs pay for the service and it filters down to the lower levels. It may look like they are losing credibility to the punter on the street but it has not and is not hurting their business. They have always said that "we produce the raw stats. How people want to use them is up to them". SEN pay them to produce discussion data.

 

[Vindicater]

AFL and the clubs pay for the service and it filters down to the lower levels. It may look like they are losing credibility to the punter on the street but it has not and is not hurting their business. They have always said that "we produce the raw stats. How people want to use them is up to them". SEN pay them to produce discussion data.

Their stat collection is fine and very detailed. (I have a mate who works for them at Adelaide oval games)

It is their highly subjective rating system that is the issue. What they have assigned value to and what they have not assigned value to is important and they don't let anybody know those parameters.

 

[Old Campaigner]

Their stat collection is fine and very detailed. (I have a mate who works for them at Adelaide oval games)

It is their highly subjective rating system that is the issue. What they have assigned value to and what they have not assigned value to is important and they don't let anybody know those parameters.

If they’re just adding a bunch of stat based measures for each player to derive a ranking it is by definition not subjective

 

[joey_jo_jo]

AFL and the clubs pay for the service and it filters down to the lower levels. It may look like they are losing credibility to the punter on the street but it has not and is not hurting their business. They have always said that "we produce the raw stats. How people want to use them is up to them". SEN pay them to produce discussion data.

Thats it in a nutshell. The actual data is great, the frustration is that, unlike with overseas sport, they don't share it with the public and drip feed us clickbait analysis from hoyne and King.

I listened to the best /worst kick segment live and it was a train wreck.
Unlike the usual sports day presenters Cornes and Healy, who take everything Hoyne says as gospel and respond with "wow i wasn't expecting that, great insight", adam white (who was filling in for cornes) had his journo hat on and scrutinised hoynes conclusions a bit more and hoyne didn't really have any responses.

The best example was when hoyne said the model rewards players for attempting riskier kicks, white asked him about how that play in the last quarter of swans v dons game from the Lizard would've contributed to his rating. The one where he took two risky kicks one after the other in the corridor, and both ended up being scrub kicks thst came off the instep. Hoyne became very guarded and vague in his response, kept saying "if it hit a target then its ranked a good kick". Anyone watching that game would judge those two kicks as bad kicks.

He also was chirping that everyone bags half back flankers as seagulls who get easy disposals but this analysis proves that wrong as most of the top 10 of his list were half back flankers.
Im not being disparaging of half back flankers but doesn't the fact his list is so heavily weighted towards one position just prove his model is flawed in that it doesn't take into account other factors that contribute to the difficulty of a kick like how much pressure the player is under or congestion is surrounding them when they take the kick?

 

[Vindicater]

If they’re just adding a bunch of stat based measures for each player to derive a ranking it is by definition not subjective

It is when you assign your own values to those statistics.

 

[doug85]

The question on Roberts kicking is very fair. He’s young and he can work it out, but it certainly needs work

 

[RedmanWasHere]

He's getting under the Tigs players' skin I'm noticing.

 

[Lore]

He's getting under the Tigs players' skin I'm noticing.

Certainly looks like it. Happy for him to give away a free in the first term if his opponent goes into his shell for the rest of the game

 

[naraku]

Again: love this kid.

 

[blitzer]

Such a clever player, always in the right spots - its why he gets such a huge amount of the ball (well our backline over possesses the ball too).

An absolute steal. I think he'll finish top 5 in the Rising Star. Maybe an outside chance to win it but it'll be hard as a 2nd year half back flanker.