Analysis A metric for Midfield Impact Factor

Remove this Banner Ad

bergholt

Norm Smith Medallist
Mar 14, 2007
7,097
16,689
Brunswick
AFL Club
St Kilda
I'm experimenting with this metric:

Midfield Impact Factor = Goals/game + Inside 50s/game + Clearances/game


Historically this aligns reasonably well with the Brownlow and who we consider to be blue-chip:

2020: Neale (13.9 adjusted), Oliver, Martin, Dangerfield, Bontempelli
2019: Fyfe (13.1), Dangerfield, Cripps, Yeo, Shuey
2018: Mitchell (13.5), Martin, Viney, Cripps, Shuey
2017: Dangerfield (14.3), Ablett, Martin (13.9), Zorko, Sloane
2016: Dangerfield (15.7), JP Kennedy, Ablett, Cripps, Gray
2015: Fyfe (13.9), Gray, Dangerfield, JP Kennedy, Prestia
2014: Ablett (14.6), Beams, Dangerfield, Selwood, Fyfe (Priddis in 17th with 10.3)
2013: Griffen (12.8), Ablett (12.6), Dangerfield, Jack, Liberatore
2012: Dangerfield (13.0), Ablett, JP Kennedy, Selwood, Swan (Watson in 6th with 12.2)
2011: Swan (12.6), Boyd, Ablett, Selwood, Cotchin
2010: Judd (12.7), Ablett, Swan, Boyd, Selwood
2009: Judd (11.9), Chapman, Sewell, Hayes, Goodes (Ablett in 8th with 9.7)
2008: Ablett (12.0), Pavlich, Mitchell, Murphy, Judd (Cooney in 38th with 7.6)
2007: Ablett (11.1), Judd, Corey, S Thompson, Simpson (Bartel in 24th with 8.4)
2006: Judd (12.4), Goodwin, Mitchell, Hayes, McLean (Goodes in 10th with 8.7)
2005: Cousins (11.3), Akermanis, Judd, Hodge, Mitchell
2004: Judd (11.7), Ricciuto, Black, Akermanis, J Johnson
2003: Buckley (13.4), Black, Simpson, Cousins, R Harvey (Ricciuto in 11th with 9.9, Goodes in 45th with 8.0)

Thoughts on whether this one makes sense?


At the moment it looks like this for 2021:

14: Parish (14.7), Petracca (14.7)
13: Liberatore, Bontempelli, Oliver
12: Adams, Dunstan
11: Hopper, Cunnington, Neale, Wines, Dangerfield, Gresham, Keays, Steele, Macrae, Yeo, Zorko, Bolton
10: Boak, Stringer, Mundy, Laird, Kelly, Miller, Parker, O'Meara, Lyons, Naitanui, Merrett, Shiel, Martin
9: Mills, Simpkin, Shuey, Fyfe, Walsh, Z Jones, Treloar, Guthrie, Sheed, Greenwood, Davies-Uniacke, Selwood, Cripps, Taranto, Sloane, Crouch

That suggests that both Parish and Petracca are having historically great seasons, and all of Libba, Bont and Oliver would also be right up there with the best any year.


Is this a real metric or just one for supercoach?
 
Last edited:

Log in to remove this ad.

RichLeMonde

Club Legend
Sep 26, 2019
1,128
1,854
Sydney
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Celtics
I think you should use goal assists rather than I50s, or consider using score involvements in place of goals and goal assists. These would be better measures of actual impact imo.

I also think clearances are too heavily weighted in your metric. Many clearances don’t impact the game. Clubs do analytics on possession chains resulting in a score or I50 (which the public can’t get access to). A per game measure of clearances that initiated possession chains culminating in an I50 would be a better metric, as it would indicate clearances that were actually to advantage. Just going by my eyeballs, I reckon guys like Diesel Williams, Sam Mitchell, and Pendles would dominate that stat, guys like Cripps less so. The number would also be quite low (presumably a fair bit lower than just clearances/game), and so would be more comparable to a stat like goal assists (best mids avg about 1.5 GAs), which would produce a better overall metric that accounted for the value of both good inside and good outside work.

the way you have it at the moment, you are giving equal value to goals (per game) and clearances (per game). 8 goals in a game is obviously a lot more valuable than 8 clearances. Thats a problem for a single metric that combines them. That’s why I think goals/game, goal assists/game, and clearances culminating in an I50 would work better, given that they are all to be added together to produce a single value.
 
Last edited:

bergholt

Norm Smith Medallist
Mar 14, 2007
7,097
16,689
Brunswick
AFL Club
St Kilda
I think you should use goal assists rather than I50s, or consider using score involvements in place of goals and goal assists. These would be better measures of actual impact imo.

I also think clearances are too heavily weighted in your metric. Many clearances don’t impact the game. Clubs do analytics on possession chains resulting in a score or I50 (which the public can’t get access to). A per game measure of clearances that initiated possession chains culminating in an I50 would be a better metric, as it would indicate clearances that were actually to advantage. Just going by my eyeballs, I reckon guys like Diesel Williams, Sam Mitchell, and Pendles would dominate that stat, guys like Cripps less so. The number would also be quite low (presumably a fair bit lower than just clearances/game), and so would be more comparable to a stat like goal assists (best mids avg about 1.5 GAs), which would produce a better overall metric that accounted for the value of both good inside and good outside work.

the way you have it at the moment, you are giving equal value to goals (per game) and clearances (per game). 8 goals in a game is obviously a lot more valuable than 8 clearances. Thats a problem for a single metric that combines them. That’s why I think goals/game, goal assists/game, and clearances culminating in an I50 would work better, given that they are all to be added together to produce a single value.
Agreed on the above. I would have score involvements instead of goals.
Yeah probably agree on most of that, but those input metrics are hard/impossible to get - unfortunately just working with what afltables has at the moment.

Worth trying to add goal assists but it's a tiny number so I doubt it changes much.
 

Unique Name

Norm Smith Medallist
Apr 16, 2014
9,818
22,123
AFL Club
Fremantle
Yeah probably agree on most of that, but those input metrics are hard/impossible to get - unfortunately just working with what afltables has at the moment.

Worth trying to add goal assists but it's a tiny number so I doubt it changes much.
Yep Goal Assists would be pointless. But Score Involvement I think would show value.

Score involvements are shown on the AFL website in the stats section and footywire i believe.
 

Chopperdave

Club Legend
Aug 29, 2008
2,209
2,373
Melbourne
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Tottenham Hotspurs, Atlanta Falcons
Yeah probably agree on most of that, but those input metrics are hard/impossible to get - unfortunately just working with what afltables has at the moment.

Worth trying to add goal assists but it's a tiny number so I doubt it changes much.
Score involvements are on the AFL website which is slowly improving to a point where it is useful.

I think if anything this just proves that the players around the ball get seen by the umpires more and lead to brownlow votes. Definitely worth keeping in mind for votes but not for any actual gameday impact measurement.
 

RichLeMonde

Club Legend
Sep 26, 2019
1,128
1,854
Sydney
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Celtics
Yeah probably agree on most of that, but those input metrics are hard/impossible to get - unfortunately just working with what afltables has at the moment.

Worth trying to add goal assists but it's a tiny number so I doubt it changes much.
Then I think you need to do something with the clearances stat, like multiply it by 0.25 (ie reduce it by 75%), so it becomes more comparable, in terms of actual impact, with goals/game or score involvements.
 

bergholt

Norm Smith Medallist
Mar 14, 2007
7,097
16,689
Brunswick
AFL Club
St Kilda
Then I think you need to do something with the clearances stat, like multiply it by 0.25 (ie reduce it by 75%), so it becomes more comparable, in terms of actual impact, with goals/game or score involvements.
Hm yeah - how about inside 50s? Inside 50s and clearances are roughly the same magnitude.
 

RichLeMonde

Club Legend
Sep 26, 2019
1,128
1,854
Sydney
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Celtics
Hm yeah - how about inside 50s? Inside 50s and clearances are roughly the same magnitude.
I’d ditch I50s if you are going to include score involvements. Otherwise you are measuring the same thing (to some extent) twice, since good I50s result in scores.

the key point is that if you’re adding all these numbers together, they need to be comparable. 8 score involvements is worth way more than 8 clearances. But, using my rough off the top of my head measure of clearances x 0.25, you might argue that 8 clearances IS equal to 2 score involvements (8 x 0.25). Or maybe 8 clearances is worth 4 score involvements, in which case you’d multiply raw clearance numbers by 0.5.

but you cannot add goals/game and clearances/game. Buddy kicking 8 is not equally valuable to 8 hacked kick Crippa clearances. Or to put it another way, a mid who averages 7 clearances and 1 goal is not equally valuable, all other things being equal, to one who averages 6 clearances and 2 goals.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Dylan82

Premiership Player
Aug 14, 2004
3,351
11,637
Brisbane
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Cardiff City
I'm experimenting with this metric:

Midfield Impact Factor = Goals/game + Inside 50s/game + Clearances/game


Historically this aligns reasonably well with the Brownlow and who we consider to be blue-chip:

2020: Neale (13.9 adjusted), Oliver, Martin, Dangerfield, Bontempelli
2019: Fyfe (13.1), Dangerfield, Cripps, Yeo, Shuey
2018: Mitchell (13.5), Martin, Viney, Cripps, Shuey
2017: Dangerfield (14.3), Ablett, Martin (13.9), Zorko, Sloane
2016: Dangerfield (15.7), JP Kennedy, Ablett, Cripps, Gray
2015: Fyfe (13.9), Gray, Dangerfield, JP Kennedy, Prestia
2014: Ablett (14.6), Beams, Dangerfield, Selwood, Fyfe (Priddis in 17th with 10.3)
2013: Griffen (12.8), Ablett (12.6), Dangerfield, Jack, Liberatore
2012: Dangerfield (13.0), Ablett, JP Kennedy, Selwood, Swan (Watson in 6th with 12.2)
2011: Swan (12.6), Boyd, Ablett, Selwood, Cotchin
2010: Judd (12.7), Ablett, Swan, Boyd, Selwood
2009: Judd (11.9), Chapman, Sewell, Hayes, Goodes (Ablett in 8th with 9.7)
2008: Ablett (12.0), Pavlich, Mitchell, Murphy, Judd (Cooney in 38th with 7.6)
2007: Ablett (11.1), Judd, Corey, S Thompson, Simpson (Bartel in 24th with 8.4)
2006: Judd (12.4), Goodwin, Mitchell, Hayes, McLean (Goodes in 10th with 8.7)
2005: Cousins (11.3), Akermanis, Judd, Hodge, Mitchell
2004: Judd (11.7), Ricciuto, Black, Akermanis, J Johnson
2003: Buckley (13.4), Black, Simpson, Cousins, R Harvey (Ricciuto in 11th with 9.9, Goodes in 45th with 8.0)

Thoughts on whether this one makes sense?


At the moment it looks like this for 2021:

14: Parish (14.7), Petracca (14.7)
13: Liberatore, Bontempelli, Oliver
12: Adams, Dunstan
11: Hopper, Cunnington, Neale, Wines, Dangerfield, Gresham, Keays, Steele, Macrae, Yeo, Zorko, Bolton
10: Boak, Stringer, Mundy, Laird, Kelly, Miller, Parker, O'Meara, Lyons, Naitanui, Merrett, Shiel, Martin
9: Mills, Simpkin, Shuey, Fyfe, Walsh, Z Jones, Treloar, Guthrie, Sheed, Greenwood, Davies-Uniacke, Selwood, Cripps, Taranto, Sloane, Crouch

That suggests that both Parish and Petracca are having historically great seasons, and all of Libba, Bont and Oliver would also be right up there with the best any year.


Is this a real metric or just one for supercoach?
Nicely done. Definitely is identifying those who are having the most impact upon the competition.


FYI - over on the West Coast pages there are a couple of threads in a similar vein that have been going on for a while.

Assessing the Midfield - "Basic" ranking that only utilises just three stats (contested possessions, clearances & inside 50s), going back to 2005.

Squad Selection & Ratings - more comprehensive system incorporating far wider range of statistics and expanded to positions beyond the midfield, going back to 2015.
 

LittleG

Norm Smith Medallist
Nov 18, 2015
8,199
9,581
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
You also need to normalise your statistics used to avoid weighting things incorrectly:
If the leading player has 8 Score involvements each game, they score 1 point. Each other player then gets points based on a ratio to 1. So If player B has 6 score involvements, he gets 0.75 and player C with 5 gets 0.625, etc. that will help you use different statistics without weighting one more highly than another.

I also like meters gained as a statistic, as players with higher meters gained are usually more attacking and more valuable.
 

bergholt

Norm Smith Medallist
Mar 14, 2007
7,097
16,689
Brunswick
AFL Club
St Kilda
but you cannot add goals/game and clearances/game. Buddy kicking 8 is not equally valuable to 8 hacked kick Crippa clearances. Or to put it another way, a mid who averages 7 clearances and 1 goal is not equally valuable, all other things being equal, to one who averages 6 clearances and 2 goals.
The Buddy example doesn't play here because it's only intended to measure mids, but completely agree on the second.

If I weight goals 4x (because 2 goals for a mid feels about as uncommon as 8 clearances), for 2021 it looks like this:

18: Petracca
17: Stringer, Bontempelli
16:
15: Parish, Liberatore
14: Bolton, Oliver
13: Cunnington, Steele, Dangerfield, Martin, Zorko, Adams, Hopper, Mundy, Keays
12: Neale, Wines, Bailey, Macrae, Dunstan, Yeo, Parker
11: Boak, Miller, Treloar, T Kelly, Lyons, J Kelly, Walsh, O'Meara, Fyfe, T Thomas, Laird, De Goey
10: Cripps, Mills, Greenwood, Naitanui, Merrett, Sheed, Z Jones, Simpkin, Davies-Uniacke, Dunkley, McLuggage, Seedsman, B Crouch, Darcy, Taranto

Eye test:

- Stringer feels too high
- Parish feels too low
- Bolton feels a touch high
- Wines, Macrae, Miller, Walsh feel too low

To me that feels like goals are a bit heavy. Scoreboard impact is great, but if you're a mid and you're not doing your core job of getting the ball moving forward then kicking a couple of goals doesn't make up for that.


Weighting goals 2x:

15: Petracca, Parish
14: Liberatore, Bontempelli
13: Oliver, Stringer
12: Adams, Cunnington, Dangerfield, Hopper, Steele, Bolton, Neale, Dunstan, Wines, Keays
11: Zorko, Macrae, Yeo, Mundy, Martin, Boak, Parker
10: T Kelly, Miller, Laird, Lyons, O'Meara, Naitanui, Merrett, Treloar, Mills, Walsh, Fyfe, Simpkin
9: Bailey, Z Jones, J Kelly, Greenwood, Shuey, Sheed, Cripps, Guthrie, Davies-Uniacke, Selwood, Taranto, B Crouch, Sloane, Viney, Serong, Dunkley


That's maybe closer to the eye test? Certainly suggests Stringer's season is high impact despite not getting a lot of possessions, while guys like Mitchell, Macrae, Merrett, Laird, Walsh, Guthrie are relatively low impact despite averaging 30+. I suspect that would accord pretty well with received wisdom.
 

bergholt

Norm Smith Medallist
Mar 14, 2007
7,097
16,689
Brunswick
AFL Club
St Kilda
You also need to normalise your statistics used to avoid weighting things incorrectly:
If the leading player has 8 Score involvements each game, they score 1 point. Each other player then gets points based on a ratio to 1. So If player B has 6 score involvements, he gets 0.75 and player C with 5 gets 0.625, etc. that will help you use different statistics without weighting one more highly than another.
Yeah completely agree in theory - I just don't have the data to do that consistently across every game in a season, unfortunately.
 

bergholt

Norm Smith Medallist
Mar 14, 2007
7,097
16,689
Brunswick
AFL Club
St Kilda
Nicely done. Definitely is identifying those who are having the most impact upon the competition.


FYI - over on the West Coast pages there are a couple of threads in a similar vein that have been going on for a while.

Assessing the Midfield - "Basic" ranking that only utilises just three stats (contested possessions, clearances & inside 50s), going back to 2005.

Squad Selection & Ratings - more comprehensive system incorporating far wider range of statistics and expanded to positions beyond the midfield, going back to 2015.
Nice! You guys are miles ahead of the Saints board.
 

LittleG

Norm Smith Medallist
Nov 18, 2015
8,199
9,581
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Yeah completely agree in theory - I just don't have the data to do that consistently across every game in a season, unfortunately.
You don’t do it per game, you do it across the full seasons data.

Meters gained, you use the average per game too. That statistic heavily penalises Crabs. Players who get the ball and don’t move it forward very much aren’t really helping their team.
 

Engimal v3

Oppa gangnam style
Sep 21, 2017
7,411
14,418
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Tasmania
I did a similar activity a great years ago (there's a thread on here somewhere) where I plotted normalised clearances, i50s and goals, and it ended up being a fairly good representation of Brownlow polling.
 

RichLeMonde

Club Legend
Sep 26, 2019
1,128
1,854
Sydney
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Celtics
The Buddy example doesn't play here because it's only intended to measure mids, but completely agree on the second.

If I weight goals 4x (because 2 goals for a mid feels about as uncommon as 8 clearances), for 2021 it looks like this:

18: Petracca
17: Stringer, Bontempelli
16:
15: Parish, Liberatore
14: Bolton, Oliver
13: Cunnington, Steele, Dangerfield, Martin, Zorko, Adams, Hopper, Mundy, Keays
12: Neale, Wines, Bailey, Macrae, Dunstan, Yeo, Parker
11: Boak, Miller, Treloar, T Kelly, Lyons, J Kelly, Walsh, O'Meara, Fyfe, T Thomas, Laird, De Goey
10: Cripps, Mills, Greenwood, Naitanui, Merrett, Sheed, Z Jones, Simpkin, Davies-Uniacke, Dunkley, McLuggage, Seedsman, B Crouch, Darcy, Taranto

Eye test:

- Stringer feels too high
- Parish feels too low
- Bolton feels a touch high
- Wines, Macrae, Miller, Walsh feel too low

To me that feels like goals are a bit heavy. Scoreboard impact is great, but if you're a mid and you're not doing your core job of getting the ball moving forward then kicking a couple of goals doesn't make up for that.


Weighting goals 2x:

15: Petracca, Parish
14: Liberatore, Bontempelli
13: Oliver, Stringer
12: Adams, Cunnington, Dangerfield, Hopper, Steele, Bolton, Neale, Dunstan, Wines, Keays
11: Zorko, Macrae, Yeo, Mundy, Martin, Boak, Parker
10: T Kelly, Miller, Laird, Lyons, O'Meara, Naitanui, Merrett, Treloar, Mills, Walsh, Fyfe, Simpkin
9: Bailey, Z Jones, J Kelly, Greenwood, Shuey, Sheed, Cripps, Guthrie, Davies-Uniacke, Selwood, Taranto, B Crouch, Sloane, Viney, Serong, Dunkley


That's maybe closer to the eye test? Certainly suggests Stringer's season is high impact despite not getting a lot of possessions, while guys like Mitchell, Macrae, Merrett, Laird, Walsh, Guthrie are relatively low impact despite averaging 30+. I suspect that would accord pretty well with received wisdom.
That is starting to look pretty good.

how would it look if you ditched goals altogether and included score involvements with a x 2 factor, since that would allow for goals and assists? Or, add goal assists and give it a x 2 factor as well, since a goal assist surely is just as valuable as a goal.

As LittleG mentioned, could also try to include metres gained. Maybe 1 point for every 100m gained? You could argue 600m gained is worth as much as 6 clearances.

sorry mate, every post I’m trying to make your life harder lol
 

btdg

Premiership Player
Oct 7, 2005
4,685
6,009
Melbourne
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
Carlton
I've used a measure on the Carlton board to evaluate young players: disposals + score (goalsx6 + points) + tackles. I like this measure because it incoroprates the defensive element.

As a general guide:
25 = 'The Nick Graham Line': named after the most dropped player in AFL history and a guy who tended to come in, play a couple of games in the 25-27 range, then have a down game at around 24 and get dropped
30 = solid game for a midfielder = "The Ed Curnow line" (hit this line every game and you'll have a long and undistinguished career)
35 = good game
40+ = outstanding/excellent
50+ = matchwinner
60 = people are going to talk about this one...

That measure gives:
Steele 41.4
Bontempelli 41.2
Miller 40.9
Mitchell 40.6
Petracca 40.3
Macrae 40.3
Wines 39.8
Oliver 39.2
Walsh 38.6
Parish 38.3
Merrett 38.3

Some lesser lights:
Adams 33.6
Liberatore 33.5
Bolton 32.0

Not sure who else to include this year but it aligns pretty well with my observations. Steele ranks highly for putting up absolutely absurd tackle numbers, while also winning a lot of the ball and kicking goals - just incredible all round footy. Miller in a similar boat and only just starting to get recognition. The others at the top end of the list have had lots of recognition and I think Bont does sit ahead. Mitchell also very underrated this year IMO.

Historical numbers:
Fyfe in 2019 = 38.5
Mitchell in 2018 = 45.2
Martin in 2017 = 43.3
Dangerield in 2017 = 48.4: This is an utterly astonishing season IMO. He was way above his career numbers in goals and tackles
Priddis' Brownlow year was a 38.5; rightfully considered one of the weaker efforts
Ablett Jr had a 47.8 in 2010 - also an astonishing year
Judd had a 43.3 in 2005 - given how much tackle numbers have risen, that was a standout.

It also works well for forwards (without going into too much detail - they tend to fluctuate more match to match, but the metric holds up ok generally) so how about this:
- Gary Ablett SR in 1993 played 17 games for an average score of 62.
- Plugger Lockett also managed a 61 in 17 games in 1995. He only bothered to lay 5 tackles for the year, too...
- Buddy Franklin had a 47.9 in 2008
- Harry McKay will likely win the Coleman but has a rating of 31.5. It's a seriously weak year for forwards.

It also works as a rating for individual games. Some noticeable stats this year:
- Clayton Oliver had a 66 vs Adelaide - the best game of the year. IT's his only 50+ but that's a huge match
- Touk Miller vs GWS = 61 points (35 disposals, 2 goals, 14 tackles). This was the game that got everyone talking...
- The Bont: 58pts vs GC, 59vs StK, 55 and 51 vs WC = the most 'Big' games of anyone. I think we all knew that
- Petracca has 3x games in the 50s. Not quite on the level of Bont but not far off.
- Darcy Parish has 3x games in the low 50s. Interestingly, all feel like missed opportunities. Kicked 0.2 vs Richmond. Only 3 tackles vs Collingwood and Geelong. We might not have seen the best of Parish yet - i think he can still go up another level. I might be wrong, but I think he won 'awards' for all 3? Definitely a big game player...
- Steele has nudged right on '50' 3x but not really gone much over. I think that's why he maybe doesn't get the recognition.
- Mitchell has a high of 48 and is consistent, but hasn't hit 50 despite being high on average
- Merrett, Wines, Walsh all have only one '50' for the year - consistently good without winning games off their own boot
 

bergholt

Norm Smith Medallist
Mar 14, 2007
7,097
16,689
Brunswick
AFL Club
St Kilda
That is starting to look pretty good.

how would it look if you ditched goals altogether and included score involvements with a x 2 factor, since that would allow for goals and assists? Or, add goal assists and give it a x 2 factor as well, since a goal assist surely is just as valuable as a goal.

As LittleG mentioned, could also try to include metres gained. Maybe 1 point for every 100m gained? You could argue 600m gained is worth as much as 6 clearances.

sorry mate, every post I’m trying to make your life harder lol
Hah yeah!

Unfortunately I'm just copying and pasting from afltables data (https://afltables.com/afl/stats/2021a.html) and that doesn't have score involvements or metres gained. If there's another data source I can get into Excel easily then happy to give it a shot, but I don't know of one.
 

bergholt

Norm Smith Medallist
Mar 14, 2007
7,097
16,689
Brunswick
AFL Club
St Kilda
I've used a measure on the Carlton board to evaluate young players: disposals + score (goalsx6 + points) + tackles. I like this measure because it incoroprates the defensive element.

As a general guide:
25 = 'The Nick Graham Line': named after the most dropped player in AFL history and a guy who tended to come in, play a couple of games in the 25-27 range, then have a down game at around 24 and get dropped
30 = solid game for a midfielder = "The Ed Curnow line" (hit this line every game and you'll have a long and undistinguished career)
35 = good game
40+ = outstanding/excellent
50+ = matchwinner
60 = people are going to talk about this one...

That measure gives:
Steele 41.4
Bontempelli 41.2
Miller 40.9
Mitchell 40.6
Petracca 40.3
Macrae 40.3
Wines 39.8
Oliver 39.2
Walsh 38.6
Parish 38.3
Merrett 38.3

Some lesser lights:
Adams 33.6
Liberatore 33.5
Bolton 32.0

Not sure who else to include this year but it aligns pretty well with my observations. Steele ranks highly for putting up absolutely absurd tackle numbers, while also winning a lot of the ball and kicking goals - just incredible all round footy. Miller in a similar boat and only just starting to get recognition. The others at the top end of the list have had lots of recognition and I think Bont does sit ahead. Mitchell also very underrated this year IMO.

Historical numbers:
Fyfe in 2019 = 38.5
Mitchell in 2018 = 45.2
Martin in 2017 = 43.3
Dangerield in 2017 = 48.4: This is an utterly astonishing season IMO. He was way above his career numbers in goals and tackles
Priddis' Brownlow year was a 38.5; rightfully considered one of the weaker efforts
Ablett Jr had a 47.8 in 2010 - also an astonishing year
Judd had a 43.3 in 2005 - given how much tackle numbers have risen, that was a standout.

It also works well for forwards (without going into too much detail - they tend to fluctuate more match to match, but the metric holds up ok generally) so how about this:
- Gary Ablett SR in 1993 played 17 games for an average score of 62.
- Plugger Lockett also managed a 61 in 17 games in 1995. He only bothered to lay 5 tackles for the year, too...
- Buddy Franklin had a 47.9 in 2008
- Harry McKay will likely win the Coleman but has a rating of 31.5. It's a seriously weak year for forwards.

It also works as a rating for individual games. Some noticeable stats this year:
- Clayton Oliver had a 66 vs Adelaide - the best game of the year. IT's his only 50+ but that's a huge match
- Touk Miller vs GWS = 61 points (35 disposals, 2 goals, 14 tackles). This was the game that got everyone talking...
- The Bont: 58pts vs GC, 59vs StK, 55 and 51 vs WC = the most 'Big' games of anyone. I think we all knew that
- Petracca has 3x games in the 50s. Not quite on the level of Bont but not far off.
- Darcy Parish has 3x games in the low 50s. Interestingly, all feel like missed opportunities. Kicked 0.2 vs Richmond. Only 3 tackles vs Collingwood and Geelong. We might not have seen the best of Parish yet - i think he can still go up another level. I might be wrong, but I think he won 'awards' for all 3? Definitely a big game player...
- Steele has nudged right on '50' 3x but not really gone much over. I think that's why he maybe doesn't get the recognition.
- Mitchell has a high of 48 and is consistent, but hasn't hit 50 despite being high on average
- Merrett, Wines, Walsh all have only one '50' for the year - consistently good without winning games off their own boot
Yeah interesting!

For 2021:

41: Steele, Bontempelli, Miller
40: Mitchell, Macrae, Petracca
39: Wines, Dunkley, Oliver
38: Walsh, Parish, Merrett, Laird
37: Keays
36: Greene, J Kelly, Cunnington, Lyons, Parker, Taranto
35: Crouch, Brayshaw, Stringer, Guthrie
34: Zorko, Mills, T Walker, Mundy, Treloar, Boak
33: Adams, Hopper, Liberatore, McCluggage, Dunstan, Franklin, Fyfe
32: Neale, Seedsman, Martin, Cripps, Bolton
31: Hawkins, Sheed, O'Meara, J Cameron, Duncan, Simpkin, Dangerfield, Crisp, Amon, T Kelly, McKay
30: Gaff, Selwood, Viney, McGrath, Harmes, J Lloyd, Bailey Smith

Eye test for mine:

- Steele and Miller too high, both very good but not absolute top echelon for mine
- Mitchell way too high
- Mitchell much higher than Stringer looks wrong, Stringer heaps more impact on games this year
- Macrae much higher than Libba looks wrong, both great but Libba much more impact
- Libba too low just because he doesn't get that much ball
- Laird probably too high
- Bolton too low imo

Overall just doesn't quite ring true for mine. Has the usual drawbacks of a disposals-based metric, that you get Tom Mitchell types way too high even though their impact isn't proportionate. Mitchell doesn't kick many goals, isn't outstanding in tackles, clearances, inside 50s - but averages 20 handballs a game so gets to be fourth ranked.

Interesting one but not for my personal taste.
 
Last edited:

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad