I read a tweet this morning that north are the 8th most experienced side this week and it made me curious as to where our team sits (considering our inability to stop big flows of goals against this season especially). So I thought I would look at the data:
There was a few surprise packets there and to me there isn't a standout, apart from perhaps the hawks being bottom for both and looking every bit like it on the field too. Interestingly there is a lot of heat on them about if they cut too deep yet they are 89 days younger on average & 14 games less played than us... The bombers are certainly one that I'm sure we all look at and think how we should be above and they have a similar spread to us. I think it's important to also consider who they have played (Hawks, suns)
In terms of the breakdown of players that have played certain brackets of games, this is where you can see our clear deficiency :
I did the clubs that are closest to us and compared the brackets of games played. The players that have played between 100-200 games in our team are 0, in fact we only have Crouch (136) on our list that fits into this category with Dawson (88) & Keays (92) to enter this season. From the weekends side we have Doedee (73), Murphy (77) & ROB (79) who will be close to this mark at the start of next season. This is a very clear gap in our experience & lets be honest Murphy, ROB and to some extend Keays are not really the guys taking us to the next success.
The other thing to stand out here is our 200+ game experienced players look to be on their last legs, Sloane is not the player he once was and we should not be offering him anther contract, Smith looking pretty cooked as well. Tex can't go on for many more years and Laird looks to be the only player we will keep long term.
Moving into next season I would say our max 200+ should be 3, our 150-200 will be 0 & our 100-150 will be 2, still far behind all the other clubs. All the while we can't really afford to offload our recent early draft picks due to a lack of talent overall.
For reference our 2017 grand final match up had the below split of games:
This shows me we are years away from any sort of meaningful success, most likely when our current 0-50 is the 101-150 range which is 100 games (4.5 years).
Stats are only useful to a point and obviously the players you have in these splits can effect your success as well. To me it just shows we have a long way to go.... Bring on 2027
| Age years | Age Months | Age rank | Games | Games rank | |
| Tigers | 27 | 172 | 1 | 131.6957 | 1 |
| Cats | 27 | 88 | 2 | 131 | 2 |
| Dees | 26 | 177 | 4 | 123.6522 | 3 |
| Pies | 27 | 38 | 3 | 121.087 | 4 |
| Eagles | 26 | 100 | 7 | 115.3913 | 5 |
| Lions | 26 | 169 | 5 | 113 | 6 |
| Port | 25 | 264 | 8 | 102.8696 | 7 |
| North | 25 | 199 | 9 | 101.2174 | 8 |
| Dogs | 26 | 169 | 6 | 99.86957 | 9 |
| Swans | 24 | 262 | 16 | 93.30435 | 10 |
| Saints | 24 | 332 | 14 | 83.91304 | 11 |
| Blues | 25 | 139 | 10 | 83.34783 | 12 |
| Suns | 25 | 39 | 13 | 82 | 13 |
| Freo | 25 | 66 | 11 | 80.6087 | 14 |
| Dons | 24 | 293 | 15 | 77.86957 | 15 |
| Giants | 25 | 63 | 12 | 77.3913 | 16 |
| Crows | 24 | 169 | 17 | 74.91304 | 17 |
| Hawks | 24 | 80 | 18 | 60.95652 | 18 |
There was a few surprise packets there and to me there isn't a standout, apart from perhaps the hawks being bottom for both and looking every bit like it on the field too. Interestingly there is a lot of heat on them about if they cut too deep yet they are 89 days younger on average & 14 games less played than us... The bombers are certainly one that I'm sure we all look at and think how we should be above and they have a similar spread to us. I think it's important to also consider who they have played (Hawks, suns)
In terms of the breakdown of players that have played certain brackets of games, this is where you can see our clear deficiency :
| 0-50 | 51-100 | 101-150 | 150-200 | 200+ |
| North | 6 | 8 | 4 | 1 | 4 |
| Saints | 7 | 5 | 4 | 6 | 1 |
| Blues | 8 | 8 | 4 | 2 | 1 |
| Suns | 7 | 10 | 2 | 4 | 0 |
| Freo | 6 | 10 | 5 | 1 | 1 |
| Dons | 10 | 6 | 4 | 1 | 2 |
| Giants | 11 | 5 | 3 | 3 | 1 |
| Crows | 13 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 4 |
| Hawks | 14 | 3 | 4 | 1 | 1 |
I did the clubs that are closest to us and compared the brackets of games played. The players that have played between 100-200 games in our team are 0, in fact we only have Crouch (136) on our list that fits into this category with Dawson (88) & Keays (92) to enter this season. From the weekends side we have Doedee (73), Murphy (77) & ROB (79) who will be close to this mark at the start of next season. This is a very clear gap in our experience & lets be honest Murphy, ROB and to some extend Keays are not really the guys taking us to the next success.
The other thing to stand out here is our 200+ game experienced players look to be on their last legs, Sloane is not the player he once was and we should not be offering him anther contract, Smith looking pretty cooked as well. Tex can't go on for many more years and Laird looks to be the only player we will keep long term.
Moving into next season I would say our max 200+ should be 3, our 150-200 will be 0 & our 100-150 will be 2, still far behind all the other clubs. All the while we can't really afford to offload our recent early draft picks due to a lack of talent overall.
For reference our 2017 grand final match up had the below split of games:
| 2017 AFL GF | Age years | Age Months | Games | 0-50 | 51-100 | 101-150 | 150-200 | 200+ |
| Crows | 25 | 340 | 108.6818 | 3 | 8 | 5 | 4 | 2 |
| Tigers | 25 | 43 | 104.0909 | 7 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 2 |
This shows me we are years away from any sort of meaningful success, most likely when our current 0-50 is the 101-150 range which is 100 games (4.5 years).
Stats are only useful to a point and obviously the players you have in these splits can effect your success as well. To me it just shows we have a long way to go.... Bring on 2027
Last edited by a moderator:
