AFL Sabermetrics

[SJ]

Interesting. A year ago on another board I went through all of 2010's games and proved a very clear fact for that season:

Teams which won the hitouts and clearances lost most of the time. Moneyball and its ilk is an interesting illustration of how people respond to facts like these - either they embrace the possibility and ask why, or they seek to deny it or explain it away.

For mine, the theory was that goals were easier to generate from counter-attack from a turnover than from scrambling a win from a stoppage.

There is certainly room for looking at any consistent pattern which seems to lead to success - both as a league-wide trend and within teams.

When John Barnes was our ruckman at GFC, we rarely won a game he won the hitouts in, but rarely lost a game he outmarked his opponent in.

I remember the post. I wonder if that changed in 2011.

 

[Bollox]

How many times a player looks at his teammate and then points randomly in some direction.

YES !
I'd like to see this one too.
Was known as the "Hodgey" at AFL level a few yrs ago.

Doesnt matter what level u play...there's always that bloke that rushes in when the tackles made, or tries directing you and others by pointing at the guy he should be manning up on..whilst he mans the mark. Then as he's gasping for breath he's randomly pointing around and yelling incoherent and irrelevant shit in some stupid attempt at looking like he's some sort of a leader of men.

If you're 100pts down it can be quite aggravating.

Could be very useful

 

[Bollox]

"Carmenology" is another forgotten stat needing to be resurrected.
There's definitely an inverse relationship between fancy boots and performance...or maybe thats just my pet hatred of flashy boots

Possible coaching implications :

1. Flouro boots...you get one half to star or you're in the magoos for 3 months
2. More than 2 colours...you get one game to star or they get flogged and nailed to your locker.
3. Club colored boots...basic game stats apply.
4. Black boots...screams "gimme a go coach, i want to earn my carmens". Slightly sympathetic analysis of his game stats.
5. White boots...sign of leftover teen angst. Like getting a filthy tat or a piercing you hope to look somehow individual or stand out, but just end up looking like everyone else.

 

[Slattery_20]

Interesting. A year ago on another board I went through all of 2010's games and proved a very clear fact for that season:

Teams which won the hitouts and clearances lost most of the time. Moneyball and its ilk is an interesting illustration of how people respond to facts like these - either they embrace the possibility and ask why, or they seek to deny it or explain it away.

I'd be very interested to read that, could you re-post (or even PM a link?).

Certainly my mind instantly sprang back to the dreamtime game this year, we creamed the clearances but kicked wide & poorly, Richmond set up extra numbers off half-back and pounded us when we had numbers committed forward.

 

[Rourke]

Interesting. A year ago on another board I went through all of 2010's games and proved a very clear fact for that season:

Teams which won the hitouts and clearances lost most of the time. Moneyball and its ilk is an interesting illustration of how people respond to facts like these - either they embrace the possibility and ask why, or they seek to deny it or explain it away.

For mine, the theory was that goals were easier to generate from counter-attack from a turnover than from scrambling a win from a stoppage.

Yes, there is something to this. A detailed analysis when I was at Champion Data showed two seeming contradictions: it is better to have the clearance than not have it (immediately worth a point on the scoreboard on average), but also that teams winning more clearances were showing virtually zero correlation with winning. The best 'hand-waving' explanation is that the clearance is random because of the ways the ball can spray from the ruck contest, so teams get more reward putting their resources into general play strategies instead (countering the ball release from the opponent, for instance).

Free kicks are similar. Obviously you get an immediate boost from winning a free kick, but the correlation between free kick difference and score difference is zero or even slightly negative! Teams playing well can offend more as a consequence of their intensity.

I'm still working on 'Moneyball' approaches to footy, but it's incredibly hard to isolate the right metrics from such a complex game compared to baseball. Whoever comes up with the solution should get rich.

 

[Jentleman Geff]

Players who are first in the scoring chain.

 

[Quinz]

Players who are first in the scoring chain.

One of the better ones I think, pro-stats does that- "Playmaker is player who launches (first) disposal of a chain that results in a goal or behind in general play from a turnover, 50/50 ballget or clearance"

1	S Pendlebury 	COL 	77
2	A Swallow 	NOR 	69
2	D Swan 	        COL 	69
4	C Judd 	        CAR 	68
5	J Selwood 	GEE 	65
6	M Murphy 	CAR 	59
7	M Boyd 	        WBU 	58
8	B Sewell 	HAW 	56
9	M Priddis 	WCE 	55
9	T Cotchin 	RIC 	55
11	N Dal Santo 	STK 	54
12	J Kelly 	GEE 	52
12	S Black 	BRI 	52
14	J Bartel 	GEE 	51
15	J P Kennedy 	SYD 	50
15	G Ablett 	GCS 	50
17	S Mitchell 	HAW 	49
17	N Naitanui 	WCE 	49
17	L Ball 	        COL 	49
20	D Wells 	NOR 	48
20	D Cox 	        WCE 	48
20	B Harvey 	NOR 	48
23	L Shuey 	WCE 	47
23	D Cross 	WBU 	47
25	M Robinson 	CAR 	46
25	L Montagna 	STK 	35
25	S Burgoyne 	HAW 	46
28	N Foley 	RIC 	45
29	B Moloney 	MEL 	44
29	T Rockliff 	BRI 	44
29	D Thomas 	COL 	44
32	R O'Keefe 	SYD 	43
32	L Hodge 	HAW 	43
32	J Watson 	ESS 	43
32	A Embley 	WCE 	43
32	H Scotland 	CAR 	43
37	S Fisher 	STK 	42
37	J Bolton 	SYD 	42
37	J Corey 	GEE 	42
37	B Howlett 	ESS 	42
37	S Selwood 	WCE 	42
42	S Johnson 	GEE 	41
42	L Shiels 	HAW 	41
44	R Griffen 	WBU 	40
44	J Ziebell 	NOR 	40
44	S Thompson 	ADE 	40
47	B Gibbs 	CAR 	39
47	A Goodes 	SYD 	39
47	C Enright 	GEE 	39
47	A Mackie 	GEE 	39
47	D Martin 	RIC 	39

 

[Jentleman Geff]

One of the better ones I think, pro-stats does that- "Playmaker is player who launches (first) disposal of a chain that results in a goal or behind in general play from a turnover, 50/50 ballget or clearance"

1	S Pendlebury 	COL 	77
2	A Swallow 	NOR 	69
2	D Swan 	        COL 	69
4	C Judd 	        CAR 	68
5	J Selwood 	GEE 	65
6	M Murphy 	CAR 	59
7	M Boyd 	        WBU 	58
8	B Sewell 	HAW 	56
9	M Priddis 	WCE 	55
9	T Cotchin 	RIC 	55
11	N Dal Santo 	STK 	54
12	J Kelly 	GEE 	52
12	S Black 	BRI 	52
14	J Bartel 	GEE 	51
15	J P Kennedy 	SYD 	50
15	G Ablett 	GCS 	50
17	S Mitchell 	HAW 	49
17	N Naitanui 	WCE 	49
17	L Ball 	        COL 	49
20	D Wells 	NOR 	48
20	D Cox 	        WCE 	48
20	B Harvey 	NOR 	48
23	L Shuey 	WCE 	47
23	D Cross 	WBU 	47
25	M Robinson 	CAR 	46
25	L Montagna 	STK 	35
25	S Burgoyne 	HAW 	46
28	N Foley 	RIC 	45
29	B Moloney 	MEL 	44
29	T Rockliff 	BRI 	44
29	D Thomas 	COL 	44
32	R O'Keefe 	SYD 	43
32	L Hodge 	HAW 	43
32	J Watson 	ESS 	43
32	A Embley 	WCE 	43
32	H Scotland 	CAR 	43
37	S Fisher 	STK 	42
37	J Bolton 	SYD 	42
37	J Corey 	GEE 	42
37	B Howlett 	ESS 	42
37	S Selwood 	WCE 	42
42	S Johnson 	GEE 	41
42	L Shiels 	HAW 	41
44	R Griffen 	WBU 	40
44	J Ziebell 	NOR 	40
44	S Thompson 	ADE 	40
47	B Gibbs 	CAR 	39
47	A Goodes 	SYD 	39
47	C Enright 	GEE 	39
47	A Mackie 	GEE 	39
47	D Martin 	RIC 	39

For some reason I thought Corey Enright was close to number one for this.

Generally signifies the player can read the play from the opposition (turnovers) or win the ball in dispute, and then use it effectively to set up a team's score.

Should also probably be expressed in percentage of team's score. Ablett would probably be number one in the league for that.

 

[flamethrower]

Instead of looking for heaps of other stats and comparing to the 'Moneyball' system start looking for the ONE stat in footy that is the most important. In baseball that was: On Base Percentage. It didn't matter how it was done, just that it was done.

What would be the equivalent in footy? Being part of the chain that led to a goal? Or would it simply be possessions? The more players you have that can get the ball, the more chance you have to impact the scoreboard? I don't know...

OT: One of the many myths spuiked by this movie. It is not OBP that is important to winning, it is OPS - on base plus slugging. Source - Bill James, the guru of Sabermetrics.

As for "sabermetrics" in Australian rules, I would think that a stat pertaining to quality disposals, ie kicks, handballs, tap ons etc that result give your team an opportunity to create a scoring chance or result in a score, would be the best indicator of the likelyhood of winning.

To simplify it, it could be scored as thus...a kick to the advantage of a team mate that allows him do the same and thus set up a shot at goal is plus 1. A kick to a genuine 50/50 contest is 0. A kick to the disadvantage of a team mate that allows the oppostion to gain possession is -1 and a direct turnover that allows the oppsosition a shot at goal is a -2.

 

[juzz_e]

In reality there just is not a possible single statistic that could be used in the same way as in 'moneyball' because the gameplay of AFL is SIGNIFICANTLY more complex then Baseball.