Champion Data 2013 Prospectus Review & Discussion

[winty]

Just watched Freo smash us in the final last year.

We had no answer for Pavilich
Corey kept us in it
Selwood is a star

Every team is calling their chances up.
The fact is we are ranked outside the top 4 in the betting which is a good gauge.
We need X factor, a couple of the youngsters to become AA players.

(Motlop could be one of them?)

The guy in my avatar would've come in handy too just quietly.

 

[Vdubs]

Loved their discussion about our list management too. Have to quote this part, as it's too good to simply summarise...

Loved their discussion about our list management too. Have to quote this part, as it's too good to simply summarise...

Excellent reading, but I'd suggest BEWS will step into a spot ahead of some on that list.

 

[FredLeDeux]

I love reading through these extracted stats.

The most significant ones confirm my prior analysis (well, if you insist, prejudices), and the others are either unreliable, an artifact of undisclosed value judgements by the compilers, clearly inaccurate, or explicable by extraneous factors. Usually all of those things - for example, Johnno's alleged crappy disposal efficiency figures are clearly wrong and can only damage CD's reputation, not Johnno's.

Their comments on List Management give me a warm and fuzzy feeling. But some of their so-called "natural
understudies" are debatable, and some are just plain wrong. Stick to the stats, boys, and leave analysis to the bigfooty experts.

Seriously, though, I always try to keep some things in mind when statistics like these:
- The only stat which undeniably affects any given match result is the final score.
- No other single team stat is even remotely conclusive in deciding the final score - including the much-vaunted clearance rates.
- Nobody really has any idea which combination of team stats is most conclusive in deciding the final score.
- Last season's team stats are of buggerall value in predicting next season's team performance.
- An individual's past stats are, logically, of very limited value in predicting his future performance.
- Comparing some individual stats between players may tell you which one performed "better" in the past, but not which one is going to do "better" in the future.
- An individual's average stats tell you nothing about his best and worst, or how often they occurred, or how crucial they were. And following on from that an individual's median average stats may often a better indication of his normal standard than his mean average stats.
- You need to look very closely indeed at some CD definitions to understand what the stat really means, and decide whether it is valuable info, or just emotionally gratifying noise.

 

[winty]

Was reading through some of the player profiles, and the following about Jared Rivers caught my eye:

A move to the forward line in Round 13 came at an opportune time, especially with Mitch Clark going down in that match. From that moment on he was the number 1 target inside 50 at the Demons, ranking 3rd for goals - kicking multiples four times - and fourth for scoreboard impact. Rivers performed well in one-on-ones as a forward, recording the fifth best winning percentage of the 37 key forwards who were involved in at least 17 contests

I thought this was interesting for two reasons:

1. With Scott experimenting with Taylor going forward last season, could we possibly see an extension of that with Rivers going forward at times too?

2. Maybe with Pods training with the defenders over the pre-season, Rivers could actually line up in the forward line instead of Taylor, or they could even alternate, which would throw out opposition coaches even more.

 

[manboob]

Maybe with Pods training with the defenders over the pre-season, Rivers could actually line up in the forward line instead of Taylor, or they could even alternate, which would throw out opposition coaches even more.

Assuming pods, rivers and taylor all learn "their lines" this could cause chaos!

 

[DanA]

Some interesting stats observations:

Joel Corey - Geelong won a clearance 13% more often than the opposition when he was in at the centre bounce, the best differential of the top 50 centre bounce attendees in the AFL.


Mitch Duncan - Involved in 23% of our scoring chains - ranked 3rd behind Steve Johnson and Tom Hawkins.

Taylor Hunt - Ryan Griffen and Dane Swan were the only two players to record more than 20 possessions while he was tagging them.

James Kelly - 34% of his centre bounce clearances resulted in a score, the equal 4th highest percentage of the top 50 clearance gatherers.

Joel Selwood - Was number one in the league for clearances from centre bounces, and 8th for total clearances.

Trent West - Attended the 5th most centre bounces of any ruckman, and when in the centre Geelong won the clearance 8% more often than their opponents, the 2nd best differential of the top 50 centre bounce attendees, including midfielders (behind Corey!)

This is quite extraordinary. We had all these players putting up elite numbers in their specialty area but overall we weren't that good. I think this highlights the weaknesses we had in having such an unbalanced team.

Kelly, Selwood and Corey won good clearance numbers but the others were all below par and it hurt even more because Corey was used so much as an outside midfielder where I thought he was largely ineffective. I think Corey could be used well coming off the bench as a burst clearance mid who might only play 70-80 minutes but prove effective in that time. As we thought the top line is still there but more support is needed.

Duncan also did well but it shows how few outside options we had. He's highly effective but hopefully well prove better with Varcoe offering support and an improved workrate from Motlop.

I think the Hunt's numbers are deceiving. My memory has him largely used to mark damaging outside mids who only average 18-22 possessions so it stands to reason him play a negative role on them would keep there numbers below the 20 possesion mark.

Finally does West deferential say he's effective or that we were extraordinarily shit when he wasn't in the middle? Either way it shows the need for McIntosh.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

In response to the question accompanying this thread, if we're just talking about 2013 (so age isn't a consideration), there's no forward/mid I'd trade Chapman for, especially if we're only talking small/medium forwards (and ignoring Pavlich and Goodes).

For some reason, everyone seems to remember him as having an indifferent 2012. After a poor start, he was sensational and should have been right in the consideration for another AA nod. Between Round 4 and 23 (missed two games), he averaged 20.6 possessions, 4 tackles and 2.1 goals and kicked at least a goal every game (20.4, 4.5 and 1.7 for the entire season).

The small forwards who kicked more goals than him averaged the following stats:

Milne (2.5 goals, 2.1 tackles, 12.4 possessions)
Betts (2.2 goals, 2.8 tackles, 12.9 possessions)
Breust (1.8 goals, 4.6 tackles, 15.1 possessions)
Callinan (1.7 goals, 1.4 tackles, 13.2 possessions)
Thomas (2.2 goals, 3.4 tackles, 11.8 possessions)

I mean...Milne probably has to get into the AA side with 56 goals in the H&A games, but wasn't Chapman clearly better than the others?

If we're strictly talking forwards who play a bit in the midfield (and not vice versa), to me, Chapman is the clear #1.

 

[Boxhead_31]

List Summary

Average Age 24y 141d
Ave games 76.2
Ave Height 188.3cm
Right Footers 36
Left Footers 4


Age Breakdown
<21 12
21-24 13
25-29 10
30> 5

Games Played
<25 18
25 - 49 4
50-99 3
100-149 6
150-199 4
200-299 5

So 62% of our list is under 24, but we are old an gone

 

[DanA]

So 62% of our list is under 24, but we are old an gone

In fairness I can understand that view if you only glanced at the side. A fair portion of the starting line up is over 30. By all rights I think we should be gone but when you delve a bit deeper you can see we're actually looking surprisingly good.