Roast Champion Data Rates Geelong As the 3rd Worst Defence In The AFL!

Remove this Banner Ad

witsend

Norm Smith Medallist
Sep 22, 2008
6,997
2,722
Melbourne
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Lakers
In a controversial move Geelong’s defence is statistically ranked the third-worst given an even crop that does not rack up huge ranking points.
In the AFL Prospectus, Champion Data acknowledged Geelong’s defence has been the stingiest since 2009.
“Harry Taylor rates above average on our list, but the rest rate average or below average,” the book stated.
“They are not great attacking or intercepting defenders so the individual players find it difficult to generate rating points. These rating points land with Geelong’s midfield and wingers pushing back to help generate the ball movement out of defence.”


This is why statistics based conclusions get a bad name...
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Spazz Cat

Brownlow Medallist
Jun 10, 2013
14,870
20,275
AFL Club
Geelong
I get it. Sort of anyway. We probably have the best defence really.
But it's a team based defence. Not that hard to figure out.
Eg, Ross Lyons St Kilda would of had the best defence easy for a couple of years.
Did they have the best back six???? Absolutely not. It's all system.
 

you pick one

Brownlow Medallist
Nov 7, 2010
22,545
27,195
308 Negra Arroyo Lane Albuquerque New Mexico
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
WADA
In a controversial move Geelong’s defence is statistically ranked the third-worst given an even crop that does not rack up huge ranking points.
In the AFL Prospectus, Champion Data acknowledged Geelong’s defence has been the stingiest since 2009.
“Harry Taylor rates above average on our list, but the rest rate average or below average,” the book stated.
“They are not great attacking or intercepting defenders so the individual players find it difficult to generate rating points. These rating points land with Geelong’s midfield and wingers pushing back to help generate the ball movement out of defence.”


This is why statistics based conclusions get a bad name...
I think the bolded is spot on,our back 6 has to be overly supported by a high intensity game plan from our mids that just doesn't stand up for 25 weeks, we push back and forward to exhaustion protecting the defender who on their own possess little run and very few foot skills.Not the first time I've made this comment.
 

Hamingja

Brownlow Medallist
May 20, 2014
14,325
17,457
AFL Club
Geelong
How does Tom Stewart not rate ‘above average’? He’s nearly the perfect blend of attack and defence.
Been a while since I played SC but I think marks from opposition kicks were basically the huge scorer for defenders. Stewart is good at that but teams now know he is good at it so try to lead him away from the contest and let Kolo be the loose instead......
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Gunf

Premiership Player
Mar 11, 2019
4,299
6,218
AFL Club
Geelong
Still not sure how having the best defence since 2009 means having one of the worst

But then again you just need to look at who champion data rate as elite and who they don't

Stats tell a story but usually not the whole story or sometimes even half the story

I mean look at Brisbane rated 13 def 17 mids 13 fwd yet ranked number 1 overall please explain that lol
 

FredLeDeux

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 2, 2012
28,099
42,447
AFL Club
Geelong
Hard to think of a less controversial opinion about Geelong than 'they don't generate much attack from defence.'
Surely you mean "more controversial"; we generate a very large proportion of our attack from defence.
The problem with their "analysis" is their archaic insistence on dividing the team into 3 categories based on (nominal) starting positions of individual players so that there are only 6 players in "the defence" that they talk about, and the other 4-6 who are actually there working as part of the team defence remain classified as "midfielders".
 

you pick one

Brownlow Medallist
Nov 7, 2010
22,545
27,195
308 Negra Arroyo Lane Albuquerque New Mexico
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
WADA
Surely you mean "more controversial"; we generate a very large proportion of our attack from defence.
The problem with their "analysis" is their archaic insistence on dividing the team into 3 categories based on (nominal) starting positions of individual players so that there are only 6 players in "the defence" that they talk about, and the other 4-6 who are actually there working as part of the team defence remain classified as "midfielders".
In Geelongs case it's not the other 4-6 it's often the other 12,I hate seeing Hawkins behind center,we all at times complain about Geelong going sideways and backwards in defense but what do you do if you win the ball at half back look up and there are no blue and white jumpers ahead of you.Two problems here Game plan and blue collar back 6.
 

FredLeDeux

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 2, 2012
28,099
42,447
AFL Club
Geelong
In a controversial move Geelong’s defence is statistically ranked the third-worst given an even crop that does not rack up huge ranking points.
In the AFL Prospectus, Champion Data acknowledged Geelong’s defence has been the stingiest since 2009.
“Harry Taylor rates above average on our list, but the rest rate average or below average,” the book stated.
“They are not great attacking or intercepting defenders so the individual players find it difficult to generate rating points. These rating points land with Geelong’s midfield and wingers pushing back to help generate the ball movement out of defence.”


This is why statistics based conclusions get a bad name...
So the "defenders" don't get any "rating points" because the "midfielders" come back and pinch them all.

If true, gives the lie to the nonsense we hear all the time about our midfielders only being one-way runners and not getting back to help out in defence.
 

Max Milburn

Norm Smith Medallist
Aug 10, 2018
5,324
10,288
Hobbiton, Tasmania
AFL Club
Geelong
Like all ”statistics”, these are simply being used to prop up (or otherwise) preconceptions.
These ”conclusions” don’t back my preconceptions.
They are welcome support to others’.
It truly bemuses me that some supporters think our defence is poor.
 

witsend

Norm Smith Medallist
Sep 22, 2008
6,997
2,722
Melbourne
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Lakers
If our defence was as poor as CD states, we would have been bottom 4 in 2019. The entire premise of having a "back 6" is relevant only at each centre bounce. In the modern game, traditional positions mean next to nothing relative to team defence and team offence. This why CD is disingenuous in saying what it did about Geelong's "back 6". To the matter of lack of drive from the D50, this is why young Jordan Clarke is already and will become even more so crucially important to our team defensive structure as a line-breaker and creator. He will be exposed on occasion in one on one's as most defenders can be, but I see him as a potentially huge weapon moving forward (pun intended). He is confident/cocky, genuinely quick and some off his 50 meter bullet kicks to Tom Hawkins were stunning, so he has the disposal skills required. Prior to injury, his first season was nothing short of remarkable.
 

witsend

Norm Smith Medallist
Sep 22, 2008
6,997
2,722
Melbourne
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Lakers
Geelong plays team defence mainly as opposed to "back shoulder" one on one, so our system is very dependant on wings and mids pushing back in exactly the same way as our forwards need help for forward pressure a la the Richmond model.
 

Top Bottom