Clanger stats

[Wigarus]

shoo

Yeah that'll get rid of him.

Just after he comes back to the thread to check his post that was quoted...

 

[The Speaker]

Yeah that'll get rid of him.

Just after he comes back to the thread to check his post that was quoted...

working so far

 

[strobe00]

OK, so Clancee of the Overflow is way better than Barlow, Pav and Fyfe. ????

Proves what they say about stats, beer, dogs, Englishmen and the mid day sun...

Pretty sure the table doesn't say that. Just says that Clancee makes less clangers per disposal than the other guys.

Pav gets more goals. Barlow gets more touches. Fyfe gets more contested possessions. They're different stats. Each player contributes to the team result in their own way.

 

[strobe00]

Some pretty chunky tables to come. Apologies, it's hard to guess what people might be interested in.

For this run, have removed the Frees Against from the player's Clanger numbers, so it's a bit more weighted towards disposal.

For this year...

 

[strobe00]

And for last year

 

[strobe00]

If nothing else, the stats provide some support for the team being more inclined to burn the ball so far this year, compared to last. The defenders in particular look to be having a tough time of it.

Though it's pretty obvious from watching the games that that's happening anyway.

 

[scon]

I am very surprised folks hadn't realised how much Clancy values possession and what a calculating user of the pill he is,particularly by foot.

 

[Clive Diablo]

It's pretty harsh that a free agai st is counted as a clanger against you. It may not actually be a mistake by a player.

I'm looking at you Dalgliesh.

 

[strobe00]

I am very surprised folks hadn't realised how much Clancy values possession and what a calculating user of the pill he is,particularly by foot.

Like I said. There's thinking he's a very good user of the ball. Which I did.

And then there's realising that he hasn't butchered a single uncontested possession in 3 games and nearly 60 disposals.

That's a fair effort. Wouldn't have thought there are too many blokes in the league doing that.

 

[scon]

Those Ghurkas win battles.

 

[Tonga Bob]

I haven't seen any mention of it but why wouldn't missed shots on goal be considered clangers?

 

[freo84]

haha
all this started when one of your posters brought up Fyfe's absense from a most clangers list where everyone had played two extra games and I am the one who caused the tears for simply stating he was 6th per game.

you poor ****s could have used someone who could kick straight in the GF

What a very silly thing to say on another teams board.

Especially a supporter of team who was stopped from playing finals because of illegal drug use.

 

[manpurple]

I am very surprised folks hadn't realised how much Clancy values possession and what a calculating user of the pill he is,particularly by foot.

Spent a fair chunk of last year defending both him and the Gu. Both of them mostly for the DE% which in my mind is a very good indication of how much they burn the ball. Perhaps a better measure in some way than clangers vs disposals as there is a lot of "noise" in the clanger number, as discussed above.

 

[scon]

I haven't seen any mention of it but why wouldn't missed shots on goal be considered clangers?

Yeah I agree Tonga Bob .I torped one from about 90 one day in the wet and it just nicked the top of the post for a minor score.I certainly regarded that as a clanger by my standards.

 

[clogged]

I haven't seen any mention of it but why wouldn't missed shots on goal be considered clangers?

They're still scores I guess, but I've seen behinds that are worse than free kicks in terms of mistakes.

 

[Tonga Bob]

Yeah I agree Tonga Bob .I torped one from about 90 one day in the wet and it just nicked the top of the post for a minor score.I certainly regarded that as a clanger by my standards.

Well played Blightey!!! I should say missed shots on goal that you would expect to kick. You know how the TV broadcast has the probability % on set shots? Maybe above 65% or something is considered a clanger.

 

[strobe00]

Spent a fair chunk of last year defending both him and the Gu. Both of them mostly for the DE% which in my mind is a very good indication of how much they burn the ball. Perhaps a better measure in some way than clangers vs disposals as there is a lot of "noise" in the clanger number, as discussed above.

If you're saying that the disposal efficiency is a less noisy way of measuring how much a player burns the ball, then I'd have to disagree.

It's one of the messiest stats to interpret as it depends on so many things.

To each their own though. But I think you're wrong, if I've correctly understood what you meant.

 

[scon]

Chris Mayne v Essendon,Hilly last week,and I think the indefatigable Kep got a 6 pack of them in a qtr against TheStinkingTankers a couple of seasons back?
What's this Blightey shitey Tonga Bob??