Effective Disposal %

[MyManLynch]

Have listed our top 10 (who have played 5 games or more this season).​

Name. Effective Disposal %. Disposal Avg. Games 2014.
Keeffe 83.6% 12 13
Seedsman 80.5% 17 8
Frost 80% 9 17
Lumumba 79% 21 17
Goldsack 77% 11 15
Maxwell 77% 14 10
Williams 77% 17 10
Fasolo 77% 15 7
Langdon 76% 17 16
Pendles 76% 29 17

Mainly defenders. Some surprises (Lumumba?).
Where are our midfielders (who deliver to our forwards)?
Our mids & forwards are all in the 60's (Sidebottom 70%).
In the 50's are Grundy, Broomhead & Martin (the latter 2 small sample - few games only).
Something we must improve.

Edit: the stats all bunched up, after I posted (sorry). Not sure how to fix in columns properly?

 

[shizzle]

Disposal efficiency isn't quite the be all and end all, as it is skewed towards those who handball more and at a guess I'd say the average AFL player has about a 90% handball efficiency. I'd love to see our kicking efficiency stats if anyone can find them, that seems to be what really lets us down.

 

[MyManLynch]

Disposal efficiency isn't quite the be all and end all, as it is skewed towards those who handball more and at a guess I'd say the average AFL player has about a 90% handball efficiency. I'd love to see our kicking efficiency stats if anyone can find them, that seems to be what really lets us down.

Good point. The AFL stats do not breakdown disp % into kicks v handball separately.
Probably need champion data. Our defenders avg 55% kicks, 45% handball (but no separate disposal % listed).

 

[mike123]

Frost 80% 9 17
Lumumba 79% 21 17
Goldsack 77% 11 15
Maxwell 77% 14 10
Williams 77% 17 10

This is the reason is the reason why we're a crap kicking team.

 

[Jasper84]

Is a disposal considered efficient if the receiving player spills it?

 

[mattys123]

Obviously those efficiency stats don't include the defenders who kick in after a behind, because I swear we are the worst at clearing the ball outside our defensive zone from a kick in, with Young and Keeffe being two of the worst offenders.

 

[Chilli Con Incarnate]

Interesting stats. There are plenty of players in there that I would consider well lower than that, but it could be the skewed effect of the handball efficiency as mentioned. At the same time, I think our delivery into the forward line is our worst area for kicking, this would back that up slightly.

 

[suspect footskills]

IMO the reason a higher number of defenders than mids/fwds have good disposal efficiency % is game plan related. There seems to be a big emphasis on mids/hf fwds streaming back into defence to provide options for counter attack leaving only one fwd in the fwd 50. We then handball our way out of the def area but so often cant seem to get numbers back into attack in time or fail to even have sufficient options to get the ball into our half of the ground. Ive seen so many of these counter attacks get cut off and turned into opp scores its ridiculous.
As pointed out above there's no distinction between kick or handball in these % but I'd bet that if we had a heat chart our handball numbers in and out of defence would be huge.
Opposition know this and the better teams just rip us apart. Handball chains give them an opportunity to constantly have us under pressure and a chain is only as strong as it weakest link. Somewhere in that handball chain, with enough pressure that ball will likely change hands and we lose posession or have to start over again at a stoppage. Not a good tactic when we have 2 young rucks.

 

[ThisIsJake]

Any kick that goes 40+ metres to a 50/50 contest is considered effective no matter the result. So if you are wondering about Lumumba's efficiency, he is the definition of a bomb it forward in hope player.

Pendles is by far our best ball user and probably the best disposer of all the elite mids in the comp. But you just wait for Scharenberg.

 

[suspect footskills]

Any kick that goes 40+ metres to a 50/50 contest is considered effective no matter the result. So if you are wondering about Lumumba's efficiency, he is the definition of a bomb it forward in hope player.

Explains a lot.

Pendles is by far our best ball user and probably the best disposer of all the elite mids in the comp. But you just wait for Scharenberg.

God I hope you're right. About time we had some competence with the ball, it's the basis of the game.

 

[ottoman]

These stats mean nothing to me as I don't know what the definition of an effective disposal is. Could someone guide me as to where I would look to get the definition for what is considered to be an effective disposal. As well as the definitions for all the other stats. For example what qualifies as a tackle etc.

 

[TheWoodsOf72]

Disposal efficiency isn't quite the be all and end all, as it is skewed towards those who handball more and at a guess I'd say the average AFL player has about a 90% handball efficiency. I'd love to see our kicking efficiency stats if anyone can find them, that seems to be what really lets us down.

Mainly defenders. Some surprises (Lumumba?). Agree that one stat alone does not tell the story. I wonder if an effective handball is also a handball to a player, who is about to be crunched?

 

[SuperSub17]

These stats mean nothing to me as I don't know what the definition of an effective disposal is. Could someone guide me as to where I would look to get the definition for what is considered to be an effective disposal. As well as the definitions for all the other stats. For example what qualifies as a tackle etc.

An effective kick is either a short one that results in uncontested retained possession for your team, or a long one that goes to a 50-50 or better - short meaning <40m, long being >40m.

An effective handball is one that just finds the intended teammate and is to the team's advantage.

 

[ottoman]

An effective kick is either a short one that results in uncontested retained possession for your team, or a long one that goes to a 50-50 or better - short meaning <40m, long being >40m.

An effective handball is one that just finds the intended teammate and is to the team's advantage.

Thanks for that SS17. There are some problems with this definition. Going by the definition above, if for example Adams passes the ball lace out to Kennedy who is standing in the clear but Kennedy F**-s up the mark, spills it and an opposition player takes the ball away it would be marked against Adams as an ineffective disposal.
Not questioning the accuracy of your info mate just pointing out some problems it can create.

 

[SuperSub17]

Thanks for that SS17. There are some problems with this definition. Going by the definition above, if for example Adams passes the ball lace out to Kennedy who is standing in the clear but Kennedy F**-s up the mark, spills it and an opposition player takes the ball away it would be marked against Adams as an ineffective disposal.
Not questioning the accuracy of your info mate just pointing out some problems it can create.

Yeah of course there's going to be some blurry lines there, of course you could never define it objectively.

The situation you describe is definitely an effective kick though.

 

[TradeDraft]

With the Rucks. They are not know for having High Kicking Effectiveness %

Though I think both Witts and Grundy use the Ball well for Rucks

 

[Collingwood pro]

With the Rucks. They are not know for having High Kicking Effectiveness %

Though I think both Witts and Grundy use the Ball well for Rucks

Both are, just that most of their kicks which are hit well especially Witts but the other player on the end of it generally drops it.

 

[Tippy78]

An interesting topic of discussion. I've always been bemused by the disposal efficiency stats and at the moment I think it's a fairly worthless stat.

If what people are saying is true then

1. Clinton Young streaming out of defence with no pressure kicks a ball 50m over the heads of Cloke and his opponent.... Effective kick!
2. Macaffer hits Young lace out with a 30m pass, Young drops it....Non effective kick??

I'm sure the stat definition will be improved over the next few years to actually become a valuable stat. In this day of turnover pain where a bad turnover in your forward line can cost you a goal 1 min later, I reckon clubs will get more focused on the players that make poor choices/delivery

 

[loki04]

Is a disposal considered efficient if the receiving player spills it?

Its considered effective even if it's kicked on his head in a 3v1 and he contests it but it goes to ground is rebounded.

Also applies to kicks to non advantage that get spoiled so on and so forth.

It is farkin stupid.

 

[SuperSub17]

It's always a bit cloudy. For example in the WB game everyone was bashing Adams for his low DE (50-something IIRC), but because he had 20 contested possessions he was frequently banging 30m kicks out of stoppages to a contest, so they're classed as ineffective.

Ultimately it's not the be-all, end-all.

 

[MyManLynch]

I guess a better gauge would be kicks that are turned over/rebounded solely due to a bad kick direct to opposition or to their advantage, resulting in turnover.

 

[Magpie Mason]

Tony Armstrong 100%.

 

[MyManLynch]

Tony Armstrong 100%.

Kmart 0%

 

[Magpie Mason]

Kmart 0%

Well at least K mart can say he didn't have 1 ineffective disposal!!

 

[DWil6]

Defenders generally have a higher disposal efficiency because they are often kicking the ball around in defence. Clearance winning mids have lower efficiencies as they are often kicking around corners and clearing congestion. Forwards have low efficiency as they are almost always kicking to defended contests. defenders have had the highest % for eons, nothing has changed. Presti, though a low possessor, almost always went at 100%.