Experience v Age - Hawks, Pies & Crows to Contend, Eagles to slide..

Joined
Nov 11, 2010
Posts
1,711
Likes
3,388
Location
Punt Rd End
AFL Club
Richmond
Thread starter #1
I am a big believer that the amount of games a team has been able to get into players on average is a far greater indicator of potential success than the age of a list. Team and game plan consistency is a far stronger measure in my option, than age. So, while some team have far older lists, if they have not had the number of games due to form, injury or opportunity, then typically they will not be a strong a group.

Of course skill, desire and chance all play their part but just purely looking at lists based on age and experience, the experience (game played) is a far better indicator of potential in my opinion than average age.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2018-11-29/oldest-youngest-most-experienced-club-lists-compared

So based on this - West Coast will slide and the Hawks, Adelaide & Pies should be contending or at least playing deep into September....

.....then there's Tigers who have a very young list with plenty of experience! Watch out!! :D
 

Attachments

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Joined
Jul 10, 2015
Posts
2,196
Likes
2,368
Location
Perth
AFL Club
West Coast
#2
I am a big believer that the amount of games a team has been able to get into players on average is a far greater indicator of potential success than the age of a list. Team and game plan consistency is a far stronger measure in my option, than age. So, while some team have far older lists, if they have not had the number of games due to form, injury or opportunity, then typically they will not be a strong a group.

Of course skill, desire and chance all play their part but just purely looking at lists based on age and experience, the experience (game played) is a far better indicator of potential in my opinion than average age.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2018-11-29/oldest-youngest-most-experienced-club-lists-compared

So based on this - West Coast will slide and the Hawks, Adelaide & Pies should be contending or at least playing deep into September....

.....then there's Tigers who have a very young list with plenty of experience! Watch out!! :D
I think that should be applied to a teams best 26 or so players as opposed to the entire list. I'd say west coast would have one of the more experienced best 22-26 in terns of games played, but due to a relatively high list turnover in the last 2 seasons it drags the list average down as a whole.
 
Joined
Nov 11, 2010
Posts
1,711
Likes
3,388
Location
Punt Rd End
AFL Club
Richmond
Thread starter #3
I think that should be applied to a teams best 26 or so players as opposed to the entire list. I'd say west coast would have one of the more experienced best 22-26 in terns of games played, but due to a relatively high list turnover in the last 2 seasons it drags the list average down as a whole.
But then that would mean your depth is untried and inexperienced. This would probably mean you fall away pretty quickly when injuries strike where as a team such as Hawthorn is more even
 
Joined
Nov 11, 2010
Posts
1,711
Likes
3,388
Location
Punt Rd End
AFL Club
Richmond
Thread starter #4
Perhaps they need to figure out the average for your 22 players that played the most games in 2018 compared to the whole squad. That would be interesting. Richmond had a great run with injury which meant we could pick and choose when to give players a spot whereas other teams had their hands forced.
 

master bate

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 13, 2006
Posts
13,118
Likes
10,456
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Melbourne
#5
But then that would mean your depth is untried and inexperienced. This would probably mean you fall away pretty quickly when injuries strike where as a team such as Hawthorn is more even
Depends on who the depth players are though.

Hawthorn last year picked guys like Worpel and Nash to play finals ahead of Whitecross and Langford because they were deemed the better players even with 0 games experience compared with 70 or 100 or whatever.

Similarly any simple analysis of the Hawks games/age is going to be massively out of whack due to Burgoyne being 36 and having played over 350 games. He might not even be an above average player by mid year next year. Same for Roughy, Frawley, Puopolo etc.

West Coast were missing 3 high quality players on grand final day - Nic Nat, Gaff and Sheppard - otherwise I'd say only LeCras was past his prime and only Cole (marginally) and Venables were before their prime. The rest of their players were the right age and if you count state league games for Rioli and Ryan had played a good amount of footy.

I'd be looking for a best 25 aged 22-31, from there games played can be a measure of quality but it isn't always a good one. Every year there's experienced senior players who be it through injury, changes in game plan or evolution of the game cross from useful role players to outside the team. Similarly every year sides discover mature age players or guys who have done a few years on the list developing who are then very useful players.
 

threesixpio

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Jun 28, 2013
Posts
22,817
Likes
29,287
AFL Club
Hawthorn
#6
I am a big believer that the amount of games a team has been able to get into players on average is a far greater indicator of potential success than the age of a list. Team and game plan consistency is a far stronger measure in my option, than age. So, while some team have far older lists, if they have not had the number of games due to form, injury or opportunity, then typically they will not be a strong a group.

Of course skill, desire and chance all play their part but just purely looking at lists based on age and experience, the experience (game played) is a far better indicator of potential in my opinion than average age.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2018-11-29/oldest-youngest-most-experienced-club-lists-compared

So based on this - West Coast will slide and the Hawks, Adelaide & Pies should be contending or at least playing deep into September....

.....then there's Tigers who have a very young list with plenty of experience! Watch out!! :D
Some standard deviation would be interesting or maybe the most players over a certain amount of games etc
 
Joined
Nov 11, 2010
Posts
1,711
Likes
3,388
Location
Punt Rd End
AFL Club
Richmond
Thread starter #7
I actually still look at teams such as GWS and think they are the team to burst on to the scene. I think they are only now starting to get their foundation players to an age where they can fight out the close contests and play through a whole season. I think, without the experience, they just continue to fall away during finals. Its all great to say they have the older leaders but its only when the majority of your team can work together to fight when the challenges come, that they can jump that hurdle. no one is talking the Giants up for that reason but I think given their experience and age demographic, they are the ones to beat this year.
 
Joined
Nov 11, 2010
Posts
1,711
Likes
3,388
Location
Punt Rd End
AFL Club
Richmond
Thread starter #8
Depends on who the depth players are though.

Hawthorn last year picked guys like Worpel and Nash to play finals ahead of Whitecross and Langford because they were deemed the better players even with 0 games experience compared with 70 or 100 or whatever.

Similarly any simple analysis of the Hawks games/age is going to be massively out of whack due to Burgoyne being 36 and having played over 350 games. He might not even be an above average player by mid year next year. Same for Roughy, Frawley, Puopolo etc.

West Coast were missing 3 high quality players on grand final day - Nic Nat, Gaff and Sheppard - otherwise I'd say only LeCras was past his prime and only Cole (marginally) and Venables were before their prime. The rest of their players were the right age and if you count state league games for Rioli and Ryan had played a good amount of footy.

I'd be looking for a best 25 aged 22-31, from there games played can be a measure of quality but it isn't always a good one. Every year there's experienced senior players who be it through injury, changes in game plan or evolution of the game cross from useful role players to outside the team. Similarly every year sides discover mature age players or guys who have done a few years on the list developing who are then very useful players.
This is true and maybe why the average age comes into play. You don't tend to keep a player on your list who is 25+ unless they as quality
 
Joined
Jul 10, 2015
Posts
2,196
Likes
2,368
Location
Perth
AFL Club
West Coast
#9
But then that would mean your depth is untried and inexperienced. This would probably mean you fall away pretty quickly when injuries strike where as a team such as Hawthorn is more even
Top 26 players would cover majority of the depth, west coast only had 28 players play more than 3 games for the year and majority of that depth was relatively experienced too.
 

Trouto

All Australian
Joined
Jul 3, 2007
Posts
659
Likes
636
Location
Bunbury
AFL Club
West Coast
#11
I am a big believer that the amount of games a team has been able to get into players on average is a far greater indicator of potential success than the age of a list. Team and game plan consistency is a far stronger measure in my option, than age. So, while some team have far older lists, if they have not had the number of games due to form, injury or opportunity, then typically they will not be a strong a group.

Of course skill, desire and chance all play their part but just purely looking at lists based on age and experience, the experience (game played) is a far better indicator of potential in my opinion than average age.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2018-11-29/oldest-youngest-most-experienced-club-lists-compared

So based on this - West Coast will slide and the Hawks, Adelaide & Pies should be contending or at least playing deep into September....

.....then there's Tigers who have a very young list with plenty of experience! Watch out!! :D
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Joined
Nov 11, 2010
Posts
1,711
Likes
3,388
Location
Punt Rd End
AFL Club
Richmond
Thread starter #13
:huh:

I'm not having a go at the Weagles. I'm just suggesting teams with a younger average age and higher average games experience are more likely to have better long term success than older teams alone. The Eagles seem to have an older core team that is very susceptible to injures due to the lack of game time they have given to their backup/depth players. They covered their injures well this year but this may prove a problem next.
 
Joined
Jul 10, 2015
Posts
2,196
Likes
2,368
Location
Perth
AFL Club
West Coast
#14
Were they? Interesting to see how they go with a tougher fixture. I'm actually surprized at the average age of your players. I didn't realise you had so many elderly players
Just about every single "expert" or journo had us missing the 8 and a lot had us bottom 4. We actually had a top 6 fixture this year as well, so it won't be too different. Will be interesting to see how we go with a healthier list however.
 

Coaster2012

Premiership Player
Joined
Jul 10, 2012
Posts
4,960
Likes
5,086
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Manchester City, Lakers
#15
Were they? Interesting to see how they go with a tougher fixture. I'm actually surprized at the average age of your players. I didn't realise you had so many elderly players
They were predicted 8-12.

We are getting older (Hurn and Kennedy), but players like Yeo, Gaff, Mcgovern, Shuey, Redden have years left in the tank, so it's hardly going to have any impact in 2019.
 
Joined
Nov 11, 2010
Posts
1,711
Likes
3,388
Location
Punt Rd End
AFL Club
Richmond
Thread starter #16
Just about every single "expert" or journo had us missing the 8 and a lot had us bottom 4. We actually had a top 6 fixture this year as well, so it won't be too different. Will be interesting to see how we go with a healthier list however.
I the end as long as you get up around the mark come finals time, you're a chance. Just because it happened this year doesn't guarantee anything for next year. Take my team for example. A flag followed by a fantastic season meant nothing after we didn't show up for the Prelim. Look art the Crows - who would have thought that would have happened this year but you certainly can't write them off next year. The Eagles have an older list so injures come hand in hand with that and injures to their better players too. Nothing against West Coast, just what happens.

Luck is a crucial component to any flag and you had it this year like we did last
 

im_a_lazy_sod

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 27, 2007
Posts
10,659
Likes
7,828
Location
Block 108 as loud as any
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
Everton FC - EFFC Sharks - Tranmere
#17
Kennedy is the only real Eagle with question marks over his age and his replacement imo

NN is another kettle of fish in terms of his injury and what happens next

Otherwise they're doing okay. Unless they win the flag again, by definition, they will have 'slid'. But **** me. They aren't going away anytime soon barring something catastrophic or a classic premiership hangover
 

Forward Press

Premium Platinum
Joined
Jul 5, 2011
Posts
25,801
Likes
32,225
Location
Perth
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Man Utd
#22
But then that would mean your depth is untried and inexperienced. This would probably mean you fall away pretty quickly when injuries strike where as a team such as Hawthorn is more even
We debuted eight players this year and of course our premiership winning side lacked 3 of our top seven or eight players. We're fine when it comes to depth.

Were they? Interesting to see how they go with a tougher fixture. I'm actually surprized at the average age of your players. I didn't realise you had so many elderly players
All 17 pundits on afl.com.au in the pre-season put us outside the eight.

We also had a 'top six' fixture this year as we were ranked the 6th best side after finals - some are commenting that our fixture this year is actually easier (no trip to Tassie, only visit Queensland once in the first round, less six day breaks).

:huh:

I'm not having a go at the Weagles. I'm just suggesting teams with a younger average age and higher average games experience are more likely to have better long term success than older teams alone. The Eagles seem to have an older core team that is very susceptible to injures due to the lack of game time they have given to their backup/depth players. They covered their injures well this year but this may prove a problem next.
Ron The Bear has the exact stats but we essentially dropped more than two years in average age and won the flag anyway, something that only happened a handful of times in VFL/AFL history. You'd have more of a point if we won the flag this year with Mitchell, Priddis, Petrie etc making up our core.
 

Abasi

WINGED GOD
Joined
Apr 19, 2006
Posts
56,497
Likes
90,728
Location
Bayside
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Spurs, Socceroos
Moderator #24
Output >>>>>>>> old list>experienced list>young list.

That's all that matters.

The teams with the best overall output are the best sides in it, regardless of what arbitrary age ruling Bigfooty posters want to put in place.
 
Top Bottom