Analysis Goal Kicking Accuracy- The End All?

[Bush_Chook]

.

 

[G Mus]

Use statspro for your statistics, I think you're missing shots at goal that don't score, like Sandi has a goal accuracy of 66.7, and Fyfe's should be 40.7 for example

 

[Bush_Chook]

Use statspro for your statistics, I think you're missing shots at goal that don't score, like Sandi has a goal accuracy of 66.7, and Fyfe's should be 40.7 for example

Yeah I've used a simpler definition (just including shots that influence the scoreboard), just didn't have the time on my lunch break to fetch the info

 

[FreoMonocle]

Footy defence has gotten smarter over the years, so it's harder to take a mark in prime position, so there will be more difficult shots. I like it that defenders aren't just witches hats and you have to earn your goals. Gone are the days of a brutish full forward sitting in the goal square, monstering the opposition and basically taking pots at goal from point blank.

As for kicking skills. They train as professionals, they don't have to work it around their main job. There is a huge number of coaches behind you, instead of the one or two, stop motion video to analyse and work on technique, better sports ware etc. It doesn't make sense that they are less skilful than they were back in the days of yore. The main difference being the running load of a forward and having tired legs - but several decades ago they weren't (generally) as fit and were having as many pies and beers as they wanted.

Not an analysis of set shots and doesn't show forced behinds, but aside from 1972 - Crikey Moses, 28 goals, 9 behinds... It doesn't really stand out as being generally more accurate and you get 1976 Hawks with 13.22 and 1980 pies 9.24 - again, no indication of forced behinds or complete misses oob.

vfl grand finals.
1971 Hawks 12.10 (82) vs Saints 11.9 (75)
1972 Carlton 28.9 (177) vs Tigers 22.18 (150)
1973 Carlton 12.14 (86) vs Tigers 16.20 (116)
1974 Tigers 18.20 (128) vs Kangas 13.9 (87)
1975 Kangas 19.8 (122) vs Hawks 9.13 (67)
1976 Hawks 13.22 (100) vs Kangas 10.10 (70)
1977 Kangas 21.25 (151) vs Pies 19.10 (124)
1978 Haws 18.13 (121) vs Kangas 15.13 (103)
1979 Carlton 11.16 (82) vs Pies 11.11 (77) - low scoring isn't only limited to moder footy
1980 Tigers 23.21 vs Pies 9.24 (78)

 

[Scham]

Do your stats include all shots or only set shots?

Do they account for shots that should make the distance but fall short due to an ineffective kick?
Do they count shots that go out of bounds? Or out of bounds on the full?

 

[yoong]

My personal take is that a team being accurate in front of goal can cover for 3 deficiencies in other areas.

 

[its free real estate]

Sandilands going the handball every time he marks has always driven me crazy. He’s a decent kick.

 

[kp junior]

I'd love to know how many practise set shots per day they get in. My guess is not nearly enough.

eg My NBA team's centre has dreams of becoming a 3 point threat. He is a rubbish shooter generally. It isn't his job really, but he is trying to add that skill to his arsenal. So he's taking 1000 3's a day.

Someone please enlighten me how many kicks at goal per day an up and coming forward with kicking issues like Brennan Cox would be taking.

 

[PapaJ]

I'd love to know how many practise set shots per day they get in. My guess is not nearly enough.

eg My NBA team's centre has dreams of becoming a 3 point threat. He is a rubbish shooter generally. It isn't his job really, but he is trying to add that skill to his arsenal. So he's taking 1000 3's a day.

Someone please enlighten me how many kicks at goal per day an up and coming forward with kicking issues like Brennan Cox would be taking.

Not sure, but someone like Cox should be doing a s**t load of kicking at goal drills - rested, fatigued, close, long. Nothing is perfect, but it works. It just gets to the point where your brain thinks its automatic and you muscle memory (if done right in the first place) obliges. Then when you miss, it's more of WTF, why did that happen. Your comparison to BBall is quite apt. It's a lot easier and less demanding physically to shoot a basket ball, but it's well know that the best shooters (and players in general) are and were the sort that, even as vets, would be those staying around, often on their own after practice when everybody else was free to go home and take an hour or so just to work on base skills and shooting.

Cox has most other things needed, especially great hands, to make it in the AFL. He should be working his but off to get those shots at goal under control.

 

[its free real estate]

Footy defence has gotten smarter over the years, so it's harder to take a mark in prime position, so there will be more difficult shots. I like it that defenders aren't just witches hats and you have to earn your goals. Gone are the days of a brutish full forward sitting in the goal square, monstering the opposition and basically taking pots at goal from point blank.

As for kicking skills. They train as professionals, they don't have to work it around their main job. There is a huge number of coaches behind you, instead of the one or two, stop motion video to analyse and work on technique, better sports ware etc. It doesn't make sense that they are less skilful than they were back in the days of yore. The main difference being the running load of a forward and having tired legs - but several decades ago they weren't (generally) as fit and were having as many pies and beers as they wanted.

Not an analysis of set shots and doesn't show forced behinds, but aside from 1972 - Crikey Moses, 28 goals, 9 behinds... It doesn't really stand out as being generally more accurate and you get 1976 Hawks with 13.22 and 1980 pies 9.24 - again, no indication of forced behinds or complete misses oob.

vfl grand finals.
1971 Hawks 12.10 (82) vs Saints 11.9 (75)
1972 Carlton 28.9 (177) vs Tigers 22.18 (150)
1973 Carlton 12.14 (86) vs Tigers 16.20 (116)
1974 Tigers 18.20 (128) vs Kangas 13.9 (87)
1975 Kangas 19.8 (122) vs Hawks 9.13 (67)
1976 Hawks 13.22 (100) vs Kangas 10.10 (70)
1977 Kangas 21.25 (151) vs Pies 19.10 (124)
1978 Haws 18.13 (121) vs Kangas 15.13 (103)
1979 Carlton 11.16 (82) vs Pies 11.11 (77) - low scoring isn't only limited to moder footy
1980 Tigers 23.21 vs Pies 9.24 (78)

After many decades of improvements, peak league goal scoring accuracy was in 2000, has declined since.

I think this has been the least accurate season since 1991. Lowest scoring season since 1968.

 

[FreoMonocle]

After many decades of improvements, peak league goal scoring accuracy was in 2000, has declined since.

I think this has been the least accurate season since 1991. Lowest scoring season since 1968.

I keep hearing about the state of the game and how the sky is falling in by tv commentators, so curiosity got the better of me. Basically, the only time that matters - Freo in the competition with the 2 additional years that you mentioned.

Goals Behinds Ratio​

1968 2859 2958 96.65%
1991 5090 4648 109.51%
1995 5055 4546 111.20%
1996 5073 4410 115.03%
1997 4830 4457 108.37%
1998 5012 4491 111.60%
1999 5143 4504 114.19%
2000 5626 4559 123.40%
2001 5258 4454 118.05%
2002 5121 3821 134.02%
2003 5101 4265 119.60%
2004 5012 4261 117.62%
2005 5118 4288 119.36%
2006 4959 4488 110.49%
2007 5107 4646 109.92%
2008 5238 4609 113.65%
2009 4913 4207 116.78%
2010 4856 4405 110.24%
2011 5285 4668 113.22%
2012 5518 4923 112.09%
2013 5561 4885 113.84%
2014 5208 4721 110.32%
2015 5176 4532 114.21%
2016 5313 4676 113.62%
2017 5355 4757 112.57%
2018 4947 4560 108.49%


Shows the overall scoring trend (aside from conceded) and the new teams effects on output/accuracy. Freo's first game in 1995, Ports in 1997, GC 2011, GWS 2012 and I can't remember Fitzroy's disappearance (unless I watch Jack Irish on TV). It looks like there was a 6 year window when the ratio of goals to behinds was 1.2ish, it's in the ballpark of 1.1 for the rest of it (excluding 1968, a semi professional league when the other years are professional).

So, this year the accuracy is a slight drop, but unless it's backed up in the next year or two it's just an outlier, but compared to before with the exception of 2000 to 2005, the years all look comparable for accuracy.

Mental note to self. I took the raw numbers from https://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/ft_team_rankings?year=1968&type=TT&sby=2

 

[its free real estate]

I keep hearing about the state of the game and how the sky is falling in by tv commentators, so curiosity got the better of me. Basically, the only time that matters - Freo in the competition with the 2 additional years that you mentioned.

Goals Behinds Ratio​

1968 2859 2958 96.65%
1991 5090 4648 109.51%
1995 5055 4546 111.20%
1996 5073 4410 115.03%
1997 4830 4457 108.37%
1998 5012 4491 111.60%
1999 5143 4504 114.19%
2000 5626 4559 123.40%
2001 5258 4454 118.05%
2002 5121 3821 134.02%
2003 5101 4265 119.60%
2004 5012 4261 117.62%
2005 5118 4288 119.36%
2006 4959 4488 110.49%
2007 5107 4646 109.92%
2008 5238 4609 113.65%
2009 4913 4207 116.78%
2010 4856 4405 110.24%
2011 5285 4668 113.22%
2012 5518 4923 112.09%
2013 5561 4885 113.84%
2014 5208 4721 110.32%
2015 5176 4532 114.21%
2016 5313 4676 113.62%
2017 5355 4757 112.57%
2018 4947 4560 108.49%


Shows the overall scoring trend (aside from conceded) and the new teams effects on output/accuracy. Freo's first game in 1995, Ports in 1997, GC 2011, GWS 2012 and I can't remember Fitzroy's disappearance (unless I watch Jack Irish on TV). It looks like there was a 6 year window when the ratio of goals to behinds was 1.2ish, it's in the ballpark of 1.1 for the rest of it (excluding 1968, a semi professional league when the other years are professional).

So, this year the accuracy is a slight drop, but unless it's backed up in the next year or two it's just an outlier, but compared to before with the exception of 2000 to 2005, the years all look comparable for accuracy.

Mental note to self. I took the raw numbers from https://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/ft_team_rankings?year=1968&type=TT&sby=2

Your numbers don't seem right. Use https://afltables.com/afl/seas/2000.html#lad and check the accuracy column.

It doesn't include finals, but that shouldn't matter.

 

[FreoMonocle]

Your numbers don't seem right. Use https://afltables.com/afl/seas/2000.html#lad and check the accuracy column.

It doesn't include finals, but that shouldn't matter.

The data I grabbed uses the finals as well methinks.

Year Goals Pointes Ratio Percentage
1968 2859 2958 96.65% 49.15%
1991 5090 4648 109.51% 52.27%
1995 5055 4546 111.20% 52.65%
1996 5073 4410 115.03% 53.50%
1997 4830 4457 108.37% 52.01%
1998 5012 4491 111.60% 52.74%
1999 5143 4504 114.19% 53.31%
2000 5626 4559 123.40% 55.24%
2001 5258 4454 118.05% 54.14%
2002 5121 4333 118.19% 54.17% Edited for Waldorf/Stattlers sake.
2003 5101 4265 119.60% 54.46%
2004 5012 4261 117.62% 54.05%
2005 5118 4288 119.36% 54.41%
2006 4959 4488 110.49% 52.49%
2007 5107 4646 109.92% 52.36%
2008 5238 4609 113.65% 53.19%
2009 4913 4207 116.78% 53.87%
2010 4856 4405 110.24% 52.43%
2011 5285 4668 113.22% 53.10%
2012 5518 4923 112.09% 52.85%
2013 5561 4885 113.84% 53.24%
2014 5208 4721 110.32% 52.45%
2015 5176 4532 114.21% 53.32%
2016 5313 4676 113.62% 53.19%
2017 5355 4757 112.57% 52.96%
2018 4947 4560 108.49% 52.04%


I'ts been decades since I was at school, so apologies if I have it wrong. Ratio I have as goals/points. Percentage is Goals/(Goals+Points). There could be an error or two as I copied the goals, then points manually, but the ratio and percentage are excel formulae. More running involved in the last few years, so the legs have more fatigue, but the accuracy is still in the ballpark.

 

[its free real estate]

The data I grabbed uses the finals as well methinks.

Year Goals Pointes Ratio Percentage
1968 2859 2958 96.65% 49.15%
1991 5090 4648 109.51% 52.27%
1995 5055 4546 111.20% 52.65%
1996 5073 4410 115.03% 53.50%
1997 4830 4457 108.37% 52.01%
1998 5012 4491 111.60% 52.74%
1999 5143 4504 114.19% 53.31%
2000 5626 4559 123.40% 55.24%
2001 5258 4454 118.05% 54.14%
2002 5121 3821 134.02% 57.27%
2003 5101 4265 119.60% 54.46%
2004 5012 4261 117.62% 54.05%
2005 5118 4288 119.36% 54.41%
2006 4959 4488 110.49% 52.49%
2007 5107 4646 109.92% 52.36%
2008 5238 4609 113.65% 53.19%
2009 4913 4207 116.78% 53.87%
2010 4856 4405 110.24% 52.43%
2011 5285 4668 113.22% 53.10%
2012 5518 4923 112.09% 52.85%
2013 5561 4885 113.84% 53.24%
2014 5208 4721 110.32% 52.45%
2015 5176 4532 114.21% 53.32%
2016 5313 4676 113.62% 53.19%
2017 5355 4757 112.57% 52.96%
2018 4947 4560 108.49% 52.04%


I'ts been decades since I was at school, so apologies if I have it wrong. Ratio I have as goals/points. Percentage is Goals/(Goals+Points). There could be an error or two as I copied the goals, then points manually, but the ratio and percentage are excel formulae. More running involved in the last few years, so the legs have more fatigue, but the accuracy is still in the ballpark.

Your 2002 numbers alone are wrong. Do it again

 

[FreoMonocle]

Your 2002 numbers alone are wrong. Do it again

I'm not your mum, you should go and make your own sandwiches.

Oh in a perfect world where I just found a relevant table and copy/pasted, instead of having a crack and trying to put it together manually while having
Waldorf? Or are you Stattler? taking pot shots instead of being constructive.

For the sake of anyone else that want's to contribute rather than carp from the sideline.
2002 5121 goals, 4333 behinds, ratio is 1.18 accuracy is 54%.

This just levels the accuracy over the years even more, just backs my assertion if anything that accuracy hasn't gone to the dogs in recent years, it is pretty well the same as it has been for the only years of the AFL that matter, Freo's years in it.

 

[Scham]

I don’t give a s**t what all the stats say. I just want to see our players, regardless of who they are, either nail a goal or get very close when having a shot inside 40m.