Review Good/Bad vs Collingwood

[Bearded Clam]

Pretty clear in the introduction..

"Below are the definitons of all the key stats used by Champion Data. Note, we have left the self-explanatory stats blank."

wow…

and old bazza reacons the stats are “black and white”!..

fk me… none of those short one line definitions explains at all exactly what criteria the statisticians taking these stats are using.

and if these pissant and completely “grey” definitions are what these statisticians are using to judge their stats on then its even more laughable that some people here are hanging their hats on them..

 

[Gtowncrow]

Stats are black and white. How a player looks is subjective, I thought Smith was decent last week and others shared that view.

DE is not a stat that is worthless, ineffective kicks don't help a team. I mean the difference of 5 - 10% is nothing and wouldn't say that shows one player is better than another. Also key defenders or players with bad kicking generally do short safer kicks which inflates their stat. If a guy is getting 25% though it tells you plenty

Getting run down isn't a stat. Sucked the life right out of us.
Brodie is currently a one trick Pony. He needs to try and pass the ball more rather than just kicking it as far as he can....like schoolboy footballers do! His 18 kicks on the weekend averaged 38.5m. There isn't too much room for passing with that average.

I don't want to bag the guy but unless his kicks get marked more, he's just asking for it to simply rebound back again. It could be coaching and team strategy but regardless, it's ineffective.

Many of us have seen this all year and understand how this repeated long bombing plays out, but I suspect that finding an empirical, quantitative statistic for this is pretty hard. There is whole other world of research called qualitative evidence.

Smith is holding his spot by a thread IMO. Hope he picks up though.

 

[Bazz_27]

Getting run down isn't a stat. Sucked the life right out of us.
Brodie is currently a one trick Pony. He needs to try and pass the ball more rather than just kicking it as far as he can....like schoolboy footballers do! His 18 kicks on the weekend averaged 38.5m. There isn't too much room for passing with that average.

I don't want to bag the guy but unless his kicks get marked more, he's just asking for it to simply rebound back again. It could be coaching and team strategy but regardless, it's ineffective.

Many of us have seen this all year and understand how this repeated long bombing plays out, but I suspect that finding an empirical, quantitative statistic for this is pretty hard. There is whole other world of research called qualitative evidence.

Smith is holding his spot by a thread IMO. Hope he picks up though.

I'm happy to look at this a bit closer. His year has been average by his usual standards and until last week he hasn't looked damaging at all.

This week he had 19 touches (18 kicks) at 74% DE. This figure isn't the end of the world but a fair indication. Given the definition of an effective kick under 40m is to hit intended target and over 40m is to a 50/50 or your teams advantage then on the weekend he was meeting that criteria 74% of the time.

The week before he was even better at 92%.

Dees was 60%, north 62%, he is going at 75% for the year.

He has been all over the place this year but the last 2 weeks have been better imo

 

[Smart Fella]

I find the disposal efficiency interesting too and I didn't realise soccer kicks were included as kicks. Carmichael had around 8 and most of them went nowhere so assume that's ineffective which really brings his efficiency down.

Smith had 3 soccer kicks, two happened to go to teammates, one to opposition so right there, 67% kicking efficiency. The other thing I noticed, his other 15 kicks, all but one went to a contest.

On CPH1903 using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[NSolis]

wow…

and old bazza reacons the stats are “black and white”!..

fk me… none of those short one line definitions explains at all exactly what criteria the statisticians taking these stats are using.

and if these pissant and completely “grey” definitions are what these statisticians are using to judge their stats on then its even more laughable that some people here are hanging their hats on them..

There's a level of subjectivity but it's not as unclear as you're making it out here. An effective disposal is a handball or short kick that hits the target, or a kick of more than 40 meters that goes to a contest. In the scenario you gave earlier, both the high kick which is marked by a forward and the lace out pass that goes directly to a forward but they cough it up would be effective disposals. That doesn't mean they are equally good of course, but it's just one small part of how you can analyse a player's effectiveness.

As a stat it's no more subjective than contested possession, clearance, hitout to advantage, goal assist, score involvement or whatever, all of which have an element of subjective judgement but are pretty clear cut in most cases.

 

[Big Crow]

Regardless of whether you think Brodie Smith

33

Brodie Smith

Age

32

Ht

189cm

Wt

88kg

Pos.

Def

Career

Season

Last 5

D

19.5

5star

K

12.3

5star

HB

7.2

4star

M

4.2

4star

T

2.1

4star

MG

500.1

5star

D

17.1

4star

K

12.6

5star

HB

4.5

3star

M

3.5

3star

T

2.3

3star

MG

438.9

5star

D

17.2

5star

K

10.8

4star

HB

6.4

4star

M

3.8

4star

T

3.6

5star

is playing well or poorly, he is an absolute candidate for having inflated DE % numbers.

Firstly he obviously plays in the backline where shirt chip kicks to an open player are common. Secondly most of his other kicks are long and often to a contest, which is judged as effective.

I don’t think Brodie is a bad user of the ball by any stretch, but you’d expect his DE numbers to typically be higher than other players based on how the statistic is explained.

Stats are just stats, and context matters. I’m no stats boffin so happy to be corrected, but DE for example doesn’t appear to differentiate between a brilliant long kick pinpointing a team mate to open up space vs bombing it down the wing to a 3v3 contest. Smith is capable of both.

 

[Gtowncrow]

I find the disposal efficiency interesting too and I didn't realise soccer kicks were included as kicks. Carmichael had around 8 and most of them went nowhere so assume that's ineffective which really brings his efficiency down.

Smith had 3 soccer kicks, two happened to go to teammates, one to opposition so right there, 67% kicking efficiency. The other thing I noticed, his other 15 kicks, all but one went to a contest.

On CPH1903 using BigFooty.com mobile app

This is good detailed data. DE% is a blunt instrument compared to this.
Did you happen to notice (or guestimate) how many of his kicks were over and under 40m? Apparently, kicking to a contest under 40m is an ineffective disposal.

 

[Smart Fella]

This is good detailed data. DE% is a blunt instrument compared to this.
Did you happen to notice (or guestimate) how many of his kicks were over and under 40m? Apparently, kicking to a contest under 40m is an ineffective disposal.

All the non soccer kicks were 40 plus except for one but ended up being an opposition mark so the DE came down anyway.

He had 14 effective possessions (1 being a handball). Of the five ineffective, 3 were marked by magpies and interestingly enough, 2 were 40 metre plus kicks to a contest but recovered by a magpie when it hit the ground.

I can only assume his long kicks to a contest then lead to a stoppage or a crow recovery that allow his disposal to still count as efficient.

On CPH1903 using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Gtowncrow]

All the non soccer kicks were 40 plus except for one but ended up being an opposition mark so the DE came down anyway.

He had 14 effective possessions (1 being a handball). Of the five ineffective, 3 were marked by magpies and interestingly enough, 2 were 40 metre plus kicks to a contest but recovered by a magpie when it hit the ground.

I can only assume his long kicks to a contest then lead to a stoppage or a crow recovery that allow his disposal to still count as efficient.

On CPH1903 using BigFooty.com mobile app

You've gone to great lengths to produce this detail. Awesome work.
I'm not against statistics if their variables are minimal. They certainly provide a measurable comparison between players and clubs and to this end, they're quite valuable.
However, as this discussion has shown, there are relevant, ill defined events in a game like AFL where intuitive experts can delve deeper.

I hope Brodie Smith can pick up his form irrespective of which measure we each choose.

 

[1970crow]

Getting run down isn't a stat. Sucked the life right out of us.
Brodie is currently a one trick Pony. He needs to try and pass the ball more rather than just kicking it as far as he can....like schoolboy footballers do! His 18 kicks on the weekend averaged 38.5m. There isn't too much room for passing with that average.

I don't want to bag the guy but unless his kicks get marked more, he's just asking for it to simply rebound back again. It could be coaching and team strategy but regardless, it's ineffective.

Many of us have seen this all year and understand how this repeated long bombing plays out, but I suspect that finding an empirical, quantitative statistic for this is pretty hard. There is whole other world of research called qualitative evidence.

Smith is holding his spot by a thread IMO. Hope he picks up though.

Smith isn’t subject to being dropped, especially this late in the year. They’ll just ride it out.

 

[Gtowncrow]

Smith isn’t subject to being dropped, especially this late in the year. They’ll just ride it out.

I was hoping it would be this week purely because of the run down. Standards should be kept up and that was my vote as worst play of 2022.

 

[SellarStardom]

So Nick Daicos had 40 disposals off half back and arguably was a key to Collingwood winning.

Would of played on either Milera or McHenry. Someone should ask Nicks who was on him, both could be dropped but we all know Nicks will never drop McHenry no matter how bad he is

 

[LeftyLuke]

Hang-on .....last week Laird was accused of over-handballing .....so which is it ?

It's where you handball it that's important. Forward handballs outside of congestion to runners good. Backwards handballs to players under more pressure bad. Hack kicks to no one in particular bad. Laird needs to do whatever it takes to not hack kick it unless he's under so much pressure that he has no alternative. He should use his legs to get some run and carry as his first instinct. He often hacks it thinking he's under more pressure than he is when he could have got a handball out to a runner or taken some territory. The hack seems to be instinctual for a few of them. I understand why they do it as they don't wanna get caught with it but teams know we do it and setup for it. Use the angles at least instead of the straight hack.

 

[Sanders]

So Nick Daicos had 40 disposals off half back and arguably was a key to Collingwood winning.

Arguably? His 3 goals in a 5 point game might have had some influence

 

[Smart Fella]

So Nick Daicos had 40 disposals off half back and arguably was a key to Collingwood winning.

Would of played on either Milera or McHenry. Someone should ask Nicks who was on him, both could be dropped but we all know Nicks will never drop McHenry no matter how bad he is

He's a smart player. His first goal he was allowed to creep to the fwd 50 as they had their team defence set up and the crows had more numbers in defensive 50.

The other two goals? Everyone should do themselves a favour (unless already pointed out) and check them out. Literally had no one on him despite being in magpies possession.

And to answer your question, it appeared to be McHenry with a bit of Murphy. Keays and Soligo matched up on him when on HFF for centre bounces. When Daicos moved forward in last, mainly Smith.

On CPH1903 using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

A young midfielder doing an apprenticeship across half back

Unheard of

 

[Bearded Clam]

There's a level of subjectivity but it's not as unclear as you're making it out here. An effective disposal is a handball or short kick that hits the target, or a kick of more than 40 meters that goes to a contest. In the scenario you gave earlier, both the high kick which is marked by a forward and the lace out pass that goes directly to a forward but they cough it up would be effective disposals. That doesn't mean they are equally good of course, but it's just one small part of how you can analyse a player's effectiveness.

As a stat it's no more subjective than contested possession, clearance, hitout to advantage, goal assist, score involvement or whatever, all of which have an element of subjective judgement but are pretty clear cut in most cases.

lets take a look at some examples again then because I’m not sure many here are getting what I am saying..

So… lets say the games just started.. its dees v crows..

1) Its Clayton Oliver’s first possesion and he handballs a prefectly weighted handball to a team mate that allows them to run onto it because he’s also handballed it to exactly the right spot.. and thus his team mate is able to take possesion and spread freely away from the contest.. Oliver has an uncanny ability to do this week in week out.

2) for Rory laird’s first possesion he panic handballs to his flat footed team mate ROB.. ROB takes possesion of the ball by having to reach down below his knees to grab it and, due to this, is unable to cleanly break away from the contest.. Rory has an uncanny ability to do this.

Two scenario’s yeah… and, under the criteria given by some here on what constitutes an “effective disposal”, BOTH players in Oliver and Laird get the same marks and are running at 100% DE..

Is that correct?..

I mean, both handballs “hit a target” right?.. regardless of the actual fact that one handball allowed a team mate to spread easily away from the contest and the other was to a flat footed team mate that didnt allow that..

they were both judged to be effective disposals correct? As per the definition of an effective disposal..

And this is the difference between Clayton Olivers game and Rory Lairds.. but when it comes to the stats, as interpretated by many here and possibly Champion Data themselves, both have the same DE% after these two disposal..

So.. If that is actually the case, then as I said, the DE% stat is complete and utter BS.

 

[Bearded Clam]

I'm happy to look at this a bit closer. His year has been average by his usual standards and until last week he hasn't looked damaging at all.

This week he had 19 touches (18 kicks) at 74% DE. This figure isn't the end of the world but a fair indication. Given the definition of an effective kick under 40m is to hit intended target and over 40m is to a 50/50 or your teams advantage then on the weekend he was meeting that criteria 74% of the time.

The week before he was even better at 92%.

Dees was 60%, north 62%, he is going at 75% for the year.

He has been all over the place this year but the last 2 weeks have been better imo

“Dees was 60%, north 62%, he is going at 75% for the year.”

So you’re saying the Dees were running as a team at a DE% of 60% and north at 62%?..

Correct?

 

[Crow_Magnon]

lets take a look at some examples again then because I’m not sure many here are getting what I am saying..

So… lets say the games just started.. its dees v crows..

1) Its Clayton Oliver’s first possesion and he handballs a prefectly weighted handball to a team mate that allows them to run onto it because he’s also handballed it to exactly the right spot.. and thus his team mate is able to take possesion and spread freely away from the contest.. Oliver has an uncanny ability to do this week in week out.

2) for Rory laird’s first possesion he panic handballs to his flat footed team mate ROB.. ROB takes possesion of the ball by having to reach down below his knees to grab it and, due to this, is unable to cleanly break away from the contest.. Rory has an uncanny ability to do this.

Two scenario’s yeah… and, under the criteria given by some here on what constitutes an “effective disposal”, BOTH players in Oliver and Laird get the same marks are running at 100% DE..

Is that correct?..

I mean, both handballs “hit a target” right?.. regardless of the actual fact that one handball allowed a team mate to spread easily away from the contest and the other was to a flat footed team mate that didnt allow that..

they were both judged to be effective disposals correct? As per the definition of an effective disposal..

And this is the difference between Clayton Olivers game and Rory Lairds.. but when it comes to the stats, as interpretated by many here and possibly Champion Data themselves, both have the same DE% after these two disposal..

So.. If that is actually the case, then as I said, the DE% stat is complete and utter BS.

Maybe there's room for two stats - "successful disposal" (the Laird example - as it does hit a teammate), but "effective disposal" where there's an actual benefit or positive outcome for the team.

 

[Bazz_27]

Maybe there's room for two stats - "successful disposal" (the Laird example - as it does hit a teammate), but "effective disposal" where there's an actual benefit or positive outcome for the team.

I'd say that's why there is a stat for score involvements & goal assists

 

[NSolis]

1) Its Clayton Oliver’s first possesion and he handballs a prefectly weighted handball to a team mate that allows them to run onto it because he’s also handballed it to exactly the right spot.. and thus his team mate is able to take possesion and spread freely away from the contest.. Oliver has an uncanny ability to do this week in week out.

2) for Rory laird’s first possesion he panic handballs to his flat footed team mate ROB.. ROB takes possesion of the ball by having to reach down below his knees to grab it and, due to this, is unable to cleanly break away from the contest.. Rory has an uncanny ability to do this.

Yes, those are both effective disposals. You seem to be hung up on the idea that because DE% doesn't provide all possibly useful information about a player and their performance that it's useless. You know what is worse than handballing to a flat-footed ruckman? Handballing to the other team, which would be an ineffective disposal. Or not getting the ball at all.

Oliver is an elite midfielder and has higher output than Laird in some statistical categories, including clearances, inside 50s, score involvements and metres gained. Some of those stats capture a bit of what you are talking about, which is that Oliver uses the ball more offensively and creatively than Laird. He also has a higher ratio of kicks to handballs which connects with some of those other stats but has a negative impact for most players on their disposal efficiency, as it is more difficult to hit a target with a kick most of the time, especially as a midfielder.

None of that means that disposal efficiency has no value as a stat. You still want to hit targets rather than not hit them, or at least get some territory value out of your disposals if you are going to a contest. DE% reflects how often a player does that, which is useful information. If Oliver hit a target with 10% more of his disposals without sacrificing offensive drive he'd be even better, for example, and Laird would be worse if fewer of his handballs found a Crows player.

 

[Crow_Magnon]

I'd say that's why there is a stat for score involvements & goal assists

True, but this doesn't take into account that a disposal may be effective and not lead to a direct score involvement...i.e. the chain may break down further along.

 

[MRB37]

Getting run down isn't a stat. Sucked the life right out of us.
Brodie is currently a one trick Pony. He needs to try and pass the ball more rather than just kicking it as far as he can....like schoolboy footballers do! His 18 kicks on the weekend averaged 38.5m. There isn't too much room for passing with that average.

I don't want to bag the guy but unless his kicks get marked more, he's just asking for it to simply rebound back again. It could be coaching and team strategy but regardless, it's ineffective.

Many of us have seen this all year and understand how this repeated long bombing plays out, but I suspect that finding an empirical, quantitative statistic for this is pretty hard. There is whole other world of research called qualitative evidence.

Smith is holding his spot by a thread IMO. Hope he picks up though.

I think a lot of it is our inability to mark in the defensive 50. Butts, Doods and Murray are average at best this year and it means we have players who just go for territory in a panic when struggling to win the ball at ground level. That is then compounded because we always allow the defence to have spare men back, so we're quite easy to set up a defensive wall against and allow repeat entries in whenever we send it back out.

It's probably another reason they've thrown Dawson back so much this year too. Frampton clearly can't be a key defender, but maybe they need to consider him instead of Dawson down back and allow Dawson to move further up the ground again.

 

[WeedsMullet84]

So Nick Daicos had 40 disposals off half back and arguably was a key to Collingwood winning.

Would of played on either Milera or McHenry. Someone should ask Nicks who was on him, both could be dropped but we all know Nicks will never drop McHenry no matter how bad he is

Milera is defensively awful unless the player is in very close proximity to him. His short distance closing speed is almost laughable.

I really have no idea why he was brought back in, other than to provide a bit more quality going inside 50, because he's near useless in every other facet of his game.

When you have Tex, Fog, and Thilthorpe as your forwards, you know a lot of the defensive stuff is going to be left to McAdam (not very good defensively despite his size) Milera, McHenry and Murphy. Even though I think McHenry had a reasonably poor game, a lot of the stat-less gut-running stuff gets left to him because everyone else around him is SO slow and they don't have the tanks for repeated efforts. Milera will be dropped before McHenry does, and so he should.

Just go and have a look at their HF/HB tackling numbers and compare them to ours.

Crows - Murphy 3 tackles. Hinge, Milera with 2 tackles each. Doedee, Jones, McAdam with 1 tackle each
Pies - Maynard 12 tackles, Crisp 10 tackles, McCreery 7 tackles, Bianco, Elliot (and even Mihocek!) 6 tackles

Sure Laird and Berry had monster tackling numbers, but overall Pies smashed us with more/even spread of tacklers across the park. Out of the top 15 tacklers in this game, 10 were Pies players.

Our major issue is that we are SO slow all over the park. Teams can practically waltz the ball out of the backline because we're far too tall, and our Medium sized Forwards (Fog/McAdam) don't apply the sort of defensive pressure you'd expect of players their size. Then when the ball gets further up the ground we don't have gut runners around the contest or behind the ball to apply that pressure need to forced turnovers.

61 inside 50's to 49 speaks volumes.

 

[Gtowncrow]

I think a lot of it is our inability to mark in the defensive 50. Butts, Doods and Murray are average at best this year and it means we have players who just go for territory in a panic when struggling to win the ball at ground level. That is then compounded because we always allow the defence to have spare men back, so we're quite easy to set up a defensive wall against and allow repeat entries in whenever we send it back out.

It's probably another reason they've thrown Dawson back so much this year too. Frampton clearly can't be a key defender, but maybe they need to consider him instead of Dawson down back and allow Dawson to move further up the ground again.

I don't want to harp on about this but kicks marked (by us) from the boot of Dawson vs Smith might be interesting reading.
My gripe with Brodie ATM is that he is really just kicking where Dawson (and now Parnell too) are invariably trying to pass. This might be harsh on Smith as Dawson has an elite 50m leg. Low and targeted.