Moneyball.

[AlibiMonday]

re·quire

   [ri-kwahyuhr] Show IPA verb, re·quired, re·quir·ing.
verb (used with object)
1.
to have need of; need: He requires medical care.
2.
to call on authoritatively; order or enjoin to do something: to require an agent to account for money spent.
3.
to ask for authoritatively or imperatively; demand.
4.
to impose need or occasion for; make necessary or indispensable: The work required infinite patience.
5.
to call for or exact as obligatory; ordain: The law requires annual income-tax returns.

He was very much a required player, he was with Geelong just 2 seasons, give me a break. To say he was not required is a nonsense, Ottens turned 30 in 2010 and his body was already battle scarred. Mumford was the replacement. The Swans took the punt on him out of desperation due to losing both Jolly and Hall at the same time. Geelong could not possibly match the Swans offer which was well out of Geelong's salary cap reach at the time. No way was he getting ahead of Ottens in 2009, Blake was on his last legs and Mumford was considered a developing player, but he most definitely would've been ahead of Blake come the 2010 season. He went for the money and the Swans salary cap advantages got him there. He was a required player.

Sydney saw more in him than Geelong did. End. Of. Story.

Hey, you got a gun in Duncan instead. Give it up and move on.

 

[the_interloper]

You must have a huge dick being able to come in here and look down on everyone else. Well done flog.

Yep I am well hung you're quite correct, bad luck to you mate!

 

[the_interloper]

Would say more people with a mathematical interest in sports. You remember, maths, it's that subject you failed at school.

Yeah, nah! And do you remember, English, it's that subject you probably never turned up for!

 

[Aussiemac82]

Yeah, nah! And do you remember, English, it's that subject you probably never turned up for!

I carnt argue with that

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Don’t think it can really apply to footy – far too team-orientated and there’s so many variables that go into a “valuable” player.

Like cricket, baseball is quite individual (for a team sport). Stats go a lot further to telling the whole story than they do in footy.

 

[TheRealComptroller]

He was a wanted player, but not a required player. Stop rewriting history. If you wanted him, you would have played him over Blake or certainly given him better than security than Blake. Sydney liked what they saw and offered him longer term security. He was guaranteed to start in 2010.

You cannot be serious?

Geelong should have played Mumford despite his shitty form?

You do realise there is a difference between team selection in August and list management in October?

You know, situational interests being considered?

 

[Simon_Nesbit]

You cannot be serious?

Geelong should have played Mumford despite his shitty form?

You do realise there is a difference between team selection in August and list management in October?

You know, situational interests being considered?

After all, it's not like Geelong had any reason to focus on form late in 2009.

 

[Chewy]

Definitely Hawthorn.

re the movie, if you can't see a comparison with the A's putting Hatteberg and his limited defensive skills at first base because he gets on base, with Schoenmakers and his limited defensive skills at CHB because he's a nice kick, then you are watching a different movie.

Or make what they called the "F...king A" trade and grab a star veteran on the cheap to round out their list AND convince the previous club to keep paying his salary.

(Oops... people are definitely going to think I'm cheerleading for the Hawthorn Athletics now..)

 

[Chewy]

the exact opposite of a moneyball-value player might be Joel Selwood, who is a top 50 player in the competition and a star, but the fact he has a strong jaw and perceived fearlessness leads to people like mike sheahan rating him among the top 10 in the league for 2012.

This is an intriguing comment, given that Selwood is carried from the field with jelly legs whenever he receives a heavy hit. I'm not questioning his toughness, but the strength of his jaw, as you put it. Repeated concussions tend to lead to a "glass jaw".

It isn't relevant to the discussion; just an aside...

 

[doppleganger]

The point about sabermetrics isn't 'finding undervalued players', that's the most obvious thing in the world. It's that the traditional ways of measuring player worth (in baseball's case RBIs/batting average/etc) weren't truly indicative of how good a player is and that advanced statistics are much better at identifying these players.

This.

Moneyball was about a club realising they needed to take a different approach to the game, as if they continued to run with the well established measures they would never be able to compete. They realised that many of the accepted stats were flawed in their nature and became the accepted indicators simply because they were easy to be captured at the time. Familiarity ensued and that was all people talked about.

Ample opportunity for this to occur in AFL, who says things like disposal count, inside 50s, contested possession, clearances, DE, tackles actually mean anything??

Developing the spatial environment is absolutely critical to AFL 'Sabermetrics', and brings with it the concept of field equity. Who is the best player at hitting a leading forward within a 20 degree wedge within 40m of goal??

Is a clearance more important than instigating a 'coast to coast' from the D50??

What is important in defense? Tackles, spoils how do they compare with a MOK??

Sabermetrics have advanced from baseball, to NFL and now even Ice-Hockey which is a more purer invasion sport in the same mould as AFL.

 

[Chewy]

Yes, I agree with you, Doppelganger. That's a good post from MarcusP2.

I believe the strong, successful, well-run, well-resourced AFL clubs have been doing exactly this. It's nothing revolutionary. It's what happens in all sporting leagues around the world. Smart, successful clubs try to find an edge and do things better than their rivals. I wouldn't call that Moneyball. I just think it's called PROGRESS.

I've thought it about all of this some more and I'm prepared to concede I was wrong to overreact the Sydney hubris. It's only natural that winners get to tell their stories and give themselves pats on the back. It wasn't jealousy on my part as a Hawks fan towards Sydney, but rather because I'm a huge fan of the book and I felt it was being trivialised or bastardised.

I don't have anything against Sydney. I just hate the shitty media labels and myths.

Every coach in the world has read Moneyball and taken the bits and pieces they feel they can use. I know that Alistair Clarkson has. I just find it grating to hear that arrogant tosser, Paul Roos blowing the Sydney trumpet every Monday night during the footy season, but I dips me lid to their methods. They've outsmarted everyone over the past 5 years.

Part of me also says... If Buddy had kicked straighter or if Cyril had pulled his finger out or if Sam Mitchell had not given away that stupid 50m penalty or if Clinton Young had stayed on his feet, or if any one of two dozen things had happened during the Grand Final, then people would be reading stories about the Hawthorn geniuses instead of the Sydney geniuses. We've gotta hear all about the winners. Everyone gives their opinion. It happens every year. Collingwood were geniuses after the 2010 GF for targeting Jolly, Ball, Brown and Krakouer.

 

[doppleganger]

Smart, successful clubs try to find an edge and do things better than their rivals. I wouldn't call that Moneyball. I just think it's called PROGRESS.

A multitude of area's of the game have been tinkered with...sports science, player loading, altitude training, rotations, player development, coaching structures, own VFL teams.

Detailed analysis of the game is still an untapped resource, as the overwhelming number of coaches still don't believe in it. They would rather pay half a dozen ex AFL players 200-300K each to be 'development' coaches, then invest 200-300K in their own analysis of the game.

Just like with sports science, altitude training etc. as soon as a successful club takes the plunge and adopts different metrics....then all clubs will follow.

Every coach in the world has read Moneyball and taken the bits and pieces they feel they can use. I know that Alistair Clarkson has. I just find it grating to hear that arrogant tosser, Paul Roos blowing the Sydney trumpet every Monday night during the footy season, but I dips me lid to their methods. They've outsmarted everyone over the past 5 years.

Roos and Sydney didn't use moneyball per se, they simply looked to have a different value system for draft picks. Clubs seemed to be placing to high a value over speculative picks, and the Swans pounced on mature players with exposed AFL experience, who were not highly valued.

Tis always funny when you read people compare draft scenarios....Dawes at the minute, Pies fans think getting pick 13 for him is a big win....with the thinking being a pick 13 will be a gun.

Dawes himself was a pick 28, and he has already outlasted players who were drafted before him in 06. People tend to overvalue the speculative draft picks...

 

[Aussiemac82]

Detailed analysis of the game is still an untapped resource, as the overwhelming number of coaches still don't believe in it. They would rather pay half a dozen ex AFL players 200-300K each to be 'development' coaches, then invest 200-300K in their own analysis of the game.

That statement is a fallacy.

Champion Data supplies an abundance of information that is used to measure progress. Almost every players game is analysed post match.

An example with Geelong;
We were getting smashed in clearances and contested possessions at the start of the year. The coaches acknowledged the stat and weren't as concerned with the numbers as the media were.

What they were concentrating on was Clearances to advantage.

So long as a higher % of our clearances led to an I50 our chances of a resulting score was increased.

Who is the best player at hitting a leading forward within a 20 degree wedge within 40m of goal??

That's easy. Steve Johnson

 

[Aussiemac82]

Just heard KB say " Chris Dawes would be your moneyball player for richmond" when talking to a caller

 

[neroblack]

That's easy. Steve Johnson

By straight drop punt or a snap around the body?

 

[Slattery_20]

I see your money ball and raise you a Laidley crab ball.

Pretty sure it was Collingwood who most recently used Money(to)Ball. Lots and lots of it.

Sydney haven't used Money(to)Ball since he retired in 2005.

 

[Aussiemac82]

By straight drop punt or a snap around the body?

According to stevie and blake caracella, the chances of him hitting a target inside 50m increases when he snaps it out side of a 20 degree angle. I want to see the numbers that says it increases when he is in front

 

[Slattery_20]

Just heard KB say " Chris Dawes would be your moneyball player for richmond" when talking to a caller

Can you say meaningless buzzword?

 

[neroblack]

According to stevie and blake caracella, the chances of him hitting a target inside 50m increases when he snaps it out side of a 20 degree angle. I want to see the numbers that says it increases when he is in front

Also interested in the probability of Cats fans dropping expletives when he misses a snap from a set shot in front compared to a miss with a drop punt..

 

[Aussiemac82]

Can you say meaningless buzzword?

It's just one of those things isn't it. I wouldn't mind if they changed the definition.

Moneyball; Any sporting team that trades for an undervalued player to fulfil a statistical deficiency within that team.

Therefore all trading will now be called Moneyballing

Done.

 

[Aussiemac82]

Also interested in the probability of Cats fans dropping expletives when he misses a snap from a set shot in front compared to a miss with a drop punt..

That's not a probability, it's a certainty.

 

[Slattery_20]

It's just one of those things isn't it. I wouldn't mind if they changed the definition.

Moneyball; Any sporting team that trades for an undervalued player to fulfil a statistical deficiency within that team.

Therefore all trading will now be called Moneyballing

Done.

Like a lot of these buzzwords, it gets diluted & lost over the years. Frontal pressure, zone, depth, elite, etc etc.
Sometimes it's quite amusing.

 

[Big Animal]

From my POV, AFL's version of moneyball selection comes more out of older rookie selections from the state comps that provides instant impact in a role where the team has a deficiency or a hole, for little money and no loss of picks etc. I'm thinking guys like Pods who for little money and no kiddie picks filled the big man up front hole left by Mooney and friends; Callinan is doing the same in the pocket at Adelaide; we took Barlow from Werribee and he was ahead in the Brownlow voting in his first year until that uncoordinated idiot Palmer broke his leg; and there are a number more. Fill a bunch of your holes with these kind of guys (oh that sounds bad) and you will have a moneball team. Cheap, instant impact, noone else wanted them, no loss of draft picks. Most teams do it a bit, none do it a lot. Therefore, because of the eveness of the drafting and salary cap, AFL doesn't need and therefore doesn't have a moneyball team.

 

[Slattery_20]

From my POV, AFL's version of moneyball selection comes more out of older rookie selections from the state comps that provides instant impact in a role where the team has a deficiency or a hole, for little money and no loss of picks etc. I'm thinking guys like Pods who for little money and no kiddie picks filled the big man up front hole left by Mooney and friends; Callinan is doing the same in the pocket at Adelaide; we took Barlow from Werribee and he was ahead in the Brownlow voting in his first year until that uncoordinated idiot Palmer broke his leg; and there are a number more. Fill a bunch of your holes with these kind of guys (oh that sounds bad) and you will have a moneball team. Cheap, instant impact, noone else wanted them, no loss of draft picks. Most teams do it a bit, none do it a lot. Therefore, because of the eveness of the drafting and salary cap, AFL doesn't need and therefore doesn't have a moneyball team.

That's just being ahead of a trend. IMHO. And it doesn't last forever, once other clubs see what you're doing it becomes the norm.
For eg Isaac Smith went in the first round last year, out of a state league - Tom Lee essentially cost St K pick 12 (minus some change).
Smart work by Freo to cash in on it before most, but not really a sustained thing, clubs just didn't really realise how good some of these guys were & needed to adjust their recruiting.

 

[Big Animal]

That's really my point. Those picks are the closest to it, but really, there is no moneyball team (because it is not required like in the ridiculously uneven US baseball comp).