- Jun 7, 2019
- 5,395
- 18,656
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
So in an idle moment, I thought I might try and work out a statistical method to forecast North's prospects (and problems) for the coming season. I don't have the coin to subscribe to ChampionData, so I've relied on footywire, supplemented here and there with AFL Stats. The method is to compare North's representation in the top bracket for the competition in key stats, against Geelong as premiers and thus the competition benchmark.
I'll do a number of play scenarios - attacking and defensive - and start with just one and get to others in a day or two.
The first play scenario is movement from the centre square - in theory, 'perfect football' is winning the hit out, completing the centre clearance, movement I50, mark I50 and convert. If you do that, then (again in theory) the opposition should not touch the ball, and obviously the more times you can manage it per game, the better.
To state the obvious, this play begins with the hit out, and on that score, North compare well, not just because of Goldy, but to my surprise, because Xerri ranks well, not just in number but crucially, hit outs to advantage:
Thus, if Goldy holds his form we're in a good spot, but Xerri looks like competent depth (leaving aside his around the ground issues)
The next phase in this play is to complete the centre clearance, and again, last year's personnel don't compare too poorly to the premiers:
Clearly, JHF and Anderson need to be replaced, but assuming Cunners stays fit and Phillips comes along, we could conceivably improve in this facet, where we are already competitive.
The next phase in the play requires the ball to go I50, and here the publicly available stats are for 'all entries', whereas for this particular analysis we need to know I50 from centre clearances. Without that more granular data, we have to take the generic I50 measure as the best available, and it's at this point that North start to fall away. We only have 4 players in the top 100 for the competition in this category, and one of them is a HBF whose I50s will likely contain shallow entries from the centre or wing (Geelong's 5 players in this category are all mid-forwards):
With the I50 count starting to fall away, so does I50 marking. Whereas Geelong have 2 top 5 players in this count, our first player ranks #27 in the comp, and the premiers have roughly double the number of marks I50 as North:
With JZ moving back and Mahony a marginal proposition, there is plenty of room for improvement; first, a second tall marking forward, and second, further small-medium support for Paul Curtis. At this point, Sheezel has a spot open in front of him, but a genuine crumbing small like Stengle remains a need.
With I50s and Marks I50s on the decline, it's no surprise to see conversion go with it. Geelong have 3 players averaging 2 goals a game, as against none for North, and the total of goals kicked by Geelong's premiere forwards is nearly double per game to North's 3 leading goalkickers, and one of those - JZ - won't be in the role next season:
Finally, for this slice of game analysis, let's finish with locking the ball in. Obviously, if the 'perfect play' is centre square-inside50-mark-goal, the next best thing is to get the ball in and keep it there. Again, the publicly available stats aren't very precise, but if we take tackles I50 as a proxy for locking the ball into F50, North are really poor. In saying that, we probably need to qualify what a Tackle I50 means, because if I could get disaggregated data, I would distinguish between a stoppage tackle I50, as against what might be called an 'offensive tackle' inside 50 (ie, a run down that potentially results in a shot on goal). To amplify the point, at Geelong, Hawkins is the leading I50 tackler, but this is presumably because of his role taking the ruck in F50. But even discounting Hawkins, Geelong still have a number of 'offensive tacklers' I50 - Close, Stengle and Rohan - whereas North's best is JZ (hardly the answer) and Greenwood figures probably for the same reason as Hawkins (ie stoppage tackles I50). It's something of an indictment on the list and forward structure that the only North forward who figures in this comparison and who will play forward in 2023 was a first year player, Paul Curtis:
So the summary thus far:
1. North are likely to continue to have a competitive centre square set up, and potentially improve further
2. No surprise to BF posters, but a second marking tall is a priority
3. North's dreadful Tackles I50 count needs attention, not just with additional personnel in the shape of a crumbing forward, but more effort from those who are established players. For example, I would be putting the acid right on Zurhaar to lift his Tackle I50 average from the current .5, to something like Stringer (1.13)
comments welcome
I'll do a number of play scenarios - attacking and defensive - and start with just one and get to others in a day or two.
The first play scenario is movement from the centre square - in theory, 'perfect football' is winning the hit out, completing the centre clearance, movement I50, mark I50 and convert. If you do that, then (again in theory) the opposition should not touch the ball, and obviously the more times you can manage it per game, the better.
To state the obvious, this play begins with the hit out, and on that score, North compare well, not just because of Goldy, but to my surprise, because Xerri ranks well, not just in number but crucially, hit outs to advantage:
Thus, if Goldy holds his form we're in a good spot, but Xerri looks like competent depth (leaving aside his around the ground issues)
The next phase in this play is to complete the centre clearance, and again, last year's personnel don't compare too poorly to the premiers:
Clearly, JHF and Anderson need to be replaced, but assuming Cunners stays fit and Phillips comes along, we could conceivably improve in this facet, where we are already competitive.
The next phase in the play requires the ball to go I50, and here the publicly available stats are for 'all entries', whereas for this particular analysis we need to know I50 from centre clearances. Without that more granular data, we have to take the generic I50 measure as the best available, and it's at this point that North start to fall away. We only have 4 players in the top 100 for the competition in this category, and one of them is a HBF whose I50s will likely contain shallow entries from the centre or wing (Geelong's 5 players in this category are all mid-forwards):
With the I50 count starting to fall away, so does I50 marking. Whereas Geelong have 2 top 5 players in this count, our first player ranks #27 in the comp, and the premiers have roughly double the number of marks I50 as North:
With JZ moving back and Mahony a marginal proposition, there is plenty of room for improvement; first, a second tall marking forward, and second, further small-medium support for Paul Curtis. At this point, Sheezel has a spot open in front of him, but a genuine crumbing small like Stengle remains a need.
With I50s and Marks I50s on the decline, it's no surprise to see conversion go with it. Geelong have 3 players averaging 2 goals a game, as against none for North, and the total of goals kicked by Geelong's premiere forwards is nearly double per game to North's 3 leading goalkickers, and one of those - JZ - won't be in the role next season:
Finally, for this slice of game analysis, let's finish with locking the ball in. Obviously, if the 'perfect play' is centre square-inside50-mark-goal, the next best thing is to get the ball in and keep it there. Again, the publicly available stats aren't very precise, but if we take tackles I50 as a proxy for locking the ball into F50, North are really poor. In saying that, we probably need to qualify what a Tackle I50 means, because if I could get disaggregated data, I would distinguish between a stoppage tackle I50, as against what might be called an 'offensive tackle' inside 50 (ie, a run down that potentially results in a shot on goal). To amplify the point, at Geelong, Hawkins is the leading I50 tackler, but this is presumably because of his role taking the ruck in F50. But even discounting Hawkins, Geelong still have a number of 'offensive tacklers' I50 - Close, Stengle and Rohan - whereas North's best is JZ (hardly the answer) and Greenwood figures probably for the same reason as Hawkins (ie stoppage tackles I50). It's something of an indictment on the list and forward structure that the only North forward who figures in this comparison and who will play forward in 2023 was a first year player, Paul Curtis:
So the summary thus far:
1. North are likely to continue to have a competitive centre square set up, and potentially improve further
2. No surprise to BF posters, but a second marking tall is a priority
3. North's dreadful Tackles I50 count needs attention, not just with additional personnel in the shape of a crumbing forward, but more effort from those who are established players. For example, I would be putting the acid right on Zurhaar to lift his Tackle I50 average from the current .5, to something like Stringer (1.13)
comments welcome
