Statistical Reasons to be Cheerful

[arrowman]

There’s been a lot of talk on the main board about our R19 loss to Collingwood and what it means for this week. I’m sure we all agree that Adelaide is doing a lot better in the attacking department since then, so I thought I’d play with the stats to see if I can quantify it.

- Noting of course that our opposition has been different, so I’ve stayed away from absolute scoring counts and focused on accuracy and efficiency.
- And I’ve left out last week’s results because the opposition was very different.
- Noting also that this is just for fun - visiting Collingwood supporters please note!

In round 19:

Collingwood scored 13.11 from 41 inside 50s, kicking accuracy 54%, 0.32 goals per inside 50 and 0.59 scores per inside 50.

Adelaide scored 9.14 from 57 inside 50s, kicking accuracy 39%, 0.16 goals per inside 50 and 0.40 scores per inside 50.

Since then (R20-22):

Collingwood have played Richmond, Sydney and Bulldogs.
They averaged 45% accuracy, 59.67 inside 50s, 0.25 goals per inside 50 and 0.56 scores per inside 50.
They have not improved, in fact they have gone backwards.

Adelaide have played Hawthorn, West Coast and Carlton.
We averaged 57% accuracy, 54.67 inside 50s, 0.35 goals per inside 50 and 0.62 scores per inside 50.
Shall I state the obvious?

It is also worth noting that the only time Collingwood improved on their R19 indicators was vs Richmond. In both other games they were down vs R19. Adelaide, on the other hand, improved on their R19 indicators in every game. (And I do mean, "improved in every game" - the trend had been consistently upwards for all except scores per inside 50)

I think the quality of opposition (at least in term of their ability to impact our teams' ability to score, and score accurately) is broadly comparable. Too bad if it's not! Here goes:

What if we repeat the R19 scoring shots with the average R20-22 accuracy?
Adelaide 13.10 (88) defeats Collingwood 11.13 (79)

What if we repeat the R19 inside 50s with the average R20-22 goal efficiency (per inside 50)?
Collingwood scores 8 goals, Adelaide scores 20

What if we repeat the R19 scoring shots with each team’s worst accuracy in R20-22?
Adelaide 10.13 (73) defeats Collingwood 9.15 (69)

What if we repeat the R19 scoring shots with each team’s best accuracy in R20-22?
Adelaide 15.8 (98) defeats Collingwood 13.11 (89)

What if Collingwood produce their best, and Adelaide their worst, R20-22 accuracy, on R19 scoring shots?
Collingwood 13.11 (89) defeats Adelaide 10.13 (73)

General conclusion: For Collingwood to win, they will have to improve their scoring efficiency/accuracy over what they have shown since R19, and/or Adelaide will have to fall off - significantly. (But even the Adelaide “wins” in the above are narrow - well, except for the “goals per inside 50” one.)

This all means nothing, of course, once the ball is bounced. But I find it a reason to be cheerful.

 

[amer]

The fools peddling their round 19 flashbacks fail to mention the dangers in playing a side you beat only a few weeks back - the opposition very often learns from its mistakes and the opposite result happens.

 

[Vantz]

Interesting statistics, hopefully they prove correct come Saturday

 

[Smoooothy]

i have another theory

collingwood wear black and white, which are drab souless colours, while adelaide wear red yellow and blue, while the blue is dark and depressing, the yellow and red are loud delightful colours, meaning we should win!!

 

[pjcrows]

Rather than endless stats, here's a few:

Adelaide are in good form, Collingwood are not.
Last time, Adelaide didn't have Burton, Mackay or Dangerfield.

But the most important one:

None of it matters if we're not switched on.

 

[adelcrows]

Shall I state another obvious reason the Collingwood supporters are being quite dillusional..

Adelaide accounted for West Coast (05 or 06??) to take top spot over at Subi then lost to them at AAMI in the prelim, hmmm seems to me that thats a stat I like to see.

 

[PCORF]

It dosen't matter. We have to go out and get the job done this weekend. Its do or die.

Last time we played the Pies I thought we quit halfway through that third quarter. If we do again this weekend we're not going to Melbourne any more this year.

Lets beat our bogey side this weekend!

 

[magtrev]

Shall I state another obvious reason the Collingwood supporters are being quite dillusional..

Adelaide accounted for West Coast (05 or 06??) to take top spot over at Subi then lost to them at AAMI in the prelim, hmmm seems to me that thats a stat I like to see.

Not quite.

05 we beat them in R22 to get top spot and then lost to them ni the Prelim at Subi (after the StK choke)
06 we got absolutely smahsed by them at Subi in round 15-18ish and then they rolled us at AAMI in the Prelim

 

[Cap]

Whilst I agree stats cannot always be a good measure of future performance, I applaud anyone with the creativeness to construct a group of realistic scenarios based on historical stats. While they fail to take into account unforseen circumstances I still reckon they make good reading.

Thanks arrowman

 

[amer]

Not quite.

05 we beat them in R22 to get top spot and then lost to them ni the Prelim at Subi (after the StK choke)
06 we got absolutely smahsed by them at Subi in round 15-18ish and then they rolled us at AAMI in the Prelim

Round 22 of 2005 we knocked them off at Subi, before losing to them at Subi in the preliminary final.

Round 17 of 2006 they belted us by 82 points at Subi, before edging us by 10 points at AAMI in the prelim. Not an opposite result, but a much closer game.

More examples of how misleading games played between the same teams a few weeks apart can be:

- Port Adelaide beat Geelong at Skilled Stadium in round 21 2007 by 5 points, only to get smashed by 119 points in the Grand Final.

- Geelong beat Hawthorn by 11 points in round 17 2008, only to lose by 26 in the Grand Final.

- Adelaide lost to Fremantle at AAMI by 15 points in round 19 2006, before beating them by 30 points in the qualifying final at AAMI.

If you're using recent minor round results as a gauge for finals, you're playing with some dodgy odds.

 

[Smoooothy]

there was one in 1999 where 2 teams played each other 2 weeks in a row (round 22 and the first final)

round 22 team b won by a bit
final team a won by plenty

(sorry, cant remember the teams)

 

[magtrev]

Essendon, and they tanked in round 22 so they could play Richmond again in the first final the next week instead of team in reasonably good form who finished 9th.

 

[Smoooothy]

thats it

from memory they got smashed in the final too

 

[hippyhippy]

The fools peddling their round 19 flashbacks fail to mention the dangers in playing a side you beat only a few weeks back - the opposition very often learns from its mistakes and the opposite result happens.

funny u should mention that ... someone else is playing this week that played rd 1 and not rd 19!

 

[Campbell's Chunky]

Patty Dangerfield wasnt playing.

 

[Vader]

there was one in 1999 where 2 teams played each other 2 weeks in a row (round 22 and the first final)

round 22 team b won by a bit
final team a won by plenty

(sorry, cant remember the teams)

It was 2001.

Essendon tanked against Richmond in R22, losing by 24 points. They played them again the following week (first week of the finals) and belted them to the tune of 70 points.

The tank was done in order to avoid playing Carlton in the first week of the finals. Carlton had defeated the Bombers in both of their encounters that year - by 17pts in R3 and 7pts in R18. Essendon really wanted to avoid playing them in the finals. By losing to Richmond, the Bombers ensured that the Tigers would finish 4th on the ladder and the Blues would finish 5th - thus there was no way the two would cross paths before the GF.

Essendon went on to lose the GF to Brisbane, the first of the Lion's three consecutive victories.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

What if we repeat the R19 inside 50s with the average R20-22 goal efficiency (per inside 50)?
Collingwood scores 8 goals, Adelaide scores 20

One of these please

The fools peddling their round 19 flashbacks fail to mention the dangers in playing a side you beat only a few weeks back - the opposition very often learns from its mistakes and the opposite result happens.

There are a few people peddling a round 1 flashback too and reaching equally flimsy conclusions.

 

[taylor_walker_13]

It was 2001.

Essendon tanked against Richmond in R22, losing by 24 points. They played them again the following week (first week of the finals) and belted them to the tune of 70 points.

The tank was done in order to avoid playing Carlton in the first week of the finals. Carlton had defeated the Bombers in both of their encounters that year - by 17pts in R3 and 7pts in R18. Essendon really wanted to avoid playing them in the finals. By losing to Richmond, the Bombers ensured that the Tigers would finish 4th on the ladder and the Blues would finish 5th - thus there was no way the two would cross paths before the GF.

Essendon went on to lose the GF to Brisbane, the first of the Lion's three consecutive victories.

And in the process the Crows got screwed also as we played Carlton in the first week of the finals rather than Richmond.

 

[Macjoe]

The fools peddling their round 19 flashbacks fail to mention the dangers in playing a side you beat only a few weeks back - the opposition very often learns from its mistakes and the opposite result happens.

Another reason.
(Hurry up Saturday. I want to Crow from the rooftops, but if I have to eat Crow I want that over.)