Analysis Statistically Speaking

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Hey BF sisters, brothers, others

This is for the stats nerds amongst us. A place to discuss relevant football stats and analyse them to death. I'm thinking regular polls to vote for the stat of the week, particularly from our games, negative or positive.

Perhaps I could paste the game stats in here as well as the autopsy threads?

I'm hoping we can get another mega discussion going.

 

[thylacine60]

Am I thread banned yet?

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

I posted this in the game thread this week. Our average pressure acts over the first 3 rounds:

22 - L O'Brien
18 - Z Williams
18 - S Walsh
17 - P Cripps
15 - M Cottrell
15 - L Fogarty
14.5 - W Setterfield
14.3 - E Curnow
14 - M Murphy
13.3 - M Gibbons
12.7 - A Saad
12.5 - Z Fisher
12 - E Betts
10.3 - P Dow
10 - S Docherty
10 - J Silvagni
9.7 - J Newnes
9.5 - T Williamson
8.7 - S Petrevski-Seton
8 - J Martin
7.3 - L Plowman
7 - M Pittonet
6.7 - L Casboult
6 - L Parks
5.7 - L Jones
5.7 - H McKay
4.7 - J Weitering
2 - O McDonald


I'm surprised by how many pressure acts LOB had in his 1 game this year. Is this a case of being second to the ball or was he putting in multiple efforts to try to affect the play?

 

[SkyhorseTamer]

I posted this in the game thread this week. Our average pressure acts over the first 3 rounds:

22 - L O'Brien
18 - Z Williams
18 - S Walsh
17 - P Cripps
15 - M Cottrell
15 - L Fogarty
14.5 - W Setterfield
14.3 - E Curnow
14 - M Murphy
13.3 - M Gibbons
12.7 - A Saad
12.5 - Z Fisher
12 - E Betts
10.3 - P Dow
10 - S Docherty
10 - J Silvagni
9.7 - J Newnes
9.5 - T Williamson
8.7 - S Petrevski-Seton
8 - J Martin
7.3 - L Plowman
7 - M Pittonet
6.7 - L Casboult
6 - L Parks
5.7 - L Jones
5.7 - H McKay
4.7 - J Weitering
2 - O McDonald


I'm surprised by how many pressure acts LOB had in his 1 game this year. Is this a case of being second to the ball or was he putting in multiple efforts to try to affect the play?

I've asked a friend of mine after seeing you post this in the other thread to get a clubs definition of pressure acts and if it aligns with champion datas definition and whether they consider it important, specifically if they have influencing the play as part of the pressure act definition or just 'in the area' . Eagerly awaiting his reply on it.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

I've asked a friend of mine after seeing you post this in the other thread to get a clubs definition of pressure acts and if it aligns with champion datas definition and whether they consider it important, specifically if they have influencing the play as part of the pressure act definition or just 'in the area' . Eagerly awaiting his reply on it.

It seems to be a relevant stat for forwards, but then I've seen what looked like ineffective games from players with high pressure act stats, which tells me they're just not getting the ball so have to apply defensive pressure. Still, if it shows workrate and chasing in particular, it's a useful stat in terms of the intensity we are trying to bring.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Under the Champion Data pressure point scoring system physical pressure acts are worth 3.75 points, closing pressure acts are worth 2.25 points, chasing pressure acts are worth 1.50 points, and corralling pressure acts which are worth 1.20 points.

So affecting the opposition possession physically is the best, chase downs to force a quick disposal or closing quickly on a mark (perhaps just slowing down the play and stopping a play on opportunity) are next, chasing generally as in multiple efforts from small forwards to get to the mark when defenders are switching play. Then corralling ... not sure why it gets points at all. Perhaps if it is slowing down a player and allowing defenders to get into position but ... blech. Not a fan.

 

[swuzzlebubble]

It seems to be a relevant stat for forwards, but then I've seen what looked like ineffective games from players with high pressure act stats, which tells me they're just not getting the ball so have to apply defensive pressure. Still, if it shows workrate and chasing in particular, it's a useful stat in terms of the intensity we are trying to bring.

Which in turn needs to be assessed against what the role and expectations of the player were.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Which in turn needs to be assessed against what the role and expectations of the player were.

In the case of a defensive forward to keep an opponent quiet, I'd agree. Still, if you are up forward you still have an obligation to provide an option and get front and centre of contests when we have the ball.

I'd love to be able to attribute each opposition stat to a player on our team and work out if they lost a physical contest, lost in terms of pace, had to zone off to help someone else and the next man didn't come up to fill his role. It would take forensic analysis and access to all the down the ground cameras to do it and I'm sure the coaches use these, but we don't have that access.

 

[CJMB]

Under the Champion Data pressure point scoring system physical pressure acts are worth 3.75 points, closing pressure acts are worth 2.25 points, chasing pressure acts are worth 1.50 points, and corralling pressure acts which are worth 1.20 points.

So affecting the opposition possession physically is the best, chase downs to force a quick disposal or closing quickly on a mark (perhaps just slowing down the play and stopping a play on opportunity) are next, chasing generally as in multiple efforts from small forwards to get to the mark when defenders are switching play. Then corralling ... not sure why it gets points at all. Perhaps if it is slowing down a player and allowing defenders to get into position but ... blech. Not a fan.

The corralling can be to limit the player with the ball’s options, force them to a less favourable play like kicking down the line into congestion or cut off the option of a good inside 50 and make them take the short/shallow option out on the boundary for a lower percentage shot on goals.

It’s not nearly as good as a tackle, but still has an impact on the play, so is scored accordingly. Maybe a touch high though, could probably drop to 1 point or 0.8 or something like that.

 

[swuzzlebubble]

There's effective corralling and ineffective corralling.

 

[SkyhorseTamer]

Under the Champion Data pressure point scoring system physical pressure acts are worth 3.75 points, closing pressure acts are worth 2.25 points, chasing pressure acts are worth 1.50 points, and corralling pressure acts which are worth 1.20 points.

So affecting the opposition possession physically is the best, chase downs to force a quick disposal or closing quickly on a mark (perhaps just slowing down the play and stopping a play on opportunity) are next, chasing generally as in multiple efforts from small forwards to get to the mark when defenders are switching play. Then corralling ... not sure why it gets points at all. Perhaps if it is slowing down a player and allowing defenders to get into position but ... blech. Not a fan.

The corralling is an odd one for me too. Sometimes you see a player corral because they prefer that to tackling, even though they could've wrapped the opposing player up however sometimes you want the bigger players to corral the smaller ones as if they commit to tackling they get side stepped and the opposition is away just that much faster than otherwise.

Has its place in the game but seems too often used.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

There's effective corralling and ineffective corralling.

I look at corralling as forcing an opponent to the boundary or a pocket and making them attempt a low percentage disposal. The thing is the corralling player should be incrementally approaching to increase that pressure and perhaps tackle if the opponent is slow to dispose. We do seem to corral a bit while not increasing the pressure or not covering two opponents. That would be the ineffective corralling that we are very familiar with.

 

[Doro]

I posted this in the game thread this week. Our average pressure acts over the first 3 rounds:

22 - L O'Brien
18 - Z Williams
18 - S Walsh
17 - P Cripps
15 - M Cottrell
15 - L Fogarty
14.5 - W Setterfield
14.3 - E Curnow
14 - M Murphy
13.3 - M Gibbons
12.7 - A Saad
12.5 - Z Fisher
12 - E Betts
10.3 - P Dow
10 - S Docherty
10 - J Silvagni
9.7 - J Newnes
9.5 - T Williamson
8.7 - S Petrevski-Seton
8 - J Martin
7.3 - L Plowman
7 - M Pittonet
6.7 - L Casboult
6 - L Parks
5.7 - L Jones
5.7 - H McKay
4.7 - J Weitering
2 - O McDonald


I'm surprised by how many pressure acts LOB had in his 1 game this year. Is this a case of being second to the ball or was he putting in multiple efforts to try to affect the play?

Looking at LOB with the ball, 9 disposals from 74% game time suggests he was second to the footy. Good that he kept the pressure up all night though.

 

[BlueGum]

Looking at LOB with the ball, 9 disposals from 74% game time suggests he was second to the footy. Good that he kept the pressure up all night though.

Yeah. He's not a jogger. Looks to do things without the ball.

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

There's effective corralling and ineffective corralling.

Bryce Gibbs was king of the ineffective corralling.
Would jog along beside the player and just allow them time and space to look at their options with no perceived pressure.

 

[ForYouBlue]

Under the Champion Data pressure point scoring system physical pressure acts are worth 3.75 points, closing pressure acts are worth 2.25 points, chasing pressure acts are worth 1.50 points, and corralling pressure acts which are worth 1.20 points.

So affecting the opposition possession physically is the best, chase downs to force a quick disposal or closing quickly on a mark (perhaps just slowing down the play and stopping a play on opportunity) are next, chasing generally as in multiple efforts from small forwards to get to the mark when defenders are switching play. Then corralling ... not sure why it gets points at all. Perhaps if it is slowing down a player and allowing defenders to get into position but ... blech. Not a fan.

So do we have access to the breakdown of any given score ODN?

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

So do we have access to the breakdown of any given score ODN?

What do you mean? Like, a player's full score for a match and where those points came from? I'm sure we could work it out based on CDs points system.

 

[ferrisb]

There's effective corralling and ineffective corralling.

Corralling is useful, but not if it's because 'I really can't be bothered tackling this guy'...

 

[swuzzlebubble]

Corralling is useful, but not if it's because 'I really can't be bothered tackling this guy'...

"If I commit to tackle and he sidesteps me I'll look worse than just letting him kick it from where he is"

 

[ferrisb]

This week is just the 2nd time we have been inside the top 8 since 2013.

More pls.

 

[Robbo's my hero]

Bryce Gibbs was king of the ineffective corralling.
Would jog along beside the player and just allow them time and space to look at their options with no perceived pressure.

Robbie Gray does not approve this post.

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

Robbie Gray does not approve this post.

Obviously he didn't do it EVERY time.

 

[swuzzlebubble]

Hey BF sisters, brothers, others

This is for the stats nerds amongst us. A place to discuss relevant football stats and analyse them to death. I'm thinking regular polls to vote for the stat of the week, particularly from our games, negative or positive.

Perhaps I could paste the game stats in here as well as the autopsy threads?

I'm hoping we can get another mega discussion going.

Is there available stats for goals scored by where in the F50 entry was made?
IE if the F50 is divided into say 6 or 9 sectors is it more efficient to enter more centrally or via the edges? Deeper or shallow?
Whilst set shots should be more accurate centrally, does the defence have more chance to repel?

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Is there available stats for goals scored by where in the F50 entry was made?
IE if the F50 is divided into say 6 or 9 sectors is it more efficient to enter more centrally or via the edges? Deeper or shallow?
Whilst set shots should be more accurate centrally, does the defence have more chance to repel?

I'm sure there are if you pay for them. For us, we'd have to watch the game with a specific focus.

 

[ForYouBlue]

What do you mean? Like, a player's full score for a match and where those points came from? I'm sure we could work it out based on CDs points system.

Sorry I realise that was confusing. Yep, that's what I was asking, whether or not we have access to the data that combines for the score or just the final product of pressure acts score.