You sir have too much spare time.A quirky one.
28 - Lewy Taylor was pick 28 in the draft... yeah we all knew that.
But
as the leading goal scorer for the lions at the end of round 4 he is ranked ......
equal 28th.
I know, amazing.
Analysis STATS CENTRAL
- Thread starter Panthera
- Start date
- Tagged users None
BL_dobsmob
Team Captain
- Aug 22, 2013
- 348
- 649
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
- Other Teams
- 49ers since 1982
stuck on hold with a call centre (it was in Australia) What else can you do but look up stats on a fav player.
A quirky one.
28 - Lewy Taylor was pick 28 in the draft... yeah we all knew that.
But
as the leading goal scorer for the lions at the end of round 4 he is ranked ......
equal 28th.
I know, amazing.
....and to cap it off, I've officially rated this as my 28th favorite stat of all time.
This being post #28 in this thread an added bonus
Last edited:
brizrider
Club Legend
Only just started hearing about the 'metres gained' stat fairly recently and wondered what it was about. Found this article from last year in case anyone else was also wondering or interested. Seems a bit of a weird stat: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/spo...r/news-story/ed5d8f01b3db21e19d5fdf76986884cb
Metres gained: vital information or a stat too far?
Moving forward is a cliche in politics and management and it is heading that way in Australian football as well.
Not just from the uncomfortable player, falling upon “moving forward” as he fumbles for words under the spotlight of the press conference.
No, the stat du jour in 2015 is “metres gained”, football’s version of “moving forward”.
We are told the Bulldogs’ emerging star Marcus Bontempelli gained a whopping 640m against the Tigers in round two. Taylor Walker ate up 713m against North Melbourne — the equivalent of four lengths of Adelaide Oval, of precious territory. With an impressive average of 636m gained per game this season, Saint Shane Savage is moving forward better than anyone in the league.
Thank goodness, at last Australian football has a measure comparable to those used in rugby, in league, and in gridiron.
What does it mean? Well, at times about as much as a politician’s moving forward.
But first we have to examine how it is calculated. Metres gained is a simply the distance between where a player takes possession and the point of the next player’s disposal, no matter if the disposal is made by friend or foe.
So if Gary Ablett runs 50m and kicks a 50m goal, 100m is added to his metres gained.
When he chips the ball 20m backwards to a teammate, who immediately handballs, his game score falls to 80m, and so on.
Statisticians hunkered down in Champion Data headquarters listen to their colleagues’ live calls of a game and chart the distances on a “game map”.
(One must be wary of martial allusions on this sacred day, but the Champion Data war room cannot help but evoke images of WAAFs pushing wooden blocks across a giant table, Battle of Britain style.)
Champion Data says the raw numbers are great for identifying “outside” players so tags can be doled out accordingly.
Players racking up territory faster than the Road Runner on a Saturday morning can be quickly identified via the “metres gained” numbers being spat out in the coaches’ box.
So the statistic has a practical use other than feeding the masses with more information to sit alongside their super-coached dream teams.
Some aren’t so sure, saying the rise of the stats-powered machine is akin to sabermetrics; welcome to the Australian version of Moneyball.
“Good lord, what pointless stats are being invented to complicate our game,” the author of Richmond’s club history, Rhett Bartlett, observed on Twitter when he heard commentators quoting metres gained this month.
His comment triggered an outpouring from fans saying metres gained was a stat too far. They also lamented the Americanisation of the indigenous game, given metres gained is a key measure in gridiron.
“Yardage,” one despairing tweeter lamented of the changing language. “Dee-fense,” cried another. “Root for your team.”
Some defended metres gained as a legitimate measure, but they were in the minority in this online debate. Most felt metres gained represented a jumped shark, and called for a return to traditional values. More art and less science thanks.
For Australian football played the way it is supposed to be played is indeed a high art.
So those who hoist metres gained as high as a Royce Hart screamer render a multidimensional game as flat as a Peter Hudson punt.
It blunts and neuters some of the game’s fundamental principles; that Australian football is not about simply gaining ground, it’s about how that ground is gained.
The beauty and the spectacle is in the flanking manoeuvres, oblique thrusts and quick switches. This is even more important in the age of parked buses.
Under the metres gained criteria, if a team runs a ball the length of the ground with a chain of short, sharp angled handballs each player’s tally for the stat barely rises at all.
In this sense, metres gained is anti-team.
Not that any of this is Champion Data’s fault. They do a sterling work especially given how close they have to work with so many journalists. It’s just that some of those same journalists, and the football community in general, should weight “metres gained” according to its relevance.
By judging a player’s worth only on how much real estate he gains, we ignore the sideways handball to slingshot a teammate into space. Indeed, the distance travelled by a backward handball is subtracted from a player’s metres gained.
A 70m torpedo punt across the ground that sends a teammate bounding into an open goal gains the kicker only the distance the ball travelled forward of an invisible line across the ground.
If Sam Mitchell dives into a pack, grabs the ball in mid-air and handballs backwards to Cyril Rioli, who streams into goal, Rioli gets a plus X and Mitchell gets a minus Y for their metres gained tallies.
Metres gained: vital information or a stat too far?
- ANDREW FAULKNER
- THE AUSTRALIAN
- 12:00AM APRIL 25, 2015
Moving forward is a cliche in politics and management and it is heading that way in Australian football as well.
Not just from the uncomfortable player, falling upon “moving forward” as he fumbles for words under the spotlight of the press conference.
No, the stat du jour in 2015 is “metres gained”, football’s version of “moving forward”.
We are told the Bulldogs’ emerging star Marcus Bontempelli gained a whopping 640m against the Tigers in round two. Taylor Walker ate up 713m against North Melbourne — the equivalent of four lengths of Adelaide Oval, of precious territory. With an impressive average of 636m gained per game this season, Saint Shane Savage is moving forward better than anyone in the league.
Thank goodness, at last Australian football has a measure comparable to those used in rugby, in league, and in gridiron.
What does it mean? Well, at times about as much as a politician’s moving forward.
But first we have to examine how it is calculated. Metres gained is a simply the distance between where a player takes possession and the point of the next player’s disposal, no matter if the disposal is made by friend or foe.
So if Gary Ablett runs 50m and kicks a 50m goal, 100m is added to his metres gained.
When he chips the ball 20m backwards to a teammate, who immediately handballs, his game score falls to 80m, and so on.
Statisticians hunkered down in Champion Data headquarters listen to their colleagues’ live calls of a game and chart the distances on a “game map”.
(One must be wary of martial allusions on this sacred day, but the Champion Data war room cannot help but evoke images of WAAFs pushing wooden blocks across a giant table, Battle of Britain style.)
Champion Data says the raw numbers are great for identifying “outside” players so tags can be doled out accordingly.
Players racking up territory faster than the Road Runner on a Saturday morning can be quickly identified via the “metres gained” numbers being spat out in the coaches’ box.
So the statistic has a practical use other than feeding the masses with more information to sit alongside their super-coached dream teams.
Some aren’t so sure, saying the rise of the stats-powered machine is akin to sabermetrics; welcome to the Australian version of Moneyball.
“Good lord, what pointless stats are being invented to complicate our game,” the author of Richmond’s club history, Rhett Bartlett, observed on Twitter when he heard commentators quoting metres gained this month.
His comment triggered an outpouring from fans saying metres gained was a stat too far. They also lamented the Americanisation of the indigenous game, given metres gained is a key measure in gridiron.
“Yardage,” one despairing tweeter lamented of the changing language. “Dee-fense,” cried another. “Root for your team.”
Some defended metres gained as a legitimate measure, but they were in the minority in this online debate. Most felt metres gained represented a jumped shark, and called for a return to traditional values. More art and less science thanks.
For Australian football played the way it is supposed to be played is indeed a high art.
So those who hoist metres gained as high as a Royce Hart screamer render a multidimensional game as flat as a Peter Hudson punt.
It blunts and neuters some of the game’s fundamental principles; that Australian football is not about simply gaining ground, it’s about how that ground is gained.
The beauty and the spectacle is in the flanking manoeuvres, oblique thrusts and quick switches. This is even more important in the age of parked buses.
Under the metres gained criteria, if a team runs a ball the length of the ground with a chain of short, sharp angled handballs each player’s tally for the stat barely rises at all.
In this sense, metres gained is anti-team.
Not that any of this is Champion Data’s fault. They do a sterling work especially given how close they have to work with so many journalists. It’s just that some of those same journalists, and the football community in general, should weight “metres gained” according to its relevance.
By judging a player’s worth only on how much real estate he gains, we ignore the sideways handball to slingshot a teammate into space. Indeed, the distance travelled by a backward handball is subtracted from a player’s metres gained.
A 70m torpedo punt across the ground that sends a teammate bounding into an open goal gains the kicker only the distance the ball travelled forward of an invisible line across the ground.
If Sam Mitchell dives into a pack, grabs the ball in mid-air and handballs backwards to Cyril Rioli, who streams into goal, Rioli gets a plus X and Mitchell gets a minus Y for their metres gained tallies.
The funny thing about stats is is that only the coaches know whats good and not good for every player.
We as fans (generalizing) tend to look at stats and go 'ohhhhhhh thats pritty'.
Coaches know what he wants out of his players and if it means for example Mitchell ends up with -100 metres gained but has 25 plus touches with 15 contested he has done his job
We as fans (generalizing) tend to look at stats and go 'ohhhhhhh thats pritty'.
Coaches know what he wants out of his players and if it means for example Mitchell ends up with -100 metres gained but has 25 plus touches with 15 contested he has done his job
Good stat for half backs and wingmen; otherwise, meh.
Buddy 8th in the league for metres gained this year.. Shows what a great season he is having, especially considering goals kicked would lead to metres lost in the final kick!
- Thread starter
- #33
Thought I'd leave this here...
No surprise that our backline concedes the most points per D50 entry from opposition; but the two above us in 16th and 17th are Fremantle and Hawthorn
And interesting that we notched up 24 and 28 scoring shots against the teams ranked 1st and 2nd in Sydney and North
No surprise that our backline concedes the most points per D50 entry from opposition; but the two above us in 16th and 17th are Fremantle and Hawthorn
And interesting that we notched up 24 and 28 scoring shots against the teams ranked 1st and 2nd in Sydney and North
That shows how up and down( Probably more down) we have been this season. Showing we can match it with some of the best teams this year. Only to capitulate agaisnt others. My guess is with experience that will rectify itself.Thought I'd leave this here...
No surprise that our backline concedes the most points per D50 entry from opposition; but the two above us in 16th and 17th are Fremantle and Hawthorn
And interesting that we notched up 24 and 28 scoring shots against the teams ranked 1st and 2nd in Sydney and North
View attachment 252550
Prior to this week week we had just one (1) player in the top 100 for disposal efficiency this season (min 3 games). Daniel Merrett (believe it or not), ranked 91st (79.5%). That's pretty ****ed up but no wonder when you do 35 minutes of skills work at training.
Last season we had 4 - Harris Andrews (ranked 15th), Dawson(33rd), Merrett again (43rd) and former captain Adcock (95th). Also pretty ****ed up given one ain't here anymore and another probably won't be nxt season.
Last season we had 4 - Harris Andrews (ranked 15th), Dawson(33rd), Merrett again (43rd) and former captain Adcock (95th). Also pretty ****ed up given one ain't here anymore and another probably won't be nxt season.
Dan's few clangers usually overshadow the pretty consistent work he does most games.
But that stat is terrible - he's not the best kick in at the Club.
I noticed when looking a few stats up earlier...
We're second in the AFL for most behinds kicked - at least we're getting it there.
Last for ranking/fantasy points (surprise???).
We're second in the AFL for most behinds kicked - at least we're getting it there.
Last for ranking/fantasy points (surprise???).
Jivlain
Hammelmann Appreciation Society
AFL Fantasy Club Board Champion
AFL Fantasy Club Board Champion
AFL Fantasy Club Board Champion
Brisbane Lions - Charlie Cameron Player Sponsor 2020
Brisbane Lions - Charlie Cameron Player Sponsor 2019
Brisbane Lions - Hugh McCluggage Player Sponsor 2018
Brisbane Lions Board Tipping Champion
Brisbane Lions - Mitch Robinson Player Sponsor 2017
- Sep 19, 2015
- 8,321
- 14,718
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
- Other Teams
- Swansea City
- Moderator
- #40
Most of his kicks are chipping it around unchallenged in the backline. Which is ok because that's all he really ought to be doing with it. It's also pretty much what everyone else up the top of that stat is doing to get it.
Heavily influenced by his 20 metre sideways kicks in defence. Has at least 4 or 5 a game that generally hit the target. Its his corridor kicking that makes me cringe.
yep, it is usually that type of kick or the 50-60 metre bomb down the line to a contest. i think that is classed an efficient disposal. any time rog tries any sort of delicate/take the game on type of kick he butchers it. that DE stat can be very miss leading depending on the type of player you are.
chopperduck
Brownlow Medallist
Only 4... that would have a massive impact on team cohession and our general ability to have our best players on the park. Didnt realise it was so low.
Mind you, for where we're at, I don't think that's bad for development (apart from the whole funtional and winning bit). 33-34 appears to be average, but other teams are rotating thos numbers through fewer available spots, so they would have more players getting less games eg. WC have rotated 20 players through 12 spots, where we have rotated 31 through 18 spots. Everyone at the Lions gets a prize in a development year and most, likely get a fair crack, whereas other teams have a faster revolving door. That's good if you're in the hunt, like WC but pointless for us at this stage.
As I said, not a bad thing, I think.
Don't forget that Martin and (most likely) Hanley have both been playing under massive duress.
- Thread starter
- #48
So, apparently if we went on with early leads we'd be 11 - 3
http://www.triplem.com.au/melbourne...ne-lions-would-be-doing-extraordinarily-well/
Most of us have noticed we start OK, then fade away as soon as our opponents score a goal or two in a row...but I for one didn't realise we have started this well across the first 14 games
You could read the above stat a million ways; fitness, mental capacity, development, game-day moves by Leppa, experience etc. etc. - but I just like the thought of us being 11 - 3
http://www.triplem.com.au/melbourne...ne-lions-would-be-doing-extraordinarily-well/
Most of us have noticed we start OK, then fade away as soon as our opponents score a goal or two in a row...but I for one didn't realise we have started this well across the first 14 games
You could read the above stat a million ways; fitness, mental capacity, development, game-day moves by Leppa, experience etc. etc. - but I just like the thought of us being 11 - 3
