Experience | PUNT ROAD END | Richmond Tigers Forum
  • IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.

Experience

LeeToRainesToRoach

Tiger Legend
Jun 4, 2006
33,186
11,548
Melbourne
Some stats on team experience as measured by games played from 2000-2006:

Diff       M MoreW More% LessW Less% D Adv%
-------------------------------------------
50+       45    32 71.1%    13 28.9% 0 146%
40...<50  61    38 62.3%    23 37.7% 0  65%
30...<40 163    97 59.5%    62 38.0% 4  56%
20...<30 239   142 59.4%    96 40.2% 1  48%
10...<20 329   156 47.4%   171 52.0% 2 -10%
0...<10 395   209 52.9%   183 46.7% 3  14%
-------------------------------------------
Totals  1232   674 55.1%   548 44.9% 10 23%


Diff - difference in average games per player
M - matches
MoreW - wins by more experienced side
More% - win %        ""          ""
LessW - wins by less experience side
Less% - less %        ""          ""
D - draws
Adv% - percentage advantage to the more experienced side (More%/Less%)-1
These figures include all home-away-games but not finals.

Apart from an anomaly in the 10-20 games difference range, the bigger the experience advantage a side has had, the better its winning strike rate. When the difference is 20 games+, the strike rate is 59% greater for the more experienced side.


Richmond home-and-away matches 2000-2006
   Diff     M  W  L   Win%
--------------------------
50+        0  0  0   -
40...<50   3  3  0 100.0%
30...<40  15  5 10  33.3%
20...<30  19  9 10  47.4%
10...<20  21 10 11  47.6%
  0...<10  29 13 16  44.8%
-10...<0   29 11 18  37.9%
-20...<-10 14  7  7  50.0%
-30...<-20 14  4 10  28.6%
-40...<-30  7  2  5  28.6%
-50...<-40  2  0  2   0.0%
<-50        1  1  0 100.0%
--------------------------
Totals    154 65 89  42.2%
+Diff      87 40 47  46.0%
-Diff      67 25 42  37.3%


Rebuilding our list is a balancing act that requires some caution. It's not as simple as culling a large number of senior players and playing the kids. Interestingly the match where we conceded the most experience (57 games) was this year's Adelaide game which required extraordinary tactics to win.

2007 is pretty much a crossroads for our list - how many of Foley, Tambling, Pattison, White, Meyer, Howat, Hughes, Oakley-Nicholls, Thursfield and Schulz (assuming that Deledio, Raines and Polo will make the grade long-term) are able to establish themselves in the next year or two will determine whether we are a chance around 2009 or whether they need to be turned over in favour of more youngsters, in which case we will be overtaken by the clubs below us on the ladder.


Average games per player, per match 2000-2006
Year  RAvg Rank  Min   Max AFLAvg Top8Avg PremAvg
-------------------------------------------------
2000  92.3  8th 82.6  99.5   89.3    96.5    96.3
2001 109.8  3rd 98.8 123.0   90.1    96.0   102.3
2002  98.4  5th 91.5 108.6   91.8    93.6   119.2
2003  95.5  8th 82.1 107.2   95.6   100.5   141.1
2004  92.1 11th 73.8 106.5   95.8    97.7   101.1
2005 107.0  5th 83.5 117.4  100.6   101.7   101.1
2006  87.0 14th 71.6  95.1  100.3   110.2     ?
-------------------------------------------------

RAvg - Richmond's average games per player
Rank - AFL rank from 1-16
Min - lowest average in any match for the season
Max - highest average        "          "
AFLAvg - AFL average
Top8Avg - average for top 8 sides
PremAvg - average for premiers

With the loss of over 540 games of experience in Stafford, Kellaway and Chaffey, our average is not likely to increase next year. 2007 could require a lot of patience.

Interestingly the Brisbane sides of 2003-04 were easily the two most experienced (average around 140 games, 3rd highest i 120). The youngest lists were Fremantle and Port in 2000, both about 60 games.

The AFL average has increased each year and perhaps peaked in 2005. The top eight teams this season have a hefty advantage in experience compared with the bottom eight, but in a few years the ladder could be more or less reversed as the bottom eight sides have a considerable lead in terms of building their lists for the long-term.


Admittedly, average games is a rough-and-ready measure, e.g. our 2005 average was boosted by Mark Graham.
 
Excellent stuff LTR.

Took some time to digest the stats that you've put up, but they certainly do support some many long held beliefs.

1. The average age of AFL players is getting older.
2. By the average 100 game mark, a club should be able to tell whether it's got the right set of youngsters.

No doubt as the area of sports stats develop more and more, we will learn some very valuable lessons about list management. And it will also give physical evidence to many of our gutfeels.
 
Phantom said:
Excellent stuff LTR.

Took some time to digest the stats that you've put up, but they certainly do support some many long held beliefs.

1. The average age of AFL players is getting older.
2. By the average 100 game mark, a club should be able to tell whether it's got the right set of youngsters.

No doubt as the area of sports stats develop more and more, we will learn some very valuable lessons about list management. And it will also give physical evidence to many of our gutfeels.
An interesting point to the average age of lists.
Heard a radio discussion sometime ago that the essendon baby bombers that won the GF in 93 were actually an older more experienced team than the Cats side that lost to us in 67. Some baby team.
 
TigerMasochist said:
Heard a radio discussion sometime ago that the essendon baby bombers that won the GF in 93 were actually an older more experienced team than the Cats side that lost to us in 67. Some baby team.

Ran a quick check and the difference was quite substantial, average age 24.30 for Essendon and 23.70 Geelong, average games 85 to 66. Taking out the five oldest players from each team evened things up but Geelong's average  was still slightly lower on both measures.
 
LeeToRainesToRoach said:
TigerMasochist said:
Heard a radio discussion sometime ago that the essendon baby bombers that won the GF in 93 were actually an older more experienced team than the Cats side that lost to us in 67. Some baby team.

Ran a quick check and the difference was quite substantial, average age 24.30 for Essendon and 23.70 Geelong, average games 85 to 66. Taking out the five oldest players from each team evened things up but Geelong's average was still slightly lower on both measures.
Any idea as to what the Tigers average age/ experience was. I had a feeling that it was also a very young team. A lot of young players just up fron the magoos & u19s.
 
TT33 said:
LeeToRainesToRoach said:
TigerMasochist said:
Heard a radio discussion sometime ago that the essendon baby bombers that won the GF in 93 were actually an older more experienced team than the Cats side that lost to us in 67. Some baby team.

Ran a quick check and the difference was quite substantial, average age 24.30 for Essendon and 23.70 Geelong, average games 85 to 66. Taking out the five oldest players from each team evened things up but Geelong's average was still slightly lower on both measures.
Any idea as to what the Tigers average age/ experience was. I had a feeling that it was also a very young team. A lot of young players just up fron the magoos & u19s.


Spot on TT33 - average age 23.45 and 58 games. Our oldest player was Fred Swift at 29 and 145 games.
 
LeeToRainesToRoach said:
TT33 said:
LeeToRainesToRoach said:
TigerMasochist said:
Heard a radio discussion sometime ago that the essendon baby bombers that won the GF in 93 were actually an older more experienced team than the Cats side that lost to us in 67. Some baby team.

Ran a quick check and the difference was quite substantial, average age 24.30 for Essendon and 23.70 Geelong, average games 85 to 66. Taking out the five oldest players from each team evened things up but Geelong's average was still slightly lower on both measures.
Any idea as to what the Tigers average age/ experience was. I had a feeling that it was also a very young team. A lot of young players just up fron the magoos & u19s.


Spot on TT33 - average age 23.45 and 58 games. Our oldest player was Fred Swift at 29 and 145 games.

Thanks LTRTR, Fred Swift, gee what a great Tiger player he was. Was quite bowlegged but could certainly play the game. Magnificent drop kicks from the goalsquare to the wing on the MCG.

Tragically was murdered by someone who broke into his house out Bendigo way I think.
 
great post phantom, some very interesting data there. it would be interesting to see where we compare in 2006 to other rebuilding teams such as the dogs, hawthorn and carlton...
 
2006 averages

Cl AvAge AvGms
--------------
Ad 26.08 115.0
St 25.62 110.6
Co 25.41 120.1
WB 25.41 111.7
Fr 25.27 102.0
Sy 25.26 113.9
Ka 25.18 104.3
Me 25.10 108.7
PA 24.70  88.9
Ge 24.46  87.6
WC 24.43  99.7
Es 24.38  94.1
Br 24.34  93.3
Ri 24.25  87.0
Ca 24.23  85.7
Ha 23.93  82.6
 
awesome LeeToRainesToRoach. you could make an argument that we are well ahead of those teams if you compare average games played compared to ladder positions... although west coast is the scary one
 
Ian4 said:
awesome LeeToRainesToRoach. you could make an argument that we are well ahead of those teams if you compare average games played compared to ladder positions... although west coast is the scary one

LeeToRainesToRoach said:
2006 averages

Cl AvAge AvGms
--------------
Ad 26.08 115.0
St 25.62 110.6
Co 25.41 120.1
WB 25.41 111.7
Fr 25.27 102.0
Sy 25.26 113.9
Ka 25.18 104.3
Me 25.10 108.7
PA 24.70 88.9
Ge 24.46 87.6
WC 24.43 99.7
Es 24.38 94.1
Br 24.34 93.3
Ri 24.25 87.0
Ca 24.23 85.7
Ha 23.93 82.6

Excellent work again LtRtR.
Almost a direct reflection of the ladder, puts a little question mark over youth policies. Can't continue to play kids forever and expect to have success. Although I agree Ian. The WCE's are bucking the trend here and can look forward to a long and successful period.