One for the analysts (stat heads)...how good are teams young lists

[Spirit of Jack]

Did a little analysis before the season. Looked at players in each team aged 22 or under. Simple stuff, how many under 23 players did a team have that got 10 disposals or more, how many disposals did these players average and what was the average age. This was the ranking I came up with, the points dont mean anything other than the relative strength to each other. ie the points are the result of formula from the variables listed above.

Strength of youth on team lists

Bri 49
Por 45
Car 43
Ric 42
WC 42
Mel 42
StK 41
Haw 40
Ess 39
Col 38
Gee 34
WB 33
Fre 32
Ade 31
Kan 31
Syd 28

I thought at the time I wonder if there is any correlation between this and how much a team improves...so far Brisbane, Port & Carlton look good, but it may well fall away from there.

The Kangaroos look very sick and Adelaide and Sydney may not have much time left at the top...or their senior players are so good the kids cant get a game. I think the Hawks youth ranking will improve dramatically this year, but not necessarily their ladder position.

 

[AstuteTiger]

Interesting stats Maverick, surprising seeing the swans, Adel and freo down the bottom but ur right those 3 teams especially swans and Adel have many mature age players running around and the younger guys at the moment aren’t really getting their chance for one reason or another.

 

[Col Walter E Kurtz]

Did a little analysis before the season. Looked at players in each team aged 22 or under. Simple stuff, how many under 23 players did a team have that got 10 disposals or more, how many disposals did these players average and what was the average age. This was the ranking I came up with, the points dont mean anything other than the relative strength to each other. ie the points are the result of formula from the variables listed above.

Could you explain your methodology a bit more? Do you mean you took the average age of the sub 23 year olds?

 

[pahoffm]

Gutfeel says that it's an indicator of who will rise in the future against those that might fall.

But, it may also depend on the deeper distribution of players amongst other parts of the lists, ie:

22-24yos
25-27yos, and
28+s

You're heading towards what I deal with in my spread analysis.
Except that I look at both age & height. I should add games played too.

 

[Phar Ace]

Did a little analysis before the season. Looked at players in each team aged 22 or under. Simple stuff, how many under 23 players did a team have that got 10 disposals or more, how many disposals did these players average and what was the average age. This was the ranking I came up with, the points dont mean anything other than the relative strength to each other. ie the points are the result of formula from the variables listed above.

Could you explain your methodology a bit more? Do you mean you took the average age of the sub 23 year olds?

And could time spent on the park by the population you've used adversely affect the table?

 

[Spirit of Jack]

Did a little analysis before the season. Looked at players in each team aged 22 or under. Simple stuff, how many under 23 players did a team have that got 10 disposals or more, how many disposals did these players average and what was the average age. This was the ranking I came up with, the points dont mean anything other than the relative strength to each other. ie the points are the result of formula from the variables listed above.

Could you explain your methodology a bit more? Do you mean you took the average age of the sub 23 year olds?

It wasnt very complex, I ranked teams by the amount of players under 23 getting 10 disposals or more in 2006, how many actual disposals those players averaged and what the average age of those players were (in this case the younger the list the better ranking). I weighted each variable, most weight to number of players, moderate weight to average disposals and least weight to average age. Like any simple modelling its not perfect but a decent indicator.

 

[Spirit of Jack]

Gutfeel says that it's an indicator of who will rise in the future against those that might fall.

But, it may also depend on the deeper distribution of players amongst other parts of the lists, ie:

22-24yos
25-27yos, and
28+s

You're heading towards what I deal with in my spread analysis.
Except that I look at both age & height. I should add games played too.

That's why I thought little of it until after the preseason and round one, where the top 3 in the list looked like they would be big improvers.

In reality I know there are many other variables ie the things you have mentioned along with other externalities such as strength of schedule, injuries, new coaching staff etc that in reality just make this another thing to consider.

I initially just did this to see how the Tiger kids stacked up and I was pleasantly surprised. Still not confident of our improvement due to the makeup of the rest of our list you refer to. We are the donut team.

 

[Spirit of Jack]

Did a little analysis before the season. Looked at players in each team aged 22 or under. Simple stuff, how many under 23 players did a team have that got 10 disposals or more, how many disposals did these players average and what was the average age. This was the ranking I came up with, the points dont mean anything other than the relative strength to each other. ie the points are the result of formula from the variables listed above.

Could you explain your methodology a bit more? Do you mean you took the average age of the sub 23 year olds?

And could time spent on the park by the population you've used adversely affect the table?

Agreed there could be many subteltys that impact the outcome. Another I thought of was what if all the young talent are KPP players or ruckman - disposals is probably not the best indicator of their talent. Dont think these things have too much bearing in reality.

 

[Talon]

I see West Coast are well and truly in the mix, a premiership with a young side, their path they have followed has them on track to win a few more I would expect. Ashley Hansen's spot is up for grabs, he could be searching for a new club next year.

 

[Disco08]

West Coast's list of young talls makes me sick.

 

[Ian4]

interesting data there maverick. the way i read it, it shows how much opportunity we gave our kids last year. would be interesting to see how we would compare with 2005. i think there will be a huge difference...