Pro Stats rankings.

[Col.E.Kurtz]

Inside 50's are fine. Game plans can some into play though. i.e stoppage teams like Sydney & Adelaide will always be low for inside 50's.

Inside 50 differentials are a better guide.

http://www.pro-stats.com.au/psw/web/team_rankings?yr=2008&ts=DA&sr=13

But as we saw in the GF, there will always be anomolies.

Yep, and by inside 50 differentials we were a just outside the 8 team, the other good measure is percentage and that showed the same thing. I like to focus on the positives, but I cannot convince myself that the stats show any we dissevered to finish higher. If anything they show 10th may have been about right.

When a team dramatically loses the inside 50's and wins the game I normally suspect it's because they got a little bit lucky (I don't believe best team always wins the game) and I suspect the GF was one of those games.

 

[Col.E.Kurtz]

Yeah but we were the better team to half time IIRC.

In that game the scoring shots were 25 vs. 27 and the inside 50's were 56 to 53. It was a one kick game and the stats back that up. Either team could have won it.

 

[Leysy Days]

Yeah but we were the better team to half time IIRC.

Footballs played over 4 qtr's last time leysy checked.

 

[In the Blood]

We ranked bottom in Frees For!!!!!......See I was right, all season we were robbed!!!! Maggots. :duh

 

[IanG]

Footballs played over 4 qtr's last time leysy checked.

Yeah but that could equally be said of Port/Bris/Ess in those games. We were the better team over 4 quarters therefore we won. No luck involved.

 

[Mac]

We ranked bottom in Frees For!!!!!......See I was right, all season we were robbed!!!! Maggots. :duh

nice call!

 

[linuscambridge]

I think the cardinal sin with stats is to decide what your opinion is and then go looking through the data for the stats that back up your own ideas on an issue. Not pointing the finger at anybody, many good points made here already, but I think it's good to cast your pre-conceptions aside and look at the stats with an open mind to figure out what they tell you.

There is one pretty good statistical measure of how good you are, it's pretty hard to go past the AFL ladder that tells us Richmond were the ninth best team last year. I have no arguments with that.

My main point was that many of the most important indicators are progressing well, marking, kicking, handballing, scoring are all good stats to have amongst the best in the league. Coming into 2009 and looking to improve tackling, hitouts, 1st possesions and contested possesions, is a far more achievable goal with a physically maturing team than the previous goals of having to improve absolutely everything-period.

 

[TigerPort]

thats the one, when the heat goes on us our players were still tending to go into self preservation made wasteful little handballs round in circles.

For all those possessions to still be only 11th for inside 50's clearly shows we drastically overused it.

I agree with you on what happens to us under pressure.

Why do they do that?? Because they do not yet have belief in the players up the ground? and/or belief in their skills to correctly get the ball to the player up the ground?

In the run on play that Wallace wants this belief is critical and until the players start to trust each other fully without question we will see more stop and prop.

The other part to that is that their reluctance to fully commit to the run on game is that they don't have faith in ALL their teammates switching to a defensive mode. Until the whole team adopts defense tactics we will see more stop and prop

 

[Dyer'ere]

But as we saw in the GF, there will always be anomolies.

History will not be kind the Mark "Blunderer" Thompson when the dust settles on the 2008 GF. The numbers tell the truth. A tactical humiliation.

 

[Col.E.Kurtz]

I agree with you on what happens to us under pressure.

Why do they do that?? Because they do not yet have belief in the players up the ground? and/or belief in their skills to correctly get the ball to the player up the ground?

In the run on play that Wallace wants this belief is critical and until the players start to trust each other fully without question we will see more stop and prop.

The other part to that is that their reluctance to fully commit to the run on game is that they don't have faith in ALL their teammates switching to a defensive mode. Until the whole team adopts defense tactics we will see more stop and prop

I think there is some truth to this theory, but it was partially a conscious choice. Wallace has definitely perused over the last few years a high possession, ball control type game plan where our team deliberately plays keepings off until the right option presents itself. Look at the last few years of stats, lots of possessions by us in our game, but less contested ball and stoppages than in most AFL games. This is why we do quite well on possession statistics, but we take a lok of kicks to get the ball inside our 50.

 

[Leysy Days]

History will not be kind the Mark "Blunderer" Thompson when the dust settles on the 2008 GF. The numbers tell the truth. A tactical humiliation.

Definately. A terrible day at the office for Bomber. Though it was before the day actually. It Started at selection.

 

[linuscambridge]

Wallace has definitely perused over the last few years a high possession, ball control type game plan where our team deliberately plays keepings off until the right option presents itself. Look at the last few years of stats, lots of possessions by us in our game, but less contested ball and stoppages than in most AFL games. This is why we do quite well on possession statistics, but we take a lok of kicks to get the ball inside our 50.

Good point, and also why Richmond can beat Hawthorn and Geelong struggle. Plan A for Geelong is press forward at all costs, they have no plan B. Plan B for the Tigers is to stop and prop at the attacking 50, maintain possesion and wait for an opportunity to open up. The only way for an inferior team to beat the Hawks.

 

[Big Cat Lover]

Can anyone explain why the Hawks ranked 14th in 1st possessions and 15th in clearances yet were premiers? And, they were 13th on the tackles list and 14th in 1%'ers.

So they are no good at getting it when it's up for grabs and aren't real desperate when they haven't got it?

 

[Leysy Days]

Can anyone explain why the Hawks ranked 14th in 1st possessions and 15th in clearances yet were premiers? And, they were 13th on the tackles list and 14th in 1%'ers.

So they are no good at getting it when it's up for grabs and aren't real desperate when they haven't got it?

Leysy will have a crack. It's more imprortant to note how they compared to there direct opponent rather than there own cold stats.

On that - they are 12th in 1st possessions, 9th in clearances. 14th in tackles & 11th in 1 %'ers. Which improves things somewhat.

Where they are streets ahead of everyone is long kicks. They have assembled a lot of exceptional good long kicks of the ball. Hodge, Guerra, Young, Dew, Osborne, Ellis & even Brad Sewell these days.

Those stats also dont show how many trunovers were caused by there zone.

There's a lot in AFL football that the stats we have access to dont show or explain, but our eyes do.

 

[Phar Ace]

Can anyone explain why the Hawks ranked 14th in 1st possessions and 15th in clearances yet were premiers? And, they were 13th on the tackles list and 14th in 1%'ers.

So they are no good at getting it when it's up for grabs and aren't real desperate when they haven't got it?

They are a transition team - that is, they win the ball off half back (or at least defensively), and are successful more than other teams at completing the transition into a scoring opportunity. What was their contested possessions like? They zone like no other, so does that take them into contested possession territory more often than man on man? Would be ironic given the titles, but that is what i suspect.

 

[Opulentus Tigris]

Gee, its really easy to get confused when looking at those stats and ranking according to different statistical aspects of the game. I guess the stat that tell us the most is the win/loss. Or the ladder.

 

[Col.E.Kurtz]

Can anyone explain why the Hawks ranked 14th in 1st possessions and 15th in clearances yet were premiers? And, they were 13th on the tackles list and 14th in 1%'ers.

So they are no good at getting it when it's up for grabs and aren't real desperate when they haven't got it?

There are two sides to every game, it doesn’t matter if you only kick 2 goals a game if your opponent kicks 1. Take a look at the opponent differential stats on inside 50’s, the Hawks and Cats dominate the league, just like in real life.

The truth is a lot of the other stats, like 1%

Gee, its really easy to get confused when looking at those stats and ranking according to different statistical aspects of the game. I guess the stat that tell us the most is the win/loss. Or the ladder.

Of course, but it's always interesting to see why teams win. And unless you have the time to watch all 8 AFL games live, then again a second time on tape most of need some sort of summary of why teams are winning and losing and who is playing well and who isn’t.

 

[pahoffm]

Inside 50's are fine. Game plans can some into play though. i.e stoppage teams like Sydney & Adelaide will always be low for inside 50's.

Inside 50 differentials are a better guide.

http://www.pro-stats.com.au/psw/web/team_rankings?yr=2008&ts=DA&sr=13

But as we saw in the GF, there will always be anomolies.

That's the one I was looking for.

Well done Leysy!

 

[the claw]

Leysy will have a crack. It's more imprortant to note how they compared to there direct opponent rather than there own cold stats.

On that - they are 12th in 1st possessions, 9th in clearances. 14th in tackles & 11th in 1 %'ers. Which improves things somewhat.

Where they are streets ahead of everyone is long kicks. They have assembled a lot of exceptional good long kicks of the ball. Hodge, Guerra, Young, Dew, Osborne, Ellis & even Brad Sewell these days.

Those stats also dont show how many trunovers were caused by there zone.

There's a lot in AFL football that the stats we have access to dont show or explain, but our eyes do.

ah the use of ones own eyes how hard is it.