The stereotypical Tiger goal.

[pahoffm]

Prostats have put out an interesting stat of the week.

http://www.prowess-sports.com/pro-stats/statofweek/statofweek.pdf

How teams kick their goals.

The stereotypical Tiger goal is:

From general play,
from infront,
10-30 metres out,
emanating from a ball up stoppage
from Ruckplay in the Defensive 50.

Interesting these stats.

 

[Scoop]

After a quick study and will have a closer look later on but it is very clear that the majority of our goals were in play and close in. The further out we got the more dramatically our % drops. Why because our skills aren't good enough, we have to run the ball in as close as we can to make up for lack of skill and make it a sure thing. Convesley, lets me know that we are moving the ball better and Terry's game plan has had a effect. Very intresting, really like getting data like this and drawing conulsions. How much fun most TW and the crew have?

 

[Phar Ace]

Thanks for the link Phanto.  Interesting interpretation of the stats you've made there.

You could make a case for the same interpretation for nearly every team on those stats. ???  A couple of team stats stand out though:

     [/list]Bulldogs running game more potent than any other team, [*]
     [/list]Sydney,Adelaide, Hawthorn, Melbourne and Kangaroos kicking as many goals from 40-50 as 10-30, whereas other teams easily exceed from 10-30.  
     [/list]West Coast kick more goals from contested marks than any other team

 

[geoffryprettyboy]

Let me start by saying that that the statistics attached on the link reflecst the overall scoring capability of the overall team. It not only focuses on the forwards, but also put the defenders under the microscope as well.

Obviously the team has many areas to improve on, but one area that has caught my eye is the goals kicked originating from the mid defence. I don’t care what the other clubs performance is in this area, what it tells me is that what happens to the ball when it leaves that particular area of the ground?

It would be good to compare 2004 to 2005, but I have this feeling under TW a lot of our grey areas have improved.

The only thing I can add is that IF ONLY we can add more polished skill into our game (kicking & hitting targets, tackling, running and making space etc.) I could confidently say not only would these stats improve, but also we would be playing finals football.

By the way what is RTG Stoppages?

 

[Bill James]

RTG I would guess is Round The Ground.

Confirms a point I have made serveral times this year to howls of derision simply based on watching the game map. Once it gets outside 45 degrees RFC has a very poor conversion rate.

 

[Phar Ace]

The only thing I can add is that IF ONLY we can add more polished skill into our game (kicking & hitting targets, tackling, running and making space etc.) I could confidently say not only would these stats improve, but also we would be playing finals football.

By the way what is RTG Stoppages?

Good call GPB. My question too about the RTG Stoppages? RTG?

 

[Phar Ace]

RTG I would guess is Round The Ground.

Confirms a point I have made serveral times this year to howls of derision simply based on watching the game map. Once it gets outside 45 degrees RFC has a very poor conversion rate.

You may well be right, Billy Boy, but i don't see how these raw stats confirm "conversion" from that area.  Sure the total goals were at the lower end from the 45, but it doesn't mean the Tigers conversion was poor, perhaps they were just there less often and working in front more often as the higher rating there confirms.................?

Thanks for the clarification about RTG - had to be bl00dy obvious didn't it :hihi

 

[Bill James]

RTG I would guess is Round The Ground.

Confirms a point I have made serveral times this year to howls of derision simply based on watching the game map. Once it gets outside 45 degrees RFC has a very poor conversion rate.

You may well be right, Billy Boy, but i don't see how these raw stats confirm "conversion" from that area.  Sure the total goals were at the lower end from the 45, but it doesn't mean the Tigers conversion was poor, perhaps they were just there less often and working in front more often as the higher rating there confirms.................?

Thanks for the clarification about RTG - had to be bl00dy obvious didn't it :hihi

Unfortunately my good friend the list is actually in order of conversion percentage not total goals. So that is exactly what it says our conversion outside 45 degrees sucks.

 

[Harry]

Due to our lack of skill, we have to virtually push, scratch and force the ball over the line, similar to a rugby try. We do not have enough polish to enable us to hit a leading forward on the chest or to carry the ball past the 50 and kick a running goal. It's usually a scrum close to goal most times we score. What does this tell you? We need more skilled midfielders who can run, carry and deliver with accuracy. Cogs and Tuck are good at extracting, but cannot deliver or kick running goals. We can't rely on these 2 for this. We have no other midfielders of note (besides a young Lids) - we have no-one else to deliver or kick goals on a consistent and accurate basis. Players like Johnson, Tivendale, Chaffey, Krakouer, etc. have severely let us down in this department. This is where we need to find better players - better carriers and deliverers. Hopefully the likes of Tambling, Meyer, Raines, Gilmour and Roach can develop into these.

 

[newyorktiger]

Should we read too much into these stats considering we lost our most skillful forward halfway through the year?

Agree with your post H. It has been the same since the late eighties.. :don't know

 

[geoffryprettyboy]

Harry Houdini, fair call on your 'polished' stuff you have written, but how can you exhume names from the prowess stats is really blowing me away.

And by the way you say we need to find a replacement for for our captain, you're kidding aren't you.