Analysis Crows Player Ratings

Remove this Banner Ad

Introducing the "Junior Callum Chambers Award" for only playing well against Adelaide in 2023. Also the coveted "Inverse Chambers" award.

Here are some tentative nominees for the year so far. I expect these results to change retrospectively over the year.
round 1 vs GWS Giants
-------------------------
Positive Anomaly: Stephen Coniglio - 22.90 (1.84 std dev. above average 13.50)
Negative Anomaly: Harry Perryman - -0.40 (1.47 std dev. below average 7.10)

round 2 vs Richmond
-------------------------
Positive Anomaly: Jack Graham - 14.50 (2.03 std dev. above average 5.92)
Negative Anomaly: Daniel Rioli - 5.70 (1.47 std dev. below average 11.90)

round 3 vs Port Adelaide
-------------------------
Positive Anomaly: Sam Powell-Pepper - 19.70 (2.32 std dev. above average 9.07)
Negative Anomaly: Jeremy Finlayson - 2.70 (1.92 std dev. below average 11.47)

round 4 vs Fremantle
-------------------------
Positive Anomaly: Jaeger O'Meara - 17.70 (1.25 std dev. above average 11.55)
Negative Anomaly: Michael Walters - 1.30 (1.58 std dev. below average 9.08)

round 5 vs Carlton
-------------------------
Positive Anomaly: Adam Cerra - 17.20 (1.51 std dev. above average 11.24)
Negative Anomaly: Matthew Kennedy - 4.20 (1.58 std dev. below average 10.43)

round 6 vs Hawthorn
-------------------------
Positive Anomaly: Chad Wingard - 11.50 (1.68 std dev. above average 2.65)
Negative Anomaly: Dylan Moore - 1.90 (1.91 std dev. below average 11.95)

(I feel like I need to invent a fancier metric for this though, Standard Deviation isn't really producing Chambers'esque candidates.)
 
Thanks Interloperer for sharing this info - like you I think the AFL Player Ratings do have some merit and seem a better guide to a player's value and contribution than just fantasy points / disposals. Do you happen to know why the official Twitter account has gone dark this season? Also it was enlightening to see you give a snippet of the philosophy behind the rating system (impact on likely scoring event) which I think is sound but on the surface I think what it misses is then the impact of that next score on the likely result. For example two identical acts (say kicking a goal) at the 29 minute mark of the last quarter of two hypothetical games might in one scenario change the result from a loss to a win but in the other scenario may change the margin from 10 goals to 11 goals...it seems somewhat naive to give the same score to each of those acts without any reference to the match circumstances. I know there are stats folks on Twitter who provide real-time updates of the likely win probability for each team as the score changes throughout the match...if you could somehow synthesise these two metrics then I think you'd have the ultimate KPI!
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Do you happen to know why the official Twitter account has gone dark this season?
My understanding (read, 'I read it on Twitter') is that the player ratings account was run by a single employee of Champion Data as a personal project, with the endorsement of Champion Data/AFL. And that employee know longer works there, therefore doesn't have access to the data.

It's a shame, because I thought their posts were very useful. Particularly the quarter-by-quarter breakdown and the weekly career summaries.

There's nothing stopping the AFL from releasing this data of course. I don't know if its lazyness, protecting the revenue source for their data, or just outright hostility to intelligent football analysis/commentary. All three are things the AFL is guilty of.

I think what it misses is then the impact of that next score on the likely result.
I agree to an extent. You could definitely use some function of margin and time remaining to work out how important each action is. But I think all that really matters for judging individual performances is "have both teams stopped seriously trying y/n?" And for 99.999% of all game time the answer is no.

But I don't think it's really something you can build into the player ratings. Particularly knowing that the system already has known limitations capturing the efficacy of important football roles like "shutdown defender" and "tagger". Layering a subjective judgement on top of that would only exarcerbate things.
 
Last edited:
View attachment 1668078

View attachment 1668087

Round Awards (WIP)
Pure Class Ratio: Nick Murray (0.41)
Quantity Over Quality: Riley Thilthorpe (0.00)
Awesome work!

Interesting to rank our zones.

Midfield - Dawson 15.6, Laird 13, O'Brien 11.3, Rachele 11.2 (our starting inside mids have been great!), Soligo 10, Berry 6.6 (definitely struggled) >> Schoenberg 3.8 (disappointing & needs to earn his way back)

Main wingmen - Jones 10.4, Sloane 10, Sholl 7.3 (been good but may be squeezed out later)

Defence - Doedee 11, Murray 10.5, Milera 9.1, Hinge 8.7, Smith 8.3, Michaelanny 7 >> Butts 3.3 (really struggling)

Forwards - Rankine 12.8, Thilthorpe 11.5 (surprising), Fogarty 9.8 > Walker 8.6, Keays 8.6, Gollant 8.6!, Pedlar 8.1 Murphy 7.8 (been good but may get squeezed out later), Himmelberg 5.8 (half of RT), McAdam 3.9 (needs to earn his way back), McHenry 3.8,
 
1682849009261.png
1682849034207.png

Match Awards (WIP)
Pure Class Ratio: Brodie Smith (0.22)
Quantity Over Quality: Wayne Milera (-0.03)

Updated 2023 Callum Chambers Jr and Inverse Chambers awards

round 1 vs GWS Giants
-------------------------
Positive Anomaly: Stephen Coniglio - 22.90 (1.64 std dev. above average 14.53)
Negative Anomaly: Harry Perryman - -0.40 (2.56 std dev. below average 12.63)

round 2 vs Richmond
-------------------------
Positive Anomaly: Jack Graham - 14.50 (2.03 std dev. above average 5.92)
Negative Anomaly: Daniel Rioli - 5.70 (1.34 std dev. below average 11.39)

round 3 vs Port Adelaide
-------------------------
Positive Anomaly: Sam Powell-Pepper - 19.70 (2.05 std dev. above average 10.30)
Negative Anomaly: Jeremy Finlayson - 2.70 (2.04 std dev. below average 12.02)

round 4 vs Fremantle
-------------------------
Positive Anomaly: Bailey Banfield - 14.70 (1.18 std dev. above average 8.87)
Negative Anomaly: Alex Pearce - 0.50 (1.50 std dev. below average 7.89)

round 5 vs Carlton
-------------------------
Positive Anomaly: Adam Cerra - 17.20 (0.93 std dev. above average 13.51)
Negative Anomaly: Marc Pittonet - 1.90 (1.94 std dev. below average 9.58)

round 6 vs Hawthorn
-------------------------
Positive Anomaly: Chad Wingard - 11.50 (1.71 std dev. above average 2.50)
Negative Anomaly: Dylan Moore - 1.90 (1.74 std dev. below average 11.07)

round 7 vs Collingwood
-------------------------
Positive Anomaly: Brody Mihocek - 16.10 (1.74 std dev. above average 8.53)
Negative Anomaly: Nick Daicos - 5.30 (2.55 std dev. below average 16.41)
 
View attachment 1675012
View attachment 1675013

Match Awards (WIP)
Pure Class Ratio: Brodie Smith (0.22)
Quantity Over Quality: Wayne Milera (-0.03)

Updated 2023 Callum Chambers Jr and Inverse Chambers awards

round 1 vs GWS Giants
-------------------------
Positive Anomaly: Stephen Coniglio - 22.90 (1.64 std dev. above average 14.53)
Negative Anomaly: Harry Perryman - -0.40 (2.56 std dev. below average 12.63)

round 2 vs Richmond
-------------------------
Positive Anomaly: Jack Graham - 14.50 (2.03 std dev. above average 5.92)
Negative Anomaly: Daniel Rioli - 5.70 (1.34 std dev. below average 11.39)

round 3 vs Port Adelaide
-------------------------
Positive Anomaly: Sam Powell-Pepper - 19.70 (2.05 std dev. above average 10.30)
Negative Anomaly: Jeremy Finlayson - 2.70 (2.04 std dev. below average 12.02)

round 4 vs Fremantle
-------------------------
Positive Anomaly: Bailey Banfield - 14.70 (1.18 std dev. above average 8.87)
Negative Anomaly: Alex Pearce - 0.50 (1.50 std dev. below average 7.89)

round 5 vs Carlton
-------------------------
Positive Anomaly: Adam Cerra - 17.20 (0.93 std dev. above average 13.51)
Negative Anomaly: Marc Pittonet - 1.90 (1.94 std dev. below average 9.58)

round 6 vs Hawthorn
-------------------------
Positive Anomaly: Chad Wingard - 11.50 (1.71 std dev. above average 2.50)
Negative Anomaly: Dylan Moore - 1.90 (1.74 std dev. below average 11.07)

round 7 vs Collingwood
-------------------------
Positive Anomaly: Brody Mihocek - 16.10 (1.74 std dev. above average 8.53)
Negative Anomaly: Nick Daicos - 5.30 (2.55 std dev. below average 16.41)
Thanks for putting these up, very interesting to see the difference between ratings and fantasy
 
1683359933117.png
1683359972993.png

Match Awards(WIP)
Pure Class Ratio: Mitchell Hinge (0.27)
Quantity Over Quality: Darcy Fogarty (0.05)

Updated 2023 Callum Chambers Jr and Inverse Chambers awards (Round 8 Only)
Positive Anomaly: Mark Blicavs - 19.70 (1.72 std dev. above average 12.22)
Negative Anomaly: Patrick Dangerfield - 5.00 (2.31 std dev. below average 15.04)

I definitely need to come up with a better metric for CC award. Blicavs only scores highly here because theres so little variance in his previous games... Though maybe it is in the spirit, most games do not have a true Callum Chambers Club candidate, you maybe get one or two a season at most.
 
1684046666252.png
1684046703283.png

Pure Class Ratio: Darcy Fogarty (0.30)
Quantity Over Quality: Rory Laird (0.07)


Walker's game today was Adelaide's best individual game via this year according to Match Ratings
 
1684568993698.png
1684569021746.png

Pure Class Ratio: Izak Rankine (0.22)
Quantity Over Quality: Mitchell Hinge (-0.02)

AFL player ratings watching a different game this week?
 
1685271783240.png 1685271812935.png

Pure Class Ratio: Tom Doedee (0.31)
Quantity Over Quality: Patrick Parnell (0.00)
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Interesting the difference between Dawsons last two games.
Not rated this week yet he was through the fantasy points and the reverse last week.
I'm surprised he got such a high rating last week. I suspect the conditions would have caused the 'expected next score' according to the ratings system to be way off from reality.

He has had a few poorer games where he's combined mostly uncontested possession with low disposal efficiency. Pretty sure the conditions were the main contributor today, but Hawthorn achieved similar results defensively with a "Do not let Dawson use his left foot, let him run past you in preference." policy.
 
Any stat that has Max that low for the season is whack.
There are known weaknesses with taggers/shut down defenders. eg. He's barely below Butts' rating last night even though Butts shut down important Brisbane forwards, while Michelanny's direct opponent scored 4 and two of those came from bad defensive errors metres from goal.

5.77 isn't terrible either. Not far below the median game for all players.
 
1685796923228.png 1685796871100.png
Pure Class Ratio: Darcy Fogarty (0.27)
Quantity Over Quality: Izak Rankine (0.01)
 
1686391228340.png
1686391308368.png

Pure Class Ratio: Nick Murray (0.28)
Quantity Over Quality: Luke Pedlar (-0.02)


Walker's rating was over 40% better than the previous best by a Crows player (his own 28 point game.) Ironically he also has the worst rating of the season

I thought Pedlar was a bit scrappy, but not net-negative scrappy. Was he responsible for any of the weird off the ball frees/50s?
 
1687797001621.png
1687796944370.png


Pure Class Ratio: Nick Murray (0.68)
Quantity Over Quality: Josh Rachele (0.05)


I scrapped the pseudo-Callum Chambers measure for now. But interestingly Brody Mihocek's first game was far above his usual range, where this one would have been the week's anti-Chambers.
 
1688198521053.png
1688198374959.png

Pure Class Ratio: Izak Rankine (0.27)
Quantity Over Quality: Jordon Butts (0.01)
 
1689426729090.png
1689426665756.png

Pure Class Ratio: Ned McHenry (0.35)
Quantity Over Quality: Luke Pedlar (0.00)


I wonder what the record the record is for "game with most goalkickers under 5 player ranking points"
 
1690101068902.png
1690101008766.png


Pure Class Ratio: Taylor Walker (0.32)
Quantity Over Quality: Luke Pedlar (-0.03)
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Analysis Crows Player Ratings

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top