Analysis The Stats and nothing but the Stats

Remove this Banner Ad

Here's the compilation of all the first-possession numbers from the first five weeks of the season.

Team Stats:

Screen Shot 2024-04-09 at 1.15.29 pm.png

These figures don't seem too disparate, although there are a few things that stand out. For the most part, we get less first possession than our opposition, but we are more efficient with the first possessions we get. However, this scenario seems to reverse in second halves, as we've had more first possessions in our second halves than our opposition, but the opposition have been more efficient with their first possessions. This would appear to be at odds with the general vibe that we're getting better the longer games go on, though I think that has more to do with our run and spread getting over the top of teams, more so than our contest work.

The other area that stands out to me as an outlier from the general efficiency vs inefficiency trend is our centre bounces. Not only do we win less first possessions than our opposition at centre bounces, but we also struggle to contain the opposition's efficiency with their first possessions.

Individual Stats:

For the individual data, I observed all of the same categories as for the team stats above ^, but I also wanted to try and get a clearer idea of just who was doing the most damage for us in terms of first possessions. Total first touches weren't enough, as that would obviously skew towards players who were simply in the midfield the most, while efficiency % wasn't enough, as that would obviously skew towards the guys who have only had one or two first touches that happened to be efficient. So I multiplied each players' total first touches by the efficiency of those first touches to create something of a ranking that was as fair as possible.

Screen Shot 2024-04-09 at 1.14.36 pm.png

I know what you might be thinking - Tom McCartin?! Dane Rampe?! Nick Blakey?! Yes, they have all won first possessions at stoppages. Release them into the midfield!

As for some of the other names in that mid-table range - Campbell, Florent, Roberts, and, the one occasion they've each done so, Wicks & Mitchell - it can be tempting to think... "Could we?" But I can also say that from looking at these replays and collating these numbers, it seems to be easier for these guys to sneak up to stoppages and win a loose ball here or there, because no one's onto them. So not to say that they'd be bad if they were used as full-time mids, but I don't think their numbers here are a true reflection of how they'd go if any of them were full-time mids.

Now, onto more of the big names.

- For Heeney to have the same number of first possessions as Grundy is insane. Watching Grundy, he just gets his hands to so many balls (stay focused) and clearly being in the ruck helps with this, so for Heeney to be on par with him shows how incredible Heeney's really been. Getting hands on it is one thing, but being clean with it is another, and Heeney's 84% efficiency shows just how far ahead of all our other mids he really is.

- Warner gets the next-most first possessions out of all our midfielders (excluding Grundy, who is like a fourth mid), but Warner's inefficiency hurts him, as he had three more first touches than Gulden & Rowbottom, but less effective first touches than either of those two.

- I think there's enormous upside for Gulden. I've seen Swans fans get a bit sensitive when Gulden's size is mentioned, as I think it brings back him being snubbed by recruiters at draft time. But let's call a spade a spade, Gulden is tiny compared to some of the guys he's playing with and going up against. So for him to be producing quite positively in this area is a testament to him as a footballer.

- I also think there's huge upside for Rowbottom as well, considering he is still yet to string together two good halves of footy in a game this year. I'm not sure why - if it's fitness-related that would be particularly disappointing - but if he starts doing so, he will explode in this area, as he's hanging in there with the more attacking mids and that is with him also clearly offering the most defensively, as well.

- Interestingly, McLean had more first possessions at centre bounces than stoppages, which is pretty hard to do, considering there are more stoppage situations in games than there are centre bounces. What this says about him, I'm not really sure. It could just be a purely quirky outcome. Probably too small a sample size to know.

- Speaking of centre bounce first possessions vs stoppage first possessions, to be honest I expected Papley's to resemble McLean's. He's considered something of a centre bounce specialist, but is clearly doing most of his damage in stoppages. Although this can easily be explained by him winning first possession at forward stoppages the same way that Florent, Roberts etc. are winning first possession at defensive stoppages.

And finally, it will be interesting tracking Adams' numbers the more midfield time he gets, whilst we can also expect to see one 'L. Parker' added into the mix. That'll be fun for us mods.
 
Here's the compilation of all the first-possession numbers from the first five weeks of the season.

Team Stats:

View attachment 1954575

These figures don't seem too disparate, although there are a few things that stand out. For the most part, we get less first possession than our opposition, but we are more efficient with the first possessions we get. However, this scenario seems to reverse in second halves, as we've had more first possessions in our second halves than our opposition, but the opposition have been more efficient with their first possessions. This would appear to be at odds with the general vibe that we're getting better the longer games go on, though I think that has more to do with our run and spread getting over the top of teams, more so than our contest work.

The other area that stands out to me as an outlier from the general efficiency vs inefficiency trend is our centre bounces. Not only do we win less first possessions than our opposition at centre bounces, but we also struggle to contain the opposition's efficiency with their first possessions.

Individual Stats:

For the individual data, I observed all of the same categories as for the team stats above ^, but I also wanted to try and get a clearer idea of just who was doing the most damage for us in terms of first possessions. Total first touches weren't enough, as that would obviously skew towards players who were simply in the midfield the most, while efficiency % wasn't enough, as that would obviously skew towards the guys who have only had one or two first touches that happened to be efficient. So I multiplied each players' total first touches by the efficiency of those first touches to create something of a ranking that was as fair as possible.

View attachment 1954574

I know what you might be thinking - Tom McCartin?! Dane Rampe?! Nick Blakey?! Yes, they have all won first possessions at stoppages. Release them into the midfield!

As for some of the other names in that mid-table range - Campbell, Florent, Roberts, and, the one occasion they've each done so, Wicks & Mitchell - it can be tempting to think... "Could we?" But I can also say that from looking at these replays and collating these numbers, it seems to be easier for these guys to sneak up to stoppages and win a loose ball here or there, because no one's onto them. So not to say that they'd be bad if they were used as full-time mids, but I don't think their numbers here are a true reflection of how they'd go if any of them were full-time mids.

Now, onto more of the big names.

- For Heeney to have the same number of first possessions as Grundy is insane. Watching Grundy, he just gets his hands to so many balls (stay focused) and clearly being in the ruck helps with this, so for Heeney to be on par with him shows how incredible Heeney's really been. Getting hands on it is one thing, but being clean with it is another, and Heeney's 84% efficiency shows just how far ahead of all our other mids he really is.

- Warner gets the next-most first possessions out of all our midfielders (excluding Grundy, who is like a fourth mid), but Warner's inefficiency hurts him, as he had three more first touches than Gulden & Rowbottom, but less effective first touches than either of those two.

- I think there's enormous upside for Gulden. I've seen Swans fans get a bit sensitive when Gulden's size is mentioned, as I think it brings back him being snubbed by recruiters at draft time. But let's call a spade a spade, Gulden is tiny compared to some of the guys he's playing with and going up against. So for him to be producing quite positively in this area is a testament to him as a footballer.

- I also think there's huge upside for Rowbottom as well, considering he is still yet to string together two good halves of footy in a game this year. I'm not sure why - if it's fitness-related that would be particularly disappointing - but if he starts doing so, he will explode in this area, as he's hanging in there with the more attacking mids and that is with him also clearly offering the most defensively, as well.

- Interestingly, McLean had more first possessions at centre bounces than stoppages, which is pretty hard to do, considering there are more stoppage situations in games than there are centre bounces. What this says about him, I'm not really sure. It could just be a purely quirky outcome. Probably too small a sample size to know.

- Speaking of centre bounce first possessions vs stoppage first possessions, to be honest I expected Papley's to resemble McLean's. He's considered something of a centre bounce specialist, but is clearly doing most of his damage in stoppages. Although this can easily be explained by him winning first possession at forward stoppages the same way that Florent, Roberts etc. are winning first possession at defensive stoppages.

And finally, it will be interesting tracking Adams' numbers the more midfield time he gets, whilst we can also expect to see one 'L. Parker' added into the mix. That'll be fun for us mods.
Absolutely brilliant caesar88!
Your next mission, should you decide to accept it, is to work out how we get better.
Trade in Connor Rozee? Works for me!
Cheer cheer!
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Absolutely brilliant caesar88!
Your next mission, should you decide to accept it, is to work out how we get better.
Trade in Connor Rozee? Works for me!
Cheer cheer!
If you give me Horse's job, I promise I'll take it seriously and definitely won't use the salary to build myself a nice beach house down the coast!
 
The gulf between our stoppage and centre bounce work is huge. 16th in the AFL for centre clearances and 1st in the comp for stoppage clearances. 5th for total clearances. Heeney has been brilliant in stoppages so far this year so he's a big influence to the rank. 15th for contested possessions as well.

However I think our contest work has been better than last year. Our biggest issues the last two weeks have been defending transition, kicking forward of center and dealing with high pressure. We've been able to run out games much better than 2023 as well, being able to spread and take the game on. We really should've ran over the top of Richmond but our composure and decision making was poor.
 
The gulf between our stoppage and centre bounce work is huge. 16th in the AFL for centre clearances and 1st in the comp for stoppage clearances. 5th for total clearances. Heeney has been brilliant in stoppages so far this year so he's a big influence to the rank. 15th for contested possessions as well.

However I think our contest work has been better than last year. Our biggest issues the last two weeks have been defending transition, kicking forward of center and dealing with high pressure. We've been able to run out games much better than 2023 as well, being able to spread and take the game on. We really should've ran over the top of Richmond but our composure and decision making was poor.
After our two first huge games it's like we relaxed and drank our bathwater. Our handling became much less clean and our positioning on transition in both directions worse. Concentration? You're dead right about composure. Unless we sort ourselves out we'll most likely lose the next three.
 
A little while back I mentioned a running trend of starting hot, then hitting a speed bump in the middle of the season. I speculated it must be some sort of training plan, but I wanted to make sure my eyes weren't playing trick on me so I made this little table.

First 4 Weeks
2021​
2022​
2023​
2024​
Wins
4​
3​
2​
3​
Percentage
1.335329​
1.15873​
1.261745​
1.253165​
Next 8 Weeks
2021​
2022​
2023​
2024​
Wins
4​
5​
3​
1​
Percentage
1.01626​
1.203526​
0.886872​
1.333333​
Odd 4 Weeks
2021​
2022​
2023​
Wins
2​
2​
1.5​
Precentage
1.246094​
1.26087​
1.520147​
Last 7-8 weeks
2021​
2022​
2023​
Wins
6​
7​
6​
Percentage
1.476723​
1.436945​
1.048747​

Ok, that's a lot of numbers, just wanted to go through a few reasons why I chose the weeks I did,

First 4 weeks - Running out of the gates, I wanted to get the first rush, but a lot of the time we run out of steam on the 3rd or 4th game. First 2 weeks have always been VERY good (unusual for a Swans team). Whatever our training plan, whatever our message, the first 2 weeks are the swans at their very best.

Next 8 weeks - The slump. While the degrees of the slump change, the fact remains that the higest win percentage of 62.5% (year we made the grandfinal), other than that our highest is 50% followed by 37.5%. In fact, despite a few small losses, we can see how consistent you have to be to make a grandfinal, as the massive slumps in the 2021 and 2023 are more obvious when comparing our consistency in 2022.

Odd 4 weeks - I grouped these, because it was a mixed bag. Win rate low, but percentage high, in many ways finding a bit of form and getting over the slump of the last 8 weeks.

Final 7-8 weeks - Whatever we do to get ready for the final weeks, we do it pretty well. Both 2021 and 2022 we came with a massive rush, posting out best win rates and percentages for the year. 2023, let's be honest, we were lucky to make finals, and our percentage shows this. We won, but not well.

Full picture?
1. 2023 sucked. We made finals by the skin of our teeth, and we we're obviously suffering from the grand final drubbing. The fact that we made finals is comendable.

2. Our training/messaging at the beginning of the season is great, everyone is on the same page and we start with a bang.

3. The middle of the season is about holding on. As dismal as it sounds, the middle of the season is obviously our least important in terms of training or messaging or both. I doubt Horse ever wants us to loose, but we definitely don't play to win big. We want to hold on, win preferably, and set up our training regiment for the final run

4. The message change. If I had to guess, the odd 4 weeks is when we change our training/messaging. It takes some time and we lose a few games, but even with a 50/50 win loss ratio, we have firmly positive percentages (we start winning big and losing small).

5. The most important part of the season, the last 6-7 weeks, are something beautiful for 2021 and 2022 (I've already discussed 2023). We get into our groove and just win. We win big and we lose rarely. Whatever we do, we set up well, but we seeminly can only keep this up for 2 months, leading tooooooooooo

6. Finals performance. Quite honestly I haven't analysed this because it's a bunch of close losses or good wins and one massive loss, but whatever our message, whatever our training, we loose steam.

Going forward???
2024 has started in much the same way, and to be honest, I'm happy with how we've planned for seasons, I don't mind going into cruise control for the next 2-3 months. We will have to expect losses like Richmond though, we aren't going to be playing at peak probably until July-August, and what we saw in the first 2 weeks won't be seen again for quite a while. We will still be aiming to win. If I could pose one critic, maybe we will try to start the run to the end of the season 3-4 weeks later, just to prime us completely for finals.

Disclaimers:
1. We are still trying to win in the middle of the season, but the fact of the matter is that timing your run is more important than anything else, so if we can get a 60% win rate and decent 110-120 percentage that's about par.
2. Past performance is not an indicator of future performance, even though we can make stipulations about what we MIGHT have said or done, we can't be sure that it did happen, or will happen again.

BUT that being said, if we are looking at miserable 2-3 months and questioning our season, and questioning Horse, I would place my bets on having a solid run at the end of the year.

Peace fellow losers.
 
A little while back I mentioned a running trend of starting hot, then hitting a speed bump in the middle of the season. I speculated it must be some sort of training plan, but I wanted to make sure my eyes weren't playing trick on me so I made this little table.

First 4 Weeks
2021​
2022​
2023​
2024​
Wins
4​
3​
2​
3​
Percentage
1.335329​
1.15873​
1.261745​
1.253165​
Next 8 Weeks
2021​
2022​
2023​
2024​
Wins
4​
5​
3​
1​
Percentage
1.01626​
1.203526​
0.886872​
1.333333​
Odd 4 Weeks
2021​
2022​
2023​
Wins
2​
2​
1.5​
Precentage
1.246094​
1.26087​
1.520147​
Last 7-8 weeks
2021​
2022​
2023​
Wins
6​
7​
6​
Percentage
1.476723​
1.436945​
1.048747​

Ok, that's a lot of numbers, just wanted to go through a few reasons why I chose the weeks I did,

First 4 weeks - Running out of the gates, I wanted to get the first rush, but a lot of the time we run out of steam on the 3rd or 4th game. First 2 weeks have always been VERY good (unusual for a Swans team). Whatever our training plan, whatever our message, the first 2 weeks are the swans at their very best.

Next 8 weeks - The slump. While the degrees of the slump change, the fact remains that the higest win percentage of 62.5% (year we made the grandfinal), other than that our highest is 50% followed by 37.5%. In fact, despite a few small losses, we can see how consistent you have to be to make a grandfinal, as the massive slumps in the 2021 and 2023 are more obvious when comparing our consistency in 2022.

Odd 4 weeks - I grouped these, because it was a mixed bag. Win rate low, but percentage high, in many ways finding a bit of form and getting over the slump of the last 8 weeks.

Final 7-8 weeks - Whatever we do to get ready for the final weeks, we do it pretty well. Both 2021 and 2022 we came with a massive rush, posting out best win rates and percentages for the year. 2023, let's be honest, we were lucky to make finals, and our percentage shows this. We won, but not well.

Full picture?
1. 2023 sucked. We made finals by the skin of our teeth, and we we're obviously suffering from the grand final drubbing. The fact that we made finals is comendable.

2. Our training/messaging at the beginning of the season is great, everyone is on the same page and we start with a bang.

3. The middle of the season is about holding on. As dismal as it sounds, the middle of the season is obviously our least important in terms of training or messaging or both. I doubt Horse ever wants us to loose, but we definitely don't play to win big. We want to hold on, win preferably, and set up our training regiment for the final run

4. The message change. If I had to guess, the odd 4 weeks is when we change our training/messaging. It takes some time and we lose a few games, but even with a 50/50 win loss ratio, we have firmly positive percentages (we start winning big and losing small).

5. The most important part of the season, the last 6-7 weeks, are something beautiful for 2021 and 2022 (I've already discussed 2023). We get into our groove and just win. We win big and we lose rarely. Whatever we do, we set up well, but we seeminly can only keep this up for 2 months, leading tooooooooooo

6. Finals performance. Quite honestly I haven't analysed this because it's a bunch of close losses or good wins and one massive loss, but whatever our message, whatever our training, we loose steam.

Going forward???
2024 has started in much the same way, and to be honest, I'm happy with how we've planned for seasons, I don't mind going into cruise control for the next 2-3 months. We will have to expect losses like Richmond though, we aren't going to be playing at peak probably until July-August, and what we saw in the first 2 weeks won't be seen again for quite a while. We will still be aiming to win. If I could pose one critic, maybe we will try to start the run to the end of the season 3-4 weeks later, just to prime us completely for finals.

Disclaimers:
1. We are still trying to win in the middle of the season, but the fact of the matter is that timing your run is more important than anything else, so if we can get a 60% win rate and decent 110-120 percentage that's about par.
2. Past performance is not an indicator of future performance, even though we can make stipulations about what we MIGHT have said or done, we can't be sure that it did happen, or will happen again.

BUT that being said, if we are looking at miserable 2-3 months and questioning our season, and questioning Horse, I would place my bets on having a solid run at the end of the year.

Peace fellow losers.
Wow that's a lot of work you've gone to Kapers, thank you, makes for very interesting reading.
Bit of a downer for us optimists that are running with the not respecting the opposition line.
 
Wow that's a lot of work you've gone to Kapers, thank you, makes for very interesting reading.
Bit of a downer for us optimists that are running with the not respecting the opposition line.
I think it just shows that there's more to losing or bad form, especially when there's a pattern. I imagine the training schedules of a rebuilding team, and a team expecting to make finals would be completely different, as their goals are completely different, but tbf I've never had any association with a professional club, so it's all guess work for me.
 
The Swans not top 6 in any of the key areas as per Champion Data

 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Swans have six players in the top five players of their age brackets, according to Champion Data

22 - Errol Gulden (2nd)
23 - Chad Warner (5th)
24 - Nick Blakey (2nd), James Rowbottom (5th)
28 - Isaac Heeney (1st)
30 - Brodie Grundy (5th)
 
I think this article is really relevant to this discussion: https://www.afl.com.au/news/1110954...the-organised-chaos-of-a-centre-bounce-battle

But it raises as many questions as it answers.

Here's an unsurprising but still illuminating point:

Most assistants and coaches spoken to by AFL.com.au said they have four or five main combinations of midfielders. But even that requires plenty of preparation and chemistry building. Clubs use analytics to delve into which mix works for them scoring but also which group sees them get scored against most.

Heeney, Rowy & Chad are winning the most centre clearances of any midfield combo in the comp this season.

The Swans rank 2nd for most number of players to have attended at least 5 CBs this season (8). The team with the most is injury-hit Richmond. Conversely Port and Freo have used fewest players at centre bounce this season. Despite that, I think it's an asset that we have more combos that work.

This quote is an example of one of those which raise questions for me:

The players themselves speak another language when dissecting the organised mayhem of a centre square battle: the stars who prefer standing 'back shoulder', those who 'cover', the 'sweepers', the 'releases', the 'hit side', 'cut throughs', 'wedges'.

It would be great if they had explained what each of these terms mean and if they delved a bit deeper into this complex subject. Why are they so averse to explaining it to us - both clubs and the meeja generally? Clearly there are plenty who have an appetite for it (even if not everyone does).
 
I think this article is really relevant to this discussion: https://www.afl.com.au/news/1110954...the-organised-chaos-of-a-centre-bounce-battle

But it raises as many questions as it answers.

Here's an unsurprising but still illuminating point:

Most assistants and coaches spoken to by AFL.com.au said they have four or five main combinations of midfielders. But even that requires plenty of preparation and chemistry building. Clubs use analytics to delve into which mix works for them scoring but also which group sees them get scored against most.

Heeney, Rowy & Chad are winning the most centre clearances of any midfield combo in the comp this season.

The Swans rank 2nd for most number of players to have attended at least 5 CBs this season (8). The team with the most is injury-hit Richmond. Conversely Port and Freo have used fewest players at centre bounce this season. Despite that, I think it's an asset that we have more combos that work.

This quote is an example of one of those which raise questions for me:

The players themselves speak another language when dissecting the organised mayhem of a centre square battle: the stars who prefer standing 'back shoulder', those who 'cover', the 'sweepers', the 'releases', the 'hit side', 'cut throughs', 'wedges'.

It would be great if they had explained what each of these terms mean and if they delved a bit deeper into this complex subject. Why are they so averse to explaining it to us - both clubs and the meeja generally? Clearly there are plenty who have an appetite for it (even if not everyone does).
Thought it was a pretty good article given they were only scratching the surface.

I'd love the additional detail, but they'd know how long readers are generally prepared to spend reading an article so try to keep it concise rather than invest a lot of additional time knowing only a small proportion of overall readers would bother.

This is the aspect I'd like to know more about: "Then there are the trios who can produce goal-making moves".

I'd be interested to know which teams and which combination of players have the most influence in their team hitting the scoreboard or generating quality goal scoring opportunities.
 
This week's first touch numbers.

I think the pressure that was applied in and around the contest is very evident in these numbers. A lot of very low efficiency across the board, both as teams and as individuals (poor Taylor Adams - welcome back to senior midfield action big fella!!)

Interestingly that pressure led to a LOT of balls simply spilling to the outside - hence a lot of the outside types like Gulden, Jordon and Florent winning an unusually high number of first possessions.

But nice to see our midfield on top, and as shown we broke away even further in the second half.

Screen Shot 2024-04-22 at 7.38.20 pm.png

Screen Shot 2024-04-22 at 7.38.56 pm.png
 
Ahem. I did actually share that same article just two posts up. Unfortunately, I didn't manage to make it pop as impressively as you did, so you might have missed it.
Oops, sorry Calli. Yeah I missed it completely.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Analysis The Stats and nothing but the Stats

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top