Analysis Champion data rates every club list

[Brick Loosener]

Goldstein.

Yeah.

 

[fleabitten]

And there are only 188 players in the league who are above average apparently. Out of 800+ players.

 

[Brick Loosener]

Essendrugs have no elite players

 

[fumbler]

Was about to take that seriously then I saw that St Kilda, Melb, port and Coll are ranked above the Hawks and cats LOL.

As for us, I counted 5 elite not 3.

Freeeooooooo way to blow.

 

[Juke]

How many times have we finished ninth? Four?

North and St Kilda have both finished 9th twice since we last did.

 

[Nostradumbass]

**** champion data

 

[Barry_Badrinath]

We came in 13th

The bottom 4 is spot on. Might be legit.

 

[TigerImposter]

Does champion data work out how many shit players are on a list?

 

[TigerImposter]

Carlton has Two elite players???? I thought Judd and Duigan had retired????

 

[mopsy]

Was about to take that seriously then I saw that St Kilda, Melb, port and Coll are ranked above the Hawks and cats LOL.

As for us, I counted 5 elite not 3.

I counted 3 elite and 2 very good. After that weeelllll its a mish mash of average, below average and juniors.

As for the hawks well clearly they have gone into a rebuild phase of sorts.they will struggle to make finals most likely bottom 6 imo.
Melbourne imo will make the 8 have had the talent to do it the last 2 seasons. StKilda and even Collingwood have done the hard yards recruiting lots of juniors. StKilda will challnge for the 8 Collingwood im not sure about.
I actually think the dark horse is Essendon.

 

[aussierulesrules]

Who the **** are the 4 Bulldogs elite players other than the Bont and Wood?
Dahlhaus? Libba? Boyd? Stretching it there Champion Data.

Not Wood actually, surprisingly, nor JJ. It was Wallis , Stringer, Bont, Murphy, Boyd and Dahlhaus.

 

[TigerImposter]

According to many on here Hampson is elite.

 

[captain blood 17]

List is bullshit. I had us at 9th.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[TigerImposter]

List is bullshit. I had us at 9th.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Careful mate. That's not joke worthy anymore.

 

[Dr Tigris]

I will use that list next year for all my picks for each round. It's obviously deeply thought through and based on solid insight and strong data analytics.

Next, I'll get picked up in the draft as a CHF to deal with the loss of TV.

just as likely to work out.

 

[captain blood 17]

Careful mate. That's not joke worthy anymore.

Those mutha ****as cant stop me mutha ****a.......


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Ned_Flanders]

Actually, even dumber than that...Melbourne above Hawthorn when both have a score of 10. But Melbourne's is 2 elite plus 8 good and Hawthorn is 5 of each. How does that make any sense?

Even if you can accept their designations and the stupidly simple method of ranking teams that they have come up with, there are still logical problems with it. Why is this even a thing.

yep, completely mental. BUT.... I hate to say it, but it doesnt change much with a weighting. Here is an elite worth 2 i/o 1

WBD (6+13) = 25 (1)
GWS (6+11) = 23 (2)
WCE (6+8) = 20 (3)
SYD (6+7) = 19 (5)
ADL (4+10) = 18 (4)
HAW (5+5) = 15 (10)
COL (2+10) = 14 (7)
GEE (5+4) = 14 (11)
POR (3+7) = 13 (8)
STK (1+11) = 13 (6)
MEL (2+8) = 12 (9)
FRE (3+6) = 12 (12)
RIC (3+6) = 12 (13)
GC (3+5) = 11 (14)
NRF (1+6) = 8 (15)
ESS (0+7) = 7 (16)
CAR (2+3) = 7 (17)
BRI (0+3) = 3 (18)

 

[fleabitten]

yep, completely mental. BUT.... I hate to say it, but it doesnt change much with a weighting. Here is an elite worth 2 i/o 1

WBD (6+13) = 25 (1)
GWS (6+11) = 23 (2)
WCE (6+8) = 20 (3)
SYD (6+7) = 19 (5)
ADL (4+10) = 18 (4)
HAW (5+5) = 15 (10)
COL (2+10) = 14 (7)
GEE (5+4) = 14 (11)
POR (3+7) = 13 (8)
STK (1+11) = 13 (6)
MEL (2+8) = 12 (9)
FRE (3+6) = 12 (12)
RIC (3+6) = 12 (13)
GC (3+5) = 11 (14)
NRF (1+6) = 8 (15)
ESS (0+7) = 7 (16)
CAR (2+3) = 7 (17)
BRI (0+3) = 3 (18)

I love how you used NRF for norf.

There are a couple of big changes that actually make it look more sensible (Hawthorn and Geelong up, Port and Melbourne down). But my main issue is that it's just a completely dumb way to rate the teams. I was coming up with more complicated ways to rate things when I was 13 and I didn't have access to the stats that Champion Data has.

For a start, what about the other players on each team's list? It's no good having 5 elite players and 10 above average players if the other 30 guys are not AFL standard. And this system gives equal weight to all the players that they have designated as elite. So Geelong gets as many points for Dangerfield as they would for whoever is the 50th best player.

It's a primary school level effort.

 

[mcuzzy]

Meh, poor depth and injuries, we'll shoot back up again next season even without Lids.

 

[Sassafras]

Those mutha ****as cant stop me mutha ****a.......


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Rebel without a cause right here.....

 

[richoatthedisco]

Actually, even dumber than that...Melbourne above Hawthorn when both have a score of 10. But Melbourne's is 2 elite plus 8 good and Hawthorn is 5 of each. How does that make any sense?

Even if you can accept their designations and the stupidly simple method of ranking teams that they have come up with, there are still logical problems with it. Why is this even a thing.

Champion Data (all stats really) is scrawny nerds' attempt at gaining relevance and power in the game the only way they can. They can't play it, and can't even tell you who can by using their eyes.

 

[richoatthedisco]

Not Wood actually, surprisingly, nor JJ. It was Wallis , Stringer, Bont, Murphy, Boyd and Dahlhaus.

Murphy, a 35-year-old recovering from an ACL, is an elite player going into 2017.

They're not even useful nerds that invent cool stuff. They just tell you what the weather was yesterday.

 

[ShadowBoxer]

So 4 elite players and 10 good players (Adelaide) beats 6 elite players and 7 good players (Sydney). Because 4+10=14 and 6+7=13 and 14>13. Good one Champion Data you little ******* champions of data, you.

Yeah, highly scientific.

 

[fleabitten]

Champion Data (all stats really) is scrawny nerds' attempt at gaining relevance and power in the game the only way they can. They can't play it, and can't even tell you who can by using their eyes.

LOL. I'm actually a stats nerd and love ratings and stuff. I just like it done properly. AFL is the only sport I know of where a lot of the stats aren't publicly available and it sucks.

 

[captain blood 17]

Rebel without a cause right here.....

Internet bad arse right here. Cross me man and i'll block you, post an interesting meme criticising you, report your post or put you on ignore.
Yeah boi.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk