-
AFLW 2024 - Round 10 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Champion Data's assessment of "elite" players
- Thread starter WaywardSonSon
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Nov 7, 2020
- 2,591
- 6,323
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
- Banned
- #78
There is no way in hell, he’s better than Rowell.
Rowell is Elite, he was Elite after 2 games, the next two cemented it and then he got injured going into his 5th game as a chance for the Brownlow.
It’s unheard of.
- Nov 26, 2015
- 6,588
- 14,683
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Jun 27, 2020
- 5,902
- 10,095
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Other Teams
- Cool Runnings
- Thread starter
- #80
Meanwhile, at CD headquarters...
- Mar 25, 2003
- 35,681
- 28,342
Actually there's a lot of subjectivity in who they rate elite it would seem. Someone has to the dials around to determine what is and isn't important, and it would seem they've got the wrong settings plugged in on a few things.
I agree the data is objective - at least mostly. Things like contested/uncontested, hard ball / loose ball, assist, hit out to advantage etc certainly have some grey areas. But by and large if you miss a game you can see the numbers afterwards and you get a pretty decent idea of who had an impact. Not the full picture, but you might see Cunnington 18 contested posessions and think "Ooo yeah he was a beast last couple of weeks when I watched North too.
But these ratings are pretty bizarre. Someone has made the call that goalkicking accuracy is enough to put a forward into the elite category, forgetting the fact that the forward in question barely kicked a goal a game. No sane coach would take a goal a game forward, over a 3-goal a game forward, just because the former doesn't kick many behinds. I read Oscar Allen got rated elite because of his tackling inside 50. Most of us on the Eagles boards are big fans and no doubt that is a good attribute of his game, but there's no way anyone on that board could say with a straight face he is in the top 53 players of the competition (53 being the number of players CD has rated elite).
Last edited:
Yes this would be my question of the model, how many categories does a player need to rank elite in to be placed in elite and how do other results in other categories affect this.
My point around it being objective is that once the model is created, its then objective unlike an opinion based Robbo's top 50 for example.
We can rightly question the model, but asking why a player isn't in compared to another is purely a data driven result.
- Nov 26, 2015
- 6,588
- 14,683
- AFL Club
- Richmond
it's simple, all CD has to say is this:
Mason Cox is elite at Goal Accuracy....everyone can fact check and say oh wow, yeah he was bloody accurate last year.
However CD simply listed Cox as elite, everyone will take that as Cox is an elite FOOTBALLER...which even my cat knows that's total nonsense.
Mason Cox is elite at Goal Accuracy....everyone can fact check and say oh wow, yeah he was bloody accurate last year.
However CD simply listed Cox as elite, everyone will take that as Cox is an elite FOOTBALLER...which even my cat knows that's total nonsense.
queensberryrules
Club Legend
- Aug 16, 2019
- 2,670
- 3,722
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
Champion Data folk don't actually "watch" the game.
- Banned
- #85
It's not about being one of the best 53 players in the comp. That's not what CD purports to be listing. They are rating players according to position. I assume they categorise Allen as a ruck/forward and deem him elite in that position. He could be 150th in the comp overall but ultimately if CD regards him as an elite ruck/forward, compared to other ruck/forwards, that's why they'd rate him elite.
I make no assessment whether he is actually elite in that position but that's what CD are saying. It has nothing to do with whether he's in the top 50 or top 53 in the comp overall.
Everyone missing the best part of how especially stupid this year's offering is, as the AFL seems to have quietly edited any mention on their site out.
And in a blast from the past, Naitanui has been joined in the list of the AFL’s premier players by provisionally suspended small forward Willie Rioli.
thewest.com.au
Can only assume "cones smoked" and "drug tests tampered with" are stats now being actively monitored?
And in a blast from the past, Naitanui has been joined in the list of the AFL’s premier players by provisionally suspended small forward Willie Rioli.
Nic Nat reigns supreme as AFL’s number one
West Coast ruckman Nic Naitanui has been crowned the best player in the AFL by a a sophisticated new rating system. See where Fremantle’s Nat Fyfe and a surprise Eagle come in.
thewest.com.au
Can only assume "cones smoked" and "drug tests tampered with" are stats now being actively monitored?
- Banned
- #87
What's this new ratings system?Everyone missing the best part of how especially stupid this year's offering is, as the AFL seems to have quietly edited any mention on their site out.
And in a blast from the past, Naitanui has been joined in the list of the AFL’s premier players by provisionally suspended small forward Willie Rioli.
Nic Nat reigns supreme as AFL’s number one
West Coast ruckman Nic Naitanui has been crowned the best player in the AFL by a a sophisticated new rating system. See where Fremantle’s Nat Fyfe and a surprise Eagle come in.
Can only assume "cones smoked" and "drug tests tampered with" are stats now being actively monitored?
If the ratings system is based around their teams performance during minutes on the ground in relation to the rest of the time then it would be hard to argue Nicnat isn't the best eagles player and an easy argument to make that he's the most important player in the league.
- Jun 27, 2020
- 5,902
- 10,095
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Other Teams
- Cool Runnings
- Thread starter
- #89
If by "easy", you mean "ridiculous", then yes, yes it would.
Without Champion Data David King wouldn't have a job.
Lets get rid of Champion data I reckon.
Lets get rid of Champion data I reckon.
Why is this data even taken seriously? It’s clearly ****ed
Willie Rioli a top 50 player in the league?
Willie Rioli a top 50 player in the league?
- Sep 7, 2009
- 6,679
- 7,223
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Other Teams
- Real Madrid, Man City, GS Warriors
The Prospectus in 2010 called Shaun Higgins the next Paul Chapman
Can’t believe Zac Fisher and Mason Cox are elite
Can’t believe Zac Fisher and Mason Cox are elite
Scorpus
Moderator
- Apr 16, 2014
- 61,738
- 165,095
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Moderator
- #95
I think this is a great illustration of why Champion Data's overall rankings are poor. The actual gatherings of stats is fine, but some of these justifications are ridiculous
The basics here is that in a GWS game they ranked Jake Riccardi as the worst player on the entire field with effectively 0 contribution to the game despite kicking 4 goals for the match.
Their justification is that his goal contributions (+1.6 +3.5 +0.8 and +1.5 in terms of rating points) were nullified by kicking a behind (-2.1), taking two marks and kicking backwards (-0.4 each), a kick to the boundary line (-0.7), two dropped marks (-1.1 and -0.8) and an ineffective handball (-1.3) among a few other minor things.
How in the world are two kicks backwards and a kick to the boundary enough of a negative effect on the team to nullify a goal from an uncontested mark.
These ratings seem very arbitrary. Who decides that a kick backwards is worth a negative rating? What if that kick is to the team's advantage overall?
The basics here is that in a GWS game they ranked Jake Riccardi as the worst player on the entire field with effectively 0 contribution to the game despite kicking 4 goals for the match.
Their justification is that his goal contributions (+1.6 +3.5 +0.8 and +1.5 in terms of rating points) were nullified by kicking a behind (-2.1), taking two marks and kicking backwards (-0.4 each), a kick to the boundary line (-0.7), two dropped marks (-1.1 and -0.8) and an ineffective handball (-1.3) among a few other minor things.
How in the world are two kicks backwards and a kick to the boundary enough of a negative effect on the team to nullify a goal from an uncontested mark.
These ratings seem very arbitrary. Who decides that a kick backwards is worth a negative rating? What if that kick is to the team's advantage overall?
- May 13, 2007
- 2,694
- 4,031
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Other Teams
- Seahawks, Huskies, Newcastle Utd.
Can't see what the issue is with the ratings that CD use.
As a non-biased observer, it was satisfying to see great man Nic Nat regarded as the #1 player in the universe.
Champion Data #1 Ranked Player
As a non-biased observer, it was satisfying to see great man Nic Nat regarded as the #1 player in the universe.
Champion Data #1 Ranked Player
- Mar 23, 2007
- 34,932
- 23,542
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Man U, Canucks and 49ers
- Jun 27, 2020
- 5,902
- 10,095
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Other Teams
- Cool Runnings
- Thread starter
- #99
Shooshing opposition supporters.
Virgin Dog
Cancelled
- Oct 29, 2017
- 9,733
- 20,647
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
He rates elite in goal accuracy (14.2 for the year) and contested marking (over 2 per game, when usually anything over 1 is considered around the elite mark). Champion Data tend to put emphasis on certain stats depending on your position. I can only assume goal accuracy and contested marking have to be the two most important stats in their model for determining elite KPFs
Similar threads
