Autopsy Dogs 60 defeated by Swans 79 - Rd 17

Remove this Banner Ad

the dog's kennel said:
So Hannan was our 3rd highest rated player and Lewis Young our 4th highest rated player. Who picked that!

By contrast, I certainly picked that Weightman would be near zero, and Bruce would be in negative ratings territory.


It seems every week Bont has more strapping, and is looking less fluent in his loping around. I wonder if he's carrying a quiet injury. EDIT: I see after the post I replied to a few other people speculated about Bont being injured. Sorry for the repetition.
Click to expand...
Not sure how they worked out that Hannan was our 3rd best - the Hun had him as 13th which was harsh on Keath and Hunter below him. Lewy was 12th

1626161943187.png
 

Log in to remove this ad.

So I’m assuming that the umpires did a good job because the swans won?
 
Golden_6 said:
Does anyone have any insight on why Hannan is rated so high? Statistically he had a poor game. 8 touches, 5 tackles, 3 score involvements. I would love to know how he is so high.
Click to expand...
In his extensive photo album Hannan has some pictures of the CD boffins.
 
Golden_6 said:
Does anyone have any insight on why Hannan is rated so high? Statistically he had a poor game. 8 touches, 5 tackles, 3 score involvements. I would love to know how he is so high.
Click to expand...
I’m a SuperCoach/Champion Data guy but these rankings are always questionable. I remember last year Jake Riccardi kicked 4 in his first or second game and they had him ranked near the bottom
 
Golden_6 said:
Does anyone have any insight on why Hannan is rated so high? Statistically he had a poor game. 8 touches, 5 tackles, 3 score involvements. I would love to know how he is so high.
Click to expand...
It does seem odd doesn't it. I looked at his output in this game compared to previous and there's nothing really that's jumping out at me about this game.

His previous best rated game this year was vs the Saints where he had 7 more disposals, kicked a goal, 5 more score involvements and about 100m extra meters gained. The only noticeable deficiency is in disposal efficiency.

Measurev Swansv Saints
Ranking Points1210.9
Disposals815
De%75%66%
Metres Gained253351
Marks24
Goals01
Score Involvement38
Tackles54

Strange.
 
There must be something about the game the model liked though, it's not like it picks and chooses. Just not easily identifiable.

There has been analysis done by someone at the Stats board that correlated in game statistics to ranking points for each position

1626234621076.png

These stats are the ones most highly correlated to the ranking points for medium forwards. He was worse in all 5 of those categories comparing Swans/Saints games.
 
Last edited:
Golden_6 said:
Does anyone have any insight on why Hannan is rated so high? Statistically he had a poor game. 8 touches, 5 tackles, 3 score involvements. I would love to know how he is so high.
Click to expand...

Because champion data is utter bullsh!t 🤷🏼‍♂️
 
Golden_6 said:
Does anyone have any insight on why Hannan is rated so high? Statistically he had a poor game. 8 touches, 5 tackles, 3 score involvements. I would love to know how he is so high.
Click to expand...
Some further info...

1626243404066.png

So it's likely to do with the effect of his possessions increasing the likelihood of scoring relative to others.

Also his Player Ratings points of 12 for this game is actually pretty low.... he's ranked 9th in this game as it was a generally low rated game all round. Usually 12 rating points has you around 13th best in the game and sometimes as low as 20th.
 
BEaston said:
Some further info...

View attachment 1177503

So it's likely to do with the effect of his possessions increasing the likelihood of scoring relative to others.

Also his Player Ratings points of 12 for this game is actually pretty low.... he's ranked 9th in this game as it was a generally low rated game all round. Usually 12 rating points has you around 13th best in the game and sometimes as low as 20th.
Click to expand...
The player ratings points can only really look at position on the ground, pressure and the nature of the ground.

Not many players actually execute 5 kicks a game to the topish of the goal square.

We can all see with our eyes that the kicks weren't as valuable as the "average" top of the square kick, those stats can't.

Fair enough. The stats also can't analyse the indirect responsibility he had regarding Swans' dominant wing and half-back players, including Dawson's BOG ground and the fact that his direct wing opponent in Florent took those two sideways kick marks I50 early in the game.
 
As disappointing as Sunday was, I reckon the silver lining was the continued sound performance of our defensive group.

Given our horrid ball movement and regular turnovers, keeping Sydney to 11 goals was a great result.

In our 4 losses this year, we have been well exposed through the midfield, yet kept our opponents to 11, 12, 13 and 11 goals respectively. They are totals that kept us as a winning chance against the odds.

On the weekend if we had've kicked 12.8 rather than 8.12 we would've been wholly undeserved winners.

When you consider that the bulk of Sydney goals were kicked by mids, our defenders really couldn't have done much more.

I bleat on about Keath but what a player, aside from beating the oppositions best kpf, as he always does, he is constantly organising and managing

With Williams, Duryea, Cordy and Dale (all with some poor disposal on the weekend admittedly) forming a solid support unit, Richards fitting in, Daniel and Young slotting in as required, and Crozier, Wood and Gardner as viable replacement options, I feel like our defensive unit is looking a lot more solid coming into finals than most give it credit for.
 
Last edited:

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Dry Rot said:
Swans will win their first semi, maybe the next week too.

Bookmark it.
Click to expand...
When intensity goes up in finals with the Swans inability to win it at the source it will bring them undone.
We didn't have anyone who could take a mark forward of centre makes a huge difference. Naughts in IMO would have changed the whole complexion of the game
 
Munnez said:
When intensity goes up in finals with the Swans inability to win it at the source it will bring them undone.
We didn't have anyone who could take a mark forward of centre makes a huge difference. Naughts in IMO would have changed the whole complexion of the game
Click to expand...

Naughton plays and the Bulldogs win, simple as that.
 
Boristown said:
Naughton plays and the Bulldogs win, simple as that.
Click to expand...
Sydney were close to full strength, while we're missing half our spine and two A-grade midfielders, along with Wood and Vandermeer. Melbourne are yet to truly put away a good side despite having a near full best 22. Any of Brisbane, Dogs or Geelong get their full 22 together for finals and the likes of Sydney and Melbourne won't make the grand final imo. Plus it's pretty clearly established by now that Port are a complete non-factor when facing good sides
 
Virgin Dog said:
Sydney were close to full strength, while we're missing half our spine and two A-grade midfielders, along with Wood and Vandermeer. Melbourne are yet to truly put away a good side despite having a near full best 22. Any of Brisbane, Dogs or Geelong get their full 22 together for finals and the likes of Sydney and Melbourne won't make the grand final imo. Plus it's pretty clearly established by now that Port are a complete non-factor when facing good sides
Click to expand...

I reckon the competition has forgotten how good Dunkley was before injury, he was the Dogs 2nd best player behind Bont up until then.

If he can recapture that form, that midfield should steamroll sides again.
 
Boristown said:
I reckon the competition has forgotten how good Dunkley was before injury, he was the Dogs 2nd best player behind Bont up until then.

If he can recapture that form, that midfield should steamroll sides again.
Click to expand...
We might be counting too much on him getting back to form quickly :(
 
Interesting to note that Sydney is still often being labelled using terms like "young", "inexperienced", "rebuilding", etc. Looking at the age/experience of the sides fielded, noting we were missing Dunkley and Naughton who would are both younger and less experienced than our average below:

1626415366931.png

Even if you account for the fact Kennedy and Buddy bring their averages up, taking them out while also taking out Libba and Bruce from our end, and you end up with two teams of the same age, but Sydney's average games closer to 88, while ours ends up around 83.5. Our profile is still younger and less experienced, AND we were missing close to a third of our best 22 while theirs was close to full fitness. I can't understand how you could label Sydney a rebuilding side - all they've done is a minor reset like we did, bringing in some young players but not going the full rebuild route that teams like North, Hawks and Freo did/are doing.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Autopsy Dogs 60 defeated by Swans 79 - Rd 17

Similar threads

Kermit
MVP Ching Rd 20: Dog d Swans
Replies
17
Views
529
Fossie 32
Fossie 32
Kermit
MVP Ching Rd 11: Dogs def by Swans
Replies
15
Views
700
Snarls Barkley
Snarls Barkley
BulldogMuscle
Autopsy Hawks defeat Dogs elimination final.
21 22 23 24 25
Replies
611
Views
31K
Mr. Walker
Mr. Walker
Kermit
MVP Ching Rd 24: Dogs d GWS
Replies
16
Views
597
Fossie 32
Fossie 32
Kermit
MVP Ching Rd 23: Dogs d Roos
Replies
16
Views
508
charcoalchicken
charcoalchicken
Kermit
MVP Ching Rd 22: Crows d Dogs
Replies
8
Views
450
Walsh Bay
Walsh Bay
dogwatch
MVP Ching Rd 17 v Port
Replies
9
Views
461
Fossie 32
Fossie 32

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top