Opinion "Help me out where I need faith!" - The Statistical Data Thread

[NoddyHolder]

Westhoff vs (AFL 2016 average key forward)

Disposals: 16.5 (12.2)

Kicks: 9.9 (7.8)

Handballs: 6.8 (4.4)

Kick/Handball Ratio: 1.50 (1.88)

Retention Rate: 72.7% (69.1%)

Inside 50s: 2.9 (2.1)

Contested Possessions: 6.4 (5.6)

Uncontested Possessions: 10.1 (6.8)

Marks: 5.7 (5.2)

Contested Marks: 1.3 (1.6)

Ground Ball Gets: 3.3 (2.9)

1-on-1 win percentage: 31.5 (30.5)

Marks inside 50: 1.2 (2.0)

Ball Gets Inside 50: 0,6 (1.2)

Goals: 1.1 (1.7)

Behinds: 0.7 (1.0)

Accuracy %: 53.5 (55.6)

Score Assists: 1.1 (0.9)

Score Involvements: 5.4 (5.8)

Tackles: 3.2 (2.1)

Below average in contested marks, marks inside 50, ball gets inside 50, goals, accuracy, score involvements

Supports El Scorcho's argument

 

[Sellyme]

1
For example - there is no way that Adelaide 2016 was, at any stage, a better side than Port Adelaide 2004. But Elo rankings say they were. Why? Because the system doesn't account for injuries to players, which doesn't affect things so much in other sports because the variables in squad sizes aren't as large due to having a greater talent pool from which to draw from.

Elo rankings don't say that Adelaide 2016 was better than Port 2004, it says it was better than the competition average by a larger margin.

This is extremely important, because Elo rankings rely on there being a standardised average for the entire league. Arc uses 1500 as this average. If the entire league's average quality shifts, so will the actually quality represented by Elo scores. Think of a hypothetical Elo system in 1897 - it's not going to just "know" that all the teams then are actually awful and shift the average down a bunch to compensate, it can only compare against the contemporary opposition.

Since 2013 a number of teams have had their ratings significantly inflated because of teams like Melbourne, Gold Coast, GWS (until recently), and Brisbane being so catastrophically bad that the distance between #1 and last was higher than ever. If you look at the graph you can see that from Fitzroy's departure from the competition to 2011 no team did worse than Fitzroy, yet in the next 5 years, 5 different teams achieved that dubious feat. Those lost Elo points have to go somewhere.

There are way too many non-mathematical variables in this game to do some sort of statistical prediction of outcomes.

While this is true to an extent, statistical models reliably beat tippers, even those who proclaim to be "experts".

It's cool to look at retrospectively, but what they should also do is give weighting to the strength of the league itself for that year. But then it becomes subjective rather than objective.

I believe Arc has expressed interest in something of this ilk before, but you're looking in the wrong place for it - an Elo model is inherently unsuited for comparing teams of different eras directly to each other. What was done in the blog post was compare how teams fared against their contemporaries, which while barely distinguishable at a quick glance, is a very major difference.

To put this in perhaps a more elegant fashion:

Geelong received 44 Premiership Points in the 1897 VFL season. Port Adelaide received 40 Premiership Points in the 2016 AFL season. Making the conclusion that 1897 Geelong is therefore the better team just doesn't make sense in the bounds of what that point system is made to measure.

 

[Janus]

Below average in contested marks, marks inside 50, ball gets inside 50, goals, accuracy, score involvements

Supports El Scorcho's argument

Dixon was above average in contested marks (1.9 vs 1.6), average in marks inside 50 (1.9 vs 2.0), above average for ball gets inside 50 (1.4 vs 1.2), average for goals (1.7), above average for accuracy (61.2% vs 55.6%) and below average for score involvements (5.5 vs 5.6). Do you think Dixon had a great year as a key forward if those are the only stats that matter?

I say if you're going to defend Dixon for us having shitty ball movement and the worst inside 50 entry in the competition, then why doesn't Westhoff get the same pass? Just because he's not a traditional key forward, doesn't mean he's not a key forward.

 

[NoddyHolder]

Dixon was above average in contested marks (1.9 vs 1.6), average in marks inside 50 (1.9 vs 2.0), above average for ball gets inside 50 (1.4 vs 1.2), average for goals (1.7), above average for accuracy (61.2% vs 55.6%) and below average for score involvements (5.5 vs 5.6). Do you think Dixon had a great year as a key forward if those are the only stats that matter?

I say if you're going to defend Dixon for us having shitty ball movement and the worst inside 50 entry in the competition, then why doesn't Westhoff get the same pass? Just because he's not a traditional key forward, doesn't mean he's not a key forward.

I didn't say anything about Dixon. I was just refering to Westhoff.

 

[missionpossible]

So our coach does lie. He kept telling us Boak wasn't injured he was just out of form. No wonder people lost faith in Hinkley after being seen as the new messiah.

A rock and a hard place. If Hinkley comes out and says he is injured the media then go ahead and ask why play him which is fair but then they want the injury identified. The last thing a coach wants is next weeks opposition knowing that Boak has a sore Driver and is not fully fit.

I must say I don't understand the coming at Hinkley as hard as people did last year yet a lot of players got a free pass for there effort. More that their effort was reactive rather than proactive.

 

[Janus]

I didn't say anything about Dixon. I was just refering to Westhoff.

I was using the comparison to show that the stats you mention aren't all there is to being a key forward.

 

[PJ Power]

I don't know about stats, but I watched every minute of every game we played last year.

Byrne-Jones was better than below average even dismissing the fact it was his first year.

Westhoff was not elite whichever way you want to classify him. Neither was Wingard.

Gray was. Pittard was. Wines was close to it in the last half of the year.

Dixon was below average, but other people's eyes said different.

Most importantly we were a below average side that played without system, composure and often without creativity, variety or flair.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

A rock and a hard place. If Hinkley comes out and says he is injured the media then go ahead and ask why play him which is fair but then they want the injury identified. The last thing a coach wants is next weeks opposition knowing that Boak has a sore Driver and is not fully fit.

I must say I don't understand the coming at Hinkley as hard as people did last year yet a lot of players got a free pass for there effort. More that their effort was reactive rather than proactive.

Not having a go at you mission, but Choco gets a bad wrap for saying an 80% Shaun Burgoyne is better than a 100% of a fringe player. Hinkley's actions meant he believed the same thing as Choco, but didn't put it out there in the public, but is seen as being 100% honest. Sure I get you don't want to alert the oppo to Boak's injury, but they probably all knew what it was, as its hard to keep secrets for 8 weeks in the AFL. I reckon it sent a bad message to other players that the coach has favourites. If you are going to bullshit, then give him a week off and say he has an ankle problem when indeed it is a sore Driver.

 

[Janus]

A rock and a hard place. If Hinkley comes out and says he is injured the media then go ahead and ask why play him which is fair but then they want the injury identified. The last thing a coach wants is next weeks opposition knowing that Boak has a sore Driver and is not fully fit.

I must say I don't understand the coming at Hinkley as hard as people did last year yet a lot of players got a free pass for there effort. More that their effort was reactive rather than proactive.

I kept banging on about it all year - that you can't judge Hinkley when his players weren't doing the basic proactive defensive and offensive actions that are required for any team to be successful. We saw it for spurts during the year, even whole games - but it was like they had already given up in the year knowing that they'd still get a game because we didn't have anyone else pushing from underneath due to injuries and suspensions.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

I don't know about stats, but I watched every minute of every game we played last year.

Byrne-Jones was better than below average even dismissing the fact it was his first year.

Westhoff was not elite whichever way you want to classify him. Neither was Wingard.

Gray was. Pittard was. Wines was close to it in the last half of the year.

Dixon was below average, but other people's eyes said different.

Most importantly we were a below average side that played without system, composure and often without creativity, variety or flair.

That is in your eyes PJ. CD reckon anyone is elite if they are it the top 10% statistically for their position. Its that simple. Same with the other ratings just the percentage is different. Its a basic non emotional metric based on the numbers. You know its like the Standard and Poors Ratings - they just go by cold hard numbers. If a company has some big long term contract or big iron ore deposit and that contract or deposit value isn't on the balance sheet then, its ignored in their ratings calculation and the company is under rated.

Westhoff gets big numbers compared to other KPF's because he spends so much time outside the forward line. Sure the stats might say he spent 74% of time in the forward line, which I find hard to believe given the way presses are played, unless CD say forward line includes from the centre line forward not from CHF square line forward. But when he goes down back for 5 minutes in a quarter, usually its when the oppo have momentum and he might take 2 or 3 contested of important intercept marks and CD give him high points and he picks up a few kicks and handballs and racks up the CD points.

Westhoff should be in some utility category not KPF category because the way he plays skews his numbers as he gets big numbers doing non KPF things.

 

[Janus]

I don't know about stats, but I watched every minute of every game we played last year.

Byrne-Jones was better than below average even dismissing the fact it was his first year.

Westhoff was not elite whichever way you want to classify him. Neither was Wingard.

Gray was. Pittard was. Wines was close to it in the last half of the year.

Dixon was below average, but other people's eyes said different.

Most importantly we were a below average side that played without system, composure and often without creativity, variety or flair.

Byrne-Jones has intangibles that you can't measure statistically.

Westhoff and Wingard were elite statistically by the virtue of consistency of performance. Remember, these rankings are done over two years and Wingard had a great 2015 making All Australian.

Pittard and Wines will be rated as elite by the end of this year for the same reason.

Champion Data make mention of that lack of creativity - the complete lack of transition play that was a hallmark in 2014. For mine, it comes from three areas:

1) The oppositions desire to congest the ball and create stoppages, knowing that we didn't have a decent ruck that could effectively turn that into a strength

2) White getting injured, meaning all line breaking transition play was going to go through Polec

3) The ability of opposition coaches to then put more focus on Ebert to stop the transition from defensive mid before it started

 

[El_Scorcho]

I kept banging on about it all year - that you can't judge Hinkley when his players weren't doing the basic proactive defensive and offensive actions that are required for any team to be successful. We saw it for spurts during the year, even whole games - but it was like they had already given up in the year knowing that they'd still get a game because we didn't have anyone else pushing from underneath due to injuries and suspensions.

This is basically the core of the argument we have on here, but your chicken/egg is the wrong way around.

If a handful of players aren't doing the job, they can be dropped, and they were. Look at Polec who was repeatedly dropped for lazy football.

When the entire team bar a couple of superstars are underperforming, it's a coaching issues. Our team spent all of the last 2 seasons doing counterintuitive things that were'n't simply lazy behaviours, they issues with what they were being told to do week in week out and overall strategy.

Overall our defensive behaviours are very good, and any bad defending stats would be the result of us getting burned by turnovers.

 

[El_Scorcho]

And really, if we're calling Westhoff an elite forward, we're proving that statistics can be used to show anything and are ultimately meaningless.

Dixon's been with us for 1 season, which was a tough season with little support playing for the worst forward entry team in the AFL. He'll get better as he goes on.

Westhoff is a tall utility who is occasionally brilliant but can be often found on the side of a milk carton. Getting a lot of disposals by KPF standards doesn't make him an elite key forward, it makes him a capable but inconsistent utility.

 

[Janus]

When you come to the realisation that a utility is exactly what the modern key forward is you'll understand why they call him elite.

 

[missionpossible]

Not having a go at you mission, but Choco gets a bad wrap for saying an 80% Shaun Burgoyne is better than a 100% of a fringe player. Hinkley's actions meant he believed the same thing as Choco, but didn't put it out there in the public, but is seen as being 100% honest. Sure I get you don't want to alert the oppo to Boak's injury, but they probably all knew what it was, as its hard to keep secrets for 8 weeks in the AFL. I reckon it sent a bad message to other players that the coach has favourites. If you are going to bullshit, then give him a week off and say he has an ankle problem when indeed it is a sore Driver.

I did not think tou were having a go at me. This is a fair discussion. I think every coach at the selection table gets caught worrying to much about this week rather than looking at the season as a bigger picture. To be honest i would br looking to rest my best players once during the year to freshen them up. Hard to do but i would think a lot of our guys will be looking for one come round 18 if we are going to play finsls

 

[El_Scorcho]

When you come to the realisation that a utility is exactly what the modern key forward is you'll understand why they call him elite.

Every player on the park is a "utility" in modern football. Westhoff doesn't fit well into any defined position because he's style of play is more of that of a flanker or wingman who just happens to be 2m tall.

They call him elite because they've classified him as a key forward instead of a utility and are basing his quality on stats that he gets primarily when he's outside the forward 50. His elite number of disposals and tackles happen when he's playing on the wing as a linkman or in the ruck.

Westhoff has some elite attributes, but if you're calling him elite you're looking too closely at the stats and not closely enough at the game.

 

[Janus]

Every player on the park is a "utility" in modern football. Westhoff doesn't fit well into any defined position because he's style of play is more of that of a flanker or wingman who just happens to be 2m tall.

They call him elite because they've classified him as a key forward instead of a utility and are basing his quality on stats that he gets primarily when he's outside the forward 50. His elite number of disposals and tackles happen when he's playing on the wing as a linkman or in the ruck.

Westhoff has some elite attributes, but if you're calling him elite you're looking too closely at the stats and not closely enough at the game.

They don't have a utility position. It's key forward, general forward, mid-forward, mid, general defender, key defender, ruck.

 

[El_Scorcho]

They don't have a utility position. It's key forward, general forward, mid-forward, mid, general defender, key defender, ruck.

That'd be one of the many problems with their ratings.

I wonder how he'd rank if classified as a general forward, or mid forward. Both of those are closer to the position he plays.

 

[Byrons Firen]

Most importantly we were a below average side that played without system, composure

Hence we 'won' the clanger count. An oppo poster last year during one of our games said "geez you guys are excruciating to watch"
iirc we topped the stoppages count too. So much for run n gun.

losing Pittard and Trengove when they leave to find a club that actually has a clue.

Ken was all serious at the AGM about how committed the group was to atone for letting down the club. I hope that's not code for
more of the same i.e. frantic effort with naff all system to execute a workable, injury minimising, gameplan that sees you beating
the teams you should and winning more than 50% of close games. Even throw in a strong home ground advantage and not the 4(?)
wins at AO last year. A system/gameplan that does have the 'smarts' to not allow the oppo so many unanswered goals.
We have the cattle imo.

 

[Powerstufff]

"I looked, and there before me was a white horse! ....

You don't tell us any more about the horse.

 

[portly]

Hence we 'won' the clanger count. An oppo poster last year during one of our games said "geez you guys are excruciating to watch"
iirc we topped the stoppages count too. So much for run n gun.

Ken was all serious at the AGM about how committed the group was to atone for letting down the club. I hope that's not code for
more of the same i.e. frantic effort with naff all system to execute a workable, injury minimising, gameplan that sees you beating
the teams you should and winning more than 50% of close games. Even throw in a strong home ground advantage and not the 4(?)
wins at AO last year. A system/gameplan that does have the 'smarts' to not allow the oppo so many unanswered goals.
We have the cattle imo.

Love that last paragraph.

Before I forget, Ken said Ryder WILL ruck and that he was excited, or similar words, that he was back in the team.

And, re our China future, my impression was that he was not allowed to say anything but was confident that PAFC would be to the China fore for some time. But I don't always get the vibe readings right.

 

[TeeKray]

The other thing with Westhoff is that he's totally inconsistent - he'll put up a 25d/10m/3g game one week and then a 7d/3m/0g game the next. So his numbers average out pretty well but he does have a lot of average or poor games. He's a very unique player and stats don't tell the full story, for good or for bad.

 

[Sleezy]

To me it comes down to would i prefer player x's output or westhoff's? These are the key forwards that westhoff loses out to (in my mind):

Walker
Jenkins
Lynch (Adel)
Daniher
Lynch (GCS)
Cameron
Gunston
Roughead
Hogan
Riewoldt (Rich)
Membrey
Riewoldt (St K)
Franklin
Kennedy
Darling

Key forwards he is on par with:
Hooker (does he play forward? I honestly can't remember)
Hawkins
Bruce
Tippet

Key forwards who will overtake him very soon:
Schache
Moore
McCarthy
Wright
Patton
Brown
Boyd

Which puts him ahead of Vickery and kids. Not what i'd call an elite key forward.

 

[Janus]

 

[Steve Dore]

It's the vibe.