Analysis Inexperience watch

[Ironmonger]

I thought I'd become immune to disappointment over the first few rounds, but it will really hurt if we lose this.

 

[dlanod]

So what's the figures with Rocky out?

 

[Cousin Jed]

Guess we can throw that excuse away now. Shit house watch?

 

[Last of the Roys]

Round 6 - Lions vs. Carlton at Etihad

• (0 to 10 games - Lions 3 vs. Blues 5)
• 0 to 24 games - Lions 5 vs. Blues 7
• 25 to 49 games - Lions 4 vs. Blues 4
• 50 to 99 games - Lions 7 vs. Blues 4
• 100 to 199 games - Lions 6 vs. Blues 6
• 200+ games - Lions 0 vs. Blues 1

Some extra stats from the lists I set up at the start of the year:

• Average games played - Lions 63.5 vs. Blues 78.1 (= -14.6)
• Average age - Lions 22.5 vs. Blues 24 (rough estimates from back in Jan)
• Average height - Lions 187.3cm vs. Blues 188.4cm
• Average weight - Lions 86kg vs. Blues 87.5kg

It is actually looking much better than I thought. Carlton actually have a lot of inexperienced players in their team, more than we do (5 with 10 games or less [vs. our 3] and 11 with less than 50 games experience [vs. our 9]). They also have players like Judd dragging up their average games played / age.

Bottom line is from the experience side of things there is no reason we can't be really competitive tomorrow. I am not exactly going to predict a Lions win, but I am a lot more hopeful of a reasonable display now than I was after the Gold Coast game (as long as there are no significant late changes like Rocky or Dayne Beams out).

 

[athensblue]

25 vs 27 ?

you'd thing we should win

 

[Cousin Jed]

Reading comprehension skills

 

[Albi_Mangler]

25 vs 27 ?

you'd thing we should win

the counts within brackets (0 to 10) are a breakdown within the band 0-24

 

[athensblue]

Ah...

ok, think we have 2 in the 200+

 

[athensblue]

apologies,

Simmo out

 

[POBT]

Haha.

 

[Skoob]

25 vs 27 ?

you'd thing we should win

Ah...

ok, think we have 2 in the 200+

apologies,

Simmo out

It's okay mate, we've got things covered over here, thanks.

 

[Last of the Roys]

Round 7 - Lions vs. Port at the Gabba

• (0 to 10 games - Lions 2 vs. Port 1)
• 0 to 24 games - Lions 5 vs. Port 2
• 25 to 49 games - Lions 4 vs. Port 2
• 50 to 99 games - Lions 7 vs. Port 7
• 100 to 199 games - Lions 6 vs. Port 10
• 200+ games - Lions 0 vs. Port 1

Some extra stats from the lists I set up at the start of the year:

• Average games played - Lions 64.5 vs. Port 107.3 (= -42.8)
• Average age - Lions 22.5 vs. Port 24.6 (rough estimates from back in Jan)
• Average height - Lions 187.3cm vs. Port 187.1cm
• Average weight - Lions 86kg vs. Port 84.8kg

It is not a pretty picture this week and worse than I had expected. We will average almost 43 games less experience per player than Port this week, our second worst differential all year only behind the North game (which was -64.3).

We will have 9 players with less than 50 games experience compared to Port's 4. At the other end we have 6 players with more than 100 games experience to Port's 11.

Anyway, I can't see us winning this one. I am just hoping it is not a huge blow-out so we don't lose our confidence after winning last week.

 

[PattyKwasagun]

Few interesting things there. Port aren't nearly as young as they try to claim they are clearly - 10 players with 100-199 games is proof of that.

Also interesting is the fact we're over 1kg heavier than them on average despite our younger side. The detraction often made of Port is that they're full of skinny outside runners - and that would back that up.

 

[jackess]

Few interesting things there. Port aren't nearly as young as they try to claim they are clearly - 10 players with 100-199 games is proof of that.

Also interesting is the fact we're over 1kg heavier than them on average despite our younger side. The detraction often made of Port is that they're full of skinny outside runners - and that would back that up.

Only 1 over 200 though and he'll only be around for 2 more games.

Cornes and Schulz are the only ones on their list over 28.

 

[James North]

Yeah the most telling stat for me is this one:

Average games played - Lions 64.5 vs. Port 107.3 (= -42.8)

This whole age thing is kinda like cars and km travelled.

 

[jackess]

Yeah the most telling stat for me is this one:

Average games played - Lions 64.5 vs. Port 107.3 (= -42.8)

This whole age thing is kinda like cars and km travelled.

Replace the 298 gamer with a debutant and the difference would only be about 30.

 

[PattyKwasagun]

Replace the 298 gamer with a debutant and the difference would only be about 30.

A 30 game difference on average is still very significant though.

 

[James North]

Replace the 298 gamer with a debutant and the difference would only be about 30.

50% more experience is still more experience.

 

[jackess]

50% more experience is still more experience.

Really? I might need this explained to me in a bit more detail.

 

[Lace Out]

Few interesting things there. Port aren't nearly as young as they try to claim they are clearly - 10 players with 100-199 games is proof of that.

Also interesting is the fact we're over 1kg heavier than them on average despite our younger side. The detraction often made of Port is that they're full of skinny outside runners - and that would back that up.

Greeny's footlongs distorting the averages..lol

 

[James North]

Really? I might need this explained to me in a bit more detail.

Your honesty is refreshing.

 

[Last of the Roys]

Just for the sake of accuracy - here are what the stats look like now Claye Beams (34 games experience) is out and Aish (24 games experience) is in:

Round 7 - Lions vs. Port at the Gabba

• (0 to 10 games - Lions 2 vs. Port 1)
• 0 to 24 games - Lions 6 vs. Port 2
• 25 to 49 games - Lions 3 vs. Port 2
• 50 to 99 games - Lions 7 vs. Port 7
• 100 to 199 games - Lions 6 vs. Port 10
• 200+ games - Lions 0 vs. Port 1

Some extra stats from the lists I set up at the start of the year:

• Average games played - Lions 64.0 vs. Port 107.3 (= -43.3)
• Average age - Lions 22.3 vs. Port 24.6 (rough estimates from back in Jan)
• Average height - Lions 187.3cm vs. Port 187.1cm
• Average weight - Lions 85.6kg vs. Port 84.8kg

By the way I just heard Sandy Roberts commentating the Bulldogs game say that the Dogs had 14 players in their team with less than 50 games experience against Freo. For those that don't know, the scores were even with 3 minutes to play, although Freo ended up winning by 13.

Anyway, our team with 9 players with less than 50 games experience suddenly doesn't look so bad (if only we could guarantee we played with the passion and intensity of the Bulldogs).

 

[Morgs_]

Will be interesting to see the games difference if Cooney, Chapman and Carlisle play on Sunday.

 

[Last of the Roys]

Well it was definitely one out of the box last week with our clearly less experience side in an upset win.

Using my old definition of having 3 more players in the team with less than 25 games experience than your opponent, we have had in the last 3+ years:

• 2012 = 1 upset win, 0 upset losses
• 2013 = 1 upset win, 0 upset losses
• 2014 = 3 upset wins, 0 upset losses
• 2015 so far = 1 upset win, 1 upset loss

The only upset loss under this criteria was the one against Gold Coast in round 5 this year.

Anyway, it would be a massive upset (in terms of relative experience) to beat the Bombers this week.

Round 8 - Lions vs. Essendon at Etihad

• (0 to 10 games - Lions 2 vs. Dons 0)
• 0 to 24 games - Lions 5 vs. Dons 2
• 25 to 49 games - Lions 5 vs. Dons 3
• 50 to 99 games - Lions 7 vs. Dons 6
• 100 to 199 games - Lions 5 vs. Dons 6
• 200+ games - Lions 0 vs. Dons 5

Some extra stats from the lists I set up at the start of the year:

• Average games played - Lions 60.7 vs. Essendon 121.3 (= -60.6)
• Average age - Lions 22.3 vs. Dons 25.5 (rough estimates from back in Jan)
• Average height - Lions 186.8cm vs. Dons 187.6cm
• Average weight - Lions 85.6kg vs. Dons 85.7kg

The difference in average games played is the second biggest all year, only just behind the North game. We have 10 players with less than 50 games experience to their 5. At the other end they have 11 players with more than 100 games experience to our 5 (including 5 Bombers having played more than 200 games to our 0).

Yeah Dustin Fletcher accounts for a big chunk of the Dons average game average (the difference between the two sides would be back to 40 if he was replaced with a first game player), but there is a very large disparity in experience levels right across the teams.

Of course strange things sometimes happen, but I am just hoping we stay competitive for the first 2-3 quarters.

(Edits in blue with Golby in and Redden out)

 

[a mayes ing]

Shouldnt have put a cheeky $10 on Lions to win. Oh well.