Coach maximum Discrepant Anomalies In Coach OpinionS Index(D.A.I.C.Os index)

[doppleganger]

Do they?

Show us the mid-forwards who were rated higher than him year by year.

2015-16

R.Gray, C.Wingard, E.Betts, C.Rioli, H.Bennel, T.Greene, Z.Williams, S.Sidebottom, B.Harvey, L.Breust, L.Daulhaus

Were small forwards who had more impact aka higher PlayEr RaTiNGS than Dusty

That is what happens when you are outside the top40 players in the league.

A low impact player according to PlaYer RaTinGs across his career was Dusty, but fluffed up by his coaches votes.

Laughable that a low impact player who outside top 40 player according to PlaYer RatiNGs in 2016 was 3rd in coaches votes.

What is the next biggest discrepancy for any top3 coaches vote finisher for Player RatInGs?

 

[Meteoric Rise]

2015-16

R.Gray, C.Wingard, E.Betts, C.Rioli, H.Bennel, T.Greene, Z.Williams, S.Sidebottom, B.Harvey, L.Breust, L.Daulhaus

Were small forwards who had more impact aka higher PlayEr RaTiNGS than Dusty

That is what happens when you are outside the top40 players in the league.

A low impact player according to PlaYer RaTinGs across his career was Dusty, but fluffed up by his coaches votes.

Laughable that a low impact player who outside top 40 player according to PlaYer RatiNGs in 2016 was 3rd in coaches votes.

What is the next biggest discrepancy for any top3 coaches vote finisher for Player RatInGs?

This is beside the point of the thread, and you are using poor bait here. And I wouldn't exactly call that a year by year list of the mid-forwards who hd higher player ratings than Dusty either, but who cares.

I will just say Dusty was a very strong vote getter & very high rating player in finals(the highest ever, easily) in home & away seasons, rating elite in all sorts of different ways eg of all AFL players, of forwards, of mid-forwards over many, many seasons. Nothing more need be said than that about Dusty.

As for you, congratulations on finding two seasons where his ratings didn't match his coaches votes, Brownlow votes, or AA selections. If you were really good you would go and find the seasons where it was the other way around.

 

[HairyO]

We have felt for a while that McRae has ruined the integrity of the AFLCA award. And now we have empirical evidence.

Well played OP.

 

[Mr Meow]

This is beside the point of the thread, and you are using poor bait here. And I wouldn't exactly call that a year by year list of the mid-forwards who hd higher player ratings than Dusty either, but who cares.

I will just say Dusty was a very strong vote getter & very high rating player in finals(the highest ever, easily) in home & away seasons, rating elite in all sorts of different ways eg of all AFL players, of forwards, of mid-forwards over many, many seasons. Nothing more need be said than that about Dusty.

As for you, congratulations on finding two seasons where his ratings didn't match his coaches votes, Brownlow votes, or AA selections. If you were really good you would go and find the seasons where it was the other way around.

I think if anything we've uncovered some more controversial coaches votes tallies using doppy's method that itself uses your favourite metric: player ratings. Seems Dusty has been inflated several times.

 

[SC_Power]

We do know who gives the votes in the Brownlow, of course we do. The match field umpires(who are known entities) meet post-game and collectively agree the votes is my understanding.

The AFLPA we do not know and in my case couldn't care less.

Media awards I don't follow but historically at least some of them we have been told which journo or "expert" cast the votes.

Norm Smith Medal we know exactly who votes for who, all 5 judges are listed individually. This of course is the most similar to the Coaches vote regime, where 2 parties each individully and separately judge the votes without influencing each other - so there is room for disparity in the votes.

As for banging on a non-existent drum, several posters on this thread alone have called for disclosure as to who is voting for who. So the drum exists outside of my banging on it.

Bit of a room of mirrors post from you on the whole.

Yeah, well played, you win of course, the AFLCA is clearly a corrupt system designed to give Nick Daicos an extra award where he clearly didn’t earn it and doesn’t deserve it.

The Brownlow is an umpires award. But even though a different group of people to coaches somehow produce a similar result, it supports your facts of coaching bias.
AFLPA is an award you don’t care about, because it doesn’t suit your bias theory, even though they produce a similar result.
Media awards you don’t follow, even though they produce a similar result.

And as for this thread, I’m sure I can find several threads on this forum on just about any topic and find people who agree with each OP, doesn’t mean that they are right.

But of course, ultimately it’s your thread and you are king in it, so keep banging. I’ll leave you with your facts theories.

 

[doppleganger]

This is beside the point of the thread, and you are using poor bait here. And I wouldn't exactly call that a year by year list of the mid-forwards who hd higher player ratings than Dusty either, but who cares.

Discrepant Anomalies In Coach OpinionS is what your thread is about.

You and the other Richmond bloke were running with PLaYeR RaTinG anomalies.

The horror of being top 6 in coaches votes and not being top 6 in PlaYer RatInGs, receiving coaches votes when not in top5 players as per PlaYEr RaTiNGs.

Dusty 2016 - 3rd in coaches votes, but not even Top 40 in avg PLayEr RatInGs.

Does anyone get near 2016 Dusty in terms of coach over-fluffing of a player who had very little impact on games??

Would be tough to find a bigger coaching opinion anomaly.

 

[PhatBoy]

I just hope one of our major political parties can address this in the lead up to the election. And if they don’t, well maybe Donald will.

 

[Mr Meow]

Thread and premise has been suitably critiqued, mocked and ripped to shreds.

I think we can ready ourselves for MRs next wild idea.

 

[Cyclops]

We have felt for a while that McRae has ruined the integrity of the AFLCA award. And now we have empirical evidence.

Well played OP.

"We"? Do you mean down at the Home?

 

[Dtennent94]

I think MR’s findings should be submitted to the AFL so they can strip Daicos of his awards and sack McRae for bringing the game into disrepute and dock Collingwood of any draft picks for the next two years so that they miss out on McGuane.

Then fine the Pies for not complying with the 2-in-4-years 1st round draft pick rule.

 

[HairyO]

"We"? Do you mean down at the Home?

When hurt feelings matter more than empirical evidence...

 

[Cyclops]

When hurt feelings matter more than empirical evidence...

Indeed, but you'll get over it.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Discrepant Anomalies In Coach OpinionS is what your thread is about.

You and the other Richmond bloke were running with PLaYeR RaTinG anomalies.

The horror of being top 6 in coaches votes and not being top 6 in PlaYer RatInGs, receiving coaches votes when not in top5 players as per PlaYEr RaTiNGs.

Dusty 2016 - 3rd in coaches votes, but not even Top 40 in avg PLayEr RatInGs.

Does anyone get near 2016 Dusty in terms of coach over-fluffing of a player who had very little impact on games??

Would be tough to find a bigger coaching opinion anomaly.

Just so nobody gets confused bout where you stand...the player ratings are credible in your opinion, or not?

 

[Lance Uppercut]

this thread is a real Fly in the ointment

 

[Lance Uppercut]

Thread and premise has been suitably critiqued, mocked and ripped to shreds.

disagree, BF needs more thoughtful analysis like this

 

[caloschwaby]

Will never cease to be hilarious how our club finds new, innovative ways to boil opposition' piss

 

[GastevsBeard]

A coaches award determined strictly by opposition coaches votes would be interesting

Especially doing it retrospectively where it can’t be gamed

 

[doppleganger]

Just so nobody gets confused bout where you stand...the player ratings are credible in your opinion, or not?

The equity approach methodology of player ratings are an enhancement to supercoach scores which are enhancement on raw descriptive stats.

It is you and your Richmond mate who decided to focus on instances where player ratings disagreed with coaches votes.

Has any other player come close to Dusty 2016 level of discrepancy between player ratings and coaches opinion?

 

[Meteoric Rise]

The equity approach methodology of player ratings are an enhancement to supercoach scores which are enhancement on raw descriptive stats.

It is you and your Richmond mate who decided to focus on instances where player ratings disagreed with coaches votes.

Has any other player come close to Dusty 2016 level of discrepancy between player ratings and coaches opinion?

Find out & report back if you fancy it. Otherwise, gagf.

 

[Broar]

Genuine question, why are Pies supporters defending Fly here? Everyone knows Daicos is a good player but by inflating his votes it also decreases his teammates as well. I can't imagine it would be good for moral knowing no matter how well you perform player x will almost always come out on top regardless of his performance.

Coming from the media or fans is one thing but it must be disheartening when your coach doesn't give fair recognition or praise.

 

[doppleganger]

Find out & report back if you fancy it. Otherwise, gagf.

So take it that means Dusty 2016 as being clearly the biggest anomaly between impact and coaches opinion.

 

[Mr Meow]

So take it that means Dusty 2016 as being clearly the biggest anomaly between impact and coaches opinion.

Your research has been appreciated and of a higher objective standard than the mess MR put together. Good work.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

So take it that means Dusty 2016 as being clearly the biggest anomaly between impact and coaches opinion.

Thanks, the world was waiting expectantly for your take on it.

 

[Lockyer24]

Genuine question, why are Pies supporters defending Fly here? Everyone knows Daicos is a good player but by inflating his votes it also decreases his teammates as well. I can't imagine it would be good for moral knowing no matter how well you perform player x will almost always come out on top regardless of his performance.

Coming from the media or fans is one thing but it must be disheartening when your coach doesn't give fair recognition or praise.

As someone pointed out, there is manipulation on both sides of the coin.

It happens in the Brownlow too.

Now that’s something people should be talking about. The coaches and players awards are far more accurate.

 

[Vankri]

Well this is a disaster of a thread with very flawed data analysis.

First and foremost the entire premise of it is silly because the breakdown per coach is unknown. It’s all well and good to try any guess it, but it remains a guess nonetheless.

The way around it seems to be calculating ‘maximum discrepancy’ which is ridiculous because out of all the potential vote combinations that surely is the absolute least likely to have happened because it takes both the high extreme for one coach and the low extreme for the other. So all it provides is the number differential for the least probable scenario. It’s not a useful metric to compare between players of a given season nor between seasons.

I think Mr Meow pointed it out first but the OP is inadvertently proving the opposite of his conclusion. Votes are in fact incredibly close if the biggest discrepancy for players sits at 20 odd votes. Again I must insist, based on a guess of the breakdown and on the most extreme differential possible. That is literally 4 games of potential difference if say a player would randomly get 5 votes from his coach and zero from 4 others.

Though of course the biased premise of the thread was clear when it was pointed out in the OP that the discrepancy last year for Nick is corroborated with not finishing top 6 in ‘player ratings’. I don’t know anyone serious that doesn’t have Nick as one of their top 5 players of 2024. That includes coaches, umps, other players as per awards and pretty much any footy follower with half a brain.

Funnier still are the Carlton posters trying to make a point of the R21 vote last year where Voss gave Nick no votes and Fly 5. I have no doubt funny games get played but think they were on Voss’ side to get his man Cripps up. Now if this is supposed to show bias on Fly’s side, let’s just recall that he essentially gave 5 votes to his best midfielder that day, from the winning team which is a very common thing to do, who had:

• our most disposals (28)
• our most contested possessions (15)
• our most and equal game high tackles (6)
• our most intercepts (7)
• our most i50s (7)
• our second most clearances (7)
• our most meters gained (471)
• add to that a goal, a goal assist and second most pressure acts (21)

This paints a picture that is much, much closer to a 5 vote game than it is to a nil.

Everyone can make their own conclusion from there. I don’t mind if Fly finds himself under scrutiny this year but for one, it didn’t matter in 2024 where Nick deserved the award, and for two you have to apply that same scrutiny to other coaches.