Analysis Some data on Crows avg games experience from 23/24

[Carmo]

In the first pic below is a table of avg games experience differential and our win loss performance.
The first row in the table is our results when we are more experienced than the opposition, ie our average games played is 1-10 games higher than our opposition. In this we have won 4 out of the 5 times in 23/24 combined.

You can see that when we're either more experienced, or within 20 games of our oppo then we perform very well, winning 2 out 3 (see the first total line).

You can also see that when we play teams whose avg games played is more than 20 higher than our own, we perform really poorly, losing typically 4 out of every 5 we play(see second total line).



In the pic below the top pic shows our average games played for 23 and 24 seasons. The first gap is the bye in 23 and the second one is a gap I left to split the 23 season and 24 season thus far. The bottom graph shows the experience differential versus our oppo for the same games.

You can see that, kinda as expected with a young team that we were putting on roughly a game of experience per round pretty consistently across 23. Whereas in 24 we've been all over the place and for quite a few rounds getting less experienced. That said, if you look at the differentials, you can see a decrease across 23 and 24 isn't that dissimilar to late 23.

 

[WetCrow1991]

Ok Matthew.

 

[Ciao Giacomo]

What an inconvenient truth Carmo.

Some have assured us again and again that we will have more chance of winning if we get rid of every player 30+ years of age.

 

[Samcro24]

What an inconvenient truth Carmo.

The Mob/Cartel have assured us again and again that we will have more chance of winning if we get rid of every player 30+ years of age.

It’s almost as though we should be getting games into young talented players with upside. So that when they are senior players we might actually contend.

 

[rabidcrow]

The best teams are the most experienced teams - that has been a fact for a number of years

That’s why I’m a rebuild you pick a core group to run with (high draft picks, existing experience plus some recruits) to pump games as a group together for a few years to build an experienced group

Check Brisbanes list at the moment - and maybe they are going over the top now - but generally playing with 12/13 guys in excess of 140 games and another 4-5 with 90 plus each week

Even Gold Coast usually have 12 100 gamers playing - we have 8 on our list


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Carmo]

What an inconvenient truth Carmo.

The Mob/Cartel have assured us again and again that we will have more chance of winning if we get rid of every player 30+ years of age.

And that we should play zero gamers versus putting the heat on to those already with 20-100 games to perform at the level.

 

[Samcro24]

No wonder we’re going all in on Dangerfield. Maybe we can get buddy out of retirement. Tell Sloaney to Htfu. It’s just an eye, he has another one.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Yep, people want talented rookies picked because they think it would make us instantly awesome and we'd win the flag

 

[NSolis]

The best teams are the most experienced teams - that has been a fact for a number of years

That’s why I’m a rebuild you pick a core group to run with (high draft picks, existing experience plus some recruits) to pump games as a group together for a few years to build an experienced group

Check Brisbanes list at the moment - and maybe they are going over the top now - but generally playing with 12/13 guys in excess of 140 games and another 4-5 with 90 plus each week

Even Gold Coast usually have 12 100 gamers playing - we have 8 on our list


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

The best teams are usually experienced but that's also because teams that aren't performing tend to get rid of their experienced players. Obviously you can't just target experience as a value.

What is definitely true is that young teams tend to struggle, so you can't just pick 22 kids each week unless you want to consistently get pumped by 15 goals. That's certainly part of the story with why the club values experience and continuity, and it's not overly surprising that we struggle when the team is less experienced, particularly when you consider who would be missing in those games.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

It’s almost as though we should be getting games into young talented players with upside. So that when they are senior players we might actually contend.

Yep, rebuilds should be about prioritising our best young talent with a core of experienced players to show the way.

We have mixed result when it comes to this philosophy.

We prioritised the likes of Soligo, Rachele & Max.

Meanwhile the likes of Worrell, Nankervis & Curtin were not expedited.

There is also the issue of not entrusting our young midfielders with enough midfield time v forward line.

 

[jackster83]

The best teams are the most experienced teams - that has been a fact for a number of years

That’s why I’m a rebuild you pick a core group to run with (high draft picks, existing experience plus some recruits) to pump games as a group together for a few years to build an experienced group

Check Brisbanes list at the moment - and maybe they are going over the top now - but generally playing with 12/13 guys in excess of 140 games and another 4-5 with 90 plus each week

Even Gold Coast usually have 12 100 gamers playing - we have 8 on our list


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

Yep.

Our problem is the lack of quality in the 50-150 game mark. Very little to show for the 2014-2019 drafts which is where most of our 22 should be coming from. It also shows in the lack of standout leadership group candidates (apologies to Dawson).

The next group (Max, Worrell, Soligo, Rachele and hopefully Thilthorpe) looks better.

 

[Sanders]

The best teams are usually experienced but that's also because teams that aren't performing tend to get rid of their experienced players. Obviously you can't just target experience as a value.

It should be obvious, but not to everyone…

 

[Samcro24]

Yep, rebuilds should be about prioritising our best young talent with a core of experienced players to show the way.

We have mixed result when it comes to this philosophy.

We prioritised the likes of Soligo, Rachele & Max.

Meanwhile the likes of Worrell, Nankervis & Curtin were not expedited.

There is also the issue of not entrusting our young midfielders with enough midfield time v forward line.

And you can’t just play experience for experience sake. Like increasing the games played average magically makes you a better side.

Sometimes they become a liability cough*sloaney*cough

 

[NSolis]

Yep, rebuilds should be about prioritising our best young talent with a core of experienced players to show the way.

We have mixed result when it comes to this philosophy.

We prioritised the likes of Soligo, Rachele & Max.

Meanwhile the likes of Worrell, Nankervis & Curtin were not expedited.

There is also the issue of not entrusting our young midfielders with enough midfield time v forward line.

Curtin has already gone into the bucket of 'the club didn't play him soon enough' huh?

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Curtin has already gone into the bucket of 'the club didn't play him soon enough' huh?

Well it took us to round 8!

Meanwhile nearly all other early picks had already played.

He's physically more ready than most 1st year players... having played senior football last year.

Sure he was injured early, but we were not exactly in a rush to bring in a very exciting highly talented player.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

And you can’t just play experience for experience sake. Like increasing the games played average magically makes you a better side.

Sometimes they become a liability cough*sloaney*cough

We have a habit of persisting with experienced players who have a block of poor games... yet don't apply these same principles to younger players.

Smith is the prime example this year, who should have been dropped or rested. Yet we played him injured.

We did the same with Tex when he couldn't bend over & some even thought his time was at an end he was that bad... when it was just our moronic selection committee who desperately played an injured player yet again.

 

[Samcro24]

It should be obvious, but not to everyone…

Some can’t handle the truth

 

[NSolis]

Well it took us to round 8!

Meanwhile nearly all other early picks had already played.

He's physically more ready than most 1st year players... having played senior football last year.

Sure he was injured early, but we were not exactly in a rush to bring in a very exciting highly talented player.

Fair enough, I think the injury mattered quite a bit and he needed a couple of games to find his feet, don't think they waited too long at all. Certainly it's not a Worrell type situation where he had to kick the door down for ages.

But they didn't rush him in as a top priority either.

 

[Carmo]

Yep, people want talented rookies picked because they think it would make us instantly awesome and we'd win the flag

Oh, I thought it was because losing 20 games a year was guaranteed to instill confidence in young players and bring success. Silly me.

 

[Samcro24]

But they didn't rush him in as a top priority either.

Big wraps and psychically ready, should be learning on the job. Wasted in the 2s.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Big wraps and psychically ready, should be learning on the job. Wasted in the 2s.

Should have been an immediate debut once over his injury concerns.

Just have to prioritise top end talent.

Meanwhile how many games are we getting into Murphy & McHenry...

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Oh, I thought it was because losing 20 games a year was guaranteed to instill confidence in young players and bring success. Silly me.

Yep, so don't run an ageing, crap team into the ground, debut minimal youngsters along the way and have to start from ground zero

Then still find ways to drip feed games into your better youngsters, meaning that you spend as long as possible as an inexperienced team

So pretty much do everything the opposite of how we've done it

 

[Ciao Giacomo]

Yep, so don't run an ageing, crap team into the ground, debut minimal youngsters along the way and have to start from ground zero.

So pretty much do everything the opposite of how we've done it

Riddle me this Drugs.

1) Which team has had the most players debut since 2020?

2) Which team has had the lowest games played by 100+ game players since 2020?

3) Which team has given the most games to players with less than 50 games experience since 2020?*


*Hint; This team has given more than 30% more games to sub 50 gamers compared to the second highest team on the list.

That’s the inconvenient thing about facts, you can check them.

 

[George Kramer]

No one’s saying get rid of good experienced players, but keeping players just because they are experienced is pointless if they are past it or not that good to begin with.

Experienced players aren’t immune to making mistakes, it gets worse when the games gone past them. Sloane started well last year and went downhill fast and was a liability.

Does Murphy’s experience whilst he stinks it up get us anywhere?

Nicks changed our game plan because he didn’t trust our young defence and wanted to protect them, he didn’t believe we could defend our attacking play. That cost us and our young defence has proven to be our best line this year given the level of inside 50s.

 

[George Kramer]

Riddle me this Drugs.

1) Which team has had the most players debut since 2020?

2) Which team has had the lowest games played by 100+ game players since 2020?

3) Which team has given the most games to players with less than 50 games experience since 2020?*


*Hint; This team has given more than 30% more games to sub 50 gamers compared to the second highest team on the list.

That’s the inconvenient thing about facts, you can check them.

Pretty sure you’ve missed his point, he’s talking before our rebuild when we played oldies and didn’t develop much, hence when we purged we lacked experience.