Analysis The Rebuilds of Geelong and Richmond and their Future Prospects

[Footy Smarts]

Well at least we aren’t talking about how Tanners the second coming of Christ anymore Smarts! Thanks for showing interest in all my posts, at least I know someone’s reading all of them
Enjoy your evening bud.

I'll make sure I keep an eye out for your posts whenever I need a good laugh. Thanks for your contribution.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Ratingz

He contributed 8 less goals total than the five-years-older Fritsch, playing as his side’s 3rd, and sometimes 4th forward, from two less total home and away games and with 3 of the games he did play adding up to a total of around three-quarters of football.

Spin it any way you want. All that does is just kick the player ratings in the dick yet again.

What's comparing him to Fritsch got to do with anything? Fritsch essentially had his worst year in the AFL, and was playing in a mess of a forward line, in a team struggling with midfield issues as well. Compare him with someone like Jack Gunston in a similar role at 22 in a high scoring top 4 team and see how he comes off. Or Tim Membrey as a 22yo in a similar role for a weak St Kilda team. Henry is not even at the races compared to those guys.

And kicking X goals less or more doesn't itself tell you how well a forward has played, there is a lot more to playing forward than just how many goals you kick....for most forwards anyway.

I mean you are denigrating player ratings, which take into account everything a player does, and next minute you are yourself making sweeping judgements based solely on how many goals a player has kicked.

 

[Rich01]

I'll make sure I keep an eye out for your posts whenever I need a good laugh. Thanks for your contribution.

All good, always know you what makes you bite Smarts. Keep up with that CBA stat. We may be able to pick a Brownlow winner next year by that stat the way you’ve been spruiking it.

And yeah, Guthrie lol.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Yep. Except when injured (remember them? Even some Geelong players have them!) he's currently a solid number 4 mid.

Let's see how he improves. Maybe you'll be as right about Bruhn as you were about Holmes. Is Tom Brown still the better footballer???

Brown has better skills than Holmes. Holmes is a much better athlete. Holmes is of course better overall right now, but don't be surprised if Brown becomes a very highly rated player when he builds his tank.

Bruhn's ratings etc obviously affected by his low time on ground in 2024, but even so, he hasn't had much of a season with 3 coaches votes from 9 games above 80% time on ground.

 

[PhatBoy]

What's comparing him to Fritsch got to do with anything? Fritsch essentially had his worst year in the AFL, and was playing in a mess of a forward line, in a team struggling with midfield issues as well. Compare him with someone like Jack Gunston in a similar role at 22 in a high scoring top 4 team and see how he comes off. Or Tim Membrey as a 22yo in a similar role for a weak St Kilda team. Henry is not even at the races compared to those guys.

And kicking X goals less or more doesn't itself tell you how well a forward has played, there is a lot more to playing forward than just how many goals you kick....for most forwards anyway.

I mean you are denigrating player ratings, which take into account everything a player does, and next minute you are yourself making sweeping judgements based solely on how many goals a player has kicked.

Because people actually gave Fritsch, from the general feeling I got anyway, a decent pass for his year. He’s a player with reasonable pedigree, he’s far more experienced, and he was basically his team’s number one avenue to goal even if he’s not a traditional key forward.

Jack Gunston is one of the greatest medium forwards of the last 30 years who played in a dynasty side with Sam Mitchell, Shaun Burgoyne, Jordan Lewis, Isaac Smith, Luke Hodge, Tom Mitchell for a while, sending it down his throat

Membrey had a great start to his career. No argument.

I’m denigrating player ratings because they’re an algorithm. They DONT take into account everything a player does. They take into account stats mate. That’s it. They’re numbers on a page. They give no context to anything at all. Keep telling yourself there’s something beyond that in them.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Because people actually gave Fritsch, from the general feeling I got anyway, a decent pass for his year. He’s a player with reasonable pedigree, he’s far more experienced, and he was basically his team’s number one avenue to goal even if he’s not a traditional key forward.

Jack Gunston is one of the greatest medium forwards of the last 30 years who played in a dynasty side with Sam Mitchell, Shaun Burgoyne, Jordan Lewis, Isaac Smith, Luke Hodge, Tom Mitchell for a while, sending it down his throat

Membrey had a great start to his career. No argument.

I’m denigrating player ratings because they’re an algorithm. They DONT take into account everything a player does. They take into account stats mate. That’s it. They’re numbers on a page. They give no context to anything at all. Keep telling yourself there’s something beyond that in them.

What are football stats other than "what a player does?" They are merely a record of whatever a player does during a match. Without them to guide us we might be fooled into thinking someone like Henry is the 22nd most valuable forward in the AFL because he has kicked the 22nd most goals for the season. In fact what is a player's total goals other than a statistic like any other?

 

[PhatBoy]

What are football stats other than "what a player does?" They are merely a record of whatever a player does during a match. Without them to guide us we might be fooled into thinking someone like Henry is the 22nd most valuable forward in the AFL because he has kicked the 22nd most goals for the season. In fact what is a player's total goals other than a statistic like any other?

Tom Hawkins kicked 3.3 in the 2011 grand final on paper.

He busted the game apart in reality and ripped it away from Collingwood.

For someone who injects himself with whatever kool aid the Punt Road News sends out in its monthly subscribers survival kit, you sure don’t seem to actually bother watching much football or ever actually apply any situational context to it.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Tom Hawkins kicked 3.3 in the 2011 grand final on paper.

He busted the game apart in reality and ripped it away from Collingwood.

For someone who injects himself with whatever kool aid the Punt Road News sends out in its monthly subscribers survival kit, you sure don’t seem to actually bother watching much football or ever actually apply any situational context to it.

You seem to be labouring under the illusion that I think Player Ratings are a precise and infallible guide to player merit in exact order. No system of rating players will ever achieve that. It is a readily quotable and credibly compiled system that takes into account more than you or I could ever see just from watching casually. So it is a useful guide.

Hawkins didn't kick 3.3 on paper. He kicked 3.3 in the match. Like, he acttually did it. It is just recorded "on paper."

If those goals were contests wins or from difficult positions player ratings would credit him for that on top of the goal. If they were lead out get hit on the chest marks converted from 30 in front, he will get credited for the goal, and players responsible for delivering it to him, blocking for him, and so on will get credited for those actions.

Your obsession with deriding player ratings or statistics is completely irrational. Below is your top 10 in the player ratings by average rating in 2024. Is that a credible top 10 or some random group of players that proves the ratings are rubbish?




And here is the bottom 20(far right column is % of time on ground per game played):

 

[PhatBoy]

You seem to be labouring under the illusion that I think Player Ratings are a precise and infallible guide to player merit in exact order. No system of rating players will ever achieve that. It is a readily quotable and credibly compiled system that takes into account more than you or I could ever see just from watching casually. So it is useful.

Hawkins didn't kick 3.3 on paper. He kicked 3.3 in the match. Like, he acttually did it. It is just recorded "on paper."

If those goals were contests wins or from difficult positions player ratings would credit him for that on top of the goal. If they were lead out get hit on the chest marks converted from 30 in front, he will get credited for the goal, and players responsible for delivering it to him, blocking for him, and so on will get credited for those actions.

Your obsession with deriding player ratings or statistics is completely irrational. Below is your top 10 in the player ratings by average rating in 2024. Is that a credible top 10 or some random group of players that proves the ratings are rubbish?


View attachment 2121964

And here is the bottom 20(far right column is % of time on ground per game played):

View attachment 2121965

Jesse Hogan waltzes into the top 7-8 players this season. Nowhere to be seen. Cameron probably does too, truth be told.

You can worship it all you want mate.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Jesse Hogan waltzes into the top 7-8 players this season. Nowhere to be seen. Cameron probably does too, truth be told.

You can worship it all you want mate.

Player Ratings probably under-rates key forwards, but this is only because opposition teams put so much energy into nullifying key forwards in modern footy. So it does probably, in reality, refelct what is actually happening on the ground.

But let's take your assertion about Hogan and Cameron. I will serch where they sit in coaches votes.

You have them in the top 7-8.

Coaches votes have them Cameron 20th, Hogan 27th.

Player Ratings has them 61st and 77th. But Player Ratings rated them the number 1 & 2 Key Forwards in the AFL. And the number 3 & 9 forwards. There is some contamination in that from guys who play time in and around the midfield where it is easier to accumulation impactful actions without necessarily beating your opponent.

Why they suffer in Player Ratings is Hogan is pitiably low in pressure acts, and Cameron is very weak in contested possessions. A lot of the players who are strong in those type of areas will be doing useful things that we just don't pick up by watching.

Neither Player Ratings or Coaches Votes discriminate according to how important the game is you are playing in or how good your opponent is or conditions or anything like that, whereas by watching, we can do those things. But how effective do you think Cameron is for instance v top 8 teams just from watching? Or say in games decided by 6 goals or less? We can statistically isolate those performances and see all of his averages including Coaches Votes, Brownlow votes, Player Ratings, disposals, contest wins, goals, score involvements and so on.

A quick scan, Cameron has only done slightly worse on average v top the 8 teams bar Geelong compared to v the rest. So his average Player Rating probably accurately reflects his output in 2024. But of course when we see the system seems to be elevating rucks and relegating key forwards, we need to think our way through that.

I was coaching a cricket club once. I wanted to sack our pro mid-season. The club was aghast. He had our most runs, second most wickets and everyone who watched thought he was clearly our best player. I analysed his playing record statistically. Against bottom half of ladder teams he averaged 12 with the ball and 50+ with the bat. Against teams in the top half of the ladder he averaged 17 with the bat and 27 with the ball. Over 5 seasons. So in the games that mattered least he was heroic. In the games that really mattered, our "best player" was putting us behind. I said to the club we shouldn't be paying some campaigner to put us behind in all the games that matter most just because he makes us win games we would have won anyway by more. As an aside, they all agreed we would be better off without him but didn't want to sack him because it amounted to backing out on a pledge.

The only way the analysis of statistics can ever harm you is if you analyse them wrong.