The Forest from the Trees: A post for the stats nerds


I also don’t understand it. In the last 3 weeks we have played FC, Geelong and GWS. Our pressure against Geelong and GWS was plain to see, right from the opening bounce.

But Carlton???!!! We played like powder-puffs. How can that performance possibly be regarded as high-pressure?


We did a lot of tackling etc. against Carlton but it seemed to be mostly behind of centre. Last 2 weeks it’s been a lot more mid and forward. But I’d still like to know what counts as contributing to pressure rating :).


Interesting article. I’m not in the finance industry, so have no idea how true it is, and how much rubbish is out there, but I have no doubt there’s plenty. And that there would be plenty in the sports data analysis industry as well.

But there are numbers, and meaningful interpretation of them can give you an advantage. It’s just being able to meaningfully interpret them (with guidance from experience and theory) that is actually the key skill, not being expert in ggplot2


Yep, I agree - and that philosophy is kinda what the article is about, in a way.
You can make anything be anything if you spin it right.

Just ask Kingy


Huh? They rank Dyson Heppell as our #1 best player but only our #5 best player under 25???

(Edit: even though DJR says he is not under 25).


The first table is absolute. The second is relative to a notional age based average performance level.


This article is great because it’s about how Carlton are trash.

My favourite bit is where they talk about how they’ve made Weitering worse


Unfortunately he seems to be on the way back.

I’m as happy as the next man to see Carlton firmly at the bottom of the ladder, but my joy is tempered by the knowledge that their solitary win was against us. And we won’t play them again this year.


Nightmare Time at the G.

According to CD, TBell was BOG.

Interesting that Stringer rates so low. Probably he is being rated as a forward and kicked no goals so he has been downgraded. Rated as a mid, 29 disposals, 9 clearances and 13 contested puts him well above Martin.


9 clearances is a sub-par day for Stringer, apparently.


He’s just not cutting it. Delist.


TBell ranking well as a ruckman. I think it was 19 Hitouts to advantage, compared with 6 to Nankervis ?

Didn’t help the side on Saturday, Richmond nuked our defence


yes but it wasn’t from stoppage. we were very good in stoppage and clearance work. our issue was ball use. both I50 and transitioning from defence.
we generated 29 forward half turnovers but scored 3 points from them, the Tigers generated about 40 and scored about 60 points from them. that was the match right there. Once they turned it over, they killed us in transition and were ruthlessly efficient up forward. When we turned it over we weren’t clean enough with our transition and it enabled the Tigers time to fall back in defence and clog up our I50.


Good nutshell analysis. Those Hurley long bombs out of defence: I am dreading them tbh. The panic hacks to the Richmond press zone. Argh. We need to designate better kicks coming out of defence and use our runners eg. Saad, McKenna, and force more congested stoppages round the boundary to grind out field position ( as we started to do in the last quarter when the game was over) . We didn’t need Hooker down back, needed more mobile rugged defenders, like Ambrose / Redman / Francis tbh. So many mistakes, in the way we set up, ( bad coaching) and some at selection based on the known opposition strengths.


it was halfway between panicked dump kicks from defense or back half stoppages and our forwards being out of position. Worsfold eluded to our forwards getting sucked too high up the ground when we were bringing it out of defense, leaving the last line of Richmond’s zone on their own. It was just Rance but on occasion they had 2 or 3 defenders set up behind the ball. It left us no one to kick the ball to or even create a contest and was one of significant problems earlier in the season.


No doubt we will have some “learnings” from this game. However, they are no longer “learnings” they are revision, and we are failing in the exams.

We need graduates, not professional students.


takes time for these things to become ingrained and under the most pressure is often when your systems break down.
To give some context, Richmond played their best game since the GF and they played it on their home deck where they have won their last 14 outings by an average of 45 points. They are on a level all of their own when they play like that.


I think his problem was disposal efficiency.

Although I didn’t notice him being particularly poor, they were saying he was going at something like 11% well into the match on the coverage


Bellchambers 17 D @ 70% DE HO 39 CLR 6 CP:11 CM:2 TOG: 87% HO2A: 19 Goals 0
Nankervis 13 @ 62%DE HO: 39 CLR 2 CP:7 CM:1 TOG: 77% HO2A: 7 G: 2

And yet, Nankervis was listed in Richmonds bests, on the back of his 2 goals I suppose, but Bellchambers was not even mentioned as in Essendons bests in the match report.

Go figure.


good chance one of you is talking about stringer and the other belly.