I can’t believe Myers is our lowest rated player for the year…
Yes. I’d like to know how they count a lot of things. Disposal efficiency vs clangers comes to mind. I’ve seen stats where those can’t both be right.
Clangers also include free kicks against, 50m penalties, dropped marks, that kind of thing. You could go at 100% efficiency and still rack up half a dozen clangers.
Thanks, now I know why they don’t make sense.
Interesting to look at that data. A lot of focus as usual and the bottom handful of players each week. But those stats show we have no one in form. Hard to win games if your top half dozen players are out of form.
Ratings for the Titanic Disaster that was yesterday.
5 Players well above average. Heppel Zerret Saad, Hurley, Parish.
The other 18 were average or below
9 Players well below average: Baguley, Jerret, McGrath, Hartley Myers, Stewart, Daniher Guelfi, Tippa,
We don’t need stats to show we played a horrid game in Q2 and Q3 and were gassed in Q4 due to lack of rotations for which I would give some leeway.
Maybe the BJ spray worked, because Zaha played much better in the last quarter.
Lots of trees in those stats, but no forest.
If a forest grew among those trees, would we win the flag?
It’s interesting to see who lifted after the 3rd quarter debacle.
And who didn’t as well.
Yep (keeping in mind this is all based on someone’s opinion of ‘worth’).
Note, though, that some, like Hepp, or Zerret were spent by that time.
But really I have significant issues with the ratings method based in the numbers there.
Agree. No one has yet come up with an algorithm that is anything but a rough estimate of a players performance based on numerical counts almost totally without factoring in quality grading.
Its better to watch the game and form your own opinion.
What does this chart mean? I have no idea what I am looking at. However if it is based on possessions then it is meaningless the way we play footy.
Stats can definitely help understanding. But those ones don’t. Apparently Heppell, Zach Merrett and Hurley has their best games of the year. You’d think if those 3 were at their best it would make us a better team. Either the measure of their best is screwed, or we need to be looking to find players whose best is effective rather than ineffective.
It’s because it’s not ‘raw data’. It is arbitrary/interpretative/opinion/perspective.
In other words - food for the masses.
Take stats ( even the good ones) with a grain of salt.
Yesterday we won the “clearances” 34-25 in spite of our ruckman being beaten. If they have been working on stoppage craft, its clear we have improved a lot, but our general midfield play in transition and without the ball remains a serious issue.
How does Guelfi even have a fkn average to be below to begin with?? ffs.
Well worth a read for those who enjoy discussions about gameplans and strategy
hanging on bit to tight.