TalkingCarlton
http://talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/

2004 vs 2005: Player Performance
http://talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=4971		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  Jarusa [ Wed Aug 31, 2005 10:05 am ]
Post subject:  2004 vs 2005: Player Performance
Thought it would be interesting to compare which players are doing better or worse between last year and this year.

The criteria is 3+ games played each year and the performance is a combined average of disposals, marks, tackles, goals, behinds and hitouts.

The second column is average 'performance' in 2004, the third column is average performance in 2005, and the finals column is the percentage difference between 2004 and 2005 (positive means better performance, negative means worse performance).

Image

Good to see so many young player improving this year.
Author:  dannyboy [ Wed Aug 31, 2005 10:35 am ]
Post subject: 
hey how good is simmo going to be if he keeps imrpoving at that rate 8)
Author:  GWS [ Wed Aug 31, 2005 10:40 am ]
Post subject: 
Good stuff Jarusa.

Is it a weighted combined figure or just a comparison of total "touches"?
Author:  GWS [ Wed Aug 31, 2005 10:41 am ]
Post subject: 
BTW - an overall 1% improvement resulted in 5.5 less wins... :shock:
Author:  Marissa [ Wed Aug 31, 2005 10:50 am ]
Post subject: 
Gives us a good indication of who we need to get rid of.
Author:  Jarusa [ Wed Aug 31, 2005 10:58 am ]
Post subject: 
GWS wrote:
Good stuff Jarusa.

Is it a weighted combined figure or just a comparison of total "touches"?


small bit of weighting, goals are given 3 points, everything else 1 point, pretty basic stats.

GWS wrote:
BTW - an overall 1% improvement resulted in 5.5 less wins...


Was hoping someone would notice that.

Seems strange, but maybe because quite a few of the players that went backwards this year are some of the more senior players and the young ones have improved may account for the lower number of wins but equivalent overall team output.
Author:  verbs [ Wed Aug 31, 2005 11:04 am ]
Post subject: 
Should do the same thing with the 2002 side and see which team has the greater aggregate. :-D
Author:  Blue Vain [ Wed Aug 31, 2005 11:17 am ]
Post subject: 
Obviously hitouts are too heavily weighted Ja? :wink:
Author:  Shakin77 [ Wed Aug 31, 2005 11:25 am ]
Post subject: 
verbs wrote:
Should do the same thing with the 2002 side and see which team has the greater aggregate. :-D


You couldn't compare the two. Different game styles of the coaches.

Likewise I reckon Hawthorn would have improved about 100% on last season. (stat wise) :-D
Author:  Pat's Fitztrick [ Wed Aug 31, 2005 12:05 pm ]
Post subject: 
Thanks for going through this exercise Jarusa, but methinks it will only serve to strengthen bias either way.
Was this a poor team because individuals performed poorly, or were individuals hampered by playing in a poor team?
Raw stats can be helpful, but the real skill is in the interpretation.
Author:  Jarusa [ Wed Aug 31, 2005 12:11 pm ]
Post subject: 
No doubt about that.

I like seeing how stuff like this is interpreted though.
Author:  KoRn [ Wed Aug 31, 2005 2:22 pm ]
Post subject: 
shouldn't houla be going down instead of going up??
Author:  Jarusa [ Wed Aug 31, 2005 2:31 pm ]
Post subject: 
KoRn wrote:
shouldn't houla be going down instead of going up??


That is probably what most would think, but he has done slightly better on a per game basis.

http://www.footywire.com/fw/web/ft_play ... er?pid=307

But the fact that he has played only 17 games this year due to being dropped (after the Hawthorn game :wink: ) as opposed to 21 last year indicates that the coaching staff have been influenced by factors other than disposals.
Author:  mightyblues_luke [ Wed Aug 31, 2005 2:52 pm ]
Post subject: 
really shows that lance has had a really good year. maybe if he puts in another big preseason like the last he might be better again.
Author:  GWS [ Wed Aug 31, 2005 2:58 pm ]
Post subject: 
mightyblues_luke wrote:
really shows that lance has had a really good year. maybe if he puts in another big preseason like the last he might be better again.


On the other hand he might just sit on his arse and eat burgers all summer...
Author:  pedro [ Wed Aug 31, 2005 3:07 pm ]
Post subject: 
Jarusa, any chance of collating all the rumoured drafts.
ie; whom to where, for what.
Post draft evaluating what percentage of rumours come true.
I appreciate you have a life and this process would probably take for ever.
Just a thought.
Regards Pedro.
Author:  Rod Waddell [ Wed Aug 31, 2005 5:30 pm ]
Post subject: 
Not bad Jarusa but just a couple of thoughts:

- Chambers was not on our list in 2004?
- IMHO the stats for Thornton, Houla & Johnson are misleading.....they've had a worse year in 2005.
Author:  Jarusa [ Wed Aug 31, 2005 5:53 pm ]
Post subject: 
Rod Waddell wrote:
Not bad Jarusa but just a couple of thoughts:

- Chambers was not on our list in 2004?
- IMHO the stats for Thornton, Houla & Johnson are misleading.....they've had a worse year in 2005.


The 2004 chambers stats are for West Coast, same deal for Longmuir, his 2004 data is from his Freo games.

I agree about the three players you named, never claimed these stats were foolproof, but they are good for creating discussion. :wink:
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC + 10 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/