Talking Carlton Index Lochie O'Brien Kerryn Harrington Lochie O'Brien Kerryn Harrington CFC Home CFC Membership CFC Shop CFC Fixture Blueseum
It is currently Fri Jul 11, 2025 8:56 pm

All times are UTC + 10 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 18 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Aug 31, 2005 10:05 am 
Offline
Alex Jesaulenko
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2005 9:00 am
Posts: 23123
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.

_________________
|♥♥♥♥♥♥| http://www.blueseum.org |♥♥♥♥♥♥|


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Aug 31, 2005 10:35 am 
Offline
Ken Hunter
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 11:12 am
Posts: 10414
Location: Coburg
hey how good is simmo going to be if he keeps imrpoving at that rate 8)

_________________
This type of slight is alien in the more cultured part of the world - Walsh. Its up there with mad dogs, Englishmen and the midday sun!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Aug 31, 2005 10:40 am 
Offline
Stephen Kernahan
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2005 11:17 am
Posts: 18761
Location: threeohfivethree
Good stuff Jarusa.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Aug 31, 2005 10:41 am 
Offline
Stephen Kernahan
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2005 11:17 am
Posts: 18761
Location: threeohfivethree
BTW - an overall 1% improvement resulted in 5.5 less wins... :shock:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Aug 31, 2005 10:50 am 
Offline
Rod Ashman

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 5:36 pm
Posts: 2646
Location: Melbourne
Gives us a good indication of who we need to get rid of.

_________________
GO BLUE BOYS!!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Aug 31, 2005 10:58 am 
Offline
Alex Jesaulenko
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2005 9:00 am
Posts: 23123
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.

_________________
|♥♥♥♥♥♥| http://www.blueseum.org |♥♥♥♥♥♥|


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Aug 31, 2005 11:04 am 
Offline
Stephen Silvagni
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 10:04 am
Posts: 28377
Location: *Currently banned*
Should do the same thing with the 2002 side and see which team has the greater aggregate. :-D


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Aug 31, 2005 11:17 am 
Offline
Stephen Kernahan

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 10:35 am
Posts: 18075
Obviously hitouts are too heavily weighted Ja? :wink:

_________________
Looking forward to seeing our potential realised.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Aug 31, 2005 11:25 am 
Offline
Horrie Clover
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 9:31 am
Posts: 317
Location: At the Coalface.
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

_________________
Working alone. At the coalface. Scott's gone for lunch! Said he would be back in 30 mins.


Last edited by Shakin77 on Wed Aug 31, 2005 12:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Aug 31, 2005 12:05 pm 
Offline
Bert Deacon
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 15, 2005 8:09 pm
Posts: 530
Location: Swimmin' in a fish bowl..
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.

_________________
Princes Park - always was, always will be.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Aug 31, 2005 12:11 pm 
Offline
Alex Jesaulenko
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2005 9:00 am
Posts: 23123
No doubt about that.

I like seeing how stuff like this is interpreted though.

_________________
|♥♥♥♥♥♥| http://www.blueseum.org |♥♥♥♥♥♥|


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Aug 31, 2005 2:22 pm 
Offline
Trevor Keogh
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 9:23 pm
Posts: 745
Location: Melbourne
shouldn't houla be going down instead of going up??


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Aug 31, 2005 2:31 pm 
Offline
Alex Jesaulenko
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2005 9:00 am
Posts: 23123
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.

_________________
|♥♥♥♥♥♥| http://www.blueseum.org |♥♥♥♥♥♥|


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Aug 31, 2005 2:52 pm 
Offline
Adrian Gallagher
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 1:52 pm
Posts: 75
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.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Aug 31, 2005 2:58 pm 
Offline
Stephen Kernahan
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2005 11:17 am
Posts: 18761
Location: threeohfivethree
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...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Aug 31, 2005 3:07 pm 
Offline
Bert Deacon

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 11:07 am
Posts: 567
Location: sunshine coast
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.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Aug 31, 2005 5:30 pm 
Offline
Harry Vallence

Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 10:49 am
Posts: 1651
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.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Aug 31, 2005 5:53 pm 
Offline
Alex Jesaulenko
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2005 9:00 am
Posts: 23123
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:

_________________
|♥♥♥♥♥♥| http://www.blueseum.org |♥♥♥♥♥♥|


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 18 posts ] 

All times are UTC + 10 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 39 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group