Aspiration
What I planned to do was rate each player against himself. So if a player played according to his form, or equalled his best ever, he would get a 10. If he underperformed, he'd get less.
Originally, I intended the mark to be out of 10, and I think I'm pretty safe with that; but it struck me as I started writing these words, that a player who had improved deserved more than 10.
The more I think about it, the more I incline towards this latter view. So, if a player stepped up a level, he might be worth 13. It's more than a bit subjective so don't expect scientific accuracy. If others do the same analysis, I'm sure they will come up with different numbers. Even if I were to do the same analysis a week later, I'm sure that the second results would not be a good match for the first.
Appetiser
Here's the sort of thing I had in mind.
Pendlebury had 596 disposals for 2014, the most for any Collingwood player (an average of 28.38), followed by Beams (516, 27.16), Sidebottom (508, 26.74) and Swan (424, 24.94).
Now normally you'd say an average of 25 disposals per game was pretty good. But for Dane Swan it's below par.
In 2013, Swan had the most disposals for the year (717, 31.17) followed by Pendlebury (688, 29.91), Sidebottom (555, 24.13) and H (who might have been Harry back then) (424, 22.32).
In one way, the totals can be a bit misleading: Collingwood played in a final in 2013 but not in 2014. So Swan, Pendlebury, Sidebottom all played 23 games in 2013. In 2014, 17, 21, 19 respectively. In fact, only Jack Frost managed 22 games for 2014.
In another way, the totals are indicative: each player gets the opportunity to play more games if the team makes the final; and the more games each player plays out of the total available speaks to list management on the one hand (when players miss due to injury) and form (when they are dropped).
2011 2013 2014 Pendlebury 742 29.68 688 29.91 596 28.38 Swan 760 31.67 717 31.17 424, 24.94 Beams 365 22.81 228 28.50 516 27.16 Sidebottom 489 19.56 555 24.13 508 26.74
These figures suggest that Sidebottom improved his quantity of possessions across the three years; Pendlebury's 2014 was not as good as his 2013; Swan dipped a little from 2011 to 2013, but his 2014 was much lower. Beams missed a lot of games in 2011 and especially in 2013.
Of course, there are many other stats which help to flesh out the story. It might be argued that Pendlebury had a better 2014 than 2013, that his stats were lowered by the quality and output of the players around him. After all, the most important facet of a team is synergy, that elusive quality that sees 1 + 1 produce a result that is greater than 2.
Watching games from 2011 demonstrates that point to a nicety. Its opponents may field 18 quality players, but Collingwood plays as a cohesive unit.
The challenge for me is to try to interpret the statistics in order to evaluate each player. Of course I'll be relying on my rusty memory. The result is sure to be contentious.
Trivia
I'm fortunate that I don't rely on Collingwood's website, according to which Beams and Maxwell no longer exist.
I propose to go in order of players' numbers.
The players
Fasolo - 12 games, 15 disposal average, 7.9 (goals, behinds)
Was used as a defender. It's hard to rate a player whose role has changed. Maybe 7.
Dwyer - 13, 16.46, 3.4
I like him a lot, but he was much better in 2013. Rating: 5.
Macaffer - 21, 13.52, 4.5
It speaks volumes when your tagger outscores a utility. Sadly, he ended the year with another knee injury after missing all of 2012. Can he return again? Perhaps he was marginally better in 2013 - 9.
Grundy - 15, 10.13, 272 hitouts, 11 frees for, 29 frees against
Given that his first 7 games were played in 2013, there's not much to measure against. In part, I'm rating him on expectation - 6.
Maxwell - 10, 13.50
Retired part way through the year. It's hard to rate a player who has played so few games. Nonetheless, I thought that when he did manage to get on the park, he played well - 8.
Goldsack - 20, 11.25, 10.5, 86 tackles
Was a fierce and effective tackler - 8.
Kennedy - 8, 12.25
Couldn't manage as many games as in 2013 (12). Seems to be just outside the best 22. Rating: 8.
Lumumba - 21, 20
Statistics support my gut feeling: he was down about 10% on 2013. Frees for/frees against are representative: 2013 - 15/10, 2014 - 11/24. Rating: 8.
Martin Clarke - 1, 13
After 9 games in 2013, only managed one - and failed to impress. I'm sad that he has not been able to return. Rating: 2.
Pendlebury - 21, 28.38, 116 tackles (team high)
Probably Collingwood's best player. More than anything else, he is a very even and consistent player; there's not much difference between his best and his worst - 9.
Blair - 21, 15.38, 12.11 112 tackles (second)
Probably exemplifies Collingwood's year better than any other player. On paper, his figures for 2014 look pretty good. Then I dig deeper. He averaged 16.27 disposals in 2013 and 15.67 in 2011. He kicked 14.6 in 2013 but a massive 26.18 in 2011 (more than the sum of the last 2 years). In 2013, he topped the tackle count with 126. Rating: 8.
Ball - 17, 18.18, 6.3, 83 tackles
A noble warrior has retired. Averaged 23.38 in 2014 in 13 games. Rating: 7.
Adams - 12, 19.17. New, no rating.
Young - 19, 16.16, 9.8
On expectation, I'm disappointed. Played only 2 games in 2013 so is virtually new; no rating.
Witts - 20, 9.95, 8.4, 375 hitouts, 70 tackles, 11 frees for, 20 frees against
I think he still has a long way to go, but vastly improved over 2013. Needs to be better in the forward line. Rating: 12.
Brown - 3. Came back from last year's knee injury, then did a shoulder. Too few games to rate.
Beams - 19, 27.16, 23.16, 100 tackles
Only played 8 games last year, but has a long track record. Rating: 10.
White - 18, 10.50, 20.14, 108 hitouts. New, no rating.
Elliott - 17, 15.06, 33.11 (second to Cloke), 60 tackles
Another good-news story. Rating: 11.
Reid - 4. Hardly any games, but not a patch on his 2013 self. Too few games to rate.
Lynch - no games (injured). No longer with the club. No rating.
Sidebottom - 19, 19.56, 14.14
Like Pendlebury, Sidebottom is a very consistent player. He kicked 19.10 in 2013 and 25.13 in 2011. From almost the same number of scoring shots, he kicked quite a bit more accurately last year, probably reflecting the fact that all Pies were under more pressure this year. Rating: 9.
Keeffe - 18, 12.00, 102 1-percenters (second)
After playing only 8 games last year, Keeffe found himself a key defender along with Frost. By and large, the defence was the (relatively) good news of 2014 (if you put aside injuries to Brown and Reid - which of course was really bad news). Rating: 11.
Josh Thomas - 13, 17.23, 8.3
I can't remember; I think he might have been injured. His numbers are generally quite inferior to last year. It's not like we were brimming with replacements. Rating: 6.
Hudson - no games (injured). No longer with the club. No rating.
Williams - 15, 17.47
Only 15 games suggests he was out with injury. He is a natural successor to Benny Johnson with more potential. At 21, he is pretty much a certain selection. Rating: 10.
Armstrong - 5, 15.80. New, no rating.
Sinclair - 5, 14.60
Why did he play only 5 games (15 last year)? Rating: 8.
Broomhead - 8, 12.88, 9.4
Showed a lot of promise from his first game. New, no rating.
Ramsay - 2, 11. New, no rating.
Cloke - 20, 12.25, 39.30
Kicked 68.51 last year. It may not have been all his fault: White was not much support; nor was anyone else. With the midfield down, poor delivery and all-round inferior team work, Cloke did not have a good year. Rating: 5.
Toovey - 17, 11.29
Returning from knee injury. Rating: 8.
Swan - 17, 24.94, 11.12
All but 3 Pies would kill to have his stats, but the figures that sum up his year best are Brownlow votes: 5 v 26 last year v 34 in 2011, his Brownlow year. Rating: 6.
Seedsman - 9, 15.56
Injured? Rating: 7.
Langdon - 19, 16.58
Most people think he's had a terrific year. New, no rating.
Frost - 22, 8.50, 168 1-percenters (first)
After only 2 games last year, in 2014 Frosty was sensational. I think he showed understandable signs of tiredness towards the end of the year. Rating: 15.
Coaches
I don't know which coach does what so I will lump them all together. If the coaching staff are considered at least partially responsible for the substance fiasco at Essendon, ours should be held accountable for the on-field performance of the team.
Team 2014 - -, 15.92, 252.191, 1564 tackles, 6 (ladder position)
Team 2013 - -, 17.22, 319.236, 1506 tackles, 11 (ladder position)
Many players succumbed to soft-tissue injury. After round 12 we were 4th. During the second half of the season we slid gently down to 11th. In 2011, we were never lower than 2nd. Rating: 5.
The wrap
Late in the season, the end couldn't come soon enough. There were days when I might have got a game, so crippled were we with injuries.
From everything I've seen so far, our stocks have been depleted prior to season 2015. I'd say that the premiership window has been slammed shut. I suspect that it will be a long road back.
The Footy Bogan is reduced to hoping we can beat our arch enemies (don't hold your breath) and string a few good games together. He will be looking for a second team to offer him some hope - maybe Richmond.
No comments:
Post a Comment