Who are your Locks?

bomberboy

Deputy Vice Captain
Joined
11 Jan 2014
Messages
3,933
Likes
157
AFL Club
Essendon
#61
If they said nothing at all, I'd probably be okay with that - it's continuing to publish information that is basically incorrect that I think is really wrong.
I agree with this. If people wanted to be adding their scores up on the fly they'd play another format - but I think HS/CD feel the need to be transparent without actually being so.

We're lucky to be aware of the misinformation, but I'd wager a lot of semi-serious Supercoachers wouldn't be - I certainly wasn't until I stumbled onto this site.
 
Joined
19 Jan 2016
Messages
13
Likes
2
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
#62
I can't start with Jake Lloyd. In 2017 he has 21% contested possessions, below average intercept possessions/marks, below average one on one and below average for tackles. I assume he improved in 2018 but hopefully cd adjust their scoring. Actually, he'll probably rack up points playing on from the super duper goal square and chipping it to the pocket!
 

Nathan

Best and Fairest
Joined
28 Dec 2012
Messages
2,991
Likes
347
#63
How can CD/VS publish a definitive scoring system? The simplest of actions is effected by so many game variables.

Every basic action would need countless side notes ie...
Kick+effective short
Kick+effective long
Kick ineffective
Kick Clanger
Kick+metres gained
Kick+effective short junk time
Kick+effective long junk time
Kick ineffective junk time
Kick Clanger junk time
Kick+metres gained junk time
Kick effective short close game
Kick effecting long close game
Kick ineffective close game
Kick Clanger close game...and so on and so on

We all understand the basics of what effects the scoring. I think what gets most of us annoyed are those few players every year that every week get maximum/minimum points...Lloyd last season regularly had massive 1st half scores with very basic ‘effective’ stats...and from memory Goldstein had a run where he was being crucified with 1 point HTA’s.
 
Last edited:

pizza safety

Well-known member
Joined
15 Oct 2018
Messages
250
Likes
387
AFL Club
Essendon
#64
How can CD publish a definitive scoring system? The simplest of actions is effected by so many game variables.

Every basic action would need countless side notes ie...
Kick+effective short
Kick+effective long
Kick ineffective
Kick Clanger
Kick+metres gained
Kick+effective short junk time
Kick+effective long junk time
Kick ineffective junk time
Kick Clanger junk time
Kick+metres gained junk time
Kick effective short close game
Kick effecting long close game
Kick ineffective close game
Kick Clanger close game...and so on and so on

We all understand the basics of what effects the scoring. I think what gets most of us annoyed are those few players every year that every week get maximum/minimum points...Lloyd last season regularly had massive 1st half scores with very basic ‘effective’ stats...and from memory Goldstein had a run where he was being crucified with 1 point HTA’s.
I remember Lloyd always got maximum points for every effective kick at any time in the match, it was frustrating the hell out of me until I brought him in.
 

pizza safety

Well-known member
Joined
15 Oct 2018
Messages
250
Likes
387
AFL Club
Essendon
#65
What Darkie said basically. Just having access to live scoring, refreshing scores after a play and taking notes on what happened points wise. Also Champion Data posted a tweet with stats from a game showing how JPK and Bont were scored one time and it backed up most of the scoring I've got listed (I've attached a link). Pretty frustrating they keep publishing blatantly false info regarding the scoring year after year on their Herald Sun articles. You could watch a player in a game this year for a quarter and follow the scoring SuperCoach provide and you could be out by as much as 10 points of what's posted at quarter time. Use what I've got listed to keep their score and it should be within at least 1-2 points of what's posted at quarter time.

Cheers Erich that helps a lot mate. I love champion data for the work they do in the prospectus and I think their player ratings are often much more accurate than public opinion (certainly not always) but given some of these things are subjective it seems like bias will always happen to some extent, not that I mind that too much and I much prefer this game to AFL fantasy. Some people who just take the p*** out of CD are just expressing their own ignorance and populism, after all it's a data company utilised by the AFL and 18 clubs, not just a weird analytics company that exists in a vacuum.
 

chels

Rising Star Winner
Joined
8 Jan 2015
Messages
294
Likes
75
AFL Club
Sydney
#66
I do not know the current ownership of CD, but when people praise them I feel they should be aware of its ownership history:

"Catapult Sports International, which manufactures GPS-tracking devices for athletes, has contracts with all 18 AFL clubs to provide the tracking devices – worn in games and training – and help manage the data collected. It also has a contract for the AFL umpires and junior development teams.
On Monday, Catapult announced that those deals could be in jeopardy as the AFL was on the verge of awarding its tracking and data-services contract to Champion Data. This rival company is 49 per cent owned by the League and counts AFL general counsel Andrew Dillon and the league's general manager of broadcasting Simon Lethlean as directors."

https://www.afr.com/technology/gadg...-an-aussie-tech-success-story-20150904-gjewar
 

BlueNwhiteHoops

Well-known member
Joined
13 Dec 2018
Messages
51
Likes
78
AFL Club
Geelong
#67
I do not know the current ownership of CD, but when people praise them I feel they should be aware of its ownership history:

"Catapult Sports International, which manufactures GPS-tracking devices for athletes, has contracts with all 18 AFL clubs to provide the tracking devices – worn in games and training – and help manage the data collected. It also has a contract for the AFL umpires and junior development teams.
On Monday, Catapult announced that those deals could be in jeopardy as the AFL was on the verge of awarding its tracking and data-services contract to Champion Data. This rival company is 49 per cent owned by the League and counts AFL general counsel Andrew Dillon and the league's general manager of broadcasting Simon Lethlean as directors."

https://www.afr.com/technology/gadg...-an-aussie-tech-success-story-20150904-gjewar
Geez, no conflict of interest there :rolleyes:
 

chels

Rising Star Winner
Joined
8 Jan 2015
Messages
294
Likes
75
AFL Club
Sydney
#68
Sorry about the delay, some non-afl interested friends appeared. Then my quick google search revealed this (emphasis added):

"Catapult already has contracts with all 18 AFL clubs as well as the AFL umpires and junior development teams. The AFL received a number of proposals and an independent panel of high performance experts was appointed to review the bids. The panel members were Darren Burgess (Port Adelaide), David Buttifant (Carlton), Andrew Russell (Hawthorn) and David Joyce (GWS). The unanimous recommendation was that the AFL award the contract to Catapult. However the AFL ignored the recommendation, opting for Champion Data.


Although Catapult will not be in serious trouble as a result, their stock plummeted by 12% when the announcement was made in early September. There are many who have accused the AFL of a conflict of interest and Catapult may yet take legal action. None of the 18 clubs want to abandon their deals with Catapult, saying they are happy with the services the company provides. The AFL did indicate that those contracts would remain in place for the time being, but it is unclear how future contracts would be managed, if at all.


Sources close to the AFL claim that both bids were very close and the decision could have favored Catapult had their proposal "been more compelling". AFL chairman Mark Evans, in a memo to the clubs, said Champion presented "value for money". Catapult chairman Adir Shiffman hopes a compromise can be reached so both companies can work together with the AFL.

https://www.afana.com/news/2015/09/19/champion-data-new-afl-contract
 

BlueNwhiteHoops

Well-known member
Joined
13 Dec 2018
Messages
51
Likes
78
AFL Club
Geelong
#69
Sorry about the delay, some non-afl interested friends appeared. Then my quick google search revealed this (emphasis added):

"Catapult already has contracts with all 18 AFL clubs as well as the AFL umpires and junior development teams. The AFL received a number of proposals and an independent panel of high performance experts was appointed to review the bids. The panel members were Darren Burgess (Port Adelaide), David Buttifant (Carlton), Andrew Russell (Hawthorn) and David Joyce (GWS). The unanimous recommendation was that the AFL award the contract to Catapult. However the AFL ignored the recommendation, opting for Champion Data.


Although Catapult will not be in serious trouble as a result, their stock plummeted by 12% when the announcement was made in early September. There are many who have accused the AFL of a conflict of interest and Catapult may yet take legal action. None of the 18 clubs want to abandon their deals with Catapult, saying they are happy with the services the company provides. The AFL did indicate that those contracts would remain in place for the time being, but it is unclear how future contracts would be managed, if at all.


Sources close to the AFL claim that both bids were very close and the decision could have favored Catapult had their proposal "been more compelling". AFL chairman Mark Evans, in a memo to the clubs, said Champion presented "value for money". Catapult chairman Adir Shiffman hopes a compromise can be reached so both companies can work together with the AFL.

https://www.afana.com/news/2015/09/19/champion-data-new-afl-contract
They should definitely take it to court if the AFL rules in favour of Champion Data.
I am guessing there will be a backdown due to the backlash and unwelcome criticism this will cause.
 
Last edited:

aps1

Rising Star Winner
Joined
12 May 2013
Messages
541
Likes
182
AFL Club
Essendon
#70
One of the main things you are missing that individual player stats won’t show is that a CD ranking (SC score) is a ranking of how a player performed relative to other players in that game, which is done by normalisation to 3300. Basic example, getting 10 disposals in a game which has 100 disposals is worth twice as much as getting 10 disposals in a game which has 200 disposals.
Was curious about the impact of normalisation, so using RDT scores, normalised last years' scores for Laird and Lloyd. Obviously doesn't account SC scoring, but you can see a significant bump in average for Lloyd.

1546386956101.png
 

Leroy

100 Games Club
Joined
24 Mar 2015
Messages
693
Likes
155
AFL Club
North Melb.
#71
Was curious about the impact of normalisation, so using RDT scores, normalised last years' scores for Laird and Lloyd. Obviously doesn't account SC scoring, but you can see a significant bump in average for Lloyd.
This is actually outstanding and not something I believe anyone has really done much of before for SC (is it as simple as getting pre-scaling data for matches and comparing with the final total? Perhaps not :/)

If you are part of a team that does not play a high possession game and also is fairly good at restricting other teams possessions (think Sydney at the SCG, without any empirical evidence to back it up and also assuming that possessions generate most of the SC score) then it makes sense that your 35 touches score more than someone with those same touches in a much higher possession game (Laird at Adelaide).

Dusty at Richmond springs to mind as well (and Rance back in the golden ticket days) - you'd often see games where 21 Tigers scored below 100 with Dusty way out ahead.

Do we have the data to build some sort of table that shows which teams raw stats get pushed up or down and by how much over the course of a season? Could be nothing, could be something. Could be a different thread haha.
 

aps1

Rising Star Winner
Joined
12 May 2013
Messages
541
Likes
182
AFL Club
Essendon
#72
This is actually outstanding and not something I believe anyone has really done much of before for SC (is it as simple as getting pre-scaling data for matches and comparing with the final total? Perhaps not :/)

If you are part of a team that does not play a high possession game and also is fairly good at restricting other teams possessions (think Sydney at the SCG, without any empirical evidence to back it up and also assuming that possessions generate most of the SC score) then it makes sense that your 35 touches score more than someone with those same touches in a much higher possession game (Laird at Adelaide).

Dusty at Richmond springs to mind as well (and Rance back in the golden ticket days) - you'd often see games where 21 Tigers scored below 100 with Dusty way out ahead.

Do we have the data to build some sort of table that shows which teams raw stats get pushed up or down and by how much over the course of a season? Could be nothing, could be something. Could be a different thread haha.
Probably not possible to do with SC scores as I understand a lot of the normalisation/weighting occurs during the game, but using RDT's scores for each game should give a fair indication where a high possession game may dilute the value of each SC stat. This of course doesn't account for any scaling (game closeness etc) that may be part of CD's algorithm.
 
Joined
6 Jan 2019
Messages
12
Likes
8
AFL Club
Hawthorn
#73
Thanks Darkie, appreciate it. I haven't had a close look at last year's winning team and the trades they made. I will do this.

I agree points in team(PIT) (rookie scores included when suspended/injured) is very relevant concept and a perennial high scorer (two top 50 finishes) swears by it. Because of this I normally don't pick flogs....until last year and I coped the Sicily suspensions. I'll will probably avoid Greene if not 100% because of this, its questionable if he's is going to hit 100 avg and especially if he cops an extra 2 weeks off.

As for me I'm taking a bit more of a simple route this year. Normally, (like last 10 years) I run mid priced madness....circa 17 non rookies. This year I'm dialling it back. If you make my starting squad (s.t. rookies stepping up) you are most likely to be top X of your position (X=6,8,2,6 by line). This means I'm eschewing some popular sensible picks this year that present very good value (e.g. Z Merrett) in favour of a pretty pure guns and rookies approach (one mid pricer but lets say I can't fully commit to only 12 keepers so it's 12+kreuzer) this year. I guess this is why I put Dusty in the pair shaped risk basket, because he's one that presents risk to my chosen strategy...not so much a risk being a bad pick if you are looking to make a number of value picks, with low downside.

Anyway, it's not RMT thread but here it is since you've read this tome. Happy for comments. Happy if admin moves it as I'm not sure how to reply and put it there.

For what it's worth I think there will be viable starting strategies from 12 to 18 non-rookie players this year if the likes of Greene and Daniher line up round one. It's going to be a very interesting year.
I can't seem to find this years winning team and the changes they made, could you post it for me please?
 
Joined
6 Jan 2019
Messages
12
Likes
8
AFL Club
Hawthorn
#74
Hey mate, can't help but notice you're a newer member, but me and a couple of others here have discussed SC scoring at great lengths in the past, and after years of watching live scores, I created this:

KICKS

Ineffective: 0
Backwards and effective: 1
Long (40+ metres) to a contest: 2
Short and effective: 3
Long to advantage (effective): 5
Clanger (unforced error): -3

NOTE: A kick to a contest less than 40 metres in distance is deemed ineffective.

HANDBALLS

Ineffective: 0
Effective: 1

MARKS

From teammate, uncontested: 1
From teammate, contested: 3
From teammate, contested inside 50: 4
From teammate, on lead: 3
From opposition, uncontested: 3
From opposition, contested: 6

FREE KICKS

Free for: 3 (counts as a contested possession)
Free against, in a contested situation: -1
Free against, in an uncontested situation: -3
Give away a 50 meter penalty: -5

HITOUTS

To advantage: 5
To disadvantage (sharked by opposition): -1
Gather from ruck contest: 2

TACKLES: 3

GOAL: 6* (can vary dramatically depending on closeness of the match)

HANDBALL RECEIVE: 1

HARD OR LOOSE BALL GET: 3

SPOIL, SHEPHERD OR SMOTHER: 1

SPOIL GAINING POSSESSION: 3

SCORE ASSIST: 3

CONTESTED KNOCK ON TO ADVANTAGE: 4

BOUNCE: 1



It's far from perfect, and almost certainly missing some stats that score points, but it's a hell of a lot better to use as a guideline than the 'scoring' provided on the Supercoach website. So as you can see, there's a lot more to it than just the stats you've used above.
Excellent post cheers
 

randomcliche

Rising Star Nominee
Joined
3 May 2017
Messages
164
Likes
134
AFL Club
Hawthorn
#75
I can't seem to find this years winning team and the changes they made, could you post it for me please?
Yeah, I can't see much either.

Here is a brief story on his team, but not a lot of analysis into trading patterns, except to say in January he didn’t give sh!t what his team looked like :).

https://outline.com/RVe5fd

Here is my take on his team, starting with his final team and total and avg player rankings respectively. Just remember that this team could have nearly been beaten by a zombie team and was comprehensively flogged by an ex post mid priced madness team.

Def
Lloyd (1, 1)
Yeo (2, 3)
Simmo (3, 5)
Laird (4, 2)
Crisp (6, 9)
Hurley (14, 13)
(Had Sicily, obviously trade) (x/4 avg 105)


Mid
Danger 3, 3
Titch 1, 1
Macrae 6, 2
Neale 8, 5
Cripps 2, 4
Oliver 4, 5
Coniglio 9, 10
MCrouch 58, 27 (only played 18 games, 101 avg),

Ruc
Grundy 1, 1
Gawn 2, 2

Fwd
Westhoff 1, 4
Smith* 3, 7
Hawkins (last rnd) (was McLean) 9, 3 (6, 15)
Buddy (20, 5) only played 18 games
Heeney (7, 9)
Wingard (15, 23)
Gray (10, 10)

So as you can see across def, mid, ruck where the largest differences between the top end and rest are, he had nearly everyone you’d want. In the forward line, where things are lot closer (only 10ppg, between Siciliy 105 ppg, and #15Toby McClean 95ppg), he still had a good selection.

The difference ppg in not having the top forwards didn’t hurt so much because compared the mids, where holding #15 means Callan Ward who was a full 11 ppg below #5 Oliver and 25ppg below Titch.

I would suspect he started Cogniclio which at 108avg was an absolute steal, although high ownership. Macrae ownership was lower. Neal ownership was super low 11.5%. Hawkins ownership 3.4% (and doesn’t look like much more this year). Ruck only ¼ of teams ended with Grundy. He did well to get Lloyd in at the right time. Even in the forward line a lot to the top avg players only had 30% ownership, he had good selection of them.

So looks like he let his rookies fatten, something I sometimes struggle with and went to 23 premiums, which does give some good cover/loophole opportunities. Looks like a mid/fwd cover swing set at the end, although he may have a Fwd / Def as well until Siciliy went down. No R/F swing and both rucks played 22 games #50klucky.
 
Joined
6 Jan 2019
Messages
12
Likes
8
AFL Club
Hawthorn
#76
Yeah, I can't see much either.

Here is a brief story on his team, but not a lot of analysis into trading patterns, except to say in January he didn’t give sh!t what his team looked like :).

https://outline.com/RVe5fd

Here is my take on his team, starting with his final team and total and avg player rankings respectively. Just remember that this team could have nearly been beaten by a zombie team and was comprehensively flogged by an ex post mid priced madness team.

Def
Lloyd (1, 1)
Yeo (2, 3)
Simmo (3, 5)
Laird (4, 2)
Crisp (6, 9)
Hurley (14, 13)
(Had Sicily, obviously trade) (x/4 avg 105)


Mid
Danger 3, 3
Titch 1, 1
Macrae 6, 2
Neale 8, 5
Cripps 2, 4
Oliver 4, 5
Coniglio 9, 10
MCrouch 58, 27 (only played 18 games, 101 avg),

Ruc
Grundy 1, 1
Gawn 2, 2

Fwd
Westhoff 1, 4
Smith* 3, 7
Hawkins (last rnd) (was McLean) 9, 3 (6, 15)
Buddy (20, 5) only played 18 games
Heeney (7, 9)
Wingard (15, 23)
Gray (10, 10)

So as you can see across def, mid, ruck where the largest differences between the top end and rest are, he had nearly everyone you’d want. In the forward line, where things are lot closer (only 10ppg, between Siciliy 105 ppg, and #15Toby McClean 95ppg), he still had a good selection.

The difference ppg in not having the top forwards didn’t hurt so much because compared the mids, where holding #15 means Callan Ward who was a full 11 ppg below #5 Oliver and 25ppg below Titch.

I would suspect he started Cogniclio which at 108avg was an absolute steal, although high ownership. Macrae ownership was lower. Neal ownership was super low 11.5%. Hawkins ownership 3.4% (and doesn’t look like much more this year). Ruck only ¼ of teams ended with Grundy. He did well to get Lloyd in at the right time. Even in the forward line a lot to the top avg players only had 30% ownership, he had good selection of them.

So looks like he let his rookies fatten, something I sometimes struggle with and went to 23 premiums, which does give some good cover/loophole opportunities. Looks like a mid/fwd cover swing set at the end, although he may have a Fwd / Def as well until Siciliy went down. No R/F swing and both rucks played 22 games #50klucky.
Legend! Cheers man
 
Top