AFL Rd 22 2023 Pre Game Prognostications Carlton vs Melbourne

[DJC]

Is that HTA a statistic that's even worth worrying about.

In  Pittonet's case it's a little over 2 a quarter
In TDK's case a little under one a quarter.

After the first possession there's no guarantee where the ball ends up, so essentially, a play that has such limited impact on a game is pretty irrelevant.

That is an astute observation Lods, and one I’ve been meaning to comment on in another thread.

In short, hitouts generally are a very low frequency statistic and they do not influence results.  If anything, hitouts sharked by the opposition is a more meaningful measure but that involves the opposition player as well the ruckman.

Believe it or not but there’s a PhD thesis on AFL statistics that I will reference when I get around to making my post.  It’s an informative and enlightening read. ?

[Lods]

Its worth worrying about more than hitouts is it not?

The way i think about it is like this. Its an oversimplification, but it holds true over time (even if individual contests don't always hold true)

There is a 50-50 contest Pittonet wins you that contest 20% of the time.
TDK about 9% of the time.
Marshall was halway inbetween at 14%.
57% of contests has no winner.

So from all the non-HTA contests (57%) you have a 50-50 battle from your mids that they must win. Lets say they win 50% of them only. So 28% is won by your midfield.

Overall, your rucks won you 29% of the contests and your mids won you 28% of the contests.

Again, its an oversimplification, but you can see how important getting that head-start is from the ruck.

Overall we have won half from ruck, half from mids.

It clouds the picture a bit using percentages on such low numbers....makes it sound like a lot when actually it's not so many.

What I see you saying there though is that there are two aspects, one the ruck, the other the midfield.... but winning the hitout to advantage wouldn't always result in a clearance.

When you spoke to Champion data they gave you an explanation of the hitout to advantage.
I seem to remember that the response was that it goes to a team-mate who has 'time' to dispose of it.

Time is the key word there that needs clarification...because though you may have time it doesn't necessarily mean you win the contest.

On the weekend one of our ruckman won a clear hit out to one of our players who juggled it and then fumbled it....he had 'time' but lacked the execution.
Another instance would be if the player is tackled and caught with the ball, free kick against....again he has time, but not the skill to get it away...how is that adjudicated?

[kruddler]

..and conceding goals to his opponent and lack of scoreboard pressure the other way?

10% more than X when X was playing in another position doesn't make much sense.

I should ignore this, but i'll try and educate you.

The 10% has literally nothing to do with the position they play or how many ruck contests they get too. Which is why i love this stat so much.

Think about it like shots on goal. If you kick a goal 60% of the time and someone else kicks it 50% of the time. You are 10% better shot on goal than the other bloke. That doesn't say how many shots on goal either are getting, but you know the first player is a better shot on goal than the second player. Clearly, you want to get the first player more shots on goal to capitalise on this advantage.

This is what that ruck statistic is showing. Pittonet will get the ball to an opponent from a ruck contest 10% of the time MORE than TDK will. This is true for the last game and this holds true over the course of the year and career. I've posted this on no less than a dozen occasions previously.

[ElwoodBlues1]

Our rucks are not worldbeaters so imho its not mainly about what they do in terms of possessions it how they put the brakes on the opposition and what the opposing rucks stats are and no game will be more important in displaying that than the one vs Melbourne this week who are more than likely to have both Gawn and Grundy in operation.
In this regard I see Pittonet as more valuable as he actually is in the team to do the grinding and work over the opposition leaving TDK to benefit from his work.

[pinot]

I should ignore this, but i'll try and educate you.

The 10% has literally nothing to do with the position they play or how many ruck contests they get too. Which is why i love this stat so much.

Think about it like shots on goal. If you kick a goal 60% of the time and someone else kicks it 50% of the time. You are 10% better shot on goal than the other bloke. That doesn't say how many shots on goal either are getting, but you know the first player is a better shot on goal than the second player. Clearly, you want to get the first player more shots on goal to capitalise on this advantage.

This is what that ruck statistic is showing. Pittonet will get the ball to an opponent from a ruck contest 10% of the time MORE than TDK will. This is true for the last game and this holds true over the course of the year and career. I've posted this on no less than a dozen occasions previously.

Educate me how crass.

TDK kicked 10% of goals that would mean everyone that didnt is no good according to your logic.

[pinot]

BTW according to official stats
https://aflratings.com.au/afl-centre-bounces/
Pitto had 72.7% of CBAs
TDK had 27.3% of CBAs

Thats over double of the time spent in the middle so one would assume Pitto would have more hitouts. 10% more HO to Advantage is such a nothng burger when they were playing in different positions.

Nothing against Pitto except he is not very good right now but the best we go so have to live with it.

[kruddler]

It clouds the picture a bit using percentages on such low numbers....makes it sound like a lot when actually it's not so many.

What I see you saying there though is that there are two aspects, one the ruck, the other the midfield.... but winning the hitout to advantage wouldn't always result in a clearance.

When you spoke to Champion data they gave you an explanation of the hitout to advantage.
I seem to remember that the response was that it goes to a team-mate who has 'time' to dispose of it.

Time is the key word there that needs clarification...because though you may have time it doesn't necessarily mean you win the contest.

On the weekend one of our ruckman won a clear hit out to one of our players who juggled it and then fumbled it....he had 'time' but lacked the execution.
Another instance would be if the player is tackled and caught with the ball, free kick against....again he has time, but not the skill to get it away...how is that adjudicated?

As i said, its an oversimplification. You are right with the examples you show, but i said that in the post. Don't look at an indivdual contest, look at the big picture as it ultimately allows for everything you are saying.

You can get a hitout to advantage and lose the ball and vice versa.
You can shark a hitout and still turn it over.
You can get a clearance and turn it over.

Don't get bogged down in the minutia of each individual contest. It works both ways.

Think about it another way....
Why do we have disposal efficiency? To tell us how good we are disposing of the ball. That doesn't mean every disposal that hits a teammate does so with enough time for him to do anything with it. Or long balls to a 50-50 are actually any good (its deemed effective btw) Individually, there are instances where you can point the finger and so thats BS....and you'd be right.
Overall though, through the course of the match, its usually a fair indication.

The stat i provide is basically rucking efficiency. Individually, its not perfect. But over time its a very good indication.

[kruddler]

BTW according to official stats
https://aflratings.com.au/afl-centre-bounces/
Pitto had 72.7% of CBAs
TDK had 27.3% of CBAs

Thats over double of the time spent in the middle so one would assume Pitto would have more hitouts. 10% more HO to Advantage is such a nothng burger when they were playing in different positions.

Nothing against Pitto except he is not very good right now but the best we go so have to live with it.

Go back and read my posts would you. You are not actually reading them.
Be angry and upset at my educate comments all you like, but if the shoe fits, i'm trying to help you.

The stat i provide is not hitouts to advantage.
It is hitouts to advantage based on ruck contests attended.

Simply,
Pittonet attended 51 ruck contests. He had 10 hitouts to advantage - 19.6% of his ruck contests that he attended, he got a hitout to advantage. (This includes all the ones he lost, and ones he got a hitout but it wasn't to the teams advantage)
De Koning attended 33 ruck contests and got 3 hitouts to advantage - 9.1%.
So Pittonet is 10% more likely to get a hitout to advantage.
Make sense?

Also a ruck contest is not limited to centre bounces.

[madbluboy]

TDK kicked a goal out of nothing and helped set up another one out of nothing. He helped turn the game.

[pinot]

Go back and read my posts would you. You are not actually reading them.
Be angry and upset at my educate comments all you like, but if the shoe fits, i'm trying to help you.

The stat i provide is not hitouts to advantage.
It is hitouts to advantage based on ruck contests attended.

Simply,
Pittonet attended 51 ruck contests. He had 10 hitouts to advantage - 19.6% of his ruck contests that he attended, he got a hitout to advantage. (This includes all the ones he lost, and ones he got a hitout but it wasn't to the teams advantage)
De Koning attended 33 ruck contests and got 3 hitouts to advantage - 9.1%.
So Pittonet is 10% more likely to get a hitout to advantage.
Make sense?

Also a ruck contest is not limited to centre bounces.

No it doesn't how do you know the 18 less ruck contests were definitely not going to go to Advantage.

How do we know TDK wouldn't stop Marshall from kicking goals on him? Rucks go forward kick goals and defend.

Gawn, Marshall, English, Nankervis, Witts, Obrien, Jackson list goes on. Just have to defend and hit the scoreboard in AFL.