Elite Numbers ’19 – Patrick Cripps (CAR)

Written by Schwarzwalder on February 6 2019

(Written & Created By Adam)

Cripps, and those cannons, will be popular again in 2019………

 

Premium history (Avg>100):

2016: 107.62 from 21

2018: 119.41 from 22

 

Avg VS Opponent:

Adel: 101.33 from 3 (low of 94 and a high of 108, 1/3 below 100)

Bris: 102 from 3 (low of 93 and a high of 118, 2/3 below 100)

Coll: 122.5 from 4 (low of 84 and a high of 187, 2/4 below 100, 2/4 120+)

Ess: 125.5 from 2 (low of 111 and a high of 140)

Freo: 112.67 from 3 (low of 19 and a high of 117)

Geel: 91.5 from 2 (low of 86 and a high of 97)

GC: 123.67 from 3 (low of 83 and a high of 173, 1/3 below 100, 1/3 120+)

GWS: 95.5 from 2 (low of 69 and a high of 122)

Haw: 120 from 2 (low of 118 and a high of 122)

Melb: 152.5 from 2 (low of 152 and a high of 153)

NM: 94 from 2 (low of 92 and a high of 96)

Port: 111.5 from 2 (low of 108 and a high of 115)

Rich: 118 from 2 (low of 106 and a high of 130)

StK: 123.33 from 3 (low of 90 and a high of 156, 1/3 below 100, 2/3 120+)

Syd: 97.33 from 3 (low of 54 and a high of 137, 1/3 below 100, 1/3 120+)

WC: 127 from 2 (low of 103 and a high of 151)

WB: 115 from 3 (low of 96 and a high of 143, 1/3 below 100, 1/3 120+)

 

Avg at Venue:

MCG: 124.67 from 15 (2/15 below 100, 8/15 120+)

2016: 117.38 from 8

2018: 133 from 7

 

Marvel: 110.67 from 15 (5/15 below 100, 4/15 120+)

2016: 97 from 7

2018: 122.63 from 8

 

Interstate: 105 from 12 (6/12 below 100, 2/12 120+)

2016: 107 from 6

2018: 103 from 6

 

MCG Wins: 130.33 from 3 (2/3 120+)

2016: 140 from 2

2018: 111 from 1

 

MCG Losses: 123.25 from 12 (2/12 below 100, 6/12 120+)

2016: 109.83 from 6

2018: 136.67 from 6

 

Marvel Wins: 98.67 from 3 (2/3 below 100)

2016: 98.67 from 3

2018: 0 from 0

 

Marvel Losses: 113.67 from 12 (3/12 below 100, 4/12 120+)

2016: 95.75 from 4

2018: 122.63 from 8

 

Wins: 122.13 from 8 (2/8 below 100, 3/8 120+)

2016: 115.5 from 6

2018: 142 from 2

 

Losses: 111.71 from 35 (12/35 below 100, 11/35 120+)

2016: 104.47 from 15

2018: 117.15 from 20

 

Pre Bye: 106.5 from 22 (11/22 below 100, 5/22 120+)

2016: 101.09 from 11

2018: 111.91 from 11

 

Post Bye: 121.14 from 21 (3/21 below 100, 9/21 120+)

2016: 114.8 from 10

2018: 126.91 from 11

 

2018 Stat Averages:

Disposals: 29.64

SC Avg when disposals equal/exceed 30: 130.08 from 12 (low of 97 and a high of 173, 1/12 below 100, 7/12 120+)

SC Avg when disposals below 30: 106.6 from 10 (low of 54 and a high of 187, 5/10 below 100, 2/10 120+)

Kicks: 11.77

SC Avg when kicks equal/exceed 12: 128.31 from 13 (low of 92 and a high of 187, 2/13 below 100, 6/13 120+)

SC Avg when kicks below 12: 106.56 from 9 (low of 54 and a high of 156, 4/9 below 100, 3/9 120+)

Handballs: 17.86

SC Avg when handballs equal/exceed 18: 131.25 from 12 (low of 97 and a high of 173, 1/12 below 100, 8/12 120+)

SC Avg when handballs below 18: 105.2 from 10 (low of 54 and a high of 187, 5/10 below 100, 1/10 120+)

Marks: 4.18

SC Avg when marks equal/exceed 5: 135.9 from 10 (low of 92 and a high of 187, 2/10 below 100, 6/10 120+)

SC Avg when marks below 5: 105.67 from 12 (low of 54 and a high of 143, 4/12 below 100, 3/12 120+)

Contested Possessions: 17.59

SC Avg when contested possessions equal/exceed 18: 130.5 from 12 (low of 94 and a high of 187, 2/12 below 100, 7/12 120+)

SC Avg when contested possessions below 18: 106.1 from 10 (low of 54 and a high of 173, 4/10 below 100, 2/10 120+)

Tackles: 6.27

SC Avg when tackles equal/exceed 7: 135.64 from 11 (low of 93 and a high of 187, 1/11 below 100, 8/11 120+)

SC Avg when tackles below 7: 103.18 from 11 (low of 54 and a high of 156, 5/11 below 100, 1/11 120+)

Clangers: 4.5

SC Avg when clangers below 5: 126.93 from 14 (low of 92 and a high of 187, 3/14 below 100, 7/14 120+)

SC Avg when clangers equal/exceed 5: 106.25 from 8 (low of 54 and a high of 151, 3/8 below 100, 2/8 120+)

Time on Ground: 89.45%

SC Avg when time on ground equals/exceeds 90%: 118.58 from 12 (low of 54 and a high of 187, 3/12 below 100, 5/12 120+)

SC Avg when time on ground below 90%: 120.4 from 10 (low of 92 and a high of 173, 3/10 below 100, 4/10 120+)

 

Premium Career Stat Averages:

Disposals:

2016: 26.95

2018: 29.64

 

Kicks:

2016: 8.38

2018: 11.77

 

Handballs:

2016: 18.57

2018: 17.86

 

Marks:

2016: 3.24

2018: 4.18

 

Contested Possessions:

2016: 16.86

2018: 17.59

 

Tackles:

2016: 6.62

2018: 6.27

 

Clangers:

2016: 3.86

2018: 4.5

 

Time on Ground %:

2016: 83.81%

2018: 89.45%

 

Disposal Efficiency%:

2016: 71.9%

2018: 67.9%

 

Contested Possession Rate%:

2016: 62.21%

2018: 58.55%

 

Observations:

Averages 110+ against 11 teams (Coll, Ess, Freo, GC, Haw, Melb, Port, Rich, StK, WC, WB) with 10 pre-bye and 6 post bye.

124.67 avg from 15 games at MCG with 2/15 below 100, 8/15 120+ and an avg of 115+ in both seasons with 3 pre-bye in 2019 and 4 post bye.

10.42 win/loss avg differential.

14.64 post bye/pre-bye avg differential with a 114+ avg in both seasons post bye with a 110+ avg in only 1 season pre-bye.

30+ differential when marks equal/exceed 5 and when tackles equal/exceed 7.

 

In Cripps’s first full season of his career he amassed an average just of shy of 120 thanks to his heavily contested game style evident by recording a 58.55% Contested possession rate and roughly 18 contested possessions and 7 tackles per game.

The only slight concern which could be a deterrence is whether he can sustain the high ‘Time On Ground’ and contested numbers if he is rotated up forward more or his TOG reduces to the average 80% to 85% range. Usually is a strong finisher as he has recorded a 114+ avg in both premium seasons with an average around 125 post bye in 2018.

His starting price could also be a deterrence but if he ever manages to increase his kick to handball ratio whilst sustaining his contested numbers he could easily push 125+.

Verdict: Strongly consider as M1-M3/Upgrade target

16
0


Leave a comment / Scroll to bottom

28 thoughts on “Elite Numbers ’19 – Patrick Cripps (CAR)”

    1. And throw away the keys. Not going anywhere but up I hope.
      Nice one Adam. Scary to think where this train is going 🙂

      10

      0
      1. I currently have both Fyfe and Kelly. I feel both are underpriced and capable of averaging the same as Cripps.

        I would dearly love to turn one of them into Cripps based purely on durability.

        But which one!

        I may have to go Kelly as this fits my bye structure.

        I really feel Cripps is firming as a must have this year.

        Thanks Adam. Awesome stats as usual.

        3

        1
        1. I believe Fyfe is already carrying an elbow injury. He never plays a full season. He has bad hair.

          Cripps is durable, young enough to improve and has sensible hair.

          See where I’m going with this?

          17

          0
          1. His hair wasn’t that sensible when he had chunks taken out of the sides. He also apparently likes John Farnham.

            With that being said, right now I only have 2 or 3 players I truly consider to be ‘locks’, and Cripps is one of them.

            7

            1
          2. I hear you Thommo.

            Bad hair or not ,its rather frustrating especially as a Freo fan, not having Fyfe when he explodes early.

            Funny to think J Kelly, Fyfe and Cripps are all WA boys.
            they would make a pretty mean midfield if we still had state of origin.

            8

            0
            1. If not for injury, Fyfe would be up there with Danger amd Ablett in Supercoach. It’s a shame injuries have affected his career so much.

              5

              0
            2. i could be wrong but J.Kelly is a vic boy Freo Tragic.
              his old man was from WA but josh born and raised in melbourne.
              but you can have harley bennell replace kelly..
              fair swap? 😉

              0

              0
  1. Great work Adam!

    With Cripps such a gun I thought I would add the AFL Prospectus analysis of him for those undecided about locking him in.

    “Overall, 52 per cent of Cripps’ AFL Player Rating points were won at stoppages – the third – highest percentage of any midfielder that played at least five games. He had the third highest contested possession rate of any midfielder , while he and Tom Mitchell were the only players to win more than 20 per cent of their side’s clearances.
    While Cripps is an absolute beast, he still rates only average for uncontested possessions and scoreboard impact and desperately needs help, finishing with 117 more disposals and 172 more contested possessions than any teammate.

    8

    0
  2. I’ve had Cripps in the side since day one.Thommo’s query on the contested beasts with the new rules has me greatly concerned.Less congestion, more open play, I feel a need for speed!! Does Lachie Neale looks a better fit?

    1

    2
    1. Although the AFL will no doubt take credit for any aesthetic changes in the game that it considers positive, I don’t think the new rules in and of themselves will have that much of an effect.

      6-6-6 applies only at centre bounces, and it was already the most common starting formation anyway. As an aside, it’s a rule that prevents just as many offensive tactics as it does defensive ones (a fact to which I think the AFL hierarchy is genuinely oblivious – illustrating precisely why they shouldn’t be trying to legislate the tactics of the game), but that’s beside the point. Insomuch as I can tell, this will have no effect whatsoever at normal stoppages.

      The other change that people seem to think will speed the game up, the new kick-in rules, is also unlikely to have much effect. End-to-end goals have always been a relative rarity. That isn’t going to change. The AFL seems to think these new rules will destroy the forward press, once and for all. Notwithstanding the fact that the forward press is at least 5 years past its peak effectiveness, what is likely to happen as a result of players being able to get the ball slightly further up the ground from a kick-in is that you will see a reduction in goals from forward-half intercepts, and an increase in midfield stoppages from kick-in chains. So much for turning the game into a goal-fest.

      What will make the game faster and more open, whether it’s this year, or next year, or in 2025, or whenever, is coaches deciding to play a fast, attacking game-style. History says that AFL tactics come and go and long-range cycles, so we can be confident it will happen at some point.

      So what does that mean for SuperCoach midfielders in 2019? Not a lot. Contested ball still precedes uncontested – before you can move the ball, you actually have to get the bloody thing. That was true during the low-scoring 60s, the high-scoring 70s through early 2000s, and the low-ish scoring mid-to-late 2010s. It’s never going to chance. Champion Data knows this, so they’re not going to stop rewarding contested beasts ahead of uncontested accumulators, regardless of the pace at which the game ends up being played.

      19

      0
      1. Cheers Salamander, like your analysis, the latter styles of Richmond, Pies and Dogs have relied on a chaos ball to a certain extent to win the ball and coupled that with intense pressure when they don’t have the ball. This seems to be the brand of the day.The new kickout rule may assist this.

        4

        0
      2. So succinctly put Salamander. Deserves at least 50 thumbs up in my book.

        I hear the SC entry numbers are down nearly 20% this year (compared to this time last year) and that HS research says it’s predominantly previous players who have simply had enough.

        SC used to pride itself on the fact that it was THE fantasy footy comp that best reflected ‘the game’.

        I said a few months back how a lot of mates don’t play anymore because of the simple fact, to a lesser and lesser degree, it doesn’t reflect the game, situation and players’ impact enough.

        You’re scoring system for AFLW is miles ahead, Jack.

        I find it wrenching to have to pick the likes of Lloyd and maybe Witherden ahead of Whitfield, Milera and Sicily simply because of the SC scoring system. The latter names are miles ahead in terms of their skills, entertainment and IMPACT on a game and I feel SC need to recognise this and address scoring to better reflect that soon.

        My big cash league has disbanded this year and I’m gutted (might have had a chance this year thanks to you lot).

        Is it just me, or are there others who feel the same?!

        #sortitoutSC

        15

        0
        1. I agree to many degrees Allsaints.
          However, i think the biggest ‘turn-off’ for many people is some of the inherit bias in scoring for certain ‘favourite’ players, over the years (think GAJ, Danger, Pendles)

          Last year it was Macrae – I watched very closely several of his games and there was simply no way that he actually achieved the stats in real time that were actually registered and scored by the system – it’s very easy to put a stat down in a computer and that then adds to the final score …. the test is, did the player really earn the stat? … I think this fact alone turns some people off.

          But yes, agree, the scoring needs to reflect more reality to players skills and levels … the difficulty is that it is hard to score live and will always have some level of subjectivity to it. AFL SC is certainly a much better product than the NRL counterpart though – as that system goes through 3 or 4 score updates with some matches played on a Thursday night still updating on a Monday!!! It significantly impacts results, and when it gets to the pointy end costs people their cash leagues and in some instances the $50K!! … and I guess that’s the final point to remember too … this is just a game us mad buggers are playing … and it’s free!! (well, may cost some relationships!! hahaha)

          7

          0
            1. Good point macca re scoring anomolies , i do still find sc, though sometimes frustrating, still very enjoyable.
              It took me a while to work out that you have to pick sc friendly players rather than your favourites.

              3

              0
        2. I’ve been playing SC for more than a decade and there used to be twice as many competitors but I’m considering playing AFL Fantasy and dumping SC as a protest at the blatant cash grab that HS/Murdoch are making from SC. They’re acting like drug dealers, filling my SC home page with attractive headlines that I have to pay to read, not giving access to the whole stats story unless I pay a premium, and creating an unfair disadvantage for the financially challenged by restricting coverage of JLT to Foxtel subscribers only. Fantasy and SC are created by the same mob with Fantasy supposedly fixing the inherent problems of SC and rewarding the footy knowledgable. Instant price rises certainly makes it harder for numpty’s to fix their early errors and gives those who research properly an advantage.
          As for rule changes by the AFL I’m unsure whether its just egos at AFL wanting their names recorded in game history, or stupidity from AFL who believe that our great game isn’t as good as basketball. 1980’s footy is still the best structure and always will be.

          4

          0
          1. Install an ad-blocker. I didn’t know the SC site even had ads for HS articles until reading your comment. Also, if you’re falling for the click-bait headlines and giving them views, you’re just perpetuating the situation.

            All the information you need for the SC can be found on this site anyway, most of the HS/other articles are terrible.

            7

            0
    2. I was just discussing the rules out of interest Joestar but I will be shocked if coaches don’t work overtime to shut down the game if it opens up too much. Besides, I imagine Cripps will just add a few uncontested marks and possessions if the game opens up a lot.

      2

      0

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *