Scoring Anomalies – Round 1

Written by The Salamander on March 27 2019

If we are to be honest, the scoring across the whole weekend felt somewhat anomalous. So anomalous, in fact, that it led many to question whether the scoring system had been changed – something which SuperCoach HQ has flat-out denied. Questions of causation aside, the distribution of scores within teams in round 1 seemed a lot more even than usual. This reminded me of the excellent work Allsaints did earlier in the year applying the idea of the Gini coefficient to the distribution of SuperCoach points within teams – I think it’s fair to say that this week, teams were going for a Scandinavian theme. It will be interesting to see over the coming weeks whether this was a one-off, or if it’s a sign of things to come. With that out of the way, here are some individual scores which might have raised a few eyebrows on the weekend…

With similar disposal counts (31 – 30) and metres gained (685 – 600), some have been wondering where the near 50-point spread between Coniglio (154) and Whitfield (105) came from. Coniglio did have an extra couple of clearances, but also lower disposal efficiency (55 percent to 70), along with 5 clangers compared to 2. Looking at their stats a bit more closely, however, I suspect that the difference is mostly due to Coniglio kicking 3 goals to Whitfield’s 0, and also laying 7 tackles to 2.

24 disposals, 4 clearances, and 430 metres gained sounds like a pretty handy debut for an 18 year old, but clearly, Sam Walsh (68 points) is going to have to do a lot more than that to impress Champion Data. 54 percent DE and 6 clangers is probably what let him down, along with only having had 8 contested possessions and 1 tackle. He certainly wasn’t the only Carlton player to rack up a high disposal count and score like this: Walsh, Setterfield, Dow, Cuningham, and Petrevski-Seton collectively had over 25 percent of Carlton’s disposals, but under 20 percent of the team’s total SuperCoach points. Upon reflection, I think this might have more to do with Richmond than anything else: the Tigers play a high-pressure brand of football that forces disposal efficiency down and clanger counts up. Keep an eye on this over the next few weeks – if this trend continues, we might have to start planning for ‘The Richmond Effect’ when our players are facing them.

Of all the weekend’s anomalous scores, Tom Liberatore’s must surely take the cake: 28 disposals (13 contested) at 61 percent DE, 594 metres gained, 8 clearances, 8 inside 50s, and 9 score involvements for just 75 points. Surely his 4 clangers can’t have hurt his score that badly?

Our final scoring anomaly for the week goes to Steve Hocking. Nine new rules, all designed to turn the game into a goal-fest, and we ended up with the lowest-scoring opening round in 50 years. There were only three 100+ scores on the weekend, all of which occured in blowouts. It’s almost as if the style in which the game is played, and the resulting level of scoring, is driven by the coaches rather than the Laws of the Game Committee! Speaking of which, in a scoring anomaly rivalling that of Tom Liberatore, the highest score this week (141) was posted by Fremantle. Who is this new coach of theirs, and what has he done with Ross Lyon!?

Continuing on from the last paragraph, I’ll finish up by paraphrasing a long-dead economist: the curious task of these low-scoring games is to demonstrate to the AFL how little they really know about what they imagine they can design.


Were there any scores from the weekend that seemed off to you? Let us know in the comments below.

16
0


Leave a comment / Scroll to bottom

16 thoughts on “Scoring Anomalies – Round 1”

  1. Thanks Sal.

    Interesting to consider the “Richmond effect.”

    With both Riewoldt and Lynch looking in pretty good form early,

    I’m considering benching Moore this week. I think he may have his hands full just trying to stop these two.

    Thoughts?

    6

    1
    1. I think Moore will take Lynch.

      Lynch did spend a chunk of time on the bench last week and I’m not sure how much fitter blokes get in one week.

      If I was Buckley I’d be telling Moore to run off him as much as possible and get him up the ground.

      10

      0
    2. Didn’t watch the game but Moore had his best JLT score directly opposed to Charlie Curnow. Admittedly the Richmond keys are probably a bigger challenge but it does indicate he can score well playing a lock down role. He does also take the majority of their kickouts which should raise his floor

      4

      0
      1. Good point Harry.

        With Collins looking to miss this week.

        I’m thinking of loopholing ( E) Moore on my Defensive bench.

        I will take anything over 65.

        4

        0
  2. Thanks Salamander. What Hocking has done may be good for the AFL, it is making SuperCoach unpredictable. The first round have seen many teams just getting used to playing the 666 in real games . It would probably take the smart ones few weeks to adjust. Except that Fyfe is back , 2 knee injuries already and ruckmen are back to pre 2017 scores. I have now gotten over the fact that I paid top dollars in the ruck. Let’s start learning . AllSaints give us your theory

    4

    0
  3. Somewhat obscure one, but how did Charlie Ballard tonne up?

    24 touches, 4 marks, 4 tackles with 6 clangers and no goals.

    Worth noting he had a similar anomaly in JLT 2 when he scored 83 from 16 disposals despite 6 clangers and 50% DE.

    Definitely on my watchlist at that price and seemingly being a CD favourite.

    8

    1
    1. From watching the game I think he had around 13 possessions in the last quarter of a close game, would boost the score right up.

      6

      0
    2. I’m guessing a high number of intercept possessions and also a higher number of his stats in the last quarter which CD would have given much more weight to in a tight game.

      3

      0
  4. Agree that libbas score was surprising. I would have been annoyed if I had him but also confident that he’s playing good footy and should see some good scores soon. Can’t believe people are trading him out this week.

    12

    0
  5. Didn’t watch the game but Moore had his best JLT score directly opposed to Charlie Curnow. Admittedly the Richmond keys are probably a bigger challenge but it does indicate he can score well playing a lock down role. He does also take the majority of their kickouts which should raise his floor

    1

    0
  6. Speaking of lowest scoring round with afl teams not registering over 100. What about super coach? No massive 170+ scores. When did that happen no monster scores in a round? I’m not sure if that’s a thing. But I remember reading a while ago the average high score of a round was 175ish. So unless a VC went 130+ I’d always take a gamble.

    2

    1
  7. does anyone know if dev smiths roll has changed , has he been pushed into the fwd line with the injection of shiel into the midfield or did he just have a bad game , if he’s been moved fwd i can trade him out to someone for the same pts & bank some good $$

    0

    0

Leave a Reply

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