Scoring Anomalies – Round 6

Written by The Salamander on May 2 2019

I can’t be the only person who thinks Dustin Martin’s 89 points for 17 disposals (11 contested, 59 percent DE, just 61 metres gained), 4 tackles, 3 clearances, 3 score involvements, and a goal, is a little generous, especially when compared to teammate Jack Ross’ identical score for 28 disposals (7 contested, 71 percent DE, 415 metres gained), 3 tackles, 3 clearances, and 8 score involvements.

With his 30 disposals (11 contested, 67 percent DE, 481 metres gained), 8 marks, and 5 clearances netting him just 85 points, it’s hard to see why Zach Merrett didn’t crack the ton on Friday. He may have been held back slightly by only having had 3 tackles, although he did also have 6 one-percenters.

Much the same can be said for Todd Goldstein, who managed 96 from 33 hitouts (11 to advantage), 21 disposals (8 contested, 71 percent DE, 211 metres gained), and 5 clearances. Once again, it may have been the lack of tackles (zero) that let him down.

Just the 85 points for Brad Crouch from 30 disposals (14 contested, 67 percent DE, 398 metres gained), 11 clearances, and just the 2 clangers on the weekend. Once again, perhaps it was only laying 2 tackles that held him back?

Finally, with two Scoring Anomalies appearances in as many weeks, Jaeger O’Meara could be forgiven for thinking that someone at Champion Data doesn’t like him very much. A clear best-on-ground on Sunday, with 42 disposals (23 contested, 64 percent DE, 431 metres gained), 8 marks, 9 clearances, 10 score involvements, and a goal, as well as a perfect 10 votes from the two coaches, he surely deserved more than 133. He may have been held back by 7 clangers, and, yep, you guessed it, only laying 2 tackles (I can sense a theme here…).



Did any scores seem off to you on the weekend? Let us know in the comments below.

14
0


Leave a comment / Scroll to bottom

13 thoughts on “Scoring Anomalies – Round 6”

  1. Any stats in the last quarter for Zerrett basically didn’t count to his scoring. Was on 90 at 3 qtr time, but since it was a close game influential plays would have gained more. Losing points in the final quarter does raise an eyebrow however

    7

    0
    1. Different games, different rules. Supercoach existed long before Fantasy started doing that; clearly Virtual Sports (the company that runs SuperCoach, and its Dreamteam-flavoured cousin Real Dream Team) didn’t feel the need to follow suit.

      1

      0
  2. Fantasy Freako cleared up BCrouch’s scoring anomaly on a podcast. Basically had 2 ineffective disposals in the 3rd when the game was up for grabs, and stated his DE was in the 50’s.

    6

    0
      1. His kicking went at 47%, he had 2 tackles and the crows players all put up big stats to take his points. Not robbed at all.

        A 30 disposal game at 60% kicking efficiency and 5 tackles would usually only get you a score of about 110 and he had players everywhere taking points off him. 85 is the right score and if you want to get a player who doesn’t have points taken off him pick Jaeger instead.

        1

        0
  3. I’ve always thought Macrea and Martins scores have been above the impact they have on the game, some players seem to score well I guess. I don’t pretend to understand how the formula works though.

    4

    0
  4. Is this going to be a weekly thing/post? it’s so silly, have a hard look at the stats & the answers 99% of the time are there to see

    1

    4
    1. | Is this going to be a weekly thing/post?

      It has been for some time.

      | have a hard look at the stats & the answers 99% of the time are there to see

      And my job is to ferret out the 1 percent that aren’t.

      8

      0
  5. To really know whats going on head to AFL stats pro and tally up the effective kicks and effective handballs. There you can clearly see that Ross had 8 effective kicks and 12 effective handballs, to Martin’s 5 effective kicks and 5 effective handballs. How close these stats are explains any of your concerns and closes the gap between the players.

    Seriously though, you must know that SuperCoach scales down what is done when the game is already over and scales up what is done when the scores are close. If it’s close the whole game the end is scaled up more than the beginning and CD scale up the moments of the game they deem to be the most pivotal. If it’s a blow out the moments where it close will be scaled up. Ross had 14 disposals in the last quarter alone, when Richmond was running away with it. Martin started well and slowed down. That’s the explanation.

    1

    0
    1. | Ross had 8 effective kicks and 12 effective handballs, to Martin’s 5 effective kicks and 5 effective handballs. How close these stats are explains any of your concerns and closes the gap between the players.

      I should think it would *widen* the gap?

      | Seriously though, you must know that SuperCoach scales down what is done when the game is already over and scales up what is done when the scores are close.

      Of course. A lot of scoring anomalies could probably be explained by scaling. But with the black-box nature of the scoring system, it can be hard to tell what’s going on at times.

      2

      0

Leave a Reply to Pete Cancel reply

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