Who did they beat? Stats clue on Crows' fall

[RustyCage]

http://www.theage.com.au/news/sport/who-did-they-beat-stats-clue-on-crows-fall/2006/08/30/1156816968193.html

Who did they beat? Stats clue on Crows' fall
Geoff McClure

August 31, 2006
Page 1 of 2 | Single page

SPORTING LIFE


A LAPSE in form coupled with lots of injuries could be the reasons being blamed for Adelaide's amazing slump in this year's AFL premiership battle, but not everyone sees it that way. Certainly not leading stats man Martin Windsor-Black. who has come up with quite an amazing stat — and one that he produced as long as four weeks ago — that he reckons proves once and for all the Crows have been merely "pretenders" all season. Writing on the respected footystats website after round 17, Windsor-Black claimed that Adelaide's high spot on the ladder then was more to do with the fact that it had had such a lucky streak of playing clubs well below it on the ladder, that nine of its 11 previous opponents were placed 10th or below. "Have we overestimated Adelaide?," asked the stats man at the time. "Have we seen the end of the Crows' dream run? Last weekend they finally played a team within five places of them on the ladder (second-placed West Coast) and lost by 82 points." And as proof of what the stats man was on about, here's the quite stunning stat, that from round six to 16, Adelaide hovered from top or third position (for an average spot of 1.63) but its opponents were placed 11, 12, 11, 13, 16, 10, 7, 11, 6, 14 and 13 (average 11.27). Noted Windsor-Black at the time: "The difference of 9.64, to be put another way, means that on average, Adelaide had played teams which were almost 10 positions below it on the ladder." He said yesterday: "Since that streak the Crows have lost four of their past five matches and will probably lose to Melbourne this weekend. They would have to be the most overrated team in the history of the game."

[sydney-dog]

their is a danger of reading too much into stats, if you want to paint a true picture you need to do the same stats for all teams and rank them, not just one team in isolation.

my stats

HEAD TO HEAD RECORDS OF THE TOP EIGHT TEAMS THIS YEAR

Adelaide: 7-4 - WINS: Collingwood twice, Melbourne, Fremantle, Bulldogs, St Kilda, Sydney. LOSSES: West Coast twice, Bulldogs, Fremantle

Only fremantle has a better record with 8 wins, west coast 7, while sydney has only won against 3 top 8 sides

But like I said do stats really present a true picture, Adelaide beat Melb in brisbane when they were sitting about 14th, after that win Melb went on to win 8 out of 10 games...

Does it paint a true picture, I don't think so

[mal]

Spare a thought for CARLTON , I looked at their draw about a month
ago and it was tough, they had to play sides above them on
the Premiership ladder......Thier form is better than it looks ?

PAFC sensational article, just strange how the Bookmakers, Media Experts,Punters,
S/DOG,TASSIE,MAL and the rest of Australia could oversight those facts.

PAFC...S/DOG... both of your statistical presentations have great merit.

Stats can be misleading as well, COLLINGWOOD need 54,000 spectators
this week to eclipse the previous club attendance record in AFL history.
Statisically thats right, but they played a lot of games at the MCG.
If they played a majority at TELSTRA DOOM that figure would be significantly less.