Analysis Crows Player Ratings

[Bob Neil]

It’s interesting that these ratings (both in general and in the match just gone) are favouring Rankine so heavily over Soligo.

 

[NSolis]

It’s interesting that these ratings (both in general and in the match just gone) are favouring Rankine so heavily over Soligo.

His disposals are super damaging I guess? Had 11 touches against Port for 3 goals and 2 goal assists, and was 4th for the team for metres gained despite having half the disposals of the rest of the top 5.

 

[Golumless]

His disposals are super damaging I guess? Had 11 touches against Port for 3 goals and 2 goal assists, and was 4th for the team for metres gained despite having half the disposals of the rest of the top 5.

I do remember the Champion data guy on SEN mentioning a few weeks back that they've pushed to really punish inaccuracy in goal kicking in the ratings this year, so I think this damage thought is probably on the money.

 

[Scorpus]

I do remember the Champion data guy on SEN mentioning a few weeks back that they've pushed to really punish inaccuracy in goal kicking in the ratings this year, so I think this damage thought is probably on the money.

Surely punishing inaccurate goal kicking more should only be implemented if the amount of scoring from kick ins has increased

 

[Bob Neil]

Surely punishing inaccurate goal kicking more should only be implemented if the amount of scoring from kick ins has increased

Not that I definitively know this to be true but my understanding of the ratings is that if a player gets the ball in a position (e.g. close to goal) where the expected score is, say, four points but ends up only actually scoring a point then in effect their involvement has cost the team three points and so this is reflected in their player rating for the match.

Then repeat this for all of their involvements in the match (i.e. does each involvement the player has positively or negatively impact the xScore for us or our opponent at any given time) and you get their aggregate impact for the match. Whether this translates directly to rating points or if there is some other metric involved I'm not sure.

 

[Interloperer]

It’s interesting that these ratings (both in general and in the match just gone) are favouring Rankine so heavily over Soligo.

Rankine's scored a few goals straight from clearances or similarly contested ball. So he'll get the credit both for creating the chance and also converting it.

Not that I definitively know this to be true but my understanding of the ratings is that if a player gets the ball in a position (e.g. close to goal) where the expected score is, say, four points but ends up only actually scoring a point then in effect their involvement has cost the team three points and so this is reflected in their player rating for the match.

Then repeat this for all of their involvements in the match (i.e. does each involvement the player has positively or negatively impact the xScore for us or our opponent at any given time) and you get their aggregate impact for the match. Whether this translates directly to rating points or if there is some other metric involved I'm not sure.

To my knowledge (a combination of that absurdly long academic paper I linked earlier and "stuff I heard on the internet"), the ratings started from the theory that 1 rating point should be analogous to 1 point on the scoreboard. So if you add up all the player ratings of both sides and subtract the loser from the winner. It should match the margin. except for two things:

1. There's obvious the points left over at the end of each quarter with no corresponding score
2. The AFL and/or Champion Data seem to have made some changes based purely on vibes. eg. An effective handball can never score less than 0 rating points, even though by the algorithm it could be negative. (the famous backwards and sideways hospital handball)

Similarly in that missed goal example, they'd actually only lose 2.5 points. Due to getting credit for the one point scored, but also 0.5 points from the field position of the kick in.

 

[Interloperer]

Pure Class Ratio: Izak Rankine

23

Izak Rankine

Age

24

Ht

181cm

Wt

82kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

13.0

3star

K

9.0

3star

HB

4.0

3star

M

2.7

3star

T

2.7

4star

G

2.0

5star

D

13.0

3star

K

9.0

4star

HB

4.0

3star

M

2.7

3star

T

2.7

4star

G

2.0

5star

D

13.0

4star

K

9.0

4star

HB

4.0

3star

M

2.7

3star

T

2.7

5star

G

2.0

5star

(0.25)
Quantity Over Quality: Daniel Curtin (-0.06)

 

[Bob Neil]

Rankine is currently in the top ten players in the competition by the AFL Player Ratings!