Thanks Thanks:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 24
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    8,900
    Post Thanks / Like

    Statistical Analysis of The Bulldogs

    Hey gang, I've compiled a few interesting statistics(thanks to the prospectus) on the 2007 season and some very interesting stats on the list in general heading in to 2008. I hope it does show some insight into where we can improve.




    Experience and Age

    - 7th most 'experienced' team with an average of 68.4 games per player.
    - 7th oldest average team with an average of 23.5 years.

    Height and Weight

    - 9th tallest average team with an average of 188.0cm. (Interesting to note that in 2005 we were the average tallest team in the league at 189.1cm)
    - 16th heaviest team at an average of 84.kg. A Massive 3.4kg on average lighter then Geelong who are number 1. That's nearly 75kg lighter over the ground on match day. (should also note here that 8 out of 11 draftees in 2006/2007 have been under 80kgs)


    Bulldogs Vs Oppositions Statistics Round by Round 2007

    - 0.9% less efficient kicking.
    - 2.5% less efficient handballing.

    - The Bulldogs gave away the most free kicks in the defensive 50 in the AFL - 23 more then the AFL average. Ryan Hargrave was the main culprit with 23 in total.

    - The Bulldogs conceded 108 'score launches' from their attacking 50. The worst in the league.

    - The Bulldogs committed 205 clangers in their defensive 50. The 2nd most in the AFL. Lake committing 26 of them.

    - In 2006-2007(the last 46 games) the Dogs had minus 578 uncontested possessions then their opposition. To put this in perspective, Hawthorn are the 2nd worst offenders and they have only conceded 295 more uncontested possessions. This statistic is an abomination.

    Team Leaders

    Contested Possession Average
    - West = 9.8
    - Cross = 8.1
    - Cooney = 6.9

    Uncontested Possession Average
    - Boyd = 18.0
    - West = 17.3
    - Cross = 16.7

    Clearances Average
    - Cooney = 4.1
    - Boyd = 3.9
    - West = 3.7

    Goals
    - Johnson = 59
    - Cooney = 28
    - Higgins = 26

    Score Assists
    - Giansiracusa = 35
    - Johnson = 25
    - Higgins = 24

    Free Kicks For Minus Free Kicks Against
    Best
    - West = +21
    - Cross = +17
    - Gilbee = +9

    Worst
    - Hargrave = -19
    - Akermanis = - 15
    - McMahon = -11

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Doglands
    Posts
    39,754
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Statistical Analysis of The Bulldogs

    Terrific stuff there B2B
    Western Bulldogs Football Club "Where it's cool to drool"

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    10,771
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Statistical Analysis of The Bulldogs

    Quote Originally Posted by Beuts2Blame View Post

    - The Bulldogs conceded 108 'score launches' from their attacking 50. The worst in the league.
    Hmm. We would have been no.1 in 05/06.

    *Edit* Thought it was started score launches from defensive 50 (i was abit tired)
    Last edited by hujsh; 09-02-2008 at 03:10 PM.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Mulligan's Boogie-board
    Posts
    13,791
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Statistical Analysis of The Bulldogs

    Quote Originally Posted by Beuts2Blame View Post
    - The Bulldogs conceded 108 'score launches' from their attacking 50. The worst in the league.
    This is one stat that really matters IMO. We need our forwards to apply far more defensive pressure - Harbrow is already outstanding in this area.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    14,670
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Statistical Analysis of The Bulldogs

    Some good info. there. What it all means, who knows, not really.

    As Mofra pointed out it shows that our forwardline allows the ball out of there zone with too much ease. Let's hope Murf, Johnno and Higgins in particular have learnt how to apply pressure in the off-season.

    Other things we must change:

    * Don't allow Hargrave to play in defence on someone taller than 185cm. Probably shouldn't happen now with the introduction of Everitt, Williams and McDougall, but if we do we are asking for trouble.
    * Lake simply must learn to use the ball more effectively.
    * Pick up your opponent to cut down on the amount of uncontested possessions the opposition have.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    8,900
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Statistical Analysis of The Bulldogs

    To me its obvious weight is a very important stat here, and a reason leading to some of the other stats.
    Last edited by LostDoggy; 10-02-2008 at 01:01 PM.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    2,921
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Statistical Analysis of The Bulldogs

    That defficiency in disposal is a big concern - having clean disposal is crucial to the success of our style of game.
    'And the Western suburbs erupt!'

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    8,900
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Statistical Analysis of The Bulldogs

    Quote Originally Posted by ErnieSigley View Post
    To me its obvious weight is a very most important stat here, and a reason leading to some of the other stats.
    Yep, agree. North Melbourne are on average the smallest team at 186.5cm. But there average weight is the 3rd heaviest in the league at 87.3kg! Only .2kg off Geelong.

    So the difference in weight between Geelong and North on game day is about 4kg. Compared to the Dogs who give up close to 75kg against Geelong..

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    8,900
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Statistical Analysis of The Bulldogs

    Thanks for the analysis of the stats. I'm not sure how important they all are but it does make for a good read.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Tasmania
    Posts
    5,920
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Statistical Analysis of The Bulldogs

    Very interesting read...well done

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Wherever the dogs are playing
    Posts
    61,277
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Statistical Analysis of The Bulldogs

    There is only one stat that really matters.................................. most wins in the season

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    8,900
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Statistical Analysis of The Bulldogs

    Quote Originally Posted by bornadog View Post
    There is only one stat that really matters.................................. most wins in the season
    That stat doesn't guarantee a GF win.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    8,900
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Statistical Analysis of The Bulldogs

    Good stats mate.

    This is a very unpopular thing to say, but the Hargrave statistic above should be noted. The charitable and orthodox interpretation is that he plays above his height and gives away free kicks because he is too small for the jobs he's asked to do.

    But I reckon he's simply too often in the wrong position and too flustered under pressure. He is the last person I like to see with the ball in the backline. But...seems like he's first picked every week so he's clearly doing something valuable, buggered if I see it though.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Behind the goals, Geelong Rd end
    Posts
    6,465
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Statistical Analysis of The Bulldogs

    Quote Originally Posted by Alan Shorty View Post
    Good stats mate.

    This is a very unpopular thing to say, but the Hargrave statistic above should be noted. The charitable and orthodox interpretation is that he plays above his height and gives away free kicks because he is too small for the jobs he's asked to do.

    But I reckon he's simply too often in the wrong position and too flustered under pressure. He is the last person I like to see with the ball in the backline. But...seems like he's first picked every week so he's clearly doing something valuable, buggered if I see it though.
    The way the rules are now, no-one will ever be able to successfully play on a taller opponent (unless he's a total gumby). Francis Bourke and Bruce Doull would never be able to play key back under the current rules.

    Hargrave is firmly entrenched in our best 22, he just can't be asked to do jobs that he's physically not capable to do.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    8,900
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Statistical Analysis of The Bulldogs

    Ryan Hargrave hasn't improved in this department for years.

    2004: FF = 5 FA = 15 Total = -10
    2005: FF = 10 FA = 19 Total = -9
    2006: FF = 13 FA = 29 Total = -16 (Worst at the club)
    2007: FF = 15 FA = 34 Total = -19 (Worst at the club and the worst for a defender in the league)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •