Statistics

[c4v3m4n]

Are you thinking about making a spreadsheet or something?

Perhaps. Perhaps not.

Honestly it all depends on what your aims for the season are. If you want to do well in your league go for the consistent player, but if you want to get higher in the rankings I see more value going with the inconsistent player. Now you are all probably thinking I'm crazy, but I'll try to explain what I mean...

Say you have 2 players, lets call them Carlos Consistent and Rob Rolercoaster.
Carlos constantly scores between 95 and 110 points, week in week out. Kinda like Marc Murphy back in 2009 for SC. In that year 16 of his scores ranged between 98 and 116. So basically with this player you know what you're going to get.
Then you have Rob, whose scores fluctuate wildly week to week. Sometimes have massive weeks scoring 150+ whilst others he is more subdued and only manages to pump out a 60/70. Similar to Buddy Franklin of 2008. That year he had 8 scores over 130 (4 of them over 160), and 9 scores under 90 (4 of them under 70).

So if you had the choice of 2 players like this who were both going to average the same thing come end of year, but would get there in different fashion and I was going for overall I would pick Rob Rolercoaster. My reasoning is if you could half predict when he would explode you give him the captaincy and reap the rewards, whereas giving Carlos the captaincy doesn't get you very far ahead when just doubling 110 compared to 150+

So in summary, you're looking at their scoring potential rather than their consistency...fair enough.

The one I like to look at the most is consistency/standard deviation.

When it comes to stats (and I only play SC) I look at very little in terms of on the ground stats.

Tackles - score well in SC and mean the player can score even when his team is without the ball
Kick to handball ratio - kicks are just worth more
Kicking efficiency - important in SC obviously

Then in terms of SC scores

Standard Deviation - reliability is very important, even more important for your premiums/captain. Rookies will always go up and down so you need your core team to score well.

However, these are basically tie breakers. The most important stat is the average filtered with my footy nous in terms of factors that could alter that average over the year, i.e. tactical changes, change in role, injury prone, etc.

Injury proneness is a big one for me. Never picking Xavier Clarke again... lol jk.

Tackles and contested marks are another big winner in my book, great ways to score big points there.

Thanks everyone for their input so far, it's been a great and valuable insight to the inner workings of your minds.

[CrowsFan]

Honestly it all depends on what your aims for the season are. If you want to do well in your league go for the consistent player, but if you want to get higher in the rankings I see more value going with the inconsistent player. Now you are all probably thinking I'm crazy, but I'll try to explain what I mean...

Say you have 2 players, lets call them Carlos Consistent and Rob Rolercoaster.
Carlos constantly scores between 95 and 110 points, week in week out. Kinda like Marc Murphy back in 2009 for SC. In that year 16 of his scores ranged between 98 and 116. So basically with this player you know what you're going to get.
Then you have Rob, whose scores fluctuate wildly week to week. Sometimes have massive weeks scoring 150+ whilst others he is more subdued and only manages to pump out a 60/70. Similar to Buddy Franklin of 2008. That year he had 8 scores over 130 (4 of them over 160), and 9 scores under 90 (4 of them under 70).

So if you had the choice of 2 players like this who were both going to average the same thing come end of year, but would get there in different fashion and I was going for overall I would pick Rob Rolercoaster. My reasoning is if you could half predict when he would explode you give him the captaincy and reap the rewards, whereas giving Carlos the captaincy doesn't get you very far ahead when just doubling 110 compared to 150+

So in summary, you're looking at their scoring potential rather than their consistency...fair enough.

If I was going for overall then yes, but usually I go for league winning which means the more consistent player. Although I do like to take the riskier options as indicated this year taking Brennan ::)

[Holz]

Seems like consistency is #1 decision maker so far.

Thanks Ringo and Q for your input.

thats for people who care about league wins. Personally i don't really care about consistency. I would be happy with a guy with 0, 200 , 0 ,200 as long as they average 100
.

When i care about leagues i look at ceilings and floors.

i would prefer scores of 80 80 80 140 80 opposed to 92 92 92 92 92. In that way the  player can win you a game with a 140 but not lose you games with a a low score. So thats why i liked stevie j this year, didnt lose me any games but won my a few. So he was great even though he was inconsistent.

[Cicjose]

its the rookies i would prefer to be consistent

but premiums that can justify their yoyo scores by having a premium average will always be looked at

[Voldemort]

I pick players based on their names, Steele Sidebottom, Tyson Goldsack and Dick are the first in my team  ;)

[Cicjose]

so are you going to pick wood dick and sack to go into bottom krak?

[ossie85]

I pick players based on their names, Steele Sidebottom, Tyson Goldsack and Dick are the first in my team  ;)

Ben Johnson, Cameron Wood and Andrew Krakouer didn't make the cut?

[Voldemort]

I guess Krakhead is in there as well  ::) na, just joking bout him, he's a good bloke