Stats Show The Mighty Hawks Have The Most Talented List

[Hawka]

The 2012 Prospectus has Shown that the hawks have the most talented playing list with 26 players classed as average or better which is the most in the AFL
With seven eltie
Sam Mitchell, Shaun Burgoyne, Luke Hodge, Jarryd Roughead, Lance Franklin, Grant Birchall and Cyril Rioli.
the equal most of any club
Now that we statistical have the best list we must show that and i think nothing but a premiership is a fail.Yea it may be tough but its true
More info can be found here
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/stats-shows-hawthorn-has-the-most-talent-laden-list/story-e6frf9jf-1226224741457

[Torpedo10]

I think the Hwks have a real crack at the Premiership in 2012. Came so close to the Pies in 2011.I think they have there best chance for a few years in 2012.

[PowerBug]

Yeah, i saw that in the paper this morning. Port and GWS are the only sides with no "elite" players.

[Torpedo10]

Well not "yet" PB. I think that Port have a few players that in a few years will be "elite".

[hawk_88]

Well not "yet" PB. I think that Port have a few players that in a few years will be "elite".

The same could be said of every club.

[ossie85]

Reckon they felt pretty talented after the prelim. Yes the Hawks are an awfully good team, and no team has underachieved as much as Hawthorn since Port in 2001-03...

Rate them a huge chance for 2012

[Torpedo10]

Well not "yet" PB. I think that Port have a few players that in a few years will be "elite".

The same could be said of every club.

Yeah but Port don't have any "elite" players at the moment.

[Holz]

thats exactly why i rate the hawks as the premiership favourites, if Burgoyne and roughed are "elite' than port should have some, i dont rate those guys as elite. But i guess what scale your using for elite.

If you guys could are you able to tell me which roos are elite

[valkorum]

The 2012 Prospectus has Shown that the hawks have the most talented playing list with 26 players classed as average or better which is the most in the AFL
With seven eltie
Sam Mitchell, Shaun Burgoyne, Luke Hodge, Jarryd Roughead, Lance Franklin, Grant Birchall and Cyril Rioli.
the equal most of any club
Now that we statistical have the best list we must show that and i think nothing but a premiership is a fail.Yea it may be tough but its true
More info can be found here
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/stats-shows-hawthorn-has-the-most-talent-laden-list/story-e6frf9jf-1226224741457

Bit surprised that Boomer isnt on the elite list.

[Holz]

The 2012 Prospectus has Shown that the hawks have the most talented playing list with 26 players classed as average or better which is the most in the AFL
With seven eltie
Sam Mitchell, Shaun Burgoyne, Luke Hodge, Jarryd Roughead, Lance Franklin, Grant Birchall and Cyril Rioli.
the equal most of any club
Now that we statistical have the best list we must show that and i think nothing but a premiership is a fail.Yea it may be tough but its true
More info can be found here
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/stats-shows-hawthorn-has-the-most-talent-laden-list/story-e6frf9jf-1226224741457

Bit surprised that Boomer isnt on the elite list.

Ok looking over the list its a joke, its what happens when you look purely on stats and not game. They say stats dont lie but in this case i think they do

Mundy not an elite?
Jamison an elite?

Houli an Elite? please cotchin anyday of the week over him any day

Wells and Boomer not elite is crazy


Even though the lists are flawed i still think they have the best list

[Torpedo10]

No Scott Thompson( Adelaide)?

[hawk_88]

Ok looking over the list its a joke, its what happens when you look purely on stats and not game. They say stats dont lie but in this case i think they do

Mundy not an elite?
Jamison an elite?

Houli an Elite? please cotchin anyday of the week over him any day

Wells and Boomer not elite is crazy

Stats don't, people do, intentionally or otherwise. Stats are consistent, humans aren't. You ask an individual to rank a group of players based on perception and you will get a different list every time. Apply a good metric and it is always the same.

Professional sport world wide is becoming much more stats oriented and much less "intuition" based. People argue that stats don't cover the intangible human element, but teams that don't follow this have consistently shown to be left behind. Metrics aren't randomly chosen, but developed and compared to past results, to identify high preforming metrics. They are proof based, scientific if you will, not human intuition. Sabermetrics (the origin of which is explored in Brad Pitt's new film Moneyball) is the most famous case of this in world sport, but most professional sports have various metrics. Pelchen, ex-Hawthorn now St Kilda, is probably the most famous individual in AFL when it comes to metrics, who developed a metric that included 16 player archetypes to recruit, each with their own metric, and famously being a left footer was a factor considered.

It is about how you read the stats. Look at what the lists actually mean.

First off they have to come up with a metric for how to classify players. In this case they have chosen rank based strategy where players are ranked within position types, identified as: midfield, general forward, key forward, general defender, key defender, ruck. A metric would also be required group the players into position type.

Then Champion Data's ranking system is used to rank the players within each position type.

So what this means is that this definition of elite is relative to the other players in each position type, not a certain level of output or ability that one has to reach. So a midfielder may well be a better midfielder than a certain forward, but the overall quality of forwards would mean that the forward could be classified elite where the midfielder won't.

It is worth noting that this isn't a metric designed to predict team success and using it as such would be a miss use. At best you could say that it could be an indicator, but even then that would be iffy.

[Holz]

Ok looking over the list its a joke, its what happens when you look purely on stats and not game. They say stats dont lie but in this case i think they do

Mundy not an elite?
Jamison an elite?

Houli an Elite? please cotchin anyday of the week over him any day

Wells and Boomer not elite is crazy

Stats don't, people do, intentionally or otherwise. Stats are consistent, humans aren't. You ask an individual to rank a group of players based on perception and you will get a different list every time. Apply a good metric and it is always the same.

Professional sport world wide is becoming much more stats oriented and much less "intuition" based. People argue that stats don't cover the intangible human element, but teams that don't follow this have consistently shown to be left behind. Metrics aren't randomly chosen, but developed and compared to past results, to identify high preforming metrics. They are proof based, scientific if you will, not human intuition. Sabermetrics (the origin of which is explored in Brad Pitt's new film Moneyball) is the most famous case of this in world sport, but most professional sports have various metrics. Pelchen, ex-Hawthorn now St Kilda, is probably the most famous individual in AFL when it comes to metrics, who developed a metric that included 16 player archetypes to recruit, each with their own metric, and famously being a left footer was a factor considered.

It is about how you read the stats. Look at what the lists actually mean.

First off they have to come up with a metric for how to classify players. In this case they have chosen rank based strategy where players are ranked within position types, identified as: midfield, general forward, key forward, general defender, key defender, ruck. A metric would also be required group the players into position type.

Then Champion Data's ranking system is used to rank the players within each position type.

So what this means is that this definition of elite is relative to the other players in each position type, not a certain level of output or ability that one has to reach. So a midfielder may well be a better midfielder than a certain forward, but the overall quality of forwards would mean that the forward could be classified elite where the midfielder won't.

It is worth noting that this isn't a metric designed to predict team success and using it as such would be a miss use. At best you could say that it could be an indicator, but even then that would be iffy.

i do agree stats dont lie, its how people manipulate and interpret stats that makes errors. For example is possessions have been used than of course hawks will dominate as their game was all about ball use. Dont like the list but i still like the hawks

[Ziplock]

out of the teams that I think have a shot of the flag next year, I want the hawks or freo to win it :)

[Holz]

out of the teams that I think have a shot of the flag next year, I want the hawks or freo to win it :)

i would be happy if gellong won it again and i would really like it to be against the hawks. But as long as collingwood don't win its ok.