Shots for and against

While watching my tip of a North win turn to another donut I thought that I would have a look at some of the graphs in my model.  I decided to have a closer look at the shots for and against (5 point moving average) for each team compared to the distribution of data from the start of the 2000 season up to the end of round four 2014.



The 5364 scores resulted in an average points per scoring shot (excluding out of bounds and including rushed: i.e. the scoreboard totals of goals and behinds) of 3.67; with a maximum of 5.375 and a minimum of 1.625; standard deviation of 0.531.  All fairly straightforward excel number crunching.



With a little more excel work I converted this data set into a cumulative distribution plot and have highlighted with two vertical lines the 33 and 66% (3.432 and 3.895 respectively).









Now taking the broad brush approach I consider a team has a good strong attack if they score more than 4.0 points per scoring shot and similarly if their opponents score more than 4.0 points per scoring shot against them then they have a leaky defence.  A tight defence concedes no more than 3.40 points per scoring shot and an attack under a lot of pressure when trying to score would also be less than 3.40.



Now of course these number bounce around each week for each team depending on who they play, the weather etc.  However, continuing with the broad brush analysis it is fairly easy to also use excel to calculate the moving average for each team (although in my case it does need a lot of look up tables and the use of the very handy function vlookup an awful lot of times).  The five point moving average for each team's offence and defence going into round five is shown in the table below:







I have highlighted the cells which are in the top or bottom third compared to the 2000-2014 data set.  Now the table shows some things that we/ the general public perception have in mind: that Fremantle have a very strong defence and that Sydney also play a defence orientated game.  Also that teams generally have scored easily against the Giants and that Melbourne have not been scoring very much.



However, I also think the table highlights a few things that are not commonly discussed: notably that the Bulldogs have a far more free flowing game with a leaky defence and an above average attack.  That Richmond and North are both "middling" teams as they are neither noted for their attack or defence.  Collingwood an Melbourne have a similar "pattern".



The table also highlights that to "be green" in both shots for and shots against is rare - only Hawthorn achieve this at the moment with Geelong only a couple of straight kicks away.  Which justifies the game of the round status on Monday where I hope that the quality of the game means that I will stay focused on the game rather than on the excel number crunching or the twitter commentary.