Jim Park Analysis 2022

Topic: Jim Park Analysis 2022 (Read 4254 times) previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Jim Park Analysis 2022

Reply #15 – July 24, 2022, 08:48:56 pm

AFL 2022   Rd 18:   Carlton vs Geelong
Probably the worst we’ve played all year. We didn’t handle the conditions or the opposition as well as we could have.

Trends:
[1]   There were 9 voters again this week, the same as last week. Not great, as we lost, but I always a hope a few others might put in their 2 cents worth.

[2]   The rating this week was 7.41, a little better than a D+. Fair enough, I guess; we didn’t get pounded and we wouldn’t allow them a free run.

[3]   12 players got a mention this week, which isn’t bad. But when we win these days a lot more draw attention to themselves. It isn’t like the old days when 3 or 4 dominated and the others were there for the ride.

[4]   The average score was 24, which is definitely on the low end. In some ways it shows that not as many people are voting these days. In others, it shows that we were not that great.

[5]   Sam Walsh managed his [color=blue]4th BOG[/color] for the season, quickly catching Cripps. Cripps has 6 BOG’s, but only 2 in this half of the season. Tom was 2nd, which says something for a guy who was beaten in the ruck. Charlie Curnow was 3rd and Matt Kennedy was 4th.

[6]   That Pitto got through the 2nd unscathed was good, as out midfield is better when he is there. Tom tries his guts out, and so does Jack Silvagni. But Pittonet is the Big Dog, and it shows.

[7]   We had 3 players get votes from everyone this week. Three others got votes from all but one voter.

[8]   5 players managed 100 votes or more. The votes were a lot more concentrated than when we win.

[9]   Doc remains the only layer to get votes in every game, but we have only 3 players who have played in every game. Most clubs have a lot more than that.

Votes:
Walsh, Sam 263
de Koning, Tom 198
Curnow, Charles 148
Kennedy, Matthew 140
Hewett, George 119
Docherty, Sam 91
Fisher, Zac 86
Stocker, Liam 29
Saad, Adam 16
Cerra, Adam 8
Newman, Nicholas 8
Motlop, Jesse 4

Progressive Voting:
3065 - Cripps, Patrick (0)
2869 - Walsh, Sam (0)
2182 - Docherty, Sam (0)
1962 - Hewett, George (0)
1920 - Curnow, Charles (0)
1761 - Saad, Adam (0)
1462 - Kennedy, Matthew (0)
965 - McKay, Harrison (0)
926 - Cerra, Adam (0)
829 - Weitering, Jacob (0)
814 - de Koning, Tom (0)
596 - Silvagni, Jack (0)
452 - Young, Lewis (0)
386 - Fisher, Zac (0)
257 - Durdin, Corey (0)
231 - William, Zac (0)
216 - Pittonet, Marc (0)
201 - O'Brien, Lochie (0)
109 - McGovern, Mitchell (0)
94 - Cottrell, Matthew (0)
90 - Newman, Nicholas (0)
79 - Martin, Jack (0)
72 - Boyd, Jordan (0)
61 - Plowman, Lachlan (0)
48 - Newnes, Jack (0)
47 - Carroll, Jack (0)
41 - Motlop, Jesse (0)
29 - Stocker, Liam (0)
19 - Setterfield, Will (0)
11 - Owies, Matthew (0)
4 - Kemp, Brodie (0)

Cripps' lead is now only about 200.

Re: Jim Park Analysis 2022

Reply #16 – August 04, 2022, 05:10:55 pm

AFL 2022 Rd: 19   Carlton vs GWS
Not our best win for the year, but a solid one.

Trends:
[1]   There were 9 voters again this week, which is consistent.

[2]   The rating was 9.11, a little higher than a B. probably a reasonable assessment.

[3]   16 players got a mention this week, which is becoming our way of things when we win. If we get a contribution from most players, we get the job done.

[4]   The average was 30 this round, which is pretty good for the spread of players we had.

[5]   Adam Saad managed his 3rd BOG for the season. He has been in the top 5 on 8 occasions this season. Sam Walsh was 2nd, the 11th time he has been in our top 5 players for the year.

[6]   While Tom de Koning didn’t rule in the ruck, he managed a vote, and our mids managed to get a lot of the ball. Still think we’ll be better when Pitto is back and in form. However, that is not a given, since his injury would have restricted his training significantly.

[7]   3 players got votes from everyone this week: the top 2 and Charlie Curnow. Other got more votes than Curnow but didn’t attract every voter.

[8]   4 players managed 100 votes or more this week.

[9]   Doc remains the only player to get a mention every week. It goes to show how durable he’s been this year, as we have only 2 or 3 players who have played every game. And it shows!

Votes:
Saad, Adam 395
Walsh, Sam 268
Cripps, Patrick 157
Kennedy, Matthew 121
Curnow, Charles 91
Cerra, Adam 81
Cottrell, Matthew 56
Docherty, Sam 46
McKay, Harrison 35
de Koning, Tom 20
Silvagni, Jack 20
O'Brien, Lochie 20
Fisher, Zac 15
Newman, Nicholas 15
Plowman, Lachlan 15
Setterfield, Will 10

Progressive Votes:
3222 - Cripps, Patrick (0)
3137 - Walsh, Sam (0)
2228 - Docherty, Sam (0)
2156 - Saad, Adam (0)
2011 - Curnow, Charles (0)
1962 - Hewett, George (0)
1583 - Kennedy, Matthew (0)
1007 - Cerra, Adam (0)
1001 - McKay, Harrison (0)
834 - de Koning, Tom (0)
829 - Weitering, Jacob (0)
616 - Silvagni, Jack (0)
452 - Young, Lewis (0)
401 - Fisher, Zac (0)
257 - Durdin, Corey (0)
231 - William, Zac (0)
222 - O'Brien, Lochie (0)
216 - Pittonet, Marc (0)
150 - Cottrell, Matthew (0)
109 - McGovern, Mitchell (0)
105 - Newman, Nicholas (0)
79 - Martin, Jack (0)
76 - Plowman, Lachlan (0)
72 - Boyd, Jordan (0)
48 - Newnes, Jack (0)
47 - Carroll, Jack (0)
41 - Motlop, Jesse (0)
29 - Setterfield, Will (0)
29 - Stocker, Liam (0)
11 - Owies, Matthew (0)
4 - Kemp, Brodie (0)

It is getting pretty close at the top end. Cripps is still playing well, just not as well as he did earlier in the season. Walsh is coming, but his last few games, even getting heaps of ball, have been less impressive.

Re: Jim Park Analysis 2022

Reply #17 – August 12, 2022, 08:15:10 pm

AFL 2022 Rd 20:   Carlton vs Adelaide
It will go down as our most disappointing performance for the year. Granted that they’ve been playing better, but we were weak. Not enough will.

Trends:
[1]   There were 10 voters for this round. I didn’t vote, I didn’t see any of the game. I am quite happy about that, everything considered.

[2]   The rating, 5.7, is our lowest for the year. That represents an E-.

[3]   8 players got a mention this week, which is one of the lowest of the season.

[4]   The average of 19 is our equal lowest for the year.

[5]   Patrick Cripps managed his 7th BOG for the season. Sam Walsh was 2nd yet again.

[6]   Tom de Koning had an ordinary one. One of the reasons we lost so poorly.

[7]   2 players got votes from every voter; Cripps was one, Cerra was the other. Sam Walsh missed from 1 voter, as did Matthew Kennedy.

[8]   4 players managed 100 votes or better, which is half of the total players getting a vote.

[9]   Doc remains the only vote getter for every game, although this was not his best. Probably his least effective.

Votes:
Cripps, Patrick 262
Walsh, Sam 188
Kennedy, Matthew 137
Cerra, Adam 108
McGovern, Mitchell 74
Docherty, Sam 63
Young, Lewis 17
Weitering, Jacob 6

Progressive Voting:
3484 - Cripps, Patrick (0)
3325 - Walsh, Sam (0)
2290 - Docherty, Sam (0)
2156 - Saad, Adam (0)
2011 - Curnow, Charles (0)
1962 - Hewett, George (0)
1720 - Kennedy, Matthew (0)
1115 - Cerra, Adam (0)
1001 - McKay, Harrison (0)
835 - Weitering, Jacob (0)
834 - de Koning, Tom (0)
616 - Silvagni, Jack (0)
469 - Young, Lewis (0)
401 - Fisher, Zac (0)
257 - Durdin, Corey (0)
231 - William, Zac (0)
222 - O'Brien, Lochie (0)
216 - Pittonet, Marc (0)
184 - McGovern, Mitchell (0)
150 - Cottrell, Matthew (0)
105 - Newman, Nicholas (0)
79 - Martin, Jack (0)
76 - Plowman, Lachlan (0)
72 - Boyd, Jordan (0)
48 - Newnes, Jack (0)
47 - Carroll, Jack (0)
41 - Motlop, Jesse (0)
29 - Setterfield, Will (0)
29 - Stocker, Liam (0)
11 - Owies, Matthew (0)
4 - Kemp, Brodie (0)

Cripps maintains a small lead. Walsh is catching up vote-wise, even if he isn't playing as well as he could.
Close between 3rd and 6th.

Re: Jim Park Analysis 2022

Reply #18 – August 18, 2022, 09:17:55 pm

AFL Rd 21 2022   Carlton vs Brisbane
This was a major fail, but for the first 25 minutes of the last quarter. A big fail.

Trends:
[1]   There were 9 voters again this week: we rarely break 10 now when we lose.

[2]   The rating, 5.67 was pretty poor, our worst for the year. This represents an E-.

[3]   11 players rated a mention this week.

[4]   The average was a mere 18 votes. Ordinary.

[5]   Jacob Weitering managed his 2nd BOG for the season, his first since his return from injury. It was very close between the top 4 vote getters.

[6]   Tom de Koning had a shocker and was dropped for the next round. We were smashed in the middle.

[7]   The top 4 vote getters all managed votes from every voter. That doesn’t happen very often.

[8]   The top 4 vote getters all managed more than 100 votes, which is significant.

[9]   I won’t repeat the message about Doc except to say that he has only a couple of rounds left until he gets a clean sweep. Brilliant effort.

Votes:
Weitering, Jacob 189
Walsh, Sam 145
Docherty, Sam 126
Cripps, Patrick 120
Saad, Adam 88
McGovern, Mitchell 63
O'Brien, Lochie 50
Cerra, Adam 31
Motlop, Jesse 25
Fisher, Zac 6
Cottrell, Matthew 6

Progressive Votes:
3604 - Cripps, Patrick (0)
3470 - Walsh, Sam (0)
2416 - Docherty, Sam (0)
2244 - Saad, Adam (0)
2011 - Curnow, Charles (0)
1962 - Hewett, George (0)
1720 - Kennedy, Matthew (0)
1146 - Cerra, Adam (0)
1024 - Weitering, Jacob (0)
1001 - McKay, Harrison (0)
834 - de Koning, Tom (0)
616 - Silvagni, Jack (0)
469 - Young, Lewis (0)
408 - Fisher, Zac (0)
272 - O'Brien, Lochie (0)
257 - Durdin, Corey (0)
247 - McGovern, Mitchell (0)
231 - William, Zac (0)
216 - Pittonet, Marc (0)
156 - Cottrell, Matthew (0)
105 - Newman, Nicholas (0)
79 - Martin, Jack (0)
76 - Plowman, Lachlan (0)
72 - Boyd, Jordan (0)
66 - Motlop, Jesse (0)
48 - Newnes, Jack (0)
47 - Carroll, Jack (0)
29 - Setterfield, Will (0)
29 - Stocker, Liam (0)
11 - Owies, Matthew (0)
4 - Kemp, Brodie (0)

Re: Jim Park Analysis 2022

Reply #19 – August 19, 2022, 09:04:23 pm

AFL 2022 Rd 21   Carlton vs Melbourne
We came up 11 seconds short. What a disappointment.

Trends:
[1]   There were 16 voters for this game, which is close to our turnout for the year. Pity we couldn’t quite finish it off. Last week there were 9: just over half as many.

[2]   The rating was 8.94, which is effectively a B, for a loss, even when one voter rated the game an E. Obviously, we were much more impressive than we have been of late.

[3]   Last week we barely had a contributor: this week we were very even and very strong. We had 13 significant contributors.

[4]   The average vote was 29 for this week, compared to our lowest level last week.

[5]   Sam Dochery had his 2nd BOG for the season, which has been his most consistent. Young was 2nd, his best effort to date.

[6]   Jack Silvagni was probably our most effective ruck on the right, as he acted as an extra mid. However, Marc Pittonet was significantly improved. We need Pitto to be at his best if we are to be a threat.

[7]   Only Doc got votes from everybody, but a number of guys attract most voters.

[8]   Four players managed 100 votes or more.

[9]   Doc continues his amazing job this year.

Votes:
Docherty, Sam 324
Young, Lewis 235
Cripps, Patrick 229
McKay, Harrison 134
Cottrell, Matthew 81
Setterfield, Will 81
Martin, Jack 70
Saad, Adam 61
Fisher, Zac 36
Silvagni, Jack 34
Walsh, Sam 28
McGovern, Mitchell 25
Curnow, Charles 3

Progressive Voting:
3833 - Cripps, Patrick (0)
3498 - Walsh, Sam (0)
2740 - Docherty, Sam (0)
2305 - Saad, Adam (0)
2014 - Curnow, Charles (0)
1962 - Hewett, George (0)
1720 - Kennedy, Matthew (0)
1146 - Cerra, Adam (0)
1135 - McKay, Harrison (0)
1024 - Weitering, Jacob (0)
834 - de Koning, Tom (0)
704 - Young, Lewis (0)
650 - Silvagni, Jack (0)
444 - Fisher, Zac (0)
272 - McGovern, Mitchell (0)
272 - O'Brien, Lochie (0)
257 - Durdin, Corey (0)
237 - Cottrell, Matthew (0)
231 - William, Zac (0)
216 - Pittonet, Marc (0)
149 - Martin, Jack (0)
110 - Setterfield, Will (0)
105 - Newman, Nicholas (0)
76 - Plowman, Lachlan (0)
72 - Boyd, Jordan (0)
66 - Motlop, Jesse (0)
48 - Newnes, Jack (0)
47 - Carroll, Jack (0)
29 - Stocker, Liam (0)
11 - Owies, Matthew (0)
4 - Kemp, Brodie (0)

Re: Jim Park Analysis 2022

Reply #20 – September 05, 2022, 04:42:09 pm

AFL Rd 23 2022:   Carlton vs Collingwood:
So near, yet so far. We proved we should be in the finals. No team is safe from us. But we still lack …

Trends:
[1]   There were 10 voters, well down on the 16 of last week, but better than the corresponding game last game last year, where we got 9. Probably about par for the course, now. Hopefully more people will want to vote in 2023, as we win more big games.

[2]   The rating was 8.83,which represents a B-. This is the best I can remember for any loss. Some of our wins don’t rate this highly.

[3]   16 players got a mention this week. Which shows that most of our players did something. We just needed that one more something. This year the number of players getting votes is generally higher than it has been. It is probably a function of our better game style and commitment.

[4]   The average vote this week was 29, which is the same as last week. Pretty good, but not quite good enough.

[5]   Patrick Cripps finished the season as he started it, with a BOG performance. Pity the result was not the same. Cerra and Doc filled the minor placings. Cripps had 8 BOG’s this season.

[6]   Our ruck position remains a point of interest. Pitto was probably beaten, but we found out afterwards he wasn’t close to 100% fit. Silvagni had some good moments in the ruck, but he isn’t the answer there. Pitto was so good early in the season; it was a pity he could produce that form at the end.

[7]   Cerra and Cripps both managed votes from everybody. Young and Doc managed all but one.

[8]   Sam Docherty got votes in every single game this season, the first time I can remember that happening. What a comeback for a guy I thought we might have seen the last of.
Doc was also one of very few who actually played every game this year. No other contender had to deal with injuries like we did.

[9]   Five players managed 100 votes or more, which was tremendous.

Votes:
Cripps, Patrick 336
Cerra, Adam 274
Docherty, Sam 177
Young, Lewis 159
Setterfield, Will 141
McKay, Harrison 53
McGovern, Mitchell 31
Saad, Adam 27
Curnow, Charles 27
O'Brien, Lochie 27
Motlop, Jesse 22
Cottrell, Matthew 13
William, Zac 13
Weitering, Jacob 9
Pittonet, Marc 9
Marchbank, Caleb 9

Final Tally:
4169 - Cripps, Patrick (336)
3498 - Walsh, Sam (0)
2917 - Docherty, Sam (177)
2332 - Saad, Adam (27)
2040 - Curnow, Charles (27)
1962 - Hewett, George (0)
1720 - Kennedy, Matthew (0)
1420 - Cerra, Adam (274)
1188 - McKay, Harrison (53)
1032 - Weitering, Jacob (9)
863 - Young, Lewis (159)
834 - de Koning, Tom (0)
650 - Silvagni, Jack (0)
444 - Fisher, Zac (0)
303 - McGovern, Mitchell (31)
299 - O'Brien, Lochie (27)
257 - Durdin, Corey (0)
251 - Setterfield, Will (142)
251 - Cottrell, Matthew (14)
244 - William, Zac (14)
225 - Pittonet, Marc (9)
149 - Martin, Jack (0)
105 - Newman, Nicholas (0)
89 - Motlop, Jesse (23)
76 - Plowman, Lachlan (0)
72 - Boyd, Jordan (0)
48 - Newnes, Jack (0)
47 - Carroll, Jack (0)
29 - Stocker, Liam (0)
11 - Owies, Matthew (0)
9 - Marchbank, Caleb (9)
4 - Kemp, Brodie (0)

Congratulations to Patrick Cripps, winner of the Jim Park Award for 2022. It was an excellent season.
Well done to the place getters, as it was pretty close after the first two.

Re: Jim Park Analysis 2022

Reply #21 – September 05, 2022, 05:25:50 pm

Thanks for all the work, Crash in doing this. It will be interesting to see how correct the voters get to the B&F.

Re: Jim Park Analysis 2022

Reply #22 – September 05, 2022, 06:55:19 pm

Top 10 B & F looks about right tbh

4169 - Cripps, Patrick (336)
3498 - Walsh, Sam (0)
2917 - Docherty, Sam (177)
2332 - Saad, Adam (27)
2040 - Curnow, Charles (27)
1962 - Hewett, George (0)
1720 - Kennedy, Matthew (0)
1420 - Cerra, Adam (274)
1188 - McKay, Harrison (53)
1032 - Weitering, Jacob (9)

Re: Jim Park Analysis 2022

Reply #23 – September 05, 2022, 07:13:52 pm

Thanks Crash for your hard work in running the Jim Park award again and providing regular analysis updates. Always worth a read.

Re: Jim Park Analysis 2022

Reply #24 – September 05, 2022, 08:36:33 pm

Quote from: percy – on September 05, 2022, 07:13:52 pm

Thanks Crash for your hard work in running the Jim Park award again and providing regular analysis updates. Always worth a read.

Thanks, guys. I'll be more punctual next year, assuming you still want it to run. There haven't always been a lot of voters this year.