A Wallabies squad based on Super 14 stats

Roar Guru

By LeftArmSpinner, 4 May 2009 LeftArmSpinner is a Roar Guru

Tagged:: Brumbies, Reds, Rugby Union, Super Rugby, Waratahs, Western Force

Related coverage

Robbie Deans was quoted recently as being likely to select his first Wallabies squad for 2009 on the basis of statistics. This is in line with his preference for players who play out the full 80 minutes and who are constant contributors rather than wafting in and wafting out.

While there are always many factors involved in selecting a sporting team, they essentially fall into two categories: objective and subjective.

Neither provide all the necessary justification to the selection of any team, let alone a national team and entry to the exclusive and life long club that is the Wallabies.

In the full knowledge that my fellow Roarers have plenty of subjective views, I will provide a weekly team based only on statistics and not provide my own subjective views until the thread develops.

I have taken raw statistics, adjusted (removed) for players who have not met a minimum participation level, and then divided the player’s total score by the number of minutes played. It is consistent measure of player effectiveness and contribution.

As John Connolly said in Sunday’s newspaper, it is ideal to choose two for each position in a squad of 30 players. I have done this literally.

Clearly there will be players who can cover more than one position. I will leave those choices to my Roar colleagues and Robbie Deans.

1 Ben Alexander BRU Prop
1 Benn Robinson WAR Prop
2 T. Polota-Nau WAR Hooker
2 Stephen Moore BRU Hooker
3 Pekahou Cowan WFR Prop
3 Al Baxter WAR Prop
4 Van Humphries RED Lock
4 Nathan Sharpe WFR Lock
5 Tom Hockings WFR Lock
5 Peter Kimlin BRU Lock
6 Mitch Chapman BRU Backrower
6 Julian Salvi BRU Backrower
7 David Pocock WFR Backrower
7 George Smith BRU Backrower
8 Richard Brown WFR Backrower
8 Matt Hodgson WFR Backrower
9 Luke Burgess WAR Scrum half
9 Brett Sheehan WAR Scrum half
10 Matt Giteau WFR Five Eight
10 Quade Cooper RED Five Eight
11 Peter Hynes RED Winger
11 Lachlan Turner WAR Winger
12 James O’Conner WFR Inside centre
12 Tom Carter WAR Inside centre
13 Digby Ioane RED Outside centre
13 Gene Fairbanks BRU Outside centre
14 S. Mortlock BRU Winger
14 Drew Mitchell WFR Winger
15 Mark Gerrard BRU Fullback
15 Mark McLinden RED Fullback

So the poll question is:

[poll id="58"]

Enjoy sports? Enjoy a bargain? All Sports Online has your favourite sporting brands at up to 70% off. Online only, premium quality sporting goods and merchandise at discounted prices. Get a deal now.

The Crowd Says (52) | Page 1 of Comments

Sin-ick said | May 4th 2009 @ 8:03am | Report comment

Quade Cooper?? Seriously?? What stats did you use to come up with that one?? He has to be the worst of all the Aussie flyhalves for the past few weeks……

Unless you have the stats to back it up…….???

Reply
stillmissit said | May 4th 2009 @ 8:03am | Report comment

How very interesting LAS. Now we know how Wang Eye (EJ) got it so wrong for so long.

It strikes me that the only ones that appear correct in both instances FMPOV are, Hooker, OS breakaway and the Hynes/Turner wing.

Reply
Knives Out said | May 4th 2009 @ 8:15am | Report comment

Wang Eye?

Reply
stillmissit said | May 4th 2009 @ 8:30am | Report comment

Knives Out – It is what the players used to call Eddie Jones that or evil eye. They reckoned that when he got the evil eye on you, you knew you were on the way out.

Eddie gets my vote as the worst Aussie coach in my nearly 40 years of watching. But that is totally off subject.

I think the point that LAS is making is very valid and that is you cant pick teams on objectivity alone.

Reply
Nashi said | May 4th 2009 @ 10:09am | Report comment

LAS, can you do the same for the All Blacks and Boks. It’d be interesting to see how they compare with last years teams. Certainly the stats would seem to suggest that Australia would field a very different team if it was based solely on stats.

I can see only see three or four positions where I would agree and those are pretty much the no-brainers such as hooker and openside. Some of the selections are just “out there”. Cooper at 10, Carter at 12, Fairbanks at 13, Mclinden at 15. Wow, Henry et al would salivate at the prospect!

Reply
LeftArmSpinner said | May 4th 2009 @ 10:35am | Report comment

Sin-ick, statistically, Cooper (27.8) is second only to Giteau (32.7) in the 10 jersey. Christian Lealiifano is third placed (23.2) and Halangahu (22.3) and Beale (15.6), not that it mattered didnt qualify because they didnt meet the minimum requirement. play enough time. Barnes (20.1) met the minimum requirement but was even less effective.

Technically, O’Connor, also a 10, (29.7), was second behind Giteau but he played primarily 12 and so got the nod for the 12 jersey.

Comparing Cooper to other inside backs, (10, 12 and 13), Isaia Toeava 298, Matt Giteau 283, Ma’a Nonu 278, Wynand Olivier 266, Francois Steyn 244, Morné Steyn 243 and Quade Cooper 240.

Stillmissit, correct. there is much more to a player than just stats. And, you can see how much of an effect the playing style of the team affects the players performances.

Subjectively, I think that the props, hookers, and locks and 7′s are spot on as are Halves and at least the first XV of the backs. But it ignores several things, like blooding younger players for the RWC. Also, if you could get a player to get Tahu in space, he could murder defences, as he showed last weekend……but….not statistically (20.1) although that it with the Tahs in the baddest of days.

Reply
Sin-ick said | May 4th 2009 @ 10:38am | Report comment

LAS,

What numbers are you spitting out? You are saying that Cooper is 27.8…….

Maybe I missed something, but 27.8 what??

Reply
Sam Taulelei said | May 4th 2009 @ 10:46am | Report comment

This concept is sounding remarkably similar to John Mitchell’s ramblings in 2002 when he selected virtually the entire Crusaders team as the starting All Blacks XV.

Selection in itself is a subjective exercise, comparing and discussing what you see players doing, what you know they’re capable of doing at test level and whether some players can step up to the next level. They’ll also have to fit in with the gameplan that Deans will be pursuing.

Lies, lies and damned statistics – surely something must be amiss to omit Berrick Barnes from the selection, he would have to be an automatic first choice Wallaby.

Reply
LeftArmSpinner said | May 4th 2009 @ 10:49am | Report comment

each player’s performance is scored on the basis of what they do, tackles, runs, etc. for each game. I have taken this cumulative total to date and then adjusted it for number of minutes played. If you dont do this, players who have missed some games, cannot compete with players who have played and scored points. So, total points / minutes played. also, players need to have scored a minimum number of points (100) to remove players who jsut play 10 minutes, make a few runs and tackles at the end of the game and get a very high score per minute played.

27.8 is actually .278 points per minute played. So Giteau has scored 283 points in 866 minutes or 32.7.

nashi, but remember that those players are the reserve in those positions. The first player listed is the higher rated player. so the run on 10 would be Giteau, with Cooper his back up. Henry wont be licking so much…..

Reply
Greg Truman said | May 4th 2009 @ 11:58am | Report comment

Cool. Statistical proof (albeit, not scientific, with the greatest respect LAS) as to why none of the Australian sides are in the top four — why rugby is in trouble in Australia and why the Waratahs are insanely, infuriately boring. OK. Forget the Waratahs thing.
Anyhoo, should Robbie Deans be one of your disciples (are you a world rated squash player?) you’ve provided a solid foundation to bet Australia will come in fourth in the tri-nations.
Not to say the run on 15 wouldn’t be fine, but jeepers, only the mothers of some of the second choices cld like their chances of Wallaby selection.

Reply