2011 AFL Power Rankings - RD3

[Roby]

The NBA have a power ranking system which rates teams from first to last due the unevenness of the draw, difference divisions and conferences. The latter been the real reason why it's done, as while a team in the Eastern conference might be on top they may be ranked fourth in the western conference based purely on win/loss ratio. Theoretically the power rankings are used to rank teams in the league provided all things were equal.

We don't have one in the AFL and that's mostly due because there is only one league/division/conference. Still, that doesn't stop supporters, fans and the media postulating where teams are ranked.

I would also argue that the AFL fixture is less fair or even than a NBA fixture which is broken into divisions were teams encompassing those divisions play each other more, rather than an AFL fixture which is governed by revenue. None the less I understand the realities of the AFL market in Australia and this purely an exercise in ranking 17 teams.

Firstly equating which teams have played each other and attributing a value to opposition played. Beating Fremantle who has only lost one game equates higher than beating the Gold Coast who have been thrashed in all games. Recent form has more weight than games from over a month ago. Also things like been down to one on the bench and winning the game, umpiring inequity, missing players, should be taken in account in determining the weight of the result. Conversely a team cannot move up or down the power rankings too quickly unless it's the earlier rounds.

Of course this doesn't take into account team's potential, matchup anomalies, teams developing strategies or finals expectations. While these are important considerations they are too difficult to quantify, so the power rankings are mainly an arbitrary indication of team performance.

I'm sure the rankings will not be agreed and the formula will be revised over time but these are my unofficial power rankings so far:

1. Collingwood
2. Geelong
3. Fremantle
4. Hawthorn
5. Essendon
6. Bulldogs
7. Adelaide
8. St Kilda
9. Sydney
10. Carlton
11. West Coast
12. Melbourne
13. Kangaroos
14. Richmond
15. Port Adelaide
16. Brisbane
17. Gold Coast

 

[rose jam]

why isn't the ladder this year followed as winning % instead of points for?

 

[worstfold]

looks about right to me

 

[DarkPhoenix]

why isn't the ladder this year followed as winning % instead of points for?

Because points for is always the first check, because of the bye this screws things around.

Assume 1 team had played one game where they doubled their opponents score, their % will be 200.

Team 2 has played 9 games and has won every game by a point, their % is going to be 100-101% maybe a bit more (depending on actual scores attained).

If you went by % Team 1 would be on top, and this would be completely unrealistic as team 2 is clearly in a better position.

(Unless ive completely misinterpreted your statement)

On Topic: Seems fairly reasonable for this point in time.

 

[NakedDeadGuy]

I have kept a 'line' ladder for my own punting research. I guess it measures performance against expectation. Means nothing but here is how the sides are ranked at the end of rd 3:

Essendon
Carlton
Collingwood
Geelong
Hawthorn
Fremantle
West Coast
Sydney
Richmond
Adelaide
Brisbane
Footscray
North Melbourne
Melbourne
St Kilda
Gold Coast
Port Adelaide

Results tend to be skewed early in the season - Carlton 2nd! The line in the GC game was only 26.5 points, but it does tend to even out and be a fair representation by rd 10ish.Any system that doesn't have the Pies on top atm is flawed, and these aren't my personal rankings, it's just mathematical. Anyway.

 

[Maddhew]

Bulldogs get flogged by Essendon, and then beat 2 teams who haven't won a game

Swans draw with Melbourne, and then beat 2 previously undefeated teams including Essendon whom flogged the dogs,

You place the Dogs above the Swans your system has failed.

 

[Maddhew]

I have kept a 'line' ladder for my own punting research. I guess it measures performance against expectation. Means nothing but here is how the sides are ranked at the end of rd 3:

Essendon
Carlton
Collingwood
Geelong
Hawthorn
Fremantle
West Coast
Sydney
Richmond
Adelaide
Brisbane
Footscray
North Melbourne
Melbourne
St Kilda
Gold Coast
Port Adelaide

again, swans are below 2 teams they have beaten. Fail again.

 

[worstfold]

again, swans are below 2 teams they have beaten. Fail again.

herpy derps read the post properly

 

[Maddhew]

herpy derps read the post properly

Sorry, my bad

It is a good idea, if you keep doing you should provide updates regularly.

 

[Maddhew]

& St Kilda? Really? their best result is a lucky draw against another team yet to register a win.

Your post is opinion (a poor one), not some well considered system for ranking team.

A lot of websites do power rankings for rugby/league teams. They generally are based on ladder position & recent form primarily, and then other factors to separate teams who are close such as away wins, wins vs higher ranked opposition.

Having St Kilda in the 8 is surely just an opinion of where you think they will finish at the end of the year, but on current rankings regardless of the formula are sitting around the arse end of the table.

Why are St Kilda ahead of Carlton and Sydney?

 

[smiddaz123]

Because points for is always the first check, because of the bye this screws things around.

Assume 1 team had played one game where they doubled their opponents score, their % will be 200.

Team 2 has played 9 games and has won every game by a point, their % is going to be 100-101% maybe a bit more (depending on actual scores attained).

If you went by % Team 1 would be on top, and this would be completely unrealistic as team 2 is clearly in a better position.

(Unless ive completely misinterpreted your statement)

On Topic: Seems fairly reasonable for this point in time.

I think he meant winning percentage as in percentage of games won, not actual percentage. Unless I was the one who misread it.

In either case, it doesn't really matter. The ladder doesn't ean much till the end of the season.

 

[Koutafidamedis]

I have kept a 'line' ladder for my own punting research. I guess it measures performance against expectation. Means nothing but here is how the sides are ranked at the end of rd 3:

Essendon
Carlton
Collingwood
Geelong
Hawthorn
Fremantle
West Coast
Sydney
Richmond
Adelaide
Brisbane
Footscray
North Melbourne
Melbourne
St Kilda
Gold Coast
Port Adelaide

Results tend to be skewed early in the season - Carlton 2nd! The line in the GC game was only 26.5 points, but it does tend to even out and be a fair representation by rd 10ish.Any system that doesn't have the Pies on top atm is flawed, and these aren't my personal rankings, it's just mathematical. Anyway.

very interested in this
if you don't mind could you go a but further in explaining exactly how it's calculated

 

[AxelFoley]

As per the Basketball Board, if you want any answers to the maths behind rankings (and how the NBA do it), mdc and Damo_3388 are the gurus.

 

[DarkPhoenix]

I think he meant winning percentage as in percentage of games won, not actual percentage. Unless I was the one who misread it.

In either case, it doesn't really matter. The ladder doesn't ean much till the end of the season.

Hmm yeah you could be right actually.

 

[Roby]

& St Kilda? Really? their best result is a lucky draw against another team yet to register a win.

Your post is opinion (a poor one), not some well considered system for ranking team.

A lot of websites do power rankings for rugby/league teams. They generally are based on ladder position & recent form primarily, and then other factors to separate teams who are close such as away wins, wins vs higher ranked opposition.

Having St Kilda in the 8 is surely just an opinion of where you think they will finish at the end of the year, but on current rankings regardless of the formula are sitting around the arse end of the table.


Why are St Kilda ahead of Carlton and Sydney?

While not heavily weighted games and form from last year count. St Kilda drew with Collingwood and beat Bulldogs last finals. Sydney lost to Bulldogs. St Kilda were ranked fourth last week but dropped four spots this week after been thrashed by Essendon. I'm sure if you guys win next week you'll jump a few spots - would that please you?

 

[Maddhew]

While not heaily weighted games and form from last year count. St Kilda drew with Collingwood and beat Bulldogs last finals. Sydney lost to Bulldogs. St Kilda were ranked fourth last week but dropped four spots this week after been thrashed by Essendon. I'm sure if you guys win next week you'll jump a few spots - would that please you?

It would please me if you didnt use form from 7 months ago in your power rankings.

And this still wouldn't explain why Essendon are in front of the Swans considering Swans beat them, Swans won 5 of their last 6 in 2010 (including a win against the dogs), and Essendon lost their last 4 in 2010, or won 2 of their last 12 if you want a larger sample.

Maybe you are using Essendon's form from 2000?

You have the Swans as 9th, if you want to include last year, the Swans are 7 Wins 1 Draw and a 5 point loss in a Semi in their past 9 games.

You have admitted in the OP your opinion is largely arbitrary. Does this mean you used a dart board?

Face it, there is no system.

And how do you explain Adelaide. Hawthorn look up and about this year, had a decent finish last year, but have only beaten 2 teams yet to register a win, 2 teams who finished 12th & 15th last year. Yet Adelaide beat them once so they are an automatic inclusion into the 8?

And Hawthorn? On Potential they are probably the 2nd best team in the comp,
but why are they 4th?

 

[rose jam]

I think he meant winning percentage as in percentage of games won, not actual percentage. Unless I was the one who misread it.

In either case, it doesn't really matter. The ladder doesn't ean much till the end of the season.

Yep,

played 3, won 2 winnnig % = 66%

for example

 

[Koutafidamedis]

While not heavily weighted games and form from last year count. St Kilda drew with Collingwood and beat Bulldogs last finals. Sydney lost to Bulldogs. St Kilda were ranked fourth last week but dropped four spots this week after been thrashed by Essendon. I'm sure if you guys win next week you'll jump a few spots - would that please you?

surely games played 7 months ago mean sweet f all

 

[Maddhew]

surely games played 7 months ago mean sweet f all

Not in the "make it up as you go" power rankings

Carlton's position is almost as bad as Sydney's

 

[Roby]

It would please me if you didnt use form from 7 months ago in your power rankings.

And this still wouldn't explain why Essendon are in front of the Swans considering Swans beat them, Swans won 5 of their last 6 in 2010 (including a win against the dogs), and Essendon lost their last 4 in 2010, or won 2 of their last 12 if you want a larger sample.

Because Essendon have recently not just beaten but thrashed the Bulldogs and Saints. Two pre-elimnary finalist. You did not beat the Bulldogs, you lost to them; or is your memory that short? Maybe that's were your problem is - you have short memory.

Maybe you are using Essendon's form from 2000?

You have the Swans as 9th, if you want to include last year, the Swans are 7 Wins 1 Draw and a 5 point loss in a Semi in their past 9 games.

I have already explained to you that last years games count but are not heavily weighted. The formula used to calculate this I believe would be too difficult for you to understand. But maybe just need reminding that you drew to a team in Melbourne who was thrashed by Hawthorn and almost lost to Brisbane. You have beaten the Eagles - a team who has just beaten Port Adelaide and North Melbourne. Other than that you beat Essendon but having watched the game the umpires favoured you heavily. If you expect to get a excellent run of umpiring decision go you way all season than unfortunately my system will not equate that.

And how do you explain Adelaide. Hawthorn look up and about this year, had a decent finish last year, but have only beaten 2 teams yet to register a win, 2 teams who finished 12th & 15th last year. Yet Adelaide beat them once so they are an automatic inclusion into the 8?

And Hawthorn? On Potential they are probably the 2nd best team in the comp,
but why are they 4th?

Again it does not equate potential. Yes Hawthorn thrashed Richmond in the wet - something you need to factor in, and thrashed Melbourne the team you couldn't beat. Richmond almost beat Carlton and drew to St Kilda, and this just in last few weeks. Up until last week they were actually ranking pretty good. Hawthorn are not ranked second or third because Geelong beat St Kilda in round one, Fremantle round two and annihilated Port Adelaide last week. Fremantle who have only just lost to Geelong round two and beat Adelaide in Adelaide last week and a better Brisbane outfit are second. Last week's form more weighted than three weeks ago.

Adelaide have beaten Hawthorn who have shown in the last two weeks to be very formidable. So yes they rank higher than Sydney.

Like I said if you guys beat Geelong next week you will go up a fair bit, but I'm guessing based on the rankings Geelong will win comfortably. I expect Hawthorn will trash West Coast, while you guys only just managed to beat pip the Eagles at the end. Adelaide should trash Port even though West Coast only just beat the Power.