Final Siren Crows likely to be without Sloane for the first final, an upset brewing perhaps...?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
And if both Adelaide teams keep winning, we have ourselves a Showdown GF.Unless Adelaide lose to GWS this week, it is impossible for the Swans and Crows to meet in the GF.
What about the North team in 2013 that didn't make the 8 but was a top 4 Squiggler?
I'm actually furious at the Suns for this occurrence. If they didn't lie down and die against the Power than the Swans would have been 5th and on the other side of the draw.Unless Adelaide lose to GWS this week, it is impossible for the Swans and Crows to meet in the GF.
Richmond have surprised us all.
Now surely, surely in one of those many sliding doors of the Squiggle, Richmond can win a final.
Thanks for the quote. Made my day already10% luck and we win the flag
but its impossible, cos it says we beat melbourne in the gf
tee hee hee
go dees
Could you please do an Explosive Squiggle now that H&A is done and the finalists haven't moved yet?
Couldn't you say more accuracy is related to better set up for shots vs. peppering the goals with low quality.
This isn't very different to regular Squiggle since by now the influence of 2016 games is pretty small.
Here's another alternate version: this one using what will probably be the Squiggle 2.0 algorithm:
Squiggle 2.0 cares more about scoring shots and also permits a lot of movement in the very early rounds of the year.
A few notable differences:
- Adelaide, Port Adelaide, Richmond and Essendon all get a boost from good Round 1 results, while Sydney drop a lot.
- Sydney's recent form isn't rated as highly, since the Swans have been unusually accurate, kicking 72.39 in their last 4 games.
- West Coast aren't rated as highly
Yep, no doubt it often is. There's good reason to treat goals as more important than behinds. Just not six times more important.Couldn't you say more accuracy is related to better set up for shots vs. peppering the goals with low quality.
None more so than the Westhoff behind at KP from Dixon. Good piece of play set up Dixons shot.Yep, no doubt it often is. There's good reason to treat goals as more important than behinds. Just not six times more important.
Maybe but every team has these shoulda coulda momentsPort could surprise a few. In the losses to wce and Richmond we controlled large parts of the game but couldn't convert inside 50 dominance or kick straight in small losses.
We're winning at 3qtr time against gws without Ryder.
The first showdown we were up for half the game then just fell short by a few goals.
And Geelong we were winning until some Dangerfield luck and moment of poor defending in the last minute.
While also beating wce away and Sydney round 1. Could have easily won 2 or 3 of those other games against top 8 sides.
With a better team structure from the last few rounds and the break after an early bye, could surprise some
Sorry squiggle, I prefer The Arc's prediction
http://www.espn.com/espn/feature/st...-forensics-statistics-win-all-afl-premiership
Sorry squiggle, I prefer The Arc's prediction
http://www.espn.com/espn/feature/st...-forensics-statistics-win-all-afl-premiership
I couldn't find an article on The Arc about finals predictions last year. Final Siren may know or have some idea about what was predicted?How did they compare last year?
Squiggles man Final Siren has gone MIA with his team playing finals, no doubt partying every night at the idea of playing at least 2 finals this year, losing both no doubt.