Greatest Dynasty of the 21st century - Lions vs Cats vs Hawks vs Tigers

[captain blood 17]

Anyone trying to downplay any of the achievements of these four great eras/teams is a deadset FW. You know who you are and i am laughing at you.

 

[Fadge]

And interestingly Geelong were only average in 2005 and 2006, so I assume if we reviewed 14 year periods, Geelong might climb further up this ladder?

The key takeaway for me is that the Geelong team that is being discussed in this thread is consistently in the top handful of teams in the history of the competition for percentage of games won, whether we cover anything between three year and 15 to 17 year durations.

 

[Fadge]

On neutral votes only, it's Brisbane 165, Geelong 55, Hawthorn 43, Richmond 9.

Awesome work FS, you are a legend.

These numbers shouldn't really surprise anybody (I say that with tongue in cheek).

 

[PJays]

I know the price vs GWS, I couldn't get enough on, massive overs!!!!!

I agree, can't believe GWS were $3.05. Deserved to be $4 or more.

Hence why I'm suggesting Richmond were lucky- went from a competitive matchup to unbackable favourite (or should've been) when the siren sounded and Collingwood's comeback fell short.

 

[Dr Tigris]

Okay for fun I wrote a bot to break down poll votes. In this thread it looks like this:

View attachment 1043270

94% of Brisbane fans voted for their own team, as did 92% of Hawthorn fans, 84% of Geelong fans, and 74% of Richmond fans.

101 out of 110 votes for Richmond are from Tiger fans.

On neutral votes only, it's Brisbane 165, Geelong 55, Hawthorn 43, Richmond 9.

West Coast and Fremantle supporters are very pro-Lions, presumably out of sympathy for the travel factor.

"UNK" is unknown, because the poster hasn't listed a team.

OK so it's Brisbane then daylight. What I'd expect. that Lions side had an aura none of the other teams had. In 5 years I'd expect this Tigers side to be seen better by people just cause of the current rivalry and tigerheads sh*t talking all the time.

interesting that own team votes are also RFC the lowest by quite a bit. Just more voting is all.

 

[Roby]

OK so it's Brisbane then daylight. What I'd expect. that Lions side had an aura none of the other teams had. In 5 years I'd expect this Tigers side to be seen better by people just cause of the current rivalry and tigerheads sh*t talking all the time.

interesting that own team votes are also RFC the lowest by quite a bit. Just more voting is all.

Unless a calamity were to occur most neutrals opinion of Richmond will change next season, only the salty ones will still be arguing they're the worst.

 

[Pessimistic]

Okay for fun I wrote a bot to break down poll votes. In this thread it looks like this:

View attachment 1043270

94% of Brisbane fans voted for their own team, as did 92% of Hawthorn fans, 84% of Geelong fans, and 74% of Richmond fans.

101 out of 110 votes for Richmond are from Tiger fans.

On neutral votes only, it's Brisbane 165, Geelong 55, Hawthorn 43, Richmond 9.

West Coast and Fremantle supporters are very pro-Lions, presumably out of sympathy for the travel factor.

"UNK" is unknown, because the poster hasn't listed a team.

Geelong and Hawthorn fans absolutely don’t vote for each other

in fact Hawthorn posters vote either Hawthorn or Brisbane (threepeat factor, you take threepeat is minimum, then chose hawks or lions)

Richmond posters the most likely to select another team (of the 4 sets) Brisbane overwhelmingly the choice in the other 14 sets of posters.

 

[Noidnadroj]

This is absolute rubbish.

They put themselves in a position to make it happen, and it happened.

Hawthorn win two close Prelims in their threepeat. If one of the 7 more scoring shots that Port Adelaide had in the 2014 Preliminary Final goes through for a goal instead of a behind, Hawks don't even have a B2B, let alone a Threepeat.

You're telling me there's no element of luck there?

Come on....

There’s luck in ‘almost’ every single Premiership as every close result involves luck. Geelong were lucky to beat the Pies by 5-points in a prelim in 2007, and lucky Hawkins point in 2009 was called a goal. So but for a little luck the other way the Cats might have 1 flag. But there’s no way you’d say they are lucky to have won 3.

Pies almost got into a Grand Final in 2019 on the back of the Eagles losing the final round to the Hawks to gift the Pies a top-4 spot. That was pure luck.... and so on...

Dangerfield’s family lives in Moggs Creek so he went to the Cats. Pure luck to get the best player in the competition the year after Cats missed finals and were perhaps heading down the ladder. And Cameron wanted to go to the Cats because he loves fishing...etc...they got Ablett, Scarlett, Hawkins father-son and so on .....

So I believe it’s a waste of time referencing luck, as there are little bits of good luck / bad luck impacting every team across an entire pre-season (injuries), 22 x H&A rounds, the fixture (who you play twice and where), trading, drafting, suspensions, mental health, father-sons, and then finals. Where do you start and stop analysing ‘luck’.

Ultimately teams are trying to win a Premiership which is a multi-year process involving hundreds of little bits of good luck and bad. Whomever wins it deserves it.




Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Fadge]

Unless a calamity were to occur most neutrals opinion of Richmond will change next season, only the salty ones will still be arguing they're the worst.

Can someone who hasn't been blocked by this fellow enlighten him as to basic probability?

PJays provided a lesson on the subject matter about 30 pages ago...

 

[Fadge]

There’s luck in ‘almost’ every single Premiership as every close result involves luck. Geelong were lucky to beat the Pies by 5-points in a prelim in 2007, and lucky Hawkins point in 2009 was called a goal. So but for a little luck the other way the Cats might have 1 flag. But there’s no way you’d say they are lucky to have won 3.

Pies almost got into a Grand Final in 2019 on the back of the Eagles losing the final round to the Hawks to gift the Pies a top-4 spot. That was pure luck.... and so on...

Dangerfield’s family lives in Moggs Creek so he went to the Cats. Pure luck to get the best player in the competition the year after Cats missed finals and were perhaps heading down the ladder. And Cameron wanted to go to the Cats because he loves fishing...etc...they got Ablett, Scarlett, Hawkins father-son and so on .....

So I believe it’s a waste of time referencing luck, as there are little bits of good luck / bad luck impacting every team across an entire pre-season (injuries), 22 x H&A rounds, the fixture (who you play twice and where), trading, drafting, suspensions, mental health, father-sons, and then finals. Where do you start and stop analysing ‘luck’.

Ultimately teams are trying to win a Premiership which is a multi-year process involving hundreds of little bits of good luck and bad. Whomever wins it deserves it.

One of the first posts you've made in this thread that I agree with

However, this is completely out of context in relation to the post I responded to.

 

[Roby]

Which team is better in this scenario? Which team is the dynasty team?

Scenario (7 years)

Team A - undefeated in home and away for seven years, makes every grand final, wins no premierships

Team B - finishes outside top four at the end of home and away every year, every second year misses the finals, wins four premierships

 

[PJays]

There’s luck in ‘almost’ every single Premiership as every close result involves luck. Geelong were lucky to beat the Pies by 5-points in a prelim in 2007, and lucky Hawkins point in 2009 was called a goal. So but for a little luck the other way the Cats might have 1 flag. But there’s no way you’d say they are lucky to have won 3.

Pies almost got into a Grand Final in 2019 on the back of the Eagles losing the final round to the Hawks to gift the Pies a top-4 spot. That was pure luck.... and so on...

Dangerfield’s family lives in Moggs Creek so he went to the Cats. Pure luck to get the best player in the competition the year after Cats missed finals and were perhaps heading down the ladder. And Cameron wanted to go to the Cats because he loves fishing...etc...they got Ablett, Scarlett, Hawkins father-son and so on .....

So I believe it’s a waste of time referencing luck, as there are little bits of good luck / bad luck impacting every team across an entire pre-season (injuries), 22 x H&A rounds, the fixture (who you play twice and where), trading, drafting, suspensions, mental health, father-sons, and then finals. Where do you start and stop analysing ‘luck’.

Ultimately teams are trying to win a Premiership which is a multi-year process involving hundreds of little bits of good luck and bad. Whomever wins it deserves it.




Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

Totally agree, with the caveat that some teams obviously need a little more luck than others. Not all luck is equal.

My own club undoubtedly unlucky.
As I explained in some detail a while back, if certain AFL rules were as they are today we'd almost certainly have won at least one of the 2004, 2009 and 2010 flags. Our chances would've increased significantly in each year, were it not for a crowd invasion, a poster being called a goal, and AFL being one of the only professional sports anywhere (the only?) who replays Grand Finals. All 3 rules subsequently changed or improved.

 

[Pessimistic]

This is absolute rubbish.

They put themselves in a position to make it happen, and it happened.

Hawthorn win two close Prelims in their threepeat. If one of the 7 more scoring shots that Port Adelaide had in the 2014 Preliminary Final goes through for a goal instead of a behind, Hawks don't even have a B2B, let alone a Threepeat.

You're telling me there's no element of luck there?

Come on....

And if they are ‘luckier’ in 2012 GF? Close final.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Richmond were very lucky with their Grand Final opponent. Without any doubt whatsoever.

All premiers are lucky in some respects, but Richmond was lucky they got a team with 2 wins on the MCG in the previous 5 years, a 13-9 record and 2 lead up wins where they scraped through by the skin of their teeth.

You're laying it on a bit thick with the injuries.

OK, Rance was a big blow.

But the other 9 players from the top 10 of Richmond's 2018 B&F averaged 20 games out of 25 in 2019. Hardly "decimated"; every year teams have worse years than that.

Plus they'd added Tom Lynch, who played every game.

So all this talk about Richmond’s injuries, how bad was it really when:

- Some of their best like Grimes, Edwards, Prestia, Vlastiun, Lynch all played every game or missed 1. Dusty missed 2.

- Houli and Lambert missed 3 & 4.

- Cotchin and Riewoldt missed about 1/2 the H&A season but were healthy for finals.

Rance was a loss but Richmond had the players to compensate. Perhaps he was a more brilliant individual but in hindsight, less valuable given the list composition than some others.

Sounds like a tougher than average year, but hardly unique.

For example in 2018 St.Kilda had 4 players whose careers were effectively ended by weird injuries- Concussions or heart issues, including a number 1 draft pick and a 2017 All Australian squad member. In this discussion, in 2014 Hawthorn had Mitchell, Rioli, Gibson, Lake, McEvoy missing a substantial part of the season, Hodge and Hill missing a few.

OK, the facts.

Richmond players used in season 2019 = 39

AFL ranking for most players used = equal 1st along with Melbourne(17th) and St Kilda 14th.

Other occasions where the Premier has the most or equal most players used in the competition across the season in 124 years of history = 0.00000000000000

Automatic best 22 players at start of season games missed through unavailability:

Grimes 1
Castagna 1
Edwards 1
Vlastuin 1
Martin 2
Astbury 3
Houli 3
Lambert 4
Short 9
Cotchin 11
Riewoldt 12
Higgins 12
Nankervis 13
Rance 24
Grigg 25

Total automatic best 22 at start of season games missed = 122, which is extremely high.

Richmond had a 3 player leadership structure, all noted champions, all highly decorated with industry and club awards, Rance, Riewoldt, Cotchin.

Total games missed by that trio = 47(of 75 possible) so collectively the 3 champion leaders played little more than 1/3rd of the season.

Total players characterised as automatic best 22 at start of season, ie never not selected at any material time when available and fully fit = 17

Lynch, Prestia, Grimes, Castagna, Edwards, Vlastuin, Martin, Astbury, Houli, Lambert, Short, Riewoldt, Cotchin, Riewoldt, Higgins, Nankervis, Rance.

Average games missed by that group = over 7, roughly 33% of the regular season missed by the players who entered the season as automatic best 22.

Other notable players to miss with injuries:

Ross missed more than half the season after an extremely promising first 7 games. He was never fully right again after a serious foot injury.

Stack has missed the last 5 games of the season including all finals in a year he finished 3rd in the Rising Star out of an extremely strong draft pool.

Jack Graham missed the Grand Final and was badly hampered for more than half the PF when he dislocated his shoulder.

That is all factual.

After the mid season bye, when Richmond were able to rest some battered players and also get some players back from injury, despite:

Rance and Grigg never playing in this period,

Cotchin missing 3 games,

Riewoldt missing two games,

Nankervis missing 8 games,

Stack missing 5 games,

Ross missing 10 games,

Graham missing the Grand Final,

Higgins missing 12 games,

the club still managed to go 12-0 with a percentage of 165%, with no less than 7 of those 12 matches being against finals teams, and an 8th victory against Port Adelaide who finished 10th with a positive w/l-percentage combination. The Richmond percentage in this period was barely boosted by games against lower clubs. Richmond’s percentage in the 7 matches played against finalists in this period = 158%. Nobody was beating Richmond in the 2019 finals PJays and Fadge .

And Richmond you are telling us were lucky in 2019. And your lemon mate Fadge reckons that is nothing because “all teams have injuries.”

F*cking comedy duo.

Richmond were by that far the best team in the competition in 2019 it is not funny, and god only knows what they might have done if not so badly affected by injuries. But at the end of the day all they could have achieved over and above what they did was more meaningless home and away wins, or in the context of this thread, more “Geelong” wins.

 

[Noidnadroj]

This was discussed extensively a page or 2 ago.

Richmond would've been anywhere from $1.70 to $1.90 vs Collingwood depending how well Collingwood won their prelim.

If Coll GWS prelim otherwise identical with Coll winning at the end, then probably $1.70 to $2.20.

Richmond couldn't have possibly been less than about $1.60 against MCG tenant Coll on a 6 match winning streak and decent H2H record vs Rich. Don't forget Richmond only ended up $1.40 vs GWS!

If Collingwood had won their prelim by 10 goals, it would've been even stevens given Richmond had to come from 21 down in their prelim. With Richmond having the better overall form line going back 2-3 months but Collingwood superior prelim.

Even stevens..... I do think you’re forgetting the most important component. Richmond is a far better team than Collingwood proven over 4-years.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Totally agree, with the caveat that some teams obviously need a little more luck than others. Not all luck is equal.

My own club undoubtedly unlucky.
As I explained in some detail a while back, if certain AFL rules were as they are today we'd almost certainly have won at least one of the 2004, 2009 and 2010 flags. Our chances would've increased significantly in each year, were it not for a crowd invasion, a poster being called a goal, and AFL being one of the only professional sports anywhere (the only?) who replays Grand Finals. All 3 rules subsequently changed or improved.

So now we are getting to your true thoughts. Geelong were lucky to win 3 flags, so according to you should not be in this discussion. And Collingwood were lucky to win one flag. Meaning of your two greatest losing GF opponents of all time, Collingwood and St Kilda, one didn’t win a flag and one shouldn’t have.

Gotcha.

 

[Fadge]

And if they are ‘luckier’ in 2012 GF? Close final.

Absolutely. Fully agree.

 

[Fadge]

Even stevens..... I do think you’re forgetting the most important component. Richmond is a far better team than Collingwood proven over 4-years.

That 'component' didn't help Richmond in their only finals encounter against Collingwood during that 4 year period...

 

[Noidnadroj]

This was discussed extensively a page or 2 ago.

Richmond would've been anywhere from $1.70 to $1.90 vs Collingwood depending how well Collingwood won their prelim.

If Coll GWS prelim otherwise identical with Coll winning at the end, then probably $1.70 to $2.20.

Richmond couldn't have possibly been less than about $1.60 against MCG tenant Coll on a 6 match winning streak and decent H2H record vs Rich. Don't forget Richmond only ended up $1.40 vs GWS!

If Collingwood had won their prelim by 10 goals, it would've been even stevens given Richmond had to come from 21 down in their prelim. With Richmond having the better overall form line going back 2-3 months but Collingwood superior prelim.

Saints flog Richmond early in 2020 and win their first final over the ‘hot’ team the Dogs and Tigers lose their first final. Semi-final odds :
Tigers $1.40
Saints $2.90

Granted Saints had injuries, but going into GF of 2019 the best team in the competition was on an 11-game winning streak, not coming off a disappoint loss ........and you think bookies would have rated it even money based on an anomaly that was the 2018 prelim?

Ok then.....


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Fadge]

Granted Saints had injuries, but going into GF of 2019 the best team in the competition was on an 11-game winning streak, not coming off a disappoint loss ........and you think bookies would have rated it even money based on an anomaly that was the 2018 prelim?

Richmond 'the best team in the competition' after not even making the previous year's Grand Final, finishing 3rd in the 2019 Home and Away season, and having a far less impressive Preliminary Final win over Geelong than Collingwood's Qualifying Final win over Geelong?

Richmond would have been faves, but probably $1.65 or $1.70. PJays has suggested a 55/45 game, I reckon a 60/40.

But they're pretty good odds given the 2018 Preliminary Final was 70/30 in Richmond's favour according to the bookies.

 

[PJays]

Saints flog Richmond early in 2020 and win their first final over the ‘hot’ team the Dogs and Tigers lose their first final. Semi-final odds :
Tigers $1.40
Saints $2.90

Granted Saints had injuries, but going into GF of 2019 the best team in the competition was on an 11-game winning streak, not coming off a disappoint loss ........and you think bookies would have rated it even money based on an anomaly that was the 2018 prelim?

Ok then.....


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

This has been discussed already

Saints 2020 irrelevant, especially when missing Ryder (3rd B&F on votes/ game), Gresham and Carlisle. But diff yr, diff circumstances

You yourself claimed
Richmond was $1.50,
Coll $3
GWS $13 before Coll vs gws prelim

Rich went down to $1.40 when everyone found out they were playing GWS, but you don't think they would've gone up if people had found out they were playing Collingwood?

It would've been even money IF Collingwood had won their prelim over GWS by 10 goals. Or maybe Richmond $1.80, Coll $2.00. No strong favorite that's for sure.

If Coll won that prelim by 10 goals:

• Coll: 6 match winning streak with better prelim. Rich: 12 match winning streak with less convincing prelim.
• H2H record fairly even over past 5 games
• Both teams close to full strength. I think Coll was missing De Goey?
• Both MCG tenants
• Finals ability: Rich 2017 flag. Coll 2018 close GF loss. Both proven finals teams.

How could the odds NOT have been close to 50/50, given all key factors would’ve been fairly even?! Maybe Richmond slight advantage- $1.80 and Coll $2.00 given Rich had finished the year so well after getting their team back together.

Now if Coll had scraped through the prelim instead of GWS scraping through, suddenly Richmond has a sizeable advantage with form. So therefore Richmond ~$1.70 and Coll ~$2.20.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Richmond 'the best team in the competition' after not even making the previous year's Grand Final, finishing 3rd in the 2019 Home and Away season, and having a far less impressive Preliminary Final win over Geelong than Collingwood's Qualifying Final win over Geelong?

Richmond would have been faves, but probably $1.65 or $1.70. PJays has suggested a 55/45 game, I reckon a 60/40.

But they're pretty good odds given the 2018 Preliminary Final was 70/30 in Richmond's favour according to the bookies.

WTF. So Richmond’s 3.1.19 win over Geelong where Richmond had 5 more shots that actually scored, in a sudden death PF, is “far less impressive” than Collingwood’s 10 point level scores win against the Cats in a second chance match where the Cats had one more shot that scored.

Pardon me while I laugh myself to death.

Let me guess. Because Hawkins, the man who has kicked all of 2.2 and one goal assist in 2 finals against the Tigers. Riewoldt plays in both matches and kicks 3.5 and has 2 goals assists, one where he is the only tall forward with no aerial support the other where he is badly out of form and acting as a secondary target. Do I have this right or is there some other reason?

You are trying to outdo PJays for ludicrous statements now. And doing a fair job of it I must say. Collingwood would have needed a Grandstand to fall down on the Richmond as they were running onto the ground in order to have any realistic chance of winning the 2019 GF had they been unlucky enough to make it.

 

[PJays]

You are trying to outdo PJays for ludicrous statements now. And doing a fair job of it I must say. Collingwood would have needed a Grandstand to fall down on the Richmond as they were running onto the ground in order to have any realistic chance of winning the 2019 GF had they been unlucky enough to make it.

Ahahah. Yeah, we're the ones making ludicrous statements. Collingwood would've had no chance, on a 6 match winning streak and playing on neutral turf against a team they pummelled twice in the past 12 months including in a final.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Which team is better in this scenario? Which team is the dynasty team?

Scenario (7 years)

Team A - undefeated in home and away for seven years, makes every grand final, wins no premierships

Team B - finishes outside top four at the end of home and away every year, every second year misses the finals, wins four premierships

In the AFL that allegedly exists in the real world, Team B.

In the Fadge-PJFL, Team A is much better because what you do earlier in matches and seasons is much more important that what the final result is.

And if Team B had the temerity to come from behind in the first term and win a Grand Final, well, they would be relegated altogether from the Fadge-PJFL. Sounds ludicrous I know, but apparently that is how the Fadge-PJFL works.

 

[Roby]

In the AFL that allegedly exists in the real world, Team B.

In the Fadge-PJFL, Team A is much better because what you do earlier in in matches and seasons is much more important that what the final result is.

And if Team B had the temerity to come from behind in the first term and win a Grand Final, well, they would be relegated altogether from the Fadge-PJFL. Sounds ludicrous I know, but apparently that is how the Fadge-PJFL works.

Have they given their answer?