Overall average performance metrics each club

[Carringbush2010]

The overall performance metrics for each club over the course of the seasons they've played in the competition at the end of the 129th season since the competitions inception.

The measured metrics

• Premierships
• GF's
• Finals won
• Finals played

Each qty of each metric is averaged out by how many seasons each club has played, and each metric is added for total averages for each season

For example Hawthorn have averaged more premierships per season than any other club.

WC and Coll have the highest average per season for finals wins

Collingwood have the highest combined averages.

Source. AFL Tables

Club	Flags	GF	Finals Won	Finals played	Seasons played	Total averages
Ade	2	3	18	38	35
Averages	0.05714285714	0.08571428571	0.5142857143	1.085714286		1.742857143
Bris	5	7	27	41	39
Averages	0.1282051282	0.1794871795	0.7714285714	1.171428571		2.250549451
Collingwood	16	43	86	193	129
Averages	0.1240310078	0.3333333333	0.6666666667	1.496124031		2.620155039
Carlton	16	29	67	143	129
Averages	0.1240310078	0.2248062016	0.519379845	1.108527132		1.976744186
Essendon	16	28	69	132	127
Averages	0.125984252	0.2283464567	0.5433070866	1.039370079		1.937007874
Fremantle	0	1	7	18	31
Averages	0	0.03225806452	0.2258064516	0.5806451613		0.8387096774
Geelong	10	20	62	137	129
Averages	0.07751937984	0.1550387597	0.480620155	1.062015504		1.697674419
GC	0	0	1	2	15
Averages	0	0	0.0714285714285714	0.1428571428571429		0.2142857143
GWS	0	1	9	19	14
Averages	0	0.07142857143	0.6428571429	1.357142857		2.071428571
Hawthorn	13	19	56	91	101
Averages	0.1287128713	0.1881188119	0.5544554455	0.900990099		1.772277228
Melbourne	13	18	54	94	126
Averages	0.1031746032	0.1428571429	0.4285714286	0.746031746		1.420634921
North Melbourne	4	9	35	75	101
Averages	0.0396039604	0.08910891089	0.3465346535	0.7425742574		1.217821782
Port Adelaide	1	2	14	32	29
Averages	0.03448275862	0.06896551724	0.4827586207	1.103448276		1.689655172
Ricmond	13	25	56	94	118
Averages	0.1101694915	0.2118644068	0.4745762712	0.7966101695		1.593220339
St Kilda	1	7	22	55	127
Averages	0.007874015748	0.05511811024	0.1732283465	0.4330708661		0.6692913386
Syd / Sth Melb	5	19	44	97	128
Averages	0.0390625	0.1484375	0.34375	0.7578125		1.2890625
West Coast	4	7	26	55	39
Averages	0.1025641026	0.1794871795	0.6666666667	1.41025641		2.358974359
WB / Footscray	2	4	21	57	101
Averages	0.0198019802	0.0404	0.2079207921	0.5643564356		0.8324792079
Fitzroy	8	13	34	59	100
	0.08	0.13	0.34	0.59		1.14

For something extra that is not finals, is total win percentage of how many games each club has played.


Couldn't find McClelland trophies / who has finished first the most on average over the course of the whole competition.

If someone can find it, please add it here.

 

[Purple Suit]

Someone is not coping with blowing the season after the start you had.

 

[Carringbush2010]

Someone is not coping with blowing the season after the start you had.

Or are you talkin about Freo blowin a home final?

 

[Mr.X]

 

[Carringbush2010]

View attachment 2441675

Hmmm, coming from a blose fan

 

[Fadge]

So the Magpies more than 10% better than the next best club, interesting.

Not surprising that the two next best clubs have only been in the competition for a little less than one third as long as Collingwood - let's see if they can maintain their levels of performance for over a century in the same way Collingwood have...

 

[Meteoric Rise]

So the Magpies more than 10% better than the next best club, interesting.

Not surprising that the two next best clubs have only been in the competition for a little less than one third as long as Collingwood - let's see if they can maintain their levels of performance for over a century in the same way Collingwood have...

Curious Collingwood have only won the Grand Final twice in the last 67 years then. Hawthorn, Carlton, Richmond, Brisbane, Geelong, Essendon, Eagles, North Melbourne, have won the Grand Final more often in that period. Adelaide has won as many in around half the time. Sydney and Melbourne have won the Grand Final as often as Collingwood in that time.

That is a lot of teams Collingwood has not had more than over the last 67 years.

Might be safer to say that up until 67 years ago the Pies were the most successful team, mainly when there were 8 or 9 established teams in the competition. And one of those was St Kilda.

 

[Carringbush2010]

Curious Collingwood have only won the Grand Final twice in the last 67 years then. Hawthorn, Carlton, Richmond, Brisbane, Geelong, Essendon, Eagles, North Melbourne, have won the Grand Final more often in that period. Adelaide has won as many in around half the time. Sydney and Melbourne have won the Grand Final as often as Collingwood in that time.

That is a lot of teams Collingwood has not had more than over the last 67 years.

Might be safer to say that up until 67 years ago the Pies were the most successful team, mainly when there were 8 or 9 established teams in the competition. And one of those was St Kilda.

The thread is about the performance metrics of every club over the course of the competition for their time in the competition.

Not cherry picked timelines to discredit / enhance clubs' performance.

Now you can disagree and say 'well back then doesn't matter now coz' Ok, if it makes you feel better.

Won't change the fact that at the time it was the highest standard, like today is now.

If we go by 'past doesn't matter logic', last years flag is irrelevant now. may as well not measure these metrics at all and just go by win percentage

 

[The 747]

Do we have the functionality to do this for the AFL era only?

 

[Carringbush2010]

Do we have the functionality to do this for the AFL era only?

Go ahead, won't change the fact that the AFL era is just an expansion and rebrand of the same league.

 

[The 747]

Go ahead, won't change the fact that the AFL era is just an expansion and rebrand of the same league.

i don't care about that debate. I was just curious about the records.

 

[CrowToon]

Go ahead, won't change the fact that the AFL era is just an expansion and rebrand of the same league.

Changes the probability of each club winning the flag. 8 teams vs 18 is different big boy.

 

[Carringbush2010]

Changes the probability of each club winning the flag. 8 teams vs 18 is different big boy.

So is 12, so is 14 and 16, so is soon to be 19 then 20, who cares? How do you factor in probabilities then?

If you wanna do an 18 club only metrics you go for it, I've just put together a measure of performance of each club over the course of the competition and each clubs time competing in it. Which is in the history books, so can't be changed.

 

[CrowToon]

So is 12, so is 14 and 16, so is soon to be 19 then 20, who cares? How do you factor in probabilities then?

If you wanna do an 18 club only metrics you go for it, I've just put together a measure of performance of each club over the course of the competition and each clubs time competing in it. Which is in the history books, so can't be changed.

Well if you wanted to have a data set worth anything then you would assign different weightings to each year according to criteria.

But if you like raw and useless numbers this is the thread to see them

 

[Carringbush2010]

Well if you wanted to have a data set worth anything then you would assign different weightings to each year according to criteria.

But if you like raw and useless numbers this is the thread to see them

So what would be the weightings then?

 

[Guardian Hawk]

I know it's going to sound like I'm arguing from convenience as a Hawthorn fan, but surely all anybody cares about is that first column?

Even leaving aside the issue already raised about number of teams in the competition, surely the biggest issue with the 'overall rating' system used above is that your 'finals played' average counts the same as your 'premierships won' average. Surely winning the flag should be weighted higher than 'finals played'?

 

[CrowToon]

So what would be the weightings then?

Well for starters the more teams in the comp = higher weighting premiership.

In fact that woyld go the same for winning and playing finals.

Also the absurdity of using raw numbers to match finals played against flags flies in the face of all decent data.

Youve essentially gone until you found a set of raw numbers that lets your team come out on top.

Noone is respecting that kind of data unless it's got integrity and comparing a 2025 premiership to a 1908 flag is just taking the piss.

 

[The 747]

I know it's going to sound like I'm arguing from convenience as a Hawthorn fan, but surely all anybody cares about is that first column?

Even leaving aside the issue already raised about number of teams in the competition, surely the biggest issue with the 'overall rating' system used above is that your 'finals played' average counts the same as your 'premierships won' average. Surely winning the flag should be weighted higher than 'finals played'?

Works for my team

 

[scoman]

So the Magpies more than 10% better than the next best club, interesting.

Not surprising that the two next best clubs have only been in the competition for a little less than one third as long as Collingwood - let's see if they can maintain their levels of performance for over a century in the same way Collingwood have...

Bookmarked.......

 

[Fadge]

Bookmarked.......

Come at me in 100 years if either of them can maintain their performance levels...

 

[Warwick]

WC and Coll have the highest average per season for finals wins

Do they?

 

[Carringbush2010]

Well for starters the more teams in the comp = higher weighting premiership

Ok, how do you 'weight' it then? Interested in how you'd do it.

Noone is respecting that kind of data unless it's got integrity and comparing a 2025 premiership to a 1908 flag is just taking the piss.

Like the 2026 flag will be irrelevant in 100 years time.

If you don't think these metrics are not valid then ok, how about we just go on win percentage for each club then? I've put that in the op as well.

 

[Carringbush2010]

I know it's going to sound like I'm arguing from convenience as a Hawthorn fan, but surely all anybody cares about is that first column?

Then how do you separate clubs with equal number of flags?

Surely winning the flag should be weighted higher than 'finals played'?

How do you 'weight' it?

 

[Guardian Hawk]

Then how do you separate clubs with equal number of flags?

How do you 'weight' it?

It's your data and there's lots of options.

If it were me, I'd rank by premiership average, and then if equal, go to GF average, then if equal (none are), go to finals won, etc (Kind of like Gold, Silver and Bronze medals in Olympics rather than ranking 'made the Olympics' as equal to 'winning Gold' as you have).

Alternatively, you weight Flags at 10, GF's at 4, Prelim's at 2 and Finals Series made at 1. Tally totals, divide by years in Comp. You can adjust these weighting to what you think is fairest.

A more sophiticated way would be a Flag won in an 18 team comp is worth 18 points, a flag won in a 12 team comp is worth 12 points, etc - divide by years in comp. If equal, a Grand Final made in an 18 team comp is worth 9 points, a 12 team comp is worth 6 points, etc. These points don't get added to the 'flag points', but are used as a tie breaker.

 

[Carringbush2010]

It's your data and there's lots of options.

If it were me, I'd rank by premiership average, and then if equal, go to GF average, then if equal (none are), go to finals won, etc (Kind of like Gold, Silver and Bronze medals in Olympics rather than ranking 'made the Olympics' as equal to 'winning Gold' as you have).

Alternatively, you weight Flags at 10, GF's at 4, Prelim's at 2 and Finals Series made at 1. Tally totals, divide by years in Comp. You can adjust these weighting to what you think is fairest.

A more sophiticated way would be a Flag won in an 18 team comp is worth 18 points, a flag won in a 12 team comp is worth 12 points, etc - divide by years in comp. If equal, a Grand Final made in an 18 team comp is worth 9 points, a 12 team comp is worth 6 points, etc. These points don't get added to the 'flag points', but are used as a tie breaker.

Yeah I agree with this, problem is the 'weightings' would be subject to opinion.

So what I've done is the simplest way, without getting into a can o worms about 'weightings', it's just purely a way to dissect from simply just flags won and it takes in averages of a clubs time in the competition, hence the averages.

Yeah as you've pointed out my model is flawed, but less subject to scrutiny when 'weighting' is added.

Even just win percentage is flawed because some will nitpick about 'when'. TBH I don't think any one model can be agreed on.