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

[Fadge]

Yes with primary school grade five mathematics. Riveting.

Amazing how he has us on ignore, yet can still make an 'informed' comment on the level of our analysis...

 

[PJays]

That's my belief. We spanked Pies weeks earlier.

And they spanked you the two times before that- including the previous year's finals.

What's your belief? How many times do you think the Pies would have won the GF, after those Prelims, out of 10?

8 or 9 out of 20 on existing prelim with different last minute finish.

9 or 10 out of 20 if Collingwood had played how I expected and comfortably won the prelim. Given Richmond wasn't exactly convincing themselves.

GWS? 3 or 4 out of 20.

Hence Richmond was lucky when GWS upset Collingwood. They went from 10 or 12 chance out of 20 to 16/17 out of 20.

 

[Final Siren]

This post has got me thinking...

Noidnadroj has proposed that if a team that has won 3 flags over 4 seasons, had won five more games, their percentage of games won would improve from 9% behind that of Geelong's, to 4%, despite being over a shorter 1.25 seasons.

Geelong won 84.13% of all games over the five year period 2007 to 2011 (106 wins, 20 losses) - it would be safe to suggest this is the greatest winning percentage of games over a five year period for any team in the history of the VFL/AFL. But who is second over a five year period?

It would be reasonable to assume the two teams in the mix would be the great Melbourne team of the late 1950's, and the Machine (Collingwood) of the late 1920's.

Collingwood between 1926 and 1930 had a record of 84 wins, 1 draw and 16 losses - 83.66%

Melbourne's best five year period was between 1955 and 1959, where they had a record of 80 wins, 2 draws and 19 losses - 80.20%

The following data has previously been provided in this thread:
Brisbane 2001 to 2004 (4 years only) - 75 wins, 1 draw, 25 losses - 75.25%
Hawthorn 2011 to 2015 - 99 wins, 27 losses - 78.57%
Richmond 2017 to 2020 - (4 years only) - 71 wins, 1 draw,23 losses - 75.26%

So let's get this straight.

Only two other teams have managed a greater than 80% win rate over five seasons, and that was prior to the era of equalisation via salary cap, draft, etc., during an era where 18 game seasons were played, and before travel was a factor.

And those two teams are generally regarded as the TWO GREATEST OF ALL TIME.

Anyone who understands competitive sport and mathematics understands the magnitude of that 6% to 9% gap between Geelong and the other three teams we are discussing in this thread. It may not be quite Bradmanesque, but it's not far from it.

Yep, this is correct. The parameters of the question are, of course, perfectly designed to suit Geelong - they aren't the best if we look at 4-year periods or 6-year periods - but even so, it's a heroic achievement.

Best win/loss records across 5 seasons (no double-counting years):

1. Geelong 2007-2011 (84.0%)
2. Collingwood 1926-1930 (83.8%)
3. Carlton 1906-1910 (83.5%)
4. Melbourne 1955-1959 (80.2%)
5. Essendon 1910-1914 (79.3%)
6. Essendon 1946-1950 (79.2%)
7. Hawthorn 1985-1989 (78.8%)
8. Carlton 1912-1916 (78.7%)
9. Hawthorn 2011-2015 (78.6%)
10. Richmond 1931-1935 (77.9%)

 

[Pessimistic]

And we'll win you all over eventually

You don’t believe that either

 

[PJays]

Yep, this is correct. The parameters of the question are, of course, perfectly designed to suit Geelong - they aren't the best if we look at 4-year periods or 6-year periods - but even so, it's a heroic achievement.

Best win/loss records across 5 seasons (no double-counting years):

1. Geelong 2007-2011 (84.0%)
2. Collingwood 1926-1930 (83.8%)
3. Carlton 1906-1910 (83.5%)
4. Melbourne 1955-1959 (80.2%)
5. Essendon 1910-1914 (79.3%)
6. Essendon 1946-1950 (79.2%)
7. Hawthorn 1985-1989 (78.8%)
8. Carlton 1912-1916 (78.7%)
9. Hawthorn 2011-2015 (78.6%)
10. Richmond 1931-1935 (77.9%)

And only Geelong from the top 7 has occurred after 1959. That says a lot.

I'd be interested knowing what the best streaks are, over any random period.

Geelong was 55-3 from round 6, 2007 to round 13, 2009.

I recall Hawthorn had a run of 40-5 across 2012-2014.

So if we picked say, 50 games. Geelong I assume would be on top with 47, whose next I wonder? Or pick 60, or 100. Whatever.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

And they spanked you the two times before that- including the previous year's finals.



8 or 9 out of 20 on existing prelim with different last minute finish.

9 or 10 out of 20 if Collingwood had played how I expected and comfortably won the prelim. Given Richmond wasn't exactly convincing themselves.

GWS? 3 or 4 out of 20.

Hence Richmond was lucky when GWS upset Collingwood. They went from 10 or 12 chance out of 20 to 16/17 out of 20.

If you were working for me and produced that assessment, it would be the last one you would ever do for me.

You are arguing Richmond were lucky to win a Premiership in a year they were decimated by injuries for half the season, substantially hampered by injuries for the rest of the season, and won the Grand Final by 89 points. That is not even spun or altered by me, that is what you are straight out arguing. People reading this will just think you are a complete f***wit.

 

[Pessimistic]

B2B or B2B2B kind of excludes any ‘luck’ tag. They made it happen

 

[Fadge]

Yep, this is correct. The parameters of the question are, of course, perfectly designed to suit Geelong - they aren't the best if we look at 4-year periods or 6-year periods - but even so, it's a heroic achievement.

Best win/loss records across 5 seasons (no double-counting years):

1. Geelong 2007-2011 (84.0%)
2. Collingwood 1926-1930 (83.8%)
3. Carlton 1906-1910 (83.5%)
4. Melbourne 1955-1959 (80.2%)
5. Essendon 1910-1914 (79.3%)
6. Essendon 1946-1950 (79.2%)
7. Hawthorn 1985-1989 (78.8%)
8. Carlton 1912-1916 (78.7%)
9. Hawthorn 2011-2015 (78.6%)
10. Richmond 1931-1935 (77.9%)

Great work FS. Boy, Carlton were a handy team between 1906 and 1916...

In my initial assessment, I argued Geelong's dynasty commenced in 2004 and is still going.

Is there any chance we can see how their win/loss record over this 17 season period stacks up with the other best 17 year periods in the competition?

 

[Fadge]

B2B or B2B2B kind of excludes any ‘luck’ tag. They made it happen

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....

 

[Pessimistic]

Great work FS. Boy, Carlton were a handy team between 1906 and 1916...

In my initial assessment, I argued Geelong's dynasty commenced in 2004 and is still going.

Is there any chance we can see how their win/loss record over this 17 season period stacks up with the other best 17 year periods in the competition?

17? That really is tailoring the discussion to suit geelong, why not 76-91 where the Hawks have .... 7 premierships and one player in all of them. What home and away win ratio difference would overcome a 4 flag deficit - between geelong and hawthorn

 

[PJays]

If you were working for me and produced that assessment, it would be the last one you would ever do for me.

You are arguing Richmond were lucky to win a Premiership in a year they were decimated by injuries for half the season, substantially hampered by injuries for the rest of the season, and won the Grand Final by 89 points. That is not even spun or altered by me, that is what you are straight out arguing. People reading this will just think you are a complete f***wit.

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.

 

[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....

Not whinging about the injuries and setbacks in 2014 either

 

[Fadge]

17? That really is tailoring the discussion to suit geelong, why not 76-91 where the Hawks have .... 7 premierships and one player in all of them. What home and away win ratio difference would overcome a 4 flag deficit - between geelong and hawthorn

Only 17 because that is where Geelong's era currently stands.

If you can go 15 for the purpose of the exercise, that will give us a good view nonetheless.

Not sure there's been any suggestion that this Geelong era has been better than the Hawthorn era of 78 to 91 - even I wouldn't argue that...

 

[PJays]

B2B or B2B2B kind of excludes any ‘luck’ tag. They made it happen

This is just a ridiculous comment.

 

[Final Siren]

Great work FS. Boy, Carlton were a handy team between 1906 and 1916...

In my initial assessment, I argued Geelong's dynasty commenced in 2004 and is still going.

Is there any chance we can see how their win/loss record over this 17 season period stacks up with the other best 17 year periods in the competition?

1. Collingwood 1925-1941 (74.0%)
2. Carlton 1905-1921 (73.1%)
3. Hawthorn 1975-1991 (71.1%)
4. Geelong 2004-2020 (70.2%)
5. Carlton 1966-1982 (69.8%)

 

[PJays]

1. Collingwood 1925-1941 (74.0%)
2. Carlton 1905-1921 (73.1%)
3. Hawthorn 1975-1991 (71.1%)
4. Geelong 2004-2020 (70.2%)
5. Carlton 1966-1982 (69.8%)

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?

 

[Final Siren]

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?

Yep, Geelong 2007-2020 would be 3rd after Collingwood 1926-1939 and Carlton 1904-1917.

 

[Elton Johns Wig]

Well done for admitting this.

My scepticism about your "honest" impartiality -at odds with your actual vote in the poll and some comments you made- was justified. Some of your "concessions" seemed inconsistent; now I realise they were part of your "experiment".

And you have proven your inability to judge Richmod with any impartiality. So well done on that.

And inconsistent? No. As I said, it's easy to concede that Richmonfd were/are curently the lesser of the sides whilst holding what you percieve to be a biased view on a particular match.

I'm a punter, I've made a lot of money betting against Richmond over the years. I don't see the sense in the chance of bias costing me money.

And they spanked you the two times before that- including the previous year's finals.



8 or 9 out of 20 on existing prelim with different last minute finish.

9 or 10 out of 20 if Collingwood had played how I expected and comfortably won the prelim. Given Richmond wasn't exactly convincing themselves.

GWS? 3 or 4 out of 20.

Hence Richmond was lucky when GWS upset Collingwood. They went from 10 or 12 chance out of 20 to 16/17 out of 20.

So somewhere between 40-50%? And you reckon I'M biased? ******* lol.

That means you've got the market floating between $1.90 each of two to maybe as skinny as the Tiges $1.60-65ish?

I would have gone large.

 

[TJASTA]

polls board more like trolls board

 

[Final Siren]

A total would be nice thanks.

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



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.

 

[PJays]

And you have proven your inability to judge Richmod with any impartiality. So well done on that.

And inconsistent? No. As I said, it's easy to concede that Richmonfd were/are curently the lesser of the sides whilst holding what you percieve to be a biased view on a particular match.

I'm a punter, I've made a lot of money betting against Richmond over the years. I don't see the sense in the chance of bias costing me money.

So somewhere between 40-50%? And you reckon I'M biased? ******* lol.

That means you've got the market floating between $1.90 each of two to maybe as skinny as the Tiges $1.60-65ish?

I would have gone large.

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.

 

[Elton Johns Wig]

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 or maybe even Collingwood slight favourite given Richmond had to come from 21 down in their prelim.

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

 

[Elton Johns Wig]

But keep going, it feeds me.

 

[captain blood 17]

Mate, we didn't lose "a star". We were decimated.

And tinted glasses? I've ranked us last out of the 4. My fellow Richmond supporters will probably disown me for being honest. Sooooo tinted.

I suggest instead you're completely tunnel visioned AGAINST Richmond because they trigger you atm because the supporters can be bonkers.

 

[PJays]

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

Exactly what I predicted.

Great work FS!