Overall average performance metrics each club

[Guardian Hawk]

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.

Sure. You don't need to assign arbitrary weightings.

You just can't total all metrics up as you have, given it means 'playing a final' (including a loss) contributes equally as winning a flag.

You just use your aggregates and have premiership aggregate be the ranking, with GF aggregate the tie breaker, with finals won aggregate the next tie breaker, etc.

The 'when' problem is solved by my last option. More teams competing = slightly more points for winning. It's not an arbitrary system that seeks to favour any one club or exclude any particular time period.

 

[Carringbush2010]

The 'when' problem is solved by my last option. More teams competing = slightly more points for winning. It's not an arbitrary system that seeks to favour any one club or exclude any particular time period.

Then some will argue that footy standard in 1925 is not equal to footy standard in 2025, in 100 years footy standard now will be irrelevant then, so may as well not even bother, so it won't solve the when problem for some.

Even win percentage will be subject to opinion coz 'when'

I do think your ideas are better than my simplistic course of the competition model though.

 

[scoman]

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

 

[SC_Power]

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.

But by giving each metric no weighting, you’re making a judgement that all metrics have equal weighting. Which they clearly shouldn’t.
So any weighting which favours what teams are playing for (more premierships, higher than more prelims, etc) is clearly a more accurate opinion.

 

[TheUnicorn]

Main issue is it kinda treats all four categories as equally important, which doesnt really make sense. Playing finals ends up being worth almost as much as winning flags, and premierships get double counted since every flag is already a GF win and a finals win too.


A more realistic way to do it is to weight things properly


Premierships - should matter most
Grand finals - matter a lot
Finals wins - matter
Finals appearances - are only a small bonus


Something like.....


Flag = 12 points
Grand final loss = 5 points
Finals win = 1.5 points
Finals loss = 0.25 points


Then divide by seasons played so it’s more about success per year rather than just total volume.


If you run the AFL Tables totals through that kind of weighting, the top clubs come out roughly

1. Hawthorn 2.12
2. Collingwood 2.04
3. Richmond 2.03
4. Carlton 2.00
5. Essendon 1.99
6. West Coast 1.93
7. Brisbane 1.85
8. Geelong 1.61

Biggest winners with this sort of weighting are probably Hawthorn, Richmond, West Coast and Brisbane, since it rewards flags and conversion more than just finals volume.


Biggest losers are clubs like Collingwood, Sydney, Port Adelaide just because the original method gives massive boosts for simply playing heaps of finals.


Not saying any formula is perfect, but it feels a lot more meaningful than treating finals played like it’s the same as a premiership.

 

[Fadge]

Main issue is it kinda treats all four categories as equally important, which doesnt really make sense. Playing finals ends up being worth almost as much as winning flags, and premierships get double counted since every flag is already a GF win and a finals win too.


A more realistic way to do it is to weight things properly


Premierships - should matter most
Grand finals - matter a lot
Finals wins - matter
Finals appearances - are only a small bonus


Something like.....


Flag = 12 points
Grand final loss = 5 points
Finals win = 1.5 points
Finals loss = 0.25 points

1. Collingwood 2.04
2. Richmond 2.03

Biggest winners with this sort of weighting are probably Hawthorn, Richmond, West Coast and Brisbane, since it rewards flags and conversion more than just finals volume.

See, this is where it is fundamentally wrong.

Richmond have three fewer flags than Collingwood and 18 fewer Grand Final appearances.

They shouldn't be anywhere near Collingwood.

 

[Chip Scab1]

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.

View attachment 2441627
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.

Where did you go to school? Not that I care but it'll tell me if anyone can trust your mathematics.

 

[Linda Lovelace]

People talking about amateur suburban competition flags as if they are the same as professional national competition flags is somehow considered perfectly sane discourse.

 

[TheUnicorn]

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

1990 - Current

1. Geelong 4.65
2. Brisbane Lions 4.16
3. Hawthorn 3.85
4. West Coast 3.76
5. Collingwood 3.39
6. Sydney 3.22
7. Adelaide 2.16
8. North Melbourne 2.12

 

[Do the Dew]

Equally weighting war era flags to current ones is ludicrous. There were far fewer teams, ridiculous finals challenge systems etc.

May as well add in Geelong's VFA flags from 150 years ago where they were voted on by journalists. Colin Carter would approve but to the rest of us it's utter nonsense.

 

[TheUnicorn]

Dont have time to get too deep into it cos I’ve gotta head off to work, but if you wanted to make it more era appropriate you could just weight seasons by how many teams were actually in the comp at the time.


Something like teams that year divided by 18.


18 team season = x1.00
12 team season = x0.67
10 team season = x0.56
8 team season = x0.44


Would stop early era stuff getting treated the exact same as winning in an 18 team national AFL comp, without just pretending it all doesn’t count either.

 

[Chip Scab1]

Dont have time to get too deep into it cos I’ve gotta head off to work, but if you wanted to make it more era appropriate you could just weight seasons by how many teams were actually in the comp at the time.


Something simple like teams that year divided by 18, so:


18 team season = x1.00
12 team season = x0.67
10 team season = x0.56
8 team season = x0.44


Would stop early era stuff getting treated the exact same as winning in an 18 team national AFL comp, without just pretending it all doesn’t count either.

Geez, you might be the smartest Essendon fan I've ever encountered. You and Howard's Treasurer.

Kudos.

 

[Carringbush2010]

I've conceded that this model is not perfect as it only goes by the course of the competition and how much time any club has been in that competition and then averaged out over that time.

And the fact that this model does (unfairly) average measures equally that are not equal i:e flags and finals played.

Seems if we wanna truly measure then only win percentage is the option, but as explained earlier even then someone will dispute that coz some games were won in the 1920's, like now wins this year will be irrelevant in 100 years to some.

So I guess I like Guardian Hawk model best

Flags won in an 18 team comp = 18 points, 16 in a 16 team comp etc then average out over a club's time in the comp.

Then GF', then finals wo etc.

Of course whatever model is drafted, there'll be some to disagree with it coz whatever

Anyone wanna have a go at it?