Certified Legendary Thread Race for the flag, in squiggly lines

[Final Siren]

Yes, Geelong won in 2007 by being a class above. It's the most convincing premiership for mine because no-one was close to them.

Aside from the Cats, 2007 was very even. Only three teams weren't in with a shot at finals, and that bottom 3 of Melbourne, Carlton & Richmond all finished with percentages in the mid-to-high 70s, which is a fair bit better than our current 2016 bottom 3 (56.1%, 60.9%, 70.8%).

 

[MC_9]

Depends what you call poor.

There looks to be eight teams this year on or below 55 attack and 55 defence.

In 2007 it looks like no (or maybe one team) is in that zone.

But you also have ~9 teams that are better placed then the 2nd best team (in 2007) at this point of the year.

 

[Final Siren]

Round 14, 2016

Animated!

Another good week for the Crows, who crept closer towards the preciousss. Imagine if they'd kicked straight! They'd be cuddling a couple of premiership cups already.

The Cats recorded another away-game-in-Melbourne failure, their third for the year.

Hawthorn are on top of the ladder for the first time since mid-2013 for ages, and, paradoxically, about as weak as they've been since then, too. Last year at this time, the Hawks were 4th, and about to annihilate Fremantle (1st) and Sydney (3rd), after which they were about as clear a flag favourite as you could imagine... and still they wouldn't win the minor premiership, because Ross Lyon kept sacrificing virgins to demon goat-gods in exchange for close wins. This year, it's the Hawks who have had the close games fall the right way, and so they're on top, at least nominally.

Speaking of unconvincing wins! Richmond have won 5 of their last 6 without once managing to resemble a finals threat. I thought Carlton's winning streak was overrated but the Tigers have made that look impressive. Four of those five wins have come against the bottom 4 in Essendon, Brisbane, Fremantle and Gold Coast, with a highest winning margin of 42.

Freo dropped anchor as Collingwood ramped up their defence, keeping the Pies clear of a rising St. Kilda.

The Ladder Predictor has some interesting movement down the bottom, with Brisbane now ever-so-slightly more likely to win the spoon than Essendon, and Fremantle falling into the bottom 3, also by the barest of margins.

Flagpole! A little bit more air for the Crows over the Hawks.

And here is your live squiggle.

 

[cryptor]

Hawthorn are on top of the ladder for the first time since mid-2013

*late-2014. Round 19 & 20

 

[Flukey!]

Interesting the ladder predictor has the HFC finishing 5th.
Could happen and as Final Siren suggests in his wrap, our winning form is actually not great form.
I suspect our best this year is actually well below that of 12 -15, regardless of our current ladder position.

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

The squiggle certainly doesn't rate Gold Coast's "best team*", that's for sure.

*Accordng to Gerard Flog Healy.

 

[Southerntakeover]

I'm sure I'm misunderstanding something, but why in the predictor does Adelaide beat Port Adelaide in Round 22 and yet go from a 15-5 record to a 15-6 record (and therefore lose top spot)?

 

[Southerntakeover]

Adelaide would thump Port.

Adelaide of 2007 > Port of 2007, let alone Adelaide of 2016.

 

[Hawkers]

I did my ladder predictor the other day and had us finishing 6th

 

[Tippett2Goal]

I'm sure I'm misunderstanding something, but why in the predictor does Adelaide beat Port Adelaide in Round 22 and yet go from a 15-5 record to a 15-6 record (and therefore lose top spot)?

As per roughly 100 other posts in this thread.

The predictor is probabilistic, meaning it allocates wins based on percentage chance of winning losing.
your 15-5 may actually be 14.51 vs 5.49 meaning rounding up to 15 - down to 5, say your a 70-30 chance of winning round 22, predictor would then move you to 15.20 vs 5.79, now rounding down wins and up losses.

 

[Rotayjay]

I feel genuinely sorry for people who are using manual ladder predictors. I used to.

Squiggle knows all. You cannot compete with the probabilistic wisdom of Squiggle. We've been through this a few times - because Squiggle gives teams fractions of wins which accounts for upsets, its ladder prediction is always several weeks ahead of the real ladder.

 

[RookiePick]

Pretty good week for West Coast watching the Hawk, North and Geelong movements.

Adelaide clearly the "in-form" side in the comp but we are a long way from home.

 

[DrEvil_]

Yes, Geelong won in 2007 by being a class above. It's the most convincing premiership for mine because no-one was close to them.

Aside from the Cats, 2007 was very even. Only three teams weren't in with a shot at finals, and that bottom 3 of Melbourne, Carlton & Richmond all finished with percentages in the mid-to-high 70s, which is a fair bit better than our current 2016 bottom 3 (56.1%, 60.9%, 70.8%).

Are you saying Geelong 2007 won because of a weak competition? Heaven forbid!

 

[Southerntakeover]

As per roughly 100 other posts in this thread.

The predictor is probabilistic, meaning it allocates wins based on percentage chance of winning losing.
your 15-5 may actually be 14.51 vs 5.49 meaning rounding up to 15 - down to 5, say your a 70-30 chance of winning round 22, predictor would then move you to 15.20 vs 5.79, now rounding down wins and up losses.

Is it your view that everyone who posts in a thread of this size is likely to have read the entirety of it?

In any event, that explanation still doesnt make it understandable to me in the circumstances (though again I'm sure the fault is with my understanding).

Am I right in thinking that the bracketed figures are the accumulated wins? If so, we're higher in that sense on an accumulative than Geelong for the respective round (although their win percentage for that particular round is higher).

Why does that only produce a loss to us within the relevant period?

Edit: no, I see. The respective loss for Geelong happens against Richmond.

 

[Gralin]

Is it your view that everyone who posts in a thread of this size is likely to have read the entirety of it?

In any event, that explanation still doesnt make it understandable to me in the circumstances (though again I'm sure the fault is with my understanding).

Am I right in thinking that the bracketed figures are the accumulated wins? If so, we're higher in that sense on an accumulative than Geelong for the respective round (although their win percentage for that particular round is higher).

Why does that only produce a loss to us within the relevant period?

Edit: no, I see. The respective loss for Geelong happens against Richmond.

If you haven't already I suggest reading the info pop-up on the Squiggle it gives a pretty good explanation.
Final Siren has also put up many great detailed posts answering these sorts of questions in the thread which you can search for.

 

[Seppo]

Final Siren
Is it possible to map out the distance traveled by each team this year on the squiggle?
(i.e. Total length of all vectors)

I'm trying to work out if Freo has had the least overall movement (It may be Essendon) and interested to see if GWS or Geelong have had the biggest movement...

 

[Final Siren]

Final Siren
Is it possible to map out the distance traveled by each team this year on the squiggle?
(i.e. Total length of all vectors)

I'm trying to work out if Freo has had the least overall movement (It may be Essendon) and interested to see if GWS or Geelong have had the biggest movement...

See this post from last month... I don't think a whole lot would have changed:

Squiggle Miles: Distance Travelled to Round 10, 2016

​

This is counting all movement, e.g. when a team goes up one week then back to the same spot the next, that travel counts.

 

[PCCCP]

How does that work
Geelong have been outside Victoria 3 times
Twice to Adelaide oval the other manuaka oval
Dogs have barely left Victoria at all as well

 

[Gralin]

How does that work
Geelong have been outside Victoria 3 times
Twice to Adelaide oval the other manuaka oval
Dogs have barely left Victoria at all as well

Squiggle movement not actual miles traveled by clubs

 

[PCCCP]

Squiggle movement not actual miles traveled by clubs

Oh wowww read that completely wrong hahah

 

[Pessimistic]

Mile high squiggle joke coming up

 

[Suma Magic]

Squiggle tips 124-28.

Eagles win 130-52.

The skynet of footy models.

 

[West Coast 06]

Squiggle tips 124-28.

Eagles win 130-52.

The skynet of footy models.

Squiggle didn't take into account West Coast being asleep for the first quarter.

 

[Suma Magic]

Squiggle didn't take into account West Coast being asleep for the first quarter.

Apparently it did.

Squiggle knows all.

 

[Bruton77]

See this post from last month... I don't think a whole lot would have changed:

Squiggle Miles: Distance Travelled to Round 10, 2016

​

This is counting all movement, e.g. when a team goes up one week then back to the same spot the next, that travel counts.

Final Siren

Do you have more like this? Previous seasons.

I'm interested in seeing who are the teams moved most and least throughout a season, and which seasons had the most and least movement overall*.

Thanks

* I do understand the earliest seasons would make up the majority of the seasons that moved most.