Certified Legendary Thread Race for the flag, in squiggly lines

[Final Siren]

Strange that Hawks seem to be a more defensive side this year despite long absences from Gibson, Lake & Stratton and also having lost Guerra.

Yes, there is a significant difference:

Hawthorn after 18 games:
2013: 2073 pts for, 1516 pts against, 136.7%
2014: 2037 pts for, 1444 pts against, 141.1%

It may not be all about the Hawks; the average AFL score in 2014 is down from 92 to 85 as well.

 

[Hawkk]

Yes, there is a significant difference:

Hawthorn after 18 games:
2013: 2073 pts for, 1516 pts against, 136.7%
2014: 2037 pts for, 1444 pts against, 141.1%

It may not be all about the Hawks; the average AFL score in 2014 is down from 92 to 85 as well.

...in which case our attack is significantly improved on last year (somewhat surprisingly without Franklin)

Considering our injuries this year its pretty amazing that Hawthorn is shadowing its performance from last year.

 

[Mningasimisonda]

was thinking the same thing really starting to move into that sweet spot, but Hawthorn is almost flush on it.

Hawthorn are playing in a field of premiership cups. Only team that is really in that zone.

Interesting where Geelong 2011 sits too. Would've expected Geelong 2007 to be higher.

 

[dclaz]

Love the work Final Siren. Next year I'm going to have a bash at modelling offence and defence to see if I can estimate victory probabilities.

 

[Final Siren]

Hawthorn are playing in a field of premiership cups. Only team that is really in that zone.

Interesting where Geelong 2011 sits too. Would've expected Geelong 2007 to be higher.

Yes, they're two interesting years to compare. I think the reason you expect Geelong 2007 to be higher is because they were a lock for the flag almost the whole year, whereas 2011 looked like it belonged to Collingwood until quite late.

This shows up in the squiggles as a huge gap between Geelong and everyone else in 2007, with no clear challenger, while 2011 has a more usual scattering of teams, with some within striking distance.

In both cases, Geelong thumped all comers. In 2007 they beat the Roos 156-50 in a Qualifying Final and (of course) the Power 163-44 in the Grand Final. But those teams weren't rated all that highly, especially North, so Geelong doesn't get as much credit for thrashing them.

Geelong 2011, by contrast, gets a ton of credit for big wins over what the squiggle considers to be an excellent team in Collingwood. Also, in late 2011 Geelong didn't just thump the lower-ranked teams but dismembered them. So it gets big boosts from results like this:

Round 19: Geelong 233-47 Melbourne
Round 20: Geelong 188-38 Gold Coast
Round 24: Geelong 149-53 Collingwood
Grand Final: Geelong 119-81 Collingwood

Another factor is that Geelong 2007 were the dominant team for most of the season, sitting 2 games clear on top of the ladder, with a monstrous percentage advantage, from Round 14. They didn't let up, but aside from the first few rounds, it was a consistent season-long performance. On the squiggle, they basically trend toward the upper right all year long. In 2011, though, the Cats saved their best for last. They spend the first 18 rounds skirting around the edge of the premiership cups, then they explode. So they finish the year in an awesome place, but a lot of that is about timing.

 

[Hawkk]

Out of curiosity, what would you regard to be the most destructive / dominant squiggle in all years of analysis?

Briefly look at all years, Geelong 2011 and Hawthorn 1988 would appear to be the standouts ahead of all other squiggles in question?

 

[Final Siren]

Out of curiosity, what would you regard to be the most destructive / dominant squiggle in all years of analysis?

Briefly look at all years, Geelong 2011 and Hawthorn 1988 would appear to be the standouts ahead of all other squiggles in question?

It's all a bit open to interpretation, like whether "dominant" means "gap to #2" or "gap to the pack" or what. I consider Geelong 2007 more dominant than Geelong 2011 because there was a bigger gap to #2.

But yeah, now you point it out, Hawthorn 1988 is super impressive too. From about Round 12 no-one gets close.

1989 is interesting because Hawthorn and Geelong are both insanely high. How lucky we are that they got to meet in that classic Grand Final.

 

[SJ]

Final Siren, perhaps would position of eventual premiers before the final series be a better comparison than premiership teams?

 

[Hawkk]

It's all a bit open to interpretation, like whether "dominant" means "gap to #2" or "gap to the pack" or what. I consider Geelong 2007 more dominant than Geelong 2011 because there was a bigger gap to #2.

But yeah, now you point it out, Hawthorn 1988 is super impressive too. From about Round 12 no-one gets close.

1989 is interesting because Hawthorn and Geelong are both insanely high. How lucky we are that they got to meet in that classic Grand Final.

Has there ever been a team that was better positioned on the chart than Geelong after round 12, 1989?

 

[WWSD]

...in which case our attack is significantly improved on last year (somewhat surprisingly without Franklin)

Considering our injuries this year its pretty amazing that Hawthorn is shadowing its performance from last year.

We have been the highest scoring team in the competition since the start of 2012. Our ability to score 100 points every time we win is simply amazing.

Points for 2011: 107.1 (rank 3rd)
Points for 2012: 121.8 (rank 1st)
Points for 2013: 114.7 (rank 1st)
Points for 2014* 113.1 (rank 1st)

Not only that we are by far and away the highest scoring team in the competition this year. The next best scoring side is Port Adelaide who are averaging 101.6 points per game. Only two sides currently averaging over 100 points per game.

Top five scoring teams in 2014
Hawthorn 2037 = 113.16
Port Adelaide 1829 = 101.61
Sydney 1720 = 95.55
Adelaide 1703 = 94.61
Geelong 1656 = 92

 

[SJ]

Has there ever been a team that was better positioned on the chart than Geelong after round 12, 1989?

Collingwood Round 20 2011?

 

[philohk]

It's all a bit open to interpretation, like whether "dominant" means "gap to #2" or "gap to the pack" or what. I consider Geelong 2007 more dominant than Geelong 2011 because there was a bigger gap to #2.

But yeah, now you point it out, Hawthorn 1988 is super impressive too. From about Round 12 no-one gets close.

1989 is interesting because Hawthorn and Geelong are both insanely high. How lucky we are that they got to meet in that classic Grand Final.

Holy teapot, Geelong 1989 offence

 

[Final Siren]

Final Siren, perhaps would position of eventual premiers before the final series be a better comparison than premiership teams?

It depends on what you're trying to show. The way it is, I think it shows the prime area you really want your team to be heading into. And it's reasonably reliable in that the premierships from the last 20 years all cluster around the same area, in far greater numbers than teams that failed, and most of the time the team that wins the flag is closer to that area than anyone else.

If you're trying to figure out how likely it is your team will win the flag based on its Round 19 position, then yes, something like you suggest might be useful, perhaps with a strike rate for each quadrant. Although you'd be missing the factor about how far ahead or behind its competitors each team was.

A "final H&A position" chart may also be distorted by the fact that top teams with secure ladder positions tend to dramatically underperform in the final round.

 

[Final Siren]

Holy teapot, Geelong 1989 offence

Yeah, those were the days! In 1989, the lowest winning score in any final was 111 points. Geelong scored 138 in the GF and lost!

In last year's finals series, a team scored 100 or more in only 3 out out of 9 games, the highest score being 116.

 

[Sirlemsip]

I don't think we are ever going to see a game better than the 1989 GF. Best game of all time - superstars on both sides, massive individual efforts (Ablett), courage/strength (and stupidity) from Brereton and Dipper to keep playing. See-sawing runs of goals.

 

[Soul_Pie]

I still think that Hawks are once again best placed to win it, especially in a year when teams seem to be struggling to score it's astonishing how easily Hawks do it. I just don't think teams can stop them, even the mega defensive units like Freo and Sydney couldn't prevent them getting over 100, and there's no team like Geelong 11 that could go with them in a shootout. Given all their interruptions this year and losing arguably the best forward in the comp, it's pretty insane how good they've been.

It's almost like the rest of the competition went into their shells and looked for ways to decrease the scoring in a match and tighten things up while the Hawks looked for more ways to exploit their attacking strengths and in the process put a bigger gap between themselves and the next best. You have a side like Sydney that now ranks lower in terms of its attack than in 2012 while in that time they've added two of the best forwards in the comp to their lineup, that just seems bizarre to me.

But hey, there's still a long way to go.

 

[philohk]

I still think that Hawks are once again best placed to win it, especially in a year when teams seem to be struggling to score it's astonishing how easily Hawks do it. I just don't think teams can stop them, even the mega defensive units like Freo and Sydney couldn't prevent them getting over 100, and there's no team like Geelong 11 that could go with them in a shootout. Given all their interruptions this year and losing arguably the best forward in the comp, it's pretty insane how good they've been.

It's almost like the rest of the competition went into their shells and looked for ways to decrease the scoring in a match and tighten things up while the Hawks looked for more ways to exploit their attacking strengths and in the process put a bigger gap between themselves and the next best. You have a side like Sydney that now ranks lower in terms of its attack than in 2012 while in that time they've added two of the best forwards in the comp to their lineup, that just seems bizarre to me.

But hey, there's still a long way to go.

Well said - I noticed that too. I guess it's a product of the continuing evolution to full-ground defence, and in that case, yeah, it is pretty amazing that we still score so freely. But like you say, long way to go.

 

[cryptor]

I still think that Hawks are once again best placed to win it, especially in a year when teams seem to be struggling to score it's astonishing how easily Hawks do it. I just don't think teams can stop them, even the mega defensive units like Freo and Sydney couldn't prevent them getting over 100, and there's no team like Geelong 11 that could go with them in a shootout. Given all their interruptions this year and losing arguably the best forward in the comp, it's pretty insane how good they've been.

It's almost like the rest of the competition went into their shells and looked for ways to decrease the scoring in a match and tighten things up while the Hawks looked for more ways to exploit their attacking strengths and in the process put a bigger gap between themselves and the next best. You have a side like Sydney that now ranks lower in terms of its attack than in 2012 while in that time they've added two of the best forwards in the comp to their lineup, that just seems bizarre to me.

But hey, there's still a long way to go.

There was a thread late last year on the main board regarding Buddy leaving the Hawks and how it would effect the team. I posted a whole bunch of stats that showed that the Hawks scored more and won by more on average without Buddy. I even broke it down further to only include games against top 8 finishing sides after a few suggested that it was only because we played most games without Buddy against lower ranked teams (it was like 60:40 (bottom10:top8) break down from memory). The stats against the top 8 sides were surprising in that the differences between what we scored and how much we won by was even greater than against the bottom sides.

What I took from that (and a whole bunch of us Hawks supporters have probably wondered this over the years) is that Buddy is too good for the teams own good. He's a major presence in the forward line and despite a deliberate attempt to kick to him less in his last few years with us he was still our most kicked to target inside 50. His presence in the side results in kicks that should've possibly been directed to other targets in arguably better positions of the 50 (closer to goal, better angle, etc.). Because opposition know he's the go-to guy the forward entries suddenly become easier to predict and as a result the team doesn't get to score as much and when they do it can be from poor positions which then results in low conversion rates.

Then there's the big guy himself. There's no doubting he's an absolute freak player and one of, if not the biggest game changers in the league. The problem is that there's no guarantee when he'll turn on those powers or if he will at all. I think strong teams like Hawthorn and Sydney who can get plenty of ball to their forward line would do better with a few consistent and reliable forwards that will each kick you your 2-4 goals each week without too much fail. Rather than what Buddy provides which is the possibility of anywhere between 1-6 goals each week. Sure if you get the ball to him often enough he'll eventually kick a few but if he's kicked 3.4 that could be the difference between a flag and no flag as the Hawks found out in 2012.

The funny thing is that if it didn't involve the absurd amounts of money he's currently being paid then Hawthorn would gladly have him back in the team despite the stats suggesting we'd be scoring less and winning by less against the better teams. He's just the kind of player you want to see running around for your club.

 

[wilbur_15]

Hi Final Siren. Just wondering if there's any easy way to get a record of the squiggles round by round tips this year?

 

[Dirty Bird]

Yeah, those were the days! In 1989, the lowest winning score in any final was 111 points. Geelong scored 138 in the GF and lost!

In last year's finals series, a team scored 100 or more in only 3 out out of 9 games, the highest score being 116.

That extra 25% of gametime would've helped.....

 

[QuietB]

...in which case our attack is significantly improved on last year (somewhat surprisingly without Franklin)

Considering our injuries this year its pretty amazing that Hawthorn is shadowing its performance from last year.

The Franklin effect is one of the most fascinating things of this season. Theoretically he should make Sydney untouchable - they were already very good without him. Theoretically his absence should also be a massive blow to the Hawks - but it hasn't been. What will Franklin do in September? Will accurate Buddy show up three games in a row?

 

[Mningasimisonda]

Holy teapot, Geelong 1989 offence

But the squiggle suggests why we didn't win premierships around that time. Insane offense but defence was not premiership worthy.

 

[SuperSub17]

That extra 25% of gametime would've helped.....

Not quite 25%, the clock stops these days for ball-ups and it didn't back then.

I think it's 7 minutes per game in comparison

 

[catstorm]

Yeah, those were the days! In 1989, the lowest winning score in any final was 111 points. Geelong scored 138 in the GF and lost!

In last year's finals series, a team scored 100 or more in only 3 out out of 9 games, the highest score being 116.

Round 12 that year Geelong was 86 offense and 87 defense is that the best combination between the two and if not who was better?

 

[Catsace]

Round 12 that year Geelong was 86 offense and 87 defense is that the best combination between the two and if not who was better?

After Geelong's festival of 100+ point wins and ever increasing scorelines (starting Rd 6 where Geelong lost 163-171 to the Hawks), following three 100+ point wins in succession were then followed by consecutive defensive smashings of at that stage the second placed Bombers and Dees, where those sides were held to 35 and 20 points respectively. Hence after Rd 12, the gargantuan leap to the right axis. Geelong did have three further losses late that year, to the Pies, Dees and Eagles who all scored 100+ against the Cats, and then that QF where Essendon smashed Geelong by 13 goals.

1992 was even higher scoring for the Cats, and yet again, after the early-mid season scoring binge a few defeats sullied the waters, with Geelong coughing up some big numbers. Crows by 92 points late in the year would have knocked the squiggle back big time, like this year's smashing at the hands of Sydney. Fascinating to see these seasons in squiggle terms.

ON another note, i checked the 1976 season, and it was noteworthy for no club really getting into contemporary Flag territory. The Blues were in the best zone, but they went out in straight sets that year. The Hawks GF win saw them land in a zone that is rather short of even the Crows 1998 flag. Given it was a very even season, it may be argued it was a relatively 'weak' sort of year, without any genuine dominant power club.