Analysis What Our Ladder Position Means - Forecasts Based on Historical Precedence

Remove this Banner Ad

Jan 17, 2008
29,054
59,120
Brisvegas
AFL Club
Hawthorn
WARNING: If you don't like stats, stats models, or examination of future success based on historical precedence, this thread is not for you.

I think it is clear now that we will finish bottom 4. There is still doubt as to what our final position will be, with every position from 18 to 15 a live possibility (unlike we finish any higher).

The question I have is, what does this mean in terms of how long we must wait until our next premiership? Hawthorn is a very successful club and we bat well above the average. I'm not going to consider our history, instead, I will review the history of outcomes to set our expectations around average outcomes and then we can tack on a 'Hawthorn is ******* awesome' factor on at the end ;)

I'll be making some comparisons between the daft era and pre-draft era. I have excluded data prior to 1950 as too many changes in league size, and even the particular teams involved. I will be focussing in on the probability of winning a premiership within ten years following a season in which a team finished a particular place on the ladder.

I have used a logistic regression model using final ladder position, a dummy for draft era (taking the value of 1 for draft era and 0 for pre-draft era) and a count of teams which competed in the league for the year related to the particular record. I also include an interaction term between the draft dummy and the final ladder position to allow the model to be more flexible. I trialled several other variables (mostly lags of final ladder position) and it didn't improve the predictive power of the model so I applied the principal of parsimony and ditched them. The model predicts whether or not a team will win a premiership within the next ten years around 68% of the time based on those variables. That is good enough for this purpose.

Lastly, due to the complex and dynamic structural changes to the league over time, I have chosen to report on average probability. This is calculated by first estimating the probability of of an individual team winning a premiership within ten years and then taking the mean of all teams that finished in that position the same position on the ladder and grouping them by draft and pre-draft eras. I also do the same thing except using a reverse ladder so I can examine the effect of finishing last regardless of league size.

Now to the fun part :)

Top 4 v Bottom 4

According to the model, pre-draft era top 4 teams had around 58% chance of winning a premiership in the following ten years. This is higher than draft era top 4 teams, which had around a 44% of winning a premiership in the following ten years.

Pre-draft bottom 4 teams had substantially less probability of winning a premiership in the following ten years (around 25% chance) as top 4 teams. This contrasts with draft era bottom 4 teams, which had around a 20% chance of winning a premiership in the following ten years.

On face value, neither stat is an endorsement of the draft system! But the reality is it has more to do with the increase in the number of teams that coincided with the draft.

By Ladder Position
As per the chart below, the probability of winning a premiership in the next ten years decreases approximately linearly with an increase in ladder position. The slope is steeper for pre-draft era, which leads to it crossing over in probability at around 9th. No team has won after finishing 17th of lower but the model still estimates a positive probability.
1627297501954.png

Notably, this model is good at predicting actual outcomes but when I attempted to use it to simulate an 18 team competition for pre and post draft, it struggled, overstating the total probability of winning a premiership within ten years.

I re-trained model using the entire dataset back to 1897 so I could get a wider range of final ladder positions. I then created the chart below assuming the league had 18 teams before and after the implementation of the draft. The draft line is probably still overstating the probability of winning a premiership within ten years (technically, the area under each curve should be the same). If I was able to appropriately adjust the draft era probability curve lower to equal the area under the pre-draft curve, my guess is it crosses the line around position 4-5. So essentially, everyone bar the top 4 was made better off under the draft system, in terms of winning a premiership in the ten years following finishing top 4.
1627290393776.png


Chances of Winning A Flag in the draft era after finishing bottom four?
As you can see, there is little difference in the probability of winning a flag in any given year following bottom four (based on historical frequency, not modelling) but the best chance is sooner rather than later for finishing 3rd last of 4th last while it is in year 9 and 10 after finishing 2nd last that has historically seen the best chance of winning a flag. Finishing last never rises above a 5% chance for a given year.
1627296790043.png


What does it all mean?
I think this analysis demonstrates that the draft really does give teams a greater shot at winning a flag in the following ten years than the old zone system. Only the top 5 had a 20% chance or better (under the assumption of 18 team competition) of winning a premiership in the next 10 years. The second model suggests that the top 9 have a 20% chance or better. While this probability is likely too high, the flatter curve shows that the probability is more evenly distributed across the ladder. Should we finish 17th, we would have around a 10% chance of winning a premiership within 10 years, though we would be the first ten to finish 17th to do so.

The analysis also shows that there is no shortcut to success, on average. Your probability doesn't increase by being lower down the ladder. It literally decreases! This is not to make any judgement on the draft or talent but is probably reflective of the fact that teams that lower just have less to build on and so only a small chance of winning a premiership in the following ten years. Finishing last seems to have a particular negative effect on your chances of winning a flag in the following ten years. This is likely the case because if you Arne't good enough to come second last your list is irredeemable with little to build on...In short, if we can't hold off North (or finish above another club) then we are likely in for a world of pain unless our hawthorn awesome factor can get us up the ladder! Go hawks!

PS I plan to re-run this model an include variables for clubs that received priority draft picks. But I need to put that dataset together as I unfortunately lost the one I had...
 
Last edited:

rei154

Premiership Player
Jun 13, 2019
3,232
8,575
AFL Club
Hawthorn
WARNING: If you don't like stats, stats models, or examination of future success based on historical precedence, this thread is not for you.

I think it is clear now that we will finish bottom 4. There is still doubt as to what our final position will be, with every position from 18 to 15 a live possibility (unlike we finish any higher).

The question I have is, what does this mean in terms of how long we must wait until our next premiership? Hawthorn is a very successful club and we bat well above the average. I'm not going to consider our history, instead, I will review the history of outcomes to set our expectations around average outcomes and then we can tack on a 'Hawthorn is ******* awesome' factor on at the end ;)

I'll be making some comparisons between the daft era and pre-draft era. I have excluded data prior to 1950 as too many changes in league size, and even the particular teams involved. I will be focussing in on the probability of winning a premiership within ten years following a season in which a team finished a particular place on the ladder.

I have used a logistic regression model using final ladder position, a dummy for draft era (taking the value of 1 for draft era and 0 for pre-draft era) and a count of teams which competed in the league for the year related to the particular record. I also include an interaction term between the draft dummy and the final ladder position to allow the model to be more flexible. I trialled several other variables (mostly lags of final ladder position) and it didn't improve the predictive power of the model so I applied the principal of parsimony and ditched them. The model predicts whether or not a team will win a premiership within the next ten years around 68% of the time based on those variables. That is good enough for this purpose.

Lastly, due to the complex and dynamic structural changes to the league over time, I have chosen to report on average probability. This is calculated by first estimating the probability of of an individual team winning a premiership within ten years and then taking the mean of all teams that finished in that position the same position on the ladder and grouping them by draft and pre-draft eras. I also do the same thing except using a reverse ladder so I can examine the effect of finishing last regardless of league size.

Now to the fun part :)

Top 4 v Bottom 4

According to the model, pre-draft era top 4 teams had around 58% chance of winning a premiership in the following ten years. This is higher than draft era top 4 teams, which had around a 44% of winning a premiership in the following ten years.

Pre-draft bottom 4 teams had substantially less probability of winning a premiership in the following ten years (around 25% chance) as top 4 teams. This contrasts with draft era bottom 4 teams, which had around a 20% chance of winning a premiership in the following ten years.

On face value, neither stat is an endorsement of the draft system! But the reality is it has more to do with the increase in the number of teams that coincided with the draft.

By Ladder Position
As per the chart below, the probability of winning a premiership in the next ten years decreases approximately linearly with an increase in ladder position. The slope is steeper for pre-draft era, which leads to it crossing over in probability at around 9th. No team has won after finishing 17th of lower but the model still estimates a positive probability.
View attachment 1188032
Notably, this model is good at predicting actual outcomes but when I attempted to use it to simulate an 18 team competition for pre and post draft, it struggled, overstating the total probability of winning a premiership within ten years.

I re-trained model using the entire dataset back to 1897 so I could get a wider range of final ladder positions. I then created the chart below assuming the league had 18 teams before and after the implementation of the draft. The draft line is probably still overstating the probability of winning a premiership within ten years (technically, the area under each curve should be the same). If I was able to appropriately adjust the draft era probability curve lower to equal the area under the pre-draft curve, my guess is it crosses the line around position 4-5. So essentially, everyone bar the top 4 was made better off under the draft system, in terms of winning a premiership in the ten years following finishing top 4.
View attachment 1187862

Chances of Winning A Flag in the draft era after finishing bottom four?
As you can see, there is little difference in the probability of winning a flag in any given year following bottom four (based on historical frequency, not modelling) but the best chance is sooner rather than later for finishing 3rd last of 4th last while it is in year 9 and 10 after finishing 2nd last that has historically seen the best chance of winning a flag. Finishing last never rises above a 5% chance for a given year.
View attachment 1188009

What does it all mean?
I think this analysis demonstrates that the draft really does give teams a greater shot at winning a flag in the following ten years than the old zone system. Only the top 5 had a 20% chance or better (under the assumption of 18 team competition) of winning a premiership in the next 10 years. The second model suggests that the top 9 have a 20% chance or better. While this probability is likely too high, the flatter curve shows that the probability is more evenly distributed across the ladder. Should we finish 17th, we would have around a 10% chance of winning a premiership within 10 years, though we would be the first ten to finish 17th to do so.

The analysis also shows that there is no shortcut to success, on average. Your probability doesn't increase by being lower down the ladder. It literally decreases! This is not to make any judgement on the draft or talent but is probably reflective of the fact that teams that lower just have less to build on and so only a small chance of winning a premiership in the following ten years. Finishing last seems to have a particular negative effect on your chances of winning a flag in the following ten years. This is likely the case because if you Arne't good enough to come second last your list is irredeemable with little to build on...In short, if we can't hold off North (or finish above another club) then we are likely in for a world of pain unless our hawthorn awesome factor can get us up the ladder! Go hawks!

PS I plan to re-run this model an include variables for clubs that received priority draft picks. But I need to put that dataset together as I unfortunately lost the one I had...
Amazing work!
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Dec 22, 2007
9,551
17,081
AFL Club
Hawthorn
WARNING: If you don't like stats, stats models, or examination of future success based on historical precedence, this thread is not for you.

I think it is clear now that we will finish bottom 4. There is still doubt as to what our final position will be, with every position from 18 to 15 a live possibility (unlike we finish any higher).

The question I have is, what does this mean in terms of how long we must wait until our next premiership? Hawthorn is a very successful club and we bat well above the average. I'm not going to consider our history, instead, I will review the history of outcomes to set our expectations around average outcomes and then we can tack on a 'Hawthorn is ******* awesome' factor on at the end ;)

I'll be making some comparisons between the daft era and pre-draft era. I have excluded data prior to 1950 as too many changes in league size, and even the particular teams involved. I will be focussing in on the probability of winning a premiership within ten years following a season in which a team finished a particular place on the ladder.

I have used a logistic regression model using final ladder position, a dummy for draft era (taking the value of 1 for draft era and 0 for pre-draft era) and a count of teams which competed in the league for the year related to the particular record. I also include an interaction term between the draft dummy and the final ladder position to allow the model to be more flexible. I trialled several other variables (mostly lags of final ladder position) and it didn't improve the predictive power of the model so I applied the principal of parsimony and ditched them. The model predicts whether or not a team will win a premiership within the next ten years around 68% of the time based on those variables. That is good enough for this purpose.

Lastly, due to the complex and dynamic structural changes to the league over time, I have chosen to report on average probability. This is calculated by first estimating the probability of of an individual team winning a premiership within ten years and then taking the mean of all teams that finished in that position the same position on the ladder and grouping them by draft and pre-draft eras. I also do the same thing except using a reverse ladder so I can examine the effect of finishing last regardless of league size.

Now to the fun part :)

Top 4 v Bottom 4

According to the model, pre-draft era top 4 teams had around 58% chance of winning a premiership in the following ten years. This is higher than draft era top 4 teams, which had around a 44% of winning a premiership in the following ten years.

Pre-draft bottom 4 teams had substantially less probability of winning a premiership in the following ten years (around 25% chance) as top 4 teams. This contrasts with draft era bottom 4 teams, which had around a 20% chance of winning a premiership in the following ten years.

On face value, neither stat is an endorsement of the draft system! But the reality is it has more to do with the increase in the number of teams that coincided with the draft.

By Ladder Position
As per the chart below, the probability of winning a premiership in the next ten years decreases approximately linearly with an increase in ladder position. The slope is steeper for pre-draft era, which leads to it crossing over in probability at around 9th. No team has won after finishing 17th of lower but the model still estimates a positive probability.
View attachment 1188032
Notably, this model is good at predicting actual outcomes but when I attempted to use it to simulate an 18 team competition for pre and post draft, it struggled, overstating the total probability of winning a premiership within ten years.

I re-trained model using the entire dataset back to 1897 so I could get a wider range of final ladder positions. I then created the chart below assuming the league had 18 teams before and after the implementation of the draft. The draft line is probably still overstating the probability of winning a premiership within ten years (technically, the area under each curve should be the same). If I was able to appropriately adjust the draft era probability curve lower to equal the area under the pre-draft curve, my guess is it crosses the line around position 4-5. So essentially, everyone bar the top 4 was made better off under the draft system, in terms of winning a premiership in the ten years following finishing top 4.
View attachment 1187862

Chances of Winning A Flag in the draft era after finishing bottom four?
As you can see, there is little difference in the probability of winning a flag in any given year following bottom four (based on historical frequency, not modelling) but the best chance is sooner rather than later for finishing 3rd last of 4th last while it is in year 9 and 10 after finishing 2nd last that has historically seen the best chance of winning a flag. Finishing last never rises above a 5% chance for a given year.
View attachment 1188009

What does it all mean?
I think this analysis demonstrates that the draft really does give teams a greater shot at winning a flag in the following ten years than the old zone system. Only the top 5 had a 20% chance or better (under the assumption of 18 team competition) of winning a premiership in the next 10 years. The second model suggests that the top 9 have a 20% chance or better. While this probability is likely too high, the flatter curve shows that the probability is more evenly distributed across the ladder. Should we finish 17th, we would have around a 10% chance of winning a premiership within 10 years, though we would be the first ten to finish 17th to do so.

The analysis also shows that there is no shortcut to success, on average. Your probability doesn't increase by being lower down the ladder. It literally decreases! This is not to make any judgement on the draft or talent but is probably reflective of the fact that teams that lower just have less to build on and so only a small chance of winning a premiership in the following ten years. Finishing last seems to have a particular negative effect on your chances of winning a flag in the following ten years. This is likely the case because if you Arne't good enough to come second last your list is irredeemable with little to build on...In short, if we can't hold off North (or finish above another club) then we are likely in for a world of pain unless our hawthorn awesome factor can get us up the ladder! Go hawks!

PS I plan to re-run this model an include variables for clubs that received priority draft picks. But I need to put that dataset together as I unfortunately lost the one I had...

TL;DR

;)
 

Simon Crawshay

Premiership Player
Jun 4, 2016
4,811
13,077
AFL Club
Hawthorn
WARNING: If you don't like stats, stats models, or examination of future success based on historical precedence, this thread is not for you.

I think it is clear now that we will finish bottom 4. There is still doubt as to what our final position will be, with every position from 18 to 15 a live possibility (unlike we finish any higher).

The question I have is, what does this mean in terms of how long we must wait until our next premiership? Hawthorn is a very successful club and we bat well above the average. I'm not going to consider our history, instead, I will review the history of outcomes to set our expectations around average outcomes and then we can tack on a 'Hawthorn is ******* awesome' factor on at the end ;)

I'll be making some comparisons between the daft era and pre-draft era. I have excluded data prior to 1950 as too many changes in league size, and even the particular teams involved. I will be focussing in on the probability of winning a premiership within ten years following a season in which a team finished a particular place on the ladder.

I have used a logistic regression model using final ladder position, a dummy for draft era (taking the value of 1 for draft era and 0 for pre-draft era) and a count of teams which competed in the league for the year related to the particular record. I also include an interaction term between the draft dummy and the final ladder position to allow the model to be more flexible. I trialled several other variables (mostly lags of final ladder position) and it didn't improve the predictive power of the model so I applied the principal of parsimony and ditched them. The model predicts whether or not a team will win a premiership within the next ten years around 68% of the time based on those variables. That is good enough for this purpose.

Lastly, due to the complex and dynamic structural changes to the league over time, I have chosen to report on average probability. This is calculated by first estimating the probability of of an individual team winning a premiership within ten years and then taking the mean of all teams that finished in that position the same position on the ladder and grouping them by draft and pre-draft eras. I also do the same thing except using a reverse ladder so I can examine the effect of finishing last regardless of league size.

Now to the fun part :)

Top 4 v Bottom 4

According to the model, pre-draft era top 4 teams had around 58% chance of winning a premiership in the following ten years. This is higher than draft era top 4 teams, which had around a 44% of winning a premiership in the following ten years.

Pre-draft bottom 4 teams had substantially less probability of winning a premiership in the following ten years (around 25% chance) as top 4 teams. This contrasts with draft era bottom 4 teams, which had around a 20% chance of winning a premiership in the following ten years.

On face value, neither stat is an endorsement of the draft system! But the reality is it has more to do with the increase in the number of teams that coincided with the draft.

By Ladder Position
As per the chart below, the probability of winning a premiership in the next ten years decreases approximately linearly with an increase in ladder position. The slope is steeper for pre-draft era, which leads to it crossing over in probability at around 9th. No team has won after finishing 17th of lower but the model still estimates a positive probability.
View attachment 1188032
Notably, this model is good at predicting actual outcomes but when I attempted to use it to simulate an 18 team competition for pre and post draft, it struggled, overstating the total probability of winning a premiership within ten years.

I re-trained model using the entire dataset back to 1897 so I could get a wider range of final ladder positions. I then created the chart below assuming the league had 18 teams before and after the implementation of the draft. The draft line is probably still overstating the probability of winning a premiership within ten years (technically, the area under each curve should be the same). If I was able to appropriately adjust the draft era probability curve lower to equal the area under the pre-draft curve, my guess is it crosses the line around position 4-5. So essentially, everyone bar the top 4 was made better off under the draft system, in terms of winning a premiership in the ten years following finishing top 4.
View attachment 1187862

Chances of Winning A Flag in the draft era after finishing bottom four?
As you can see, there is little difference in the probability of winning a flag in any given year following bottom four (based on historical frequency, not modelling) but the best chance is sooner rather than later for finishing 3rd last of 4th last while it is in year 9 and 10 after finishing 2nd last that has historically seen the best chance of winning a flag. Finishing last never rises above a 5% chance for a given year.
View attachment 1188009

What does it all mean?
I think this analysis demonstrates that the draft really does give teams a greater shot at winning a flag in the following ten years than the old zone system. Only the top 5 had a 20% chance or better (under the assumption of 18 team competition) of winning a premiership in the next 10 years. The second model suggests that the top 9 have a 20% chance or better. While this probability is likely too high, the flatter curve shows that the probability is more evenly distributed across the ladder. Should we finish 17th, we would have around a 10% chance of winning a premiership within 10 years, though we would be the first ten to finish 17th to do so.

The analysis also shows that there is no shortcut to success, on average. Your probability doesn't increase by being lower down the ladder. It literally decreases! This is not to make any judgement on the draft or talent but is probably reflective of the fact that teams that lower just have less to build on and so only a small chance of winning a premiership in the following ten years. Finishing last seems to have a particular negative effect on your chances of winning a flag in the following ten years. This is likely the case because if you Arne't good enough to come second last your list is irredeemable with little to build on...In short, if we can't hold off North (or finish above another club) then we are likely in for a world of pain unless our hawthorn awesome factor can get us up the ladder! Go hawks!

PS I plan to re-run this model an include variables for clubs that received priority draft picks. But I need to put that dataset together as I unfortunately lost the one I had...
Awesome work!

My take out of all of the he above is that the strategy of deliberately tanking to finish as low as you can to maximise your draft picks is a broken strategy.

Teams need to stay as far away from the bottom of the ladder as possible as it is a fallacy that tanking for a year or two to stockpile picks lets you throw the switch a couple of years later and slingshot up the ladder.

Much better to do everything in your power to stay up around the top 4 like Geelong / Sydney / West Coast have done as success breeds success.

I think this is a major reason Clarko is not being renewed, it's going to be a long grind back from where we are now.
 

Carl Spackler

Club Legend
Jul 29, 2018
2,406
5,642
AFL Club
Hawthorn
WARNING: If you don't like stats, stats models, or examination of future success based on historical precedence, this thread is not for you.

I think it is clear now that we will finish bottom 4. There is still doubt as to what our final position will be, with every position from 18 to 15 a live possibility (unlike we finish any higher).

The question I have is, what does this mean in terms of how long we must wait until our next premiership? Hawthorn is a very successful club and we bat well above the average. I'm not going to consider our history, instead, I will review the history of outcomes to set our expectations around average outcomes and then we can tack on a 'Hawthorn is ******* awesome' factor on at the end ;)

I'll be making some comparisons between the daft era and pre-draft era. I have excluded data prior to 1950 as too many changes in league size, and even the particular teams involved. I will be focussing in on the probability of winning a premiership within ten years following a season in which a team finished a particular place on the ladder.

I have used a logistic regression model using final ladder position, a dummy for draft era (taking the value of 1 for draft era and 0 for pre-draft era) and a count of teams which competed in the league for the year related to the particular record. I also include an interaction term between the draft dummy and the final ladder position to allow the model to be more flexible. I trialled several other variables (mostly lags of final ladder position) and it didn't improve the predictive power of the model so I applied the principal of parsimony and ditched them. The model predicts whether or not a team will win a premiership within the next ten years around 68% of the time based on those variables. That is good enough for this purpose.

Lastly, due to the complex and dynamic structural changes to the league over time, I have chosen to report on average probability. This is calculated by first estimating the probability of of an individual team winning a premiership within ten years and then taking the mean of all teams that finished in that position the same position on the ladder and grouping them by draft and pre-draft eras. I also do the same thing except using a reverse ladder so I can examine the effect of finishing last regardless of league size.

Now to the fun part :)

Top 4 v Bottom 4

According to the model, pre-draft era top 4 teams had around 58% chance of winning a premiership in the following ten years. This is higher than draft era top 4 teams, which had around a 44% of winning a premiership in the following ten years.

Pre-draft bottom 4 teams had substantially less probability of winning a premiership in the following ten years (around 25% chance) as top 4 teams. This contrasts with draft era bottom 4 teams, which had around a 20% chance of winning a premiership in the following ten years.

On face value, neither stat is an endorsement of the draft system! But the reality is it has more to do with the increase in the number of teams that coincided with the draft.

By Ladder Position
As per the chart below, the probability of winning a premiership in the next ten years decreases approximately linearly with an increase in ladder position. The slope is steeper for pre-draft era, which leads to it crossing over in probability at around 9th. No team has won after finishing 17th of lower but the model still estimates a positive probability.
View attachment 1188032
Notably, this model is good at predicting actual outcomes but when I attempted to use it to simulate an 18 team competition for pre and post draft, it struggled, overstating the total probability of winning a premiership within ten years.

I re-trained model using the entire dataset back to 1897 so I could get a wider range of final ladder positions. I then created the chart below assuming the league had 18 teams before and after the implementation of the draft. The draft line is probably still overstating the probability of winning a premiership within ten years (technically, the area under each curve should be the same). If I was able to appropriately adjust the draft era probability curve lower to equal the area under the pre-draft curve, my guess is it crosses the line around position 4-5. So essentially, everyone bar the top 4 was made better off under the draft system, in terms of winning a premiership in the ten years following finishing top 4.
View attachment 1187862

Chances of Winning A Flag in the draft era after finishing bottom four?
As you can see, there is little difference in the probability of winning a flag in any given year following bottom four (based on historical frequency, not modelling) but the best chance is sooner rather than later for finishing 3rd last of 4th last while it is in year 9 and 10 after finishing 2nd last that has historically seen the best chance of winning a flag. Finishing last never rises above a 5% chance for a given year.
View attachment 1188009

What does it all mean?
I think this analysis demonstrates that the draft really does give teams a greater shot at winning a flag in the following ten years than the old zone system. Only the top 5 had a 20% chance or better (under the assumption of 18 team competition) of winning a premiership in the next 10 years. The second model suggests that the top 9 have a 20% chance or better. While this probability is likely too high, the flatter curve shows that the probability is more evenly distributed across the ladder. Should we finish 17th, we would have around a 10% chance of winning a premiership within 10 years, though we would be the first ten to finish 17th to do so.

The analysis also shows that there is no shortcut to success, on average. Your probability doesn't increase by being lower down the ladder. It literally decreases! This is not to make any judgement on the draft or talent but is probably reflective of the fact that teams that lower just have less to build on and so only a small chance of winning a premiership in the following ten years. Finishing last seems to have a particular negative effect on your chances of winning a flag in the following ten years. This is likely the case because if you Arne't good enough to come second last your list is irredeemable with little to build on...In short, if we can't hold off North (or finish above another club) then we are likely in for a world of pain unless our hawthorn awesome factor can get us up the ladder! Go hawks!

PS I plan to re-run this model an include variables for clubs that received priority draft picks. But I need to put that dataset together as I unfortunately lost the one I had...

Nice analysis. You need good players to succeed and you need them over a long period to build the cohesiveness of a champion team.

It would be interesting to see coaching turnover and its relation to finish position/GF chances. Clubs on the bottom are switching coaches every three or four years. A coach change is like a reset on the whole climb. It's rare that someone would say the whole club was ready to win if it only had better game day management. I suspect it's a good proxy for how organised a club is for high achievement. Carlton's long run in the doldrums despite draft picks up the ying yang or GWS's failure to climb come to mind.

Can you give us a list of the clubs that managed to climb from bottom to top? I would be willing to take a look at coaching tenure for them to see if my thoughts are worth looking into further.
 
Sep 28, 2019
4,756
8,291
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Awesome work!

My take out of all of the he above is that the strategy of deliberately tanking to finish as low as you can to maximise your draft picks is a broken strategy.

Teams need to stay as far away from the bottom of the ladder as possible as it is a fallacy that tanking for a year or two to stockpile picks lets you throw the switch a couple of years later and slingshot up the ladder.

Much better to do everything in your power to stay up around the top 4 like Geelong / Sydney / West Coast have done as success breeds success.

I think this is a major reason Clarko is not being renewed, it's going to be a long grind back from where we are now.
Both tigers and us built from finishing last and second last then have won 6 of the last 8 flags.

Even west coast dropped down the ladder before bouncing up. Only Sydney and Geelong have really avoided the bottom of the ladder. Both have been incredibly lucky with Academy and f/s picks as well as players wanting to play from.

Given it takes time to rise up the ladder and teams finishing 1-4 are right in their premiership window the odds are actually not that bad for being down the ladder. Especially when some teams down the bottom wouldn’t win a flag due to how badly they are run a well run team shouldn’t fear the bottom of the ladder.
 

Simon Crawshay

Premiership Player
Jun 4, 2016
4,811
13,077
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Both tigers and us built from finishing last and second last then have won 6 of the last 8 flags.

Even west coast dropped down the ladder before bouncing up. Only Sydney and Geelong have really avoided the bottom of the ladder. Both have been incredibly lucky with Academy and f/s picks as well as players wanting to play from.

Given it takes time to rise up the ladder and teams finishing 1-4 are right in their premiership window the odds are actually not that bad for being down the ladder. Especially when some teams down the bottom wouldn’t win a flag due to how badly they are run a well run team shouldn’t fear the bottom of the ladder.
Unless I am reading those graphs wrong (a real possibility I admit) it appears that if you finish 17th or 18th in particular your odds of winning a premiership in the next 10 years are pretty dire.

I admit different teams are better at managing a rebuild but I think we need to be careful of assuming it will be a given we will be contending again in the short / medium term based on this analysis.
 
Thanks Brishawk. Awesome stuff. One question - does the limited amount of post draft data impact how reliable are the predictions. We’re talking ‘within 10 years’, but the draft has only been in place for 30isj years, right?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Sep 28, 2019
4,756
8,291
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Unless I am reading those graphs wrong (a real possibility I admit) it appears that if you finish 17th or 18th in particular your odds of winning a premiership in the next 10 years are pretty dire.

I admit different teams are better at managing a rebuild but I think we need to be careful of assuming it will be a given we will be contending again in the short / medium term based on this analysis.
Based on the average probability it’s 1 in 10. I’d take that given you have to be a fair way from a flag to finish down the ladder. And generally a lot of work is needed to get back up to competing where if you are in the top 8 you are a chance in the short term. What’s more surprising to me is the fact the difference between finishing between 1st and last is less than 4 times for average probability. Given we are in the era of teams winning multiple flags in a short period of time.

If you are able to be up competing that’s where you want to be. But when you get an unbalanced list like us in 2016. It’s better to ride it down than fight it.
 
Dec 22, 2007
9,551
17,081
AFL Club
Hawthorn
I did put a warning at the top that this thread was not for everyone 🤪
Actually, I'm a data person and was taking the piss.

You mentioned that you were planning to re-run this model. It would be interesting to see what
happens to your data when you include PPs and remove those clubs that aren't well administered.
 
Jan 17, 2008
29,054
59,120
Brisvegas
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Both tigers and us built from finishing last and second last then have won 6 of the last 8 flags.

Even west coast dropped down the ladder before bouncing up. Only Sydney and Geelong have really avoided the bottom of the ladder. Both have been incredibly lucky with Academy and f/s picks as well as players wanting to play from.

Given it takes time to rise up the ladder and teams finishing 1-4 are right in their premiership window the odds are actually not that bad for being down the ladder. Especially when some teams down the bottom wouldn’t win a flag due to how badly they are run a well run team shouldn’t fear the bottom of the ladder.
13 clubs have received priority picks in the first 4 picks of the draft for a total of 30 picks handed out between 1992 and 2009. 5 clubs won a total of 12 flags within 10 years of receiving a priority pick (12 out of 26 between 1993 and 2019). In addition, 5 clubs (some of the same clubs) came runner up in a total 7 grand finals. Two of the clubs that received priority picks managed to 3-pete. Richmond, Sydney and Western bulldogs went on to win 6 flags and 1 runners up more than 10 years after the priority pick (6 out of 26 between 1993 and 2019). That is 18 out of 26 premiers! I think there is little doubt that hitting the bottom of the ladder hard enough to gain a priority pick was a viable path to a flag pre-2010, although Carlton did not benefit from it at all despite getting 3 in 5 years. I'm not sure it is true anymore. You do need talent but it is too easy for players to move clubs so if you don't provide enough upward momentum you will struggle to keep your young talent together.

*My data source doesn't have pick 1 in 2019 as a priority pick but I would include that as a priority pick but not enough time has passed to do analysis on the success of it.
 
Last edited:
Jan 17, 2008
29,054
59,120
Brisvegas
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Unless I am reading those graphs wrong (a real possibility I admit) it appears that if you finish 17th or 18th in particular your odds of winning a premiership in the next 10 years are pretty dire.

I admit different teams are better at managing a rebuild but I think we need to be careful of assuming it will be a given we will be contending again in the short / medium term based on this analysis.
The first chart shows this because your chances of winning a flag within ten years gets worse as you increase the number of teams in the competition so going from 16 to 17 to 18 teams really makes it tough for those last two teams. The chart doesn't control for the number of teams in the league. The second chart is more realistic model in the sense it controls for the number of teams in the league. So really it is lower chance than 16 but you don't see the big drop down like you do in the first chart. I hope that clears things up.
 
Jan 17, 2008
29,054
59,120
Brisvegas
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Actually, I'm a data person and was taking the piss.

You mentioned that you were planning to re-run this model. It would be interesting to see what
happens to your data when you include PPs and remove those clubs that aren't well administered.
I think priority picks will make the case worse for finishing low down the ladder. See my post above. They had a large impact.
 

Scorpia21

Debutant
Oct 26, 2015
116
112
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Awesome work!

My take out of all of the he above is that the strategy of deliberately tanking to finish as low as you can to maximise your draft picks is a broken strategy.

Teams need to stay as far away from the bottom of the ladder as possible as it is a fallacy that tanking for a year or two to stockpile picks lets you throw the switch a couple of years later and slingshot up the ladder.

Much better to do everything in your power to stay up around the top 4 like Geelong / Sydney / West Coast have done as success breeds success.

I think this is a major reason Clarko is not being renewed, it's going to be a long grind back from where we are now.
Uhmm!

20004 we finshed second last 15th and 2005 we finished14th 3rd last and fast forward 2008 we won the Premierships.

West Coast 2000 13th and 14th 2001 and Kapow Premiers 2006


Stats mean nothing and we are on track to win a Premiershio before 2025 but I believe 2 we will win👍💪
 
Jul 10, 2008
1,461
2,542
Adelaide
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Good overall models but do they account for FS pIckes (see Bulldogs, Geelong) or academies (Swans++, Bulldogs from now on)? These distort the intended outcome of the draft. The FS should be random, the teams benefitting have been lucky. THe northern Academies are not just luck, they systematically favour the teams with exclusive access.

I think you should add a variable “swans yes or no”
 
Jan 17, 2008
29,054
59,120
Brisvegas
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Good overall models but do they account for FS pIckes (see Bulldogs, Geelong) or academies (Swans++, Bulldogs from now on)? These distort the intended outcome of the draft. The FS should be random, the teams benefitting have been lucky. THe northern Academies are not just luck, they systematically favour the teams with exclusive access.

I think you should add a variable “swans yes or no”
They don’t account for the draft at all. Not yet anyway. Northern academies are a recent initiative and we don’t have the data yet. It has only been 9 years since gws joined the comp so too soon really. There has been so many changes to rules around drafting, trading and free agency etc that I’m not going to bother trying to include every conceivable variable. There is something to be gained from a more parsimonious model. But I will include priority picks as a variable in future as it ran for a long enough time and plenty of them were given out.
 
Sep 28, 2019
4,756
8,291
AFL Club
Hawthorn
13 clubs have received priority picks in the first 4 picks of the draft for a total of 30 picks handed out between 1992 and 2009. 5 clubs won a total of 12 flags within 10 years of receiving a priority pick (12 out of 26 between 1993 and 2019). In addition, 5 clubs (some of the same clubs) came runner up in a total 7 grand finals. Two of the clubs that received priority picks managed to 3-pete. Richmond, Sydney and Western bulldogs went on to win 6 flags and 1 runners up more than 10 years after the priority pick (6 out of 26 between 1993 and 2019). That is 18 out of 26 premiers! I think there is little doubt that hitting the bottom of the ladder hard enough to gain a priority pick was a viable path to a flag pre-2010, although Carlton did not benefit from it at all despite getting 3 in 5 years. I'm not sure it is true anymore. You do need talent but it is too easy for players to move clubs so if you don't provide enough upward momentum you will struggle to keep your young talent together.

*My data source doesn't have pick 1 in 2019 as a priority pick but I would include that as a priority pick but not enough time has passed to do analysis on the success of it.
Priority picks have definitely helped some teams down the bottom of the ladder. And some have absolutely squandered them.

I had a look and all premiers since at least 2000 onwards have had a year bottom four aside from Geelong (2 bottom 5 finishes) and Sydney (bottom 5 and 6 finishes)

What would be interesting is have any teams avoided the bottom of the ladder for over 10 years without success? Maybe only Geelong this year if they don’t win.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back