Sorry for the delay.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.
Here are the teams that have finished bottom and made it to the top of the ladder within ten years. Also the team that finished bottom 4 and made it to the top of the ladder within ten years.
And here is the same thing except winning a premiership within ten years rather than finishing on top of the ladder.
Please note, there is the potential for serial correlation here. You might come last, then last, then make your way up the ladder. In which case you would be counted twice for reaching the the top of the ladder/winning the premiership. Essentially it is a count of how many times you finished last (bottom 4) in the ten years prior to finishing top.
21.4 KB Views: 5