Analysis Whatever you do, don't finish top of the ladder

[Boxhead_31]

Whatever you do don't finish 9th to 18th or your chances of winning a flag are minuscule.

Mind you Carlton did beat a team in the finals even though they finished 9th a few years ago

 

[HTT]

its an unfair comparison. You are comparing 1st with 7 other spots. I bet if you look at each spot in isolation, 1st has the greatest odds of winning. I doubt there are more 2nd placed winners than 1st, or more 3rd placed winners than 2nd etc.

There are more 2nd place premiers than 1st in the current system.
Though it is basically an insignificant difference. Top 2 win the overwhelming majority of premierships which is expected due to a) them being the best and b) them getting the best shot at it

 

[Freomaniac]

I know its the NBA, but under their playoff/finals system, you would be surprised on how often the 1st placed side has lost to the 8th placed side.

There has been many sides that have won at 1st-3rd. One side has won in 4th (2006 Miami heat)

There has only been one side that has won from 6th spot and that is the 1994-5 Houston Rockets. Which Remarkably isn't a huge Achievement because the Rockets won the championship the previous year but finished top in the Western Conference. Houston finished 6th due to getting injuries to key players mid season.

It was basically the equivalent of a side winning a flag from top 1 season then finish 5th or 6th with getting injuries mid season but still win 4 finals to win the flag.

There has been one NBA side that has made the NBA finals from 8th spot. That was new york in 1999. But back then it was a 50 game season rather than your typical 82 game season.

It would be similar to what Carlton did in 1999 in making the Grand final from 6th spot but Saying carlton made the finals in An AFL shortened season of 16 games getting 8th spot with an 8 win and 8 loss record.

 

[Goggin Our Best]

I find it interesting how no one wins from 4th. They share the same advantages as 3rd yet 3rd goes on to win reasonably frequently while 4th is basically never premier. Surely 4th isn't typically that much weaker?

Some stats are hard to believe re 4th

When they had the final four system - and they had that for many many many years - so 1st and 2nd had to win 2 finals or 2 out of 3 finals - and 3rd and 4th had to win 3 finals - but the winner of the 1st semi got a weeks break - so theres very little difference really between the 4 of the finalists

However im pretty sure - it took till 1967 - Richmond - for a side to finish 4th and actually win the flag - amazing

 

[Frank Gallagher]

Not one side has won the flag from finishing 18th.

Not one!!

 

[dean33]

View attachment 695402

Because I was curious.

Looks like it's definitely better to be 2nd (occasionally 3rd) playing 4th in a prelim than 1st playing 3rd (occasionally 2nd).

This is interesting, maybe the first week should be changed and instead have 1st v 3rd and 2nd v 4th?

 

[LoungeLizard]

Not one side has won the flag from finishing 18th.

Not one!!

But one has won the flag from finishing last.

 

[mcgarnacle]

Team needs to be mentally strong to win the premiership as minor premiers. They're favourites and as the best team over a 22 game season, they're expected to win their home QF & PF at the very least and then the GF. It's not unusual for these teams to tighten up under expectation.

 

[Goggin Our Best]

But one has won the flag from finishing last.

Very clever post that - in the context of a reply to a poster saying 18th have never won it

 

[numbwombat]

Interesting to see that every year 1999-2015, at least one of the grand finalists had featured in the previous year's grand final or would go on to play in the following year's. 2016 and 2017 the first exceptions in nearly 20 years, and if the Pies and Eagles (currently 3rd and 4th) miss this year, it'll be three in a row. Difficult to know to what extent that's coincidence versus equalisation policies, expansion teams weakening the comp overall, etc.


Related - on 2nd having won more flags - 5 of those 8 were Brisbane '01 and '02, Geelong '09 and '11, and Hawthorn '14 - all of them except Brisbane '01 finals-hardened teams who'd won a flag recently and whose coaches/administrations knew the minor premiership wasn't the be all and end all for a team in serious contention. All had a few advantages the AFL have since cooled on (Bris - salary cap concessions; Cats - Hawkins father-son for pick 41; Hawks - Hodge + Roughhead via priority picks, and threepeat came after a few years of diluted drafts for GCS/GWS.) Unless GWS turn it on soon, might not see many teams that are so dominant over a number of years, with the AFL more reluctant nowadays to risk upsetting equalisation with things like priority picks.

 

[BlueandGoldforever]

Will this year be the season that fourth wins the premiership? I think Geelong are beatable at the MCG.

 

[Freomaniac]

Winning the minor premiership doesn't necessarily mean you've peaked too early or are destined not to win the flag. But it pays to remember what happened to the last 20 minor premiers:

Essendon 1999: Lost PF

Essendon 2000: Won premiership

Essendon 2001: Lost GF

Port Adelaide 2002: Lost PF

Port Adelaide 2003: Lost PF

Port Adelaide 2004: Won premiership

Adelaide 2005: Lost PF

West Coast 2006: Won premiership

Geelong 2007: Won premiership

Geelong 2008: Lost GF

St Kilda 2009: Lost GF

Collingwood 2010: Won premiership

Collingwood 2011: Lost GF

Hawthorn 2012: Lost GF

Hawthorn 2013: Won premiership

Sydney 2014: Lost GF

Fremantle 2015: Lost PF

Sydney 2016: Lost GF

Adelaide 2017: Lost GF

Richmond 2018: Lost PF

That's just 6 flags out of 20 and 14 failures - 6 preliminary final losses and 8 grand final losses. Even if you look at the last 50 minor premiers from Collingwood 1969 to Richmond 2018 inclusive, it's 20 premierships and 30 failures - not as 'bad' as recently but you'd think that the best team all year would usually win the flag.

This is no longer just minor premiers getting bad luck over and over - it is a pattern at the highest level of Australian rules football. Sides that finish top tend to be finals losers rather than flag winners.

Is it that sides finishing 2nd-7th have a bit more petrol in the tank, while the minor premiers spend all theirs finishing on top of the table? Are there other factors at play? I don't think this is a bad thing at all personally - the uncertainty of finals is part of the greatness of our game.

Thoughts?

add the 2019 geelong team to that list now

 

[Topkent]

Stats for second place:

• Kangaroos 1999: won GF
• Blues 2000: lost PF
• Lions 2001: won GF
• Lions 2002: won GF
• Pies 2003: lost GF
• Lions 2004: lost GF
• Eagles 2005: lost GF
• Crows 2006: lost PF
• Port 2007: lost GF
• Hawks 2008: won GF
• Cats 2009: won GF
• Cats 2010: lost PF
• Cats 2011: won GF
• Crows 2012: lost PF
• Cats 2013: lost PF
• Hawks 2014: won GF
• Eagles 2015: lost GF
• Cats 2016: lost PF
• Cats 2017: lost PF
• Eagles 2018: won GF

So second place has won the flag a total of 8 times of the last 20 seasons.

Also probably proves that with 18 teams and a 22 round season the best team doesn't always win the home and away

 

[Wallaby]

it's interesting that the minor premiership historically translated statistically into almost 50% of flags. yet only one out of eight in recent times.

perhaps the more even draft has played a role

More even draw. There are 18 teams, and each side only plays H&A double-ups against 5 of those. If you get lucky, and get your double-ups against the weaker sides (or just those having a crap season), and get lucky with who you play at home versus who you play away, and get lucky when in the season you play them - it doesn't mean much. In 2016, the top 6 all finished within 4 points of each other (the top 3 were level on points), in 2018 the top 4 all finished within 2 points of each other, in 2019 the top 3 finished level on points. And percentage can come down to who got lucky with a fine/wet and rainy/windy day when playing a minnow.

People who claim that 'So-and-so were clearly the best team' when they only finished on top by percentage clearly haven't thought it through very much.

 

[Johnny Bananas]

There aren't enough benefits from finishing top. To fix this, I'd amend the finals series so that instead of automatic matchups based on finishing places, I'd let the #1 seed choose their first week opponent, then the next ranked seed, and so on and so forth until we have four matchups. Then do the same the next week depending on who is playing. Can do this either McIntyre system style or current system style.