Standardised premiership tally

[LoungeLizard]

Yes

What rating will Melbourne get for losing to Collingwood by 7pts & Carlton by 2pts, same as WCE?

Well this system rates them the same, do we think West Coast had a better season than Melbourne?

I don't.

Lets look at 2018, I would rather make a GF and lose than finish last.

100 for 1st, -100 for last.

Make 1st 50 above 2nd, then last 50 below 2nd last, then divide the points for the rest, 2nd 50, 2nd last -50 etc.

 

[Unpredictable]

Well this system rates them the same, do we think West Coast had a better season than Melbourne?

I don't.

Lets look at 2018, I would rather make a GF and lose than finish last.

100 for 1st, -100 for last.

Make 1st 50 above 2nd, then last 50 below 2nd last, then divide the points for the rest, 2nd 50, 2nd last -50 etc.

Why f*** around, which team has had the most wins all up?

 

[LoungeLizard]

Why f*** around, which team has had the most wins all up?

Ok, let's look at this another way then.

Before last years GF Richmond would get a higher rating over this century than Geelong, do you think Richmond have performed better than Geelong this century?

 

[Tiger2709]

Ok, let's look at this another way then.

Before last years GF Richmond would get a higher rating over this century than Geelong, do you think Richmond have performed better than Geelong this century?

The thread is about Premierships not home and away games, before last year for this century we have three wins including a back to back and a win against Geelong in an 18 team comp and they had three no b2b in a 16 team comp, so yes.

 

[CrowToon]

A tally devoid of any logic. How quaint.

 

[LoungeLizard]

The thread is about Premierships not home and away games, before last year for this century we have three wins including a back to back and a win against Geelong in an 18 team comp and they have three no b2b in a 16 team comp, so yes.

Ok, fair post, but you aren't counting how you happen to get the players that got you those 3 premierships, you were crap for years getting high draft picks so you hopefully pick up the better draft picks.

Yes I know some teams have been lucky with FS's but imagine how good Geelong could have been if they were also tanking for picks.

 

[Unpredictable]

Yes I know some teams have been lucky with FS's but imagine how good Geelong could have been if they were also tanking for picks.

Fadge doesn't like to "imagine."

In your imagination if Geelong were "tanking" for picks, would Richmond of been lucky with father sons?

 

[LoungeLizard]

Fadge doesn't like to "imagine."

In your imagination if Geelong were "tanking" for picks, would Richmond of been lucky with father sons?

Let me just say, it's only Richmond supporters who would think they have out performed Geelong this century.

Edit: And maybe the odd Hawthorn supporter.

 

[Unpredictable]

Let me just say, it's only Richmond supporters who would think they have out performed Geelong this century.

Before last season's GF you mean?

 

[LoungeLizard]

Before last season's GF you mean?

Yes

 

[Unpredictable]

Yes

You said that Tiger2709's post was fair, so was it fair or not?

 

[LoungeLizard]

You said that Tiger2709's post was fair, so was it fair or not?

It's fair if you're only counting premierships, but premierships are won in all different ways.

Richmond were getting high draft picks.

 

[FreddyTwoShoes]

Don’t forget to factor in premierships won before / after THE STAND RULE.

 

[BF Tiger]

Well done OP. Devised a system, explained the logic behind and presented the results in a fair and balanced way.

Way better than any Fadge gorithm.

 

[Fadge]

What rating will Melbourne get for losing to Collingwood by 7pts & Carlton by 2pts, same as WCE?

I think you'll find, that's his point...

 

[Fadge]

Ok, let's look at this another way then.

Before last years GF Richmond would get a higher rating over this century than Geelong, do you think Richmond have performed better than Geelong this century?

You're really asking a Richmond supporter that question, and expect a rational answer?

 

[LoungeLizard]

You're really asking a Richmond supporter that question, and expect a rational answer?

Well my wife is a Richmond supporter and I asked her, she didn't even hesitate with "no way"

 

[Fadge]

Well my wife is a Richmond supporter and I asked her, she didn't even hesitate with "no way"

She's a rare species, hang on to her...

 

[Gavin Excell]

Don’t forget to factor in premierships won before / after THE STAND RULE.

Flags won pre Hocking interference must be acknowledged

 

[Unpredictable]

Well my wife is a Richmond supporter and I asked her, she didn't even hesitate with "no way"

Did they take those "lucky FS's" into consideration or only Richmond's "tanking for picks"?

Because when we picked Reiwoldt (13) and Edwards (26) Geelong got Selwood (7) and one of those "lucky FS's" you mentioned.

"imagine how good Geelong could have been if they were also tanking for picks."

Imagine the FS rule wasn't what it was then?

 

[Unpredictable]

Flags won pre Hocking interference must be acknowledged

Danks for that

 

[Hoops]

My premiership ladder uses a scoring system based on the chance of winning the premierships in any given year a club competed
Par premierships = 1/number of teams first year played + 1/number of teams second year played ....... + 1/number of teams final year played.

Rank	Club	Premierships	Par Premierships	Score
1	West Coast	4	2.28	1.76
2	Hawthorn	13	7.46	1.74
3	Essendon	16	10.44	1.53
4	Carlton	16	10.85	1.47
4	Collingwood	16	10.85	1.47
6	Richmond	13	9.48	1.37
7	Melbourne	13	10.31	1.26
8	Adelaide	2	1.99	1.00
9	Geelong	10	10.42	0.96
10	Brisbane/Fitzroy	11	11.53	0.95
11	Port Adelaide	1	1.60	0.62
12	North Melbourne	4	7.46	0.54
13	Sydney	5	10.60	0.47
14	Western Bulldogs	2	7.46	0.27
15	St Kilda	1	10.44	0.10
16	Fremantle	0	1.73	0.00
16	University	0	0.70	0.00
16	Gold Coast	0	0.73	0.00
16	Greater Western Sydney	0	0.67	0.00

 

[BF Tiger]

My premiership ladder uses a scoring system based on the chance of winning the premierships in any given year a club competed
Par premierships = 1/number of teams first year played + 1/number of teams second year played ....... + 1/number of teams final year played.

Rank	Club	Premierships	Par Premierships	Score
1	West Coast	4	2.28	1.76
2	Hawthorn	13	7.46	1.74
3	Essendon	16	10.44	1.53
4	Carlton	16	10.85	1.47
4	Collingwood	16	10.85	1.47
6	Richmond	13	9.48	1.37
7	Melbourne	13	10.31	1.26
8	Adelaide	2	1.99	1.00
9	Geelong	10	10.42	0.96
10	Brisbane/Fitzroy	11	11.53	0.95
11	Port Adelaide	1	1.60	0.62
12	North Melbourne	4	7.46	0.54
13	Sydney	5	10.60	0.47
14	Western Bulldogs	2	7.46	0.27
15	St Kilda	1	10.44	0.10
16	Fremantle	0	1.73	0.00
16	University	0	0.70	0.00
16	Gold Coast	0	0.73	0.00
16	Greater Western Sydney	0	0.67	0.00

I like this. I think maybe you should just dump University. Won nothing and were easy beats for most of their existence.

Similarly most of the Brisbane Bears existence should be ignored. Maybe dump five years.

I would also consider dumping a number of years (3?) for each of GWS and GCS.

 

[Mr Meow]

Did they take those "lucky FS's" into consideration or only Richmond's "tanking for picks"?

Because when we picked Reiwoldt (13) and Edwards (26) Geelong got Selwood (7) and one of those "lucky FS's" you mentioned.

"imagine how good Geelong could have been if they were also tanking for picks."

Imagine the FS rule wasn't what it was then?

We would've missed out on James Kelly and Selwood if we had to bid for Ablett, Hawkins and Scarlett. Selwood the big one obviously.

If Richmond weren't poor and you take out top 10 picks, what side would they have had?

 

[BF Tiger]

We would've missed out on James Kelly and Selwood if we had to bid for Ablett, Hawkins and Scarlett. Selwood the big one obviously.

If Richmond weren't poor and you take out top 10 picks, what side would they have had?

Maybe we get Dangerfield (pick 10) instead of Cotchin.

Maybe we pick Fyfe (pick 20) instead of Dusty.