Certified Legendary Thread The Squiggle is back in 2023 (and other analytics)

[Final Siren]

Yup - you are correct.

Yes, it can look a bit like a trend.

Collingwood 2010 and Geelong 2011 were two of the all-time great premierships, won by outstanding teams with powerful attacks and defences. Scoring was always going to fall away from there.

Sydney 2012 was a defensive specialist, but a very good one. And they were so different from every other team (except Ross Lyon ones) that they looked like an outlier, not the start of a trend.

Hawthorn 2013-2015 were fundamentally balanced but leaned more toward attack, so things seemed back on track, scoring-wise.

Then the Bulldogs 2016 looked a lot like Sydney 2012: defensive specialists, weak in attack.

Richmond 2017 was similar, but less remarkable, and more like the best team at the right time in an even year.

And West Coast 2018 was even closer to the pack, again with a good defense but only a moderately good attack, and again winning the flag by coming good at the right time.

So we were probably a bit spoiled by Collingwood 2010 and Geelong 2011, because that level of performance wasn't sustainable, but 2016-2018 has given us three weak attacks in a row, and that makes Sydney 2012 look like part of a pattern in retrospect.

The other thing is that 2018 had no good attack specialists for the first time in decades -- none at all! Even in 2005 and 2006, which were two even, defensive years, there were a couple of teams that managed sharper attacks than anyone could produce in 2018. Most years can offer two or three or even four teams with better attacks than 2018's peak (Melbourne).

So I can imagine that as much as Sydney 2012 seemed to alarm the AFL, that could be dismissed as a one-off, whereas what we saw in 2018 seemed more fundamental and systemic.

 

[Wojcinski]

Yes, it can look a bit like a trend.

Collingwood 2010 and Geelong 2011 were two of the all-time great premierships, won by outstanding teams with powerful attacks and defences. Scoring was always going to fall away from there.

Sydney 2012 was a defensive specialist, but a very good one. And they were so different from every other team (except Ross Lyon ones) that they looked like an outlier, not the start of a trend.

Hawthorn 2013-2015 were fundamentally balanced but leaned more toward attack, so things seemed back on track, scoring-wise.

Then the Bulldogs 2016 looked a lot like Sydney 2012: defensive specialists, weak in attack.

Richmond 2017 was similar, but less remarkable, and more like the best team at the right time in an even year.

And West Coast 2018 was even closer to the pack, again with a good defense but only a moderately good attack, and again winning the flag by coming good at the right time.

So we were probably a bit spoiled by Collingwood 2010 and Geelong 2011, because that level of performance wasn't sustainable, but 2016-2018 has given us three weak attacks in a row, and that makes Sydney 2012 look like part of a pattern in retrospect.

The other thing is that 2018 had no good attack specialists for the first time in decades -- none at all! Even in 2005 and 2006, which were two even, defensive years, there were a couple of teams that managed sharper attacks than anyone could produce in 2018. Most years can offer two or three or even four teams with better attacks than 2018's peak (Melbourne).

So I can imagine that as much as Sydney 2012 seemed to alarm the AFL, that could be dismissed as a one-off, whereas what we saw in 2018 seemed more fundamental and systemic.

So what you're saying is that Geelong 07 & 11 premiership teams are the GOAT's

 

[Final Siren]

So what you're saying is that Geelong 07 & 11 premiership teams are the GOAT's

That image is cut off; Essendon 2000 is up there as well, with a better attack but worse defence than Geelong 2011.

Which is better depends on what you rate! Essendon 2000 and Geelong 2007 were incredible teams that smashed everyone and faced relatively little competition. Geelong 2011 was an incredible team that had to beat another incredible team (Collingwood).

 

[Cuzz09]

And West Coast 2018 winning the flag by coming good at the right time.

Yeah rd2.

Top 3 all year I thought.

On SM-G925I using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[HTT]

Yeah rd2.

Top 3 all year I thought.

On SM-G925I using BigFooty.com mobile app

Eagles dropped off a little through the middle of the year, pretty sure you were a game clear on top at one stage but then we finished up 2 games clear. Other models differed a bit but Squiggle has us a mile ahead for most of the year while WC floated amongst 7-8 other contenders.

WC then undeniably played the best footy in September and thats why they won the flag, much like Richmond 2017 and WB 2016.

 

[Cuzz09]

But didnt come from "nowhere"

Finished 2nd.

On SM-G925I using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Cuzz09]

But I know what you're saying

On SM-G925I using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[RookiePick]

... And West Coast 2018 was even closer to the pack, again with a good defense but only a moderately good attack, and again winning the flag by coming good at the right time...

We definitely didn't dish out the thrashings that the squiggle is enamoured with but I think we were a side that were number 1 in games won, number 1 in finals won over a four year period.

There was a big body of consistent work for the squiggle to make its predictions on and by and large the Eagles performed right around those marks.

The squiggle should be happy with the eagles. The less teams move around the squiggle the more accurate the squiggle is predicting the outcomes as far as I understand it. Isn't that the goal of a predictive algorithm?

 

[Freomaniac]

Am I the only person who envisaged robot tanks driving atop piles of human skulls whilst reading this post?

like in terminator?

 

[Final Siren]

Yeah rd2.

Top 3 all year I thought.

It's more about how close the Eagles were to the pack, not the top. You can make a case that West Coast were one of the best 3 teams all year -- Squiggle doesn't quite agree, but it's not too far off -- but they were also relatively close to the other finalists, because it was an even year.

Even leaving Squiggle aside, percentage is usually a good guide to a team's season-long performance, and that shows West Coast finishing on 121.4% while five other teams finished on 120% or higher. Three other teams scored over 130% (Richmond, Geelong, Melbourne).

That's why I say their flag is reliant on performing at the right time, as opposed to what more commonly happens, where the eventual premier spends most of the season well ahead of the pack, even if they also have another strong contender or two.

 

[Final Siren]

We definitely didn't dish out the thrashings that the squiggle is enamoured with but I think we were a side that were number 1 in games won, number 1 in finals won over a four year period.

There was a big body of consistent work for the squiggle to make its predictions on and by and large the Eagles performed right around those marks.

The squiggle should be happy with the eagles. The less teams move around the squiggle the more accurate the squiggle is predicting the outcomes as far as I understand it. Isn't that the goal of a predictive algorithm?

Yes, West Coast's 4-year performance is really impressive! It's especially remarkable because of the personnel turnover in that time. Robert Walls gets a lot of stick for his spoon prediction, but it wasn't too outlandish a guess, given that West Coast had scraped into the finals and then lost a ton of experience in the off-season. You normally expect a team to fall down the ladder in that situation.

 

[flamingEMBERS]

Yes, West Coast's 4-year performance is really impressive! It's especially remarkable because of the personnel turnover in that time. Robert Walls gets a lot of stick for his spoon prediction, but it wasn't too outlandish a guess, given that West Coast had scraped into the finals and then lost a ton of experience in the off-season. You normally expect a team to fall down the ladder in that situation.

No, it was really outlandish considering the turnover was of old players that were holding us back. It wasn't as though we gutted the team.
Priddis was too slow and a turnover merchant, that held the midfield back.
Petrie, whilst WCE fans fell in love with him with his effort, he was always only a stop gap whilst Lycett and Naitanui returned.
Mitchell, possibly could have played on but was really slow and hurt us defensively.
Butler, time was up.
Wellingham, lacked effort and heart at times.

 

[flamingEMBERS]

Anyhow back on topic. Would you rather win the Squiggle or win the flag?

 

[iluvparis]

Anyhow back on topic. Would you rather win the Squiggle or win the flag?

Most teams do the double

 

[RookiePick]

Yes, West Coast's 4-year performance is really impressive! It's especially remarkable because of the personnel turnover in that time. Robert Walls gets a lot of stick for his spoon prediction, but it wasn't too outlandish a guess, given that West Coast had scraped into the finals and then lost a ton of experience in the off-season. You normally expect a team to fall down the ladder in that situation.

I think Walls gets a lot of stick because his analysis was so superficial. If you look at most of West Coasts 2017 performances they typically dominated games early and then ran out of legs. It was just whether or not the had accumulated a sufficient lead to hold on for the win. With just a bit of scratching you could see that the return of 2 good quality rucks and the addition of more younger legs into the midfield to share the running load would keep West Coast in games for longer.

Admittedly I had us in the 6-10th type of ladder finish as I thought it would take some time to bed in the new personnel and West Coast would tread water. I was happily surprised but for a couple of nailbiters that is actually where we would have landed.

 

[flamingEMBERS]

Most teams do the double

Probably due to the fact they need to win finals against good sides.

How often has the regular season squiggler won the premiership?

 

[Final Siren]

Probably due to the fact they need to win finals against good sides.

How often has the regular season squiggler won the premiership?

More often than the minor premier has won the flag.

 

[iluvparis]

More often than the minor premier has won the flag.

 

[nameless]

Carlton over Swans aye?
Interesting tip...

 

[Final Siren]

Carlton over Swans aye?
Interesting tip...

Mmm! The rest of the internet's computer models are tipping Swans, so it's a brave call.

Squiggle started the year with a very low opinion of Sydney (15th) and it's gotten worse after two rounds. But it likes what it's seen from Carlton, so they've risen a fair bit. They're now rated about on par with each other.

 

[Dr Tigris]

Mmm! The rest of the internet's computer models are tipping Swans, so it's a brave call.

Squiggle started the year with a very low opinion of Sydney (15th) and it's gotten worse after two rounds. But it likes what it's seen from Carlton, so they've risen a fair bit. They're now rated about on par with each other.

Still a big call. But one that makes sense. I reckon Carlton now have the cattle to win a few. They're still Carlton, but you never know. Sydney are sliding. But they are still Sydney so you never know

 

[Hobbes]

Adelaide v Geelong +13
Melbourne +6 v Essendon
Carlton v Sydney +1
GWS +7 v Richmond
Brisbane +17 v Port Adelaide
Collingwood +13 v West Coast
Western Bulldogs +20 v Gold Coast
Hawthorn +12 v North Melbourne
Fremantle +16 v St Kilda

6/9. Running total 15/27. And my first exact margin prediction of the year - thank you Brisbane.

1.West Coast 24.6 (+2)
2. Geelong 22.6
3. Collingwood 18.6 (-2)
4. GWS 14.1
5. Brisbane 8.8
6. Adelaide 0.8 (+1)
7. Hawthorn 0.61 (+2)
8. Fremantle 0.55 (+3)
9. Port Adelaide 0.3 (+1)
10. Western Bulldogs -1.1 (-2)
11. Richmond -2.6 (-5)
12. Essendon -3.4 (+1)
13. St Kilda -4.1 (+1)
14. Melbourne -5.0 (-2)
15. Gold Coast -6.5 (+2)
16. Sydney -7.9
17. North Melbourne -11.3 (-2)
18. Carlton -19.1

Four (five if you count Brisbane) teams are shooting ahead, and there's a massive pile-up in the middle. Gold Coast is rising, and even Carlton isn't that awful.

Sydney +2 v Melbourne
Collingwood +20 v Western Bulldogs
Geelong +14 v GWS
Essendon v Brisbane +6
Port Adelaide +9 v Richmond
North Melbourne v Adelaide +6
West Coast +24 v Fremantle
Gold Coast +19 v Carlton
St Kilda v Hawthorn +5

 

[Sausages]

Adelaide v Geelong +13
Melbourne +6 v Essendon
Carlton v Sydney +1
GWS +7 v Richmond
Brisbane +17 v Port Adelaide
Collingwood +13 v West Coast
Western Bulldogs +20 v Gold Coast
Hawthorn +12 v North Melbourne
Fremantle +16 v St Kilda

6/9. Running total 15/27. And my first exact margin prediction of the year - thank you Brisbane.

1.West Coast 24.6 (+2)
2. Geelong 22.6
3. Collingwood 18.6 (-2)
4. GWS 14.1
5. Brisbane 8.8
6. Adelaide 0.8 (+1)
7. Hawthorn 0.61 (+2)
8. Fremantle 0.55 (+3)
9. Port Adelaide 0.3 (+1)
10. Western Bulldogs -1.1 (-2)
11. Richmond -2.6 (-5)
12. Essendon -3.4 (+1)
13. St Kilda -4.1 (+1)
14. Melbourne -5.0 (-2)
15. Gold Coast -6.5 (+2)
16. Sydney -7.9
17. North Melbourne -11.3 (-2)
18. Carlton -19.1

Four (five if you count Brisbane) teams are shooting ahead, and there's a massive pile-up in the middle. Gold Coast is rising, and even Carlton isn't that awful.

Sydney +2 v Melbourne
Collingwood +20 v Western Bulldogs
Geelong +14 v GWS
Essendon v Brisbane +6
Port Adelaide +9 v Richmond
North Melbourne v Adelaide +6
West Coast +24 v Fremantle
Gold Coast +19 v Carlton
St Kilda v Hawthorn +5

We are glad to have contributed to the advance of science

 

[RookiePick]

Interesting to see the Tiggers and Giants response on the squiggle. Obviously a shoot out from what was predicted

 

[Pessimistic]

Squiggle doesn’t rate Hawthorn beating north. Who knows what losing would have done