With the Saints desperately clinging to hopes of a 100% winning record for 2009 and the Cats having already shot their bolt (and the 2009 Bombers disappearing down the gurgler!), I thought it might be interesting to look at how some recent seasons dominated by one or two clubs look statistically* by comparison.
2000 Bombers
25 wins, average margin 53.6pts; 1 loss, 11pts; Premiers
2007 Cats
21 wins, avg margin 54.9pts; 4 losses, avg margin 11.3pts; Premiers
2008 Hawks
20 wins, avg margin 42.4pts; 5 losses, avg margin 25.8pts; Premiers
2008 Cats
23 wins, avg margin 51.9pts; 2 losses, avg margin 56pts; runner-up
2009 Saints (to Rnd 18)
18 wins, avg margin 40.1pts; 0 losses; TBA
2009 Cats (to Rnd 18)
16 wins, avg margin 34.4pts; 2 losses, avg margin 24.5pts; TBA
Keeping in mind the famous declaration attributed to 19th-century British PM Benjamin Disraeli — There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics! — it would appear the 2009 Saints are some way short of the domination wrought by the 2000 Bombers and 2007–8 Cats.
Saints fans will, quite rightly, consider a Premiership — if it eventuates — to be sufficient reward in itself, and my purpose is not to denigrate those efforts or that result in any way.
Nevertheless, it's not unreasonable to claim the 2000 Bombers as the most dominant team in recent decades: 2 goals+ per game over the 2009 Saints (at round 18); and fewer losses/better losing margins than 2007–2008 Cats.
* Data from http://finalsiren.com
Monday, August 03, 2009
Dominance
2000 Bombers
25 wins, average margin 53.6pts; 1 loss, 11pts; Premiers
2007 Cats
21 wins, avg margin 54.9pts; 4 losses, avg margin 11.3pts; Premiers
2008 Hawks
20 wins, avg margin 42.4pts; 5 losses, avg margin 25.8pts; Premiers
2008 Cats
23 wins, avg margin 51.9pts; 2 losses, avg margin 56pts; runner-up
2009 Saints (to Rnd 18)
18 wins, avg margin 40.1pts; 0 losses; TBA
2009 Cats (to Rnd 18)
16 wins, avg margin 34.4pts; 2 losses, avg margin 24.5pts; TBA
Keeping in mind the famous declaration attributed to 19th-century British PM Benjamin Disraeli — There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics! — it would appear the 2009 Saints are some way short of the domination wrought by the 2000 Bombers and 2007–8 Cats.
Saints fans will, quite rightly, consider a Premiership — if it eventuates — to be sufficient reward in itself, and my purpose is not to denigrate those efforts or that result in any way.
Nevertheless, it's not unreasonable to claim the 2000 Bombers as the most dominant team in recent decades: 2 goals+ per game over the 2009 Saints (at round 18); and fewer losses/better losing margins than 2007–2008 Cats.
* Data from http://finalsiren.com
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
12 comments:
whilst that is very interesting you could turn the statistics by:
Measuring the stats over the H & A season only
and
Instead of looking at the avg margin taking the percentage.
The latter change being more pertinent for mine.
I'd agree make it H&A only - the way clubs treat pre-season games these days, it's not an accurate reflection
No pre-season games in the analysis, Anon. Home and away plus finals.
James, as you've no doubt already observed, the differences in percentage between the 2009 Saints, 2007-8 Cats and 2000 Bombers is minimal. Let me remind you of Disraeli's observation! If you choose the right statistic, you can 'prove' almost anything!
I think average margins better suggest a team's dominance than percentage — although, curiously, the same numbers (points for and points against) are involved.
The problem with margin is it's influenced by things like weather, ground, etc.
Does 23 goal to 18 goals (high scoring game) beat a 4 goal win in a 9 goal - 5 goal game? No
Tell me, Anon, how ground and weather don't influence percentage! And why is a 9-goal to 5-goal win more meritorious than 23-goal to 18-goal?
That's not to say that the 9-goal win CAN'T be better, but it's a bit of a stretch to make the comment you have.
Because a team that is 10% better will have a higher winning margin (in terms of points) when they a dry, small ground.
eg. 220-220 (a 20 point win) vs 55-50 (a 5 point win)
This example is obviously taking it to extremes and is pretty unlikely, but does illustrate the point
Your point is perfectly valid, Anon, except that season percentages, like average margin, are taken across a season, which minimises effects such as you've noted.
It's worth noting, for the conversation, that a team starting at 1000 points for, 800 points against and a percentage of 125 loses 3 percent in the case of the 20-point win (above), and loses only 1 percent in the case of the 5-point win. Isn't that a distortion too?
Good point - it is a distortion as well.
My take on it is that if the Saints go winless throughout the season and finals, and win the premiership, that immediately puts them at the top.
With the statistical errors and anomalies highlighted above, neither percentage or average margin is a reliable indicator, especially when you look at the way modern teams will take their foot off the gas once a game is won (bringing off their star players, etc).
A team that is undefeated beats one that has lost one game for mine.
Far be it for me to be picky, James (?), but if the Saints are winless for the season, there won't be any finals. ;-) I know you mean undefeated!
I wouldn't have any argument whatsoever with your final proposition. The only fly in the ointment is that they haven't achieved it yet!
Anon isn't me : P
Go Saints.
You mean there's another fanatical Saints fan out there? ;-)
They 'sound' just like you!
As I suggested on August 5, there's a fly in that ointment! Magnificent Bombers!
Post a Comment