Below is the Ranking on Dashboard Metrics table after Round 2.

It’s still too early to draw any meaningful conclusions from it.

Below is the Ranking on Dashboard Metrics table after Round 1.

It is far too early to suggest that the sample is in sufficiently for us to draw any meaningful conclusions from this table.

Below is the final Ranking on Dashboard Metrics table for the season.

The metrics currently most rank correlated with ladder position are:

• Opponent Goals per Game: +0.92

• Opponent Points per Game: +0.91

• Opponent Scoring Shots per Game: +0.89

• MoS Win Production Function: +0.89

• Percent of Quarters Won: +0.86

• Q1 Performances: +0.85

• Own Points per Game: +0.84

• Own Scoring Shots per Game: +0.83

• Own Goals per Game: +0.81

• Q4 Performances: +0.8

• Q2 Performances: +0.79

The only metric that is rank correlated less than +0.5 with ladder position is

• Opponent Conversion Rate: +0.42

You might summarise success in the home and away season then as being about:

• Defensive ability

• Good starts

Below is the latest Ranking on Dashboard Metrics table (note that I order teams based firstly on the percentage of available competition points they have accrued and then on percentage).

The metrics currently most rank correlated with ladder position are:

• Opponent Goals per Game: +0.93

• Opponent Points per Game: +0.92

• MoS Win Production Function: +0.9

• Opponent Scoring Shots per Game: +0.88

• Q1 Performances: +0.87

• Percent of Quarters Won: +0.86

• Own Scoring Shots per Game: +0.85

• Own Points per Game: +0.84

• Q4 Performances: +0.82

• Own Goals per Game: +0.81

• Q2 Performances: +0.75

The only metric that is currently rank correlated less than +0.5 with ladder position is

• Opponent Conversion Rate: +0.43Own Scoring Shots per Game: +0.82

• Q4 Performances: +0.81

• Q2 Performances: +0.75

• Q3 Performances: +0.71

No metric is currently rank correlated less than +0.5 with ladder position.

Below is the latest Ranking on Dashboard Metrics table (note that I order teams based firstly on the percentage of available competition points they have accrued and then on percentage).

The gulf between the Top and Bottom 9 remains a feature and, after this week’s results, the average all-metrics rankings of the Top 9 teams range from Adelaide’s 2.1 to Fremantle’s 8.4, while those of the Bottom 9 range from Sydney’s 11.3 to West Coast’s 17.2.

The metrics currently most rank correlated with ladder position are:

• Opponent Goals per Game: +0.93

• Opponent Points per Game: +0.91

• Opponent Scoring Shots per Game: +0.89

• Q1 Performances: +0.88

• MoS Win Production Function: +0.87

• Percent of Quarters Won: +0.87

• Own Points per Game: +0.85

• Own Goals per Game: +0.82

• Own Scoring Shots per Game: +0.82

• Q4 Performances: +0.81

• Q2 Performances: +0.75

• Q3 Performances: +0.71

No metric is currently rank correlated less than +0.5 with ladder position.

Below is the latest Ranking on Dashboard Metrics table, which continues to highlight a sizeable gap between the top 9 and bottom 9 teams when looking across all metrics (note that I order teams based firstly on the percentage of available competition points they have accrued and then on percentage).

To quantify this schism, I’d note that the average all-metrics rankings of the Top 9 teams range from Adelaide’s 2.1 to Fremantle’s 7.7, while those of the Bottom 9 range from Sydney’s 11.1 to West Coast’s 17.1.

The metrics currently most rank correlated with ladder position are:

• Opponent Goals per Game: +0.92

• Opponent Scoring Shots per Game: +0.92

• Opponent Points per Game: +0.91

• Percent of Quarters Won: +0.9

• MoS Win Production Function: +0.89

• Own Points per Game: +0.83

• Q1 Performances: +0.83

• Own Scoring Shots per Game: +0.82

• Own Goals per Game: +0.81

• Q3 Performances: +0.79

That least rank correlated with ladder position is:

• Opponent Scoring Shot Conversion: +0.49

Below is the latest Ranking on Dashboard Metrics table, which continues to highlight a sizeable gap between the top 9 and bottom 9 teams when looking across all metrics (note that I order teams based firstly on the percentage of available competition points they have accrued and then on percentage).

To quantify this schism, I’d note that the average all-metrics rankings of the Top 9 teams range from Adelaide’s 2.1 to Fremantle’s 7.7, while those of the Bottom 9 range from Sydney’s 11.1 to West Coast’s 17.1.

The metrics currently most rank correlated with ladder position are:

• Opponent Goals per Game: +0.92

• Opponent Scoring Shots per Game: +0.92

• Opponent Points per Game: +0.91

• Percent of Quarters Won: +0.9

• MoS Win Production Function: +0.89

• Own Points per Game: +0.83

• Q1 Performances: +0.83

• Own Scoring Shots per Game: +0.82

• Own Goals per Game: +0.81

• Q3 Performances: +0.79

That least rank correlated with ladder position is:

• Opponent Scoring Shot Conversion: +0.49

Below is the latest Ranking on Dashboard Metrics table, which still shows a sizeable gap between the top 9 and bottom 9 teams when looking across all metrics (note that I order teams based firstly on the percentage of available competition points they have accrued and then on percentage).

The metrics currently most rank correlated with ladder position are:

• Opponent Points per Game: +0.94

• Opponent Goals per Game: +0.93

• Percent of Quarters Won: +0.91

• Opponent Scoring Shots per Game: +0.91

• MoS Win Production Function: +0.87

• Q1 Performances: +0.87

• Q3 Performances: +0.79

• Own Points per Game: +0.79

• Own Scoring Shots per Game: +0.79

• Own Goals per Game: +0.76

• Q2 Performances: +0.73

That least rank correlated with ladder position is:

• Opponent Scoring Shot Conversion: +0.39

Interesting that the Quarter Performance least correlated with ladder position is Q4, largely thanks to Brisbane Lions, Hawthorn, and Collingwood.

Below is the latest Ranking on Dashboard Metrics table, which still shows a sizeable gap between the top 9 and bottom 9 teams when looking across all metrics (note that I order teams based firstly on the percentage of available competition points they have accrued and then on percentage).

The metrics currently most rank correlated with ladder position are:

• Opponent Points per Game: +0.95

• Opponent Goals per Game: +0.95

• Percent of Quarters Won: +0.93

• Opponent Scoring Shots per Game: +0.92

• MoS Win Production Function: +0.9

• Own Points per Game: +0.82

• Q1 Performances: +0.8

• Own Scoring Shots per Game: +0.8

• Q3 Performances: +0.78

• Own Goals per Game: +0.77

That least rank correlated with ladder position is:

• Opponent Scoring Shot Conversion: +0.46

Below is the latest Ranking on Dashboard Metrics table, which shows the sizeable gap between the top 9 and bottom 9 teams (note that I order teams based firstly on the percentage of available competition points they have accrued and then on percentage).

The metrics currently most rank correlated with ladder position are:

• Opponent Points per Game: +0.93

• Opponent Goals per Game: +0.91

• MoS Win Production Function: +0.9

• Opponent Scoring Shots per Game: +0.9

• Percent of Quarters Won: +0.88

• Q1 Performances: +0.84

• Own Points per Game: +0.82

• Own Scoring Shots per Game: +0.81

• Own Goals per Game: +0.8

• Q3 Performances: +0.79

Those least rank correlated with ladder position are:

• Opponent Scoring Shot Conversion: +0.35

• Own Scoring Shot Conversion: +0.45

Below is the latest Ranking on Dashboard Metrics table, which, possibly more strongly than ever this season, shows that the teams currently in the Top 8 deserve to be there based on the metrics shown here (note that I order teams based firstly on the percentage of available competition points they have accrued and then on percentage).

The metrics currently most rank correlated with ladder position are:

• Opponent Points per Game: +0.93

• Percent of Quarters Won: +0.92

• MoS Win Production Function: +0.9

• Opponent Goals per Game: +0.9

• Opponent Scoring Shots per Game: +0.87

• Own Scoring Shots per Game: +0.86

• Own Points per Game: +0.86

• Q3 Performances: +0.82

• Own Goals per Game: +0.82

• Q1 Performances: +0.78

• Q4 Performances: +0.75

Those least rank correlated with ladder position are:

• Opponent Scoring Shot Conversion: +0.37

• Own Scoring Shot Conversion: +0.49

Below is the latest Ranking on Dashboard Metrics table, which continues to show that the teams currently in the Top 8 deserve to be there based on the metrics shown here (note that I order teams based firstly on the percentage of available competition points they have accrued and then on percentage).

The metrics currently most rank correlated with ladder position are:

• Percent of Quarters Won: +0.93

• Opponent Points per Game: +0.93

• Opponent Goals per Game: +0.89

• MoS Win Production Function: +0.89

• Opponent Scoring Shots per Game: +0.83

• Own Points per Game: +0.81

• Own Goals per Game: +0.78

• Own Scoring Shots per Game: +0.78

• Q3 Performances: +0.76

• Q1 Performances: +0.75

Those least rank correlated with ladder position are:

• Own Scoring Shot Conversion: +0.44

• Opponent Scoring Shot Conversion: +0.49

Below is the latest Ranking on Dashboard Metrics table, which cpntinues to show that the teams currently in the Top 8 deserve to be there based on the metrics shown here (note that I order teams based firstly on the percentage of available competition points they have accrued and then on percentage).

As well, outside the eight, Western Bulldogs continue to have metrics that would also justify a spot for them in the Top 8. The Win Production Function now has them in 2nd.

The metrics currently most rank correlated with ladder position are:

• Opponent Goals per Game: +0.93

• Percent of Quarters Won: +0.91

• Opponent Points per Game: +0.91

• MoS Win Production Function: +0.87

• Opponent Scoring Shots per Game: +0.84

• Own Points per Game: +0.8

• Own Scoring Shots per Game: +0.79

• Own Goals per Game: +0.79

• Q1 Performances: +0.78

• Q4 Performances: +0.7

Those least rank correlated with ladder position are:

• Opponent Scoring Shot Conversion: +0.28

• Own Scoring Shot Conversion: +0.32

• Q2 Performances: +0.49

At this point in the season, ladder position is a lot about how well teams have defended

Below is the latest Ranking on Dashboard Metrics table, which again shows that the teams currently in the Top 8 deserve to be there based on the metrics shown here (note that I order teams based firstly on the percentage of available competition points they have accrued and then on percentage).

Outside the eight, Western Bulldogs continue to have metrics that would also justify a spot for them in the Top 8. The Win Production Function still has them in 4th.

The metrics currently most rank correlated with ladder position are:

• Percent of Quarters Won: +0.88

• MoS Win Production Function: +0.88

• Opponent Goals per Game: +0.88

• Opponent Points per Game: +0.88

• Own Goals per Game: +0.85

• Opponent Scoring Shots per Game: +0.84

• Own Points per Game: +0.83

• Own Scoring Shots per Game: +0.8

• Q1 Performances: +0.74

Those least rank correlated with ladder position are:

• Opponent Scoring Shot Conversion: +0.21

• Own Scoring Shot Conversion: +0.42

• Q2 Performances: +0.49

It’s remarkable that three of the bottom six teams on Opponent Scoring Shot Conversion currently sit in the Top 8 on my competition ladder, and that four of the Top 10 on this metric sit in ladder positions 14th and below.

Below is the latest Ranking on Dashboard Metrics table, which again shows that the teams currently in the Top 8 deserve to be there based on the metrics shown here (note that I order teams based firstly on the percentage of available competition points they have accrued and then on percentage).

Outside the eight, Western Bulldogs still have metrics that would also justify a spot for them in the Top 8. The Win Production Function has them in 4th.

The metrics currently most rank correlated with ladder position are:

• Opponent Points per Game: +0.93

• Opponent Goals per Game: +0.92

• MoS Win Production Function: +0.90

• Percent of Quarters Won: +0.88

• Own Points per Game: +0.83

• Own Goals per Game: +0.82

• Opponent Scoring Shots per Game: +0.8

• Own Scoring Shots per Game: +0.8

• Q1 Performances: +0.75

Those least rank correlated with ladder position are:

• Opponent Scoring Shot Conversion: +0.45

• Own Scoring Shot Conversion: +0.46

• Q2 Performances: +0.47

Below is the latest Ranking on Dashboard Metrics table, which now shows that the teams currently in the Top 8 deserve to be there based on the metrics shown here (note that I order teams based firstly on the percentage of available competition points they have accrued and then on percentage), with the possible exception of Fremantle.

Outside the eight, Western Bulldogs have metrics that would also justify a spot for them in the Top 8. The Win Production Function has them in 3rd.

The metrics currently most rank correlated with ladder position are:

• MoS Win Production Function: +0.90

• Opponent Points per Game: +0.90

• Percent of Quarters Won: +0.89

• Opponent Goals per Game: +0.88

• Own Scoring Shots per Game: +0.83

• Own Goals per Game: +0.83

• Own Points per Game: +0.80

• Opponent Scoring Shots per Game: +0.79

• Q1 Performances: +0.73

• Q3 Performances: +0.70

Those least rank correlated with ladder position are:

• Own Scoring Shot Conversion: +0.44

• Q2 Performances: +0.47

• Opponent Scoring Shot Conversion: +0.50

Below is the latest Ranking on Dashboard Metrics table, which continues to show that the teams currently in the Top 8 deserve to be there based on the metrics shown here (note that I order teams based firstly on the percentage of available competition points they have accrued and then on percentage). The persistent exception remains Essendon, who now rank no better than 4th on any metric, and 12th or lower on 9 metrics, and who have a percentage of just 85. The Win Production Function now suggests that their scoring data justifies 14th position on the ladder.

Outside the eight, GWS undoubtedly has the metrics that would justify a spot in the Top 8. The Win Production Function has them in 8th.

The metrics currently most rank correlated with ladder position are:

• Opponent Points per Game: +0.89

• MoS Win Production Function: +0.88

• Percent of Quarters Won: +0.88

• Opponent Goals per Game: +0.85

• Own Scoring Shots per Game: +0.85

• Opponent Scoring Shots per Game: +0.82

• Own Points per Game: +0.80

• Own Goals per Game: +0.74

Those least rank correlated with ladder position are:

• Own Scoring Shot Conversion: +0.37

• Q2 Performances: +0.46

• Opponent Scoring Shot Conversion: +0.47

Below is the latest Ranking on Dashboard Metrics table, which continues to show that the teams currently in the Top 9 deserve to be there based on the metrics shown here (note that I order teams based firstly on the percentage of available competition points they have accrued and then on percentage). The persistent exception remains Essendon, who now rank no better than 6th on any metric, and 12th or lower on 11 metrics, and who have a percentage of just 81.2. The Win Production Function still suggests that their scoring data justifies 13th position on the ladder.

Having said that Essendon’s metrics don’t appear to justify a spot in the Top 8, none of the teams outside the Top 8 have stand out credentials. Best amogst them, however, is undoubtedly GWS, a shade ahead of Carlton.

The metrics currently most rank correlated with ladder position are:

• MoS Win Production Function: +0.92

• Percent of Quarters Won: +0.88

• Own Scoring Shots per Game: +0.85

• Opponent Scoring Shots per Game: +0.83

• Opponent Points per Game: +0.81

• Opponent Goals per Game: +0.79

• Own Points per Game: +0.78

• Own Goals per Game: +0.77

Those least rank correlated with ladder position are:

• Opponent Scoring Shot Conversion: +0.32

• Own Scoring Shot Conversion: +0.38

• Q1 Performances: +0.47

• Q2 Performances: +0.48

Below is the latest Ranking on Dashboard Metrics table, which continues to show that the teams currently in the Top 9 deserve to be there based on the metrics shown here (note that I order teams based firstly on the percentage of available competition points they have accrued and then on percentage). The only exception remains Essendon, who rank no better than 5th on any metric, and as low as 17th on Q3 Performances, and who have a percentage of just 90.8. The Win Production Function suggests that their scoring data justifies 13th position on the ladder.

The metrics currently most rank correlated with ladder position are:

• Percent of Quarters Won: +0.89

• Opponent Goals per Game: +0.85

• MoS Win Production Function: +0.84

• Opponent Points per Game: +0.84

• Opponent Scoring Shots per Game: +0.81

• Own Scoring Shots per Game: +0.8

• Own Points per Game: +0.78

• Own Goals per Game: +0.74

Those least rank correlated with ladder position are:

• Opponent Scoring Shot Conversion: +0.33

• Own Scoring Shot Conversion: +0.37

• Q1 Performances: +0.48

Below is the latest Ranking on Dashboard Metrics table, which continues to show that the teams currently in the Top 8 deserve to be there based on the metrics shown here (note that I order teams based firstly on the percentage of available competition points they have accrued and then on percentage). The only exception is Essendon, who rank no better than 7th on any metric, and as low as 17th on Opponent Scoring Shot Conversion.

The metrics currently most rank correlated with ladder position are:

• Percent of Quarters Won: +0.89

• Own Scoring Shots per Game: +0.86

• MoS Win Production Function: +0.85

• Opponent Scoring Shots per Game: +0.83

• Own Goals per Game: +0.79

• Own Points per Game: +0.79

• Opponent Points per Game: +0.79

• Opponent Goals per Game: +0.78

• Q3 Performances: +0.74

Those least rank correlated with ladder position are:

• Q1 Performances: +0.23

• Own Scoring Shot Conversion: +0.3

• Opponent Scoring Shot Conversion: +0.41

• Q2 Performances: +0.47