The latest Ranking on Team Dashboard Metrics table appears below, and suggests that success in 2020 has been most associated with:

• Expected Wins (according to the MoS Win Prediction Function)

• Points Conceded

• Scoring Shots Conceded

• Points Scored

• Goals Scored

• Quarters Won

• Q1 Performance

• Scoring Shots Generated

• Goals Conceded

The latest Ranking on Team Dashboard Metrics table appears below, and, given the time, and the fact that I have a truckload of stuff to do before the next round starts tomorrow, will need to tell its own story.

The latest Ranking on Team Dashboard Metrics table appears below, and still shows a surprising number of bottom-half performances by teams in the top-half of the Competition Ladder.

It’s pretty extraordinary, this far into a season, to have three of the bottom five teams on Own Scoring Shot Conversion sitting somewhere in the Top 6 spots on the ladder and, even more so, for the eight best teams on Opponent Scoring Shot Conversion to be sitting outside the Top 8.

Based on the latest Team Dashboard statistics, those most correlated with teams’ competition ladder position (adjusted for games played) are:

• Teams’ ranking on the MoS Win Prediction Function (+0.89)

• Teams’ ranking on Points Scored per Game (+0.87)

• Teams’ ranking on Own Scoring Shots per Game and % of Quarters Won (+0.86)

• Teams’ ranking on Goals Scored per Game (+0.83)

• Teams’ ranking on Q1 Performances (+0.80)

• Teams’ ranking on Opponent Scoring Shots per Game (+0.76)

Based on the latest Team Dashboard statistics, those most correlated with teams’ competition ladder position (adjusted for games played) are:

• Teams’ ranking on the MoS Win Prediction Function (+0.89)

• Teams’ ranking on Points Scored per Game (+0.87)

• Teams’ ranking on Own Scoring Shots per Game and % of Quarters Won (+0.86)

• Teams’ ranking on Goals Scored per Game (+0.83)

• Teams’ ranking on Q1 Performances (+0.80)

• Teams’ ranking on Opponent Scoring Shots per Game (+0.76)

So, we still have half of the teams in the Top 8 ranked in the bottom 6 for Own Scoring Shot Conversion, and five of them ranked in the bottom 9 for Opponent Scoring Shot Conversion. What a strange year …

Given all that, though, the 10-year-old MoS Win Prediction Function continues to do a good job of predicting team winning percentages as a function of scoring statistics. The rank correlation between its ordering of the teams and that based on the ladder ordering (adjusted for games played) is now at +0.92.

You know that the season’s probably a weird one when

• the team who’s 1st on Scoring Shot Conversion is 2nd on the competition ladder, and the team who’s 18th is immediately below them and 3rd on the ladder

• the team who’s 4th on the ladder is 10th on Q1 performances, 11th on Q2 performances, and 15th on Q4 performances

• the team who’s 2nd-last on the ladder is 3rd on Opponent Scoring Shot Conversion, 6th on Q2 performances, and 8th on Q3 performances

• the correlation between competition ladder position and Q4 performances is only +0.26, and that between competition ladder position and Q1 performances is only +0.82

The latest Rankings on Dashboard Metrics table appears below and we can now say with confidence that bad kicking is neither good nor bad football. The correlations between teams’ ladder positions and their ordering based on their own or their opponents’ Scoring Shot Conversion rates are now both essentially zero.

That is, truly, extraordinary.

The latest Rankings on Dashboard Metrics table appears below.

No in-depth commentary this week other than to note that there are some teams in lofty ladder positions that are performing relatively poorly on some of the metrics (eg the Lions are last on Own Scoring Shot Conversion), and teams towards the cellar that are relatively high-performing on some metrics (eg the Roos are 1st on Opponent Scoring Shot Conversion).

The latest Rankings on Dashboard Metrics table appears below.

Of all the metrics, the MoS Win Production Function continues to show the highest rank correlation with teams’ ladder positions.

It suggests that:

• Adelaide has won 1.2 games fewer than might be expected given its scoring statistics

• Fremantle has won 1.0 games fewer

• Essendon has won 0.9 games more

• Brisbane Lions and Hawthorn have won 0.8 games more each

Every other team is within 0.6 wins of what would be expected.

The latest Rankings on Dashboard Metrics table appears below, and continues to show some surprisingly low rank correlation between the teams’ ladder positions and their rank on particular metrics, specifically:

• Opponent Scoring Shot Conversion: -0.08

• Q4 Performances: +0.06

• Own Scoring Shot Conversion: +0.14

• Q2 Performances: +0.31

• Q3 Performances: +0.53

• Conceded Goals per Game: +0.56

So far this season, giving your opponents more easily converted scoring chances, and fading away in Q4s, have had relatively little effect on team success.

Here’s the latest Rankings on Dashboard Metrics table, which reveals the following interesting facts:

• Port Adelaide, though Top 2 on every other metric, is 11th on Own Scoring Shot Conversion

• Gold Coast is 12th on Scoring Shot generation

• Brisbane Lions are 18th on Own Scoring Shot Conversion, and 15th on Opponent Scoring Shot Conversion

• Hawthorn are 14th on Opponent Scoring Shot Conversion, and 16th on Q4 performances

• North Melbourne’s statistics are all over the place: bottom half on Opponent Scoring Shot generation, Own Scoring Shot Conversion, Own Goals and Points per Game, and Q1, Q2 and Q3 performances, but top half for all the other metrics including 1st on Opponent Scoring Shot Conversion and Q4 Performances

• Adelaide are 6th on Own Scoring Shot Conversion, and 4th on Opponent Scoring Shot Conversion, but 18th on both Own and Opponent Scoring Shot generation

Here’s the latest Rankings on Dashboard Metrics table. Some commentary maybe next week - it’s late.

It’s a little early to be making too much of the data in the Rankings on Dashboard Metrics table, which appears below, so we’ll leave any commentary for another week or two.

The final table of Rankings on Dashboard Metrics appears below.

There are a number of metrics on which some teams higher on the ladder do surprisingly poorly, and others on which some teams lower on the ladder do surprisingly well, but we’ve covered a number of examples of these in recent weeks, so I’ll leave it to the reader to undertake a final review of these for themselves.

This week, we’ll have one final look at the MoS Win Production Function and what it suggests about how many more or fewer wins teams have recorded relative to what their scoring metrics would suggest they might reasonably have been expected to.

The latest table of Rankings on Dashboard Metrics appears below, one striking feature of which is the contrast between the rankings on metrics for the teams from 1st to 6th on the ladder with those for the teams from 7th and 8th - Essendon and the Western Bulldogs.

• Essendon is no higher than 4th on any metric, and is 10th or worse on 10 of the 14 metrics.

• The Western Bulldogs are 4th or better on only two metrics, and 10th or worse on eight metrics.

• Hawthorn, in contrast, who currently sit 9th on the ladder, are ranked 5th or higher on six metrics, and 10th or worse on only six metrics. They are also 7th on Expected Wins, while the Western Bulldogs are 8th, and Essendon 12th.

The latest table of Rankings on Dashboard Metrics appears below.

This week, let’s focus on the current Top 8 teams on the competition ladder, for which we note that:

• Geelong are ranked no lower than 4th on any Dashboard metric

• Brisbane Lions are only 7th on Opponent Scoring Shots, 11th on Own Conversion, 8th on Opponent Conversion, 9th on Goals Conceded, and 10th on Points Conceded

• West Coast are only 9th on Scoring Shot Production, 11th on Opponent Scoring Shot Production, and 13th on Q2 performances

• Richmond are 15th on Opponent Conversion, 10th on Goals Conceded, 9th on Points Conceded, and 12th on Q4 performances

• Collingwood are 9th on Opponent Conversion, 14th on Q2 performances, and 11th on Q3 performances

• GWS are 13th on Opponent Conversion, and 11th on Q1 performances

• Essendon are 13th on Scoring Shot Production, 15th on Opponent Scoring Shot Production, 11th on Goals and Points Scored, 12th on Goals and Points Conceded, 17th on Q1 performances, 11th on Q2 and Q4 performance, 10th on Q3 performances, 13th on Quarters won, and 12th on Expected Wins according to the MoS Win Production Function

• Port Adelaide are 13th on Own Conversion, 10th on Opponent Conversion, and 14th on Q1 performances.

The latest table of Rankings on Dashboard Metrics appears below.

While there’s still a very high correlation between the teams’ ladder positions and their ordering based on Expected Wins according to the MoS Win Production Function half of the teams find themselves with at least one or more wins or losses greater than their scoring statistics would suggest, namely:

• Sydney (2.6 fewer wins)

• Port Adelaide (1.3 fewer wins)

• Carlton and Hawthorn (1.2 fewer wins)

• Adelaide (1.1 fewer wins)

• North Melbourne (1.0 fewer wins)

• St Kilda (1.9 fewer losses)

• Richmond (1.8 fewer losses)

• Brisbane Lions (1.7 fewer losses)

• Essendon and West Coast (1.3 fewer losses)

In terms of ladder positions, however, it’s the Western Bulldogs who find themselves highest on the ladder relative to their Expected Win count. They’re in 10th on the ladder but are ranked only 14th on Expected Wins.