2014 v 2012

[ShockOfHair]

How similar is this year's runup to the GF compared with 2012?

Our record vs the Hawks in both years, played 2, won 1, lost 1.

This year finals series seems to be a little similar.
In 2012 the QF was a dour contest against Adelaide. We won by 29. This year's against Freo was even more of a struggle, but we got home by 24.
The PF vs Collingwood was a relative romp, though nothing like the canter against North Melbourne, but we were never threatened.

For the Hawks both PFs went right down to the last minute of the game.

People keep saying Hawthorn were favourites in 2012 - is that right? I seem to recollect them as slight favourites but there was a fair bit of smart money on Sydney.

The personnel are highly similar. Of the 22 who played in the PF, 15 who played in the '12 GF - 16 if you count that guy who swapped teams.

Any other differences or similarities between now and then?

[Jewels]

How similar is this year's runup to the GF compared with 2012?

Our record vs the Hawks in both years, played 2, won 1, lost 1.

This year finals series seems to be a little similar.
In 2012 the QF was a dour contest against Adelaide. We won by 29. This year's against Freo was even more of a struggle, but we got home by 24.
The PF vs Collingwood was a relative romp, though nothing like the canter against North Melbourne, but we were never threatened.

For the Hawks both PFs went right down to the last minute of the game.

People keep saying Hawthorn were favourites in 2012 - is that right? I seem to recollect them as slight favourites but there was a fair bit of smart money on Sydney.

The personnel are highly similar. Of the 22 who played in the PF, 15 who played in the '12 GF - 16 if you count that guy who swapped teams.

Any other differences or similarities between now and then?

I hope the final result!

[Meg]

And I hope that guy who swapped teams kicks straighter this time!

[Mel_C]

And I hope that guy who swapped teams kicks straighter this time!

I hope so too! 5 goals 12 behinds in the last 2 hawk games.

[tasmania60]

Hes pumped as long as the first ones straight , 4 goals 3 to Tippo .

[Conor_Dillon]

Pinched this off BigFooty...thought it was brilliant!

The countdown is on! So let�s review the last

10 years... this season�s best 22 contains

9 All Australians,

8 players under the age of 25,

7 players who started on the rookie list, and

6 players who were taken with national draft picks later than 30. Only

5 different teams have won flags since 2005. If the Swans win on Saturday, they will have played in

4 grand finals for a return of

3 flags. We are

2 cities,

1 club �

Go Swans.

[floppinab]

One of the big differences between 2012 and 2014 is that we are red hot favourites this time, certainly not a situation they have had in the recent history of 4 GF appearances. The underdog, "no one gives us a chance", has worked for us in the past. It will be interesting to see if the weight of expectation has any bearing on them this time around.

[Go Swannies]

If anyone follows the Squiggle (it's brilliant) on Big Footy - it's changed to a Swans win:

Grand Final Preview 2014?

All year, Hawthorn have looked like the team in pole position, sitting comfortably closer to the mass of premiership cups than any other team. Even when Sydney edged ahead in terms of raw scores, Hawthorn remained in a historically fertile place, while Sydney were surrounded by white space, where teams often made finals but fell short of premierships.

The Swans' two finals performances, though, have given them a significant kick towards that cluster of cups. They're now in a place where a 2015 premiership wouldn't look out of place - it would sit closer to that main cluster than to the "outlier" premierships of 1994 and 2005. The Hawks no longer have that mantle of being the clearly best-positioned team.

The Hawks' consistency, charting in the same place all year (despite significant disruption), has also been impressive, but again it's become hard to knock the Swans on that score. After restarting their season in Round 5, they rocketed to an excellent position and held that for the second half of the year, before now kicking into a higher gear in the finals. So neither team is betraying any fragility or erratic movement that might suggest their current position is undeserved.

The Hawks are the most attacking team in the league and the Swans the best defensive team, although both are quite balanced compared to the top teams of years gone by. For example, last year we also had a Grand Final between the most attacking and defensive teams, but the Hawks' defence was weaker while the Dockers' attack was weaker.

In a way it feels anti-climactic to have these two face off, because they've been the most likely Grand Finallists for a while now. If Port had made it, it would have made for a more amazing story. But Grand Finals aren't for romance: Grand Finals are for the two best teams of the year to run through each other. And that's what we're getting.

Squiggle tip

The usual squiggle algorithm awards 12pts to the home team against an interstate opponent. This works well during the home & away season, allowing the squiggle to, for example, correctly tip the Hawks to beat Sydney in Melbourne, then lose to Freo away, then beat Geelong at home.

There are two little wrinkles with it, though. The first is about what happens when there's a difference between the nominal home team (the team with "home" status) and the geographic home team (the team in whose state the game is being played). This is one of those games: Sydney, by virtue of finishing 1st on the ladder, is the nominal home team, but Hawthorn is the geographic home team. Historically, in these situations, the nominal home team does better. It seems strange and counter-intuitive, but it's what happens.

Secondly, this algorithm is calibrated to tip home & away matches, not Grand Finals. It doesn't have a particularly good record at tipping Grand Finals.

So although the interactive squiggle predictor is saying Sydney 82 - 91 Hawthorn, this is only after awarding the Hawks' a 12-pt home advantage that there's little statistical evidence that it deserves.

My best Grand Final tipper, as discussed before, is the OFFDEF-75 algorithm. This awards no home ground advantage, and heavily weights recent matches, i.e. finals performances. It has a 9-1 (90%) record at picking Grand Final winners over the last 10 years, and 20-5 (80%) over the last 25 years.

Before last weekend, OFFDEF-75 liked Port Adelaide best, then Sydney, then the Hawks. After the Swans thrashed North Melbourne, they moved ahead of Port - despite the Roos not being considered the toughest of opponents, the final margin was a big one, enough to shift them significantly. This meant that for Port to pull ahead, they had to beat the Hawks by 4 goals, and for the Hawks to pull ahead, they had to absolutely demolish the Power.

Neither happened. A narrow win to Hawthorn left Sydney ahead, and so the OFFDEF-75 Grand Final tip is:

Sydney 90 - 80 Hawthorn ?

Algorithm details: For anyone interested in more nitty-gritty, here are some notable algorithms and their tips. Overall, 7 are tipping Sydney (by 6-18 pts) and 1 is tipping Hawthorn (by 9).

1. OFFDEF-75. My best Grand Final picker. No home advantage. Heavily weights recent games. 25-year GF record: 80%. 10-year GF record: 90%. Tip:Sydney by 10.
2. VENUE-81:13. Considers performances at the MCG. 25 years: 76%. 10 years: 80%. Sydney by 6.
3. OFFDEF-88:5. 5-pt home advantage to the nominal home team. Some more weight to recent games. 25 years: 80%. 10 years: 70%. Sydney by 11.
4. ISTATE-91:12: POWER:88. Heavily weights games against strong opposition. 25 years: 68%. 10 years: 80%. Sydney by 12.
5. PILGRIM-91:12. Penalizes teams based on distance travelled between games. 25 years: 72%. 10 years: 60%. Sydney by 8.
6. ISTATE-91:12. Core squiggle algorithm, using nominal home ground advantage. 25 years: 60%. 10 years: 50%. Sydney by 18.
7. ISTATEV2F-91:12. Core squiggle algorithm, using geographic home ground advantage. 25 years: 56%. 10 years: 60%. Hawthorn by 9.
8. HOMER. Tip the home team, i.e. the one that finished higher on the ladder. 25 years: 52%. 10 years: 50%. Sydney.

[Zlatorog]

The expectation didn't bother Hawks last year when a lot of people went for Dockers. If you're a champ and have a desire to win nothing will stop you. If Buddy and Tippo kick straight with contributions from Goodes and Sam Ried there should be no doubts yhey can win the premiership. Accuracy will be the key. So, am I confident? No, because the way the lost to Hawks in R18 proves that nothing is given and this GF is not won yet by a long shot. But you can always hope.

Edit: Wow, Go Swannies, that was fantastic. I might use it for next year tipping!

[Industrial Fan]

Would be interesting to looks at how those algorithms predicted 2012.

I'm a bit uneasy this week. I was bullish in 05 and 06 probably more through blind faith than anything. Was really unsure of what to expect in 2012 and thought at the least we'd make a contest but didnt make any predictions with confidence. This week I'm feeling we should take the Hawks down comfortably, but I'm also sure thats what the Hawks were thinking about us in 2012.

[Matt80]

A good way to analyse the 2012 and 2014 teams is individual player analysis. I will compare how each player is traveling compared to 2012. The categories are slightly worse, neutral, slightly better, much better. Same players have left and I will analyse there replacements against them.

Nick Smith - Slightly better
Ted Richards - Slightly worse
Rhyce Shaw - Slightly worse
Nick Malceski - Slightly better
Heath Grundy - Neutral
Alex Johnson / Rampe - Neutral
Mattner / Rohan - Slightly better
Pyke - Slightly better
Kennedy - Neutral
Parker - Much better
K. Jack - Neutral
Hanners - Neutral
McVeigh - Slightly better
Cunningham / ROK - Slightly worse
Franklin / LRT - Much Better
Jetta - Slightly worse
Lloyd / Morton - Neutral
Reid - Neutral
Goodes - Slightly worse
Tippett / Mumford - Slightly better
Bird - Slightly better
Bolton / McGlynn - Slightly better

I've counted:

- two much betters
- eight slightly betters
- seven neutrals
- five slightly worse's

In summary we have two players who are much better in their positions than 2012. We also have net three players who are slightly better than 2012.

We are therefore a more formidable team in 2014 than 2012, but not streets ahead. The big difference in the two teams is Buddy and the rapid improvement in Parker.

[ernie koala]

Putting aside the fact this is just your opinion on player comparisons, and most could be argued against....

Unless you do the same analysis of Hawthorn, and then compare the 2, it's meaningless.