Yeah this has been the one thing bugging me in our redevelopment as well. I was hoping we might be right this year. Clearly not.
| TalkingCarlton http://www.talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/ |
|
| Percentage http://www.talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=15823 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | bluehammer [ Mon Apr 23, 2007 12:16 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Percentage |
Percentage tells you a lot more about your team's big picture than wins and losses do. We're sitting 12th, but on the percentage ladder we're 15th. It's been the same for the past three seasons. Even in 2004 when we finished 11th, our percentage had us 20% behind 10th. We were 13th on the percentage ladder this year. I'll take wins over richmond and Essendon* any day of the week, but until we are able to: * Win first quarters * Eliminate the 10 goal + losses We'll have to be content with exciting wins over low end teams (like Essendon* and Richmond). Bad percentage is worth 4 points. Sorry Jarusa, not as detailed as a footy geek analysis... |
|
| Author: | Wojee [ Mon Apr 23, 2007 12:30 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
We win narrow, lose big. |
|
| Author: | camel [ Mon Apr 23, 2007 12:32 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Yeah this has been the one thing bugging me in our redevelopment as well. I was hoping we might be right this year. Clearly not.
|
|
| Author: | dannyboy [ Mon Apr 23, 2007 12:50 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I think this will remain a problem while we rely on two things A) on Fev to kick so many of our goals. Block that up and we are in trouble. b) on ruckmen who do not do enough around the ground - especially forward. mind some might suggest c) 
|
|
| Author: | No1Blue [ Mon Apr 23, 2007 1:00 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Essendon* can't be considered a low ranked team now though, can they?? They've showed they're contenders i'd think.. just not top 4 that they crapped on that they were... |
|
| Author: | Navy Blue Horse [ Mon Apr 23, 2007 1:03 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
It's obvious from our results to date that we are still a bottom 4 side. We shuld be content with 6-8 wins this year. The worst thing that could happen to us is to play above ourselves and win 10 games like in 2004 and finish 10th?. We still need more quality kids, we won't play finals this year, so may as well take advantage of the draft. I'm not for tanking, just being realistic. |
|
| Author: | thehalford [ Mon Apr 23, 2007 1:35 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
dannyboy wrote: mind some might suggest c)
c) The Sole Emoticon??? 
|
|
| Author: | bluebeard [ Mon Apr 23, 2007 1:35 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
If we win 8 games and get the 5 pick I will be satisfied. Not happy...just satisfied. We need a new coach to go up the ladder properly. Pagan will never coach us into the finals. |
|
| Author: | Sergeant.Blue [ Mon Apr 23, 2007 1:42 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
bluebeard wrote: We need a new coach to go up the ladder properly.
Pagan will never coach us into the finals. That's right, cos guys like Houlahan, Wiggins, Ackland, Cloke, Carrazzo and Fisher are all having their doors knocked down to be traded to top 8 teams... It's more than just the coach. These guys are good players but they're not great players - and will not get us to any finals soon. |
|
| Author: | camel [ Mon Apr 23, 2007 2:24 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
blue-insider wrote: bluebeard wrote: We need a new coach to go up the ladder properly. Pagan will never coach us into the finals. That's right, cos guys like Houlahan, Wiggins, Ackland, Cloke, Carrazzo and Fisher are all having their doors knocked down to be traded to top 8 teams... It's more than just the coach. These guys are good players but they're not great players - and will not get us to any finals soon. Houlihan, Wiggins, Carazzo and Fisher would be more than handy contributors in the West Coast line up. A bit of patience and a dose of reality wouldn't go astray. |
|
| Author: | keogh [ Mon Apr 23, 2007 3:07 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Bit early to talk about %. It wont be the last time a team is smashed by WC at Subi. Because we have played only 4 games that has a big negative impact on our %. Still I agree that % at times says more about teams than a win loss ratio. |
|
| Author: | Wojee [ Mon Apr 23, 2007 3:21 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
camelboy wrote: blue-insider wrote: bluebeard wrote: We need a new coach to go up the ladder properly. Pagan will never coach us into the finals. That's right, cos guys like Houlahan, Wiggins, Ackland, Cloke, Carrazzo and Fisher are all having their doors knocked down to be traded to top 8 teams... It's more than just the coach. These guys are good players but they're not great players - and will not get us to any finals soon. Houlihan, Wiggins, Carazzo and Fisher would be more than handy contributors in the West Coast line up. A bit of patience and a dose of reality wouldn't go astray. Agreed, even top teams like WCE have a healthy contingent of good ordinary players and a couple of spuds. It's impossible to assemble an entire list of superstars. |
|
| Author: | bluebeard [ Mon Apr 23, 2007 3:25 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Even if Pagan had a list of superstars we still wouldnt win a premiership. If your not part of the solution....you are part of the problem. |
|
| Author: | bluehammer [ Mon Apr 23, 2007 3:35 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
No1Blue wrote: Essendon* can't be considered a low ranked team now though, can they??
Don't tell me YOU'RE buying that sheedy bullshit too? |
|
| Author: | bluehammer [ Mon Apr 23, 2007 3:38 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
keogh wrote: Bit early to talk about %. It wont be the last time a team is smashed by WC at Subi. Because we have played only 4 games that has a big negative impact on our %.
Still I agree that % at times says more about teams than a win loss ratio. Yeah that was more my point, though the trend - although only 4 rounds in - is the same. As Wojee said, we win narrow and lose big. Percentage says more about your mental strength and ability to be competitive a darnsight more than W/L. |
|
| Author: | BIBI01 [ Mon Apr 23, 2007 4:13 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
IMO our low percentage has a lot to do with our poor accuracy in front of goal we should not have more than 12 points per game since 2003 68 games where we have scored more goals than points. in those 68 games 14 games we scored more than 12 points in the game 5 games where goals scored were the same as points scored in those 5 games 1 game we scored more than 12 points in the game 18 games where we scored more points than goals in those 18 games 14 games we scored more than 12 points in the game this is just 1 factor of percentage but small improvements here and there make a big difference. |
|
| Author: | Synbad [ Mon Apr 23, 2007 9:25 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Our low percentage has alot to do with a few things. Accuracy infront of goal isnt one of the genuine reasons. Unless you think if we get 19 scoring shots a game they all should be goals. |
|
| Author: | hadz [ Mon Apr 23, 2007 9:42 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
It's got a lot to do with it - and heaps of teams are struggling this year if you look at the conversion - especially this last round It's a skill that should be mastered, but isn't 4.15 or whatever we kicked is disgraceful - just think if it were 15.4 or even, lets say for 60% accuracy 12.7 and all of a sudden the game isn't a blowout Same as against richmond - we had 40 scoring shots or thereabouts... |
|
| Author: | Sydney Blue [ Mon Apr 23, 2007 9:47 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Our set shots for goal are usually a long way out and our shots on the run are usually under pressure because we dont know how to sheppard . Plus you can hear the whistling in the stands when Waite and Carrazzo line up |
|
| Author: | BIBI01 [ Tue Apr 24, 2007 11:54 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Synbad wrote: Our low percentage has alot to do with a few things.
Accuracy infront of goal isnt one of the genuine reasons. Unless you think if we get 19 scoring shots a game they all should be goals. really??? so getting 1 point and turning over posession, rather than getting 5 more points and back to a 50/50 contest isn't a genuine reason. |
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC + 10 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|