Form ladder 2019
Users browsing this topic:0 Registered, 0 Hidden and 0 Guests
Registered Users: None |
 |
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
K
Joined: 09 Sep 2011
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
| Pies4shaw wrote: | | "Hawthorn are a real threat this year." C'mon - we know we aren't happy until someone says it. |
' "LISTEN, we're a middle of the road side."
When a frustrated Alastair Clarkson said that after Hawthorn's loss to Melbourne in round seven, you just knew he – again – was about to do something dramatic.
Clarkson doesn't coach to be middle of the road. That's for others. He coaches to win premierships, and every single match of football he coaches, and it means he lives every minute of every day with ice in his veins.
No player under his watch is able to get comfortable with his role in the Hawks' team. The trading out of Sam Mitchell, Jordan Lewis and Luke Hodge after the 2016 and 2017 seasons was brutal, AFL-unprecedented leadership, and his axing of Jarryd Roughead for round eight's match against GWS was the type of decision 99.99 per cent of others would be too scared to make.'
(Barrett, afl.com.au) |
|
|
|
 |
K
Joined: 09 Sep 2011
|
| Post subject: | |
|
R8 injury ladder (1 = best; 18 = worst):
1. Brisbane
2. WCE
3. WB
4. Geelong
5. GWS
6. Fremantle
7. Essendon
8. Port
9. Carlton
10. GC
11. Adelaide
12. Sydney
13. Collingwood
14. Richmond
15. Hawthorn
16. NM
17. Melbourne
18. StK
Brisbane rule supreme at the top of the ladder. Bailey's injury makes an injury list of just three. Apart from NicNat and Barrass, WC are close to full strength and are clearly in second spot. Morris & Duryea are the main injuries at the Dogs. StK stay at the bottom, but Melbourne are close, with Hibberd breaking a collarbone and Melksham out 4-5 weeks. Lever will return through the VFL.
Hawthorn are rising up the ladder, with Mitchell and Birchall their main injuries. Mitchell has had plates removed from his broken leg. Adelaide are rising too, with Doedee the one long-term absence. Douglass and Seedsman could return through the SANFL. |
|
|
|
|
K
Joined: 09 Sep 2011
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| If David's form ladder and the injury ladder are okay, then it looks like Brisbane & Carlton are massive underperformers. It looks like there is one big overperformer, the team that sits second on David's ladder. The other 15 teams are pretty close on the form ladder to their spots on the injury ladder. |
|
|
|
|
Rd10.1998_11.1#36
rd10.1998_11.1#36
Joined: 18 Jul 2018
Location: Sevilla, Spain
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Or to put it another way, you think the form ladder is only correct if it matches the injury ladder. That is effectively what you just said. Which is crap because good teams finds way (refer Pies & Weagles 2018)
_________________
https://forever.collingwoodfc.com.au/sav-sinks-the-dockers/ |
|
|
|
|
K
Joined: 09 Sep 2011
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Maybe I need to explain my previous post very slowly...
| K wrote: | If David's form ladder and the injury ladder are okay,...
|
What this means: It is possible that they are not "okay". For "okay", read "correct" if you want. Obviously (at least obviously to David and me), this is a very difficult task, so no one is expecting them to be perfect. Whingeing from others does not make them less or more imperfect.
| K wrote: | ... then it looks like Brisbane & Carlton are massive underperformers.
|
What this means: "Brisbane and Carlton probably cannot use injuries as an excuse for poor performance. Carlton really is a bad team (despite giving a grand finalist a big scare)."
| K wrote: | | It looks like there is one big overperformer, the team that sits second on David's ladder.... |
What this means: "Well done to that team (apart from injuries, which we don't know who or what to blame for) for performing quite well despite having a not-so-good injury profile! Keep up the solid work (but maybe try to sort out your injuries)!"
The idea of these ladders isn't mysterious, but if more explanation is needed I nominate David to give it.  |
|
|
|
|
Rd10.1998_11.1#36
rd10.1998_11.1#36
Joined: 18 Jul 2018
Location: Sevilla, Spain
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| K wrote: | | It is possible that they are not "okay" |
They're not ok, otherwise teams wouldn't be under- or over-performing. That's the point of a ladder, to give a relative ranking of teams versus each other, whether it's based on win-loss, percentage, injuries, 'form' or tarot cards. If a team is not where the ladder says they should be then the methodology of the ladder is inaccurate
| K wrote: | | Obviously (at least obviously to David and me), this is a very difficult task, so no one is expecting them to be perfect |
Then what's the point. We already have an imperfect ladder
| K wrote: | | Whingeing from others does not make them less or more imperfect. |
lol. Sorry to distract you from curing cancer, pray continue
| K wrote: | | Brisbane and Carlton probably cannot use injuries as an excuse for poor performance. |
Right. SO the injury ladder isn't relevant. Which is what I said
| K wrote: | | Carlton really is a bad team |
We know. That's why they're on the bottom of the real ladder. Even David has them bottom. So once again, injury ladder=not ok
| K wrote: | | Well done to that team [just say Pies FFS] for performing quite well despite having a not-so-good injury profile! |
Translation: injury ladder not relevant, Which is what I said
| K wrote: | | Keep up the solid work (but maybe try to sort out your injuries)! |
Now that you've said it I'm sure they'll get right onto that. Before they were using leeches and healing crystals
| K wrote: | | The idea of these ladders isn't mysterious, but if more explanation is needed I nominate David to give it |
If more explanation is needed, I give up
_________________
https://forever.collingwoodfc.com.au/sav-sinks-the-dockers/ |
|
|
|
|
Rd10.1998_11.1#36
rd10.1998_11.1#36
Joined: 18 Jul 2018
Location: Sevilla, Spain
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| K wrote: | | this is a very difficult task, so no one is expecting them to be perfect. Whingeing from others does not make them less or more imperfect |
Unless it's your whinging of course...
| K wrote: | | Yes, some others' opinions on the form ladder (which were offered in past years) might imply an improved version |
Oh sorry, I mean 'opinion' *cough*
_________________
https://forever.collingwoodfc.com.au/sav-sinks-the-dockers/ |
|
|
|
|
K
Joined: 09 Sep 2011
|
| Post subject: | |
|
The injury ladder is a ranking of how the 18 teams are performing on injuries only -- that's why it's called that. (The form ladder is a small misnomer, but okay, whatever... It's whole-season 'form'. That's its historical Nick's name.)
It's very simple.
Last edited by K on Wed May 15, 2019 10:39 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
|
Rd10.1998_11.1#36
rd10.1998_11.1#36
Joined: 18 Jul 2018
Location: Sevilla, Spain
|
|
|
|
|
Invigoration
Joined: 22 Sep 2010
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| K wrote: | R8 injury ladder (1 = best; 18 = worst):
1. Brisbane
2. WCE
3. WB
4. Geelong
5. GWS
6. Fremantle
7. Essendon
8. Port
9. Carlton
10. GC
11. Adelaide
12. Sydney
13. Collingwood
14. Richmond
15. Hawthorn
16. NM
17. Melbourne
18. StK
Brisbane rule supreme at the top of the ladder. Bailey's injury makes an injury list of just three. Apart from NicNat and Barrass, WC are close to full strength and are clearly in second spot. Morris & Duryea are the main injuries at the Dogs. StK stay at the bottom, but Melbourne are close, with Hibberd breaking a collarbone and Melksham out 4-5 weeks. Lever will return through the VFL.
Hawthorn are rising up the ladder, with Mitchell and Birchall their main injuries. Mitchell has had plates removed from his broken leg. Adelaide are rising too, with Doedee the one long-term absence. Douglass and Seedsman could return through the SANFL. |
...what am I looking at here? NM are missing virtually nobody of elite substance while Richmond is borderline decimated and so is Port? Have you just gone off injury list length or something?
PA are missing 8 of their best 18;
Burton
Dixon
Ebert
Gray
Hartlett
Jonas
Watts
Wines
That's massive. Same with Richmond;
Cotchin
Nank
Riewoldt
Rance
Rioli
Vlastuin
Short
Grigg/Ross are borderline - Grigg was definitely best 22.
Meanwhile I can't even put a finger on North's best missing player. Thompson is important to North I guess but certainly no star, same goes for McDonald, Jacobs, Daw and EVW
_________________
Brown re his GF omission:
"It’s not about me & it never has been. It’s about the team & it’s about Collingwood & it’s about the 22 other blokes out there on the park. That’s all that matters to me" |
|
|
|
|
Rd10.1998_11.1#36
rd10.1998_11.1#36
Joined: 18 Jul 2018
Location: Sevilla, Spain
|
|
|
|
|
David 
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Round 9 form ladder:
1. Geelong
2. Collingwood
3. GWS
4. West Coast
5. Essendon
6. Adelaide
7. Brisbane
8. Richmond
9. Fremantle
10. Western Bulldogs
11. Port Adelaide
12. Hawthorn
13. St. Kilda
14. North Melbourne
15. Sydney
16. Gold Coast
17. Melbourne
18. Carlton
_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
Johnno75
Joined: 07 Oct 2010
Location: Wantirna
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Reckon you are underselling the Tigers, given their injuries they are in decent form, I’d say on par with the Giants.
_________________
Human behavioural studies suggest people who use a lot of swear words tend to be more honest & trustworthy. |
|
|
|
|
RudeBoy
Joined: 28 Nov 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Surely the Tigers are above the Bummers? |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
| Post subject: | |
|
I think 5–8 (or, indeed, 5–13) are really close and hard to disentangle at the moment, but I worked out a few mini-ladders. At the moment, to me, there's a clear top 4 and clear bottom 5, and everyone else is kind of in-between.
Of teams in that 5–13 group playing each other, Essendon are 3–0 with a net margin of 65 points, whereas Richmond are 3–1 with a net margin of only 21. Neither have managed to beat any top 4 teams, though Essendon came close against us (whereas Richmond have been pretty easily defeated by us and GWS). Finally, Richmond have been slightly better against bottom 5 teams, winning their three games against Carlton, Melbourne and Sydney fairly unconvincingly whereas Essendon have only narrowly slipped up against Sydney (and otherwise smashed North Melbourne and accounted for Melbourne by a few goals).
You can make of those figures what you will, but I think it shows that both teams have been pretty comparable so far, with Essendon having the slight edge in games against better teams and the teams in their own group.
_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
