| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
E
Joined: 05 May 2010
|
| Post subject: The great percentage MYTH! |  |
|
i've heard a lot of people banging on about how dreadful our percentage is and how we need to start working on it quick smart.
My own view is that we should focus just on winning and our percentage will take care of itself.
By way of example, prior to this week's games, our percentage was 60% lower than Carltons percentage (97% to 157%). One week of fairly mediocre results - 9 goal win to us and 4 goal loss by them - and the gap has virtually halved. and this is the team with the best percentage in the league.
I just dont think its an issue.
Thoughts? |
|
|
|
 |
Cuthbert Collingwood 
Once was on fire, now all at sea
Joined: 08 Dec 2005
Location: The BBC (Brunswick Bowling Club)
|
| Post subject: | |
|
not at this stage E, and last year our amazing percentage didn't really matter in the end. It's fine to win every game by two goals if you only lose two or three as you will still be top 2, but if you are going to lose a few more you want that percentage a little bit higher.
_________________
McRae for Governor-General! |
|
|
|
|
What'sinaname 
Joined: 29 May 2010
Location: Living rent free
|
| Post subject: | |
|
I think percentage will be important this year. We need to continue to do what we did against Brisbane - beat up on the bottom 6 or so teams and get the maximum percentage gain from those gains as it will be hard to have a blow out win against the top 10 teams this year. They can all turn it on on any given day.
_________________
Fighting against the objectification of woman. |
|
|
|
|
Culprit 
Joined: 06 Feb 2003
Location: Port Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Clueless, here is just a few examples where % matters.
2010 Final Ladder
8th Carlton 22 11 11 0 2143 1983 108.07 44
9th North Melbourne 22 11 11 0 1930 2208 87.41 44
2000 Final Ladder
3rd Melbourne 22 14 8 0 2557 2159 118.43 56
4th Kangaroos 22 14 8 0 2447 2304 106.21 56
6th Brisbane Lions 22 12 10 0 2602 2222 117.10 48
7th Western Bulldogs 22 12 10 0 2321 2241 103.57 48
8th Hawthorn 22 12 10 0 2198 2251 97.65 48
1990 Ladder
2nd Collingwood (P) 22 16 6 0 2376 1825 130.19 64
3rd West Coast 22 16 6 0 2274 1920 118.44 64
4tg Melbourne 22 16 6 0 2339 2066 113.21 64 |
|
|
|
|
E
Joined: 05 May 2010
|
| Post subject: | |
|
other than 2010, can you please explain to me how the other scenario's could possibly matter. and if you think that we are going to need percentage to make the 8th, then dont worry about wins or percentage becasue we wont win anything from 8th or 9th!!!!!!
So effectively, all of your examples are irrelevant given that we now use a final 8. and that, after all is precisely my point. A flag favorite doesnt care a lick about percentage. If we are relying on percentage, we are done for anyway.
clueless indeed!!!!
Let's just focus on wins! Percentage will take care of itself. |
|
|
|
|
mudlark
Joined: 19 Mar 2002
Location: Maroochydore Qld
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Not too sure about his,but didn't Ninthmond finish" 9th" by . something of a % a few years ago??? If not ninthmond then someone else??  |
|
|
|
|
Skids
Quitting drinking will be one of the best choices you make in your life.
Joined: 11 Sep 2007
Location: Joined 3/6/02 . Member #175
|
| Post subject: | |
|
1990 Ladder
2nd Collingwood (P) 22 16 6 0 2376 1825 130.19 64
3rd West Coast 22 16 6 0 2274 1920 118.44 64
4tg Melbourne 22 16 6 0 2339 2066 113.21 64
I'm with Culprit 
_________________
Don't count the days, make the days count. |
|
|
|
|
yin-YANG
Joined: 03 Oct 2011
|
| Post subject: | |
|
We've had a slow start to the year and managed to win safely without dominating in our wins, therefore a low %.
The good news is that as our team gets better we will get to play more teams in the bottom half of the comp to boost our %.
But like E states, stuff % I would rather just keep winning and claim our flag...
_________________
Love us or Hate us... we are Collingwood - you can't ignore the Mighty Magpies!!! |
|
|
|
|
Tannin 
Can't remember
Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Location: Huon Valley Tasmania
|
| Post subject: | |
|
There is merit in both arguments.
Culprit is correct to state that percentage sometimes matters quite a lot - it can be, for example, the difference between playing a final at the G instead of Subiaco.
E is correct to state that percentage seldom makes any difference worth talking about.
Mind you, we Nicksters spend any amount of time and passion talking about things that probably aren't actually worth talking about .... so WTF?
In the end, quality sides crush poor sides. Yes, in theory we only need to win each game by a goal or two (because premiership points are vastly more important than percentage, and if you have enough of them it doesn't matter if your percentage is 0.01%). But the reality is that if your side is not good enough to smash the weaker sides and rack up 5 and 10 goal wins, you are only making up the numbers anyway.
_________________
�Let's eat Grandma.� Commas save lives! |
|
|
|
|
Duff Soviet Union
Joined: 16 Aug 2010
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Tannin wrote: | There is merit in both arguments.
Culprit is correct to state that percentage sometimes matters quite a lot - it can be, for example, the difference between playing a final at the G instead of Subiaco.
E is correct to state that percentage seldom makes any difference worth talking about.
Mind you, we Nicksters spend any amount of time and passion talking about things that probably aren't actually worth talking about .... so WTF?
In the end, quality sides crush poor sides. Yes, in theory we only need to win each game by a goal or two (because premiership points are vastly more important than percentage, and if you have enough of them it doesn't matter if your percentage is 0.01%). But the reality is that if your side is not good enough to smash the weaker sides and rack up 5 and 10 goal wins, you are only making up the numbers anyway. |
Spot on. The best example of this would be 1992. That was the year we finished equal first on points but a distant third on the ladder, due to a % which was actually worse than anyone in the top six. People say that year we had bad luck facing a team that "had our number" in St Kilda. Wrong. That year we won an inordinate and unsustainable number of close games because we weren't good enough to actually smash anyone. And sure enough, in the first final we lost a very close game of the sort we'd won all year (proving that you can't win every close game you're in and that a lot of close games basically come down to luck) to a team with less wins but a better point differential. That year was not a missed opportunity because we never had a snowballs chance in hell of winning the whole thing.
So ultimately, in the end winning games is much more important than percentage, but percentage is often a better indicator of how good a team actually is.
_________________
"We ain't gotta dream no more" |
|
|
|
|
David
to wish impossible things
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: the edge of the deep green sea
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Percentage can certainly make a difference. But keep in mind that it's round 7. At this stage, percentage is still quite variable. As pointed out in the OP, that means that a massive difference can be erased by a big win or loss.
That won't be the case as we head towards finals, however. As the for and against columns grow larger, it's going to take huge wins to improve our percentage by even 5 or 10%. At that point, percentage will matter.
My point, then, is this: it doesn't really matter that we haven't been beating lesser teams convincingly so far; however, we really ought to start doing it in the near future.
_________________
"Every time we witness an injustice and do not act, we train our character to be passive in its presence." – Julian Assange |
|
|
|
|
neil 
Joined: 08 Sep 2005
Location: Queensland
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Teams above us have all played either GWS or GC or Melbourne
Percentage is sometimes important but if we keep winning and winning well then percentage takes care of itself.
A good percentage is better than a poor percentage
Last year we had a great percentage but it meant buggerall at the end.
_________________
Carlscum 120 years being cheating scum |
|
|
|
|
Culprit
Joined: 06 Feb 2003
Location: Port Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
The thing is I plucked 3 years out of nowhere. 
% does make a difference in saying that if you win every game then it doesn't.
If it came down to finish 4th or 5th on % under the current finals raffle system. I will rather have the highest % and finish 4th. Ah but % means nothing. |
|
|
|
|
Skids
Quitting drinking will be one of the best choices you make in your life.
Joined: 11 Sep 2007
Location: Joined 3/6/02 . Member #175
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Gee a bit more research and I reckon it's fair to say % could have played a massive part in our success (or lack of) over the past 2 decades!
Top 5
1981- We finish second by % to the filth. They get a weeks rest, we didn't.
1984- We finish 4th not 3rd due to %. Double chance gone.
1986- We finish 6th not 5th due to %. miss finals.
Top 6
1992-We finish 3rd not 1st due to %. Instead of a QF we are eliminated in sudden death EF.
Top 8
1994- We finish 8th not 7th due to %. Fly to Perth for a sudden death final and are eliminated (Melbourne finished 7th and made it through to a PF)
2006- We finish 5th instead of 4th due to %. Lose an EF instead of getting the double chance. (Sydnet finish 4th and lose the GF by a point)
2007-We finish 6th instead of 5th due to % and get knocked out in the PF by 5 points.
2009- We finish 4th instead of 3rd due to our %. We knocked off saints who were on top and made it to the PF where we got smashed anyway.
Conclusion - % is very, very important.
Myth BUSTED.
_________________
Don't count the days, make the days count. |
|
|
|
|
Skids
Quitting drinking will be one of the best choices you make in your life.
Joined: 11 Sep 2007
Location: Joined 3/6/02 . Member #175
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Duff Soviet Union wrote: |
Spot on. The best example of this would be 1992. That was the year we finished equal first on points but a distant third on the ladder, due to a % which was actually worse than anyone in the top six. People say that year we had bad luck facing a team that "had our number" in St Kilda. Wrong. That year we won an inordinate and unsustainable number of close games because we weren't good enough to actually smash anyone. And sure enough, in the first final we lost a very close game of the sort we'd won all year (proving that you can't win every close game you're in and that a lot of close games basically come down to luck) to a team with less wins but a better point differential. That year was not a missed opportunity because we never had a snowballs chance in hell of winning the whole thing.
So ultimately, in the end winning games is much more important than percentage, but percentage is often a better indicator of how good a team actually is. |
You use the most bizzare example
1992, top 6 = 1 v 2 in a QF, the other 2 finals are EFs.
You say we didn't have a snowflakes chance in hell of winning the flag that year yet, in round 10 we beat Geelong, round 13 we beat WCE at Subi and round 14 we beat the Dogs (the other 3 teams in the top 4)
Maybe you weren't born in '92 
_________________
Don't count the days, make the days count. |
|
|
|
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
