How many wins to make the finals?

[The Falcon Strike]

With the advent of 2 new sides in the past two years, it means there are now 88 more premiership points to filter through the system, with the likelhood that the majority will be abosrbed at the top end of the ladder.

In the past 11 and a good percentage has often been enough. Only one side has finished the finals with 12 wins (since the 16 team comp).

So with the finals being the top 45% of teams, as opposed to the top 50% of teams - and with the extra 88 points in the mix - I think we might see a team miss the finals with perhaps as high as 13 wins.

I certainly wouldn't want to be relying on 12 wins to get you through.

Looking at the draws utilising the ladder predictor, and having seen a number of games over the past 4 weeks - it looks like we are down to 10 teams squeezing into 8 positions.

 

[ep2018]

12 - 13 wins

 

[Skids]

13 should get you a spot.

 

[lamaros]

With the advent of 2 new sides in the past two years, it means there are now 88 more premiership points to filter through the system, with the likelhood that the majority will be abosrbed at the top end of the ladder.

In the past 11 and a good percentage has often been enough. Only one side has finished the finals with 12 wins (since the 16 team comp).

So with the finals being the top 45% of teams, as opposed to the top 50% of teams - and with the extra 88 points in the mix - I think we might see a team miss the finals with perhaps as high as 13 wins.

I certainly wouldn't want to be relying on 12 wins to get you through.

Looking at the draws utilising the ladder predictor, and having seen a number of games over the past 4 weeks - it looks like we are down to 10 teams squeezing into 8 positions.

Teams still only play 22 games. Winning more than you lose will get you in nearly every year.

 

[Sentinel]

With the advent of 2 new sides in the past two years, it means there are now 88 more premiership points to filter through the system, with the likelhood that the majority will be abosrbed at the top end of the ladder.

I don't agree with this. Given that both GWS and GC are not predicted to win more than 2 or 3 games between them, the 88 extra points will be spread quite evenly through the whole ladder. Take the Demons for example. In previous years, if they were to finish last they would maybe expect 2 wins over the 22 rounds. They have 3 games against these teams and assuming they win all 3, you can add 3 win to their other 2 which they would have possibly won otherwise, so already thats 12 points taken at the very bottom end of the ladder.

Teams mid-ladder would probably need to win 2, perhaps 1 if an even year, more games than they would have previously to make the 8. Similar to having an average of 19 games plus 3 byes (depending on how many games are played against GWS and GC, no disrespect intended to these teams), so win half (10) plus the 3 'byes' gives you 13 wins and a finals spot.

 

[calyam]

Teams still only play 22 games. Winning more than you lose will get you in nearly every year.

True. However, the new teams, who will lose almost all their games, will affect the distribution of wins throughout the ladder. From memory, 2011 was one of the most uneven seasons on record and I suspect that 2012 may even prove to be more uneven as the season progresses.

These easy wins have to go somewhere, and last year it was towards the top of the ladder. However, if these easy wins are distributed around the middle of the ladder, which may be the case given Adelaide and North play GWS and GC twice, then it might take 13 wins to make the finals.

 

[maelcoluim]

Teams still only play 22 games. Winning more than you lose will get you in nearly every year.

But there are now 18 teams competing for 8 finals positions, so it's statistically more likely that you'll need to win an extra game or two in order to make the finals. I think 13 wins will be needed to guarantee a finals spot this year (12 wins may be enough on %), as it also looks like there may be 3-4 teams which will struggle to get more than a handful of wins.

 

[The Falcon Strike]

I don't agree with this. Given that both GWS and GC are not predicted to win more than 2 or 3 games between them, the 88 extra points will be spread quite evenly through the whole ladder. Take the Demons for example. In previous years, if they were to finish last they would maybe expect 2 wins over the 22 rounds. They have 3 games against these teams and assuming they win all 3, you can add 3 win to their other 2 which they would have possibly won otherwise, so already thats 12 points taken at the very bottom end of the ladder.

Teams mid-ladder would probably need to win 2, perhaps 1 if an even year, more games than they would have previously to make the 8. Similar to having an average of 19 games plus 3 byes (depending on how many games are played against GWS and GC, no disrespect intended to these teams), so win half (10) plus the 3 'byes' gives you 13 wins and a finals spot.

That's a fair point - but it also means 9th place should win 1-2 extra games this year as compared to year's before. Which would mean 13 odd wins.

 

[Bayes30]

Lets put it this way....11 wins + good percentage WONT get you in!!!

 

[calyam]

I don't agree with this. Given that both GWS and GC are not predicted to win more than 2 or 3 games between them, the 88 extra points will be spread quite evenly through the whole ladder. Take the Demons for example. In previous years, if they were to finish last they would maybe expect 2 wins over the 22 rounds. They have 3 games against these teams and assuming they win all 3, you can add 3 win to their other 2 which they would have possibly won otherwise, so already thats 12 points taken at the very bottom end of the ladder.

Teams mid-ladder would probably need to win 2, perhaps 1 if an even year, more games than they would have previously to make the 8. Similar to having an average of 19 games plus 3 byes (depending on how many games are played against GWS and GC, no disrespect intended to these teams), so win half (10) plus the 3 'byes' gives you 13 wins and a finals spot.

The reality is that it'll probably be spread fairly evenly across the league, which will result in a shift for every team (ex. GWS and GC and perhaps Melbourne). Last season though it seemed to have a larger affect towards the top of the ladder, with each of the top 4 teams getting win totals that would have finished top in most other seasons.

 

[Senatorguesty]

How can these extra points be taken by only the top teams as some like to say? How you can you say because gws are now playing the top 4 sides will now win an extra 4 games a year? The points will 100% be distributed evenly (barring fixturing reason) throughout the entire league. EVERY team will benefit from an extra 8-12 points. They won't somehow be swallowed up but the top few teams. I don't know how you can even stand by that.

 

[UpTheGuts]

0.5 wins more than we end up with

 

[Senatorguesty]

0.5 wins more than we end up with

Lol +1.

 

[lamaros]

True. However, the new teams, who will lose almost all their games, will affect the distribution of wins throughout the ladder. From memory, 2011 was one of the most uneven seasons on record and I suspect that 2012 may even prove to be more uneven as the season progresses.

These easy wins have to go somewhere, and last year it was towards the top of the ladder. However, if these easy wins are distributed around the middle of the ladder, which may be the case given Adelaide and North play GWS and GC twice, then it might take 13 wins to make the finals.

Every top 8 side beat GC last year.

12 wins will get you in the 8 most likely, like it has every other year since we've had a top 8.

 

[Macca18]

12 wins will again get you in hence the 4-0 teams are already in the box seat considering they only have to win 8 of their remaining 18 games to get in. Percentage may come into play between 8th and 9th but doubt it.

 

[The Falcon Strike]

Every top 8 side beat GC last year.

12 wins will get you in the 8 most likely, like it has every other year since we've had a top 8.

Not quite, there's been two incidents of teams missing out with 12 wins

Both of whom were Richmond in '94 and '98

 

[lamaros]

Not quite, there's been two incidents of teams missing out with 12 wins

Both of whom were Richmond in '94 and '98

I stand corrected. Missed 1998. Only 15 teams in 1994 so I don't count that.

 

[BomberWatson]

Not quite, there's been two incidents of teams missing out with 12 wins

Both of whom were Richmond in '94 and '98

Hawthorn also missed out in 03 with 12 wins, and Richmond once again missed out in 08 with 11.5 wins (so more wins than losses).