Analysis Crows Minor/Major Premiers - form comparisons

[John Who]

Not really sure what to make of things, but I thought it would be interesting to compare our form in 2017 against our past form when in the years we had either won the premierships or won the Minor rounds.

ladder position | W | L | | D | percentage | % rank | Streak
1997 (= Premiership)
StK 1 15 7 0 119.6 2 W7
Ade 4 13 9 0 121.59 1 L1

1998 (= Premiership)
NMelb 1 16 6 0 117.43 2 W9
Ade 5 13 9 0 123.4 1 W1

2005 (= 3rd)
Ade 1 17 5 0 136.45 1 W10
Syd 3 15 7 0 116.39 4 W4

2017 (= ?)
Ade 1 15/16 5/6 1 139.86 1 W1/L2

Amazing how back in 97/98, we had only won 13 games and still able to scrape through with the premierships! Though on closer inspection, we actually had the best percentages in the minor rounds in both 97 and 98, which generally meant we played the better football in those years compared with the other teams.

Interesting to note, the winning/losing streak before the Finals series, doesn't really mean much at all! In 97/98 we were on a 1 game losing or winning streak, and still ended up with the big gong! In 2005, we won 10 straight before the Finals and look what good it did us!

Which Crows will turn up for the Finals? The 90s fever? Or the New Millenium bug?

 

[Samcro24]

I have one nagging doubt and it is this:-

For a team with the best attack, we can fail to score when we need to. It cost us vs Collingwood and Sydney. (And almost geelong) I'd feel much better had we found a way to win those two games.

Looking at our scores we are generally wasteful. Need to convert our chances, or our season ends with a heartbreaking 1-2 kick loss.

 

[Simmo28]

Not really sure what to make of things, but I thought it would be interesting to compare our form in 2017 against our past form when in the years we had either won the premierships or won the Minor rounds.

ladder position | W | L | | D | percentage | % rank | Streak
1997 (= Premiership)
StK 1 15 7 0 119.6 2 W7
Ade 4 13 9 0 121.59 1 L1

1998 (= Premiership)
NMelb 1 16 6 0 117.43 2 W9
Ade 5 13 9 0 123.4 1 W1

2005 (= 3rd)
Ade 1 17 5 0 136.45 1 W10
Syd 3 15 7 0 116.39 4 W4

2017 (= ?)
Ade 1 15/16 5/6 1 139.86 1 W1/L2

Amazing how back in 97/98, we had only won 13 games and still able to scrape through with the premierships! Though on closer inspection, we actually had the best percentages in the minor rounds in both 97 and 98, which generally meant we played the better football in those years compared with the other teams.

Interesting to note, the winning/losing streak before the Finals series, doesn't really mean much at all! In 97/98 we were on a 1 game losing or winning streak, and still ended up with the big gong! In 2005, we won 10 straight before the Finals and look what good it did us!

Which Crows will turn up for the Finals? The 90s fever? Or the New Millenium bug?

The finals method helped us back then though. Mathematically the top two teams have a major advantage over the bottom 4 when compared to McIntyre system.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Cap]

I have one nagging doubt and it is this:-

For a team with the best attack, we can fail to score when we need to. It cost us vs Collingwood and Sydney. (And almost geelong) I'd feel much better had we found a way to win those two games.

Looking at our scores we are generally wasteful. Need to convert our chances, or our season ends with a heartbreaking 1-2 kick loss.

We were 50 points down against Collingwood. So i think the 1 and 1/2 qtrs in which we did score showed that we can score.

Sydney we could have scored but kicked poorly.

We should have no fear. We've beaten all of Geeolong,GWS and Richmond.

Sydney was frustrating but nothing suggests we couldn't win.

The other teams in the 8 arent worth discussion because they won't be in the game long enough to matter.

If we arent in a prelim after the first final we should give it up. There are no excuses this year.

 

[Samcro24]

We were 50 points down against Collingwood. So i think the 1 and 1/2 qtrs in which we did score showed that we can score.

Sydney we could have scored but kicked poorly.

We should have no fear. We've beaten all of Geeolong,GWS and Richmond.

Sydney was frustrating but nothing suggests we couldn't win.

The other teams in the 8 arent worth discussion because they won't be in the game long enough to matter.

If we arent in a prelim after the first final we should give it up. There are no excuses this year.

Not saying we can't do it- just that it has happened and it's at odds with the way we usually score. Suggests there is still a bit of front running in our game.

5 points down with 5 to go in a prelim and I'm not confident we can get it done.

 

[John Who]

The finals method helped us back then though. Mathematically the top two teams have a major advantage over the bottom 4 when compared to McIntyre system.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Valid point. But it's also the older system that allowed the Crows to have a second chance in 98 after losing their first Finals game.

 

[Doug_Glatt]

Valid point. But it's also the older system that allowed the Crows to have a second chance in 98 after losing their first Finals game.

Mind you, we would have played Essendon who finished eighth and we beat in the minor round vs playing the Saints who finished sixth and who we lost to in the minor round. Not disagreeing, just saying we might not have lost the first round final.

I do much prefer the new system where you don't need to wait on other matches to see if you progress in the finals - your destiny is in your own hands.

 

[Bone71]

Mind you, we would have played Essendon who finished eighth and we beat in the minor round vs playing the Saints who finished sixth and who we lost to in the minor round. Not disagreeing, just saying we might not have lost the first round final.

I do much prefer the new system where you don't need to wait on other matches to see if you progress in the finals - your destiny is in your own hands.

???? No matter which system if you win you progress, you only relied on other results if you lost and you were placed 3-6 in the first week. Also the McIntyre final 8 always advantaged the higher seeded side which isn't really the case in the current format as the highest seed often gets the theoretically harder game in the 3rd (non double chance) week.

btw we lost to Melbourne not St Kilda in the 1st week of finals in 98.

 

[Doug_Glatt]

???? No matter which system if you win you progress, you only relied on other results if you lost and you were placed 3-6 in the first week. Also the McIntyre final 8 always advantaged the higher seeded side which isn't really the case in the current format as the highest seed often gets the theoretically harder game in the 3rd (non double chance) week.

btw we lost to Melbourne not St Kilda in the 1st week of finals in 98.

You're right, it was Melbourne not the Saints.

You're also right about if you win in finals you always progress, probably used the wrong expression there about 'destiny in your own hands'. Under the old system, your team could be eliminated by higher ranked teams losing to teams below you, so you could have been eliminated for tactical reasons or even out of pure spite.

For example this year I think Sydney and Geelong are our biggest threats - under the old system, if Sydney (6th) lost in round one, either we or Geelong could lose the first final to eliminate Sydney. Even if we didn't throw the game but still lost, there would be people who assumed we deliberately tanked.

 

[Bone71]

Under the old system, your team could be eliminated by higher ranked teams losing to teams below you, so you could have been eliminated for tactical reasons or even out of pure spite.

Possible I suppose but I would suggest it is unlikely that a side deliberately lost, especially a team in the top 4, in order to eliminate a 6th or even 5th placed side. In 1998, for instance, the only side that realistically could have eliminated St Kilda (or Adelaide if the Saints had beaten Sydney) was the Bulldogs who played in the last final of the 1st week and finished the H&A season in 2nd. The cost of that would have been a drop in seeding and a game against Melbourne (4) and if they win that then North Melbourne (1) in the PF as opposed to going directly into a PF and avoiding the top ranked team until the GF.

I have heard it suggested that Adelaide threw the final against Melbourne that year in order to avoid North in the PF. That is probably the only game that it makes sense to tank in because it would have required both 2nd (playing 7th) & 3rd (playing 6th) to lose, 1st having already played on the Friday night, before they would be eliminated. It still would be risky but there would be a definable advantage if they survived - which there seems there may have been. Under the current system, with the bye between the H&A and the finals, I think it more likely a top 4 side would tank in the first week so they didn't have to deal with too many breaks leading into a PF than the suggested 98 Adelaide 1st week tank.

 

[John Who]

Possible I suppose but I would suggest it is unlikely that a side deliberately lost, especially a team in the top 4, in order to eliminate a 6th or even 5th placed side. In 1998, for instance, the only side that realistically could have eliminated St Kilda (or Adelaide if the Saints had beaten Sydney) was the Bulldogs who played in the last final of the 1st week and finished the H&A season in 2nd. The cost of that would have been a drop in seeding and a game against Melbourne (4) and if they win that then North Melbourne (1) in the PF as opposed to going directly into a PF and avoiding the top ranked team until the GF.

I have heard it suggested that Adelaide threw the final against Melbourne that year in order to avoid North in the PF. That is probably the only game that it makes sense to tank in because it would have required both 2nd (playing 7th) & 3rd (playing 6th) to lose, 1st having already played on the Friday night, before they would be eliminated. It still would be risky but there would be a definable advantage if they survived - which there seems there may have been. Under the current system, with the bye between the H&A and the finals, I think it more likely a top 4 side would tank in the first week so they didn't have to deal with too many breaks leading into a PF than the suggested 98 Adelaide 1st week tank.

I gave you a 'like' because I just can't recall everything you mentioned to that extent, but it sounded good! Though, I think we need to understand, it's merely a comparison in form between the Crows then and now. The thread wasn't meant to for the discussion of the old Finals system. I actually forgot about the old system until after Simmo made mention of it!
It's comforting to know if say the Crows lost to WCE today, it probably doesn't really affect our mindset or momentum as suggested by the chart in the OP. It's really all about how we apply ourselves in the start of the Finals, and utilising the home ground advantage that we deserve from getting in the top 2.

 

[Bone71]

The thread wasn't meant to for the discussion of the old Finals system.

Yeah I know just couldn't help myself

 

[SugarShane]

I have one nagging doubt and it is this:-

For a team with the best attack, we can fail to score when we need to. It cost us vs Collingwood and Sydney. (And almost geelong) I'd feel much better had we found a way to win those two games.

Looking at our scores we are generally wasteful. Need to convert our chances, or our season ends with a heartbreaking 1-2 kick loss.

Our attack is very much brute force. Just get it in there enough and goals will happen. When the opportunities dry up our lack of efficiency definitely gets exposed.

 

[SugarShane]

Mind you, we would have played Essendon who finished eighth and we beat in the minor round vs playing the Saints who finished sixth and who we lost to in the minor round. Not disagreeing, just saying we might not have lost the first round final.

I do much prefer the new system where you don't need to wait on other matches to see if you progress in the finals - your destiny is in your own hands.

Whenever opposition supporters whinge that we should've been eliminated in 1998, they always conveniently forget that we would've played 8th instead of 4th in week 1.

 

[Samcro24]

Whenever opposition supporters whinge that we should've been eliminated in 1998, they always conveniently forget that we would've played 8th instead of 4th in week 1.

At home.