The gap between top 8 and bottom 8.

[cos789]

I'm not sure what all the fuss is about .Usually people just look at how many wins it takes to get into the top half and the closer it is to 50% then the more even the competition .

The simple fact is that there is a greater gap this year .
But even in the space of a season team positioning is quite dynamic .

The worrying aspect for me is the teams that went for rebuilding and haven't improved .And now we have the addition of two teams probably built on youth as well .Is it wrong to try and rebuild too much forgetting that you still need experienced players to show the way ?

 

[Probst]

if you can finish 7th with a positive win-loss ratio yet only have a single win against the top 8 then yes youve had a pretty easy ride.

6th or 7th (maybe even 8th)

Easy draw?

Collingwood
Geelong
Carlton
North
Freo
Adelaide

1,2,5,9,10,14 is the ladder position of the teams we have played twice

Lets do some primary school maths matey.

1+2+5+9+10+14 = 41, now divide by 6 and you get the average which is about 6.83

Now the 'average' draw would be having played 6 teams twice at the average ladder position of 8.5.

Ours is 6.83 and is thus harder than average.

We also travelled 6 times so stop having a whinge at St Kildas 'easy' draw.

 

[Exactive]

if you can finish 7th with a positive win-loss ratio yet only have a single win against the top 8 then yes youve had a pretty easy ride.

It means you've beaten the sides you're meant to beat and haven't beaten many quality sides, not that you've had an easy draw...

 

[BF Tiger]

Stupid thread. As mentioned previously you can't compare on two different variables. Put up a ladder on how many games everyone has won against the sides in the top 8 and it might make more sense. All this proves is that West Coast had an easy draw

Point taken, but I started this initially after the article in the paper that showed North's poor performance against the top 8. So I looked at bottom 8 first and then it got extended to top 8 but I just used the same data. It'd be pretty easy to work out how the top 8 has fared against other top 8 sides using this "ladder" and the actual ladder.

 

[BF Tiger]

The top 6 have combined for 67.5 wins to 3.5 losses against the bottom 8.

Thats a huge gap. Especially considering the top sides haven't had much to play for for the last couple of rounds.

And I was highlighting this point too.

 

[shoe]

The top 6 have combined for 67.5 wins to 3.5 losses against the bottom 8.

Thats a huge gap. Especially considering the top sides haven't had much to play for for the last couple of rounds.

That is concerning.. if a trend develops. What about comparing that stat to other years'?

 

[my name was taken]

i lol'd

the most interesting stat when comparing wins against top 8 teams is that stkilda had like 1.......1......even we have 2, plus the draw against the saints.

flat track bullies if you ever saw one, and it appears an easy draw has them in the 8.

lol at easy draw. In theory you generally lose to teams above you and beat teams below you. You are basically saying teams that actually lost to stkilda in the bottom eight deserve it more than them . If Saints are better than those teams as the OPs ladder suggests then they are exactly where they belong.

Also easy draws usually come from what teams you play twice, stkildas wasn't easy.

 

[RogersResults]

2011: Top 8 Average Match/Win% = 71.1%
2011: Btm 9 Average Match/Win % = 31.2%: Difference 39.9%

Two examples from other seasons:

2005: Top 8 Average Match/Win% = 63.4%
2005: Btm 8 Average Match/Win % = 36.6%: Difference 26.7%

1997: Top 8 Average Match/Win% = 59.4%
1997: Btm 8 Average Match/Win % = 40.6%: Difference 18.8%

The 2011 top 4 are currently the best performed in the history of the competition. Tables here: