Will Carlton be the 'bolter' in 2023?

[carlton_99]

'Noone has said we had a hard draw'... There are plenty of others in various other threads, but it took me 30 seconds to find this example from a Carlton supporter in this very thread.

Hmmmm.

This does not say anything close to it being unfair. The draw was tougher then exepcted because Pies Freo and Tigers all improved significantly. Poster was 100% correct

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

'Ruffle some feathers'?!?

Who would give a rats tossbag if Carlton had a perceived 'easier draw' next year?

I'll tell you what makes a perceived 'easier draw' - win more friggin games of football!

Of course Geelong played fewer top 8 teams than Carlton - they won 6 more games and therefore the teams they doubled up against had a tougher time of making the 8/finishing higher on the ladder.

If you want to calculate the draw difficulty by your double up opponents, Carlton played the 4th, 5th, 7th, 14th and 16th teams twice. Average ladder position 9.2.

9.2 in an 18 team competition is.........AVERAGE.

But as I've stated in other threads, you can't simply look at the ladder positions to assess the draw difficulty. What form were Carlton's opponents in they played you? What injuries did they have at the time (pre-game/in-game)?

I reckon Brisbane were a very different team when Essendon played them in round 17 (with half their team out with Covid), than when Collingwood played them in round 5 (when they were in the midst of winning 8 of their first 9 games). Even when Carlton eventually played Brisbane and Melbourne for that matter, neither team were in anywhere near the form they were in during the first half of the season.

You guys really do work hard each and every year to excuse mediocrity, don't you?

So now injuries matter? Aren't you constantly bleating that all teams have injuries and Carlton's injuries don't matter? You used to, so I'm assuming that broken record hasn't changed.
So Brisbane and Melbourne were different teams in the second half of the season, but Carlton weren't? Other teams missing players is a way of assessing draw difficulty, but Carlton players missing (like 3 of our top 5 mids) is just... 'excuses'.
You're well and truly cooked.

Yeah - it's clearly rocket science to state 'We had 11 games against teams who finished in the Top 8, therefore we had an unfairly difficult draw'...

Nobody is saying it was an unfair draw. They're simply refuting it was an easy one. Fairly obvious difference. Not surprised you didn't pick up on it.

'Noone has said we had a hard draw'... There are plenty of others in various other threads, but it took me 30 seconds to find this example from a Carlton supporter in this very thread.

Hmmmm.

See above. Difference between unfair and hard, especially when others are claiming it was an easy draw.

As for average ladder position?!? What in the hell is that made up metric? What does the average ladder position look like for every other team's double ups? Not that it makes any difference.

 

[Fadge]

With the draw supposedly aiming to be harder for previous year's top 8 finishers and easier for bottom teams, the top teams SHOULD actually get more games against top 8 teams, while the others should get less.
The fact that Carlton had 11 games and Geelong only had 8 games, shows that it isn't really working. Especially when you consider that Geelong played 4 games against North and WC, who both weren't expected to do much and 11 games against bottom 8.

Frig me. Harder draw. Unfair draw. It's all semantics.

Is this poster saying 'harder', or 'unfair'.

Who cares.

Just win games of football and you won't need excuses.

And you'll also see that you end up playing fewer teams in the top 8, because you'll have played your part in keeping them out of the top 8.

 

[Fadge]

As for average ladder position?!? What in the hell is that made up metric? What does the average ladder position look like for every other team's double ups? Not that it makes any difference.

It's no different to the 'number of top 8 teams we had double-ups against'.

If you want to work out the average ladder position for each clubs' double ups, go ahead and do it.

And I think you'll see a pretty clear trend. Marginal differences with the best teams on the lower end of the scale, with the lesser teams on the upper end of the scale. And it all accounts for exactly zero advantage for one team over another, because it's actually based on performance over the course of the season, in the same way as looking at how many double ups each team has against Top 8 teams is.

 

[Arr0w]

Frig me. Harder draw. Unfair draw. It's all semantics.

Is this poster saying 'harder', or 'unfair'.

Who cares.

Just win games of football and you won't need excuses.

And you'll also see that you end up playing fewer teams in the top 8, because you'll have played your part in keeping them out of the top 8.

And again, your theory has been refuted.

You really do struggle fadge

 

[Thrawn]

This is the same Fadge who thinks Richmond's flags were flukes.

Pay no attention to him.

 

[Zephyr Effekt]

No bolting, just natural progression.

Evolving gameplan + healthy list = finals next year.

However, a tougher draw will keep them away from the top 4 (could still make a prelim though).

 

[Rimmer]

Is it called bolting if you jump from 9th to the finals?

 

[Fadge]

Is it called bolting if you jump from 9th to the finals?

Particularly when it's taken 8 years and 20 first round draft picks to do so?

 

[Zephyr Effekt]

This has been pointed out to you before, but here we go again...

Teams have 5 double ups each for the year, excluding finals.
A team who finishes in the 8 can play a minimum of 7 games against other top 8 sides, assuming they get no double ups against the others.
If they happen to get all 5 double ups against top 8 sides, plus having to play everyone at least once, they can play a maximum of 12 games against top 8 sides.

Teams who finish outside the 8 can play a minimum of 8 games against top 8 sides, assuming no double ups and a maximum of 13 games if all 5 double ups are top 8 teams.

That's a variance of one game at the top and bottom end. While there's potential, at the extremes, for one team to play 7 games, while the other plays 13, in a fair draw, most should be around the 9-11 game mark, but it's impossible to predict which teams will rise or fall when allocating the double ups.
With the draw supposedly aiming to be harder for previous year's top 8 finishers and easier for bottom teams, the top teams SHOULD actually get more games against top 8 teams, while the others should get less.
The fact that Carlton had 11 games and Geelong only had 8 games, shows that it isn't really working. Especially when you consider that Geelong played 4 games against North and WC, who both weren't expected to do much and 11 games against bottom 8.

People can claim that we'll have a harder draw next year, but the reality is it can literally only be 2 more games against top 8 sides than what we did this year, and that's IF we don't finish top 8. If we DO finish top 8, we can only play 1 more game against a top 8 side. With the luck of the draw of teams rising and falling, there's a chance that we could actually end up playing less games against top 8 teams next year, considering we were at the higher end this year.
Wouldn't that ruffle some feathers?

What those numbers fail to show is that Carlton didn't lose consecutive games untill round 21 which was only the 2nd time they had to play a top 8 side the following week after a loss.

Rounds 1-20

Rd 5 - Port Adelaide (18th) W
Rd 7 - North Melbourne (18th) W
Rd 13 - Essendon (16th) W
Rd 15 - Fremantle (3rd) W
Rd 17 - WCE (17th) W
Rd 19 - GWS (15th) W

Rounds 21-23

Rd 21 - Brisbane (5th) L
Rd 22 - Melbourne (3rd) L
Rd 23 - Collingwood (5th) L

1-3 vs top 8 teams following a loss.

5-0 vs bottom 8 teams following a loss.

When the draw opens up like that you take that nugget with both hands and run.

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

What those numbers fail to show is that Carlton didn't lose consecutive games untill round 21 which was only the 2nd time they had to play a top 8 side the following week after a loss.

Rounds 1-20

Rd 5 - Port Adelaide (18th) W
Rd 7 - North Melbourne (18th) W
Rd 13 - Essendon (16th) W
Rd 15 - Fremantle (3rd) W
Rd 17 - WCE (17th) W
Rd 19 - GWS (15th) W

Rounds 21-23

Rd 21 - Brisbane (5th) L
Rd 22 - Melbourne (3rd) L
Rd 23 - Collingwood (5th) L

1-3 vs top 8 teams following a loss.

5-0 vs bottom 8 teams following a loss.

When the draw opens up like that you take that nugget with both hands and run.

That's all reasonable, but just putting them down as 3 losses also fails to show that 2 of those losses were by a combined 6 points.
A little bit of luck (somebody puts a body on Pickett and Ginni gets called for an illegal shepherd on Saad) and they could easily have been wins.

The main point is that, despite the calls from experts and big footy pundits at the start of the year that we had one of the easiest draws, it turned out to be one of the toughest, and for those saying we'll have a tougher draw next year due to finishing higher on the ladder, if we were to make the 8 next year, we can physically only play one more game against a top 8 side.
It's mathematically impossible for us to play more than 12 games against top 8 sides if we finish in the 8, so the difference will be negligible.

The draw is the least of our worries. Injuries, consistency and continuity (all of which are intrinsically linked) will be our biggest hurdle.

 

[Zephyr Effekt]

That's all reasonable, but just putting them down as 3 losses also fails to show that 2 of those losses were by a combined 6 points.
A little bit of luck (somebody puts a body on Pickett and Ginni gets called for an illegal shepherd on Saad) and they could easily have been wins.

The point was not that Carlton lost but rather that Carlton had only played 1 game against top 8 teams vs 5 games against bottom 4 teams after a loss in the first 19 games of the season.

Even Carlton's longest winning stretch for the season of 4 games included the scalps of North Melbourne (18th), Adelaide (12th), GWS (15th) and Sydney (5th).

Also do you want to go down the rabbit hole of flipping close wins/losses because the Port Adelaide and Hawthorn games come to mind.

The main point is that, despite the calls from experts and big footy pundits at the start of the year that we had one of the easiest draws, it turned out to be one of the toughest, and for those saying we'll have a tougher draw next year due to finishing higher on the ladder, if we were to make the 8 next year, we can physically only play one more game against a top 8 side.
It's mathematically impossible for us to play more than 12 games against top 8 sides if we finish in the 8, so the difference will be negligible.

How many of those top 8 teams were in the top 8 when you played them or was it 2, 4 or 6 weeks before or after you played them and how was their form leading into the game or after?

Next you'll be telling me Carlton beat four top 8 teams this year.

The draw is the least of our worries. Injuries, consistency and continuity (all of which are intrinsically linked) will be our biggest hurdle.

I agree regarding injuries. However, the draw has a significant impact on a teams fortunes when it comes to momentum/form which is intrinsically linked with consistency/continuity.

If you think Carlton's draw was anything but favourable then you need to take the blue tinted goggles off for a minute.

 

[Fadge]

The point was not that Carlton lost but rather that Carlton had only played 1 game against top 8 teams vs 5 games against bottom 4 teams after a loss in the first 19 games of the season.

Even Carlton's longest winning stretch for the season of 4 games included the scalps of North Melbourne (18th), Adelaide (12th), GWS (15th) and Sydney (5th).

Also do you want to go down the rabbit hole of flipping close wins/losses because the Port Adelaide and Hawthorn games come to mind.



How many of those top 8 teams were in the top 8 when you played them or was it 2, 4 or 6 weeks before or after you played them and how was their form leading into the game or after?

Next you'll be telling me Carlton beat four top 8 teams this year.



I agree regarding injuries. However, the draw has a significant impact on a teams fortunes when it comes to momentum/form which is intrinsically linked with consistency/continuity.

If you think Carlton's draw was anything but favourable then you need to take the blue tinted goggles off for a minute.

Great post.

They don't understand the simple concept that is - the more games you lose, the more likely it is that your opponents make the finals (particularly double up opponents). Conversely, the more games you win, the less likely it is that your opponents make the Top 8 (particularly double up opponents).

It really is basic mathematics.

 

[#gosaintas]

Crazy Vossy will keep them out of the 8. It should be impossible with that list but he'll manage it.

 

[Pistol Night]

Crazy Vossy will keep them out of the 8. It should be impossible with that list but he'll manage it.

The mans a genius. Inside the 8 all year and only have to get over the biggest chokers in history in round 23 to make the finals. Still found a way to miss

 

[Zephyr Effekt]

Great post.

They don't understand the simple concept that is - the more games you lose, the more likely it is that your opponents make the finals (particularly double up opponents). Conversely, the more games you win, the less likely it is that your opponents make the Top 8 (particularly double up opponents).

It really is basic mathematics.

You need to go beyond that to get a better understanding because in isolation it provides little context when ranking draws.

 

[Kreuuuzeurns]

You need to go beyond that to get a better understanding because in isolation it provides little context when ranking draws.

Can you do the same analysis for the other 17 clubs before making claims?

 

[Fadge]

You need to go beyond that to get a better understanding because in isolation it provides little context when ranking draws.

Yep, and it's all been said before.

The Carlton folk just don't want to swallow it, because it conflicts with their narrative.

 

[Fadge]

Can you do the same analysis for the other 17 clubs before making claims?

Others don't care enough about it to waste their time doing so.

The variations between the toughest and easiest draws will always be negligible - swings and roundabouts.

 

[Pistol Night]

Others don't care enough about it to waste their time doing so.

The variations between the toughest and easiest draws will always be negligible - swings and roundabouts.

If you need to delve this deeply into analysis to find out whether you're s**t or not chances are you're s**t.

 

[JyeDye]

If you need to delve this deeply into analysis to find out whether you're s**t or not chances are you're s**t.

Whenever I start seeing people do analysis on the draws I am honestly amazed at how many people actually give a s**t.

 

[Fadge]

Whenever I start seeing people do analysis on the draws I am honestly amazed at how many people actually give a s**t.

It fuels the beliefs of those who can't think critically and provides an excuse for their club's mediocrity.

 

[Kreuuuzeurns]

Others don't care enough about it to waste their time doing so.

The variations between the toughest and easiest draws will always be negligible - swings and roundabouts.

There’s no point in doing such deep analysis on one club if you’re not going to do similar for other clubs.

Will take it as poor trolling until I see otherwise.

 

[Zephyr Effekt]

Yep, and it's all been said before.

The Carlton folk just don't want to swallow it, because it conflicts with their narrative.

Nobody's saying they're a bad team either.

I get that failing to make finals and take advantage of a draw that opened up like Moses had just parted the seas might be a bitter pill to swallow but the pushback on anything labelling thier draw as favourable is bemusing.

Maybe their injury list balanced out how favourable the draw was at the end of the day as the analysis didn't place any weighting on injuries.

 

[Pistol Night]

There’s no point in doing such deep analysis on one club if you’re not going to do similar for other clubs.

Will take it as poor trolling until I see otherwise.

Oh no