Chris McDermott Is A Fool!!!

[degruch]

Those SA wankers don't know that anything exists beyond the outer suburbs of Adelaide, that quaint country town caught in a 1940's timewarp that is only famous for its bizarre gothic sex crimes and mass murders.

And then there are the smart ones that got out like myself.

...and that's how I got my job, on the Gothic Sex Crimes Commission.

Speaking of Adelaide, we play there twice in the first five rounds of 2009. It could be a defining venue for us early on this season.

Awesome! I'll be there, supporting the team and look at suspects...should be a busy day.

[WayneJudson42]

I'm still amazed that people are still moronic enough to look at ladder positions in order to assess whether a team improved or not - or will improve the following year.

Another example of a stupid and hostile post.

You don't have to read it. And even further, you're under no obligation to respond if you don't like it.

Correct and correct again.

[PJ]

The only relevance is obviously during the year.

Once that year has passed, it holds no relevance bar your pick in the draft.

So if St.Kilda were to drop out of the 8 you would consider this irrelevant and would not be one of the ones citing this as evidence of a drop in their ststus?

Of course all the coaches and players will be saying it means nothing come round 1. But how often will it be brought up as a reference point for improvement/dropping off the pace.

C'mon Rog give us a little bit of something worthwhile to argue with - not just your attempts at belittlement by name calling (seen as a sign of insecurity and immaturity).

[WayneJudson42]

The only relevance is obviously during the year.

Once that year has passed, it holds no relevance bar your pick in the draft.

So if St.Kilda were to drop out of the 8 you would consider this irrelevant and would not be one of the ones citing this as evidence of a drop in their ststus?

Of course all the coaches and players will be saying it means nothing come round 1. But how often will it be brought up as a reference point for improvement/dropping off the pace.

C'mon Rog give us a little bit of something worthwhile to argue with - not just your attempts at belittlement by name calling (seen as a sign of insecurity and immaturity).

what he/she said.

[plugger66]

I am a bit with RF on this one. Ladder positions after the season IMO dont mean as much as total wins or % for the season when discussing how will go in the next season. We were one loss off eighth so unless we improve we could easily drop down the ladder a few positions where as if Geelong didnt improve they are still likely to finish top 2 as they had a commanding break on the rest of the teams.

As I have said before the only way we can improve is 2nd and 3rd year players and every side will think the same at this time of year. Lets just hope ours improve more than most.

[PJ]

I agree with your point about the difference between us and Geelong/hawthorn plugger66. The 2nd and 3rd tiers must step up and I offered an opinion as to why.

To suggest there is no room for improvement - RF's point, is negative speculation based on what appears to be a raging anti-current personal complex undermined by a massive superiority ego.

Unfortunately this perception is not backed by any valid argument - put simply his posts are ordinary.

[WayneJudson42]

I am a bit with RF on this one. Ladder positions after the season IMO dont mean as much as total wins or % for the season when discussing how will go in the next season. We were one loss off eighth so unless we improve we could easily drop down the ladder a few positions where as if Geelong didnt improve they are still likely to finish top 2 as they had a commanding break on the rest of the teams.

As I have said before the only way we can improve is 2nd and 3rd year players and every side will think the same at this time of year. Lets just hope ours improve more than most.

Agree. You also have to consider that going forward, there are no guarantees for teams such as the Cats and Hawks... given possible "outside" events which may occur.

Totally and purely subjective IMO.

[BAM! (shhhh)]

I am a bit with RF on this one. Ladder positions after the season IMO dont mean as much as total wins or % for the season when discussing how will go in the next season. We were one loss off eighth so unless we improve we could easily drop down the ladder a few positions where as if Geelong didnt improve they are still likely to finish top 2 as they had a commanding break on the rest of the teams.

As I have said before the only way we can improve is 2nd and 3rd year players and every side will think the same at this time of year. Lets just hope ours improve more than most.

If the goal is forecasting results, then I'm in total agreement that W/L is not the key indicator. However, I would very strongly argue that attempting to forecast the league's results is more intuition than science regardless of what indicators are taken into account.

In the states, they can often forecast baseball pretty well - because they play 162 games, batters will exceed 500 plate appearances, pitchers will throw over 1000 pitches, you can apply wighting to past results and play the averages. A lot of people have spent a lot of time determining key indicators this way.

The AFL is a 22 game season, with highly variable statistics that are difficult to correlate with winning. % is thrown off by downhill skiers (if you lose small to 7 other finalists, but pound the bottom 4, you'll have a relatively good %), High possession can strangle opposition - or can become over-possession.

For me, it's part of the fun of being a fan.

So when trying to guess next years results, I tend to try and figure out what a teams best stretch of games indicated, what their worst string indicated.

For St Kilda, under Ross Lyon over the last 2 years, the (season's) starts have been poor, the finishes good (though you could argue we left peaking too late last year, and were still finding our best in the Semi Final while Hawthorn was by that stage simply a team on a mission). I'd be saying for St Kilda, the key to a good finish would be a good start, where for teams below them, there are reasons for concern.

Adelaide overcame what was supposed to be a decline year, can they do it again? Sydney did likewise, same question. Collingwood (with the retirement of Burns) are a mystery - young, talented, could be anything, could easily slip. By %, North would have been 10th (they were sub 100). Of teams outside the 8, Cartlon and Richmond look the likely new entrants. I had Brisbane tipped for the 8 at the start of '08, but their worst is terrible, and I'll wait and see on Voss (his list management has bewildered me, but he's only the next Timmy Watson once he fulfils it - no way to know until the games start, but Leigh Mathews leaves big shoes to fill) before I give them the nod this time around. Port are similar to Collingwood in being hard to read - They're quick and skilled, but not exactly multi-dimensional in their approach.

Plenty of room for movement on the ladder next year, but plenty of scalps more likely than the Saints for a ladder drop - while we were part of a pack, we don't look set to decline (easier to justify an improvement if anything, though IMO that's optomistic), where others do. 2 clubs look sure to improve, but the Saints aren't the easiest target.

Though it is worth bearing in mind that we only qualified for finals very late, and top 4 in rd 22 before anyone gets too optomistic.

[rodgerfox]

What if you finish 16th, but lost 10 games by 1 point?
What if you finish 3rd, but won 10 games by a point?
What if you finish 14th, but lost your 10 best players for the season?
What if you finished 2nd, but did not have 1 injury for the entire year?

[PJ]

What if you finish 16th, but lost 10 games by 1 point?
What if you finish 3rd, but won 10 games by a point?
What if you finish 14th, but lost your 10 best players for the season?
What if you finished 2nd, but did not have 1 injury for the entire year?

Then that is as good as you are for that year. Anything else is pure speculation. Once a season is over it's over, end game.

You get your pass/fail mark from the masses

Prospects for the next year are a complete new ball ball game with any number of variables

change of players
change of coaches/more coaches
fitness levels
environmental factors (moorabbin/seaford)
individual development
coaching emphasis
change to personel for forward/defence/midfield setup
tinea problems

Ladder position for the previous year becomes a reflection on the collective club - a bench mark.

[rodgerfox]

What if you finish 16th, but lost 10 games by 1 point?
What if you finish 3rd, but won 10 games by a point?
What if you finish 14th, but lost your 10 best players for the season?
What if you finished 2nd, but did not have 1 injury for the entire year?

Then that is as good as you are for that year. Anything else is pure speculation. Once a season is over it's over, end game.

You get your pass/fail mark from the masses

Prospects for the next year are a complete new ball ball game with any number of variables

change of players
change of coaches/more coaches
fitness levels
environmental factors (moorabbin/seaford)
individual development
coaching emphasis
change to personel for forward/defence/midfield setup
tinea problems

Ladder position for the previous year becomes a reflection on the collective club - a bench mark.

I'm unsure what you're arguing PJ?

[PJ]

I'm still amazed that people are still moronic enough to look at ladder positions in order to assess whether a team improved or not - or will improve the following year.

Simply that you cannot dismiss ladder position and it's associated factors as an indicator for how a team has gone.

We can argue till the cows come home about every other factor but it's all subjective and even though the "morons" may wish to quote this. It is in fact a statistic.

All the media talk that we just "fell into fourth" pisses me off because they don't take into account that the saints actually worked "f**king hard" to get there and perhaps deserve a little credit for that.

Just because Nth, Ess and a few others tripped over their left testicle at the end of the season doesn't mean they will amount to anything next year. In fact quite the opposite - getting it happening at the right time of the year is everything.

St.Kilda on the other hand managed to get their act together, yea they failed the big ones but were clearly IMO better than what was below - take what you want out that (positive or negative?)

[rodgerfox]

I'm still amazed that people are still moronic enough to look at ladder positions in order to assess whether a team improved or not - or will improve the following year.

Simply that you cannot dismiss ladder position and it's associated factors as an indicator for how a team has gone.

I think you can.

Finishing above a team, does not mean you are a better than them.

We can argue till the cows come home about every other factor but it's all subjective and even though the "morons" may wish to quote this. It is in fact a statistic.

'Every other factor' is exactly what should be discussed. We are not better than Collingwood because we finished above them. We are better than them for 'other factors'.

All the media talk that we just "fell into fourth" pisses me off because they don't take into account that the saints actually worked "f**king hard" to get there and perhaps deserve a little credit for that.

We did fall into 4th. The only relevance if finishing 4th is that you get a double chance in the finals.
Outside of that, it simply means that for many other factors we ended up higher on the ladder than 12 teams below us.

Just because Nth, Ess and a few others tripped over their left testicle at the end of the season doesn't mean they will amount to anything next year. In fact quite the opposite - getting it happening at the right time of the year is everything.

Getting it happening isn't enough. What if every team gets it happening? Then what? It comes down to many other factors. What if you 'get it happening' but the fixture has you playing your last 4 games interstate? As opposed to another team who 'gets it happening' yet plays their last 4 games at the G?

What if you 'get it happening' but your best player does his knee?

We finished 4th, as opposed to as low as 9th because Jack Riewoldt's right leg couldn't kick 50m after 120 minutes of footy, and because some other Richmond bloke hit the post from 25m out.

St.Kilda on the other hand managed to get their act together, yea they failed the big ones but were clearly IMO better than what was below - take what you want out that (positive or negative?)

There's no way we were 'clearly' better than what was below.

If the ladder is the bible, then we were only about 3 or 4 goals better than those below us. Only 1 goal better than Adelaide!

If Ramanaskus slotted that goal under no pressure in the last quarter of the last game, we wouldn't have finished 4th.

It's almost like a photo finish in horse racing. The horse that wins gets the chocolates. The one that gets beaten by a whisker doesn't.

However when assessing the form for the next race, to look solely at the fact that one of them has a 1 next to it's name, and the other has a 2 - is crazy. There are many factors involved.

One of them may have had more weight. One of them may have travelled 3 wide the whole way. etc. etc.

The footy is the same.

[tweedaletomanning]

I'm still amazed that people are still moronic enough to look at ladder positions in order to assess whether a team improved or not - or will improve the following year.

Simply that you cannot dismiss ladder position and it's associated factors as an indicator for how a team has gone.

I think you can.

Finishing above a team, does not mean you are a better than them.

We can argue till the cows come home about every other factor but it's all subjective and even though the "morons" may wish to quote this. It is in fact a statistic.

'Every other factor' is exactly what should be discussed. We are not better than Collingwood because we finished above them. We are better than them for 'other factors'.

All the media talk that we just "fell into fourth" pisses me off because they don't take into account that the saints actually worked "f**king hard" to get there and perhaps deserve a little credit for that.

We did fall into 4th. The only relevance if finishing 4th is that you get a double chance in the finals.
Outside of that, it simply means that for many other factors we ended up higher on the ladder than 12 teams below us.

Just because Nth, Ess and a few others tripped over their left testicle at the end of the season doesn't mean they will amount to anything next year. In fact quite the opposite - getting it happening at the right time of the year is everything.

Getting it happening isn't enough. What if every team gets it happening? Then what? It comes down to many other factors. What if you 'get it happening' but the fixture has you playing your last 4 games interstate? As opposed to another team who 'gets it happening' yet plays their last 4 games at the G?

What if you 'get it happening' but your best player does his knee?

We finished 4th, as opposed to as low as 9th because Jack Riewoldt's right leg couldn't kick 50m after 120 minutes of footy, and because some other Richmond bloke hit the post from 25m out.

St.Kilda on the other hand managed to get their act together, yea they failed the big ones but were clearly IMO better than what was below - take what you want out that (positive or negative?)

There's no way we were 'clearly' better than what was below.

If the ladder is the bible, then we were only about 3 or 4 goals better than those below us. Only 1 goal better than Adelaide!

If Ramanaskus slotted that goal under no pressure in the last quarter of the last game, we wouldn't have finished 4th.

It's almost like a photo finish in horse racing. The horse that wins gets the chocolates. The one that gets beaten by a whisker doesn't.

However when assessing the form for the next race, to look solely at the fact that one of them has a 1 next to it's name, and the other has a 2 - is crazy. There are many factors involved.

One of them may have had more weight. One of them may have travelled 3 wide the whole way. etc. etc.

The footy is the same.

Good post!

Ladder positions mean squat when trying to assess how a team will go the following year.

Case and point: Port Adelaide finished 2nd in 2007...now that was a good indicator for 2008, wasn't it?

[BringBackMadDog]

Rodger you talk in circles, If you believe we will finish 13th Name the 8 sides that finished below us last year who will finish above us in 09 and why they will improve more than us. You talk a whole lot of negative crap but never provide any factual information to support your "logic". All you want to do is continually kick the club that you supposedly "support"

[rodgerfox]

Rodger you talk in circles, If you believe we will finish 13th Name the 8 sides that finished below us last year who will finish above us in 09 and why they will improve more than us. You talk a whole lot of negative crap but never provide any factual information to support your "logic". All you want to do is continually kick the club that you supposedly "support"

I didn't say we'd finish 13th.

[Mr Magic]

I don't think he's far off the mark to be honest.

rodger never stated McDermott was correct.

This is exactly what he posted initially in this thread when others were voicing their opinion towards McDermott's projected 2009 ladder.

Maybe he'd care to enlighten the rest of us as to what he means exactly by 'I don't think he's far off the mark to be honest' in relation to where he thinks we will finish on the ladder if not 13th?

[InkerSaint]

What if you finish 16th, but lost 10 games by 1 point?
What if you finish 3rd, but won 10 games by a point?
What if you finish 14th, but lost your 10 best players for the season?
What if you finished 2nd, but did not have 1 injury for the entire year?

You're over-analysing it.

There's the skill to win, and there's the will to win.

If you lose 10 games by a point, that's not just bad luck - there is a demotivator at work somewhere.

We finished 4th, as opposed to as low as 9th because Jack Riewoldt's right leg couldn't kick 50m after 120 minutes of footy, and because some other Richmond bloke hit the post from 25m out.

You can't take an event like this out of context - both team's mindsets would have been different as a result. How they each reacted to this is entirely up for grabs.

[degruch]

We finished 4th, as opposed to as low as 9th because Jack Riewoldt's right leg couldn't kick 50m after 120 minutes of footy, and because some other Richmond bloke hit the post from 25m out.

Yeah, you hear that a lot from Richmond supporters. I wonder how many thin excuses we have for only finishing 4th?

[HarveysDeciple]

We finished 4th, as opposed to as low as 9th because Jack Riewoldt's right leg couldn't kick 50m after 120 minutes of footy, and because some other Richmond bloke hit the post from 25m out.

yeah but we took our chances.....

Collingwood didn't take their chances to finish top 4, neither did the Roos, nor the Crows....tiges didn't take their chances for 8, nor did Brisbane...

we stood up when we had too, won the games we needed too and finished 4th...

deserved it, and were good enough to do so. Didn't fluke anything...

we were a long way from a flag that is for sure, a long long way, but we deserved to finish 4th.

[saint66au]

We finished 4th, as opposed to as low as 9th because Jack Riewoldt's right leg couldn't kick 50m after 120 minutes of footy, and because some other Richmond bloke hit the post from 25m out.

yeah but we took our chances.....

Collingwood didn't take their chances to finish top 4, neither did the Roos, nor the Crows....tiges didn't take their chances for 8, nor did Brisbane...

we stood up when we had too, won the games we needed too and finished 4th...

deserved it, and were good enough to do so. Didn't fluke anything...

we were a long way from a flag that is for sure, a long long way, but we deserved to finish 4th.

Exactly.

We finsihed 4th for whole bunch of reasons...but Rodg of course chooses the one that brings the least amount of credit to St Kilda..as is his want.

Still waiting on your reasons why you think we'll be around 13th in 09...or are you too busy smirking at those with any shred of positivity?

[rodgerfox]

We finished 4th, as opposed to as low as 9th because Jack Riewoldt's right leg couldn't kick 50m after 120 minutes of footy, and because some other Richmond bloke hit the post from 25m out.

yeah but we took our chances.....

Collingwood didn't take their chances to finish top 4, neither did the Roos, nor the Crows....tiges didn't take their chances for 8, nor did Brisbane...

we stood up when we had too, won the games we needed too and finished 4th...

deserved it, and were good enough to do so. Didn't fluke anything...

we were a long way from a flag that is for sure, a long long way, but we deserved to finish 4th.

We finished 4th. That's a fact. We finished 4th becuase at the end of the H&A season we were higher on the ladder, based on games won and % than 12 other teams.

No one is disputing that.


What's I'm disputing, is the notion that it means shiit when assessing where we actually stand in terms of who we're better than, and who we will be better than this year.

As I said earlier in the horse racing analogy. The horse that wins by a nose deserves to win. It took it's chances.

However, it doesn't always mean it is better than the horse it beat by a nose. Many factors could have contributed to it winning on that day.

So when looking ahead, to use the finishing position only as gauge is foolish.

[HarveysDeciple]

We finished 4th, as opposed to as low as 9th because Jack Riewoldt's right leg couldn't kick 50m after 120 minutes of footy, and because some other Richmond bloke hit the post from 25m out.

yeah but we took our chances.....

Collingwood didn't take their chances to finish top 4, neither did the Roos, nor the Crows....tiges didn't take their chances for 8, nor did Brisbane...

we stood up when we had too, won the games we needed too and finished 4th...

deserved it, and were good enough to do so. Didn't fluke anything...

we were a long way from a flag that is for sure, a long long way, but we deserved to finish 4th.

We finished 4th. That's a fact. We finished 4th becuase at the end of the H&A season we were higher on the ladder, based on games won and % than 12 other teams.

No one is disputing that.


What's I'm disputing, is the notion that it means shiit when assessing where we actually stand in terms of who we're better than, and who we will be better than this year.

As I said earlier in the horse racing analogy. The horse that wins by a nose deserves to win. It took it's chances.

However, it doesn't always mean it is better than the horse it beat by a nose. Many factors could have contributed to it winning on that day.

So when looking ahead, to use the finishing position only as gauge is foolish.

agree with most of that...the horse racing analogy is a good won...

But ladder positions show what the side is capable of in a given situation....positives and negatives can be drawn accordingly...not everything went right for us in 09, but a lot did.

I am curious though.....do you think it is accurate to suggest we will finish 13th? if so why?

[rodgerfox]

I am curious though.....do you think it is accurate to suggest we will finish 13th? if so why?

I think predicting ladder positions (based on what I've talked about throughout this thread) is the biggest exercise in futility that you could possibly find.

I think it's fair to say we will finish in the bottom 8 of the comp, and most likely not the bottom 4.

Which exact ladder position though, will depend on a thousand things.

[saint66au]

I am curious though.....do you think it is accurate to suggest we will finish 13th? if so why?

I think predicting ladder positions (based on what I've talked about throughout this thread) is the biggest exercise in futility that you could possibly find.

I think it's fair to say we will finish in the bottom 8 of the comp, and most likely not the bottom 4.

Which exact ladder position though, will depend on a thousand things.

So what did actually led you to draw these conclusions? Do you think we will tread water, to be overtaken by 4-8 other sides.....or do you really think we will play worse in 09 than we did in 08 and be our own downfall? Or a combination of the two?