Survive if we convert 1-in-3 draws into wins?

[Ken Tram]

It seems that we have a chance of surviving if we can win 1-in-3 of the games that we have been drawing, and turn 1-in-4 of our losses into draws. I expected the conversion rate I be higher!

If you think we could have won 3 of those 9 draws (1-in-3) - and that we can maintain that level of performance until the end of the season - then we may have a good chance of surviving. 

I quite liked the idea of working out what conversion rates (draws into wins, and losses into draws) would have been needed from the first part of the season in order for us to achieve the form that we will need for the rest of the season. I think that it makes it easier to see the scope of the current squad to achieve the necessary uplift by considering the 9 draws and what would have been needed to be uplifted to lead to 3 of them being converted into victories - and what might be needed to sustain this uplift for the rest of the season.

I was also surprised that we may only need to convert 1-in-3 of the draws into wins! That surprised me. 

Anyway, let me know if you found it interesting! The tables with the points calculations follow below! 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Final Table - if current form continues
If our current form continued, then on average, we would expect to win 6, draw 14, and lose 8 more games.

P     W     D      L      Pts
18    4      9       5      21
28    6     14      8      32               .
46   10    23    13      53 - 21 = 32

 

Conversions (Uplift)
1-in-3 draws into wins (5 out of 14)
1-in-4 losses into draws (2 out of 8)

P     W     D      L   
28    6    14      8    
            /  \     /   \
28   6+5   9+2    6   

 

Final Table - with Uplift

P     W     D      L      Pts
18    4      9       5      21
28   11    11      6      44               .
46   15    20    11      65 - 21 = 44

 

 

44 points

The target of 44 points may be low, but it has been enough in 3 of the past 4 seasons (although this is also 3 out of the past 7 seasons). From 2014/15, survivors have secured the following points: 46, 49, 51, 43, 44, 49 & 44 points.

If we are going to survive, I think that we have to assume that it will be one of those 44-point seasons?

It would be too much pressure to aim for 51 points.

Maybe it is possible to look at historical league table standings in November, and correlate them to how many points were needed to survive, to indicate what might be a realistic points target for survival?

If we are on track, teams around us may bottle it! They will see a 65-point team chasing down a 44-point team! (As we know, teams can get the wobbles towards the end of the season!)

Important note: I cannot believe that you have read down to the end! All of these comments assume that we will not have our post-Christmas slump! Come to think of it, isn't it nice to know that it is impossible for us to slip down the table after Christmas this year!

[Ken Tram]

Sadly ... it seems that Wayne was too busy to read this post! ?

He was talking of the need to win games, and change the shape to go for the win.

The basis of my sums was that Derby can carry on playing the same way with minor tweaks. And if that is the case, drawing against the top of the league is fine.

Don't lambast me - I know nothing about football compared with Rooney! And I may have misunderstood what I heard Rooney say. It's just that I worry about the mindset that the team must win games. It feels risky.

To me, the message is that the team can continue to play as they have been playing -  and that working on and practising discrete elements of performance can be enough -rather than making big changes. Even just embedding what they have been working on.

That way, the message to the team is that they can do it - rather than that the team and structure as it is cannot do it

Ultimately, the odds are against us! But the sums above show that it is doable.

Converting 1 in 3 of the games that we have been drawing is doable! And looking at our games so far - I think we can see 1 in 3 of the draws that we could have won without major changes.

[Ken Tram]

Sorry for the long posts. To summarise ...

If we covert 1-in-3 of the games that we have been drawing into wins, and 1-in-4 of the losses into draws, then we could survive!

Am I correct to think that our squad was capable of converting 1-in-3 of our draws into wins?

If so, could we continue to play the same way - and tweak and practise discrete elements of performance - rather than changing structures "because we need to go for wins"?

[Leeds Ram]

when was the last time a team survived a 19 point deficit in december to stay up? Even without the 21 points deduction we'd be looking over our shoulders at the trap door as it is rather than looking at the playoffs. The fact is we need to pick up 43 points from 26 games and over the course of a season that equates to 74 points. Does anyone look at our team and think it's capable of that? Being honest even without the points deductions I think we'd be struggling to keep our heads above water. The deductions just guarantee we're dead and buried this year. Nothing from our past form to our XG indicates we're going to do it or really even come close no matter how much we try to find a rationale for hope.  

[The Scarlet Pimpernel]

13 hours ago, Leeds Ram said:

when was the last time a team survived a 19 point deficit in december to stay up? Even without the 21 points deduction we'd be looking over our shoulders at the trap door as it is rather than looking at the playoffs. The fact is we need to pick up 43 points from 26 games and over the course of a season that equates to 74 points. Does anyone look at our team and think it's capable of that? Being honest even without the points deductions I think we'd be struggling to keep our heads above water. The deductions just guarantee we're dead and buried this year. Nothing from our past form to our XG indicates we're going to do it or really even come close no matter how much we try to find a rationale for hope.  

We all know this. Thing is I start each game hoping for a win. 

[I know nuffin]

12 minutes ago, The Scarlet Pimpernel said:

We all know this. Thing is I start each game hoping for a win. 

Quite simple somehow need to get a docent striker in as what we have quite simply is not good enough. CKM to me is one of the few players who has not bought into what Rooney wants. Think he was on about 17 minutes including added time last money and managed 2 touches and 2 passes. That kind of involvement isn't going to get us the wins we need.

[May Contain Nuts]

15 hours ago, Ken Tram said:

Sadly ... it seems that Wayne was too busy to read this post! ?

He was talking of the need to win games, and change the shape to go for the win.

The basis of my sums was that Derby can carry on playing the same way with minor tweaks. And if that is the case, drawing against the top of the league is fine.

Don't lambast me - I know nothing about football compared with Rooney! And I may have misunderstood what I heard Rooney say. It's just that I worry about the mindset that the team must win games. It feels risky.

To me, the message is that the team can continue to play as they have been playing -  and that working on and practising discrete elements of performance can be enough -rather than making big changes. Even just embedding what they have been working on.

That way, the message to the team is that they can do it - rather than that the team and structure as it is cannot do it

Ultimately, the odds are against us! But the sums above show that it is doable.

Converting 1 in 3 of the games that we have been drawing is doable! And looking at our games so far - I think we can see 1 in 3 of the draws that we could have won without major changes.

I don't think you've misunderstood Rooney

He's not going to go gung-ho and ignore the defence but if we're in a drawing position and the game is coming to its end, he is going to take a few gambles if he thinks we're capable of doing what you've suggested.

We're very much stuck between a rock and and hard place, we can't afford to chuck away points but we can't be too conservative and settle for a draw all the time - the key is knowing when to stick and when to twist. (Please note that other cliches are available)

The problem with this whole idea is that our main habit seems to be converting 3 points into 1, or 0, and very rarely the other way round.

It also feels like every time Rooney does opt for more attacking subs towards the end of games that those are the points we chuck away, maybe it's purely coincidental, maybe it's poor game management, maybe it's just the reality of a limited squad.

It certainly wasn't a wise move to bring Ebosele AND Jozwiak on against QPR while Richard Stearman was once again sat on his arse on the bench (despite his introduction late on in games having coincided with us picking up a few points), but then we may still have lost if he had come on anyway - the point is really just that it was indicative of Rooney's approach.

Edited December 3, 2021 by Coconut's Beard

[Ken Tram]

On 02/12/2021 at 19:13, Leeds Ram said:

when was the last time a team survived a 19 point deficit in december to stay up? Even without the 21 points deduction we'd be looking over our shoulders at the trap door as it is rather than looking at the playoffs. The fact is we need to pick up 43 points from 26 games and over the course of a season that equates to 74 points. Does anyone look at our team and think it's capable of that? Being honest even without the points deductions I think we'd be struggling to keep our heads above water. The deductions just guarantee we're dead and buried this year. Nothing from our past form to our XG indicates we're going to do it or really even come close no matter how much we try to find a rationale for hope.  

I agree with you, that it seems very unlikely!

But, converting 1 in 3 draws into wins doesn't seem impossible, looking back at our draws so far.

PS. I'm not a psychologist, but having hope seems vital. Thinking about being a 76 point team makes it seem hard. Thinking about having to convert 1 in 3 draws into wins seems achievable.

[Ken Tram]

On 03/12/2021 at 09:40, Coconut's Beard said:

I don't think you've misunderstood Rooney

He's not going to go gung-ho and ignore the defence but if we're in a drawing position and the game is coming to its end, he is going to take a few gambles if he thinks we're capable of doing what you've suggested.

We're very much stuck between a rock and and hard place, we can't afford to chuck away points but we can't be too conservative and settle for a draw all the time - the key is knowing when to stick and when to twist. (Please note that other cliches are available)

The problem with this whole idea is that our main habit seems to be converting 3 points into 1, or 0, and very rarely the other way round.

It also feels like every time Rooney does opt for more attacking subs towards the end of games that those are the points we chuck away, maybe it's purely coincidental, maybe it's poor game management, maybe it's just the reality of a limited squad.

It certainly wasn't a wise move to bring Ebosele AND Jozwiak on against QPR while Richard Stearman was once again sat on his arse on the bench (despite his introduction late on in games having coincided with us picking up a few points), but then we may still have lost if he had come on anyway - the point is really just that it was indicative of Rooney's approach.

This is exactly my point!

Don't make changes at the end to nick 3 points! The chance if turning 1 point into 0 is too high.

Keep on playing the way that we have been.

Weneed to get the extra goals from improving aspects of our current game, rather than changing formation to try to nick wins.

I think ...

[Dean (hick) Saunders]

On 02/12/2021 at 19:13, Leeds Ram said:

when was the last time a team survived a 19 point deficit in december to stay up? Even without the 21 points deduction we'd be looking over our shoulders at the trap door as it is rather than looking at the playoffs. The fact is we need to pick up 43 points from 26 games and over the course of a season that equates to 74 points. Does anyone look at our team and think it's capable of that? Being honest even without the points deductions I think we'd be struggling to keep our heads above water. The deductions just guarantee we're dead and buried this year. Nothing from our past form to our XG indicates we're going to do it or really even come close no matter how much we try to find a rationale for hope.  

I agree. I think the extra 9 probably won’t make any difference in the end.

[BondJovi]

2 hours ago, Ken Tram said:

This is exactly my point!

Don't make changes at the end to nick 3 points! The chance if turning 1 point into 0 is too high.

Keep on playing the way that we have been.

Weneed to get the extra goals from improving aspects of our current game, rather than changing formation to try to nick wins.

I think ...

The plan needs to be win the game when we are on top. Sadly it is something we have struggled to do since the start of last season. Too many times our good spells in games either see us 1-0 up or still 0-0 and this tends be in the first half. Momentum then changes in the second half and we struggle to turn it around., for whatever reason. 

We do need to win matches, so we have to take more gambles. But if we are to try and win the game, changes have to be made sooner.

[Leeds Ram]

On 03/12/2021 at 09:07, The Scarlet Pimpernel said:

We all know this. Thing is I start each game hoping for a win. 

I don't think people do all know this and I hope for wins too but that doesn't change the reality. 

[Leeds Ram]

4 hours ago, Ken Tram said:

I agree with you, that it seems very unlikely!

But, converting 1 in 3 draws into wins doesn't seem impossible, looking back at our draws so far.

PS. I'm not a psychologist, but having hope seems vital. Thinking about being a 76 point team makes it seem hard. Thinking about having to convert 1 in 3 draws into wins seems achievable.

It's not only converting draws into wins it's keeping our draws and avoiding defeats too. So you're missing out an element. Psychology plays a part in sports but it's often overplayed for me especially in terms of crowd psychology. 

[Ken Tram]

10 hours ago, BondJovi said:

The plan needs to be win the game when we are on top. Sadly it is something we have struggled to do since the start of last season. Too many times our good spells in games either see us 1-0 up or still 0-0 and this tends be in the first half. Momentum then changes in the second half and we struggle to turn it around., for whatever reason. 

We do need to win matches, so we have to take more gambles. But if we are to try and win the game, changes have to be made sooner.

Thanks. You might be right. We do need to convert some draws into wins!

I am not opposed to using more than one systems during different parts of a game. And, I don't mind us going for wins. My concern is when it sounds similar to when managers say, "This is a must-win match." 

But, I am not sure about taking more gambles ... which I have tried to explain below (there will be a time for that as the number of points we get become tougher ... but I do not think that we are this point yet).

We are going to struggle. But, our team have been capable of winning more games than they have, with just a few tweaks (I think). So, it is risky to change a team that has been managing to do that.

If we tell the players that they must win every game - which is different to saying that we aim to win every game - then how do they feel when they lose. Do they then think that it is impossible to survive. And if they think it is impossible, how do we get the best from them? 

Football is not like basketball, with 100 points in a match. Across the country, there will be no score draws. So, the goals come from a moment of skill or luck. To me, the most important thing is to maintain a system that has been working quite well for us. And focus on tweaking the use of skill that gives us chances. By changing the system too much, away from what the players are most comfortable using, we are shifting the focus from winning through skill towards winning through luck. 

 

[Ken Tram]

8 hours ago, Leeds Ram said:

It's not only converting draws into wins it's keeping our draws and avoiding defeats too. So you're missing out an element. Psychology plays a part in sports but it's often overplayed for me especially in terms of crowd psychology. 

You are not wrong. I think that the moments that get the crowd roaring contribute to the effectiveness of a team!

When the conversion rate was 1-in-3 draws into wins, people were saying, "We need to win nearly every match," and, "We cannot get enough points." So, I was trying to emphasise that phrasing it differently made it seem more achievable.

When it comes to keeping draws, avoiding losses, and winning more - we have the team that we have - so what is the best way to get more wins. We have a good team! It is capable of beating any other team in the league. Therefore, the greatest chances of success must lie in focusing on goals coming from skill, and defending coming from skill, rather than luck.

We could do more of the "last 10-minute" style where teams throw everything forward, and increase the chance of lucky moments, but at the same time making it more likely to give away a goal. Or do we play in the way that we have been doing, and work on skills in training to turn the chances that we are creating into more goals?

I hope that I did not misunderstand your point!

[Asanovic70]

It's the hope that kills you, and there are a minority of fans on the site whose unsentimental way of looking at things in a detached manner (our finances, our league situation) is not making friends. It probably is best to keep one's counsel and not aggravate people even more in a febrile situation, but the more pragmatic side of me accepts the bracing truth of their analysis, hard as it is to take.

 I think @Leeds Ram  articulated it best. Browsing wikipedia, Bournemouth & Rotherham both received 17pt deductions in 2008-09, both of them staying up. It was also the season when Luton received 30. So whilst they were both punished severely, they did at least have the incentive of knowing they were 13pts better off than another side & that it was essentially a case of trying to overhaul one more team in a division with only two relegation spots (or battling each other to survive). FWIW, I think we could overhaul Barnsley, but not two other sides.

 

Edited December 5, 2021 by Asanovic70

[Leeds Ram]

On 05/12/2021 at 00:52, Ken Tram said:

You are not wrong. I think that the moments that get the crowd roaring contribute to the effectiveness of a team!

When the conversion rate was 1-in-3 draws into wins, people were saying, "We need to win nearly every match," and, "We cannot get enough points." So, I was trying to emphasise that phrasing it differently made it seem more achievable.

When it comes to keeping draws, avoiding losses, and winning more - we have the team that we have - so what is the best way to get more wins. We have a good team! It is capable of beating any other team in the league. Therefore, the greatest chances of success must lie in focusing on goals coming from skill, and defending coming from skill, rather than luck.

We could do more of the "last 10-minute" style where teams throw everything forward, and increase the chance of lucky moments, but at the same time making it more likely to give away a goal. Or do we play in the way that we have been doing, and work on skills in training to turn the chances that we are creating into more goals?

I hope that I did not misunderstand your point!

Reframing may make it 'seem' more achievable to some but in my head it doesn't. Not only do we need to win a lot more games we need to keep avoiding defeat which is one hell of a task. The evidence suggests we don't have a good team at this level though. It says we lack quality to consistently produce the goods and would be looking at relegation. I honestly don't understand this 'we're a good team' view as nothing in points, XG or past form makes this claim viable. It's our own bias that is blinding us. It's a below average championship team that's got a 21 point deduction. 

[Ken Tram]

I

6 hours ago, Leeds Ram said:

Reframing may make it 'seem' more achievable to some but in my head it doesn't. Not only do we need to win a lot more games we need to keep avoiding defeat which is one hell of a task. The evidence suggests we don't have a good team at this level though. It says we lack quality to consistently produce the goods and would be looking at relegation. I honestly don't understand this 'we're a good team' view as nothing in points, XG or past form makes this claim viable. It's our own bias that is blinding us. It's a below average championship team that's got a 21 point deduction. 

Thanks for explaining! I fear that the sums in the following posts will reinforce your view! And, I never understand what XG is. (The "good team" stuff is probably a mixture of blind faith and because ... umm .... because we do have a good team! lol!  

[Ken Tram]

Post Bournemouth (Played 18)

Target Team - Cardiff City
P:18 W:05 D:03 L:10 = 18 Pts (After 18 played)
P:46 W:13 D:08 L:25 = 47 Pts (Final: on current form)

Survival Target:
47 Pts (1.68 per game)
Equivalent form:
Coventry City (6th)

Derby County
P:18 W:04 D:09 L:05 = 21-21 = 00 Pts (After 18 played)
P:46 W:10 D:23 L:13 = 53-21 = 32 Pts (Final: on current form)
P:46 W:15 D:23 L:08 = 68-21 = 47 Pts (Final: with conversions*)

* Draws into wins: 1 in 2.8 (36% of games we've been drawing)
* Losses into draws: 1 in 2.6 (38% of games we've been losing)

[Ken Tram]

Post Fulham (Played 19)

Target Team - Hull City
P:19 W:05 D:03 L:11 = 18 Pts (After 19 played)
P:46 W:12 D:07 L:27 = 43 Pts (Final: on current form)

Survival Target:
43 Pts (1.56 per game)
Equivalent form:
Blackburn Rovers (7th)

Derby County
P:19 W:04 D:10 L:05 = 22-21 = 01 Pts (After 19 played)
P:46 W:10 D:24 L:12 = 54-21 = 33 Pts (Final: on current form)
P:46 W:14 D:22 L:10 = 64-21 = 43 Pts (Final: with conversions*)

* Draws into wins: 1 in 3.5 (29% of games we've been drawing)
* Losses into draws: 1 in 6 (17% of games we've been losing)