Place--Team--Gms--Pts--Pts/Gm 1.........LA......12.....21....1.75 2.........KC......12.....18.....1.5 2(tie)...CLB.....10.....15.....1.5 2(tie)...SJ.......10.....15.....1.5 5.........CHI.....11....16.....1.45 6.........DAL....10.....14.....1.4 7.........MET....10....13.....1.3 8.........COL....10.....11.....1.1 9.........DC......12....13.....1.08 10.......NE.......11.....9......0.82 Movers this week: San Jose up 4 places, Wizards up 3. Fire and Metros both down 3. Places 2-7 are remarkably tight. Parity rules.
This may be a stupid question, but since when does a single table ever go by points per game? Never would be the probable answer.. It goes by points and goal difference if two or more teams are tied, not points per game..
I think it's a good way to look at how the teams are doing, taking into account how many 'games in hand' they have. Maybe someone can change my mind but till then... good stuff, sachsen.
Next time put the teams in the relegation zone in italics or bold face or something so we can see who is going to get relegated in 6 months.
Hey this is just sachsen's way of looking at MLS teams in terms of their performance on a week by week basis. If you look back through similar threads he discussed why he doesn't and why he likes looking at this way. I agree with him, I think looking at the PPG is an intriguing way of doing it even if it's just for puproses of something else to discuss.
The main reason that you generally don't seem teams listed in PPG style like this is that assumes that the teams with games in hand will actually earn those points in order to deserve to be in that position once they catch up on their number of games. Even though some teams have played more games, they have actually earned those points, so they deserve to be listed higher in the standings. Ask Newcastle now if they think they should have been listed in 4th place for most of the last half of the season because they were 1 to 3 points behind Liverpool but had a game in hand. When it came time to play that game in hand, they lost and they finished 5th right where they had been for 2 months.
I like the idea of goal differential as a tie breaker. That's used the world over, so I think I'll incorporate it into the single table I've been putting together. So this week, instead of a three-way tie for 2nd, it works out to: 2. San Jose (GD: 4) 3. Kansas City (GD: 3) 4. Columbus (GD: 0) Sorry, have to disagree with this. The whole idea of having a "game in hand" is that you at least have the OPPORTUNITY to move ahead. Teams who have played more games don't have the opportunity. Let's say the MLS season is only 12 games long. Which would you rather be, DC United or Metrostars? They both have 13 points - but DC has already played 12 games while Metros have 2 more to go. (Of course this example is meaningless since 8 out of 10 teams make the playoffs, but that's another topic...) Anyway, it's all relative to me. This is just a means of comparison. I wouldn't want it to be the real single table, if MLS had one. Oh, and thanks to those who are leaving me nice positive reps from this thread - I appreciate it.
My apologies, I wasn't aware of the evolution of your thinking in terms of how a team is doing week to week.. I was just going on what is used the world over.. The points per game method is interesting to see but it loses it's luster when you consider the smallness of the league.. That's why games in hand isn't that big of a deal to me.. For example, let's say United is finished with their season of 30 games and has 40 pts and a -2 GD.. The Metros and Columbus both have a game in hand, yet it is against each other while they both sit at 38 points.. While it's good that both Columbus and the Metros have that game in hand, having more points to me is the best position to be in, especially in this case because United is garaunteed to finish ahead of one of those two teams and could finish ahead of both of them if a tie comes about.. Therefore, this early in the season it's better to have the games in hand, yet having the points already in the bank does have it's advantages as well.. When you are the trailing team with games in hand, you still have to get the wins and it's not easy to do in MLS with parity running rampant..
LOL! I LOVE that! DAMN the parity!!!!! If only we could get parity to die in a fire. Ive been bringing this whole parity thing, and how I dont think its necessarily the best thing for the league, up for a while now. Some ways yes its great.. some ... not at all. Ok.. sorry.. thats a whole different thread really. That line just made me laugh though.. I loved it! Sachsen: I like your single tables and the PPG. I agree it shows more clearly how teams are doing, and gives another angle to look at and discuss. Just for my own kicks, I took your table and did it based on points alone, with GD being the tie breakers when applicable. Place--Team--Gms--Pts....GD 1.........LA......12.....21.... +7 2.........KC......12.....18.... +3 3.........CHI.....11....16..... +3 4.........SJ.......10.....15.... +4 5.........CLB.....10.....15...... 0 6.........DAL....10.....14..... -1 7.........MET....10....13..... -3 8.........DC......12....13..... -5 9.........CO......10.....11.... -2 10........NE.......11.....9..... -6 The signifigant difference is Chi. They move up to 3rd. Clb and SJ swap spots, as do DC and CO. Sorry, just wanted to see it laid out that way for myself and thought I would share.
I believe the Galaxy had the least (or second to least) goals scored during the 2003 season. What a difference a year and a trade or two makes.
They also had one of the best goals against records. That has changed, too, but it makes them more fun to watch!
Bear in mind that by having a much more attack minded game plan, they expose themselves to counterattacks. Plus, w/ Ruiz and Kiro out for about 5 games, despite the fact that Ngwenya and Moreno have proven potent offensively, their ability to retain possession is lower than the 2 big guys, which further leaves them vulnerable to counters. This is how KC scored its 2nd goal on the 5th...
Gotta take the bitter with the sweet, fellow fans. I said back in 2003 that I would prefer to watch a team capable of 4-2 or 5-3 games (and accept the inevitable losses that come with that type of attacking mentality) over 1-0, 0-0, 0-1 snoozers any day of the week. So far, that belief has been justified by what I've witnessed this season.