The Next Six Games

[Ian Royal]

Swansea (H) L
Bristol City (A) W
Burnley (A) D
Doncaster (H) W
QPR (A) D
Cardiff (H) L

Hmmm only 8 points. Still 24 points after 15 games isn't too shabby.

[Maguire]

WLLWWD so 10pts from those 6 which I think would be a very respectable return

So 11 in the end (I had Millwall down as a loss). Don't think anybody can complain about that. Good job.

[Snowball]

Well the six games up to Gylfi leaving, (two against lower-league opposition), versus six games since

P6 W2 D3 L1 9-8 07 POINTS
P6 W3 D2 L1 9-4 11 POINTS


Scored the same number of goals, conceded four less. So are we missing Gylfi?

Did actually Gylfi play in those two games against lower-league opposition then?
If you had a point to make with those stats it's beyond me.

No he didn't, and I said so at the beginning of this thread. Take the four games he DID play in, then...

P4 W1 D2 L1 5-5 05 Points @ 1.25 points per game, 0/4 CLEAN SHEETS = "57.50 Point Season" WITH Gylfi
P6 W3 D2 L1 9-4 11 Points @ 1.83 points per game, 3/6 CLEAN SHEETS = "84.33 Point Season" WITHOUT Gylfi

Scored 1.5 goals per game without Gylfi versus 1.25 goals per game with Gylfi

Conceded .67 goals per game without Gylfi versus conceded 1.25 goals per game with Gylfi

[Platypuss]

So why tag those stats with even a mention of Gylfi? Bare stats are fine - but implying causation is junior school.

Try the stats with and without Williams. I reckon they'd be about as meaningful as your with/without Gylfi ones.

[Philly Flyer]

Swansea (H) W
Bristol City (A) W
Burnley (A) D
Doncaster (H) W
QPR (A) D
Cardiff (H) D

12 points again (and I'll take 11 as per the previous 6). We might slip up against Swansea or Doncaster but I reckon we could also nick a win at Loftus Road. Really looking forward to Brizzle away. Hopefully as good as November 2008. The game on 13/11 vs Norwich will be a top 3 or 4 contest.

[Snowball]

So why tag those stats with even a mention of Gylfi? Bare stats are fine - but implying causation is junior school.

BECAUSE the argument was, simply. "How well will we do in the next 6 games?" (v the first six games)

The argument was raised because a fair few were saying we were "finished" because Gylfi had gone.

NOTE, YOU DID NOT COMPLAIN AT THE TOP OF THIS THREAD.

I was arguing that we were NOT finished, that the defence would improve (IT HAS)
and that the goals would be replaced by others (THEY HAVE BEEN.)






Try the stats with and without Williams. I reckon they'd be about as meaningful as your with/without Gylfi ones.

God, you're "easy". Williams is OUT because HARTE is IN.

And Harte is IN because we had money released by the sale of Gylfi.

And of course, Zurab is in, too, because we had money released by the sale of Gylfi

And Zurab has played two, won 1, drawn 1...


Hmmm, next question?

[leww_rfc]

DWWDDL

[Mike Hunt]

Swansea (H) W
Bristol City (A) W
Burnley (A) L
Doncaster (H) W
QPR (A) L
Cardiff (H) D

10 points.

[brendywendy]

Swansea (H) W
Bristol City (A) W
Burnley (A) D
Doncaster (H) W
QPR (A) D
Cardiff (H) D

12 points

[Snowball]

Can't see it, but it will be a dream six games if we manage to avoid defeats at Burnley and QPR, and home to Cardiff

If we DO get W3 D3 from these six, then we will seriously be in the running for an automatic promotion

[Platypuss]

Snowball, you're confus(ed/ing) and quote like a pre-schooler.

Are you saying that we aren't missing Gylfi the player or Glylfi the pot of cash? You started with inferring the former, but now you seem to be talking about the latter.

Williams was dropped for Cummings for the Leicester game and hasn't started since. Armstrong is now fit and would also have replaced Williams without the need for Harte or any of the Gylfi money.

You obviously enjoy creating stats that suit your "argument" but appear to be shying away from doing the with/without WIlliams. What do the bare stats say?

[Snowball]

Snowball, you're confus(ed/ing) and quote like a pre-schooler.

Are you saying that we aren't missing Gylfi the player or Glylfi the pot of cash? You started with inferring the former, but now you seem to be talking about the latter.
Williams was dropped for Cummings for the Leicester game and hasn't started since. Armstrong is now fit and would also have replaced Williams without the need for Harte or any of the Gylfi money.
You obviously enjoy creating stats that suit your "argument" but appear to be shying away from doing the with/without WIlliams. What do the bare stats say?

We are not missing Gylfi, the player. We are benefitting from the cash raised.

Looking at this season:

(a) In terms of attack we are not missing Gylfi the player (so far). We are scoring MORE goals per game (and against tougher opposition.)

(b) In terms of defence, we are not missing Gylfi the player (so far). We are conceding a lot less goals and have kept 3/6 clean-sheets.

(c) In terms of overall goal-difference we are not (so far) missing Gylfi the player. See (a) and (b)

(d) In terms of scoring from free-kicks and penalties we are not (so far) missing Gylfi the player. In these six games Harte and Long have scored pens, Harte a free-kick.

(e) In terms of a war-chest, we are better off now that Gylfi is gone. we have Harte and Zurab, and 50% clean sheets. (3 from 6)

(f) In terms of league position we are not missing Gylfi (so far). 13th then, 2 points off 6th, 7th now, equal points with 6th.

(g) In terms of assists (Gylfi 0 this season) we are not missing Gylfi the player. Howard has 4 assists in 8 starts (1 in 2). (Gylfi had 10 assists in 38 starts last season = 1/4)

Armstrong is now fit and would also have replaced Williams without the need for Harte or any of the Gylfi money.

(a) Armstrong wasn't fit and ready when Harte played his first game.
(b) Armstrong is not renowned for his penalties. Harte is and has scored 1/1
(c) Armstrong is not renowned for his free-kicks and Harte has already scored 1, sealing the game against Barnsley.
(d) Harte has already made Team of the Week and to deny his real influence on the side is plain dumb.
(e) So without the Gylfi money we were going to get Zurab and offer better contracts to Karacan & Antonio?

[Platypuss]

You obviously enjoy creating stats that suit your "argument" but appear to be shying away from doing the with/without WIlliams. What do the bare stats say?

How surprising, you seem to have responded to all my points other than this one. Quelle surprise......

[Ian Royal]

You obviously enjoy creating stats that suit your "argument" but appear to be shying away from doing the with/without WIlliams. What do the bare stats say?

How surprising, you seem to have responded to all my points other than this one. Quelle surprise......

leave it, platy. It ain't wurf it.

[Maguire]

The analysis above continues to be an affront to scientists the world over.

It's just mind-numbing how much gets extrapolated from so little.

[RFCUK]

Swansea (H) W
Bristol City (A) L
Burnley (A) W
Doncaster (H) W
QPR (A) L
Cardiff (H) L

My heart says otherwise, but I'm unfortunately going to be realistic. I'm going for 9 points out of 18. I think against Swansea and Doncaster we'll up our goal difference by a good five.

[andrew1957]

Swansea (H) W
Bristol City (A) W
Burnley (A) L
Doncaster (H) W
QPR (A) L
Cardiff (H) D

10 points seems likely to me.

[Snowball]

You obviously enjoy creating stats that suit your "argument" but appear to be shying away from doing the with/without WIlliams. What do the bare stats say?

How surprising, you seem to have responded to all my points other than this one. Quelle surprise......

YOU do the stats. The Williams thing is plainly stupid, so you should do fine.

How you can ignore a player who has played in the champions league SEMI (edit) final,
got 18 goals last season, has already scored 2 for us in 6 games, from full-back,
one a superb free-kick, played in a defence that has 50% clean sheets...

[Snowball]

The analysis above continues to be an affront to scientists the world over.

It's just mind-numbing how much gets extrapolated from so little.

it isn't "analysis". It's a statement of absolute facts, for people to INTERPRET

[Platypuss]

As if any stats can any more "plainly stupid" than any others. They are, as you frequently say, just statements of absolute facts.

I'll leave it for others to infer that the only reason you won't run the Williams stat is because you don't like what they say.