Maneki Neko low risk moneyball signing.
identify what the squad is missing, in this case, experience, quality, deadball ability, cover in midfield. fill that gap for no money with a player other people have written off..
BR0B0TManeki Neko low risk moneyball signing.
identify what the squad is missing, in this case, experience, quality, deadball ability, cover in midfield. fill that gap for no money with a player other people have written off..
it's the opposite of Moneyball, his stats are absolute dogshit
56% pass completion for a midfieLOLder
BR0B0TManeki Neko low risk moneyball signing.
identify what the squad is missing, in this case, experience, quality, deadball ability, cover in midfield. fill that gap for no money with a player other people have written off..
it's the opposite of Moneyball, his stats are absolute dogshit
56% pass completion for a midfieLOLder
bcubedBR0B0TManeki Neko low risk moneyball signing.
identify what the squad is missing, in this case, experience, quality, deadball ability, cover in midfield. fill that gap for no money with a player other people have written off..
it's the opposite of Moneyball, his stats are absolute dogshit
56% pass completion for a midfieLOLder
Isn't Moneyball saying you have to look at some specific stats that will work for your team, not the obvious ones? There may be some stats we don't know about where he excels!
BR0B0TbcubedBR0B0T
it's the opposite of Moneyball, his stats are absolute dogshit
56% pass completion for a midfieLOLder
Isn't Moneyball saying you have to look at some specific stats that will work for your team, not the obvious ones? There may be some stats we don't know about where he excels!
In my original post, I linked to the Statsbomb Charlie Adam radars.
This covers a lot of key stats such as expected assists etc
They weren't gr8...he's also very static!
StrandedBR0B0TManeki Neko low risk moneyball signing.
identify what the squad is missing, in this case, experience, quality, deadball ability, cover in midfield. fill that gap for no money with a player other people have written off..
it's the opposite of Moneyball, his stats are absolute dogshit
56% pass completion for a midfieLOLder
Yeah but he only played 400 mins and often in fits and starts and generally brought on to try and make things happen to try and get Stoke back into a game. The pass completion is low as he was attempting 2.7 long balls a game - which fits in with the view he was trying to force the game. He also played at least 1 key pass per game. So nowhere near as bad as the headline 56% figure.
stealthpapesStrandedBR0B0T
it's the opposite of Moneyball, his stats are absolute dogshit
56% pass completion for a midfieLOLder
Yeah but he only played 400 mins and often in fits and starts and generally brought on to try and make things happen to try and get Stoke back into a game. The pass completion is low as he was attempting 2.7 long balls a game - which fits in with the view he was trying to force the game. He also played at least 1 key pass per game. So nowhere near as bad as the headline 56% figure.
yeah, came here to say someone misread the point of Moneyball.
stealthpapes Again, that he's been shit recently - and he really has been - makes no difference to it being a Moneyball signing or not.
For someone who claims to be all over this, it seems a fundamental point to be stumbling on.
Royalwasterstealthpapes Again, that he's been shit recently - and he really has been - makes no difference to it being a Moneyball signing or not.
For someone who claims to be all over this, it seems a fundamental point to be stumbling on.
I'm with you ... signing someone who is acknowledged to have been really good is CLEARLY not a moneyball signing. Getting on someone on a free who has been written off is. But it can also be a Meyler type rubbish signing more often than not.
NewCorkSeth Wait.. sorry.. is moneyball not based on effective stats? If his stats have been shit recently then he is not a moneyball signing.
I mean moneyball doesn't apply to football because it's not a simple game. Its not "how often does he get on base".
The point is a moneyball signing (for arguments sake in football) is based on current stats not what they did 5 years ago.
stealthpapes Again, that he's been shit recently - and he really has been - makes no difference to it being a Moneyball signing or not.
For someone who claims to be all over this, it seems a fundamental point to be stumbling on.
SCIAG If we're being generous, I think the "Moneyball" aspect with Adam is perhaps that he's a set-piece specialist. At least at his peak, he was a Sigurdsson/Harte level threat and set piece skills don't really seem to diminish in the same way as other skills. Set pieces remain an under-exploited area of the game and consequently a club lacking resources can focus on them to overperform.
Signing a player who looks shit on paper because he might give us an extra ~20 goals a season (either directly or through his delivery), is a form of Sabermetrics. In the wider world of football it's considered a stupid idea, but it might not be - again look at Harte or Rory Delap.
SCIAG If we're being generous, I think the "Moneyball" aspect with Adam is perhaps that he's a set-piece specialist. At least at his peak, he was a Sigurdsson/Harte level threat and set piece skills don't really seem to diminish in the same way as other skills. Set pieces remain an under-exploited area of the game and consequently a club lacking resources can focus on them to overperform.
Signing a player who looks shit on paper because he might give us an extra ~20 goals a season (either directly or through his delivery), is a form of Sabermetrics. In the wider world of football it's considered a stupid idea, but it might not be - again look at Harte or Rory Delap.
BR0B0Tstealthpapes Again, that he's been shit recently - and he really has been - makes no difference to it being a Moneyball signing or not.
For someone who claims to be all over this, it seems a fundamental point to be stumbling on.
definition of word argument...
'Moneyball' process was to identify metrics that actually contribute to winning games rather than traditional methods. On-base percentage and slugging were considered the key metrics iirc...so they recruited players who could do this i.e. had really fcuking good stats in these key areas relative to the amount they would cost
The football equivalent has seen stats like xG, xAssists etc. (the shizzle posted above) Charlie Adam is spectacularly shit at all of these
Anti Moneyball was recruiting old players based on former reputation. However, if you can identify the key metrics that CA possesses that make him a moneyball signing I'll STFU
p.s. it's not "I reckz he can Hollywood pass from the halfway line in the last twenty mins"
yep, welcome to Reading CharlieSnowflake RoyalSCIAG If we're being generous, I think the "Moneyball" aspect with Adam is perhaps that he's a set-piece specialist. At least at his peak, he was a Sigurdsson/Harte level threat and set piece skills don't really seem to diminish in the same way as other skills. Set pieces remain an under-exploited area of the game and consequently a club lacking resources can focus on them to overperform.
Signing a player who looks shit on paper because he might give us an extra ~20 goals a season (either directly or through his delivery), is a form of Sabermetrics. In the wider world of football it's considered a stupid idea, but it might not be - again look at Harte or Rory Delap.
Need to factor in how many extra goals we'd concede from him being unable to track, close down or pass though.
Users browsing this forum: ankeny, Fluff, Jinx, Mr Angry, Royals and Racers, South Coast Royal, WestYorksRoyal and 219 guests
