why is no one laying the blame at the Crynes

I don't know if you've read the book or seen the film Moneyball, but this is exactly the approach the Oakland Athletics took in Major League Baseball. It had some success, you don't make a film about a system that fails, and the sabermetrics approach has been adopted by many Major League Baseball teams.

Could a similar system transfer to football? No idea. However, I would say there are far more variables in football. Every bit of action in Baseball is a set play, the pitcher chucks the ball and the hitter attempts to t.wat it out of the stadium. It's the same thing, over and over again throughout every single game between every two teams that have played the game. The skill of the pitcher and the hitter varies, and there's the excitement in the game, but it's a set procedure repeated time and again. Producing comparable statistics for such a game is relatively straight forward. Well, it is compared to football.

Football is a far more open game, much more fluid, situations arise in a game that may not be seen again for months or years. We do have statistics on football players, but I'm not sure they're as useful or comparable as those produced for baseball players.

Baseball has been producing statistics on players for decades. It's a relatively new phenomenon in football. In baseball the statistics are taken very seriously, as they are in most American sports, and many fans can reel off the stats of all their favourite players. These stats are analysed by thousands of people, both professionally and as a hobby. They're printed in all the sports papers. Do you know anyone who studies the Opta stats? Do you ever even see them? One of the revelations about the sabermetrics system was that people were emphasising the importance of the wrong stats and not paying enough attention to those that matter. This came to light after years and years of research. Football is still in its infancy in this area, it may be that the most important stats aren't even being recorded, never mind analysed.

Devising a mathematical model to be used for the acquisition of players is one thing, finding one that actually works is quite another. I wonder how many mathematical models have been devised over the years that don't work compared to those that do. What do you reckon, thousands? Millions?

Sabermetrics research began in the middle of the 20th century. The first book on the subject that received any recognition was published in 1964. Dozens of books and research papers were published throughout the 70s and 80s. Mathematicians, academics, software engineers, journalists, baseball coaches and sports fans have all worked on the system, refining it and perfecting it over year and years.

The first professional baseball manager to fully adopt the approach was Billy Beane in 2002, after 50 years of research on the system by hundreds, if not thousands, of people.

I have no idea if we are now signing players based on a mathematical model analysing player statistics. If we are, I have no idea who has devised it or how rigorously it has been tested. I have no idea if the system works. However, if we have adopted such a system, I think it is perfectly valid to question it. I think it would be extremely remiss of us not to. Personally, I have about a million questions.

 

Stupid fat fingers...Decimal point in wrong place!

 

Re: Fookin Hell I hope you have a bunker under your house

I think it's clear chance to sell was when in championship to whoever

 

Statistics in football are a waste of space unless you're talking goals scored. Watched Liverpool v Everton before going down to Oakwell and Jagielka had a 97% pass completion rate which put him ahead of Gerrard. Jagielka never passed it more than 10 yard to either his goalie or another defender. Stats can't tell you the ratio of defence splitting passes and good attempts that ended in failure.

 

Re: Fookin Hell I hope you have a bunker under your house

Aye, the buggers were queuing all the way down Grove Street, owd Pat was beating em off wi a stick...

 

This is the article for those that haven't read it. Someone posted it on Twitter

<img src="https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BykA4mOIMAA0nHC.jpg:large">

 

Re: Fookin Hell I hope you have a bunker under your house

Would you spend the equivalent to your mortgage to buy our club? We can criticise the owner but unless someone comes along what can we do. I haven't seen many clubs advertised like a house though so are we doing anything different. Fact is no-one wants us.

 

Ben told me prior to the MK game, that we'd recruited players in the main, who could get us 70+ goals as that would surely see us make the playoffs. But as I said in the blog the next day, if we concede more than 70 then it's not going to be much use.


This 'analytical' approach to recruitment seems to be failing thus far. I'd have analysed the fact that our defence has been ***** for years and first fixed that. I'd be looking to play full backs at full back, midfielders in midfield, wingers ont wing and strikers up front. Sounds barmy, I know.

 

[/QUOTE]This 'analytical' approach to recruitment seems to be failing thus far. I'd have analysed the fact that our defence has been ***** for years and first fixed that. I'd be looking to play full backs at full back, midfielders in midfield, wingers ont wing and strikers up front. Sounds barmy, I know.[/QUOTE]

Agree with that. As I said yesterday,

It all starts with shoring the defence up. If we have to play seven at the back, the worst we'll do is another 37 points. But actually, we've some promising young players in this squad - even though they lack physical presence at the moment. If we stop conceding - even if it gets ugly - then we will actually bag the odd goal (unlikely though that seems after today's showing) and blag a win or two.

As for PC putting 15M in, then while I respect Gally's view, that would represent getting on for half his reported personal fortune. I think he has more sense than that!

 

That doesn't mention his son devising the method or anything of the sort, just that his son is involved in the running of the club these days.

It also clearly states that Danny has the final decision. Lots of Chinese whispers going on I recon.

 

There's no history of enough rope to hang under this board

 

'Analytical Approach' - sounds like common sense to me.

 

We've analysed it and have sacked DW.

Further analysis shows that doing the same thing expecting the same results is also sensible

 

"Definition of madness...."


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Just edited along those lines!

 

Who has?

You're not seriously counting a few lads off here (known DW haters) as the majority?

If we sack Danny, I think I'll chalk **** on it all. But he's not doing his case much good I have to admit that.

 

Just paraphrasing what may be said...

 

You will have PM, in one minute.