MLS

[Deuce]

That Wondolowski article is pure yankstats, loving it

 

Friend of mine in NY was always telling me that football won't make it in the US because it can't be distilled into the sheer amount of "objective" stats as hockey or baseball. Give'em time.

 

We're on the verge of developing robust and influential sabermetrics for soccer (soccermetrics). I think it'll take hold in the U.S. before anywhere else, simply because we already heavily quantify our other sports (football to some extent, but primarily in baseball).

 

It has the potential to revolutionize the way in which the game is viewed and played, giving credit to traditionally (as an aside, I think Carrick is a guy whose value would increase immensely from in-depth statistical analysis) undervalued players and exposing flaws among overrated players.

 

It won't work.

 

It's worked to some degree for every other sport. Every sport can be quantified, just some more so than others.

[ponsaelius]

How on earth is Carrick 'undervalued' btw? He cost £17 million and Ferguson plays him near enough every game.

[Deuce]

How on earth is Carrick 'undervalued' btw? He cost £17 million and Ferguson plays him near enough every game.

 

In terms of the media, opposing fans, etc. he's never considered one of the best midfielders in the league. Despite earning as much as he does and playing nearly every game for Man United.

 

My point is, he's clearly a player who could benefit from statistics that go deeper than goals/assists or even completion rate.

[Miercoles]

That Wondolowski article is pure yankstats, loving it

 

Friend of mine in NY was always telling me that football won't make it in the US because it can't be distilled into the sheer amount of "objective" stats as hockey or baseball. Give'em time.

 

We're on the verge of developing robust and influential sabermetrics for soccer (soccermetrics). I think it'll take hold in the U.S. before anywhere else, simply because we already heavily quantify our other sports (football to some extent, but primarily in baseball).

 

It has the potential to revolutionize the way in which the game is viewed and played, giving credit to traditionally (as an aside, I think Carrick is a guy whose value would increase immensely from in-depth statistical analysis) undervalued players and exposing flaws among overrated players.

 

It won't work.

 

 

Why not?

 

Statistics are just a record of how a player plays. How could that possibly not be useful? A player is better at shooting the ball with his right foot, so you show him onto his left foot, that's statistics in action.

 

Ya'll are just Yankee-phobic up in hurr

[ponsaelius]

I've seen stats applied and used effectively in Baseball and to a lesser extent American football. I can't see any useful applications for it in football apart from very simplistic things such as ground covered by players, something that is already being done effectively. In terms of actually analysing the game itself it is simply too complex, free-flowing and multilayered to ever be interpreted through data and statistics. Not effectively anyway. Whatever you can learn from stats in football can be bettered by the human eye, a top class coach like Alex Ferguson doesn't need statistics to see that Carrick is good at football.

 

I don't understand the argument that stats will expose underrated and overrated players. Scouts and coaches do that. Fans can do that. Anybody who watches and understands the sport can see a good footballer from a bad one. Liverpool bought that tubarse Adam because he got lots of assists one season and made lots of chances. Yeah, because he took every set piece, was given the ball at every occasion and was given the responsibility to do that in a desperately limited side. Fact is when you actually watch him its clear to anybody with eyes he's immobile, not hugely talented, can't tackle, and is generally a shite player in numerous aspects of the game but can strike a ball fairly well with his left foot when given the platform.

 

I've not seen any representation of football through statistics that I've thought can do anything other than reinforce or deepen a pre-held opinion that I've made with my own eyes. They don't make me think a player I thought was shit is actually good, or think a player I thought was good is actually not all that. They won't convince me that the pattern of a football match was different to what I saw either. In football nothing beats the human eye.

 

When this revolutionary soccernomics comes out I'll have a look at it, but up until now most football statistics I've seen have been llargely irrelevant.

 

 

[ponsaelius]

That Wondolowski article is pure yankstats, loving it

 

Friend of mine in NY was always telling me that football won't make it in the US because it can't be distilled into the sheer amount of "objective" stats as hockey or baseball. Give'em time.

 

We're on the verge of developing robust and influential sabermetrics for soccer (soccermetrics). I think it'll take hold in the U.S. before anywhere else, simply because we already heavily quantify our other sports (football to some extent, but primarily in baseball).

 

It has the potential to revolutionize the way in which the game is viewed and played, giving credit to traditionally (as an aside, I think Carrick is a guy whose value would increase immensely from in-depth statistical analysis) undervalued players and exposing flaws among overrated players.

 

It won't work.

 

Why not?

 

Statistics are just a record of how a player plays. How could that possibly not be useful? A player is better at shooting the ball with his right foot, so you show him onto his left foot, that's statistics in action.

Ya'll are just Yankee-phobic up in hurr

 

Mint, people have been doing that since the beginning of time anyway. 

[Miercoles]

Nah, you're just ignoring the statistical analysis that you do see in football, or not recognizing it.

 

 

You know a certain goalkeeper (I'm looking at you, Reina) is bad in the air, so you use a lot of high crosses to pressure him in that weakness. Showing a player onto a certain foot, like I said before. Using a particular formation that the opposition defense has struggled with earlier in the season. Certain players have a better first touch so you play it into their feet, others have a higher conversion rate on headers so you play it to them in the air. The list goes on and on. You're taking these things as "common knowledge" which to a certain extent they are, but they are common knowledge of the use of statistics.

 

I think you're just missing the point here. When you say that Ferguson doesn't need statistics, what you mean is that he is doing the analysis himself rather than having a company do it (which probably isn't true anyway, I'm sure he has assistants that help him with the analysis of players). Statistics is just the systematic analysis of past performances and if you really think that doesn't have a place in football already, you are just plain crazy.

 

Yes football is fluid, but that doesn't mean that there aren't patterns to analyze, strengths and weaknesses of certain players in certain situations, and ways to keep them in or out of those situations based on that knowledge. It's going to be a harder task for the statisticians than baseball, but it's by no means impossible.

[Ameritoon]

I really don't see stats ever working that much in soccer, nor do I think it's really a problem for US fans. It might be something that benefits coaches/managers, but they already have access to those stars. People that love stats are a niche group, really, or ESPN whenever Elias gives them something good.

[Miercoles]

That Wondolowski article is pure yankstats, loving it

 

Friend of mine in NY was always telling me that football won't make it in the US because it can't be distilled into the sheer amount of "objective" stats as hockey or baseball. Give'em time.

 

We're on the verge of developing robust and influential sabermetrics for soccer (soccermetrics). I think it'll take hold in the U.S. before anywhere else, simply because we already heavily quantify our other sports (football to some extent, but primarily in baseball).

 

It has the potential to revolutionize the way in which the game is viewed and played, giving credit to traditionally (as an aside, I think Carrick is a guy whose value would increase immensely from in-depth statistical analysis) undervalued players and exposing flaws among overrated players.

 

It won't work.

 

Why not?

 

Statistics are just a record of how a player plays. How could that possibly not be useful? A player is better at shooting the ball with his right foot, so you show him onto his left foot, that's statistics in action.

Ya'll are just Yankee-phobic up in hurr

 

Mint, people have been doing that since the beginning of time anyway. 

 

Which is exactly my point. You're saying it's useless, and I'm saying that it is already in use.

[ponsaelius]

It's just knowing which foot the other bloke is using, which you can see the moment he controls the football. 'Statistics in action' ffs.

 

I'm all for sensible discussion on this matter, but that is unbelievable. 

[Deuce]

The same arguments I'm hearing from Sewelly are the same things we've heard in MLB from the purists over the years. And yet the A's rode Moneyball to the playoffs and the Sox copied their model, added some cash, and won the Series.

 

Teams like ManU, Chelsea, City, etc. are always going to compete by spending the most money. They're the Yankees of the PL. Finding diamonds in the rough, players that no one else wants, could be the key to success for clubs that wouldn't otherwise be able to compete. It's largely how Moyes has kept Everton relevant (and ironically, Everton has been one of the leading pioneers of advanced statistical analysis among soccer clubs). THAT is what we're getting after.

[Mike]

Soccer is going to get so American over the next 5 years.

[Deuce]

It's just knowing which foot the other bloke is using, which you can see the moment he controls the football. 'Statistics in action' ffs.

 

I'm all for sensible discussion on this matter, but that is unbelievable. 

 

We've not even scratched the surface on the kind of statistical record-keeping that could be done. Analyzing opponents based on seemingly irrelevant figures. If you can develop patterns, you can expose them. Keepers already study the penalty taking habits of opposing players. That can be greatly expanded.

 

Human beings are creatures of habit. Footballers are no different.

[ponsaelius]

Nah, you're just ignoring the statistical analysis that you do see in football, or not recognizing it.

 

 

You know a certain goalkeeper (I'm looking at you, Reina) is bad in the air, so you use a lot of high crosses to pressure him in that weakness. Showing a player onto a certain foot, like I said before. Using a particular formation that the opposition defense has struggled with earlier in the season. Certain players have a better first touch so you play it into their feet, others have a higher conversion rate on headers so you play it to them in the air. The list goes on and on. You're taking these things as "common knowledge" which to a certain extent they are, but they are common knowledge of the use of statistics.

 

I think you're just missing the point here. When you say that Ferguson doesn't need statistics, what you mean is that he is doing the analysis himself rather than having a company do it (which probably isn't true anyway, I'm sure he has assistants that help him with the analysis of players). Statistics is just the systematic analysis of past performances and if you really think that doesn't have a place in football already, you are just plain crazy.

 

Yes football is fluid, but that doesn't mean that there aren't patterns to analyze, strengths and weaknesses of certain players in certain situations, and ways to keep them in or out of those situations based on that knowledge. It's going to be a harder task for the statisticians than baseball, but it's by no means impossible.

 

None of these things are statistical or data analysis, they're all observations made from watching football. Compiling lots of stats on the number of times Reina fumbles the ball on crosses won't tell you anything you don't already know from using your own eye. In fact, they're only likely to confuse the matter because they won't take into account a million different factors.

 

Same goes for first touch. First touch is one of the most fundamental and natural skills of the game, it's not something that can be analysed through statistics. Trying to argue that passing the ball to Robin van Persie because he's geet mint is an example of 'statistics' is absolutely absurd.

[Deuce]

Soccer is going to get so American over the next 5 years.

 

"We're proud to introduce the next Director of Football Operations for Liverpool Football Club: Theo Epstein."

[Miercoles]

It's just knowing which foot the other bloke is using, which you can see the moment he controls the football. 'Statistics in action' ffs.

 

I'm all for sensible discussion on this matter, but that is unbelievable. 

 

We've not even scratched the surface on the kind of statistical record-keeping that could be done. Analyzing opponents based on seemingly irrelevant figures. If you can develop patterns, you can expose them. Keepers already study the penalty taking habits of opposing players. That can be greatly expanded.

 

Human beings are creatures of habit. Footballers are no different.

 

But Duece, you can just watch which way it goes when he kicks it! And then jump that direction! In no way would it be useful to have that knowledge before the game, and you certainly wouldn't want to base your tactics and gameplan around the weaknesses revealed by that information, that's just silly.

[ponsaelius]

OK, maybe it has some use on penalties. The one time our sport gets close to the stop-start nature of shit like Baseball.

[ponsaelius]

The same arguments I'm hearing from Sewelly are the same things we've heard in MLB from the purists over the years. And yet the A's rode Moneyball to the playoffs and the Sox copied their model, added some cash, and won the Series.

 

Teams like ManU, Chelsea, City, etc. are always going to compete by spending the most money. They're the Yankees of the PL. Finding diamonds in the rough, players that no one else wants, could be the key to success for clubs that wouldn't otherwise be able to compete. It's largely how Moyes has kept Everton relevant (and ironically, Everton has been one of the leading pioneers of advanced statistical analysis among soccer clubs). THAT is what we're getting after.

 

Moyes has kept Everton relevant because he gets good players cheap for numerous reasons. Same we have done getting extremely naturally talented players seen as damaged goods because they're injury-prone/percieved trouble makers (Ben Arfa), undervalued because of a contract clause and playing in an undervalued league/team (Cabaye) or maybe a combination of both of these things (Ba).

 

That's good management and scouting. None of it has been done through statistical analysis. Statistical analysis doesn't tell you that Ben Arfa is a good player, in fact I bet statistics don't favour him particularly well in the productivity department. But he's mint.

 

I don't see how statistics can ever unearth undervalued players. I argue that that is the one thing they fundamentally can't do over other methods.

[cubaricho]

Sorry, I can't take you seriously.

 

I'm not the biggest fan of statistics in football, but I do see their place.  And I think that if you stopped dismissing Miercoles out of hand (which is an embarrassingly common trait on this board) you'd see that he makes a lot of valid points.  There are lots of things you see on the pitch that you just know, but they are also "statistics in action" - they aren't mutually exclusive, they are different ways to look at the same thing.

 

And like Mike alludes too (jokingly), the statistical way is going to be the way forward when the kinds of money that are being thrown around increase even more.  Owners and Managers are going to want solid evidence (statistics, for better or worse) that someone can play other than just a "feeling."  The feeling aspect is gone in a lot of American sports and romanticized about in the same way that it will be in Football 10-20 years from now.

[Hanshithispantz]

Statistics are used a lot in football (Pardew fucking wanks over them) by proper management, they wouldn't be doing their job properly if they weren't, but I imagine it's more to just back up what they've already seen with their own eyes.

 

I cannot imagine many managers choosing their squad and tactics because of what they've read on a spreadsheet.

[ponsaelius]

Well maybe I was overly harsh on Miercoles, so I apologise, but I find his arguments presented on this page to be ridiculous and nonsensical.

 

I just don't think that - outside of maybe set-pieces - statistical analysis will ever be of a huge use in the actual match processes of football. To say that statistics are going to change or revolutionize the sport blankly because it worked in US sports I find ridiculous and showing of a lack of understanding of the sport.

[ponsaelius]

Statistics are used a lot in football (Pardew fucking wanks over them) by proper management, they wouldn't be doing their job properly if they weren't, but I imagine it's more to just back up what they've already seen with their own eyes.

 

I cannot imagine many managers choosing their squad and tactics because of what they've read on a spreadsheet.

 

The managers that rat on about statistics in football are cunts like Allardyce and Pardew who's sides invariably play god-awful stuff. 

 

I know Wenger uses statistics, he was revolutionary when he first came with regards to players fitness levels, their diets and stuff like that but as far as I'm aware he doesn't encoporate them into the actual gameplay on the pitch.

[Deuce]

Well maybe I was overly harsh on Miercoles, but I find his arguments presented on this page to be ridiculous and nonsensical.

 

I just don't think that - outside of maybe set-pieces - statistical analysis will ever be of a huge use in football. To say that statistics are going to change or revolutionize the sport blankly because it worked in US sports I find ridiculous and showing of a lack of understanding of the sport.

 

No, this comes from having a different perspective on the game. Not everyone looks at football through an English or even European lens. Nor is there one correct way to view the game.

 

[Deuce]

Jermaine Jones might be considering a summer move to MLS.

 

Orlando City are aiming to be named the next MLS franchise by the end of 2013.

 

Sacramento is launching a USL Pro team next year.

[Kaizero]

Would love Orlando to become the next expansion team.