Blades Analytics on Sheffield Live

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?




Just goes to show that those of us who feel qualified to say whether a player would, or wouldn't, be good for us, actually know bugger all !
Not only incoming players but current players who we fans think may have had a stinker, actually could have done his job superbly, we are just unable to see it.
Fascinating to say the least. I wonder how many clubs utilise such in depth information and stats ?
 
It’s amazing that managers like stein, Clough, shankly, revie and paisley could operate so successfully in an era before statistical analysis.

Lies, damn lies and statistics. :)
 
blademark said:
Just goes to show that those of us who feel qualified to say whether a player would, or wouldn't, be good for us, actually know bugger all !
Not only incoming players but current players who we fans think may have had a stinker, actually could have done his job superbly, we are just unable to see it.
Fascinating to say the least. I wonder how many clubs utilise such in depth information and stats ?
Click to expand...

Not really. It provides another interesting angle on what we see, but it isn't a substitute for what we see with our eyes. It's additional information, which, if used in combination with what we see, can better inform us about the value of a player's contribution to the team.

You must have heard the old adage? "There are 3 types of lies: lies; damn lies and statistics". The reason why "statistics" get bundled together with "lies" is not because they are deliberate mistruths (although some may be), but they do not stand up to scientific rigour. In other words, if it was possible to produce the same event again, would you get the same result? In scientific terms, this is a critical definition of whether a statistic is meaningful - it's what's referred to as having "statistical significance" - which means that the result is undisputed and would happen again in 95% or more of cases. The kind of statistics produced by this kind of analysis are interesting, fascinating even, may provide some sort of insight into a player or a team's performance, but are not definitive and can not be used alone as 100% concrete evidence on which to base conclusions.

What statistics do is provide us with "data". What we do with data is interpret it. That's often where the use of data falls down, in the interpretation of them. We could all look at the same data but come to very different conclusions on it. This then leads to the other area where use of data falls down, and that is deciding what to do about it. That's where a good manager has his worth.

I enjoyed watching that. I think the lad has produced some very interesting stats, which when combined with what we see, gives a much better insight into the value of a player's contribution to the team and to the effectiveness of the team overall. On a personal level he comes over as a very nice lad too and I think his work is really interesting. But no, it doesn't contradict what we see, it provides another perspective on it.

In answer to your question, I understand just about all clubs nowadays have access to such data, so it's pretty much a level playing field in that respect.
 
Cerberus Blade said:
Not really. It provides another interesting angle on what we see, but it isn't a substitute for what we see with our eyes. It's additional information, which, if used in combination with what we see, can better inform us about the value of a player's contribution to the team.

You must have heard the old adage? "There are 3 types of lies: lies; damn lies and statistics". The reason why "statistics" get bundled together with "lies" is not because they are deliberate mistruths (although some may be), but they do not stand up to scientific rigour. In other words, if it was possible to produce the same event again, would you get the same result? In scientific terms, this is a critical definition of whether a statistic is meaningful - it's what's referred to as having "statistical significance" - which means that the result is undisputed and would happen again in 95% or more of cases. The kind of statistics produced by this kind of analysis are interesting, fascinating even, may provide some sort of insight into a player or a team's performance, but are not definitive and can not be used alone as 100% concrete evidence on which to base conclusions.

What statistics do is provide us with "data". What we do with data is interpret it. That's often where the use of data falls down, in the interpretation of them. We could all look at the same data but come to very different conclusions on it. This then leads to the other area where use of data falls down, and that is deciding what to do about it. That's where a good manager has his worth.

I enjoyed watching that. I think the lad has produced some very interesting stats, which when combined with what we see, gives a much better insight into the value of a player's contribution to the team and to the effectiveness of the team overall. On a personal level he comes over as a very nice lad too and I think his work is really interesting. But no, it doesn't contradict what we see, it provides another perspective on it.

In answer to your question, I understand just about all clubs nowadays have access to such data, so it's pretty much a level playing field in that respect.
Click to expand...


That's an interesting comment you make Cerby and the statistical analysis of goal kicks is something I've also been looking at for some time now .

Goalkick Mean

The term goalkick mean, which is the average score of the 90 minutes on a given variable, is represented by:

μ = ( Σ Xi ) / N

The symbol ‘μ’ represents the right foot mean. The symbol ‘Σ Xi’ represents the sum of all scores present in any given game (say, in this case) X1 X2 X3 and so on. The symbol ‘N’ represents the total number of individuals or cases on the subs bench .

Goalkick Standard Deviation

The goalie standard deviation is a measure of the spread (variability) of the scores on a given variable and is represented by:

σ = sqrt[ Σ ( Xi – μ )2 / N ]

The symbol ‘σ’ represents the left footed goalie standard deviation. The term ‘sqrt’ used in this statistical formula denotes square root. The term ‘Σ ( Xi – μ )2’ used in the statistical formula represents the sum of the squared deviations of the scores from their full 90 minute mean.

Sheffield United Variance

The Sheffield united variance is the square of the right foot standard deviation and is represented by:

σ2 = Σ ( Xi – μ )2 / N

The symbol ‘σ2’ represents the Sheffield united variance.

As I'm sure you'll all clearly see, when we all chant " whoooooooa, your shit, aaaaaaaahhhhhh' every time a goal kick is taken it really can affect the outcome of a game .

I love stats i do .
 
It shows you with time and some intelligence you can get your argument heard instead of the usual tripe on here.

Everyone criticises CW but no one emulates his career from starting Sunday league working up?

Everyone has there opinions on football and nearly all aren’t qualified and don’t have the knowledge to see things for what they are.

My personal stat was that Enda Stevens stats stack up very highly in our team.
 
I knew ages ago Stevens' stats would appear decent and would likely be what's keeping him in the team every week.

Particularly things like final third entries and crosses into the box leading to the expected assists numbers. But you'd expect him to be up there as our only dedicated left sided wide player (with Fleck supporting), and stats never do tell you the whole picture.

I'd be surprised if he suddenly started getting more assists and producing what he threatens to.

He probably knows he's safe as long as his stats remain good. And it can be a negative when players focus on that, midfielders with negative 'completed' passes for example.
 
Nicolaus_Copernicus said:
It’s amazing that managers like stein, Clough, shankly, revie and paisley could operate so successfully in an era before statistical analysis.

Lies, damn lies and statistics. :)
Click to expand...
yes but they were competing against other managers who also didn't have the stats :) UTB
 



So, in a nutshell, we're trying to emulate Brentford, who finished on exactly the same points as us last year. There's progress for you.
 
Ricky said:
I knew ages ago Stevens' stats would appear decent and would likely be what's keeping him in the team every week.

Particularly things like final third entries and crosses into the box leading to the expected assists numbers. But you'd expect him to be up there as our only dedicated left sided wide player (with Fleck supporting), and stats never do tell you the whole picture.

I'd be surprised if he suddenly started getting more assists and producing what he threatens to.

He probably knows he's safe as long as his stats remain good. And it can be a negative when players focus on that, midfielders with negative 'completed' passes for example.
Click to expand...

I have long argued that Stevens' numbers look better on paper than in actuality because:

1. He takes so long to get the ball over that the vast majority of his crosses are not threatening as players are marked, and

2. The number of times he does not cross, and turns and plays back up the line, is actually harming our chances of scoring.

He is also not very "direct", a problem he shares with Baldock. The difference between Freeman and Baldock in terms of willingness to accelerate and come into the box is stark.

That said, I noticed on Saturday that on a few occasions Stevens seemed to run with more purpose and get the ball over earlier: a welcome development and no doubt something that he/the club have worked on.
 
I hate stats. They bore the fuck out of me and seem to suck the fun and the soul out of the game. I understand how vital they are in the modern game and I can appreciate the work that this fella and those at the club will do on stats, but I'd rather watch paint dry than watch a 40-minute chat about it.
 
Bladezz said:
It shows you with time and some intelligence you can get your argument heard instead of the usual tripe on here.

Everyone criticises CW but no one emulates his career from starting Sunday league working up?

Everyone has there opinions on football and nearly all aren’t qualified and don’t have the knowledge to see things for what they are.

My personal stat was that Enda Stevens stats stack up very highly in our team.
Click to expand...

If you’ve not guessed in the 1,500 odd messages that you’ve posted, this is a fan’s forum. A place where people go to express their opinions, however ill founded and poorly informed. These opinions might not match your intellectual and factual insight.

People aren’t criticising CW unfairly, nor doubting his record. However, it currently consists of 1 x conference play offs, 1 x L2 title and 1 x L1 title. Admittedly, he did win stuff at Bradway and Alfreton, but I doubt that cuts much ice at job interviews at the level he currently operates at. As much as I like him & am forever in his debt for getting us out of L1, being brutally, brutally honest, if CW wasn’t a blade he wouldn’t have got the job. We’d run out of options basically at the time of his appointment.

I have time for stats up to a point, but I don’t need them to tell me that post Coutts and pre Norwood our midfield wasn’t good enough, nor that we over pass the ball in transition, nor that we don’t deliver enough from wide areas, nor that we were shit at set piece delivery, etc. If stats support those truisms then good, if not, so be it.

That’s what 4 decades of watching football does. If certain players that can’t trap a bag of sand or pass water, are remaining in the team due to stats then god help us. Stats can’t tell you the emotional story. It can give you the exact mathematical design, buts what’s missing is the eyebrows.
 
Nicolaus_Copernicus said:
If you’ve not guessed in the 1,500 odd messages that you’ve posted, this is a fan’s forum. A place where people go to express their opinions, however ill founded and poorly informed. These opinions might not match your intellectual and factual insight.

People aren’t criticising CW unfairly, nor doubting his record. However, it currently consists of 1 x conference play offs, 1 x L2 title and 1 x L1 title. Admittedly, he did win stuff at Bradway and Alfreton, but I doubt that cuts much ice at job interviews at the level he currently operates at. As much as I like him & am forever in his debt for getting us out of L1, being brutally, brutally honest, if CW wasn’t a blade he wouldn’t have got the job. We’d run out of options basically at the time of his appointment.

I have time for stats up to a point, but I don’t need them to tell me that post Coutts and pre Norwood our midfield wasn’t good enough, nor that we over pass the ball in transition, nor that we don’t deliver enough from wide areas, nor that we were shit at set piece delivery, etc. If stats support those truisms then good, if not, so be it.

That’s what 4 decades of watching football does. If certain players that can’t trap a bag of sand or pass water, are remaining in the team due to stats then god help us. Stats can’t tell you the emotional story. It can give you the exact mathematical design, buts what’s missing is the eyebrows.
Click to expand...

There's an impressive amount of nonsense stuffed into that post - fair play.

Wilder has achieved promotion from every league he's ever managed in (apart from the Championship) and had just won L1 with 99 points - with a team who avoided relegation by a point the previous season - when we appointed him.

For someone who has had to work his way up the leagues to get the chance to.manage us, what exactly could his CV consist of? An FA Cup win with Alfreton? A Premier League title with Bradway? A Champions League winner's medal with Northampton, perhaps?
 
Nicolaus_Copernicus said:
If you’ve not guessed in the 1,500 odd messages that you’ve posted, this is a fan’s forum. A place where people go to express their opinions, however ill founded and poorly informed. These opinions might not match your intellectual and factual insight.

People aren’t criticising CW unfairly, nor doubting his record. However, it currently consists of 1 x conference play offs, 1 x L2 title and 1 x L1 title. Admittedly, he did win stuff at Bradway and Alfreton, but I doubt that cuts much ice at job interviews at the level he currently operates at. As much as I like him & am forever in his debt for getting us out of L1, being brutally, brutally honest, if CW wasn’t a blade he wouldn’t have got the job. We’d run out of options basically at the time of his appointment.

I have time for stats up to a point, but I don’t need them to tell me that post Coutts and pre Norwood our midfield wasn’t good enough, nor that we over pass the ball in transition, nor that we don’t deliver enough from wide areas, nor that we were shit at set piece delivery, etc. If stats support those truisms then good, if not, so be it.

That’s what 4 decades of watching football does. If certain players that can’t trap a bag of sand or pass water, are remaining in the team due to stats then god help us. Stats can’t tell you the emotional story. It can give you the exact mathematical design, buts what’s missing is the eyebrows.
Click to expand...

Your stating your opinion about my opinion, which in my opinion is pointless.
 
nicksufc said:
There's an impressive amount of nonsense stuffed into that post - fair play.

Wilder has achieved promotion from every league he's ever managed in (apart from the Championship) and had just won L1 with 99 points - with a team who avoided relegation by a point the previous season - when we appointed him.

For someone who has had to work his way up the leagues to get the chance to.manage us, what exactly could his CV consist of? An FA Cup win with Alfreton? A Premier League title with Bradway? A Champions League winner's medal with Northampton, perhaps?
Click to expand...

Thank you. So it’s just the middle paragraph that you disagree with? So not all nonsense?

I was stating facts, not criticisms of CW. I rate him as a manager & rate him as a SUFC manager, but I’m always careful not to let his back story cloud my view of him. The reason why ex players get a job straight out of playing, at a higher level than CW started, is that the idea of ‘working your way up’ is outdated and not viewed on as a plus point. It’s a quaint view held by people who talk wistfully about ‘working their way up’, ‘Starting on the bottom rung’ or ‘Starting on the shop floor’. Far better to have experience of dealing with modern professional players, coach the youth side of as best club as you can & a Pro Licence as early as possible. Like I said, it doesn’t cut much ice at interviews.

I’ll stand by my view that if CW wasn’t a blade and he’d not been in the Copthorne, we wouldn’t have been looking at the manager of Northampton to be our new manager. If you think differently, so be it, and I wouldn’t say that your view was nonsense. I supppose it’s a moot point. :)
 
Nicolaus_Copernicus said:
If you’ve not guessed in the 1,500 odd messages that you’ve posted, this is a fan’s forum. A place where people go to express their opinions, however ill founded and poorly informed. These opinions might not match your intellectual and factual insight.

People aren’t criticising CW unfairly, nor doubting his record. However, it currently consists of 1 x conference play offs, 1 x L2 title and 1 x L1 title. Admittedly, he did win stuff at Bradway and Alfreton, but I doubt that cuts much ice at job interviews at the level he currently operates at. As much as I like him & am forever in his debt for getting us out of L1, being brutally, brutally honest, if CW wasn’t a blade he wouldn’t have got the job. We’d run out of options basically at the time of his appointment.

I have time for stats up to a point, but I don’t need them to tell me that post Coutts and pre Norwood our midfield wasn’t good enough, nor that we over pass the ball in transition, nor that we don’t deliver enough from wide areas, nor that we were shit at set piece delivery, etc. If stats support those truisms then good, if not, so be it.

That’s what 4 decades of watching football does. If certain players that can’t trap a bag of sand or pass water, are remaining in the team due to stats then god help us. Stats can’t tell you the emotional story. It can give you the exact mathematical design, buts what’s missing is the eyebrows.
Click to expand...

So you didn't listen to it?

I thought I'd give it 5 mins or so and ended up listening to the whole thing.

The two maps for Norwood and Evans are remarkable.

 
mattbianco1 said:
So you didn't listen to it?

I thought I'd give it 5 mins or so and ended up listening to the whole thing.

The two maps for Norwood and Evans are remarkable.

Click to expand...


Yes, i listened to it. I wouldn't comment on it if I didn't. :)

Overall, I don't like the cold, clinical, mathematical break down of the game, but that's the way the game is going. As I said, I didn't need statistics to tell me the improvement Norwood has made. BA obviously have stats that back this view up. Conversely, I don't agree with the statistical support of Clarke. But hey, i'm a Luddite. :)
 
Nicolaus_Copernicus said:
Yes, i listened to it. I wouldn't comment on it if I didn't. :)

Overall, I don't like the cold, clinical, mathematical break down of the game, but that's the way the game is going. As I said, I didn't need statistics to tell me the improvement Norwood has made. BA obviously have stats that back this view up. Conversely, I don't agree with the statistical support of Clarke. But hey, i'm a Luddite. :)
Click to expand...
A Luddite, you say ?
Should be a cracking game when play Ludd then, we'll find out if stats make any difference at all :)
 
mattbianco1 said:
So you didn't listen to it?

I thought I'd give it 5 mins or so and ended up listening to the whole thing.

The two maps for Norwood and Evans are remarkable.

Click to expand...

Thanks for clearing it up matt, its a lot clearer now cheers pal.
 



Boxer Blade said:
Thanks for clearing it up matt, its a lot clearer now cheers pal.
Click to expand...

Watch the fecking video then :oops:

But basically, the left of the chart is the defence side of their games. Notice Evans is skewed to the left:

upload_2018-8-24_13-56-12.png

Then you bring Norwood in and see the spikes on the right - Forward Passes and Key Passes:

upload_2018-8-24_13-56-56.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Nessman930
Organizing North American Blades
Replies
1
Views
407
I should coco
I should coco
FH Team
Stephen Bettis live on Football Heaven tonight (6-7pm)
6 7 8
Replies
231
Views
19K
Bell4
Bell4
A
Steel City Derby Watch Along - On Sale Now
2
Replies
58
Views
4K
Inter_blade83
Inter_blade83
Esteban Cambiasso
Hull city game £38 in BL upper
Replies
4
Views
688
Berkshire Blade
B
O
Was the game against Hull Stolen.
2
Replies
49
Views
3K
Tezza1889
Tezza1889

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Back
Top Bottom