Summer transfer window 2021.

[JacknOry]

8 minutes ago, Hoochie Bloochie Mama said:

Data science.

So it would seem. 

[tomphil]

12 hours ago, JacknOry said:

The point is - stats can be construed in either direction. You are telling us that Buckly has a positive blah blah but in the same table AA has a negative. Yet AA fired 25+ goals and is prbably why we're not relegated. Yet, your stats suggest we should drop him and play Buckley - its a load of bollocks tbh.

But it's the future sadly.

Not really these lads fault they are clearly very passionate about it and so it would seem is football in general.

Look forward in the future to managers saying 'well the data said if we did this or that there'd be a 75% chance we'd win. The pitch/ref/weather have got in the way though'...

Of course our mon is ahead of the curve on that.

[Dreams of 1995]

13 hours ago, JacknOry said:

These data nerds tie themselves in knots - the data they are using to defend a player on the FRINGES of the squad, shows that our BEST player is shite.

Couldnt make it up.

You just have made it up.

That's not what that table of data shows in any way shape or form

Nor has it been what Joe and Andy have been trying to claim either

People dismissing data analysis because "they can see better with their eyes" are allowing themselves to be blinded. Whilst data might not present the whole truth it goes some way to filtering out the 'luxury' players 

Steve Walsh wrote a great article in The Times a few weeks back about his discovery of Kante and Mahrez. He was taken back by Mahrez's skills on the ball but in scouting him came across Kante. Before deciding to scout Kante he retrieved his data and was impressed by his 'recoveries', tackle percentages etc. This was a player that wasn't a glamourous player like Mahrez, not a goal scorer like Haaland (who Walsh uncovered too iirc) but an industrious player that really shined in his match data. Without using them scouting systems that he used he might never have returned to see Kante play in the flesh.

There's definitely a role to play with data in football and imo those that are throwing it aside are either old news or unwilling to adapt to the modern world. 

[JacknOry]

35 minutes ago, Dreams of 1995 said:

You just have made it up.

That's not what that table of data shows in any way shape or form

Nor has it been what Joe and Andy have been trying to claim either

People dismissing data analysis because "they can see better with their eyes" are allowing themselves to be blinded. Whilst data might not present the whole truth it goes some way to filtering out the 'luxury' players 

Steve Walsh wrote a great article in The Times a few weeks back about his discovery of Kante and Mahrez. He was taken back by Mahrez's skills on the ball but in scouting him came across Kante. Before deciding to scout Kante he retrieved his data and was impressed by his 'recoveries', tackle percentages etc. This was a player that wasn't a glamourous player like Mahrez, not a goal scorer like Haaland (who Walsh uncovered too iirc) but an industrious player that really shined in his match data. Without using them scouting systems that he used he might never have returned to see Kante play in the flesh.

There's definitely a role to play with data in football and imo those that are throwing it aside are either old news or unwilling to adapt to the modern world. 

Good players get found - Kante would have been found without data. So, he came across Kante whole scouting somebody else - he caught his eye, then checked his stats etc. Sounds like without eyes he might not have come back to watch him play again, not because of the data. 

I sometimes wonder how the game ever survived before data existed. 

I have accepted many times that data has a role to play - I have never dismissed its use. I am just pointing to this example of using stats to defend a player while the same stats show AA to be poor and the likes of Amari Bell as world beaters.

 

[RoverKyle]

Whilst I don't doubt the importance of data in football, I doubt the importance of its application at Rovers. For years we've seemingly picked transfer targets based on players Mowbray's teams have played against before, whether someone is a nice man or not, what said players wear when they meet the management team & players from Middlesbrough. We're presumably ignoring a lot of data based scouting to do that. 

There needs to be a whole culture shift at the club before it plays any significant role for us. For me, that starts with Mowbray and his mates leaving. There's almost no point bickering about that until it happens. 

[Dreams of 1995]

6 minutes ago, JacknOry said:

Good players get found - Kante would have been found without data. So, he came across Kante whole scouting somebody else - he caught his eye, then checked his stats etc. Sounds like without eyes he might not have come back to watch him play again, not because of the data. 

I sometimes wonder how the game ever survived before data existed. 

I have accepted many times that data has a role to play - I have never dismissed its use. I am just pointing to this example of using stats to defend a player while the same stats show AA to be poor and the likes of Amari Bell as world beaters.

 

With respect you haven't read the article and Steve Walsh, seen as one of the greatest recruiters in football right now, is adamant of the use of data and scouting systems in football.

The game existed before data because nobody used data. If nobody uses it then everybody is on an equal playing field. If 10 teams are using data analysis and 10 teams aren't I would argue the latter would be at a disadvantage.

Again, I must point out that in the example of statistics you are on about, neither Joe nor Andy claimed that this shown Armstrong to be poor and Bell to be a world beater. It is a collection of statistics that show whether we win or lose if an individual player is on the pitch. That is all. I really do not see the beef.

Edited June 8, 2021 by Dreams of 1995

[RoverCanada]

Haha, +/- is a funny ol' stat to be arguing about... and a strange one to apply to football. As has been said, context is important. (Ice) hockey is my true love, where +/- has long been rubbished. I'll give the column in that table some credit for adjusting for minutes on the pitch, but it's still incredibly misleading to compare across every player.

Setting Buckley aside, let's highlight Downing and Dolan at +1.3/90 and +1.1/90, respectively. Great numbers, apparently, but I think we can all agree that they're players who were mostly put on late in games when we were chasing, and thus more likely to pick up a goal. They may have contributed to that, but you need to adjust for 'score effects' to tease out that context (something that has been done for GF% stats in hockey, but it's not entirely satisfactory).

Chasing up where that table is located (here: https://fbref.com/en/squads/e090f40b/Blackburn-Rovers-Stats), let's also look at the bottom, where we've got Elliott Bennett at -0.72/90. Now I'm sure plenty would like to use that as ammunition to attack a divisive player, but he's likely partly getting dinged for being put on largely as a defensive/emergency replacement. Or late in games out of reach, eg, he gets hit with a -1 for being on for Koroma's 82 min goal in our final 5-2 win over Huddersfield. The number can also be exaggerated for players with a small amount of minutes when converting to per 90.

And then there's overall team effects, which make it a silly stat to apply in football where you've got 11 players playing most of the match together. (In hockey, players are constantly changing on and off, so there is a bit more hope to tease out player impact from team impact, if still difficult). Wharton played great, but he was also part of a general purple patch for the squad. Is he really +1.36/90 vs +0.35/90 better than Lenihan...? Armstrong played almost 85% of our minutes and his aggregate +/- of +7 essentially just reflects our overall GF-GA difference of +11 over the year.

(Kinda interesting that Elliott is near the bottom at -0.16/90 despite playing a lot of minutes, but again, I wouldn't read too much into this stat)

I'll admit to generally being an analytics fan (and I have some appreciation for xG-like stats, if of course not 100% devotion!), but let's focus on the stats that are actually being used by teams at the forefront of analytics (many of which aren't publicly available!). Reminds me of when data analytics were first coming into football in the '90s and they were counting things like tackles, without the context that if you're tackling a lot, it probably also means you never have the ball...

Edited June 8, 2021 by RoverCanada

[Ewood Ace]

10 minutes ago, Dreams of 1995 said:

Steve Walsh, seen as one of the greatest recruiters in football right now,

Evertonian's would beg to differ on this. And Walsh's awful spell at Everton combined with Leicester's continued success in the market without him suggests that there was much more to Leicester's recruitment success than Steve Walsh.

[RoversClitheroe]

Roberto Firmino was found via Football Manager.

[Bigdoggsteel]

31 minutes ago, Ewood Ace said:

Evertonian's would beg to differ on this. And Walsh's awful spell at Everton combined with Leicester's continued success in the market without him suggests that there was much more to Leicester's recruitment success than Steve Walsh.

Not as simple as saying he had an awful spell at Everton. Plus I don't think anyone is saying he was solely responsible for what Leicester did. Just that he used different techniques to find players. Some absolutely excellent and value players. These are facts. 

 

[Guest]

54 minutes ago, JacknOry said:

I am just pointing to this example of using stats to defend a player

Andy's table wasn't posted in some heroic attempt to "defend" John Buckley. @Sparks Roverclaimed that "when Bucko starts we always lose" and both Andy and I proved that to not be the case. It was a factual error and data can show us that. Andy's table showed that we don't lose when Bucko starts. He never once attempted to draw the conclusion that this table could be used to determine the playing abilities of players, nor did he suggest it.

Why you're choosing to argue with a straw man, rather than what was actually said, is beyond me. Nobody claimed, suggested or implied that a +/- on GS/GW table could show you that John Buckley is better than such a player. The only person who has used that table in that manner is you.

[Dreams of 1995]

34 minutes ago, Ewood Ace said:

Evertonian's would beg to differ on this. And Walsh's awful spell at Everton combined with Leicester's continued success in the market without him suggests that there was much more to Leicester's recruitment success than Steve Walsh.

I would predict that whatever scout I propose there would be a period in his career they didn't perform

However, the basis of the message was clear, and that is that data is used to identify players which when coupled with an understanding of the game can be used to filter out and highlight stand out performers

This thread would have you believe the naked eye is better than data but in terms of pinpointing players in a now global market it is fundamentally important to have an established data analysis team

It can also be used quite well to point out a players' weakness within your own squad

[Guest]

48 minutes ago, RoverCanada said:

Haha, +/- is a funny ol' stat to be arguing about... and a strange one to apply to football. As has been said, context is important. (Ice) hockey is my true love, where +/- has long been rubbished. I'll give the column in that table some credit for adjusting for minutes on the pitch, but it's still incredibly misleading to compare across every player.

Nobody did this. Somebody said we always lose when Player X starts and this table aided in showing that to be factually untrue. Nobody once attempted to compare players playing ability using this table and declare John Buckley better than Adam Armstrong. That would be a silly conclusion to draw. 

[Guest]

53 minutes ago, Dreams of 1995 said:

Again, I must point out that in the example of statistics you are on about, neither Joe nor Andy claimed that this shown Armstrong to be poor and Bell to be a world beater. It is a collection of statistics that show whether we win or lose if an individual player is on the pitch. That is all. I really do not see the beef.

100%. I don't understand why the argument against this table is "you can't use this to show that JB is better than AA" when both me and Andy 1000000% agree with that statement and have never attempted to do so.

[Guest]

Extensive insight on Harry Pickering here https://themanonfootball.wordpress.com/2021/06/07/four-wonderful-years-of-harry-pickering/

 

[Sparks Rover]

23 minutes ago, JoeH said:

Nobody did this. Somebody said we always lose when Player X starts and this table aided in showing that to be factually untrue. Nobody once attempted to compare players playing ability using this table and declare John Buckley better than Adam Armstrong. That would be a silly conclusion to draw. 

All it really shows is that he's not usually on the pitch.  The ones who are tend to further down the table....they are on the pitch more often....

My throwaway comment which was partly in jest has upset a few stats men. You don't need a silly table to know that Bucko played in the dead-rubber last game groundhog day match., where the happy clappers are happy to use it in cold numbers....we all know that if that game was to get in the play offs.😅 young JB would be nowhere near the starting 11

 

Edited June 8, 2021 by Sparks Rover

[RoverCanada]

32 minutes ago, JoeH said:

Nobody did this. Somebody said we always lose when Player X starts and this table aided in showing that to be factually untrue. Nobody once attempted to compare players playing ability using this table and declare John Buckley better than Adam Armstrong. That would be a silly conclusion to draw. 

Ah, I may have lost the thread a bit, but +/- doesn't even really answer that question, so I'm not sure of the point of bringing it up at all...

(For the record, we were 3-2-2 in games Buckley started 🙂)

Anyway, my post was actually more of a general defence of analytics and why attacking stats like +/- is a silly strawman to use, as there did seem to be a sudden rash of analytics bashing based on one out of context table!

[bluebruce]

When are we expecting Tony to first use the excuse of 'there won't be much movement in the market until the Euros are over' ?

I'm gonna go for in the next 1-2 weeks.

[tomphil]

10 hours ago, RoverKyle said:

Whilst I don't doubt the importance of data in football, I doubt the importance of its application at Rovers. For years we've seemingly picked transfer targets based on players Mowbray's teams have played against before, whether someone is a nice man or not, what said players wear when they meet the management team & players from Middlesbrough. We're presumably ignoring a lot of data based scouting to do that. 

There needs to be a whole culture shift at the club before it plays any significant role for us. For me, that starts with Mowbray and his mates leaving. There's almost no point bickering about that until it happens. 

But he's been trying to be modern using it and it's terms along with his own version of 2021 total football.

If the guy managed to his limited strengths like he was a few years ago we wouldn't be top 6 but might look a bit better. What worries me is him just picking sides and systems based on stats he's being fed. I think that might explain some of the odd stuff he does.

Then he ends up throwing it out the window on 65 mins and making multiple changes.

He's an old school manager, dinosaur to some, he'd be better off managing the old school way and not trying to make wine out of water.

[simongarnerisgod]

tony considers himself progressive but he`s not a good enough manager to get his tactical instructions through to his players,who in turn are not good enough to implement them,hence the winless streaks and soulless performances,imo he gave up 2 seasons ago and now he`s just picking up his considerable wages,so much for an honourable man who said he`d go if he felt he`d reached the end,honourable my ****** a**e

[rigger]

1 hour ago, bluebruce said:

When are we expecting Tony to first use the excuse of 'there won't be much movement in the market until the Euros are over' ?

I'm gonna go for in the next 1-2 weeks.

Before we hear about season tickets.

[JacknOry]

11 hours ago, Dreams of 1995 said:

With respect you haven't read the article and Steve Walsh, seen as one of the greatest recruiters in football right now, is adamant of the use of data and scouting systems in football.

The game existed before data because nobody used data. If nobody uses it then everybody is on an equal playing field. If 10 teams are using data analysis and 10 teams aren't I would argue the latter would be at a disadvantage.

Again, I must point out that in the example of statistics you are on about, neither Joe nor Andy claimed that this shown Armstrong to be poor and Bell to be a world beater. It is a collection of statistics that show whether we win or lose if an individual player is on the pitch. That is all. I really do not see the beef.

So, we should just play Bell, Buckley and Bennett every match? Promotion nailed on next season! Have you answered why this apparent plus for Buckley is not a negative for our best player this season? Don't see many teams around around OUR NET POISITIVE superstar, yet the AA who is negative is attracting quite the interest. 

Point is, stop using stats to defend players if you not going to use the same stats fro all other team players. Buckley, i hope he does well but these data nerds are painting him out to be the next Lampard.

 

Edited June 8, 2021 by JacknOry

[JacknOry]

11 hours ago, Dreams of 1995 said:

With respect you haven't read the article and Steve Walsh, seen as one of the greatest recruiters in football right now, is adamant of the use of data and scouting systems in football.

The game existed before data because nobody used data. If nobody uses it then everybody is on an equal playing field. If 10 teams are using data analysis and 10 teams aren't I would argue the latter would be at a disadvantage.

Again, I must point out that in the example of statistics you are on about, neither Joe nor Andy claimed that this shown Armstrong to be poor and Bell to be a world beater. It is a collection of statistics that show whether we win or lose if an individual player is on the pitch. That is all. I really do not see the beef.

They were using it to defend Buckley. Its as a simple as it gets. We win more when Buckley plays - that is what was said. I suggest you read back. 

[phili]

2 minutes ago, JacknOry said:

According to the same table you and your lover posted, Buckley is net positive for the team while AA is a negative. What gives?

 

It doesn't show that at all though. it was a table to show that buckley had started more games that we had won than started more games we lost. That is all.

Also we were under Hugh's and Big Sam pioneers of the use of the data systems we are now trying to catch up with before the system was dismantled after Venky's took over and implemented an agency lead approach.. Samba being an example of a demo Hugh's had of the system in the first few weeks he was here and then invited for a trial to see if the predictions of the stats matched with reality.

As its a transfer thread and with most clubs now using these systems extensively especially with getting to games for the last 18 months, how do you think most clubs will be doing transfer business this year? Which would you prefer we go down the data approach or ring up our friendly agent and ask him to bring in 5 new player for us?

 

[JacknOry]

2 minutes ago, phili said:

It doesn't show that at all though. it was a table to show that buckley had started more games that we had won than started more games we lost. That is all.

Also we were under Hugh's and Big Sam pioneers of the use of the data systems we are now trying to catch up with before the system was dismantled after Venky's took over and implemented an agency lead approach.. Samba being an example of a demo Hugh's had of the system in the first few weeks he was here and then invited for a trial to see if the predictions of the stats matched with reality.

As its a transfer thread and with most clubs now using these systems extensively especially with getting to games for the last 18 months, how do you think most clubs will be doing transfer business this year? Which would you prefer we go down the data approach or ring up our friendly agent and ask him to bring in 5 new player for us?

 

Im fully aware of SA bringing the sports science here but thanks for reminding me of my 40th birthday many years ago. My point is that these guys (kids in their 20s) are using stats to defend one player but not to attack another. How is it that difficult to understand? Buckley is great but AA sucks - ok.