GIMH
Norwood's on Fire
Safe standing isn't it, rather than terracing?
-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
*Official* English Football Season 2015-16
- Thread starter Furball
- Start date
Furball
Evil Scotsman
Nah, would be gun at Selhurst Park. They've got an awesome section behind the goal on the left as the TV cameras look at it.
Cabinet96
Hall of Fame Member
Why? Would improve stadium capacities and atmosphere.
GIMH
Norwood's on Fire
Mainly trolling tbh
Last edited:
This has made me rather happier about the whole situation
Brentford owner Matthew Benham says he hates the term Moneyball | Football | The Guardian
Brentford owner Matthew Benham says he hates the term Moneyball | Football | The Guardian
sledger
Spanish_Vicente
Taking this article's thrust a bit further, I am really sick of things that talk about "data" and/or "analytics". There are times where I really regret devoting the last three years of my life to sudying these things. They're almost as bad as management speak to me these days.
That said I don't actually mind hearing people mention "moneyball", as it just makes me think of Liverpool, and that's always good for a laugh.
That said I don't actually mind hearing people mention "moneyball", as it just makes me think of Liverpool, and that's always good for a laugh.
Furball
Evil Scotsman
He's right. Moneyball has nothing to do with just "stats", it's working out what statistics and attributes are under-rated by the market and extracting value from the market.
Thinking cricket, you'd maybe pay big bucks for a bloke like Aaron Finch because you think of him as a big hitting top order batsman. Except Kane Williamson gets his runs at a faster SR. Williamson also strikes at a virtually identical rate to Rohit Sharma despite the latter hitting 4 times as many 6s. So while Rohit might be flashier to watch and attract a higher price, Williamson is just as efficient when it comes to the speed of his run scoring. When you're a team with a limited budget, you go for Williamson.
Last edited:
Uppercut
Request Your Custom Title Now!
I think size and physical strength are overvalued. There's a thrill you get from watching someone physically dominate that puts some people in awe of big, athletic players. Like when Pogba bursts past people into space he looks like an unstoppable force of nature, but Modric does the exact same thing far more often, it just doesn't look so impressive.
For something undervalued, I'm not sure. Maybe agility. David Silva dominates the ball every game he plays just by being able to change direction faster than everyone else. Also I've never seen a quantitative method that accounts for defensive positioning, so that'll be where the gap is if the data-driven stuff really takes off.
For something undervalued, I'm not sure. Maybe agility. David Silva dominates the ball every game he plays just by being able to change direction faster than everyone else. Also I've never seen a quantitative method that accounts for defensive positioning, so that'll be where the gap is if the data-driven stuff really takes off.
Uppercut
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Yeah definitely sets off the bull**** detectors. Has the idea of Mathiness gone mainstream or is it just an Econ thing?
sledger
Spanish_Vicente
I've not heard of that yet. But data fundamentalism seems to be everywhere all of a sudden. And very annoying it is too.
duffer
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Lillian Thomson
Hall of Fame Member
Extraordinary statement from Steve McClueless that Tim Krul's injury could cost them 18-20 points. They currently have 3 from 8 games. Assuming Krul was fit and they had a good run and somehow managed to scrape into mid table with about 45 points that would be a miracle. Without him their expectancy is somewhere in the mid 20s. 
Cabinet96
Hall of Fame Member
Yeah, he's probably just trying to be dramatic or get an excuse in early. No way he can be that deluded. I don't think any player is worth 20 points for their team. I think at best a guy like Messi might be able to get Newcastle 20 more points than they otherwise would but it's hard to say.
dontcloseyoureyes
BARNES OUT
No goalkeeper is worth 20 points, most probably aren't worth that for their career in relation to replacement level.
sledger
Spanish_Vicente
Yeah it's a nonsense comment. Obviously just attempting to lay the foundations for all the excuses that he'll inevitably start making for Newcastle's horrible level of performance this year.
On a general level though, I think a world class goalkeeper (to some sides, at least) can probably be worth about ten points a season. Had Arsenal had a proper goalie (and not bloody Almunia) in 2009/2010 for instance, it's probably not a stretch to say they quite conceivably could/would have won the title.
I remember someone on here, Uppercut I think, pointed out that 10 points they dropped over the last couple of months of the season that year were directly attributable to goals that were conceded as a result of Almunia ****ing up.
On a general level though, I think a world class goalkeeper (to some sides, at least) can probably be worth about ten points a season. Had Arsenal had a proper goalie (and not bloody Almunia) in 2009/2010 for instance, it's probably not a stretch to say they quite conceivably could/would have won the title.
I remember someone on here, Uppercut I think, pointed out that 10 points they dropped over the last couple of months of the season that year were directly attributable to goals that were conceded as a result of Almunia ****ing up.
dontcloseyoureyes
BARNES OUT
That's a terrible analysis though, unless you analyze every goal and ascertain whether he made a save that a replacement level keeper couldn't have made, you can't say that he lost you ten points. Maybe he lost you ten points in those matches but how many saves did he make during the other 30-odd games that an average keeper wouldn't have made? Probably a similar amount. You have to assess both sides otherwise the analysis is pointless.