Author Topic: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy  (Read 78056 times)

Offline tax_man

  • Kopite
  • *****
  • Posts: 807
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #920 on: March 28, 2012, 01:54:45 pm »
that description of moneyball is inaccurate, and it's been perpetuated wrongly over and over.  what he described has indeed always been done by most clubs.  that's nothing new.  it's more of an objective, statistical look at players who are traditionally overlooked because there is some kind of risk (or traditional bias) associated with them.  in football, that would be something like when people say "he's too small to play in the premier league," or "he's extremely one-footed" or "he gets too many red cards" or "he only scored that many because he plays in a shitty league" or "he hasn't done it at a big club" or "he's too old now" or "he's too slow for the Premier League" or "he gets in trouble off the pitch a lot" or "he's a nutter" or anything like that where there's a subjective bias - some predetermined, traditional reason some player won't be a good signing.  the player will have good stats in all the relevant categories, but because "he's too small" or whatever, there's a risk that is normally associated with signing him.  moneyball looks to take advantage of that and sign those "risky" players who are normally overlooked by other clubs because the players are otherwise good players.  because they have a "defect" or a risk/bias going against them, clubs will practice "risk aversion" and sign a player who doesn't have a bias going against him, but he would cost more.  in baseball that used to mean you could sign a 'defected' player cheaply because the bias says they shouldn't be worth much.  in football that may be the case still if you can get to those players early enough.

I get that, my point was more that people keep just saying the word 'moneyball' to mean what I quoted, buy good and buy cheap. It's such a buzz word now. Even on the fantastic Anfield Wrap they talked of our moneyball strategy on this weeks show without questioning what it means and without realising that we are about as close to moneyball as Man City at times.

Offline IndianaRed

  • Aaarghhh!!!!... my eyes!!!!... my eyes!!!!..
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 3,130
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #921 on: March 28, 2012, 02:10:38 pm »
I get that, my point was more that people keep just saying the word 'moneyball' to mean what I quoted, buy good and buy cheap. It's such a buzz word now. Even on the fantastic Anfield Wrap they talked of our moneyball strategy on this weeks show without questioning what it means and without realising that we are about as close to moneyball as Man City at times.

yeah, i tried to address that in the first couple sentences.  people who don't know what it means are kind of just accepting it as "buy good, young players with potential for cheap" which isn't really what it is, and it's indeed becoming a buzz word for the wrong thing.
« Last Edit: March 28, 2012, 02:18:51 pm by IndianaRed »

Offline IndianaRed

  • Aaarghhh!!!!... my eyes!!!!... my eyes!!!!..
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 3,130
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #922 on: March 28, 2012, 02:12:35 pm »
[in addendum to the above post about last summer's buys]

FSG seem to value experience in the premier league extremely highly, especially concerning last summer's buys.  Damien said in interviews after each player was signed that experience in the PL was important.  Downing has plenty of course, while Juan Mata didn't, which could have been a reason they marked him off the list if he was ever on it, and for similar transfer fees and given the numbers Downing was producing, the one with PL experience came with less risk.  they could have bought a foreign leftback - Aly Cissokho for example was linked heavily - but they didn't, sort of: instead they bought a foreign player who had premier league experience in Jose Enrique.  they bought a foreign CB but he was already playing for his national team (who are playing well these days) and came with a low price tag.  henderson had a few years of PL experience, was playing pretty well AND was young, so perhaps they saw a lot of value in him.  charlie adam had a year's experience and had been playing very well.  it was only a year, but perhaps his form persuaded them.  all i'm saying is, they value (or valued) PL experience very highly in their early buys, perhaps in the hopes it would help them avoid a player becoming a flop.

as you can see they're only willing to take some risks; foreign players who are not PL-tested run you the risk of not being up to it in the premier league, and thus wasting money.  by focusing on PL-proven players they were attempting to eliminate that risk and perhaps embracing other risks.

i'm sure their strategy is evolving though now that they've had a couple go's at transfer windows.  maybe they will take more or different risks as they gain experience in football.
« Last Edit: March 28, 2012, 02:20:25 pm by IndianaRed »

Offline Alan_X

  • WUM. 'twatito' - The Cat Herding Firm But Fair Voice Of Reason (Except when he's got a plank up his arse). Gimme some skin, priest! Has a general dislike for Elijah Wood. Clearly cannot fill even a thong! RAWK Resident Muppet. Has a crush o
  • RAWK Staff
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 53,219
  • Come on you fucking red men!!!
  • Super Title: This is super!
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #923 on: March 28, 2012, 02:20:37 pm »
When discussing the principles of Moneyball, people often forget the actual title of the book: "Moneyball: The Art of Winning an Unfair Game". Of course it is about basic economics. By the way, it is more like "buy youngish quality players (that will be effective in your system) on the cheap".


We're reading a different book then. The one I'm reading is not about basic economics at all. The background is economic - how does a team like the Oakland As compete against clubs with larger budgets?

The answer is to look for value in players overlooked by the traditional scouting system and whose skills are not highlighted by a scoring and statistical system originally defined by a cricket lover.

The examples in the book are all based around scientific rigour - questioning whether what is measured is right - does a batter's RBI mean anything useful? Whether the old-school coaches' preferences are meaningful or fundamentally flawed?

It's more than just picking a decent player who's a little short. It's about having the evidence to show that a decent player who's a little short will have an impact on the team. The perfect example in the book is Chad Bradford - a player that Paul DePodesta had been watching but didn't have the evidence to justify signing him. It was the work of Voros McCracken, in providing reliable pitching statistics in a way that no-one had done before, that gave DePodesta that justification.

In a tight economic situation the important thing is to minimise the risk that's inherent when buying new players and to understand what any player will bring to the team. It's about measurable and most importantly meaningful statistics.

Personally I am not convinced that those principles can be applied directly to a game as fluid as football.

So I'd say that your "buy youngish quality players (that will be effective in your system) on the cheap"... is ok except that it's not about "youngish quality players" (David Judge for example), that the system might have to change depending on the players available (using three players to replace the statistical impact of one star), and that it's about the right value not buying cheap.
Sid Lowe (@sidlowe)
09/03/2011 08:04
Give a man a mask and he will tell the truth, Give a man a user name and he will act like a total twat.
Its all about winning shiny things.

Offline kdorg

  • Anny Roader
  • ****
  • Posts: 432
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #924 on: March 28, 2012, 02:36:54 pm »
Sorry this is really long but this is the most comprehensive indicator of Comolli's model and what he looks for I've seen as it's an interview with lots of direct quotes. Hopefully anyone who hasn't seen it will find it interesting even if a bit tl:dr

Quote
Dave Richardson interviews Damien Comolli, Director of Football at Liverpool Football Club.

Dave Richardson PhD is a specialist in youth development, organisational culture and community and the assistant director of the School of Sport and Exercise Sciences at Liverpool John Moores University.

Eyebrows were raised, especially those with a Spurs connection, when Damien Comolli returned to the English Premier League with Liverpool Football Club. Damien was appointed as the Director of Football Strategy by Liverpool FC and Fenway Sports Group (FSG) in November last year. He then was promoted as Director of Football. His previous excursions in to the Premier League have received mixed reviews. A short time spent Googling ‘Damien Comolli’ offers an array of perspectives from various (expert) commentators. This interview offers us a chance to hear for ourselves Damien’s thoughts on talent identification, scouting, recruitment and player development.

Comolli was a young player with AS Monaco until his late teens. At this early age he appeared to have an eye for talent. His own eye critiqued his own ability and concluded that he was not good enough. The continuation of ‘some’ type of career in football required an alternative strategy.

The customary coaching licenses followed alongside a further ‘what if’ contingency of a degree in Law. The law degree doesn’t feature significantly in our early exchanges, and acts only as a vehicle for learning and structuring work. I’m sure that a law degree offers more than this, but Comolli is content to focus on the football education that he required in order to secure a future in the game.

A coaching position at AS Monaco was subsequently secured. Arsene Wenger was the manager at the time and a significant ally in Damien’s future career choice and undoubtedly his practice. In 1996 an under 18s coaching position at Nagasaki in Japan proved an attractive proposition. Subsequently, his encounters with Wenger continued and the relationship evolved. Two years later, and one year in to Wenger’s tenure at Arsenal, he offered Comolli a position as the Gunners’ European Scout.

Comolli’s experiences thus far included playing and coaching, even a spot of goalkeeper coaching. He also admits to being swayed towards fitness and conditioning. Those with any sense of football nous believe, rightly or wrongly, that they can ‘spot’ a player. However, to take on such a high profile and critical role with little or no experience of ‘scouting’, in a new country and at such a high profile club would appear a fairly daunting prospect.

Comolli spent a year ‘learning’ this new trade, ‘understanding what scouting was about’. Any thoughts of returning to the coaching environment petered out after a couple of years, as his confidence and reputation for spotting and recruiting talent evolved.

Comolli’s CV possesses two stints at Saint Etienne as Sporting Director and a 3 year period as Tottenham’s Director of Football. All of these appointments embraced a wider brief than his role at Arsenal, including more strategic development plans, medical provision, scouting and contract negotiations.

These roles also saw Damien positioned as an intermediate between those that run the club, the owners and the head coach. With no real management experience, other than watching others, his first stint at Saint Etienne was a steep, but valuable, learning curve; one that Damien claims enabled him to learn a vast amount in a very short period of time. Comolli has learnt quickly. He is also quick to recognise the importance of having good people around him, good people who know the demands and identity of their club.

Comolli has been involved in either coaching, identifying, scouting and/or recruiting players to the highest level for nearly 20 years. He is well aware of the complex intricacies of talent identification and development. In essence, the facets of talent ID and development include a complex mosaic of talent considerations including, technical, tactical, physical, physiological, psychological, social and cultural issues. So, in scouting a player, what should you be looking for? Comolli recounts the evolutionary nature of his existence and subsequent evolution of the talent scouting and recruitment process,

‘I would say there has been a major change in the last 3 to 4 years whereby I think now we need to look a lot more at the psychological aspect of the player, the attitude of the player, the mentality of the player on the pitch than we used to… before, it was all about the talent and the physical ability and I think now probably with the style of play of the likes of Barcelona and Arsenal… I think we are now more orientated towards the attitude of the player. Is he a team player? Is he intelligent enough that he puts himself at the disposal of the team? The first thing we used to look for is the talent, but not anymore. What we want, is a talented player but with the right attitude and intelligence.’


Comolli explains further and continues to champion the notions of attitude, respect for the team and intelligence, ‘You can sense from what he (the player) does on the pitch, his intelligence and practical awareness can usually be seen without having to meet the player, you want players to be able to use that talent for the team and to be a team player… Obviously, when you work in the Premier League you need to look out for physical attributes because it’s physically very demanding, you need to be strong, you need to be quick. But coming back to the talent, how do you use it? How does the player use the talent they’ve got?’

Comolli works hard to translate this philosophy to his scouts and recruitment staff. Additionally, he recognises that each club is different, each manager is different, ‘You have to respect what the club wants, how the club wants to play and the type of player the club wants to bring in… it’s not worth putting a player that you like as a scout but doesn’t match with what the club needs or what the club is looking for, or doesn’t match the playing philosophy or identity (of the club).’

These words are rarely heard in the talent recruitment corridors of many top-level (and lower-level) football clubs, or rarely are they fully articulated in this way. The job is to educate the scouts, create regular and direct communication between them and the coaching staff.

 The best scouts ‘get it, usually, but if they don’t, it’s about bringing them here and making them understand what we look for, trying to make them understand what the club’s philosophy is in terms of our approach to playing the game and our (the club’s) identity.

’ The ideal scout is one, ‘that has got a great eye, a great judgement of player and also a fantastic network.

The eye in this regard, must match the needs of the club (i.e., both the academy and the first team), the club’s playing philosophy and the identity of the club. I sense that first of all, you need to spend some reconnaissance time to understand what these immediate needs are and then translate this to the coaches and scouts who must begin to recognise and understand that the needs of the club and the subsequent identity of the club is about ‘today’ as opposed to ‘yesterday’ or some bygone era.

The process of recruitment is, more than ever, a strategic operation. At a first team level, due diligence must be afforded to potential multi-million pound acquisitions. The initial player recommendations of the scout are followed up by at least 3 to 4 more viewings from ‘other’ senior staff. Subsequently, three positive reports will trigger a ‘buying’ mechanism, ‘the beauty of having different people is that different people watch different things. They have a slightly different eye, depending on their experience, their personality or background as maybe a coach or maybe a player… the diversity is key… you want to develop a situation where people can challenge, challenge me or the manager. You know, saying that’s my opinion, you may not agree with me but I’ll give you my opinion because that’s the way I think and that’s what I’ve seen… you want your scouts to be strong, not sit on the fence, make a recommendation, yes, no, why. You want a strong recommendation either way.’

Comolli recognises that today’s outlay on players requires more than just a playing recommendation. The recommendation must go beyond the pitch. Compiled reports require information about the player’s lifestyle, his approach to training, what he eats and drinks, his family and his background.

The narrative conjures up images of scouts being schooled watching re-runs of the exploits Jim Rockford or Eddie Shoestring. Yet understanding every aspect of a player is critical in guiding the ultimate call as to whether you spend a few million. There are no guarantees. We are all fully aware of those players that have not travelled well or settled well into their new club. High outlay and high expectations with little or no delivery or reward (no matter what the circumstances) is an equation that Comolli wishes to avoid. Reducing the risk is paramount. Comolli explains that his role is to try to anticipate whether a player will adapt to life in his new club, with his new team mates, his new city (new country even) or new environment before the club signs them. The club then works with the player’s agent to help the player and his family to settle and become more independent. This post-signature aspect of player recruitment has been traditionally neglected by numerous factions within football. Comolli maintains that this is a critical part of his and the club’s role.

Comolli’s role is not confined to first team player recruitment. He’s also involved in the development of the scouting network for the Academy. He recognises that scouting the younger ages is even more challenging,
‘the younger you look at them the more difficult the scouting job is… it is so difficult to try to get a player who is (say) 12, and predict that he’s going to be a top player at 18. The older they are the easier it is from a scouting point of view. But in terms of what we are looking for in a player it is exactly the same thing; talent, attitude, intelligence, tactical awareness. We are taking more of a gamble because we don’t know how a player is going to change between 12 to 15 or 16 and 19 and also 17 and 19 or 17 and 20… you don’t want to sign a player who is 15 and fully matured because you know there is no room for development, from a physical point of view and sometimes from a psychological point of view as well, because sometimes the player will dominate his category at 15 but not so much at 20. So that’s the basic thing to take into consideration. But again, we tell the scouts to not just look only at the talent, but look at what the player is like with his talent and how he uses his talent, so it’s coming back, a little bit, to how we work with the first team.’[/i]

 The judgement of talent in these early years appears more flexible. There also appears to be a sense of cultural congruence between the first team and the academy. Comolli reiterates his philosophy; talented players, with intelligence, a respect for the team, a sense of selflessness and an ability to develop and learn. At this point he recounts the words of Ernie Accorsi, the former General Manager of the NFL’s New York Giants football team, ‘He used to say that if a kid has had a good attitude in the past but lost his way, you can make him good again but if your kid has never had a good attitude then you’ll never make him good.’

The sentiment here refers back to attitude. Comolli describes his evolving experiences, ‘you think yeah his attitude is no good but we’re going to change him… you’ve got no chance…you always want to meet the player and sometimes you’ve got to make a judgement without really knowing the person personally. But if you think his behaviour is not right but you know he’s going to come into our environment are we going to make him better are we’re going to change him totally, it doesn’t work. In my experience it doesn’t work. You need to see some positive signs to be convinced that you are going to be able to change the kid, if you don’t see anything positive he won’t change.’

The psychologists reading this may contend Comolli’s stance. Most psychological literature tends to suggest that, with the correct support, anything is possible. Comolli disagrees. Top-level football is a tough place to be. Players with ‘attitude deficiencies’ can negatively impact the positive environment that you wish to create. Moreover, too much valuable practitioner time can be spent on and/or with them. They have no place in Comolli’s model.

Comolli recognises the importance of the youth academy in his strategic recruitment plan, ‘If there is no path between the academy or the reserves and the first team then you can work as well as you want in the academy but there will be no end project. If there is no common identity, there is no common coaching or playing philosophy then it doesn’t work. I’ve arrived in clubs where it was literally two different entities within one club; on one side the academy and the other side the first team and I consider that (the development of cultural congruence) as a very important part of my job to make sure that everybody is on the same line.’

The development of cultural congruence between the academy and first team environments is a difficult challenge. Cultural and physical distance between the two entities can further exaggerate the divide.

Comolli has developed a series of shared events for first team, reserve team and youth team staff to encourage mutual understanding, references points, philosophical, technical and tactical synergy.

Comolli is clearly an advocate of developing common practices across the youth and professional environments. His job is to create a ‘real’ pathway for a young player to travel from the academy through to the reserves and ultimately in to the first team. Comolli is concerned that the post academy experience is probably the biggest challenge facing him and football in general,

‘it’s the same everywhere’. I think that the step between the first team and the reserves is a challenge for every single club in Europe and the bigger the football club the more difficult it is… we haven’t found the right, or perfect path or the right balance and I still think we’ve still got a lot of improvements to make from 18 to 20, 21. Those 3 years are a bit touch and go in football at the moment.’

Young players entering the first team environment are (normally) not the finished article, yet they are treated as such. The culture of the professional environment is one that does not typically embrace the notion of development. The bigger conundrum for Comolli is what to do with the player who is (say) 20 and is too good for the reserves but not quite ready for the first team.

Many promising young careers have come to an undistinguished, faltering and invisible end in an environment of uncertainty typically beset with a ruthless mandate to ‘just get on with it’. The loan system is normally championed as a solution to this problem. Traditionally the loan system has been devoid of strategic intent and/or strategic management with little thought to the ‘matching’ of host and donor clubs or the development needs of the player.

Comolli’s model appears different, [/i]‘The loan system is managed by myself and the Academy Director… it’s crucial to the player’s development. It is managed properly and thoughtfully. We speak to the player after every game, the local scouts pay a visit to the player to ensure everything is fine and then we kind of have a list of clubs that we are keen to send the players to because we know the type of football they will play, the way they train, we know they will look after the player… we don’t want to be in a situation where a loan will be dictated to us, we prefer to be proactive.’[/i]

The provision of a development pathway is a difficult challenge in any football club. The volatile, short-termism of the football industry typically dictates that managers, chief executives and owners haven’t got time for this.

Comolli’s experience knows that he needs the owners on board as well as the manager. To carry out his strategic plan he needs support and patience from those around him. Such virtues are typically in short supply in such environments but Comolli seems to have found them with Liverpool FC and FSG.

As for the future of talent recruitment, Comolli extends his need to understand every detail of a player before the club decide to sign them. The need for (accurate and reliable) data and information; physiological, physical, technical, psychological and social is critical to help inform decisions.

As is the case in America, he believes that psychological profiling prior to signing a contract will emerge in England and in Europe. The sense of knowing the person as opposed just the player appears critical. At the earlier age Comolli would like to be able to predict the work load capacity of a player before signing them. In essence, he wants to know if they can cope physically with the demands of top-level football. Something similar occurs in US baseball with the physical assessment and work load capacity of the pitcher’s arm. Comolli’s not quite sure whether this will transfer or translate to football just yet, but I’m sure he’ll find out pretty soon.


Offline Nessy76

  • Shits alone and doesn't condone public self-molestation. Literally Goldenballs' biggest fan
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 17,993
  • We All Live In A Red And White Klopp
    • Andrew Ness Photographer
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #925 on: March 28, 2012, 02:41:44 pm »
It has some, and will have more as stat-gathering in football matures and becomes more sophisticated. For example, people look at 'assist' figures for wingers or creative midfielders - but the assist figure depends on a striker doing his bit to qualify. So the newer, more sophisticated stat is 'chance creation' - passes which lead to shots on goal, regardless of whether they end in a goal or not. As mentioned a million times on RAWK, Downing, Adam and Henderson all figured very highly in 'chance creation' stats last season - Downing is 5th in 'chance creation' over the last 7 years, behind only Gerrard, Lampard, Fabregas and Giggs.

To that extent, I think you'd have to say it's been fairly successful, we have been creating chances all season without finishing them off. I think there is a practical limit to the usefulness of stats in football, because of the complexity of the game. There are undoubtedly some useful indicators, but I really don't think there is as much to be developed here as some make out. I'd be fascinated to find out what Comolli actually looks at.

There are some good points made in this post:

Say Downing's chances created. Putting the ball into the six yard is a chance created. Is that a true reflection, probably not. There could have been nobody in the box. Or how many were in the box ? Or are stats sophisticated enough to actually determine a chance created as being X feet within a team mate in the box ? Or what is it. THere would be so many variables to play with.
Did he create the most chances from the left, and % of those from the left converted. Does that mean he's better playing in a certain position.

But I think this is overcomplicating things.

"Assists" may sometimes actually be the more useful stat, precisely because it doesn't need to go into the whys and wherefores so much. If someone is setting up thirty goals a season, they are doing something right. It could well be that they are playing with a demon of a striker who converts every half chance. But why is it always our man who provides that killer final pass? Isn't it the case that he's making that striker look good just as much?

On the other hand, you have the much more subjective "chances created" stat. To really get any meaning out of this one, you need to examine not just the player you are looking at, but the way his team-mates interact with him. If he is creating lots of "chances" but none of them are going in the net, is it the fault of the striker? Or are the "chances" he provides always half a second too slow, just behind the forward's foot, at chest height or to a player who is actually being marked out of a good opportunity?

That sort of vision and timing is very hard to measure statistically, but will come out obviously through a simpler metric like "assists" - he's doing the job, that's all we really care about.

Take a striker now, he's getting a lot of chances but not scoring many goals. "Chance conversion" seems like a useful stat to me.
But what if the balls he gets are always just behind him, or he gets it when he's being marked by two men, or he's not at a good angle to get a shot off?

Then his positioning and timing is poor, and he'll probably never be a good striker.

For me, the useful stats are the ones which prove themselves.

"Pass completion" doesn't tell you much about a player by itself, but depending on his postion, there's a percentage you don't want to go below. Roughly speaking, this lower-limit percentage reduces as you move away from your own goal, wingers are more likely to lose a ball in an attempt on goal, while a centre-back needs to be absolutely spot on if he's passing inside his own area.

Even the direction of passing isn't much of an indicator, if you look at Barca, there are players in the midfield who play the ball sideways a lot of the time, and backwards just as often. But when it moves forward, the whole team is involved, and an attack can build very quickly. I'm sceptical that a useful, detailed mathematical/statistical model of that is possible. What you can look for, though, is which player tends to successfully make forward passes more often in key parts of the pitch, leaving the sideways/backwards passes for another analysis. Again, there's statistical "noise" around this information, because it depends on the awareness of players higher up the field, but that sort of noise really should fade with a large enough data set. Unless the man in question only ever plays it forward to the same player, in which case he's an idiot and not worth buying.
Fuck the Daily Mail.
Abolish FIFA

Offline Blade

  • Not the sharpest tool in the box
  • Kopite
  • *****
  • Posts: 731
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #926 on: March 28, 2012, 02:52:16 pm »
We're reading a different book then. The one I'm reading is not about basic economics at all. The background is economic - how does a team like the Oakland As compete against clubs with larger budgets?

The answer is to look for value in players overlooked by the traditional scouting system and whose skills are not highlighted by a scoring and statistical system originally defined by a cricket lover.

The examples in the book are all based around scientific rigour - questioning whether what is measured is right - does a batter's RBI mean anything useful? Whether the old-school coaches' preferences are meaningful or fundamentally flawed?

It's more than just picking a decent player who's a little short. It's about having the evidence to show that a decent player who's a little short will have an impact on the team. The perfect example in the book is Chad Bradford - a player that Paul DePodesta had been watching but didn't have the evidence to justify signing him. It was the work of Voros McCracken, in providing reliable pitching statistics in a way that no-one had done before, that gave DePodesta that justification.

In a tight economic situation the important thing is to minimise the risk that's inherent when buying new players and to understand what any player will bring to the team. It's about measurable and most importantly meaningful statistics.

Personally I am not convinced that those principles can be applied directly to a game as fluid as football.

So I'd say that your "buy youngish quality players (that will be effective in your system) on the cheap"... is ok except that it's not about "youngish quality players" (David Judge for example), that the system might have to change depending on the players available (using three players to replace the statistical impact of one star), and that it's about the right value not buying cheap.

We are definitely reading the same book, but you are definitely looking too much into it. The basics of the Moneyball theory are OK, but they represent only a minor fraction of the entire science that has developed in the USA over the years. I am more of a basketball person when it comes to American sports, so I can recommend some reading from that area. You should try "The Wages of Wins" by Berri, Schmidt and Brook.

Offline Fuzion6

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,607
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #927 on: March 28, 2012, 04:04:26 pm »
The funny thing is that buying English players is the complete opposite of "Moneyball". Moneyball principles suggest you shy away from players that are overvalued or overhyped beyond their true worth. English players have the famous English tax and as such should not be bought with the enthusiasm we did so last summer.

Offline IndianaRed

  • Aaarghhh!!!!... my eyes!!!!... my eyes!!!!..
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 3,130
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #928 on: March 28, 2012, 04:10:07 pm »
The funny thing is that buying English players is the complete opposite of "Moneyball". Moneyball principles suggest you shy away from players that are overvalued or overhyped beyond their true worth. English players have the famous English tax and as such should not be bought with the enthusiasm we did so last summer.

we weren't buying "english".  we were buying players with PL experience, which is different.  some of them happened to be english though.

Offline Nessy76

  • Shits alone and doesn't condone public self-molestation. Literally Goldenballs' biggest fan
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 17,993
  • We All Live In A Red And White Klopp
    • Andrew Ness Photographer
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #929 on: March 28, 2012, 04:21:50 pm »
we weren't buying "english".  we were buying players with PL experience, which is different.  some of them happened to be english though.

True. We only bought 2 (out of 7) English players last summer. And it does make sense, given the home-grown rule, to prioritise a few players who qualify.
Fuck the Daily Mail.
Abolish FIFA

Offline Blade

  • Not the sharpest tool in the box
  • Kopite
  • *****
  • Posts: 731
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #930 on: March 28, 2012, 04:37:57 pm »
we weren't buying "english".  we were buying players with PL experience, which is different.  some of them happened to be english though.

Emile Heskey
Dietmar Hamann
Christian Ziege
Nick Barmby
Gary McAllister
Abel Xavier
Harry Kewell
Steve Finnan
Peter Crouch
Jermaine Pennant
Craig Bellamy
Yossi Benayoun
Robbie Keane
Glen Johnson
Joe Cole
Paul Konchesky
Brad Jones
Andy Carroll
Charlie Adam
Jose Enrique
Stewart Downing
Jordan Henderson

The players with Premier League experience that we have signed under Ged, Rafa, Roy and Kenny. I might have missed someone.

Offline IndianaRed

  • Aaarghhh!!!!... my eyes!!!!... my eyes!!!!..
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 3,130
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #931 on: March 28, 2012, 04:55:22 pm »
Emile Heskey
Dietmar Hamann
Christian Ziege
Nick Barmby
Gary McAllister
Abel Xavier
Harry Kewell
Steve Finnan
Peter Crouch
Jermaine Pennant
Craig Bellamy
Yossi Benayoun
Robbie Keane
Glen Johnson
Joe Cole
Paul Konchesky
Brad Jones
Andy Carroll
Charlie Adam
Jose Enrique
Stewart Downing
Jordan Henderson

The players with Premier League experience that we have signed under Ged, Rafa, Roy and Kenny. I might have missed someone.

is this supposed to demonstrate our purchase record of payers with PL experience hasn't been very good?  i'm a bit lost otherwise... but if it is, i would say there are some decent names in there... but the only relevant ones are from the time FSG got here onward, since the rest weren't bought under [my theory of] our policy to focus on buying players with PL experience.  having said that, our record in that time isn't very good either (with the only one to show he's a very good player being the only non-British one... hey-ho... jury still out on a couple of them though), and like i've said a couple times, i do think our transfer strategy will evolve over the next couple windows and won't be as focused on mostly buying PL-experienced players and we'll take different risks than we have in recent windows

Offline Eeyore

  • "I have no problem whatsoever stating that FSG have done a good job.".Mo Money, Mo Problems to invent. Number 1 is Carragher. Number 2 is Carragher. Number 3 is Carragher. Number 4 is Carragher. Likes to play God in his spare time.
  • Campaigns
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 31,475
  • JFT 97
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #932 on: March 28, 2012, 05:06:19 pm »
We are definitely reading the same book, but you are definitely looking too much into it. The basics of the Moneyball theory are OK, but they represent only a minor fraction of the entire science that has developed in the USA over the years. I am more of a basketball person when it comes to American sports, so I can recommend some reading from that area. You should try "The Wages of Wins" by Berri, Schmidt and Brook.


I have always wondered if those kind of books are written by people suffering from schizophrenia. Who else would be smart enough to come up with a system that gave them an edge but dumb enough to tell their rivals all about it.
« Last Edit: March 28, 2012, 05:18:43 pm by Al 555 »
"Ohhh-kayyy"

Offline didi shamone

  • Too old for fighting
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 5,228
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #933 on: March 28, 2012, 06:26:10 pm »
I'm fairly skeptical about stats in football. Some are obviously useful but there are some players who's stats are probably underwhelming. Lucas and Hamann would look very ineffective in terms of chance creation. How could you quantify Hyypia when he played in a mediocre dutch team. His stats wouldn't relate to playing in the premiership. Maybe this is why we largely went for premiership players.

On the economic side we paid top bucks for these players and barring Enrique I doubt we'd turn any profit if we moved them on. I think our two non prem players would turn a big profit though.
I hope I'm just old fashioned but I think you just need good scouts. Get em relatively young and with talent. Don't pay through the nose unless you believe they're something special.
Of course I'm leaving out the acadamy side of things and hopfully that will throw up a few jems.

Those 2 yank conman have turned us into right bunch of accountants >:(. I never gave a shite about the economic side of the game before those 2 gimps.


Offline Blade

  • Not the sharpest tool in the box
  • Kopite
  • *****
  • Posts: 731
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #934 on: March 28, 2012, 06:57:28 pm »
is this supposed to demonstrate our purchase record of payers with PL experience hasn't been very good?  i'm a bit lost otherwise... but if it is, i would say there are some decent names in there... but the only relevant ones are from the time FSG got here onward, since the rest weren't bought under [my theory of] our policy to focus on buying players with PL experience.  having said that, our record in that time isn't very good either (with the only one to show he's a very good player being the only non-British one... hey-ho... jury still out on a couple of them though), and like i've said a couple times, i do think our transfer strategy will evolve over the next couple windows and won't be as focused on mostly buying PL-experienced players and we'll take different risks than we have in recent windows

That post is supposed to show that the "Players with Premier League experience" criteria is nonsense. Like with the players from all the other leagues, you get some good ones and some bad ones. I don't think that Kenny and Comolli are so stupid to include such a criteria in their recruitment policy.

Offline IndianaRed

  • Aaarghhh!!!!... my eyes!!!!... my eyes!!!!..
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 3,130
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #935 on: March 28, 2012, 07:24:21 pm »
That post is supposed to show that the "Players with Premier League experience" criteria is nonsense. Like with the players from all the other leagues, you get some good ones and some bad ones. I don't think that Kenny and Comolli are so stupid to include such a criteria in their recruitment policy.

i guess i can dig up some comolli quotes from the initial player transfer stories, which i'll do shortly... but regardless, a player who has already demonstrated he can play well in the premier league presents less risk than one who has not.  that doesn't mean there's no risk and he'll definitely play better upon transfer than a player from another league would upon transfer into the premier league, but i don't know how there can't be less risk involved with a player who has already shown he can play in the PL.  attempting to take as small a risk in player purchases as they can while being committed to bringing in new players sounds like something a company new to the PL and football in general would like to do, and whether it shows in history or not, buying players who have PL experience presents less risk than buying those who have none.

Offline IndianaRed

  • Aaarghhh!!!!... my eyes!!!!... my eyes!!!!..
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 3,130
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #936 on: March 28, 2012, 07:47:49 pm »
I don't think that Kenny and Comolli are so stupid to include such a criteria in their recruitment policy.

Comolli on Enrique just after signing:

What sort of qualities will he bring to the team?

"The first thing that comes to my mind is his pace. He is a very quick, strong and powerful athlete with good technique, as you would expect from someone who comes from Spain, and a good left foot. He will give us some size as well because he is about 6ft 1ins, which is a very good size for a full-back. So all of this and signing a player that is already in the Premier League means we know he will settle in very easily. He is good friends with Andy (Carroll) from their Newcastle days, so he ticks a lot of boxes."

http://www.liverpoolfc.tv/news/latest-news/comolli-he-s-one-of-the-best

Comolli on Jordan Henderson and general transfer strategy just after JH signing:

There is talk of us targeting the best young English talent this summer - is that the strategy?

"Yes and no. It's not because a player is English and young that we are going to go for him. We go for a player because he ticks all the boxes. It's what we need at this time in this window. If a player is English or British or has played in the Premier League we'll look at that over someone who is abroad but it could be any nationality as long as they tick the boxes and is what we need for this window and going forward."

http://www.liverpoolfc.tv/news/latest-news/our-transfer-strategy

Comolli after signing Adam:

He was nominated for Player of the Season in 2010-11 - but have we seen the best of Charlie Adam yet? How much room is there for him to improve?

"I think he can improve because with age comes experience. He had the first year in the Premier League, and with more experience he's going to understand the game in the Premier League more. Also, training on a daily basis with the quality of player we have here will stretch him as a player - physically, mentally and tactically. Training with the best helps you to become better - and I think that's what we're going to see."

http://www.liverpoolfc.tv/news/latest-news/comolli-on-adam-and-transfers

Comolli on Downing after signing:

So with Jordan Henderson, Charlie Adam, Alexander Doni and Stewart Downing signed up, this is turning into a really productive summer for Liverpool, isn't it?

"Yes. What we are very pleased about is that we are still early in July. We've played only one game pre-season, and we've got a lot of players in. That will allow Steve (Clarke), Kevin (Keen) and Kenny to work well with the players straight away and not have to wait until the end of August, like sometimes you have to do. It's good for team building and it's good for the tactical work they have to do. Also, the players are from the Premier League, so we know they will settle in quickly at the club. Jordan is coming back on Monday and he can't wait."

http://www.liverpoolfc.tv/news/latest-news/he-s-a-big-big-signing-for-lfc

Comolli on Bellamy after signing:

Interviewer: And he's a player of vast Premier League experience...

DC:  "Yes, Premier League experience, Champions League experience, the fact that he played here before so he knows what to expect and knows the place. He's a perfect fit."

http://www.liverpoolfc.tv/news/latest-news/craig-has-the-qualities-we-need

Offline Blade

  • Not the sharpest tool in the box
  • Kopite
  • *****
  • Posts: 731
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #937 on: March 28, 2012, 07:49:47 pm »
i guess i can dig up some comolli quotes from the initial player transfer stories, which i'll do shortly... but regardless, a player who has already demonstrated he can play well in the premier league presents less risk than one who has not.  that doesn't mean there's no risk and he'll definitely play better upon transfer than a player from another league would upon transfer into the premier league, but i don't know how there can't be less risk involved with a player who has already shown he can play in the PL.  attempting to take as small a risk in player purchases as they can while being committed to bringing in new players sounds like something a company new to the PL and football in general would like to do, and whether it shows in history or not, buying players who have PL experience presents less risk than buying those who have none.

Mate, take another look at the list that I have posted above.

Offline Blade

  • Not the sharpest tool in the box
  • Kopite
  • *****
  • Posts: 731
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #938 on: March 28, 2012, 07:51:19 pm »
Comolli on Enrique just after signing:

What sort of qualities will he bring to the team?

"The first thing that comes to my mind is his pace. He is a very quick, strong and powerful athlete with good technique, as you would expect from someone who comes from Spain, and a good left foot. He will give us some size as well because he is about 6ft 1ins, which is a very good size for a full-back. So all of this and signing a player that is already in the Premier League means we know he will settle in very easily. He is good friends with Andy (Carroll) from their Newcastle days, so he ticks a lot of boxes."

http://www.liverpoolfc.tv/news/latest-news/comolli-he-s-one-of-the-best

Comolli on Jordan Henderson and general transfer strategy just after JH signing:

There is talk of us targeting the best young English talent this summer - is that the strategy?

"Yes and no. It's not because a player is English and young that we are going to go for him. We go for a player because he ticks all the boxes. It's what we need at this time in this window. If a player is English or British or has played in the Premier League we'll look at that over someone who is abroad but it could be any nationality as long as they tick the boxes and is what we need for this window and going forward."

http://www.liverpoolfc.tv/news/latest-news/our-transfer-strategy

Comolli after signing Adam:

He was nominated for Player of the Season in 2010-11 - but have we seen the best of Charlie Adam yet? How much room is there for him to improve?

"I think he can improve because with age comes experience. He had the first year in the Premier League, and with more experience he's going to understand the game in the Premier League more. Also, training on a daily basis with the quality of player we have here will stretch him as a player - physically, mentally and tactically. Training with the best helps you to become better - and I think that's what we're going to see."

http://www.liverpoolfc.tv/news/latest-news/comolli-on-adam-and-transfers

Comolli on Downing after signing:

So with Jordan Henderson, Charlie Adam, Alexander Doni and Stewart Downing signed up, this is turning into a really productive summer for Liverpool, isn't it?

"Yes. What we are very pleased about is that we are still early in July. We've played only one game pre-season, and we've got a lot of players in. That will allow Steve (Clarke), Kevin (Keen) and Kenny to work well with the players straight away and not have to wait until the end of August, like sometimes you have to do. It's good for team building and it's good for the tactical work they have to do. Also, the players are from the Premier League, so we know they will settle in quickly at the club. Jordan is coming back on Monday and he can't wait."

http://www.liverpoolfc.tv/news/latest-news/he-s-a-big-big-signing-for-lfc

Comolli on Bellamy after signing:

Interviewer: And he's a player of vast Premier League experience...

DC:  "Yes, Premier League experience, Champions League experience, the fact that he played here before so he knows what to expect and knows the place. He's a perfect fit."

http://www.liverpoolfc.tv/news/latest-news/craig-has-the-qualities-we-need

Well, it seems that we have a serious problem.

Offline IndianaRed

  • Aaarghhh!!!!... my eyes!!!!... my eyes!!!!..
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 3,130
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #939 on: March 28, 2012, 08:02:37 pm »
Mate, take another look at the list that I have posted above.

I still don't know what you want me to take from it.  It shows that some players with PL experience work out and some do not, as is the case with players transferring in from any foreign league.  Like I said, whether history shows it or not, a player presents less risk if he's already demonstrated he can play well in the Premier League.  You simply cannot say "At least we've already seen he can play in the Premier League" about a player from a foreign league, and that means whether you like it or not, there is more risk taking a player from a foreign league.  There's evidence for one, and there is no evidence for the other.  In reality it may turn out differently in the end with the PL player playing poorly once signed for the club, because less risk does not mean no risk... but at least there's something to go on with a player who has played in the PL.

Offline IndianaRed

  • Aaarghhh!!!!... my eyes!!!!... my eyes!!!!..
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 3,130
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #940 on: March 28, 2012, 08:05:57 pm »
Well, it seems that we have a serious problem.

And to this, I say FSG's strategy is probably evolving.  They didn't allow themselves the chance to make more mistakes during the recent Jan. window.  I fully expect them to take more or different risks as they get more comfortable in football.  Transfers will have more risk, and will yield higher reward if successful.  We'll see.  FSG aren't stupid... they'll have learned from the past couple windows.

Offline Bergersrightwingviews

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 3,155
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #941 on: March 28, 2012, 08:13:14 pm »
Those quotes from Comolli are worrying. The way I see it experience of the PL per se is meaningless. What we should be looking at is attributes that equal success in the Pl. Some are obvious: pace, strength etc. Obviously we are still learning how to interpret football in terms of statistics, but it is more detailed data on a player's attributes that should be taken into account. I hope Comolli isn't as swayed by Prem experience as those quotes would suggest.
  Torres was a near instant hit because he was fast, strong, direct, and liked to play on the shoulder of the last man. This translates well to the Premiership because defences often don't sit as deep as they do in Italy for example, and lose the ball close to their own goal more often than in Spain where defenders are generally better on the ball. I don't know how to quantify things like this statistically, but plainly Torres was a better option than any of the Pl based strikers we could have bought at the time.
  In my opinion most of our best signings in recent years have not had premiership experience: Reina, Torres, Suarez, Alonso, Luis Garcia, Hyypia, (Mascherano is an exception as is Enrique). What I am trying to explain (badly) is that premiership experience in and of itself is meaningless. Certain attributes translate to success in Britain. We need to identify what they are and then use them to cast the net far and wide. We shouldn't just look at English based players. 
Roger Scruton was right about everything.

Offline AJG

  • Know All Transfer Guru and Fledgling DoF
  • Kopite
  • *****
  • Posts: 646
  • It's true, I was Comolli's apprentice
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #942 on: March 28, 2012, 08:18:00 pm »
Well, it seems that we have a serious problem.
:-X. Do you think he still feels that way? Hopefully hes not completely stupid
''I just want to say to him if your confidence is down in front of the 40,000 opponent's fans, just
imagine them like a frog, an ugly frog'' - Mohammad Shahrul

Offline farawayred

  • Whizz For Atomms. Nucular boffin. A Mars A Day Helps Him Work, Rest And Play
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 26,257
  • Oh yes, I'm a believer!
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #943 on: March 28, 2012, 08:22:48 pm »
Well, that's a bit like the chicken and the egg, isn't it? When you are bulk rebuilding a team, you want all the players to have the successful attributes to make it in the PL. By the same token, those that already are playing in the PL and have shown decent levels of success must have the successful attributes, so they are the ones you are trying to identify, aren't they? The problem comes when you take a player X from team A and move him to team B; he may not enjoy the same success as the players around him would play differently, his role would be different.

When we are targeting a couple or a few players only, we may look for different attributes and skills (we surely need them), but I can't fault the logic used by Comolli and team to rebuild an entire squad. No matter how much we harp about underperforming players like Adam, Carroll and Downing, we are a stronger TEAM than we were last year. Just need to look at the bench. Injuries and suspensions is what did us, and as a result we acquired a loser's mentality a bit. But the slate can be wiped clean next season.
Cruyff: "Victory is not enough, there also needs to be beautiful football."

Offline Alan_X

  • WUM. 'twatito' - The Cat Herding Firm But Fair Voice Of Reason (Except when he's got a plank up his arse). Gimme some skin, priest! Has a general dislike for Elijah Wood. Clearly cannot fill even a thong! RAWK Resident Muppet. Has a crush o
  • RAWK Staff
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 53,219
  • Come on you fucking red men!!!
  • Super Title: This is super!
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #944 on: March 28, 2012, 08:31:04 pm »
We are definitely reading the same book, but you are definitely looking too much into it. The basics of the Moneyball theory are OK, but they represent only a minor fraction of the entire science that has developed in the USA over the years. I am more of a basketball person when it comes to American sports, so I can recommend some reading from that area. You should try "The Wages of Wins" by Berri, Schmidt and Brook.


What a bizarre thing to say. All I'm doing is reading back what the book says. And the fundamental point of the book is that the application of the principles described in the book (not the half-arsed bollocks being touted around English football) is that they were effective.

I have two issues with the transfer of 'Moneyball' to football. First, can football be reduced to that level of analysis and second - does anyone mouthing the words 'Moneyball' have a fucking clue what the fuck they are talking about.
Sid Lowe (@sidlowe)
09/03/2011 08:04
Give a man a mask and he will tell the truth, Give a man a user name and he will act like a total twat.
Its all about winning shiny things.

Offline Bergersrightwingviews

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 3,155
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #945 on: March 28, 2012, 08:32:16 pm »
Well, that's a bit like the chicken and the egg, isn't it? When you are bulk rebuilding a team, you want all the players to have the successful attributes to make it in the PL. By the same token, those that already are playing in the PL and have shown decent levels of success must have the successful attributes, so they are the ones you are trying to identify, aren't they? The problem comes when you take a player X from team A and move him to team B; he may not enjoy the same success as the players around him would play differently, his role would be different.

When we are targeting a couple or a few players only, we may look for different attributes and skills (we surely need them), but I can't fault the logic used by Comolli and team to rebuild an entire squad. No matter how much we harp about underperforming players like Adam, Carroll and Downing, we are a stronger TEAM than we were last year. Just need to look at the bench. Injuries and suspensions is what did us, and as a result we acquired a loser's mentality a bit. But the slate can be wiped clean next season.

I see your point, but what I was getting at is that we should not exclude potential players on the grounds that they have not yet proven themselves in the PL. If moneyball is about finding undervalued players, then surely buying prem proven players is the very antithesis of that. If they are already prem proven then they will be expensive. We should be bringing in the best we can from all leagues, but if we can find a gem in say Spain who has attributes we think would translate well to the EPL then that will often be a cheaper option than a player who everybody already knows about. Especially if that means we can avoid a bidding war with PL rivals. 
Roger Scruton was right about everything.

Offline IndianaRed

  • Aaarghhh!!!!... my eyes!!!!... my eyes!!!!..
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 3,130
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #946 on: March 28, 2012, 08:34:37 pm »
Those quotes from Comolli are worrying. The way I see it experience of the PL per se is meaningless. What we should be looking at is attributes that equal success in the Pl. Some are obvious: pace, strength etc. Obviously we are still learning how to interpret football in terms of statistics, but it is more detailed data on a player's attributes that should be taken into account. I hope Comolli isn't as swayed by Prem experience as those quotes would suggest.
  Torres was a near instant hit because he was fast, strong, direct, and liked to play on the shoulder of the last man. This translates well to the Premiership because defences often don't sit as deep as they do in Italy for example, and lose the ball close to their own goal more often than in Spain where defenders are generally better on the ball. I don't know how to quantify things like this statistically, but plainly Torres was a better option than any of the Pl based strikers we could have bought at the time.
  In my opinion most of our best signings in recent years have not had premiership experience: Reina, Torres, Suarez, Alonso, Luis Garcia, Hyypia, (Mascherano is an exception as is Enrique). What I am trying to explain (badly) is that premiership experience in and of itself is meaningless. Certain attributes translate to success in Britain. We need to identify what they are and then use them to cast the net far and wide. We shouldn't just look at English based players.

You can't deny though that people associated a lot of risk with Torres because a lot of people actually didn't think he was big enough, strong enough, fast enough, or a prolific-enough goalscorer for the premier league.  people didn't know at the time that Torres was a better option than PL-based strikers.  maybe Darren Bent would have been a great signing for us back then for somewhat similar money.  he's had a good goal record the past few years.  just playing devil's advocate, but anyway i'm just saying, we did have a PL-based option in 2007 and he probably wouldn't have been a poor signing, not that that matters now. 

for what it's worth, i agree that most of our best signings in recent years have been from foreign leagues, but we had a foreign manager at the time who happened to just also be very smart and had a good grip on judging foreign talent, having worked in spain a long time.  he bought players from a country/league he was very familiar with, so for him it was maybe less of a risk.

anyway, we'll see this summer if we still value PL-experienced players more than foreign-based players.  i suspect the strategy will have evolved a bit.

Offline Fat Scouser

  • Trolley Dolly with a 54 2/3 inch waist - last seen shopping on Scottie Road for speedos. Is just a bit.....you know.....
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 23,906
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #947 on: March 28, 2012, 08:38:43 pm »
Could you say Rafas policy was more like that by signing lots of players who either had percieved biases against them or had hit a low point in their career and thus were undervalued at the time of signing then sold on at higher value eg Mascherano, Bellamy, Pennant, Crouch.

Or by signing a few high cost quality star players along with lots of low cost low risk players. If the low risk players are crap so what as all it takes is one or two to be a success to reap the rewards of such an approach.

So was Rafas transfer policy Moneyball or some variation of it?
It's a simple game... Rafa turned us from a club that leaked money like a sieve in transfers into one that actually turned a profit. Sadly, fellas like Whelan and Souness, for reasons best known to them, but probably just money and being in with the Hicks clan in Whelan's case, decided to just pull figures out their arse and basically blatantly lie. The lie became just another stick to beat Rafa with and that was that.
But the fact is, Rafa has gone. We have a manager. There's no point in constantly looking back. Much more relevant, is this system going to work for us now under Dalglish?
"A peasant you are. A peasant you will remain. And we shall use all our wealth and power, to make your lot even worse and keep you exactly where you are, Bondage!"    The Boy King, Richard II, after  putting down the The Peasants Revolt in 1381.

http://misterinobody.weebly.com/

Offline farawayred

  • Whizz For Atomms. Nucular boffin. A Mars A Day Helps Him Work, Rest And Play
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 26,257
  • Oh yes, I'm a believer!
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #948 on: March 28, 2012, 08:40:23 pm »
I see your point, but what I was getting at is that we should not exclude potential players on the grounds that they have not yet proven themselves in the PL. If moneyball is about finding undervalued players, then surely buying prem proven players is the very antithesis of that. If they are already prem proven then they will be expensive. We should be bringing in the best we can from all leagues, but if we can find a gem in say Spain who has attributes we think would translate well to the EPL then that will often be a cheaper option than a player who everybody already knows about. Especially if that means we can avoid a bidding war with PL rivals. 
I agree with you, finding undervalued players is the name of the game. But that itself is not enough, one must rate the player with the probability of success in the PL. So, a player who already plays successfully in the PL carries a lot lower risk factor than a foreign player. This doesn't contradict what you say, because if the foreign player can become someone like Messi, you'd take him to give him the chance to raise his game. It just implies that the probability of success is higher, but the risk is still worth taking.
Cruyff: "Victory is not enough, there also needs to be beautiful football."

Offline Fat Scouser

  • Trolley Dolly with a 54 2/3 inch waist - last seen shopping on Scottie Road for speedos. Is just a bit.....you know.....
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 23,906
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #949 on: March 28, 2012, 08:42:36 pm »
does anyone mouthing the words 'Moneyball' have a fucking clue what the fuck they are talking about.
Think that's one of the most sensible things I've seen about it.
All I understand... a manager, his scouting and coaching staff identify a wish list of players, ranked from first choice down. They give it to the money men. They try and get the players on the list for the best deal possible. Anything above this seems to be bollocks to me.
"A peasant you are. A peasant you will remain. And we shall use all our wealth and power, to make your lot even worse and keep you exactly where you are, Bondage!"    The Boy King, Richard II, after  putting down the The Peasants Revolt in 1381.

http://misterinobody.weebly.com/

Offline Bergersrightwingviews

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 3,155
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #950 on: March 28, 2012, 08:43:00 pm »
You can't deny though that people associated a lot of risk with Torres because a lot of people actually didn't think he was big enough, strong enough, fast enough, or a prolific-enough goalscorer for the premier league.  people didn't know at the time that Torres was a better option than PL-based strikers.  maybe Darren Bent would have been a great signing for us back then for somewhat similar money.  he's had a good goal record the past few years.  just playing devil's advocate, but anyway i'm just saying, we did have a PL-based option in 2007 and he probably wouldn't have been a poor signing, not that that matters now. 



anyway, we'll see this summer if we still value PL-experienced players more than foreign-based players.  i suspect the strategy will have evolved a bit.

I actually think Bent would work better in this side. We make good chances just can't put them away.

 As for Torres - that is exactly the point. People didn't think he was whatever enough for the PL. They were wrong Benitez was right.
It is easy for me with hindsight to say that Torres was a good moneyball signing, but the fact remains that he was. I echo the other posters who said that Benitez's transfers (when he had the funds) seem to be moneyball-esque. People didn't know Torres would be a success, our scouts knew better. We need to repeat that. We need to take advantage of the ignorance and parochial nature of English football. Some people genuinely think that Barca would struggle against Stoke on a cold wet blah blah. We can steal the march on our rivals by identifying talent that others won't look at because they think that Johnny Foreigner can't adapt.
Roger Scruton was right about everything.

Offline farawayred

  • Whizz For Atomms. Nucular boffin. A Mars A Day Helps Him Work, Rest And Play
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 26,257
  • Oh yes, I'm a believer!
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #951 on: March 28, 2012, 08:46:33 pm »
Think that's one of the most sensible things I've seen about it.
All I understand... a manager, his scouting and coaching staff identify a wish list of players, ranked from first choice down. They give it to the money men. They try and get the players on the list for the best deal possible. Anything above this seems to be bollocks to me.
I'm afraid that that doesn't covers it, FS. The players on that list are evaluated, a price tag put on them, and the money man will get the vast majority from those 'on sale'. They may not be the top targets identified by the manager. But if a critical player skill is missing, they will get that player even if they overpay for him, just as long as he is the keystone for the team.
Cruyff: "Victory is not enough, there also needs to be beautiful football."

Offline Fat Scouser

  • Trolley Dolly with a 54 2/3 inch waist - last seen shopping on Scottie Road for speedos. Is just a bit.....you know.....
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 23,906
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #952 on: March 28, 2012, 08:55:38 pm »
I'm afraid that that doesn't covers it, FS. The players on that list are evaluated, a price tag put on them, and the money man will get the vast majority from those 'on sale'. They may not be the top targets identified by the manager. But if a critical player skill is missing, they will get that player even if they overpay for him, just as long as he is the keystone for the team.
I just think there's an awful lot of bollocks spoken nowadays, mate. I'm watching Milan Barca. The prick commenting just said Milan have had their biggest ever "Box office," takings for this game. That to me was the words used for theatres. I suppose it's to fit in with the "Football community," and Football family." Still sounds like broken biscuits to me.
I remember how Kenny arrived here, Bob whispered in his ear, "Grab your coat son, before they realise what they have done." Seems to me to be a decent bit of business. What the fuck we need this Comolli geezer for is beyond me. To the best of my knowledge, he's never had any great successes in spoting players on the cheap and getting them. So what's he here for... part of our new football family? Don't know, just seems like cack to me.
"A peasant you are. A peasant you will remain. And we shall use all our wealth and power, to make your lot even worse and keep you exactly where you are, Bondage!"    The Boy King, Richard II, after  putting down the The Peasants Revolt in 1381.

http://misterinobody.weebly.com/

Offline Endoe

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,966
  • A liverbird on my chest
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #953 on: March 28, 2012, 08:57:16 pm »
One thing that concerns me is, the coirrellation between what a team spends in wages and where they end up on the ladder at the end of a season, on the back of us looking to cut wages. Of course I dont think we should be spending money for no reason, but its going to be harder to close the gap on the opposition, even when we were spending a heap on wages to attract the top talent. For me the jury is still out on our new owners, if only because they're very new, just something that has crossd my mind a few times this season, since from memory we're about par.

Offline Brentieke

  • Vote King Hendo. Beaker's panic gif was modelled on his coupon. A seer & visionary - he saw how shite we are.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 9,919
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #954 on: March 28, 2012, 09:00:04 pm »
Comolli on Enrique just after signing:

What sort of qualities will he bring to the team?

"The first thing that comes to my mind is his pace. He is a very quick, strong and powerful athlete with good technique, as you would expect from someone who comes from Spain, and a good left foot. He will give us some size as well because he is about 6ft 1ins, which is a very good size for a full-back. So all of this and signing a player that is already in the Premier League means we know he will settle in very easily. He is good friends with Andy (Carroll) from their Newcastle days, so he ticks a lot of boxes."

http://www.liverpoolfc.tv/news/latest-news/comolli-he-s-one-of-the-best

Comolli on Jordan Henderson and general transfer strategy just after JH signing:

There is talk of us targeting the best young English talent this summer - is that the strategy?

"Yes and no. It's not because a player is English and young that we are going to go for him. We go for a player because he ticks all the boxes. It's what we need at this time in this window. If a player is English or British or has played in the Premier League we'll look at that over someone who is abroad but it could be any nationality as long as they tick the boxes and is what we need for this window and going forward."

http://www.liverpoolfc.tv/news/latest-news/our-transfer-strategy

Comolli after signing Adam:

He was nominated for Player of the Season in 2010-11 - but have we seen the best of Charlie Adam yet? How much room is there for him to improve?

"I think he can improve because with age comes experience. He had the first year in the Premier League, and with more experience he's going to understand the game in the Premier League more. Also, training on a daily basis with the quality of player we have here will stretch him as a player - physically, mentally and tactically. Training with the best helps you to become better - and I think that's what we're going to see."

http://www.liverpoolfc.tv/news/latest-news/comolli-on-adam-and-transfers

Comolli on Downing after signing:

So with Jordan Henderson, Charlie Adam, Alexander Doni and Stewart Downing signed up, this is turning into a really productive summer for Liverpool, isn't it?

"Yes. What we are very pleased about is that we are still early in July. We've played only one game pre-season, and we've got a lot of players in. That will allow Steve (Clarke), Kevin (Keen) and Kenny to work well with the players straight away and not have to wait until the end of August, like sometimes you have to do. It's good for team building and it's good for the tactical work they have to do. Also, the players are from the Premier League, so we know they will settle in quickly at the club. Jordan is coming back on Monday and he can't wait."

http://www.liverpoolfc.tv/news/latest-news/he-s-a-big-big-signing-for-lfc

Comolli on Bellamy after signing:

Interviewer: And he's a player of vast Premier League experience...

DC:  "Yes, Premier League experience, Champions League experience, the fact that he played here before so he knows what to expect and knows the place. He's a perfect fit."

http://www.liverpoolfc.tv/news/latest-news/craig-has-the-qualities-we-need

Said at the time what a ridiculous piece of shit that strategy and the "he's premier league proven so he'll hit the ground running" was.

And if an idiot like me, with no football experience living 5 hours away in Beirut, knows that then what the fuck does that say about our director of football.
My blog on Corruption in English Football and LFC Analysis.

http://diminbeirut.typepad.com/my-blog/

https://twitter.com/DimmyBad

Offline farawayred

  • Whizz For Atomms. Nucular boffin. A Mars A Day Helps Him Work, Rest And Play
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 26,257
  • Oh yes, I'm a believer!
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #955 on: March 28, 2012, 09:00:53 pm »
I just think there's an awful lot of bollocks spoken nowadays, mate. I'm watching Milan Barca. The prick commenting just said Milan have had their biggest ever "Box office," takings for this game. That to me was the words used for theatres. I suppose it's to fit in with the "Football community," and Football family." Still sounds like broken biscuits to me.
I remember how Kenny arrived here, Bob whispered in his ear, "Grab your coat son, before they realise what they have done." Seems to me to be a decent bit of business. What the fuck we need this Comolli geezer for is beyond me. To the best of my knowledge, he's never had any great successes in spoting players on the cheap and getting them. So what's he here for... part of our new football family? Don't know, just seems like cack to me.
I totally understand, mate. But it's the old argument whether that scheme DoF/Manager can work in England and how to implement it. After so many years of what you said in a past post - money leaking out of the club as a sieve - I'm open to something new... If that can plug the holes of the sieve, then I'm fine with Moneyball and all that. So I think that's why Comolli is here, not that he is the best of the best of the best, but someone who privy to the system who can set it up.

Or I may be deluding myself with wishful thinking... Who knows...
Cruyff: "Victory is not enough, there also needs to be beautiful football."

Offline IndianaRed

  • Aaarghhh!!!!... my eyes!!!!... my eyes!!!!..
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 3,130
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #956 on: March 28, 2012, 09:03:34 pm »
I actually think Bent would work better in this side. We make good chances just can't put them away.

 As for Torres - that is exactly the point. People didn't think he was whatever enough for the PL. They were wrong Benitez was right.
It is easy for me with hindsight to say that Torres was a good moneyball signing, but the fact remains that he was. I echo the other posters who said that Benitez's transfers (when he had the funds) seem to be moneyball-esque. People didn't know Torres would be a success, our scouts knew better. We need to repeat that. We need to take advantage of the ignorance and parochial nature of English football. Some people genuinely think that Barca would struggle against Stoke on a cold wet blah blah. We can steal the march on our rivals by identifying talent that others won't look at because they think that Johnny Foreigner can't adapt.

I think we're one of the few who, recently, have been put off by Johnny Foreigner.  Most clubs with money don't really seem to hesitate about players with good stats but who are based in foreign leagues.  In other words, I don't think we'd steal a march on anyone by taking the risk on foreign-based players because that's what everyone but us does already.  In this way, I think it's the weakest of the types of "defects" which cause players to be overlooked, because i don't think it really causes that many players to be overlooked nowadays.  i think FSG will realize that sooner or later, and that will be one of the risks we embrace rather than avoid.

Offline Fat Scouser

  • Trolley Dolly with a 54 2/3 inch waist - last seen shopping on Scottie Road for speedos. Is just a bit.....you know.....
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 23,906
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #957 on: March 28, 2012, 09:03:52 pm »
FSG won't stand for money leaking away, mate. We'll have to live within our means. I'm alright with that, but only if it applies to all clubs.
"A peasant you are. A peasant you will remain. And we shall use all our wealth and power, to make your lot even worse and keep you exactly where you are, Bondage!"    The Boy King, Richard II, after  putting down the The Peasants Revolt in 1381.

http://misterinobody.weebly.com/

Offline Brentieke

  • Vote King Hendo. Beaker's panic gif was modelled on his coupon. A seer & visionary - he saw how shite we are.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 9,919
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #958 on: March 28, 2012, 09:09:54 pm »
i guess i can dig up some comolli quotes from the initial player transfer stories, which i'll do shortly... but regardless, a player who has already demonstrated he can play well in the premier league presents less risk than one who has not.  that doesn't mean there's no risk and he'll definitely play better upon transfer than a player from another league would upon transfer into the premier league, but i don't know how there can't be less risk involved with a player who has already shown he can play in the PL.  attempting to take as small a risk in player purchases as they can while being committed to bringing in new players sounds like something a company new to the PL and football in general would like to do, and whether it shows in history or not, buying players who have PL experience presents less risk than buying those who have none.

Except i's a complete fallacy to say there's less risk buying players with premier league experience. It's an absolute myth.

Im a saddo, but not sad enough to compile a list of every single transfer in premier league history. I am definately sad enough to compile a list of players we've bought from the premier league since the turn of the century. Here's what our "less risk" approach did for us:

1) Heskey 11m
2) Barmby 6m
3) Arphexad free
4) Mcallister free
5) Ziege 5m
6) Kirkland 8m
7) Xavier free
8) Kewell 5m
9) Finnan 5m
10) Crouch 7m
11) Fowler free
12) Zenden free
13) Pennant 7m
14) Bellamy 7m
15) Benayoun 5m
16) Keane 20m
17) Johnson 17m
18) Cole free
19) Konchesky 5m
20) Carroll 35m
21) Adam 6m
22) Henderson 14m
23) Downing 20m
24) Enrique 6m

How many successes from that list? How many actually had no risk involved?

And, how many actually "hit the ground running"? Can think of only Johnson, Enrique and Kewell. Finnan was better in his 2nd season, Yossi and Emile too. Gary Mac and Crouch bloomed later on in the season.

My blog on Corruption in English Football and LFC Analysis.

http://diminbeirut.typepad.com/my-blog/

https://twitter.com/DimmyBad

Offline Haemoglobin

  • The Phantom Drive-By Dunker
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 5,513
  • Nunca Caminarás Solo
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #959 on: March 28, 2012, 09:29:34 pm »
Im a saddo, but not sad enough to compile a list of every single transfer in premier league history. I am definately sad enough to compile a list of players we've bought from the premier league since the turn of the century. Here's what our "less risk" approach did for us:

1) Heskey 11m
2) Barmby 6m
3) Arphexad free
4) Mcallister free
5) Ziege 5m
6) Kirkland 8m
7) Xavier free
8) Kewell 5m
9) Finnan 5m
10) Crouch 7m
11) Fowler free
12) Zenden free
13) Pennant 7m
14) Bellamy 7m
15) Benayoun 5m
16) Keane 20m
17) Johnson 17m
18) Cole free
19) Konchesky 5m
20) Carroll 35m
21) Adam 6m
22) Henderson 14m
23) Downing 20m
24) Enrique 6m

How many successes from that list? How many actually had no risk involved?
Kewell is kewl ;D

But yeah, that's pretty shite isn't it. Most of our best performers from that list were the cheaper ones, but there is serious wastage going on with the rest of it. >:(
"under-promise and over-deliver"