Author Topic: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy  (Read 78189 times)

royhendo

  • Guest
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #1000 on: March 29, 2012, 03:08:53 pm »
non cash impact though.

This is the bit I'd like to understand - the impact on actual cashflow/cash at bank, versus the impact on reported operating cost and eventual tax liability. (As you well know JP, given the vacant expression on my face when you mentioned it on Monday.) ;D

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: 53,265
  • Come on you fucking red men!!!
  • Super Title: This is super!
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #1001 on: March 29, 2012, 03:16:42 pm »
I'm back here after posting on another forum, the statistics says Carroll is worth 35 million, when he plays the team earn 2.0 points per game. That's 3rd place over a course of the season. Apart from that Comolli's statistical based buys have been shocking.

Two questions in reply to that: How do you show that it's not just a statistical quirk? If you don't know why or even whether Carroll's presence was the factor in the raising the points per game ratio then it's just correlation not causation. As there are no 2.0 point games that must mean that Carroll plays when the team draws or loses as well as when we win. I'm sure that through cherry-picking games I could find a player who would match that or even exceed it. Does Kenny play Carroll in games we were probably going to win anyway?

And secondly - I'm still waiting for the links that show that Comolli is actually using statistics to select players in a way that corresponds to sabremetrics in baseball. My personal view is that 'chance-creation' is as valuable a measure as RBI's in baseball (or saying that just being on the pitch when we win is an objective measure of a player's actual contribution to the team performance).
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 drpepe

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,802
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #1002 on: March 29, 2012, 03:23:10 pm »
This is the bit I'd like to understand - the impact on actual cashflow/cash at bank, versus the impact on reported operating cost and eventual tax liability. (As you well know JP, given the vacant expression on my face when you mentioned it on Monday.) ;D

^^^ yeah that. I feel like a total dunce whenever  the dreaded amortization word enters the thread.... to me it just sounds like an intangible device used in accounting circles - is it relevant to our income/expenditure on players?  :-\

Offline drpepe

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,802
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #1003 on: March 29, 2012, 03:25:02 pm »
Two questions in reply to that: How do you show that it's not just a statistical quirk? If you don't know why or even whether Carroll's presence was the factor in the raising the points per game ratio then it's just correlation not causation. As there are no 2.0 point games that must mean that Carroll plays when the team draws or loses as well as when we win. I'm sure that through cherry-picking games I could find a player who would match that or even exceed it. Does Kenny play Carroll in games we were probably going to win anyway?

And secondly - I'm still waiting for the links that show that Comolli is actually using statistics to select players in a way that corresponds to sabremetrics in baseball. My personal view is that 'chance-creation' is as valuable a measure as RBI's in baseball (or saying that just being on the pitch when we win is an objective measure of a player's actual contribution to the team performance).

 ;D yesterday a poster brought up a similar 'stat' (true) that Suarez scores 75% of his goals when carra is playing  .... clearly an example of causation!  ;)

Offline Carlos: Very Kickable

  • Pompous Twat. Scourge of Pinko Liberalism. Attitude to Cyan Conservatism is unclear. Lives in a Monochrome world and is baffled by colours.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,802
  • As Gnaeus Pompeius Magnus would say...
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #1004 on: March 29, 2012, 03:28:41 pm »
Two questions in reply to that: How do you show that it's not just a statistical quirk? If you don't know why or even whether Carroll's presence was the factor in the raising the points per game ratio then it's just correlation not causation. As there are no 2.0 point games that must mean that Carroll plays when the team draws or loses as well as when we win. I'm sure that through cherry-picking games I could find a player who would match that or even exceed it. Does Kenny play Carroll in games we were probably going to win anyway?

You're misunderstanding statistics here - it will ALWAYS be correlation not causation; you're actually arguing about a matter of degree. The only way you could 'prove' causation would be to play the exact same team with and without Carroll and you would have to do it a number of times against the same opposition to get to a result you could determine as 'significant'.
I know you struggle with reading comprehension Carlitos, but do try to pay attention

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 #1005 on: March 29, 2012, 03:31:19 pm »
;D yesterday a poster brought up a similar 'stat' (true) that Suarez scores 75% of his goals when carra is playing  .... clearly an example of causation!  ;)

That was me.

It was in response to The Carroll Law which states that any Luis Suarez shot will hit the post and go in instead of out at the mere sight of the Big Yin's pony tail.
My blog on Corruption in English Football and LFC Analysis.

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

https://twitter.com/DimmyBad

Offline Vulmea

  • Almost saint-like.....
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 4,329
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #1006 on: March 29, 2012, 04:13:35 pm »
Ah but he doesn't want glamourous superstars - unlike Barca.

Villa, Busquets, Xavi and Iniesta and even Messi to a certain extent all seem to place 'team' ahead of individual or is that just my perception of them?

The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie — deliberate, contrived and dishonest — but the myth — persistent, persuasive and unrealistic.

John F. Kennedy/Shanklyboy.

Offline incredibleL4ever

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,627
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #1007 on: March 29, 2012, 04:24:17 pm »
Sounds like Swansea.

More Like Atletico Bilbao.

It seems to me that paying players more means they work less. 

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: 53,265
  • Come on you fucking red men!!!
  • Super Title: This is super!
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #1008 on: March 29, 2012, 04:25:56 pm »
You're misunderstanding statistics here - it will ALWAYS be correlation not causation; you're actually arguing about a matter of degree. The only way you could 'prove' causation would be to play the exact same team with and without Carroll and you would have to do it a number of times against the same opposition to get to a result you could determine as 'significant'.

No I don't think I am. What we're all missing are the footballing equivalent of sabremetrics - metrics that split the action in a game into measurable derivatives and allow for comparison and value judgements about what a player actually 'does' in a game and what is of real objective value.

I should say again that I'm still not convinced that a fluid game like football is reducible to that level, but to pursue the 'thought experiment' of applying sabremetrics/Moneyball to football as a game (not just management of the transfer-budget for financial reasons) it's essential that at some point we find ways to know what Andy Carroll does on the pitch and how exactly he contributes.

Billy Beane and Paul DePodesta didn't re-run games with exactly the same team line-ups to get useable statistics. In fact it's fairly obvious that there are too many variables at work to believe that the same team playing again would achieve the same result. What they did was refine out the subjective and unmeasurable to allow a players performance (at a particular set of activities over a series of games) to be predicted with some certainty.

As it says in the book - Billy Beane and Paul PoDesta weren't clairvoyants, they were card-counters.

This is how you establish where things lie on the continuum from randomness to correlation to causation:

1. Working out what measurements are relevant
2. (As importantly) Working out what measurements or factors are not relevant
3. Making a prediction on the impact a particular player should have if the metrics are causal
4. Measure that players impact over a series of games.
5. Review and repeat.

In some ways the use of the word statistics diverts attention form what's going on. This is about the scientific method: observation, hypothesis, experiment and measurement, review. And most importantly, allow others to peer-review your work.
« Last Edit: March 29, 2012, 04:30:19 pm by Alan_X »
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 JohnHenrysIceCreamCone

  • Main Stander
  • ***
  • Posts: 165
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #1009 on: March 29, 2012, 04:54:51 pm »
Have you read the book? It's full of examples.

I have not. Could you name a few?

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: 53,265
  • Come on you fucking red men!!!
  • Super Title: This is super!
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #1010 on: March 29, 2012, 05:08:24 pm »
I could, but in a thread discussing Moneyball wouldn't it be sensible (and show some respect to the others posting in the thread) to read the book that's the basis for discussion? I hadn't posted in here before because I hadn't read the book. To be honest unless you read the whole thing and appreciate the complete story then posting one example is pointless.

I've started making notes to do a short version of the book but the clearest example is that a team with the lowest salary topped it's division. That by buying players based on specific attributes to create a winning team, they err.... won. And they won consistently and in the way that they predicted they would.

To get a sense of what they were doing in Oakland - there's the story of the thought experiment DePodesta did to appreciate the importance of getting on base (not traditionally valued) against slugging (which is). It ran like this:

If every player get's on base every time, how many runs will the team score?  The answer is that they would never be out and would score an infinite number of runs and the first innings would never stop.

Quote
Another useful stat to consider when trying to determine a player’s offensive value is on base plus slugging (OPS).  OPS is an attempt to correct the flaws with OBP and SLG by combining the two statistics.  Because the two stats do such a great job of masking the others flaws it theoretically makes sense to add the two together and make one super-statistic.  However, by simply adding the two together OPS implies that SLG and OBP are equally important.  According to OPS an extra point of OBP is equal to an extra point of SLG.  Oakland A’s assistant General Manager, Paul DePodesta, had trouble believing this assumption.  Michael Lewis describes his thinking in his book, Moneyball. “Not long after he arrived in Oakland, Paul asked himself a question: what was the relative importance of on-base and slugging percentage? His answer began with a thought experiment: if a team had an on-base percentage of 1.000 (referred to as ‘a thousand’)–that is, every hitter got on base–how may runs would it score? An infinite number of runs, since the team would never make an out. If a team had a slugging percentage of 1.000–meaning, it gained a base for each hitter that came to the plate—how many runs would it score? That depended on how it was achieved, but it would typically be a lot less than an infinite number, a team might send four hitters to the plate in an inning, for instance. The first man hits a home run, the next three make outs. Four plate appearances have produced four total bases and thus a slugging percentage of 1.000 and yet have scored only one run in the inning.”

http://touchemalljoe.wordpress.com/

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 postmaster

  • Kemlynite
  • **
  • Posts: 34
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #1011 on: March 29, 2012, 05:12:03 pm »
One excuse I've read being banded about is that our transfers are poor because they're from "low/mid table teams". Where they came from is entirely irrelevent. It's how we man-manage them and use them that matters. For example (and this is ignoring lower division players):


Spurs: Kaboul (Pompey), Parker (West Ham), Saha (Bitters), Defoe (Pompey), Friedel (Villa),
Toon: Williamson (Pompey), Gosling (Bitters), Taylor (Wigan)
United: Jones (Blackburn), Rooney (Bitters), Smalling (Fulham), Young (Villa), Valencia (Wigan)
City: Lescott (Bitters), Milner (Villa), Johnson (Borough), Barry (Villa)


We shouldn't make excuses for our poor domestic transfers. Either the management aren't utilising (playing Henderson on the right, for example), man managing the players (Shelvey/Suarez, for example) or they simply were not good enough in the first place (Carroll/Downing/Adam, for example). Where they come from does not matter.

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: 53,265
  • Come on you fucking red men!!!
  • Super Title: This is super!
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #1012 on: March 29, 2012, 05:14:51 pm »
One excuse I've read being banded about is that our transfers are poor because they're from "low/mid table teams"....

That's nothing do with Moneyball - it just means that whoever said it is an idiot.
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 postmaster

  • Kemlynite
  • **
  • Posts: 34
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #1013 on: March 29, 2012, 05:16:50 pm »
That's nothing do with Moneyball - it just means that whoever said it is an idiot.

It was said by posters on here repeatedly.  :-X

Offline i_wun_bite

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,558
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #1014 on: March 29, 2012, 05:18:48 pm »
;D yesterday a poster brought up a similar 'stat' (true) that Suarez scores 75% of his goals when carra is playing  .... clearly an example of causation!  ;)

reina doesn't score goals nor does carra. having said that, there are only 9 other players who could score a goal. 1/9 would naturally lead to a higher scoring chance for Suarez as compared to 1/10 who could score goals. Now give me my PhD in statistics. :)

Offline kkjellquist

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,843
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #1015 on: March 29, 2012, 05:18:56 pm »
Two questions in reply to that: How do you show that it's not just a statistical quirk? If you don't know why or even whether Carroll's presence was the factor in the raising the points per game ratio then it's just correlation not causation.

Sounds like football needs a WAR (wins above replacement) stat like baseball.  WAR in simple terms is a value that represents the number of wins a player gives you per season over a 'base level' replacement.  In Carroll's case you would have to calculate how many more points he gives us in a season versus an average championship level striker. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wins_above_replacement

"Statistics are like bikinis—they show a lot but not everything." - Lou Piniella

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: 53,265
  • Come on you fucking red men!!!
  • Super Title: This is super!
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #1016 on: March 29, 2012, 05:21:38 pm »
It was said by posters on here repeatedly.  :-X

Then they are idiots and will be dealt with appropriately. Where a player comes from should be irrelevant - it's what they've done that should be taken into account, assuming always that you understand whether what they have done is 'theirs' and transferable or a function of the team they were in and the tactics they were playing.
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 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: 53,265
  • Come on you fucking red men!!!
  • Super Title: This is super!
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #1017 on: March 29, 2012, 05:22:59 pm »
Sounds like football needs a WAR (wins above replacement) stat like baseball.  WAR in simple terms is a value that represents the number of wins a player gives you per season over a 'base level' replacement.  In Carroll's case you would have to calculate how many more points he gives us in a season versus an average championship level striker. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wins_above_replacement


Except I don't think we are in a position to measure that.
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 Vulmea

  • Almost saint-like.....
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 4,329
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #1018 on: March 29, 2012, 05:28:54 pm »
We shouldn't make excuses for our poor domestic transfers. Either the management aren't utilising (playing Henderson on the right, for example), man managing the players (Shelvey/Suarez, for example) or they simply were not good enough in the first place (Carroll/Downing/Adam, for example). Where they come from does not matter.

What objective criteria are you using to assess these transfers? Goals scored? Points? League position? Daily mirror player ratings?

How do you assess individual performance in a team game where those team interact constantly for 90 minutes?

How long are you assessing the transfer over - one game, one week, one month, one transfer window, one season, two seasons?

Its not about making excuses - its about trying to define what success is for a transfer  isn't it?

The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie — deliberate, contrived and dishonest — but the myth — persistent, persuasive and unrealistic.

John F. Kennedy/Shanklyboy.

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: 53,265
  • Come on you fucking red men!!!
  • Super Title: This is super!
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #1019 on: March 29, 2012, 05:34:54 pm »
It makes me sad when I think of how things were under Rafa. It makes me sad that the masses were once again blinded by the media who were totally against Rafa. Yes we won the carling cup this year but it does not compare to that feeling of grandure at the club when Rafa was at the helm.

Not taking anything away from what Kenny has done for us, he has tried to instill an English team into Liverpool at a time when the talent in England is so few and far between. Hats off to him fo trying but due to the politics involved in the youth football of England we dont allow for flair or creative players to develop.

I feel bad for Gerrard, he will more than likely never see a premiership title and he deserves it than more than most of the players in England due to his determination and heart.

We haven't seen champions league for a while and while we recruit players such as Henderson, Carrol or Downing we never will - No matter how you manage these players, they will always be limited. This is so negative but I think its time we woke up. Istanbul was six years ago. We are not a small domestic cup club, we are meant to be one of the best in the world...



Err.... why have you posted this in here?
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 JohnHenrysIceCreamCone

  • Main Stander
  • ***
  • Posts: 165
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #1020 on: March 29, 2012, 05:39:45 pm »

To get a sense of what they were doing in Oakland - there's the story of the thought experiment DePodesta did to appreciate the importance of getting on base (not traditionally valued) against slugging (which is). It ran like this:


I thought what they were doing in Oakland was turning a blind eye to their players abusing steroids because, as a result, they put up some insane statistics and won ball games?

Truth is AlanX I am well versed in Moneyball and, at best, it has had mixed results in baseball. All one has to do is look at the flops the Red Sox have signed with a so called statistical wonderboy making the calls. Sound familiar?

Offline Carlos: Very Kickable

  • Pompous Twat. Scourge of Pinko Liberalism. Attitude to Cyan Conservatism is unclear. Lives in a Monochrome world and is baffled by colours.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,802
  • As Gnaeus Pompeius Magnus would say...
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #1021 on: March 29, 2012, 05:41:07 pm »
No I don't think I am.

No worries bud - we'll agree to disagree but the rest of your post proves my case rather than contradicts it..

In some ways the use of the word statistics diverts attention form what's going on. This is about the scientific method: observation, hypothesis, experiment and measurement, review. And most importantly, allow others to peer-review your work.

This is how you establish where things lie on the continuum from randomness to correlation to causation..

Steps 1-5


You're essentially describing how to use a modelling process here - and refining it and allwing other people to review it. But think about what you're saying - its a MODEL. If you could prove causation in this way you wouldn't have to put people through drug trials yo ucould just tease out the causative processes again and again. You can only 'prove' causation by directly testing the factors again and again (and even then it isn't proved). What you're describing is how to work out a higher degree of correlation with enough certainty you dont lose any money from it - that's completely different.




In fact it's fairly obvious that there are too many variables at work to believe that the same team playing again would achieve the same result. What they did was refine out the subjective and unmeasurable to allow a players performance (at a particular set of activities over a series of games) to be predicted with some certainty.

As it says in the book - Billy Beane and Paul PoDesta weren't clairvoyants, they were card-counters.


Exactly. They were working out what factors correlate statistically well with success. Choosing new factors or having a high degree of confidence in that correlation doesn't mean you are proving causation (which is the original point I made).

You make the point youself in the next sentence - counting cards doesnt guarantee you win it just correlates a higher chance of success if you bet when the deck is 'hot'.

But as I said I doubt I'll convince you. If you do think you're right though id encourage you to spend less time on here and give the club a call - you''l be a multi-millionaire before Christmas if what you say is correct.

Good luck  ;D
I know you struggle with reading comprehension Carlitos, but do try to pay attention

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 #1022 on: March 29, 2012, 05:54:46 pm »
I love this thread right now.

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: 53,265
  • Come on you fucking red men!!!
  • Super Title: This is super!
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #1023 on: March 29, 2012, 06:05:03 pm »
Carlos - we're arguing semantics. I understand exactly what you're talking about (hence the reference to card-counting).

But in order to have a meaningful discussion about this subject we have to be able to use a degree of shorthand. I mean, statistically we can't say that gravity will always operate. We know that it's always operated in the past and all the evidence and science says that it will continue to operate but there is an infinitesimally small possibility that in five minutes I will start floating up towards the ceiling.

As I keep saying - I'm in this as a thought experiment. To try and understand what you measure, or 'count' to gain an advantage on the pitch over a number of games.
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 Limbo

  • Ridiculous
  • Main Stander
  • ***
  • Posts: 102
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #1024 on: March 29, 2012, 06:06:58 pm »
I supposed the best way is to scout the players- and scout them a lot.

See how they react when they go a goal behind. See how they react when the crowd is on the team's back. See how they react to losing a game. So they accept it and move on or do they fight to avoid losing and become sore losers if they do? Do they hide or are they pro active and demand the ball?

See if they have had any postions of leadership in their careers. A Kenny quote about Luis which I always mention: "He was the captain of Ajax at 22 and he's a foreigner. That's all I need to know about his mentality".

Alonso, Torres, Suarez, Gerrard etc all captained their sides at a young age. That's a pretty good marker for example.

Check their careers for challenges they've overcome. For example, someone scouting Lucas now would note how he overcame so much difficulties to insert himself as an untouchable starter in our first 11.

What makes you think this wasn't done? and if it wasn't done, who's fault was it? The scout? the scouting philosophy? Comolli?

I think the scouting department should be heavy on scouting the "mental" parts of a player since Comolli mentions it as one of the first things they look for, so I'm not really sure where this is coming from. As for the "Captains = Mentally Strong" argument, let's assume it's true. What do we do with the other players at the club? Ignore them since they might be risky?

All in all, scouting is complex, much more so than perhaps most of us armchair critics will ever appreciate. Human beings are hard to predict. Don't believe me? Just ask the rising number of divorcees nowadays. People can't even figure out their partners almost half the time and you really can't get more intimate or have more on the line.  :P

Let's just stop the simplistic blanket statements, they don't provide any useful direction for anybody and don't really contribute to the topic on hand.

Ask around about the player. Ask previous managers and teammates. For example, Downing's teammates told me he was shithouse of a player. If an idiot like me living in Beirut knows this, how the fuck does our DOF not know it? And if he did, why was this not a clear sign that we should steer clear?

Maybe they heard rumours, maybe they didn't, we'll never know. Maybe his England team mates were saying the opposite? But then that's probably speculation on my part, hehe.  After all, Gerrard and the others have only been playing with him on international duty for several years, why should they ask them for opinions??? Maybe they thought "Bleh, Gerrard is only the club captain anyway so his opinion is a waste of time" and followed that with "Dang it, you WILL play with whoever I buy and NO, I ain't gonna bother asking you what you think! I don't even wanna hear it!!!".

It's funny how many fans think "idiots probably can't even change a light bulb" when the team isn't performing as well as we hope.

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: 53,265
  • Come on you fucking red men!!!
  • Super Title: This is super!
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #1025 on: March 29, 2012, 06:22:39 pm »
I thought what they were doing in Oakland was turning a blind eye to their players abusing steroids because, as a result, they put up some insane statistics and won ball games?

Truth is AlanX I am well versed in Moneyball and, at best, it has had mixed results in baseball. All one has to do is look at the flops the Red Sox have signed with a so called statistical wonderboy making the calls. Sound familiar?

Has it had mixed results or is the principle likely to experience diminishing returns over time? The whole principle was to look for value that others don't appreciate. ONce others start using the same measurements, the value of players with those measurements goes up. What worked for the A's is that everyone thought they were fucking nuts!

If everyone uses the same measurements, the accuracy and predictability of a player's performance will improve but the edge that gives you will disappear over time.

Moneyball (as described in the book) isn't a panacea that magically solves everything, it's just one more idea that gave a team an advantage at a particular time. The same goes for tactical innovations, for dietary innovations and so on and so on.

And I have to say that I wouldn't have minded some of the Red Sox's 'mixed results' over the last few seasons since Henry appointed a statistical wonderboy. Two World Series? Would I be happy if we'd won two league titles in the last ten years? Fucking right I would!

AS for Comolli (who I guess you're referring to) I'll say it again - I've yet to see anything written or reported about him that suggests that he uses any meaningful and measurable data to select players.
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 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: 53,265
  • Come on you fucking red men!!!
  • Super Title: This is super!
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #1026 on: March 29, 2012, 06:40:50 pm »
All in all, scouting is complex, much more so than perhaps most of us armchair critics will ever appreciate. Human beings are hard to predict.

OK - the point of the topic being discussed as how you make the job of scouts more predictable. I'd hazard a guess that the problems they had with scouts at the Oakland A's are replicated over and over at football clubs across the country. Buy players who look the part, players with skills and trick cost more, strikers cost the most. Look for talented players at a very young age who can be 'brought on' cheaply.

There are geniuses who can pick a player from anywhere and see exactly where they would fit and how they would contribute to a team. Bob Paisley was probably the most naturally gifted scout in the history of football. Hardly a single mis-step (were there any?). Joey Jones from Wrexham, Ronnie Whelan from Home Farm, Grobbelar from Vancouver Whitecaps for £250,000?...

But managers like Bob are few and far between.

Quote
Let's just stop the simplistic blanket statements, they don't provide any useful direction for anybody and don't really contribute to the topic on hand.

I agree.
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 nocturnalvin

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 6,627
  • Justice For The 96.
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #1027 on: March 29, 2012, 06:56:09 pm »
But Alan, are you then limiting the discussion to identify sets of values/data from existing data thats being collected ? If thats the case, until someone can present/post the full specs of what is being currently collected, then we are all debating only on some of the more general things we know, such as passes completed, shots on target, chances created.

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: 53,265
  • Come on you fucking red men!!!
  • Super Title: This is super!
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #1028 on: March 29, 2012, 07:08:21 pm »
But Alan, are you then limiting the discussion to identify sets of values/data from existing data thats being collected ? If thats the case, until someone can present/post the full specs of what is being currently collected, then we are all debating only on some of the more general things we know, such as passes completed, shots on target, chances created.

No mate, my gut reaction (and the limited evidence of this season's transfers) is that whatever measures are being used are virtually worthless in determining the performance of the team.

One of the most interesting things about the book was that the A's improved after the midseason trades. They didn't just buy with a view to the long term. They were able to identify players that would have an immediate impact based on the measures they were using.

I think it would be interesting to come up with what we think are useful metrics. The ones being used aren't working.
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 Not A Scouser

  • Anny Roader
  • ****
  • Posts: 498
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #1029 on: March 29, 2012, 07:15:57 pm »
Part of the plan was to buy for the future.  In terms of numbers of players bought, at least half of the buys last year were youth players.  Then Henderson, Carroll, Coates, weren't bought to be the best available players this season.  "We bought him for the next five years."  That doesn't mean that they haven't performed as well as we would like, or that we can't judge how they played this season (generally poorly), but the judgement on whether they will are good buys or not should be over the next 4+ years if we are using Comolli's system.

The three players bought to perform this season were Adam, Downing and Suarez.  I think all three of them have performed below expectations.  Downing is 27 and has been playing in the Premier League for years, he should have been good, he hasn't been, that's a bad buy.  Adam was bought pretty cheaply has played 1 and 1/2 a premier league season and is 25.  I expect him to improve somewhat.  Suarez has converted chances at a very low rate.  He is electrifying to watch, and creates a lot of chances for himself but 7 goals in 24 games for a 23 million pound striker is poor.  You can see that when playing with more creative players (Gerrard) he does better.  He's 25 and will improve.

At Spurs it took several years for the effect of Comolli's purchases to be seen, about 4-5 years until they reached their peak.  Half the starting Spurs line-up are Comolli purchases (including their best players).  He spent money, and he got about half of his purchases wrong, but the success is a fact.  His biggest failing was who he hired as a manager, and the impatience of fans and management.

The plan may still fail abjectly, but I think we can really make a judgement on the plan yet.

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 #1030 on: March 29, 2012, 07:25:05 pm »
No mate, my gut reaction (and the limited evidence of this season's transfers) is that whatever measures are being used are virtually worthless in determining the performance of the team.

One of the most interesting things about the book was that the A's improved after the midseason trades. They didn't just buy with a view to the long term. They were able to identify players that would have an immediate impact based on the measures they were using.

I think it would be interesting to come up with what we think are useful metrics. The ones being used aren't working.

Do you think it might be useful in coming up with whatever these metrics are to use the team that is the most consistent, and the winningest as our study group?  It seems like that makes sense to me, so Barcelona is the team that comes to mind.  If we were able to use them as the benchmark and identify the metrics based on them (which would be easier than basing them on any other team since they're so consistent; it would also be easier to isolate personnel changes and to isolate events throughout 90-minute matches and measure their impact on the game) we could then apply what we find to any other team afterward.

It's dawning on me now that it may take years to identify these metrics.  It will take the watching and studying of countless 90 minute matches in order to breakdown events and to make implications about their impact on the game.

Offline Vulmea

  • Almost saint-like.....
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 4,329
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #1031 on: March 29, 2012, 07:33:59 pm »
Do you think it might be useful in coming up with whatever these metrics are to use the team that is the most consistent, and the winningest as our study group?  It seems like that makes sense to me, so Barcelona is the team that comes to mind.  If we were able to use them as the benchmark and identify the metrics based on them (which would be easier than basing them on any other team since they're so consistent; it would also be easier to isolate personnel changes and to isolate events throughout 90-minute matches and measure their impact on the game) we could then apply what we find to any other team afterward.

It's dawning on me now that it may take years to identify these metrics.  It will take the watching and studying of countless 90 minute matches in order to breakdown events and to make implications about their impact on the game.

winningest is only  a word in the US it doesn't really work anywhere else

I would have thought the best chance to i.d. the factors would be to look at the biggest sample size and find the statistically significant ones - playing for barca would seem to have an inherent advantage in being percieved as successful

The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie — deliberate, contrived and dishonest — but the myth — persistent, persuasive and unrealistic.

John F. Kennedy/Shanklyboy.

Offline Not A Scouser

  • Anny Roader
  • ****
  • Posts: 498
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #1032 on: March 29, 2012, 07:38:23 pm »
Do you think it might be useful in coming up with whatever these metrics are to use the team that is the most consistent, and the winningest as our study group?  It seems like that makes sense to me, so Barcelona is the team that comes to mind.  If we were able to use them as the benchmark and identify the metrics based on them (which would be easier than basing them on any other team since they're so consistent; it would also be easier to isolate personnel changes and to isolate events throughout 90-minute matches and measure their impact on the game) we could then apply what we find to any other team afterward.

It's dawning on me now that it may take years to identify these metrics.  It will take the watching and studying of countless 90 minute matches in order to breakdown events and to make implications about their impact on the game.

The only change I would make is most successful team for the money (Barcelona have a massive, massive wage bill), and more specifically, best performing team for a similar amount of money that we have, and ideally in the most similar league to ours.  Spurs over the last six or seven years is probably the best of these.  Then you evaluate the characteristics of the good buys and the flops on that/those teams to try and do even better.  Hopefully you do that better than every other team that is trying to do the same.  If you don't, you try to evaluate why not.

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: 53,265
  • Come on you fucking red men!!!
  • Super Title: This is super!
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #1033 on: March 29, 2012, 07:46:18 pm »
Truth is AlanX I am well versed in Moneyball...

So you were just being a fucking smart-arse? Thanks for the contribution.
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 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 #1034 on: March 29, 2012, 07:56:18 pm »
winningest is only  a word in the US it doesn't really work anywhere else

I would have thought the best chance to i.d. the factors would be to look at the biggest sample size and find the statistically significant ones - playing for barca would seem to have an inherent advantage in being percieved as successful

are you really going to nitpick about me saying 'winningest'?  you know what i mean by it. 

i don't know what the best method would be, but i'm fully open to hearing what people think.  i just think it would be the easiest to isolate events within matches by examining what they do as opposed to any other team, because they seem to have the biggest element of control over matches.  obviously it's a bit curious because they spend millions and millions and have raised some of the best talent in the world themselves so that brings up questions about the reliability of the data... but i just figure the metrics can be identified by using them, and then scaled down to fit any other team's budget.  i don't know though.  it will take minds a lot more clever than mine to figure it out.

Offline Zeb

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 18,571
  • Justice.
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #1035 on: March 29, 2012, 08:05:56 pm »
And secondly - I'm still waiting for the links that show that Comolli is actually using statistics to select players in a way that corresponds to sabremetrics in baseball. My personal view is that 'chance-creation' is as valuable a measure as RBI's in baseball (or saying that just being on the pitch when we win is an objective measure of a player's actual contribution to the team performance).

Downing signing had some of the indications: link to Mirror story with relevant quotes.

Most of the really interesting stuff he's alleged to have said come from reports of quotes in French media but they're frustratingly difficult to track down to the original cited source. "The whole principle is about creating value, and managing to find a player in the market who is underestimated financially compared to his stats", is one thing he's meant to have said on French tv.
"And the voices of the standing Kop still whispering in the wind will salute the wee Scots redman and he will still walk on.
And your money will have bought you nothing."

Offline Sangria

  • In trying to be right ends up wrong without fail
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 19,075
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #1036 on: March 29, 2012, 08:08:44 pm »
No mate, my gut reaction (and the limited evidence of this season's transfers) is that whatever measures are being used are virtually worthless in determining the performance of the team.

One of the most interesting things about the book was that the A's improved after the midseason trades. They didn't just buy with a view to the long term. They were able to identify players that would have an immediate impact based on the measures they were using.

I think it would be interesting to come up with what we think are useful metrics. The ones being used aren't working.

We could probably come up with some workable rules of thumb, but different ones depending on what kind of player we're looking for. Not necessarily numerical ones subject to statistical analysis, as we don't have the range of stats that professionals do, but ones based on experience and logic, and certain open to peer review. Yorky's hobbyhorse of playing with the head up is one such, not exactly a measurable quality, but one where its worth is clear.
"i just dont think (Lucas is) that type of player that Kenny wants"
Vidocq, 20 January 2011

http://www.redandwhitekop.com/forum/index.php?topic=267148.msg8032258#msg8032258

Offline djschembri

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,605
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #1037 on: March 29, 2012, 08:27:46 pm »
Downing signing had some of the indications: link to Mirror story with relevant quotes.

Most of the really interesting stuff he's alleged to have said come from reports of quotes in French media but they're frustratingly difficult to track down to the original cited source. "The whole principle is about creating value, and managing to find a player in the market who is underestimated financially compared to his stats", is one thing he's meant to have said on French tv.

Not to nitpick, or derail from this thread, but how was signing Downing for 20M on a 5 year contract at the age of 27, a case of a player being "underestimated financially"?

Offline Vulmea

  • Almost saint-like.....
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 4,329
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #1038 on: March 29, 2012, 08:40:32 pm »
are you really going to nitpick about me saying 'winningest'?  you know what i mean by it. 


sorry lad - not trying to nit pick - its a foible that young kids have over here, they add 'est' to words - 'bestest', 'mostest' etc so to me, this side of the pond it comes across as childlike - I'm guessing thats not how you are looking to come across thats why I 'picked' on it just trying to be helpful really - no offence meant.

two countries divided by a common language eh :)
The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie — deliberate, contrived and dishonest — but the myth — persistent, persuasive and unrealistic.

John F. Kennedy/Shanklyboy.

Offline Vulmea

  • Almost saint-like.....
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 4,329
Re: Moneyball, Soccernomics and Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #1039 on: March 29, 2012, 08:43:19 pm »
Not to nitpick, or derail from this thread, but how was signing Downing for 20M on a 5 year contract at the age of 27, a case of a player being "underestimated financially"?

18.5m according to lfchistory.net - see you overestimated by 1.5m there
The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie — deliberate, contrived and dishonest — but the myth — persistent, persuasive and unrealistic.

John F. Kennedy/Shanklyboy.