Topic: Statistical Comparison of LFC players to Rest of EPL - starting w/LB

[BabuYagu]

Latest update on my ongoing comparison of all Premier League Left Backs

At the moment I have only looked at 1-v-1 and blocking situations. Iīll look at pressing/second balls next. Still not looking at any defensive metrics but here is where we are at so far.

Blocks vs 1-v-1s

Blocks Broken Down

1-V-1 Ability broken down

Green
This grouping would be what I would consider the best grouping of left backs in 1-v-1 situations in the Premier League at the moment. I would say for that grouping Davies & van Aanholt look the best, although van Aanholt will be 27 when the season starts. We seem to target players a few years younger than that so we have a core squad coming into their peak 2 or 3 years from now. With this in mind, and Davies likely unavailable (or over priced for what we want to spend) as he is at Spurs, Robertson then looks the best option available to us.
Light Green
Bertrand, Cresswell & Olsson may also be very good options although the very low number of tackles they are making is a concern. Are they simply not being tested much in 1-v-1 situations? Are they world class at staying on their feet and jockeying people away from danger without making a challenge? Or are they too passive and simply back off ensuring they are rarely beaten, foul or make a challenge but cause a lot of problems for their sides?
Yellow
This would be the league average group. Alonso was the surprising name in there for me. Although maybe this explains why Chelsea want a 60m left back this summer?
Orange
This would be the group that seem weak in 1-v-1 situations. They are all fouling & being dribbled past more than twice as often as Nathaniel Clyne. Interesting names in group are Chilwell (bullet dodged or still learning?), Milner (sorry James, but I figured this would be his weakest category given he is not a defender and at 31 will be losing some of that explosiveness) Monreal (explains Arsenals need for a new leftback too) and Danny Rose (always thought he was a liability in defence, his improved attacking game and better center backs mopping up behind him maybe is seeing his weaknesses exposed less?)
Outliers
Gibbs & Moreno are both way out on their own, and not in a good way for either. Moreno looks like he could be a good fullback. Hell, maybe even a world class one. However, again, his decision making comes into play. He dives into every challenge. He attempts 4,3 tackles per 90 compared to the second highest in the league 2,99. The league average is 2,1. If he stayed on his feet half the time you expect he would simultaneously reduce his fouling and dribble past numbers too. You 1/2 all his numbers and he would be the best full back in the league in this category by some distance. But that has always been the problem with Alberto, if. He has everything a full back could need to be the Naby Keita of full backs except the brain of one.

[Klippity Klopp]

I do think a player like Keita in the box there would help who is ridiculous on second balls.

Yeah.

Or a VVD in the area of the yellow box might allow us to put more players in the yellow box as he seems very dominant in the air.

I just find it an interesting set up.

[JCB]

I'd like to introduce a new parameter (high/medium/low block) to the fold and see if it helps . Theoretically, by colour coding the graphs it might aid in highlighting and grouping the players who perform differently to their respective peers. However grouping can be subjective especially if thee person in question doesn't watch enough of every team to make a confident assessment (that would be me). Here's what i think it should be, would love to get a 2nd opinion on these before I jump in.


Edit 2: Don't bother...I went ahead in the meantime and the outputs didn't yield any insight in the slightest (see below)


Player Name      Team           Low/High Block
Kieran Gibbs   Arsenal           High Block
Nacho Monreal   Arsenal           High Block
Charlie Daniels   Bournemouth   Medium Block
Stephen Ward   Burnley           Low Block
Marcos Alonso   Chelsea           High Block
P. van Aanholt   Crystal Palace   Medium Block
L.Baines           Everton           Medium Block
A. Robertson   Hull City           Low Block
Ben Chilwell   Leicester City   Medium Block
Christian Fuchs   Leicester City   Medium Block
Nathaniel Clyne   Liverpool           High Block
James Milner   Liverpool            High Block
Alberto Moreno   Liverpool           High Block
Jon Flanagan   Liverpool           High Block
Gaël Clichy   Manchester City   High Block
George Friend   Middlesbrough   Low Block
Ryan Bertrand   Southampton   Medium Block
Erik Pieters   Stoke City           Low Block
Martin Olsson   Swansea City   Low Block
Ben Davies   Tottenham Hotspur   High Block
Kyle Walker   Tottenham Hotspur   High Block
Danny Rose   Tottenham Hotspur   High Block
José Holebas   Watford        Medium Block
A. Nyom       West Bromwich Albion   Low Block
Aaron Cresswell   West Ham United           Medium Block



Edit: Also why isn't a Man U player included? was there no data on it?

[penga]

snip

I don't really want anything from you, just highlighting that even you can appear biased at times as well despite the attempt and thread title. I also didn't say what you pointed out and questioned in Ghoulam was unfair (in fact I said questioning no. of tackles is logical and fair) - I'm just saying your perception was probably over-skeptical or even negative from the start. You mused his apparent passiveness could lead to more danger for the team, but the team has an overall good defensive record even though they play attacking football - so it's hard to see him being a problem. Fair enough Ghoulam has low amount of tackles - but his tackle success % numbers are remain high even in seasons where he did actually get high amount of tackles + dribbled past which suggests good tackling technique or positioning but you attempted explained it away with the negative default and also said it was an outlier which still doesn't negate the positive success rate and dribbled past which you suggested as like a causation (because he makes low tackles he has high % rate and low dribbled past).

On the other hand with Robertson who you've watched a more but probably not that much either (like week in week out most games), you have managed to interpret almost every stat into a positive and sort of skipped over the possible negatives. When someone offers a negative stat on him you automatically tried to explain most of them away mainly with tactical reasons as the answer. Also in comparison, Hull conceded 80 goals (worst in league) in a defence minded team and Robertson was one quarter of that back 4 and was probably offered plenty of protection in their tactical shape and numbers around him - now that's obviously not an individual problem and could easily be down to playing with inferior players but it still raises questions - is there something you're not seeing? I've not watched Ghoulam enough either to confirm whether he is indeed as good as the stats suggest, I was just using this as an example of how you interpret things with seemingly different standards.

If I took the same approach on Robertson as you did Ghoulam, I could question a number of things similarly which you interpret as positive. E.g. Robertson probably has a decent amount of crosses blocked and more shots blocked because their team plays more defensive and has less possession. This could go someway into explaining why Fuchs, Pieters, Ward, Holebas and Cresswell who play for lower possession teams have good blocking numbers despite none of them seeming really spectacular. Also how much weight should we really give to fouls and dribbled past? What if Milner or Moreno for example commit more fouls higher up the pitch than Robertson does? So those fouls could be more acceptable or less dangerous. Furthermore it could be very likely there are less situations where Robertson is isolated 1v1 considering the distance away he is from the CB, the wingers and the midfielders with Hull's system (as well as overall space to dribble into) as opposed to Liverpool's - therefore he could get exposed more and his stats might become worse when he plays here - likewise but on the positive side his stats in creating chances are likely to improve although they are poor now.

With regards to Mignolet, the funny thing is I actually agreed from the start - way before when people called him a good shot stopper a few years ago, that he was actually average or below average. The part I'm not agreeing on is that you imply that is the reason (or main reason) we concede 16 more goals than Spurs or 15 more the season before because that's a huge disparity - there are most likely in my opinion, other factors at play regardless of the XG charts and stats - could be an underlying problem with the way we concede chances compared to them or other teams not just a GK issue.

I'm also saying what happens when the stats don't confirm what you watched and predicted? e.g. earlier you said you would expect Cresswell to have poor blocked crosses per 90 due to his passiveness however that was proved wrong by the stats. So do you accept the stats or find reasons to argue against the stat? Similarly with Robertson and aerial duels as I elaborated in the previous post - in this case you argued for the positive side of Robertson by default when numbers were really bad. But I think you are coming to analyse that more closely eventually later in this thread. Anyway it will also be interesting seeing things when the attacking side is analysed.

[JCB]

/snip

Player Name	Season	League	Tackling Success Rate	Tackles Won per 90	Fouls per 90	Dribbled Past per 90	1-v-1 Score
Clyne	2016/17	Premier League	76,25%	1,65	0,38	0,62	1,00
Clyne	2015/16	Premier League	84,00%	2,55	0,58	0,48	1,06

For me here, I am trying to avoid a Stewart Downing moment in placing too much importance on one number. In 2015/16 Clyne's tackle success was insane. He also made a lot more tackles too so he wasnīt just diving in. He actually lost more tackles in 2016/17 despite making far fewer. He also got dribbled past more in 2016/17 (which I probably value highest of all the numbers if I am honest). Fouls go up slightly more than dribbled past goes down though, so he ends up very slightly worse in terms of his 1-v-1 score but overall I think he 2015/16 numbers look better. But thatīs just my interpretation of them. Itīs not right or wrong. The end result is 2015/16 Clyne failed 0,06 times more per game to adequately deal with 1-v-1īs so maybe that is right? I guess thatīs one for Klopp to decide. Does he like more aggressive Clyne or not?

based on the bolded part I recommend weighting your figures: 

So instead of:  0.38   +   0.62    = 1.00     try   
                      (0.38)* 1  +  (0.62) * 1.2   = 1.124

For now the values you assign to the coefficients (1 ; 1.2) will be arbitrary and based on your subjective opinion but it should yield a better metric. Maybe later with more info these can be refined.

[JCB]

So I tried colour coding my previous graphs (and Babu's Tackles+Dribbles) based on low/high block setup but it didn't offer any nuggets like I thought it might. Thought I'd share regardless.

[Rush 82]

So I tried colour coding my previous graphs (and Babu's Tackles+Dribbles) based on low/high block setup but it didn't offer any nuggets like I thought it might. Thought I'd share regardless.

What it does show is that Andy is closer to Clyne in performance than Milner - and that's a good thing in my book.

[rickardinho1]

So I tried colour coding my previous graphs (and Babu's Tackles+Dribbles) based on low/high block setup but it didn't offer any nuggets like I thought it might. Thought I'd share regardless.

Thanks.

Some things that stand out to me at a glance:

Chilwell and Fuchs have very similar stats despite not appearing to be similar in style. Both tackle a lot, and get dribbled past frequenctly & commit fouls a lot. They don't appear (to my untrained eye) to be that similar stylistically, so perhaps these stats have a lot more to do with tactics than individual ability. Seems to me that Leicester's manager really wants his fullbacks to be super aggressive, even at the expense of getting dribbled past more often.

The same might be said of Milner and Monreal, two fullbacks playing in very attacking teams with a high line, and both have similar stats.

These stats also show exactly why Davies is preferred to Rose in certain games. Rose plays very high up and is probably told to make more fouls if needed, compared to Davies who is clearly more conservative. That said, it is interesting to note the differences between Walker and Rose, who basically do a similar role.

I also don't think this graph does justice to Marcos Alonso, given that he was playing as a wing back and thus offered more allowance to get forward. I'd expect him to be closer to Robertson or Bertrand if he played as a proper LB in a back 4. If anyone wants to dig up stats from previous seasons that would be nice. Would also love to see where a peak Baines (ca. 2013/14) would be on this graph.

[vivabobbygraham]

As for van Aanholt, I checked him out last night and noticed Kent stood him up twice and twice failed to get past him. There were other time he cut in on his left and Aanholt tracked him and then Kent got a shot off and almost scored. But thatīs a different thing to 1-v-1 scoring and actually what I plan to look at next. Thatīs the first time Iīve paid attention to his 1-v-1 abilities and he did okay v Kent who, Iīll be honest, looks a shit to deal with in 1-v-1s. His feet are fast, he is two footed, he has fantastic balance and agility. He will fuck up some full backs for us this year for sure. Maybe just not van Aanholt. I do also have a feeling for the side he is in, van Aanholt is quite passive. His numbers should be higher than Clyne, not lower. So that is something I am looking for. Is he just standing off peopel and letting them get shots, crosses and dangerous passes around him easily? Kent did that after failing to beat him twice. So the gut says yes, but I need to look at it properly later today.......

.......Guardiola doesnīt sign good defensive full backs. His #1 priority is always recovery pace. After that he looks at them with the ball. Then he looks at defence. In many ways Walker offers Guardiola what he wants (but not everything he needs). Ted Knutsen said last season that Man City wouldnīt win anything with a bunch of old full backs. He was right too. Recovery pace at full back is so important to Guardiola and how he plays (us too, btw, which is why Milner at 31 will be a problem sooner rather than later). Walkerīs pace and ability to hit hard right footed crosses first time mean he will naturally stretch opponents tactically as you cannot give him 15 yards on the right flank to hurt you with. Walker isnīt great through. Heīs no Dani Alves in terms of technique and dribbling. Heīs just average/above average at lots of things and his pace takes that up a level above his underlying skill set. Milner with Walkerīs pace would likely be a beast. Moreno with Milnerīs pace wouldnīt even be a professional footballer perhaps.

Good stuff Babu as always. I've always liked Kent, he's a proper footballer who will develop into an outstanding versatility player for someone, hopefully us. I don't believe he needs another season on loan, I think he needs to develop here, in and around the squad. I am particularly curious to seem him play left back, a Klopp left back. His speed, two foottedness, balance and strength makes him ideal material for there. I know we have bought Robertson to develop there and I believe him to be an outstanding prospect but Kent could excel there too if allowed.

[newterp]

I remember when Jack Robinson looked like he was going to make it

[vivabobbygraham]

I remember when Jack Robinson looked like he was going to make it

He was given the opportunity and didn't take it. That's football. Should we stop trying based on Jack Robinson's failure? Where is he now btw? Anyone know?

[BabuYagu]

I'd like to introduce a new parameter (high/medium/low block) to the fold and see if it helps . Theoretically, by colour coding the graphs it might aid in highlighting and grouping the players who perform differently to their respective peers. However grouping can be subjective especially if thee person in question doesn't watch enough of every team to make a confident assessment (that would be me). Here's what i think it should be, would love to get a 2nd opinion on these before I jump in.


Edit 2: Don't bother...I went ahead in the meantime and the outputs didn't yield any insight in the slightest (see below)


Player Name      Team           Low/High Block
Kieran Gibbs   Arsenal           High Block
Nacho Monreal   Arsenal           High Block
Charlie Daniels   Bournemouth   Medium Block
Stephen Ward   Burnley           Low Block
Marcos Alonso   Chelsea           High Block
P. van Aanholt   Crystal Palace   Medium Block
L.Baines           Everton           Medium Block
A. Robertson   Hull City           Low Block
Ben Chilwell   Leicester City   Medium Block
Christian Fuchs   Leicester City   Medium Block
Nathaniel Clyne   Liverpool           High Block
James Milner   Liverpool            High Block
Alberto Moreno   Liverpool           High Block
Jon Flanagan   Liverpool           High Block
Gaël Clichy   Manchester City   High Block
George Friend   Middlesbrough   Low Block
Ryan Bertrand   Southampton   Medium Block
Erik Pieters   Stoke City           Low Block
Martin Olsson   Swansea City   Low Block
Ben Davies   Tottenham Hotspur   High Block
Kyle Walker   Tottenham Hotspur   High Block
Danny Rose   Tottenham Hotspur   High Block
José Holebas   Watford        Medium Block
A. Nyom       West Bromwich Albion   Low Block
Aaron Cresswell   West Ham United           Medium Block



Edit: Also why isn't a Man U player included? was there no data on it?

Itīs something I was thinking about at the end of all this when I want to refine the process. I know statsbomb adjust defensive numbers based on possession. The logic being that a team that has the ball 60% of the time only defends 40% of the time. A team with the ball 40% of the ball defends 60% of the time - So 50% more.

The problem is when looking at the numbers across the leagues, it stands out to me that it seems a very individual thing. Two of the highest tacklers are Milner & Monreal - playing for Liverpool/Arsenal. Two of the lowest are Olsson & Gibbs (Swansea & Arsenal again). So if we start adjusting those numbers with possession, the highest tacklers numbers are going up, the lowest are going down. So I would need to find the right correlation between team/system/tactics and underlying numbers before I think about taking that further.

As for United, Blind played as much at CB and even DM as he did left back. Which means his numbers would look very off. Shaw barely played in the league last season, even less than Chilwell and Gibbs and when I looked at his numbers they were too small to include and would have made him a huge outlier in many ways, so thought it better to exclude him. I considered using older numbers for him like I have Moreno & Flanagan, but really I only put the extra work in there to include players currently in the Liverpool squad. Plus Shaw had a bad injury that seems to have shaved a bit off his physical side of the game so looking at pre-injury Shaw would probably only really tell us how good he was pre-United, not currently.

[BabuYagu]

based on the bolded part I recommend weighting your figures: 

So instead of:  0.38   +   0.62    = 1.00     try   
                      (0.38)* 1  +  (0.62) * 1.2   = 1.124

For now the values you assign to the coefficients (1 ; 1.2) will be arbitrary and based on your subjective opinion but it should yield a better metric. Maybe later with more info these can be refined.

As mentioned above, Iīm looking at things like this at the end when it comes to refining the process. Instinctively I think that being dribbled past is always a problem. Fouling someone is not. Fouls are also tactical allowing the side to re-set their shape to better deal with a deal ball than trying to survive a counter where you are outnumbered.

However, I wouldnīt like to guess exactly how much more dangerous being dribbled past is to giving away the average foul. Not sure how to work that out either. I think I would need to maybe find a way to calculate how many fouls that full backs concede are in the final 3rd. If say, 60% are in the final 3rd then that would be a starting point to weighting them. Then there is probably a way to find out what value taking 1 defender out of play during an attack is towards a goal compared to winning a free kick around the box.

For example, I know that giving away a penalty = goal 77-83% of the time. Giving away a direct free kick results in a goal only 6% of the time though. I also know that indirect free kicks against us last season resulted in 35 shots against us and 2 goals. What I dont know is how many we conceded in the final third. Maybe we deal with 2/3rds of the ones we give away. Therefore maybe every time we give away an indirect freekick itīs only resulting in a goal 2% of the time. So, we can probably work out the value of a foul in the final 3rd. However, being dribbled past is harder. It certainly feels a lot more dangerous though from watching it happen. But I wouldnīt feel comfortable just arbitrarily giving it a number at the moment. Though it is something I would like to know.

[BabuYagu]

Thanks.

Some things that stand out to me at a glance:

Chilwell and Fuchs have very similar stats despite not appearing to be similar in style. Both tackle a lot, and get dribbled past frequenctly & commit fouls a lot. They don't appear (to my untrained eye) to be that similar stylistically, so perhaps these stats have a lot more to do with tactics than individual ability. Seems to me that Leicester's manager really wants his fullbacks to be super aggressive, even at the expense of getting dribbled past more often.

The same might be said of Milner and Monreal, two fullbacks playing in very attacking teams with a high line, and both have similar stats.

These stats also show exactly why Davies is preferred to Rose in certain games. Rose plays very high up and is probably told to make more fouls if needed, compared to Davies who is clearly more conservative. That said, it is interesting to note the differences between Walker and Rose, who basically do a similar role.

I also don't think this graph does justice to Marcos Alonso, given that he was playing as a wing back and thus offered more allowance to get forward. I'd expect him to be closer to Robertson or Bertrand if he played as a proper LB in a back 4. If anyone wants to dig up stats from previous seasons that would be nice. Would also love to see where a peak Baines (ca. 2013/14) would be on this graph.

I wouldnīt base too many theories on Chilwellīs stats as itīs a very low sample size and heīs just a kid. Kids tend to dive in more but those tendancies decrease with experience and then his weaknesses should decline also. Unless he cannot be coached, of course. Then he will keep diving in. This is my worry with Flanagan - he dives into more tackles in the league, has a spell injured, goes on loan and was averaging 9 tackles a game on loan. So diving in even more. With Flanno I really think he uses tackling to get himself out of problems his bad body shape and positioning get him into, same with Moreno albeit his underlying problems are different.

In contrast, Clyne & Milner are in the same team and look entirely different. Monreal & Gibbs play the same position at the same club and are entirely different. Davies & Rose also, very different. I am sure that systems and tactics have an impact but I think more than anything you can see the traits of players here that maybe need tweaks for the system, possession, tactics rather than those things dictating what the players will look like, if that makes sense.

I see Davies and Rose in numbers the same way I see them live. Likewise Monreal (although surprised he dives in that much) and Gibbs. Monreal looks like a fullback, albeit one that is starting to show his physical decline due to age. Gibbs looks like one of those dummies they use for goalkeepers to practice catching crosses against, except someone has gives this dummy so wheels and handed the remote control to a 6 year old.

For example, Monreal was signed aged 27, towards the end of his physical peak. These are his numbers for each season since.

Season (Age at end of season)	Tackles Success	Tackles/90	Fouls/90	Dribbled Past/90	1-v-1 Score
2013/14 (28)	69,05%	3,21	0,84	0,99	1,83
2014/15 (29)	76,47%	3,31	0,93	0,78	1,71
2015/16 (30)	72,48%	3,02	0,78	0,83	1,61
2015/16 (31)	67,78%	2,57	0,94	1,4	2,34

I think that first season is the adjustment to a new league/country. Then he had his peak season with 0,78 dribbled past and 76% tackle rate per 90. Now every year he will find it physically harder and harder to deal with those pacey, agile wingers. His reactions and tackles will get slower. People will go by him easier and those numbers will creep up while his tackle success will trend downwards. He might start diving into tackles early to compensate before wingers can face him up, or stand off too much - either way he will become less and less effective as a full back for them. Hence where Kolasinac comes in.

[BabuYagu]

He was given the opportunity and didn't take it. That's football. Should we stop trying based on Jack Robinson's failure? Where is he now btw? Anyone know?

He was on QPRs bench still last I saw. Not sure the story there but when I watched QPR v Ipswich recently he was on the bench for them and looks like was on their bench pretty much all season bar the odd game here or there.

Good stuff Babu as always. I've always liked Kent, he's a proper footballer who will develop into an outstanding versatility player for someone, hopefully us. I don't believe he needs another season on loan, I think he needs to develop here, in and around the squad. I am particularly curious to seem him play left back, a Klopp left back. His speed, two foottedness, balance and strength makes him ideal material for there. I know we have bought Robertson to develop there and I believe him to be an outstanding prospect but Kent could excel there too if allowed.

I like Kent also and would like to see how he does as a winger in this side. Saw him last season at Barnsley and he looked a great little player and would dictate a game if sides didnīt find a way to stop him. His production numbers didnīt look great but his underlying numbers were very solid and that was in a woeful Barnsley team. And I now woeful, Iīve been watching Mick McCarthyīs Ipswich at that level who are forbidden passing the ball shorter than 15 yards it seems. They are throwing out some of the worst passing numbers I have ever seen. Anyway...

Klopp has previous in turning promising wingers into full backs so who knows. He certainly has the frame to move back there if it happened. The thing I always wondered with Klopp is did he do this out of necessity or design? Because squad building for an almost bankrupt Dortmund and a very cash rich Liverpool are entirely different jobs. Which means I think we will probably see a lot less of this kind of experimenting here. He did move Milner back to left back but that now looks like a temporary solution to multiple problems. Milner lacked the penetration to be an #8 for him and the explosiveness to be a winger for him. He could either be a squad player here, something he left City to end, or he could find him a role in a place we were weak in options with Moreno and Flanagan. We were reluctant to go out and buy a full back, perhaps feeling spending money for a marginal upgrade was a mistake and was better waiting for the right player to become available. I guess weīll see what happens. I personally think Kent will make it as a winger though, love his quick feet, penetration, shooting and crossing off either foot and game intelligence.

[BabuYagu]

I don't really want anything from you, just highlighting that even you can appear biased at times as well despite the attempt and thread title. I also didn't say what you pointed out and questioned in Ghoulam was unfair (in fact I said questioning no. of tackles is logical and fair) - I'm just saying your perception was probably over-skeptical or even negative from the start. You mused his apparent passiveness could lead to more danger for the team, but the team has an overall good defensive record even though they play attacking football - so it's hard to see him being a problem. Fair enough Ghoulam has low amount of tackles - but his tackle success % numbers are remain high even in seasons where he did actually get high amount of tackles + dribbled past which suggests good tackling technique or positioning but you attempted explained it away with the negative default and also said it was an outlier which still doesn't negate the positive success rate and dribbled past which you suggested as like a causation (because he makes low tackles he has high % rate and low dribbled past).

On the other hand with Robertson who you've watched a more but probably not that much either (like week in week out most games), you have managed to interpret almost every stat into a positive and sort of skipped over the possible negatives. When someone offers a negative stat on him you automatically tried to explain most of them away mainly with tactical reasons as the answer. Also in comparison, Hull conceded 80 goals (worst in league) in a defence minded team and Robertson was one quarter of that back 4 and was probably offered plenty of protection in their tactical shape and numbers around him - now that's obviously not an individual problem and could easily be down to playing with inferior players but it still raises questions - is there something you're not seeing? I've not watched Ghoulam enough either to confirm whether he is indeed as good as the stats suggest, I was just using this as an example of how you interpret things with seemingly different standards.

If I took the same approach on Robertson as you did Ghoulam, I could question a number of things similarly which you interpret as positive. E.g. Robertson probably has a decent amount of crosses blocked and more shots blocked because their team plays more defensive and has less possession. This could go someway into explaining why Fuchs, Pieters, Ward, Holebas and Cresswell who play for lower possession teams have good blocking numbers despite none of them seeming really spectacular. Also how much weight should we really give to fouls and dribbled past? What if Milner or Moreno for example commit more fouls higher up the pitch than Robertson does? So those fouls could be more acceptable or less dangerous. Furthermore it could be very likely there are less situations where Robertson is isolated 1v1 considering the distance away he is from the CB, the wingers and the midfielders with Hull's system (as well as overall space to dribble into) as opposed to Liverpool's - therefore he could get exposed more and his stats might become worse when he plays here - likewise but on the positive side his stats in creating chances are likely to improve although they are poor now.

With regards to Mignolet, the funny thing is I actually agreed from the start - way before when people called him a good shot stopper a few years ago, that he was actually average or below average. The part I'm not agreeing on is that you imply that is the reason (or main reason) we concede 16 more goals than Spurs or 15 more the season before because that's a huge disparity - there are most likely in my opinion, other factors at play regardless of the XG charts and stats - could be an underlying problem with the way we concede chances compared to them or other teams not just a GK issue.

I'm also saying what happens when the stats don't confirm what you watched and predicted? e.g. earlier you said you would expect Cresswell to have poor blocked crosses per 90 due to his passiveness however that was proved wrong by the stats. So do you accept the stats or find reasons to argue against the stat? Similarly with Robertson and aerial duels as I elaborated in the previous post - in this case you argued for the positive side of Robertson by default when numbers were really bad. But I think you are coming to analyse that more closely eventually later in this thread. Anyway it will also be interesting seeing things when the attacking side is analysed.

I think that is probably because thatīs how a debate works. You state an assertion (e.g. Ghoulam looks good in 1-v-1s based on his numbers / Robertson seems to avoid aerial duels based on his numbers) and then I give a list of all the alternative possibilities than the one you arrived at that are equally plausible and then, the most important part that you are still leaving out, state I wouldnīt draw any conclusions from numbers, I would need to go away and watch consistently those players to see which scenario is actually happening.

If you are making a negative assertion about Robertson, then the list of alternatives will be positive. I then stated I never noticed this when watching, nor was I particularly paying attention for it though, and I would need to go away and watch to make sure. Thatīs fair right? If you are taking the negative stance, I am being the voice of reason which puts me on the opposite side. If I donīt do that, I am somehow supporting your assertion by not providing any possible argument against it.

If you are making a positive assertion about Ghoulam, then the list of alternatives will be negative. I then stated I didnt  particularly notice Ghoulam when I was watching them (in fact I went and looked, two of the games I watched against Juventus where Napoli were amazing he never even played for some reason). I then state I would need to go away and watch to make sure. Thatīs fair right? If you are taking the positive stance, I am being the voice of reason which puts me on the opposite side. If I donīt do that, I am somehow supporting your assertion by not providing any possible argument against it.

I mean that is just basic debating. Nothing to do with who the players are, who they play for, my opinions of them, or anything else. I never stated any conclusion whatsoever and in both instances suggest there isnīt sufficient evidence to make any assertions or eliminate any either which makes every possible scenario equal at the moment.

[Giono]

Is it guaranteed that Moreno will be moved on this window?

This thread has been interesting. I like when the stats confirm what I assume my eyes have seen.

But I wonder if Moreno's tackling stats are really that damning?

He has the legs to get back and try to break up the play with a tackle more often than most. Also he seems able to recover quick enough most times. What I mean is that if a big lumbering central defender tackles he is committing himself and basically taking himself out of the play for a bit because his recovery is slowed down.

[JCB]

Itīs something I was thinking about at the end of all this when I want to refine the process. I know statsbomb adjust defensive numbers based on possession. The logic being that a team that has the ball 60% of the time only defends 40% of the time. A team with the ball 40% of the ball defends 60% of the time - So 50% more.

The problem is when looking at the numbers across the leagues, it stands out to me that it seems a very individual thing. Two of the highest tacklers are Milner & Monreal - playing for Liverpool/Arsenal. Two of the lowest are Olsson & Gibbs (Swansea & Arsenal again). So if we start adjusting those numbers with possession, the highest tacklers numbers are going up, the lowest are going down. So I would need to find the right correlation between team/system/tactics and underlying numbers before I think about taking that further.

As for United, Blind played as much at CB and even DM as he did left back. Which means his numbers would look very off. Shaw barely played in the league last season, even less than Chilwell and Gibbs and when I looked at his numbers they were too small to include and would have made him a huge outlier in many ways, so thought it better to exclude him. I considered using older numbers for him like I have Moreno & Flanagan, but really I only put the extra work in there to include players currently in the Liverpool squad. Plus Shaw had a bad injury that seems to have shaved a bit off his physical side of the game so looking at pre-injury Shaw would probably only really tell us how good he was pre-United, not currently.

Funnily enough that's something I was looking at last night. The metrics you provided are not possession adjusted so we have no idea how useful they are if taken at face value and in isolation. I have already grabbed the Team possession stats and will attempt to incorporate it in later today just as an experiment. As you quite rightly pointed out this isn't enough to completely resolve the issue ( ie. Your team may defend 50% of the time but how much is down your flank? ) but it does go some way to reconciling the matter... I won't bother publishing anything but it will probably come in handy further down the line if we do try and cater for it along with other variables.

Thanks for the Man U update. Thought it would be something like that.

[BabuYagu]

I'm also saying what happens when the stats don't confirm what you watched and predicted? e.g. earlier you said you would expect Cresswell to have poor blocked crosses per 90 due to his passiveness however that was proved wrong by the stats. So do you accept the stats or find reasons to argue against the stat?

Itīs in the post you are quoting.

Iīve said from the very start that you shouldnīt form opinions on players based on stats, or limited viewing either. I said I would highlight people who "appear" good at a certain skill and then making scouting comments so we could all go out, watch the players and see if what the theory suggests is accurate or, better still not. Then we can look at why the process suggests players are good at something they are not and refine it.

[Anfield89]

Is it guaranteed that Moreno will be moved on this window?

This thread has been interesting. I like when the stats confirm what I assume my eyes have seen.

But I wonder if Moreno's tackling stats are really that damning?

He has the legs to get back and try to break up the play with a tackle more often than most. Also he seems able to recover quick enough most times. What I mean is that if a big lumbering central defender tackles he is committing himself and basically taking himself out of the play for a bit because his recovery is slowed down.

Moreno has the legs to get back and mostly he is able to recover quickly but his brain doesn't engage and he commits himself dives in taking himself out of the game.

[BabuYagu]

Is it guaranteed that Moreno will be moved on this window?

This thread has been interesting. I like when the stats confirm what I assume my eyes have seen.

But I wonder if Moreno's tackling stats are really that damning?

He has the legs to get back and try to break up the play with a tackle more often than most. Also he seems able to recover quick enough most times. What I mean is that if a big lumbering central defender tackles he is committing himself and basically taking himself out of the play for a bit because his recovery is slowed down.

Funny you mention that, if you look at Flanagan v Moreno, the two tackle monsters in the group. Moreno makes a huge number of tackles (almost 2x the average) but only getīs dribbled past very slightly above average (1,09 vs 0,96). This indicates that his tackles donīt always result in him being beaten and his pace allows him to remain in the game defensively speaking.

Flanno on the other hand is about 2.5x above average in tackles and 2x above the average in dribbles past also which indicates his pace might not be good enough to get him back in the game.

So I guess what it is showing is Moreno is diving in too much but because of his pace, his numbers are not as bad as they otherwise could be maybe?

[JCB]

As mentioned above, Iīm looking at things like this at the end when it comes to refining the process. Instinctively I think that being dribbled past is always a problem. Fouling someone is not. Fouls are also tactical allowing the side to re-set their shape to better deal with a deal ball than trying to survive a counter where you are outnumbered.

However, I wouldnīt like to guess exactly how much more dangerous being dribbled past is to giving away the average foul. Not sure how to work that out either. I think I would need to maybe find a way to calculate how many fouls that full backs concede are in the final 3rd. If say, 60% are in the final 3rd then that would be a starting point to weighting them. Then there is probably a way to find out what value taking 1 defender out of play during an attack is towards a goal compared to winning a free kick around the box.

For example, I know that giving away a penalty = goal 77-83% of the time. Giving away a direct free kick results in a goal only 6% of the time though. I also know that indirect free kicks against us last season resulted in 35 shots against us and 2 goals. What I dont know is how many we conceded in the final third. Maybe we deal with 2/3rds of the ones we give away. Therefore maybe every time we give away an indirect freekick itīs only resulting in a goal 2% of the time. So, we can probably work out the value of a foul in the final 3rd. However, being dribbled past is harder. It certainly feels a lot more dangerous though from watching it happen. But I wouldnīt feel comfortable just arbitrarily giving it a number at the moment. Though it is something I would like to know.

Perfectly logical approach but your metric may be ultimately be flawed if we don't add some kind of weighting. I'll try and think of some way to weigh it myself but it might be impossible with the data out there.

[BabuYagu]

Funnily enough that's something I was looking at last night. The metrics you provided are not possession adjusted so we have no idea how useful they are if taken at face value and in isolation. I have already grabbed the Team possession stats and will attempt to incorporate it in later today just as an experiment. As you quite rightly pointed out this isn't enough to completely resolve the issue ( ie. Your team may defend 50% of the time but how much is down your flank? ) but it does go some way to reconciling the matter... I won't bother publishing anything but it will probably come in handy further down the line if we do try and cater for it along with other variables.

Thanks for the Man U update. Thought it would be something like that.

It will be interesting to see how various things affect the results. But before any of that I want to get to the end of the overall process and then start refining it. Iīm also curious to test all this during the season, For example, Kolasinac, Monreal and Gibbs in particular look like they can be got at by a winger with pace. Do we try to isolate them by attacking down the left, pulling out to Hendo and then quickly switching to the right where we have Salah vs whoever? Bayern used this attacking pattern a LOT with Xabi Alonso & Robben in the Bundesliga to devastating affect against full backs who couldnīt stop Robben 1-v-1.

[JCB]

By the way Babu,

just sent you some more visuals via pm. Let me know what you think

[vivabobbygraham]

He was on QPRs bench still last I saw. Not sure the story there but when I watched QPR v Ipswich recently he was on the bench for them and looks like was on their bench pretty much all season bar the odd game here or there.

I like Kent also and would like to see how he does as a winger in this side. Saw him last season at Barnsley and he looked a great little player and would dictate a game if sides didnīt find a way to stop him. His production numbers didnīt look great but his underlying numbers were very solid and that was in a woeful Barnsley team. And I now woeful, Iīve been watching Mick McCarthyīs Ipswich at that level who are forbidden passing the ball shorter than 15 yards it seems. They are throwing out some of the worst passing numbers I have ever seen. Anyway...

Klopp has previous in turning promising wingers into full backs so who knows. He certainly has the frame to move back there if it happened. The thing I always wondered with Klopp is did he do this out of necessity or design? Because squad building for an almost bankrupt Dortmund and a very cash rich Liverpool are entirely different jobs. Which means I think we will probably see a lot less of this kind of experimenting here. He did move Milner back to left back but that now looks like a temporary solution to multiple problems. Milner lacked the penetration to be an #8 for him and the explosiveness to be a winger for him. He could either be a squad player here, something he left City to end, or he could find him a role in a place we were weak in options with Moreno and Flanagan. We were reluctant to go out and buy a full back, perhaps feeling spending money for a marginal upgrade was a mistake and was better waiting for the right player to become available. I guess weīll see what happens. I personally think Kent will make it as a winger though, love his quick feet, penetration, shooting and crossing off either foot and game intelligence.

Absolutely, Kloppo likes good, intelligent footballers on the pitch, hence Milly at left back He is always going on about decision making in game. He has no control there. He gives his players the absolute authority to make decisions and there's the rub. I can only imagine how it must feel to play for him.

[BabuYagu]

Absolutely, Kloppo likes good, intelligent footballers on the pitch, hence Milly at left back He is always going on about decision making in game. He has no control there. He gives his players the absolute authority to make decisions and there's the rub. I can only imagine how it must feel to play for him.

Btw - not the thread for it, but I think Kent would be a nightmare in a more central position like Lallana with pace. Heīs a bit young and lacking experience to play there for us now, but I think that is where he ends up eventually.

[Giono]

Funny you mention that, if you look at Flanagan v Moreno, the two tackle monsters in the group. Moreno makes a huge number of tackles (almost 2x the average) but only getīs dribbled past very slightly above average (1,09 vs 0,96). This indicates that his tackles donīt always result in him being beaten and his pace allows him to remain in the game defensively speaking.

Flanno on the other hand is about 2.5x above average in tackles and 2x above the average in dribbles past also which indicates his pace might not be good enough to get him back in the game.

So I guess what it is showing is Moreno is diving in too much but because of his pace, his numbers are not as bad as they otherwise could be maybe?

That sounds reasonable. They have much different pace.

But I wonder if where those tackles take place is also a differentiator and also lessens the effect of getting taken out of the play?

Moreno also tends to play much higher up the pitch offensively. So would going into a last ditch tackle after a long run back like he did today for that Vardy chance (slid right by him), lessen the impact of losing your ability to control your area after the tackle? In many cases play would be dead or the ball would be recovered by another defender and play moved on.

[vivabobbygraham]

Btw - not the thread for it, but I think Kent would be a nightmare in a more central position like Lallana with pace. Heīs a bit young and lacking experience to play there for us now, but I think that is where he ends up eventually.

More reason to stay at home and not be farmed out. Taking free kicks with his left peg was quite revealing. Not even Adam would do that.

On topic, I was really impressed with Alberto today. Made Phils goal, looked bright. Maybe he needs to go home and speak the lingo. I honestly believe if he had learned the language of his employers he would have matured both on and off the pitch. Immature, but with bags of potential.

Any stats for that? 

[Giono]

Moreno has the legs to get back and mostly he is able to recover quickly but his brain doesn't engage and he commits himself dives in taking himself out of the game.

But he did anticipate play a bit when Vardy had that chance 1-on-1 with Klavan in the 2nd half:

At the 5:30 park: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9fT4XYKMc0

[Mr_Shane]

If Alberto stays, play him at Left Midfield.  I think he would do a good job as a wide-left midfielder who offers protection to the left-back

[BabuYagu]

Iīm currently dodging the score of the Liverpool game while it downloads so I will be offline for a while so it doesnīt pop up on some site I visit and piss me off.

I also think the blocking numbers didnīt pull through correctly from the data table as I am checking the ones I have vs other sites. I might need to redo that a little bit as some numbers look a little off. It might have been look at per appearance rather than per 90 or something so I am redoing them all manually. I notice some people who played more as a sub like Gibbs, Chilwell, etc their numbers appear lower on the formula than my own calculations at a glance. Not sure it will change results much, weīll see though. Lesson learned though, triple check the numbers rather than rushing to share the results to keep things moving.

Iīm also going to start looking at the next category though as I think we are ready to move on from blocks & 1-v-1īs now. Pressing/Second Balls is next. The ability to disrupt the oppositions attacking play by either trying to force mistakes or capitalize on them when they do. Here I will be looking at some things we have already looked at (tackles, blocked passes) as well as others we havenīt (recoveries, interceptions). Iīm not sure what to expect here. On one hand I expect wide players pressing to have more proactive numbers (tackles, blocked passes) and less reactive numbers (interceptions) as they will be forcing passes to go infield where the midfielders will do the recovering and intercepting. Recoveries can go either way though here because the pressing will results in more recoveries all over the pitch. Then again, a low block results in players needing to thread passes through the eye of a needle which results in blocked passes, interceptions, recoveries too. Maybe they even themselves out. In fact, low block will be defending more than sides who press so perhaps this is where the possession adjustment would come into play? Letīs see.

[lamonti]

If Alberto stays, play him at Left Midfield.  I think he would do a good job as a wide-left midfielder who offers protection to the left-back

Shipping our dreadful left backs to left midfield is one of the grandest Anfield traditions.

[afc tukrish]

 
Pressing/Second Balls is next. The ability to disrupt the oppositions attacking play by either trying to force mistakes or capitalize on them when they do. Here I will be looking at some things we have already looked at (tackles, blocked passes) as well as others we havenīt (recoveries, interceptions). Iīm not sure what to expect here. On one hand I expect wide players pressing to have more proactive numbers (tackles, blocked passes) and less reactive numbers (interceptions) as they will be forcing passes to go infield where the midfielders will do the recovering and intercepting.

Interesting, as some teams do set their press to encourage the ball played outside the midfield half-spaces before pouncing, which would, in theory, result in wide players winning more tackles, blocked passes, etc.

Very much looking forward to this analysis, Babu...

[BabuYagu]

I think Iīm going to remove Ben Chilwell (696 minutes), Keiran Gibbs (702) & Martin Olsson (1253 minutes) from the calculations in future. All three of them continually throw up extreme numbers due to the small ratio of minutes they played compared to the others in the list (averaging 2620 minutes).

It shouldnīt change any of the findings really as none of them are particularly strong at the moment - hence why they are playing only a small % of the league minutes for their clubs. However, their outlier numbers results in more clustering together of all the others who play a large volume of games.

[lgvkarlos]

Think both first choice are week points in our team, both seem unable to find one of our players with a cross. This  makes us easy to defend against if the team drops deep. Milner was great until Christmas but has dropped off a cliff since, not sure if it is fatigue or teams working him out.
Looking forward to TAA and Robertson playing, hopefully it might have the same effect it had on Migs.

[Anfield89]

But he did anticipate play a bit when Vardy had that chance 1-on-1 with Klavan in the 2nd half:

At the 5:30 park: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9fT4XYKMc0

He did and what I pointed out was one incident in the game but that one incident happens far far too often.

[Giono]

He did and what I pointed out was one incident in the game but that one incident happens far far too often.

He flew by at speed but he was back up and ready quickly, while the right back or other central defender were nowhere to be seen.

[BabuYagu]

More reason to stay at home and not be farmed out. Taking free kicks with his left peg was quite revealing. Not even Adam would do that.

On topic, I was really impressed with Alberto today. Made Phils goal, looked bright. Maybe he needs to go home and speak the lingo. I honestly believe if he had learned the language of his employers he would have matured both on and off the pitch. Immature, but with bags of potential.

Any stats for that? 

You can really see the difference his movement causes for sides. If they try to narrow his pace and movement can murder them. Everytime he made one of those runs that would take him behind their shape it looked like a clear goalscoring chance would happen. I watched that one right at the start of the first half and he was onside, Sturridge was off but inactive so it shouldnīt have been flagged.

I also noticed early on he hammered a left foot cross into the 6 yard box. I know some people donīt like those as they are "aimless" but they arenīt easy to defend and actually on of the things counter pressing sides so is play balls into areas where you can immediately counter press and try to win the ball in a very dangerous spot. So after that, they didnīt want to sit narrow against him anymore and also wanted to stop those early crosses in after a switch when the defence wasnīt set to deal with them. He getīs it again and feints the same hard cross and instead threads a through ball in behind to Phil. That was just clever play.

This is what confuses me most about him. Those runs he makes are clever. He was certainly taught that from his time as a winger because the timing and direction of them is spot on to cause maximum carnage. Likewise he knows he is an attacking threat and makes some clever choices in terms of when to cross, pass, recycle, or just smash one into an area where our strikers are nearby and see what happens. I remember Ojo getting a goal off a cross like this in 2015/16 against Swansea. The center back who was running towards his own goal had to swivel and kick away from where his momentum was taking him. The ball didnīt go very far because kicking from a position of poor balance results in errors. It landed right to Benteke who tapped it in. Ojo got "lucky" off a "poor aimless cross". But itīs about playing percentages in some moments. How many o.g.s have we conceded over the years to those hard, low crosses into the box where defenders risk touching them towards their own goal? I remember Carra & Skrtel scoring them aplenty.

I realise none of this is about blocking or 1-v-1s so to get back on topic, anybody count how many crosses Milner blocked yesterday? I didnīt but I know it was a lot. There was one point he blocked 3 in 5 minutes, two of which resulted in corners. Good lad.

See Milner losing that far post header? I think whoever we have at full back loses that which is why preventing crosses is so vital. Aerial ability of full backs isnīt see as important because you need them to be better suited to dealing with 1-v-1 situations more than heading situations. To deal with 1-v-1 situations, it helps to be similar height and build to a winger. If your system protects full backs somewhat from 1-v-1īs (low block, center backs who were full backs, 2 DMīs who go out to support on 1-v-1s quickly, etc) then you can get away with a tall full back of course. In a low block, a bigger full back is probably more preferable as you do more blocking and heading and are not defending spaces. Itīs how sides like Stoke got away with playing rugby players at full back for years. Any time they got isolated though, they got destroyed. The problem was when games were tight, their shape remained tight. THeir full backs only became a problem when they opened up chasing the game. That back post header yesterday made me realise that pretty much any full back loses that and there isnīt much you can do. Ivanovic wouldnīt but he (or someone like him) would have other major struggles in our system which would be exposed far more other than anothers aerial ability. Itīs something I worry a bit about with Clyne as he is probably the worst in the entire league here, but perhaps I am worrying over something that is rarely an issue in comparison to the amount of times his 1-v-1 play protects us at the back.

Also havenīt had a chance to replay them, who was the players playing bad balls to Karius. First that was short was Matip? Second which was overhit behind him was Klavan? Moreno? Not sure. I didnīt like seeing much passing to the keeper on what was considered a bad pitch.

[vivabobbygraham]

You can really see the difference his movement causes for sides. If they try to narrow his pace and movement can murder them. Everytime he made one of those runs that would take him behind their shape it looked like a clear goalscoring chance would happen. I watched that one right at the start of the first half and he was onside, Sturridge was off but inactive so it shouldnīt have been flagged.

I also noticed early on he hammered a left foot cross into the 6 yard box. I know some people donīt like those as they are "aimless" but they arenīt easy to defend and actually on of the things counter pressing sides so is play balls into areas where you can immediately counter press and try to win the ball in a very dangerous spot. So after that, they didnīt want to sit narrow against him anymore and also wanted to stop those early crosses in after a switch when the defence wasnīt set to deal with them. He getīs it again and feints the same hard cross and instead threads a through ball in behind to Phil. That was just clever play.

This is what confuses me most about him. Those runs he makes are clever. He was certainly taught that from his time as a winger because the timing and direction of them is spot on to cause maximum carnage. Likewise he knows he is an attacking threat and makes some clever choices in terms of when to cross, pass, recycle, or just smash one into an area where our strikers are nearby and see what happens. I remember Ojo getting a goal off a cross like this in 2015/16 against Swansea. The center back who was running towards his own goal had to swivel and kick away from where his momentum was taking him. The ball didnīt go very far because kicking from a position of poor balance results in errors. It landed right to Benteke who tapped it in. Ojo got "lucky" off a "poor aimless cross". But itīs about playing percentages in some moments. How many o.g.s have we conceded over the years to those hard, low crosses into the box where defenders risk touching them towards their own goal? I remember Carra & Skrtel scoring them aplenty.

I realise none of this is about blocking or 1-v-1s so to get back on topic, anybody count how many crosses Milner blocked yesterday? I didnīt but I know it was a lot. There was one point he blocked 3 in 5 minutes, two of which resulted in corners. Good lad.

See Milner losing that far post header? I think whoever we have at full back loses that which is why preventing crosses is so vital. Aerial ability of full backs isnīt see as important because you need them to be better suited to dealing with 1-v-1 situations more than heading situations. To deal with 1-v-1 situations, it helps to be similar height and build to a winger. If your system protects full backs somewhat from 1-v-1īs (low block, center backs who were full backs, 2 DMīs who go out to support on 1-v-1s quickly, etc) then you can get away with a tall full back of course. In a low block, a bigger full back is probably more preferable as you do more blocking and heading and are not defending spaces. Itīs how sides like Stoke got away with playing rugby players at full back for years. Any time they got isolated though, they got destroyed. The problem was when games were tight, their shape remained tight. THeir full backs only became a problem when they opened up chasing the game. That back post header yesterday made me realise that pretty much any full back loses that and there isnīt much you can do. Ivanovic wouldnīt but he (or someone like him) would have other major struggles in our system which would be exposed far more other than anothers aerial ability. Itīs something I worry a bit about with Clyne as he is probably the worst in the entire league here, but perhaps I am worrying over something that is rarely an issue in comparison to the amount of times his 1-v-1 play protects us at the back.

Also havenīt had a chance to replay them, who was the players playing bad balls to Karius. First that was short was Matip? Second which was overhit behind him was Klavan? Moreno? Not sure. I didnīt like seeing much passing to the keeper on what was considered a bad pitch.

Trent and Matip were the two I saw. Trent wasn't really to Karius but was lax and there was some sloppy passing all over the pitch tbf. I put it down to the legs just about gone by this game due to the double sessions including one before the game I believe?

[penga]

I think that is probably because thatīs how a debate works. You state an assertion (e.g. Ghoulam looks good in 1-v-1s based on his numbers / Robertson seems to avoid aerial duels based on his numbers) and then I give a list of all the alternative possibilities than the one you arrived at that are equally plausible and then, the most important part that you are still leaving out, state I wouldnīt draw any conclusions from numbers, I would need to go away and watch consistently those players to see which scenario is actually happening.

If you are making a negative assertion about Robertson, then the list of alternatives will be positive. I then stated I never noticed this when watching, nor was I particularly paying attention for it though, and I would need to go away and watch to make sure. Thatīs fair right? If you are taking the negative stance, I am being the voice of reason which puts me on the opposite side. If I donīt do that, I am somehow supporting your assertion by not providing any possible argument against it.

If you are making a positive assertion about Ghoulam, then the list of alternatives will be negative. I then stated I didnt  particularly notice Ghoulam when I was watching them (in fact I went and looked, two of the games I watched against Juventus where Napoli were amazing he never even played for some reason). I then state I would need to go away and watch to make sure. Thatīs fair right? If you are taking the positive stance, I am being the voice of reason which puts me on the opposite side. If I donīt do that, I am somehow supporting your assertion by not providing any possible argument against it.

I mean that is just basic debating. Nothing to do with who the players are, who they play for, my opinions of them, or anything else. I never stated any conclusion whatsoever and in both instances suggest there isnīt sufficient evidence to make any assertions or eliminate any either which makes every possible scenario equal at the moment.

That's fair but at the end of the day we are comparing fullbacks and putting forward opinions/assertions mainly based on stats and limited viewings here because I'm assuming none of us actually watched all these fullbacks for the majority of the games they played except for our own. These opinions/assertions can be deemed educated guesses that help us form a reasonable perception of a player- always with the qualification that we haven't watched them enough to be 100% sure which is what we are all doing here isn't it?

Maybe I'm questioning why there are basically no negative assertions or reservations about the stats analysed by you on Robertson in this thread yet? You probably don't need me to bring them up, I just did because you missed some out. You could have included amount of aerial duels won in the Squawka graphic just like amount tackles won in another graph in your initial analysis but didn't - why not? The stat goes against your limited viewing yet you ran with the opinion that he has no real weaknesses. Also when you provide a positive assertion based on stats by Robertson how come you haven't really tried to argue against it and muse how those stats could be misleading for example? It seems a positive is a positive and a negative is argued into a positive in your opinion of Robertson so far.

A more balanced debate might have looked like this:

- Robertson has good 1v1 numbers when we take into account tackles per 90, tackle success, fouls per 90 and dribbled past per 90 compared to other fullbacks. (Basically what you have been saying in this thread), however he gave away 2 penalties (which you said in another thread) and could possibly be more exposed playing in our system as we allow opposition wingers more space.
- Robertson has decent % won in aerial duels but the amount is extremely low - 2nd last compared to other fullbacks suggesting he is passive but I don't know if it is really a problem (as opposed to suggesting he is solid based on your limited viewing which goes against the stats)