Stats - how much notice do you take?

[banno]

Some stats need to be taken with a pinch of salt. For example the successful passes can easily be skewed when they are nothing but safe passes especially along the back line to and fro. A player receives the ball and passes back to same player = successful pass against player receives the ball, turns into attacking mode and tries a through ball that a defender just gets a toe to it and concedes a corner = failed pass.....we score from the corner!!! Too many grey areas in certain stats. Should be catergorised somehow into forward passes, backward passes, sideway passes etc for a clearer picture. I think the goals stat is the clearest we can get.

 

[suey_11]

They are really useful when they back up my agenda

This word for word.

 

[McBain]

So hipster to hate on stats right now.

 

[degsy]

So the other day when discussing the potential of us signing Gylfi Sigurdsson on Twitter, I shared a link to a heavily statistics based post which demonstrated that in quite a few areas there was little between him and Ross...

Anyway, it provoked a mini debate about the importance of statistics. Personally, I'm a bit of a 'stats centrist'. I mean, I don't put too much emphasis on them but I do think (when presented with context) they can be useful.

I was thinking of doing a podcast on the topic and therefore wanted your thoughts?

Basically, I want to know how much notice you take of them? Do you proactively seek them out? And how much do they influence your thoughts on certain footballers?

'I never trust a statistic I didn't make up myself.' - Winston Churchill.

 

[hetion]

The problem with 'stats' is that most stats the average football fan has access to are...crap. Assists, goals, even things like distance run and chances created - like @Berenger said, that's top trumps, not useful statistics. Proper statistical models that take in multitude data points and large data sets can tell you absolutely enormous amounts. Like, all the variables that make a certain type of pass from a certain area into a certain area difficult, and how good is a certain player at completing those passes compared to every Premier League player who's ever tried to?

Things like mentality, grit etc - if nothing shows up as a measurable benefit, then are you just imagining stuff? If a player 'never gives up', then some sort of measurable outcome should occur for it to matter - maybe they make more possession-adjusted defensive actions when in a losing position than the average player or something. Scouting is still very important but proper stats can give you either a wider reaching overview or a more in-depth look at a player to complement traditional scouting. Or they can do something like flag up a player with really weird/interesting stats who you should definitely go have a proper look at.

 

[The binman chronicles]

Not a fan of that particular stat. Running a lot doesn't correlate success. If you run around like a headless chicken nothing is gained. Loads of topplayers don't run a lot.

True to a point, but it's quite easy to tell who is running around doing nothing and someone who is productive in the final third or breaking up play of the opposition.

 

[Deleted member 28206]

So the other day when discussing the potential of us signing Gylfi Sigurdsson on Twitter, I shared a link to a heavily statistics based post which demonstrated that in quite a few areas there was little between him and Ross...

Anyway, it provoked a mini debate about the importance of statistics. Personally, I'm a bit of a 'stats centrist'. I mean, I don't put too much emphasis on them but I do think (when presented with context) they can be useful.

I was thinking of doing a podcast on the topic and therefore wanted your thoughts?

Basically, I want to know how much notice you take of them? Do you proactively seek them out? And how much do they influence your thoughts on certain footballers?

Zero

 

[Caolam]

Stats have become a useful tool in assessing a player, but they are simply that another tool. They are a thing, not good not bad just a thing. It is the people who rely on purely statistics to make an assessment of a player that are bad.

 

[penev10]

Stats need interpretation and not by Sky or whoever. Proper analytics is being carried out by every major team in every major sport and we rarely get exposed to these metrics.

Analytics discerns which stats are meaningful, scientifically over many years' worth of data, and inform and influence a lot of decisions regarding players/tactics/transfers etc.

 

[everton2004]

9 times out of 10 I don't pay much attention to them.

 

[PhilM]

Some are useful, some not.

There was a clip of Rooney miss hitting a shot last season, it bounced straight to Zlatan who scored, the stats showed that Rooney got an assist, my eye told me that he spooned a ball onto Zlatans head.

Statistics can be a useful tool to measure a player's ability or recent performances against others, but they're only useful within a specific context.

Ultimately however like yourself, I judge a player on what I see with my own eyes and all the statistics in the world can't beat that gut feeling.

 

[Eggs]

...Everton employ full-time analysts based at USM FF and part of their role is to consider statistics on the clubs players but also on players all over the globe. Every top club make the same investment. You see the analysts in prime position at games sitting with lap tops viewing live streams.

Stats are significant part of the modern game.

 

[helpimonfire]

Never been arsed about stats, they mean nowt.

If wearing an Everton shirt cannot make a player want to play then sell them.

 

[LEONARD]

Not interested in the least.

Games are either fantastic (an Everton win) or crap ( an Everton loss).

This fact was blurred under the Martinez reign, when every game, even an Everton win, seemed like a tedious 0-0 draw.

 

[trueblue84]

Unfortunately, the football (media) world doesn't use statistics like the scientific community would. They are used to provoke debate or moulded to fit an argument and are therefore pretty useless. i.e...

When people use stats like 'chances created', what constitutes a chance?
Why is 'distance covered' an important stat without the context of where the player is running or what they are actually doing?
etc.

In short, stats in football only mean what you want them to mean.