"the manager has only a 15% influence on where a team finish in the league"

[dholliday]

Interesting Xmas Stocking book for you stattos out there?

The Martinez mention is a bit outdated now (the review's from June):

Roberto Martinez is a fan of football analytics, the science of compiling and analysing the rapidly increasing plethora of data on every aspect of the game. He subscribes to a sophisticated software package, yet one is entitled to ask just how much use this is, given that under the Spaniard's charge Wigan have just been relegated.

The authors of this thought-provoking exploration of football statistics counter that query by demonstrating that the figures prove a manager has only a 15 per cent influence on where any team finish in a league; other factors, notably the size of the wage bill, have a far greater impact. And furthermore, the result of any one match is 50 per cent down to luck.

Corners have practically no effect on results – in the Premier League at least: crunching the numbers from 134 games producing a total of 1,434 corners showed that each corner was worth 0.022 goals; in other words, a team in the top flight scored from a corner on average only once every 10 games.

Undoubtedly the most left-field piece of research proves that in the five big European leagues, players from countries with high levels of civil conflict receive far more yellow and red cards than those from more stable nations.

Tho' one League manager told the authors: "Stats can't tell me who to sign. They can't measure the size of a player's heart."

 

[Goat]

That must be why Fergie pissed the League every year then yeah?

Is there anything more useless than stats?

 

[Deleted member 28206]

That must be why Fergie pissed the League every year then yeah?

Is there anything more useless than stats?

FACHTS

http://www.whoateallthepies.tv/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/Rafael-benitez-guarantee.gif


And..

 

[Allezfan]

That must be why Fergie pissed the League every year then yeah?

Is there anything more useless than stats?

He did with a team that was within 15% of his competitors though.

The argument is that a team that isn't within 15% (in terms of quality of player which can be partly measured by how much the market thinks their worth in terms how much they're being paid) can't be improved by more than that by the manager.

I don't think that's too big a stretch. It's why even in the season martinez pulled off the management coup of the last 20 years he also got relegated. A manager can win you one off games but over a season quality tells.

 

[Deleted member 28206]

He did with a team that was within 15% of his competitors though.

The argument is that a team that isn't within 15% (in terms of quality of player which can be partly measured by how much the market thinks their worth in terms how much they're being paid) can't be improved by more than that by the manager.

I don't think that's too big a stretch. It's why even in the season martinez pulled off the management coup of the last 20 years he also got relegated. A manager can win you one off games but over a season quality tells.

Its acceptable if you're a Wigan manager, but not at Everton. I don't have a sense of entitlement, but thats a bigger motivator than a cup for me.

 

[Allezfan]

Its acceptable if you're a Wigan manager, but not at Everton. I don't have a sense of entitlement, but thats a bigger motivator than a cup for me.

Surely the fact that the same manager who got relegated last year is 6th with us proves that ultimately there's only so much you can polish a turd, though?

15% seems about right to me. Mostly the teams with the best players finish highest with 15% variance due to the quality of the managers.

15% isn't nothing. Last year without that 15% it's man u finishing 3rd or sunderland going down. It's a lot.

Also that's 15% compared to other premier league managers. You'd imagine up against an amateur or a team with non manager the difference would be far more pronounced.

 

[Deleted member 28206]

Surely the fact that the same manager who got relegated last year is 6th with us proves that ultimately there's only so much you can polish a turd, though?

15% seems about right to me. Mostly the teams with the best players finish highest with 15% variance due to the quality of the managers.

15% isn't nothing. Last year without that 15% it's man u finishing 3rd or sunderland going down. It's a lot.

Also that's 15% compared to other premier league managers. You'd imagine up against an amateur or a team with non manager the difference would be far more pronounced.

All these percentages are giving me a headache.

 

[dead_soft]

Tho' one League manager told the authors: "Stats can't tell me who to sign. They can't measure the size of a player's heart.":

Whoever said that is a tool. Of course they use stats.

 

[dholliday]

Whoever said that is a tool. Of course they use stats.

Passion. Hard graft. Run the channels. Get yer head down and work hard. Passion. That's all you need, lad.

said every PE teacher ever.

 

[DualityNSNO]

"Stats can't tell me who to sign"?

Isn't that the first thing you look at? I personally wouldn't sign a striker from non-league cuz he's a great lad, over a prolific scorer.

 

[toffee matt]

"Stats can't tell me who to sign"?

Isn't that the first thing you look at? I personally wouldn't sign a striker from non-league cuz he's a great lad, over a prolific scorer.

That must explain the kone signing then

 

[Eggs]

.....silly.

 

[Allezfan]

.....silly.

You disagree eggs?

 

[Eggs]

You disagree eggs?

....I do. I have to say that the Manager is the key ingredient of any club. Its ok saying its all down to players and the manager doesn't cross the white line, but its the boss who buys the players. I always judge a manger by the players he's bought and sold. Alan Ball lost it at Portsmouth when he said he was shouting at players who didn't care because they were on 3 times more than him, that delta has changed.

 

[Allezfan]

....I do. I have to say that the Manager is the key ingredient of any club. Its ok saying its all down to players and the manager doesn't cross the white line, but its the boss who buys the players. I always judge a manger by the players he's bought and sold. Alan Ball lost it at Portsmouth when he said he was shouting at players who didn't care because they were on 3 times more than him, that delta has changed.

But you can only bring in the players you can afford. And you can only keep players you can afford to pay good wages to. If you're finishing above a team that pays it's players 3 times what you're on, you'll start thinking that they'll give you 3 times what you're on, too.

It's not as simple as the club with the best managers finish the highest. Martinez is in my opinion a better manager than Pardew and Wenger a better manager than Mancini. But if you have more money, you can bring in better players so you finish higher.

We're not talking about the difference between a club managed by Alex Ferguson and a club managed by bill from the pub.

The argument is that of the 20 premier league clubs, all of which have managers considered the top in the country, the difference between those 20 clubs is 15% down to the manager and mostly down to other factors like the fiannces and the players, etc, etc.

Now 15% is the difference between 1st and 3rd and 18th and 15th.

So the argument is, clubs in the premier league are sorted mostly by finances in to groups. the top 4 will always finish top 4 whoever manages them simply because they have much better players. And the bottom 5 will always be the bottom 5. Unless one of the top 4 appoints a manager not of premier league standard at all, they won't drop out. What the managers dictates is that last 15% whether you finish 1st or 2nd, 4th or 8th, or 19th or 16th. And that's huge.

But give Ferguson crystal palace and they won't finish 3rd, they'll just stay up. The manager can dictate where in that group you finish but not turn you into a club you're not.

See Martinez and Royle getting relegated, for instance.

That makes sense to me.

I think it's the only possible explanation for Avram Grant finishing 2nd.