The Snowball stat thread

[Maguire]

So let's take 12 games or whatever and be done with it. If I looked at the fixtures and saw the first of those 12 games was a defeat and so changed it to 11 games then i'd be rightly accused of having an agenda.

Taking something from Sept 17th (??!!!) is not "recent form" or the "near past" in terms of our season IMHO.

[southbank1871]

I've got to question the wisdom here of attempting to have any sort of reasoned deb8 with Snowball.

[Mr Angry]

I've looked at Saints and West Ham's poorest 6 game sequences over the season.

The worst sequence for Saints is 5 points from 6 games (Games 4-9)

The worst sequence for West Ham is 7 points from 6 games (Games 19-24)

This compares with Reading's worst sequence of 4 points from 6 games (Games 1-6)

Going back to my previous post and comparing the sequences of games from start of season:

Reading

games 1-6 - 4 points
games 7-12 - 12 points
games 13-18 - 8 points
games 19-24 - 15 points
games 25-30 - 12 points
games 31-35 - 15 points (only 5 games)

Saints

games 1-6 - 12 points
games 7-12 - 11 points
games 13-18 - 16 points
games 19-24 - 8 points
games 25-30 - 8 points
games 31-35 - 14 points (6 games)

West Ham

games 1-6 - 13 points
games 7-12 - 8 points
games 13-18 - 16 points
games 19-24 - 7 points
games 25-30 - 13 points
games 31-35 - 9 points (Only 5 games)

So one could argue that each team has had a bad run but that the difference between each bad run is only 3 points (Reading worse but only just). Only difference being that Reading's worst run was at the beginning of season.

Interesting though that if we compare the 2 worst sequences of runs for each team we get - Reading 16 points (start of season), Saints 16 points (start of second half of season) and West Ham 20 points (start of second half of season)

But, West Ham appear to be going - good run, average run, outstanding run, average run, good run, average/good run (depending on result of their 6th game in sequence).

Reading and Saints have both had 3 good to outstanding runs in a row:

Reading bad, good, average, outstanding, good, outstanding;

Saints good,good,outstanding, average, average, outstanding).

Therefore, based on each consecutive sequence of 6 games throughout the season, Reading are the only team to have suffered a bad run. However, to make up for this Reading have achieved 2 outstanding and one good run (all over the past 15 games) compared to Saints and West Ham.

Just throwing this out there for everyone to pick over/interpret.

PS - I'm not Snowball in disguise - I have a day off and thought I'd waste it doing this!

Interesting stuff Stroud; cheers for that.

I guess one way of interpreting your findings is that our "worse run, in comparison to Saints & West Ham" is why we are third; the other thing I would say is that both Saints and West Ham may well - statistically speaking - be due another sequence of relatively poor results. Even during their recent "poor" form, West Ham had been averaging 2ppg (they were on a sequence of WDWDWD until it was broken by a 2nd succesive draw on Saturday) yet a defeat on Saturday away at a resurging Leeds, and their av ppg for the last 6 games drops to 1.5......

[Ian Royal]

How about Cummings as a trigger?

How about "A new FB pairing" as a trigger?

Easily rejected seeing as we have continued to be great with Cummings out of the side and Left Back personel have been even more changeable in that period. As have Tabb & Church being in the side.

Don't look at the data to find a theory. Find a theory and check it with data. You're doing things backwards.

I tend to look at unusual things happening and then try to come up with a theory as to why the unusual is happening. Don't see a problem with this - if I see something which is bucking the trend I then try to work out why. Only difference is that I'm not offering a theory because when people do that on here it all gets a bit nasty for some reason. I'm just stating that there was a significant change in the statistical trend from game 6 onwards and as the evidence has built from there (i.e. more data has been gathered to support that - i.e. it's become less and less likely that it can be dismissed as a blip) it has become clear that this change has become more and more significant. Don't see why that should be a problem. I'll leave it to others to suggest why this has happened.

Obviously you need a reason to find a theory, but you do that by a quick look at our results. It's clear we've gone from struggling, to improving, to good to bloody brilliant. So you look for the catalysts that might have caused that and then crunch some numbers to see if the specifics support it.

Otherwise all your analysis has told me is a slightly more detailed and verbose version of: shit, average, good, fab.

So forget the pretty patterns in the numbers for a second and try and find the cause. I'll give you a head start on a few. Gorkss joining. The team settling after transfers completed. Roberts joining.

That doesn't quite fit with game 6 IMO. But it's close.

[Snowball]

then i'd be rightly accused of having an agenda.

You? An agenda? No, Heaven forbid.

You, Maguire, are an example to us all.

I just wish I could reach something approaching your high level of equanimity.

Taking something from Sept 17th (??!!!) is not "recent form" or the "near past" in terms of our season IMHO.

I once gave a lecture to goldfish. It wasn't a success.

Luckily, here, I don't have that problem. People are highly intelligent, with good memories,
and high levels of reasoning.

That's why they remember why I started taking the stats from September 17th, and why I said
I would stick with that date for the whole season. They all remember the half-dozen times I have
repeated that statement.


That's why I said, "This is 16 games, and next it will be 17 games, and after that 18 games, and after that 19."

And that is the same mantra I have repeated every time AE gets boring. Nothing has changed.

[Snowball]

On the stats you quote above, they aren't quite right.
Cardiff's worst run is 6 points from the 6 games from 17th Sep, not 8 points.
And Middlesbrough's worst run is the 3 points they have taken from their last 6 games, not the 7 points that you quote.
The impact of removing these 'worst' runs, in terms of ppg over the remaining 22 fixtures on each team's record, illustrates my point perfectly.
Suddenly the '22-game table' looks like this, far different to the 'form table' you have had us topping, or 2nd, for the last few weeks.

(Played, Pts, PPG)

West Ham 23 49 2.13
Southampton 23 47 2.04
Birmingham 22 42 1.91
Middlesbrough 23 44 1.91
Cardiff 23 44 1.91
Reading 22 41 1.86
Blackpool 23 41 1.78
Hull 22 40 1.82

Eliminate a team's 'bad run', and of course their record looks better, and more pertinently, better compared to everyone else.

Here it is. It was at 22 games at the time, I did this to illustrate my point that the stats were skewed as they eliminated Reading's bad run, but included the poor form of others.

Excellent, truly excellent work. So let us AGREE that cmonurz work above "levels the playing field." That was up to Jan 30

So all we need to do is add in the games since.



1 P7 21 Points Reading
2 P8 17 Points Ipswich
3 P9 19 Points Southampton
4 P9 17 Points Brighton
5 P9 17 Points Watford
6 P8 14 Points Middlesbrough
7 P8 13 Points Birmingham
8 P8 13 Points West Ham
9 P9 14 Points Blackpool

And this is the Snowball-Cmonurz table with the games since added

Remember this is the table with EVERY club's poorest run of six games removed.

29 62 2.14 ppg Reading
32 66 2.06 ppg Southampton
31 62 2.00 ppg West Ham
31 58 1.87 ppg Middlesbrough
30 55 1.83 ppg Birmingham
32 55 1.72 ppg Blackpool
31 52 1.68 ppg Cardiff
31 49 1.58 ppg Hull

[Snowball]

...87 pages of which are your posts.

and you keep coming back to read them, lover.

[Snowball]

To anybody that works with stats (either producing them or analysing them) painting the full picture is not WRONG, it's the way it should be.

Well in that case the best predictor of the final table is ALWAYS the table up to that point.

"Therefore" the final table will be exactly as it is now. We might as well stop and not play the last 10-11 games.

You seem to be ignoring clubs losing players, clubs gaining players...

Are you REALLY trying to say that the quality, form and confidence of sides do not change?

What to you is a sound reason for ignoring games, to someone else is completely unfathomable.

It's a cross I bear. I can only simplify so far...

As for distorting a sides true value, it's quite simple - this sides true value is that we are 3rd in the table.
The value you are showing is not the true one, it's distorted.

I will give you 1,000-1 if the table finishes in the exact order it is currently in.

The table as-is today does NOT reflect the CURRENT worth of the constituent clubs.

It represents the AVERAGE worth so far assessed, over 34/35/36 games

You seem to be arguing that we might as well stop the season half-way (or today)
and not allowing for sides to improve or hit a bad patch

[Snowball]

I really cannot see the problem here. What is likely to occur in the near future is much more related to what has happened in the near past rather than the distant past. This, after all, is the whole raison d'etre behind the concept of form tables. Somebody on a good run is likely to perform better than somebody on a bad run even if the latter is higher up the table because of a good run earlier in the season. Surely the whole point of all these stats is to try to assist in predicting the likely final outcome at the end of the season, in which case current form is surely a better guide

Of course it is, JC. Thank-you.

Reading FC are top of this league on the form as I have posted (Since September 17th)

PLUS the last 20/19/18 games etc all the way down to the latest 6 games

[Snowball]

So let's take 12 games or whatever and be done with it. If I looked at the fixtures and saw the first of those 12 games was a defeat and so changed it to 11 games then i'd be rightly accused of having an agenda.

Taking something from Sept 17th (??!!!) is not "recent form" or the "near past" in terms of our season IMHO.

I have posted last 6-7-8-9-10-11-12-13-14-15-16-17-18-19 & 20 games

We are top of them all

[Platypuss]

Mods, take note.

Of what? People discussing posts on a discussion board?

Yeah, Ok.

[Platypuss]

To be fair to him, Snowball is fantastic at what he does.

Kes could learn a thing or two.

Nah, expert fishing is about the minimum effort for the maximum haul.

[Snowball]

Obviously you need a reason to find a theory, but you do that by a quick look at our results. It's clear we've gone from struggling, to improving, to good to bloody brilliant.
So you look for the catalysts that might have caused that and then crunch some numbers to see if the specifics support it.

And negatives that cause a bad run.

Start of Season.

Just lost a number of players, lost Captain Matt Mills, unrest, worry about losing Shane Long, hangover from losing Play Off Final.
Just brought in an unknown Centre-Back, Elwood back from a summer marriage and off form, Griffin unfit and carrying an injury
breaks down TWICE in five games. We lose Long after one game and are struggling to find a new way of playing up front. Manset
is tried but it is felt he doesn't have the base fitness. Harte, like Elwood appears to be off colour. There is a problem, possibly off-
field with Jem Karacan.


Manager Starts to Deal With problems.

1. Recognisies that Khumalo is a total disaster and never going to work.
2. Brings in Kasper Gorkss, a top-end Championship CB of real pedigree (First game, Game 4, will take 2-3-4 games to settle)
3. Drops Karacan after Game 6, gives Tabb 4 consecutive starts (wakes Karacan up)
4. Brings back Cummings Game 6 for Griffin
5. Drops Harte Game 5.
6. Brings in Mills for Harte Game 5. (Giving Harte his wake-up call. Mills will be fresh and nervous, but will settle down.)
7. Signs Adam Le Fondre (first game, Game 5, will take time to settle in)
8. Brings back Church Game 6 first start
9. Drops Manset

I'll give you a head start on a few. Gorkss joining. The team settling after transfers completed. Roberts joining.

REALLY?

I hadn't realised that Gorkss (in game 4) would improve the defence.

I didn't realise that the mis-firing Griffin and Harte being replaced by Cummings and Mills would improve the team

And I didn't realise that signing and playin Adam Le Fondred would help us get goals now we had lost Long

[Snowball]

No Fishing. Just spotting trolls.

[SydenhamRoyal]

I think it is around about game 22 where we have been top of the post first 6 games table - and stayed there. I'll leave it to some random other (??) to confirm this

Do you mean "since game 22"?

And in that case do you mean games 17-22, 18-23 etc?

I mean since game 22, the league table ignoring the first 6. Then updated week by week, always ignoring the first 6. Vague memory says we would have been top throughout that period (if it werent for that ridiculous disallowed goal v Palace) and top since about game 25 even allowing for that ridiculous decision.

[Snowball]

6 Game Form

TO BE UPDATED AFTER DONCASTER GAME

Points
04 Game 01-06 (First 6 Games)
06 Game 02-07 To Doncaster Home
04 Game 03-08
07 Game 04-09
08 Game 05-10
11 Game 06-11
12 Game 07-12
10 Game 08-13
10 Game 09-14
07 Game 10-15
09 Game 11-16
06 Game 12-17
08 Game 13-18
10 Game 14-19
09 Game 15-20
12 Game 16-21 2 ppg (Birmingham 1-0, Cardiff defeat, Ipswich 3-2, Peterboro 3-2, Blackpool Defeat,West Ham 3-0)
12 Game 17-22 2 ppg
15 Game 18-23
15 Game 19-24
12 Game 20-25
15 Game 21-26
12 Game 22-27
12 Game 23-28
12 Game 24-29
12 Game 25-30
15 Game 26-31
15 Game 27-32
18 Game 28-33
18 Game 29-34
18 Game 30-35

[SydenhamRoyal]

How about Cummings as a trigger?

How about "A new FB pairing" as a trigger?

Easily rejected seeing as we have continued to be great with Cummings out of the side and Left Back personel have been even more changeable in that period. As have Tabb & Church being in the side.

Don't look at the data to find a theory. Find a theory and check it with data. You're doing things backwards.

Not easily rejected. Cummings played til he was injured, in the meantime McD in the transfer window bought in quality cover for any of the CBs or RB, and so Connolly was able to slot in. Fortuitous timing perhaps, but the transfer window has definitely upped the (already upping) trend

[Simon's Church]

Since March 11th we've averaged a measly 1ppg, could be a struggle to even make the play-offs if we keep up this kind of form

[Snowball]

Form Since September 17th

Cardiff 0-3 Hull
Doncaster 1-1 Reading
Leicester 2-1 Birmingham


Up to Doncaster Away

1 30 19-06-05 43-22 +21 63 2.10 ppg Reading (97-Point season Form)

2 29 15-08-06 40-27 +13 53 1.83 ppg West Ham United 84-Point season Form)

3 30 15-09-06 50-25 +25 54 1.80 ppg Southampton (83-Point season Form)

=====================================================
4 29 13-09-07 33-22 +11 48 1.66 Hull City
5 30 13-10-08 47-29 +18 49 1.63 Birmingham City
6 28 12-09-07 31-30 +01 45 1.61 Middlesbrough
7 30 12-09-09 51-44 +07 45 1.50 Blackpool
8 29 11-10-08 43-40 +03 43 1.48 Cardiff City
9 29 12-07-10 41-38 +03 43 1.48 Leeds

[Snowball]

1 36 32 69 Southampton
2 36 18 67 Reading
==========================
3 35 21 66 West Ham
4 35 06 59 Middlesbrough
5 36 08 58 Brighton
6 35 09 57 Hull
======================

7 36 07 57 Cardiff
8 35 19 56 Birmingham
9 36 10 56 Blackpool


10 36 05 53 Leeds United
11 36 07 51 Leicester