Manager v luck etc

SCIAG
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 6362
Joined: 17 Jun 2008 17:43
Location: Liburd for England

Re: Manager v luck etc

by SCIAG » 12 Oct 2019 15:03

leon
SCIAG
leon
That’s some weird reasoning - theres only 2 reasons to sack a manager?

Not sure I understand what you're getting at. Are you saying that my observation that I'd only sack someone if they weren't good enough or if they did something bad is a truism? Because if so, fair enough - I guess what I'm saying is I would just set quite a high standard for what constitutes "incompetence".

If on the other hand you're disagreeing with me, and would be happy to sack a manager for reasons other than misconduct or getting us relegated (maybe just because we think someone else can do a better job) then again, fair enough, your opinion. Personally I probably wouldn't go there. I think clubs underestimate the negative impact that the upheaval of bringing in a new manager can cause. I'd want us to nearly always appoint managers with strong connections to the club, and try to develop our coaches into future managers, Anfield Bootroom style. If they keep us in this division and solvent then they've done their job. But that's me being idealistic rather than necessarily what would actually work.


I was questioning your point yes.

It was either a bit like saying I’d only sack a manager that required sacking or saying there are only two reasons to sack a manager- they are incompetent (ie totally unfit to do their job) or they have committed an act of gross misconduct (eg bumming Kingsley Royal)

Either way I was struggling with it tbh.

Yeah and my follow up post was totally incoherent which is why I shouldn't post on Friday nights.

I think, essentially, I was saying that I'd only sack a manager if it was looking like they were definitely going to get us relegated.

URZZZZ
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 7279
Joined: 20 Apr 2013 18:30

Re: Manager v luck etc

by URZZZZ » 12 Oct 2019 17:09

Snowflake Royal
URZZZZ
stealthpapes Once we've got that out of the way, there's enough data out there to be able to estimate the contributions of skill and of luck to football matches.

I think I've got a decent book that goes into it, explains how it comes to the answer. Give me a day.


Well, luck of course plays a part, there’s no denying that. Goalkeeper errors, bad referee decisions, ricochets etc etc...

But I just cannot possibly see how it can correspond to explaining how well/poorly a team does over 46 games

If you can provide the data to reject that claim, then I’ll concede the point but from where I’m standing, I don’t see how it’s possible

I'd argue goalkeeper errors aren't luck. Good keepers make fewer errors. Simple as.


Take any goalkeeper though. If he plays a blinder against team X, then makes a huge blunder to gift team Y the win, then surely you can deduce team Y are lucky, certainly in comparison to team X anyway?

For example, Liverpool's goal against Everton last year at Anfield. Pickford is generally considered a decent goalie. He makes a huge blunder to give Liverpool the win in the 95th minute. Surely that's luck on Liverpool's part?

URZZZZ
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 7279
Joined: 20 Apr 2013 18:30

Re: Manager v luck etc

by URZZZZ » 12 Oct 2019 17:11

stealthpapes
URZZZZ
stealthpapes Once we've got that out of the way, there's enough data out there to be able to estimate the contributions of skill and of luck to football matches.

I think I've got a decent book that goes into it, explains how it comes to the answer. Give me a day.


Well, luck of course plays a part, there’s no denying that. Goalkeeper errors, bad referee decisions, ricochets etc etc...

But I just cannot possibly see how it can correspond to explaining how well/poorly a team does over 46 games

If you can provide the data to reject that claim, then I’ll concede the point but from where I’m standing, I don’t see how it’s possible


Hi URZZZ

This topic is covered in detail in Chapter 1 of The Numbers Game (ISBN-10: 9780241963623) and there's a few academic papers on the topic. A bit busy this weekend but there's some nice examples in the chapter.

I also recalled this Economist article, Managers in football matter much less than most fans think.


image upload


Graph provides an interesting insight into it. Certainly adds a different perspective into it

Will give the chapter a read when I've got the time to

User avatar
BR0B0T
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 15325
Joined: 08 Nov 2016 23:25

Re: Manager v luck etc

by BR0B0T » 12 Oct 2019 17:37

stealthpapes Once we've got that out of the way, there's enough data out there to be able to estimate the contributions of skill and of luck to football matches.

I think I've got a decent book that goes into it, explains how it comes to the answer. Give me a day.


post up the name of the book... I don't think there are that many that really go into much detail on it i.e. the actual models/code

User avatar
BR0B0T
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 15325
Joined: 08 Nov 2016 23:25

Re: Manager v luck etc

by BR0B0T » 12 Oct 2019 17:38

BR0B0T
stealthpapes Once we've got that out of the way, there's enough data out there to be able to estimate the contributions of skill and of luck to football matches.

I think I've got a decent book that goes into it, explains how it comes to the answer. Give me a day.


post up the name of the book... I don't think there are that many that really go into much detail on it i.e. the actual models/code


lols...assume it's the one from post above


User avatar
stealthpapes
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 7531
Joined: 05 Jun 2013 13:25
Location: proverbs 26:11

Re: Manager v luck etc

by stealthpapes » 12 Oct 2019 17:52

BR0B0T
BR0B0T
stealthpapes Once we've got that out of the way, there's enough data out there to be able to estimate the contributions of skill and of luck to football matches.

I think I've got a decent book that goes into it, explains how it comes to the answer. Give me a day.


post up the name of the book... I don't think there are that many that really go into much detail on it i.e. the actual models/code


lols...assume it's the one from post above


aye but this one at least cites the underpinning literature.

User avatar
leon
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 29048
Joined: 14 Apr 2004 09:18
Location: Hips, Lips, Tits, Power

Re: Manager v luck etc

by leon » 12 Oct 2019 17:58

SCIAG
leon
SCIAG Not sure I understand what you're getting at. Are you saying that my observation that I'd only sack someone if they weren't good enough or if they did something bad is a truism? Because if so, fair enough - I guess what I'm saying is I would just set quite a high standard for what constitutes "incompetence".

If on the other hand you're disagreeing with me, and would be happy to sack a manager for reasons other than misconduct or getting us relegated (maybe just because we think someone else can do a better job) then again, fair enough, your opinion. Personally I probably wouldn't go there. I think clubs underestimate the negative impact that the upheaval of bringing in a new manager can cause. I'd want us to nearly always appoint managers with strong connections to the club, and try to develop our coaches into future managers, Anfield Bootroom style. If they keep us in this division and solvent then they've done their job. But that's me being idealistic rather than necessarily what would actually work.


I was questioning your point yes.

It was either a bit like saying I’d only sack a manager that required sacking or saying there are only two reasons to sack a manager- they are incompetent (ie totally unfit to do their job) or they have committed an act of gross misconduct (eg bumming Kingsley Royal)

Either way I was struggling with it tbh.

Yeah and my follow up post was totally incoherent which is why I shouldn't post on Friday nights.

I think, essentially, I was saying that I'd only sack a manager if it was looking like they were definitely going to get us relegated.


Ha - Same here tbh!

Yeah I see your point. I guess it’s working out when is definitely.

User avatar
BR0B0T
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 15325
Joined: 08 Nov 2016 23:25

Re: Manager v luck etc

by BR0B0T » 12 Oct 2019 18:40

will have to define what we mean by luck here (from the position of controllable by the manager)

key players not available...(injuries, suspension*, wife giving birth, illness, bereavement etc)
refereeing decisions...awarding penalties, cards, freekicks etc offside pretty much dealt with tbf
deflections...resulting in unintended largely positive/negative outcomes
beach balls

i'd say there is a mean-reverting element to player quality...it's possible a manager could assemble a squad whose performance is collectively above/below their 'expected' quality for periods of time before correcting itself naturally.

- Good season under Stam...strikers massively exceeded xG
- Bad season under Stam...strikers way under xG
- Two seasons combined approximate actual goals with xG

Is it clinical striking or luck?

Kermogant's league stats (games and goals)

2015–16 Championship 17 3
2016–17 Championship 42 18
2017–18 Championship 25 2

if the parts we deem luck are random I'm not sure why anyone would think they aren't more likely to be 'normally' distributed...i.e. some teams are going to be much luckier than others

URZZZZ
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 7279
Joined: 20 Apr 2013 18:30

Re: Manager v luck etc

by URZZZZ » 12 Oct 2019 22:15

2 world wars, 1 world cup Seriously, we get all so wound up about managers, stats, records etc etc.

When you think about it most managers have good spells and shit spells, often with the same club. Even the Special (needs) One. That's why our history shows that when we just pick total randomers with no managerial experience (McGhee, Gooding & Quinn, Parjudas, McDermott, Stam) they perform just as well if not better than experienced managers with glowing CVs.

It's MAINLY about luck, circumstance, momentum, investment, injuries and the players themselves.

Obviously you can have particularly good or bad managers that can help or hinder but I'm at the point now having seen so many managers that i just think it's more to do with things outside manager choice.

Bring in my grandma, I don't care anymore. Any change will be good.


With regards to the other factors:

Circumstance - I'm not sure if this has much relevance at all. Any youth player is willing to show what they've got, they're all chomping at the bit. Plus, it's not just down to circumstance when a youth player is ready. It's also down to the coaching of the player and the mentality brought forward. You mention the point about new dads, newly married couples etc but surely that can also have an adverse effect? You have more responsibilities outside your work etc

Momentum - naturally that does play a role but surely that's up to the manager themselves to generate the momentum in the first place. Or in the opposing stance, surely it's a manager's job to pick them up after a defeat, work on the weaknesses and go out and win the next game? To your motivation point, players should be motivated to play any game of football. For the years they've spend training to make it this far, for the money they earn as well. Any manager that cannot motivate his team should not be a manager either

Investment - again it's easier for a manager to have money at his disposal. But at the same time, it still takes skill for a manager to identify their targets and implement them into their style. Too many signings, especially from abroad, often leads to imbalances in the squad. Similarly enough, managers without the money should be able to work with what they've got. Look at Dyche at Burnley. They've spent minimum, he hasn't complained and he's done a great job. Then look at Marco Silva at Everton. Spent millions this summer to find themselves in the relegation zone. Most managers that complain about a lack of funding use it as a shield to hide behind their mistakes

Injuries - yep, this can be a difficult situation for managers. IIRC Farke was without ten first team players a few weeks ago! But what I'd like to know is what percentage of injuries result from training injuries etc...because that can relate more to tactical deficiencies rather than luck. Not explaining it great, but you notice Arsenal used to suffer many injuries under Wenger and now under Emery, their injury list is almost non-existent. This article may help explain what I'm talking about
ttps://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/footba ... es-up.html

Players - as a manager, you can't really compensate for horror shows (Virginia at Wolves, Puscas miss vs Bristol, Swift's red card vs Fulham, Virginia at Hull etc). But many players are under the guidance of their manager. The manager spends "X" hours a week training the players up to what he wants. If it's purely down to a lack of effort, then it's 100% on the players. But if the players are struggling tactically, that's down to the managers IMO

Overall - I think managers are hugely important. Set your team out with identity, structure and balance. Have effective communication with your medical team/coaching staff to reduce injuries. Set your methods out clear for the players. Abandon any tactics that clearly aren't working (cough cough Jose). Pick your players up after a defeat, don't let them spiral out of control

It's why most managers are either serial failures/serial successes IMO


Millsy
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 10024
Joined: 16 Jul 2004 18:36
Location: Running from The Left

Re: Manager v luck etc

by Millsy » 12 Oct 2019 22:34

URZZZZ
2 world wars, 1 world cup Seriously, we get all so wound up about managers, stats, records etc etc.

When you think about it most managers have good spells and shit spells, often with the same club. Even the Special (needs) One. That's why our history shows that when we just pick total randomers with no managerial experience (McGhee, Gooding & Quinn, Parjudas, McDermott, Stam) they perform just as well if not better than experienced managers with glowing CVs.

It's MAINLY about luck, circumstance, momentum, investment, injuries and the players themselves.

Obviously you can have particularly good or bad managers that can help or hinder but I'm at the point now having seen so many managers that i just think it's more to do with things outside manager choice.

Bring in my grandma, I don't care anymore. Any change will be good.


With regards to the other factors:

Circumstance - I'm not sure if this has much relevance at all. Any youth player is willing to show what they've got, they're all chomping at the bit. Plus, it's not just down to circumstance when a youth player is ready. It's also down to the coaching of the player and the mentality brought forward. You mention the point about new dads, newly married couples etc but surely that can also have an adverse effect? You have more responsibilities outside your work etc

Momentum - naturally that does play a role but surely that's up to the manager themselves to generate the momentum in the first place. Or in the opposing stance, surely it's a manager's job to pick them up after a defeat, work on the weaknesses and go out and win the next game? To your motivation point, players should be motivated to play any game of football. For the years they've spend training to make it this far, for the money they earn as well. Any manager that cannot motivate his team should not be a manager either

Investment - again it's easier for a manager to have money at his disposal. But at the same time, it still takes skill for a manager to identify their targets and implement them into their style. Too many signings, especially from abroad, often leads to imbalances in the squad. Similarly enough, managers without the money should be able to work with what they've got. Look at Dyche at Burnley. They've spent minimum, he hasn't complained and he's done a great job. Then look at Marco Silva at Everton. Spent millions this summer to find themselves in the relegation zone. Most managers that complain about a lack of funding use it as a shield to hide behind their mistakes

Injuries - yep, this can be a difficult situation for managers. IIRC Farke was without ten first team players a few weeks ago! But what I'd like to know is what percentage of injuries result from training injuries etc...because that can relate more to tactical deficiencies rather than luck. Not explaining it great, but you notice Arsenal used to suffer many injuries under Wenger and now under Emery, their injury list is almost non-existent. This article may help explain what I'm talking about
ttps://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/footba ... es-up.html

Players - as a manager, you can't really compensate for horror shows (Virginia at Wolves, Puscas miss vs Bristol, Swift's red card vs Fulham, Virginia at Hull etc). But many players are under the guidance of their manager. The manager spends "X" hours a week training the players up to what he wants. If it's purely down to a lack of effort, then it's 100% on the players. But if the players are struggling tactically, that's down to the managers IMO

Overall - I think managers are hugely important. Set your team out with identity, structure and balance. Have effective communication with your medical team/coaching staff to reduce injuries. Set your methods out clear for the players. Abandon any tactics that clearly aren't working (cough cough Jose). Pick your players up after a defeat, don't let them spiral out of control

It's why most managers are either serial failures/serial successes IMO



Well thought out reply. Good points.

Basiy I think of course a manager has an impact, just much less than we think as we tend to underestimate a lot of other factors.

URZZZZ
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 7279
Joined: 20 Apr 2013 18:30

Re: Manager v luck etc

by URZZZZ » 13 Oct 2019 00:58

2 world wars, 1 world cup
URZZZZ
2 world wars, 1 world cup Seriously, we get all so wound up about managers, stats, records etc etc.

When you think about it most managers have good spells and shit spells, often with the same club. Even the Special (needs) One. That's why our history shows that when we just pick total randomers with no managerial experience (McGhee, Gooding & Quinn, Parjudas, McDermott, Stam) they perform just as well if not better than experienced managers with glowing CVs.

It's MAINLY about luck, circumstance, momentum, investment, injuries and the players themselves.

Obviously you can have particularly good or bad managers that can help or hinder but I'm at the point now having seen so many managers that i just think it's more to do with things outside manager choice.

Bring in my grandma, I don't care anymore. Any change will be good.


With regards to the other factors:

Circumstance - I'm not sure if this has much relevance at all. Any youth player is willing to show what they've got, they're all chomping at the bit. Plus, it's not just down to circumstance when a youth player is ready. It's also down to the coaching of the player and the mentality brought forward. You mention the point about new dads, newly married couples etc but surely that can also have an adverse effect? You have more responsibilities outside your work etc

Momentum - naturally that does play a role but surely that's up to the manager themselves to generate the momentum in the first place. Or in the opposing stance, surely it's a manager's job to pick them up after a defeat, work on the weaknesses and go out and win the next game? To your motivation point, players should be motivated to play any game of football. For the years they've spend training to make it this far, for the money they earn as well. Any manager that cannot motivate his team should not be a manager either

Investment - again it's easier for a manager to have money at his disposal. But at the same time, it still takes skill for a manager to identify their targets and implement them into their style. Too many signings, especially from abroad, often leads to imbalances in the squad. Similarly enough, managers without the money should be able to work with what they've got. Look at Dyche at Burnley. They've spent minimum, he hasn't complained and he's done a great job. Then look at Marco Silva at Everton. Spent millions this summer to find themselves in the relegation zone. Most managers that complain about a lack of funding use it as a shield to hide behind their mistakes

Injuries - yep, this can be a difficult situation for managers. IIRC Farke was without ten first team players a few weeks ago! But what I'd like to know is what percentage of injuries result from training injuries etc...because that can relate more to tactical deficiencies rather than luck. Not explaining it great, but you notice Arsenal used to suffer many injuries under Wenger and now under Emery, their injury list is almost non-existent. This article may help explain what I'm talking about
ttps://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/footba ... es-up.html

Players - as a manager, you can't really compensate for horror shows (Virginia at Wolves, Puscas miss vs Bristol, Swift's red card vs Fulham, Virginia at Hull etc). But many players are under the guidance of their manager. The manager spends "X" hours a week training the players up to what he wants. If it's purely down to a lack of effort, then it's 100% on the players. But if the players are struggling tactically, that's down to the managers IMO

Overall - I think managers are hugely important. Set your team out with identity, structure and balance. Have effective communication with your medical team/coaching staff to reduce injuries. Set your methods out clear for the players. Abandon any tactics that clearly aren't working (cough cough Jose). Pick your players up after a defeat, don't let them spiral out of control

It's why most managers are either serial failures/serial successes IMO



Well thought out reply. Good points.

Basiy I think of course a manager has an impact, just much less than we think as we tend to underestimate a lot of other factors.


Pretty much. A lot of these other factors can be tied down into management/coaching skills but agree with the gist that it’s too easy to blame a manager when it’s not going well

However I always find it ironic that as already mentioned, when teams lose, a lot of people will just blame the manager but when certain teams win, it’s only down to “individual players” (the lengths people go to to defend their point). It’s like Liverpool in 13/14. Seasons and seasons of finishing no where near the top, yet that season they finish a couple of points off top. I’ve heard people say it wasn’t down to “Rodgers’ coaching skills at all” and that they only finished there because of Suarez! No credit whatsoever for the manager. Weird stance to have

User avatar
BR0B0T
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 15325
Joined: 08 Nov 2016 23:25

Re: Manager v luck etc

by BR0B0T » 13 Oct 2019 08:55

URZZZZ
2 world wars, 1 world cup
URZZZZ
With regards to the other factors:

Circumstance - I'm not sure if this has much relevance at all. Any youth player is willing to show what they've got, they're all chomping at the bit. Plus, it's not just down to circumstance when a youth player is ready. It's also down to the coaching of the player and the mentality brought forward. You mention the point about new dads, newly married couples etc but surely that can also have an adverse effect? You have more responsibilities outside your work etc

Momentum - naturally that does play a role but surely that's up to the manager themselves to generate the momentum in the first place. Or in the opposing stance, surely it's a manager's job to pick them up after a defeat, work on the weaknesses and go out and win the next game? To your motivation point, players should be motivated to play any game of football. For the years they've spend training to make it this far, for the money they earn as well. Any manager that cannot motivate his team should not be a manager either

Investment - again it's easier for a manager to have money at his disposal. But at the same time, it still takes skill for a manager to identify their targets and implement them into their style. Too many signings, especially from abroad, often leads to imbalances in the squad. Similarly enough, managers without the money should be able to work with what they've got. Look at Dyche at Burnley. They've spent minimum, he hasn't complained and he's done a great job. Then look at Marco Silva at Everton. Spent millions this summer to find themselves in the relegation zone. Most managers that complain about a lack of funding use it as a shield to hide behind their mistakes

Injuries - yep, this can be a difficult situation for managers. IIRC Farke was without ten first team players a few weeks ago! But what I'd like to know is what percentage of injuries result from training injuries etc...because that can relate more to tactical deficiencies rather than luck. Not explaining it great, but you notice Arsenal used to suffer many injuries under Wenger and now under Emery, their injury list is almost non-existent. This article may help explain what I'm talking about
ttps://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/footba ... es-up.html

Players - as a manager, you can't really compensate for horror shows (Virginia at Wolves, Puscas miss vs Bristol, Swift's red card vs Fulham, Virginia at Hull etc). But many players are under the guidance of their manager. The manager spends "X" hours a week training the players up to what he wants. If it's purely down to a lack of effort, then it's 100% on the players. But if the players are struggling tactically, that's down to the managers IMO

Overall - I think managers are hugely important. Set your team out with identity, structure and balance. Have effective communication with your medical team/coaching staff to reduce injuries. Set your methods out clear for the players. Abandon any tactics that clearly aren't working (cough cough Jose). Pick your players up after a defeat, don't let them spiral out of control

It's why most managers are either serial failures/serial successes IMO



Well thought out reply. Good points.

Basiy I think of course a manager has an impact, just much less than we think as we tend to underestimate a lot of other factors.




However I always find it ironic that as already mentioned, when teams lose, a lot of people will just blame the manager but when certain teams win, it’s only down to “individual players” (the lengths people go to to defend their point). It’s like Liverpool in 13/14. Seasons and seasons of finishing no where near the top, yet that season they finish a couple of points off top. I’ve heard people say it wasn’t down to “Rodgers’ coaching skills at all” and that they only finished there because of Suarez! No credit whatsoever for the manager. Weird stance to have


did you not take a look at the graph Papes posted

URZZZZ
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 7279
Joined: 20 Apr 2013 18:30

Re: Manager v luck etc

by URZZZZ » 13 Oct 2019 12:20

BR0B0T
URZZZZ
2 world wars, 1 world cup

Well thought out reply. Good points.

Basiy I think of course a manager has an impact, just much less than we think as we tend to underestimate a lot of other factors.




However I always find it ironic that as already mentioned, when teams lose, a lot of people will just blame the manager but when certain teams win, it’s only down to “individual players” (the lengths people go to to defend their point). It’s like Liverpool in 13/14. Seasons and seasons of finishing no where near the top, yet that season they finish a couple of points off top. I’ve heard people say it wasn’t down to “Rodgers’ coaching skills at all” and that they only finished there because of Suarez! No credit whatsoever for the manager. Weird stance to have


did you not take a look at the graph Papes posted


Yeah. It's an interesting insight into it. Doesn't mean I have to necessarily agree with it


User avatar
BR0B0T
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 15325
Joined: 08 Nov 2016 23:25

Re: Manager v luck etc

by BR0B0T » 13 Oct 2019 12:24

URZZZZ
BR0B0T
URZZZZ


However I always find it ironic that as already mentioned, when teams lose, a lot of people will just blame the manager but when certain teams win, it’s only down to “individual players” (the lengths people go to to defend their point). It’s like Liverpool in 13/14. Seasons and seasons of finishing no where near the top, yet that season they finish a couple of points off top. I’ve heard people say it wasn’t down to “Rodgers’ coaching skills at all” and that they only finished there because of Suarez! No credit whatsoever for the manager. Weird stance to have


did you not take a look at the graph Papes posted


Yeah. It's an interesting insight into it. Doesn't mean I have to necessarily agree with it


sure I get it...

your opinions >>>> facts

User avatar
Snowflake Royal
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 39405
Joined: 20 Jun 2017 17:51

Re: Manager v luck etc

by Snowflake Royal » 13 Oct 2019 12:58

There's just one problem with that Bro. And it's that the graph actually demonstrates that good managers can make a strong positive impact.

User avatar
BR0B0T
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 15325
Joined: 08 Nov 2016 23:25

Re: Manager v luck etc

by BR0B0T » 13 Oct 2019 13:14

Snowflake Royal There's just one problem with that Bro. And it's that the graph actually demonstrates that good managers can make a strong positive impact.


yeah I suppose but just to a much lesser degree

manager could be +2 points
star player could be +8 points

User avatar
Snowflake Royal
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 39405
Joined: 20 Jun 2017 17:51

Re: Manager v luck etc

by Snowflake Royal » 13 Oct 2019 13:20

BR0B0T
Snowflake Royal There's just one problem with that Bro. And it's that the graph actually demonstrates that good managers can make a strong positive impact.


yeah I suppose but just to a much lesser degree

manager could be +2 points
star player could be +8 points

If someone else could read all the data and supporting analysis and explain how it defines star players, whether it includes other players, whether it includes lower divisions, how it works out expected performance and how it takes into account changing circumstances stances and picking up from someone out performing the norm, I'd be interested.

Because it seems pretty limited from that one graph.

Obvs can't be arsed myself.

URZZZZ
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 7279
Joined: 20 Apr 2013 18:30

Re: Manager v luck etc

by URZZZZ » 13 Oct 2019 19:22

Royalwaster
Hound Gomes had a fair share of 'luck' personally last year. The two key games for him were Ipswich (a) - where they missed an absolute sitter in the last min, and Wigan (h) where we played really poorly and came out with 3 points - partly due to Wigan utterly switching off on a drop ball I think it was.


Luck is probably a bit too 'random' but yes good fortune etc. that is unlikely to be replicated in the long-term. We were 'fortunate' for example that we got a loan keeper who made some amazing saves and gave us several draws / wins we'd otherwise have not got ... it makes me think of that season in which Suarez at Liverpool just couldn't stop scoring goals. That Liverpool team was so average, but they almost won the league ... unlike the current Liverpool team and manager. I also agree that a lot in football is about momentum - string a few wins together and the confidence that generates alone can turn a mediocre team into a very strong team. We did it under McD and I remember Crystal Palace doing it under Dowie a few years before that - look at Dowie after that season everyone thought he was a great manager ... well it didn't last did it!?


On the Wigan (H) point, I'm convinced we may have been goners if Martinez didn't make that save at 2-1 down. It's not talked about much because of the late goals but that save was arguably just as important. A loss to Wigan in our situation would have been really damaging and at 3-1 down, I wouldn't have put any money on us to get back. And arguably, all three goals against Wigan shouldn't have counted

But that Liverpool team wasn't average :| you think a team with Sterling, Coutinho and an inform Sturridge are average? Dream on

Hound
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 24935
Joined: 27 Sep 2016 22:16
Location: Simpleton

Re: Manager v luck etc

by Hound » 13 Oct 2019 20:47

URZZZZ
Royalwaster
Hound Gomes had a fair share of 'luck' personally last year. The two key games for him were Ipswich (a) - where they missed an absolute sitter in the last min, and Wigan (h) where we played really poorly and came out with 3 points - partly due to Wigan utterly switching off on a drop ball I think it was.


Luck is probably a bit too 'random' but yes good fortune etc. that is unlikely to be replicated in the long-term. We were 'fortunate' for example that we got a loan keeper who made some amazing saves and gave us several draws / wins we'd otherwise have not got ... it makes me think of that season in which Suarez at Liverpool just couldn't stop scoring goals. That Liverpool team was so average, but they almost won the league ... unlike the current Liverpool team and manager. I also agree that a lot in football is about momentum - string a few wins together and the confidence that generates alone can turn a mediocre team into a very strong team. We did it under McD and I remember Crystal Palace doing it under Dowie a few years before that - look at Dowie after that season everyone thought he was a great manager ... well it didn't last did it!?


On the Wigan (H) point, I'm convinced we may have been goners if Martinez didn't make that save at 2-1 down. It's not talked about much because of the late goals but that save was arguably just as important. A loss to Wigan in our situation would have been really damaging and at 3-1 down, I wouldn't have put any money on us to get back. And arguably, all three goals against Wigan shouldn't have counted

But that Liverpool team wasn't average :| you think a team with Sterling, Coutinho and an inform Sturridge are average? Dream on


Absolutely. 3-1 would have been game over. Didn’t really mention that as he screwed up badly for the second

But yes, seen a few things on Twitter ‘if only Puscas has scored that sitter...’ but certainly works both ways. Couple of times Martinez pulled out incredible saves to save us points (Norwich, Ipswich, Villa spring to mind) but that Wigan one was potentially season changing

URZZZZ
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 7279
Joined: 20 Apr 2013 18:30

Re: Manager v luck etc

by URZZZZ » 13 Oct 2019 23:32

Hound
URZZZZ
Royalwaster
Luck is probably a bit too 'random' but yes good fortune etc. that is unlikely to be replicated in the long-term. We were 'fortunate' for example that we got a loan keeper who made some amazing saves and gave us several draws / wins we'd otherwise have not got ... it makes me think of that season in which Suarez at Liverpool just couldn't stop scoring goals. That Liverpool team was so average, but they almost won the league ... unlike the current Liverpool team and manager. I also agree that a lot in football is about momentum - string a few wins together and the confidence that generates alone can turn a mediocre team into a very strong team. We did it under McD and I remember Crystal Palace doing it under Dowie a few years before that - look at Dowie after that season everyone thought he was a great manager ... well it didn't last did it!?


On the Wigan (H) point, I'm convinced we may have been goners if Martinez didn't make that save at 2-1 down. It's not talked about much because of the late goals but that save was arguably just as important. A loss to Wigan in our situation would have been really damaging and at 3-1 down, I wouldn't have put any money on us to get back. And arguably, all three goals against Wigan shouldn't have counted

But that Liverpool team wasn't average :| you think a team with Sterling, Coutinho and an inform Sturridge are average? Dream on


Absolutely. 3-1 would have been game over. Didn’t really mention that as he screwed up badly for the second

But yes, seen a few things on Twitter ‘if only Puscas has scored that sitter...’ but certainly works both ways. Couple of times Martinez pulled out incredible saves to save us points (Norwich, Ipswich, Villa spring to mind) but that Wigan one was potentially season changing


If only Mannone didn't throw the ball in his own goal against Derby on the first game of the season, we'd have broken the 106

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ankeny, Biscuit goalie and 556 guests

It is currently 29 Mar 2024 13:07