El MayorAnd despite his failings at times is capable of being at times unplayable. He walks round players occasionallySuper HansEl MayorSuper HansThe stats are clearly flawed though. I don’t think anyone would say Stansfield is our 9th best player.
People are not going to like this, but I disagree.
People romanticise Stansfield cos he works hard, he scores goals and he’s a young lad.
However hard he works, there are many games where he has no impact and that is reflected in the stats. It’s all well and good chasing lost causes but if you don’t actually win any it’s not effective.
Chances missed like the one away to Huddersfield don’t help his stats either.
Oh I 100% agree that Stansfield is overrated, though I don’t think the system he’s played in necessarily helps him either.
It ranks Dembele ahead of him, which is bollocks.
Dembele has played far fewer games, and so has a smaller data set. This is something always to take into account with this sort of thing.
He’s also plenty capable of doing feck all tracking back which has cost us a few goals.
Stats don’t show that.
They might. But yes he has been dire at tracking back. Ipswich away made me sick in my mouth
Super HansHe’s also plenty capable of doing feck all tracking back which has cost us a few goals.
Stats don’t show that.
Dembeles a frustrating one.
Obviously got a talent there that we desperately need on the pitch, but generally plays like he couldn't give a shit about the team.
Super HansHe’s also plenty capable of doing feck all tracking back which has cost us a few goals.
Stats don’t show that.
Yes they do.
You look at the range of scores Dembele has, he’s got a 9.5 for that game vs Huddersfield and some horrific scores where he’s been dreadful.
Raw data is worth looking at, I’ve kept it here - tracking not only average but median, high and low scores plus team averages over the season and under each manager.
[docs.google.com]
Not sure if it’s covered but what’s stansfields goal per XG ?
I’m guessing that’s a stat where he’s amongst the best in the division ?
DolphNot sure if it’s covered but what’s stansfields goal per XG ?
I’m guessing that’s a stat where he’s amongst the best in the division ?
9.16 for 12 goals on Sofascore.
El MayorgeneralBlueEl MayorSuper HansThe stats are clearly flawed though. I don’t think anyone would say Stansfield is our 9th best player.
People are not going to like this, but I disagree.
People romanticise Stansfield cos he works hard, he scores goals and he’s a young lad.
However hard he works, there are many games where he has no impact and that is reflected in the stats. It’s all well and good chasing lost causes but if you don’t actually win any it’s not effective.
Chances missed like the one away to Huddersfield don’t help his stats either.
Stats this ... stats that .... numbers on paper. Some will say stats can be a load of bollocks !
All I know is if we had 11 players with Stansfield's attitude, work rate, determination and character consistently applying those attributes we wouldn't be in this relegation dog fight.
I agree wholeheartedly that stats on their own only tell one side of the story.
Problem is all I see here from people arguing against them are their subjective opinions - which are influenced by their own perceptions and biases and as such aren’t the whole picture either.
Stats help us understand that our own perceptions could well be flawed and that there are things that we might have missed / overlooked.
stats are a fantastic tool, but no serious football statistician uses whoscored rating or anything like that
people like to mock xG but it's a much much better predictive tool than some arbitrarily weighted rating, and all the real football nerds i've seen dismiss it outright