Kyle Posted October 4, 2019 Author Share Posted October 4, 2019 I fell out with him a few times of twitter. Absolute banger of a boy. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Positive, sometimes. Posted October 4, 2019 Share Posted October 4, 2019 1 minute ago, RandomGuy. said: That Norwegian boy was the best, absolutely seething every season we didnt fit his narrative. I also know someone who hates Parish with a passion, him coming in the team would cause a proper cranial detachment. Is that him who's a Celtic fan? I called him out for it and he ended up accusing me of being a bigot etc... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomGuy. Posted October 4, 2019 Share Posted October 4, 2019 (edited) 6 minutes ago, Mr Positive, sometimes. said: Is that him who's a Celtic fan? I called him out for it and he ended up accusing me of being a bigot etc... Aye. I'm sure he went on a rant about our style of play being unsustainable, before admitting he'd seen us play about twice in his entire life. Edited October 4, 2019 by RandomGuy. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valentino Bolognese Posted October 4, 2019 Share Posted October 4, 2019 (edited) 36 minutes ago, Radford said: Ask the guy, he'll happily tell you I'm sure. Remember, there are maybe shots he saved that he wouldn't have been expected to, so it could be more than seven! No, they should publish them. I've seen every minute of Saints this season and I can confidently say that if they think that there are seven or more goals that an 'average' Premiership goalkeeper would have saved, my polite suggestion is that they need to find another hobby. Edit : love the fact that they take the figures to 3 decimal figures, a classic way of trying to give credibility to spurious figures by implying an accuracy that cannot possibly be robust. Second edit: "Remember, there are maybe shots he saved that he wouldn't have been expected to, so it could be more than seven!" Well yes, but that would also be the case for every other keeper. Hence average, becasue 'shots expected to be saved' is the variable they are propounding to be able to measure. To be clear 'm not defending these psuedo stats in any way but they should be internally consistent at least. Edited October 4, 2019 by Valentino Bolognese 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomGuy. Posted October 4, 2019 Share Posted October 4, 2019 (edited) This is the guy. We finished 4th this season. I think he went the whole season referencing how "poor" we were, even when Saints fans brought this up at the end of the season. He spent the next season demanding TW was sacked. Edited October 4, 2019 by RandomGuy. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radford Posted October 4, 2019 Share Posted October 4, 2019 3 hours ago, Valentino Bolognese said: No, they should publish them. I've seen every minute of Saints this season and I can confidently say that if they think that there are seven or more goals that an 'average' Premiership goalkeeper would have saved, my polite suggestion is that they need to find another hobby. They pay for the raw data, so it's unreasonable to expect them to make that all widely available. And with respect, there are literally tens of thousands (if not more) of shots that are analysed to produce these xG numbers, precisely because it's an advancement on what the eye tells one person watching one team. It's factual that Clark has failed to save that number of shots that a goalkeeper at this level (it extends beyond Premiership to other leagues of similar standing) would normally save. There is nothing spurious about it. Like everything, some of these advanced parameters are more interesting/useful/reliable than others; this one is fairly definitive IMO. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Marly Posted October 4, 2019 Share Posted October 4, 2019 They pay for the raw data, so it's unreasonable to expect them to make that all widely available. And with respect, there are literally tens of thousands (if not more) of shots that are analysed to produce these xG numbers, precisely because it's an advancement on what the eye tells one person watching one team. It's factual that Clark has failed to save that number of shots that a goalkeeper at this level (it extends beyond Premiership to other leagues of similar standing) would normally save. There is nothing spurious about it. Like everything, some of these advanced parameters are more interesting/useful/reliable than others; this one is fairly definitive IMO. You can prove anything with statistics. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radford Posted October 4, 2019 Share Posted October 4, 2019 Can you prove Clark is having a good season? I understand the scepticism of something new but a lot of research goes into this stuff. If x number of goalkeepers save a type of shot from an area (and it takes into account number of defenders in the way etc...) and Clark doesn’t then you can't really dress it up than what it is. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomGuy. Posted October 4, 2019 Share Posted October 4, 2019 (edited) 12 minutes ago, Radford said: Can you prove Clark is having a good season? I understand the scepticism of something new but a lot of research goes into this stuff. If x number of goalkeepers save a type of shot from an area (and it takes into account number of defenders in the way etc...) and Clark doesn’t then you can't really dress it up than what it is. I'm absolutely convinced you used to slate me for all this chat, so I'm now convinced you're just ripping the pish here. Unless Sadford has evolved into a mental breakdown stage. Madford Edited October 4, 2019 by RandomGuy. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyle Posted October 4, 2019 Author Share Posted October 4, 2019 Liam Gordon out for 8 weeks. Much better news than what we seemed to be fearing. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tree house tam Posted October 4, 2019 Share Posted October 4, 2019 3 minutes ago, RandomGuy. said: I'm absolutely convinced you used to slate me for all this chat, so I'm now convinced you're just ripping the pish here. Unless Sadford has evolved into a mental breakdown stage. Madford Stage 3. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radford Posted October 4, 2019 Share Posted October 4, 2019 2 minutes ago, RandomGuy. said: I'm absolutely convinced you used to slate me for all this chat, so I'm now convinced you're just ripping the pish here. As I said above, I like some of it, not other bits. I think in terms of finishing ability, saving ability etc... it's pretty useful and revealing. I don't like the stuff that goes into third assists and the like. On the fence with the pass maps, think they are very game dependent. Not sure they show us much for a Saints game away at Celtic for example. Fair, no? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valentino Bolognese Posted October 4, 2019 Share Posted October 4, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, Radford said: They pay for the raw data, so it's unreasonable to expect them to make that all widely available. And with respect, there are literally tens of thousands (if not more) of shots that are analysed to produce these xG numbers, precisely because it's an advancement on what the eye tells one person watching one team. It's factual that Clark has failed to save that number of shots that a goalkeeper at this level (it extends beyond Premiership to other leagues of similar standing) would normally save. There is nothing spurious about it. Like everything, some of these advanced parameters are more interesting/useful/reliable than others; this one is fairly definitive IMO. And with equal respect, bookies have teams of analysts working on xG an even they regard it as only directionally accurate over a very large sample universe. As they have markets on such a huge volume of games they can deal with the variance and price it in. Looking at a single player over seven games is far too low a base and not what the xG measure is intended for. So I'm afraid that for this purpose, that method is categorically spurious. As with all large-sample stats it's good in generality but useless for specifics, and I'd imagine there are massive error margins. That's why I was laughing at their 3 decimal places, it's a classic red flag for dodgy numbers on such a tiny sample size. Edit: I'm willing to accept that I don't like these numbers because there is a bit of me not liking what they are saying. There probably is a degree of robustness to them in that if thse guys are any good at modelling they will have done a lot of validation on historical data so that they have reasonable confidence. However it they don't publish what their confidence is, and thier methodology, it's hard to take it seriously. Maybe there's a peer-reviewd paper somewhere. Edited October 4, 2019 by Valentino Bolognese 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valentino Bolognese Posted October 4, 2019 Share Posted October 4, 2019 37 minutes ago, Radford said: As I said above, I like some of it, not other bits. I think in terms of finishing ability, saving ability etc... it's pretty useful and revealing. I don't like the stuff that goes into third assists and the like. On the fence with the pass maps, think they are very game dependent. Not sure they show us much for a Saints game away at Celtic for example. Fair, no? Pass maps have the advantage of being based on actual observed events rather than an extrapolation of a propensity model. I agree however that I don't know how much use they might be in informing playing, coaching or managing decisions. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ro Sham Bo Posted October 4, 2019 Share Posted October 4, 2019 Excuse the intrusion, but some of you might like to know that Steven Anderson has already won his first League 1 player of the month award. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintDougie Posted October 4, 2019 Share Posted October 4, 2019 35 minutes ago, Ro Sham Bo said: Excuse the intrusion, but some of you might like to know that Steven Anderson has already won his first League 1 player of the month award. No surprise at all, far too good for League one. Unfortunately his Premiership days are behind him, should be finishing his career as a solid Championship player, and by current league standings he's on course to do that next season. Just depends with which club though! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Costanza Posted October 4, 2019 Share Posted October 4, 2019 Zander Clark isn’t having a good season, much like everyone else. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PauloPerth Posted October 4, 2019 Share Posted October 4, 2019 Agree. Don't know enough about this specific set of stats to use it or otherwise, but I think Zander would benefit from time out of the team. It can take a player out the spotlight, let them work on things away from any pressure, and come back fresher, more confident, and with a hunger to prove themself again. I'd pick Parish for this weekend, though I can't see Tommy doing so. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Saintee Posted October 4, 2019 Share Posted October 4, 2019 Clark is bang average. A taller Bert Tucuth. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tree house tam Posted October 4, 2019 Share Posted October 4, 2019 Oaft. Wonder who's next to be taken out the spotlight, Captain Marvel? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.