Jump to content

7rew

Members
  • Content Count

    2,269
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by 7rew


  1. Nigel, I looked at doing that at one point.

    In terms of similar sized clubs I went for 50%-150% stadium capacity. You need to go that wide to get both Bournemouth and Sunderland.

    There are 50 such clubs, with only 7 or so bigger. Which is what put me off doing more in-depth work.

    On the other hand there are more of those below us than above us.

  2. Why do we sign injury prone players?

    Because, like Anthony Pilkington, sometimes they don''t stay injury prone with an environment change and you get a player cheaper than they are worth. It is a question of risk/reward, both of which can be higher with a poor injury record.

    Also Vadis wasn''t injury prone until he got here, he just got a really bad injury playing for us early on and never really recovered. Even not previously injury prone players can become that way.

  3. "I''m sure someone will use those stats to prove what an injury liability he will undoubtedly become... "

    I''ll try:

    The presence of inverted commas around the "injuries" shows that they are not actually medical injuries. So, we''ve signed a player so disinterested he pulls a sickie the equivalent of every of month!

    Now, where''s the tongue in cheek emoji when you need it?


  4. The problem people have is that quite recently we have had a sustained period of above expectation results using high variance tactics, and those happen to be more exciting for the crowd.

    Football is a game of luck, since there are enough things you can''t control involved. However you can influence the expected goal difference in a match (I expect to win by 1 or lose by 2) and the variance of that number (but it could be 1 either side of that or it''ll be between -3 and +5).

    When you are likely to score less than the opposition then you want a high variance to help get wins, when you are likely to score more than the opposition, then low variance is your friend. Low variance can also help avoid big defeats when it is tight. The key part is the number of matches that at our above 0 goal difference, since that gets you points. Broadly speaking, the more goals in a match, the higher the variance is.

    Under Lambert in the premier league, we were a couple of goals worse than other teams, so we needed high variance, ultra attacking football to get wins, and we ended at the top end of where we reasonably could be.

    In Hughton''s first season, we were better and not behind a lot of teams. So we benefited from lower variance, tighter tactics. We ended up at the high end of where we could reasonably be. The next season was basically the same tactics but was not as lucky, we probably were below our average position, but not stupidly so.

    Alex Neil has tried both. He tried both in the prem last season, being put of the high variance stuff by Newcastle. The low varience stuff worked a bit after that, but mostly we weren''t close enough to other teams to get enough wins with it.

    This season, we are better than other teams, so I expect to see us playing low variance football going for a between 1-3 goal win, rather than all out attack to possibly get a 5 goal win at the risk of a 1 goal loss.

    With these tactics the question is do you feel lucky punk?

    Frankly it always is.


  5. The point about Villa not being a six pointer is that we don''t gain anything from losing to Spurs and beating Villa compared to beating Spurs and losing to Villa. We get three points in both cases.

    Given that we have had reasonable success when the opposition are expected to dominate recently, but failed when we are expected to ourselves, I''m not entirely sure Spurs away isn''t better suited to us at the moment than Villa at home! Given that we should put out the best team in both matches, although that may well not be the same team each time.


  6. [quote user="Gainer the Gopher"]He played defense when the defense sucked. Don''t blame him.

    Riiiiiiight.[/quote]

    Yes, Doherty played in a defence that sucked. Adam Drury played in the same defence.

    Neither of them either were Jon Otsemobor or signed him, or picked him.

    Neither of them are why that defence sucked. Not even close to why.
×
×
  • Create New...