Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Indy_Bones

Judgment on Ratio

Recommended Posts

For

a long time I''ve hated the base goal to game ratio that gets trotted

out all the time as a yardstick for a players ability (goalscoring at

least), and the reason is that it doesn''t take into account the

amount of actual time the player has had in each game. You could see

a player with a 1 in 38 goal ratio and think he''s the biggest pile o''

crap on the planet, but if you then see that he''s had a single minute

in each game, then you realise it''s a far different story.

Therefore

I use an adjusted ratio based on minutes played, which can then be

converted into full games to give an approximation of their

theoretical ratio. This is by no means an exact science, it''s just

basic number crunching, but the picture you get can be far more

representative than the normal method.

I

applied this formula recently on here as part of the Vaughan thread

to demonstrate that his record is much better than the basic goal to

game ratio would suggest, and following other comments on the

Mackail-Smith thread, I decided that just out of interest I''d run the

stats for the Prem''s strikers and midfielders this season to see what

comes out - the results are very interesting in places.

Take

for example Van Persie vs Darren Bent:

RVP

played for a total of 1770 minutes compared to Bent''s 3142

RVP

scored 18 in 25 games to Bent''s 17 in 35, giving a goal ratio of 1.39

for RVP vs 2.06 for Bent.

Taking

this theoretically, we could then suggest that if we took this result

over a full season, then RVP would get 27 goals to Bent''s 18.

Using

the adjusted ratio however we get RVP with 1.09 vs Bent on 2.05 (note the similarlity here to previous goal ratio due to Bent playing virtually a full season), which gives RVP on 35 to Bent on 19 - nearly 7

goals more than on the base game ratio.

Similarly

look at Elmander vs Fletcher:

Elmander

played 3095 mins to Fletcher''s 1395

Elmander

scored 10 in 36 to Fletcher''s 10 in 27, giving a goal ratio of 3.6

for Elmander vs 2.7 for Fletcher

Over

the season we see Elmander ending on 10 goals to Fletcher''s 14

Using

the adjusted ratio we get Elmander with 3.44 vs 1.55 for Fletcher, giving Elmander 11 and Fletcher 25 - a 14

goal difference this time!

Another good example is Sammon at Wigan, a base goal ratio of 1 in 6, but using the adjusted method you get 2.4...

The

logic behind this argument is simple, a player who can do more with

less time on the pitch is theoretically better than the guy who gets

the same results with more time - quality over quantity.

Now

let''s look at the top 20 (includes strikers and midfielders):

Player                    Mins Played    Goals Scored    Total Games (based on mins played)    Adjusted GTG Ratio    Theoretical Goals

Blake                            47                    1                                  0.5                                             0.52                            73Klasnic                         339                  4                                   3.8                                             0.94                            40Van Persie                   1770                18                               19.7                                            1.09                            35Berbatov                      2208                21                                24.5                                            1.17                            33Hernandez                   1491                13                               16.6                                            1.27                            30Owen                           238                  2                                  2.6                                              1.32                            29Tevez                            2513                21                                27.9                                            1.33                            29Best                              742                  6                                  8.2                                              1.37                            28Vela                              386                  3                                  4.3                                              1.43                            27Harewood                     661                 5                                   7.3                                             1.47                            26Ba                                 933                  7                                 10.4                                             1.48                           26Tchoyi                           830                  6                                   9.2                                             1.54                            25Fletcher                         1395               10                                15.5                                             1.55                            25Sturridge                       1131                8                                  12.6                                             1.57                           24Zamora                         757                  5                                   8.4                                              1.68                            23Kalou                            1570               10                                 17.4                                             1.74                            22Pavlyuchenko                1589               10                                 17.7                                             1.77                            22Carroll                           2071               13                                 23.0                                             1.77                            21Beckford                       1327                8                                  14.7                                              1.84                           21Ben Arfa                        168                  1                                  1.9                                               1.87                            20Van der Vaart                 2222               13                                 24.7                                              1.9                             20Odemwingie                   2680               15                                 29.8                                              1.99                           19

(apols for the poor alignment, cba to mess with it)

Please

note that Robbie Blake with only 47 mins played in a single game

leads to a skewed result however you look at it.

Also, despite theory, I can''t see many ''lesser'' players hitting 25+ goals, although I do feel that the logic is still fairly sound.

It

makes we wonder if should be looking at younger players like Vela and

Best, who have their best to come (no pun intended), wouldn''t cost

stupid amounts, and are likely to relish the chance of regular games

at this level. Damn shame that players like Sturridge and Macheda

(2.44 ratio) aren''t possible options as well...

On

a side note it also shows what an incredible bargain Man Utd got in

Hernandez for 6 mil...

Thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Interesting, but maybe put a minimum number of minutes played to get a better idea of who really has done well. Say something around 360 minutes (4 games worth). You can''t really read a lot in to someone who hasn''t played much of the season at all ,even if they have scored a couple of goals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Interesting. Generally speaking, it''s difficult to really assess players on goals alone, as this doesn''t tell you how many misses, assists, tackles from the front, mistakes they have caused in opposition boxes, corners won at key times of the game, etc, etc. I think the point I''m making is that unless you watch/scout players regularly, you can''t really tell what they have to offer and you can''t assess players by one statistic, which is a bigger floor in people''s arguments - even though I note strikers are expected to score goals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
as well as minutes the state of the game is key; we all know players who when starting cant score that crucial break through goal but can score the second or third. So coming on as a sub is easier when the lead is there/secure and more inspired when level or behind.

The whole assists passing bit is where the opta stats arise; but as with any stat, whether a weighted mix, goal/game or goal/min all have a merits as well as disadvantages - its teh same with any stat - a number is meaningless without a context.

The reason goal/game is popular is that its easy to calculate and understand.... Not perfect but it works on a core level for most fans

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stats are wonderful things but can be very misleading, especially assists.

Is it an assist if a cross falls behind the striker who miraculously gets in an overhead kick to score?

But not an assist if a cross leaves the striker with a tap in from two yards which he cocks up?

This is why stats are used only to reinforce opinions of players not to be the ''be all and end all'' of a player.

I was told many years ago by my old sports master  that you could be the best player on the pitch but never touch the ball. That would throw the stats out of the window!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Goals scored need to be weighted:

1: Is it a substitute that comes on for the last 10 minutes..... ie: it is easier for him to score as he is fresh against tired defenders

2: Is he playing in a usually attacking team..... easier to score

3: Is he playing in a usually defensive team.... harder to score

4: Is he playing against a usually attacking team.... easier to score

5: Is he playing against a usually defensive team.... harder to score 

5: Is it from a penalty..... very easier to score

6: Is the goal from open play.... harder to score

7: Is the goal from a set piece... easier to score

8: How hard was the goal to score..... ie: a tap in from one yard is far easier than a volley from 30 yards, a diving header, or where a player has dribbled 50 yards to score beating 5 players on the way.  

9: Perhaps also where a player provides an unselfish assist where he could have scored himself should also receive a weighting such as half a goal.

10: Goals should also be weighted according to whether they are in a Cup competition(ie are the teams from the same division) or which League they are scored in.  

So, of course just using goals scored is misleading, and this is why I also like to analyse how goals are scored before passing a proper opinion.  I would also award a player extra points for versatility, as a goalscorer that can score with all attributes (head, left foot, right foot, volleys, dribbles, from short and long distance) is a far more complete player than one that only ever scores with just his right foot with a first touch from 2 yards. Number of bad misses as a ratio to goals scored of course should also be taken into account.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Some fair points made, and I fully agree that you can only really judge a player if you''ve regularly seen them play - especially against opponents of differing quality e.g. Man Utd one week, West Ham the next...The point I was trying to make however is that without this sort of view, we can only really make a judgment based on the stats, and that the goal to game ratio stat is often misleading.I would say that without any form of in-depth analysis, this method provides arguably the best yardstick for judging an attackers goalscoring ability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I reckon that you should probably discount players from the chart until they have either 1000 mins playing time or 10 goals. That should remove a lot of the statistical anomolies. Those discounted players could be shown in a seperate chart to show achievement but without sufficient data to be rated as actual ratings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...