Why are our "Stats Team" against signing a Veteran?

[Wearethewhites]

After mentioning yesterday about our desire to only sign short, attacking players, that can't score for toffee, and being eaten alive about Fletchers height  1500.gif thought I'd try to appose this question more civilly to the forum, as I feel it needs discussing.

My point yesterday wasn't about Fletchers height, it was more about him needing one opportunity and scoring one goal when it counted, whilst I watched all of our, ok, 'tongue in cheek' short attacking players huff and puff and miss opportunity after opportunity.   

Coming back to Fletcher, and the likes ( lets say Murray of Brighton ) why are the Stats Team so against signing a veteran striker like this, that can bag you 15-20+ goals a season in this division.

Granted, no sell on value, but, it you were to go up, you release that player, but the gains are massive.

For me, and I'm not knocking the guy, but, we've just spent 9M Euros on someone who is 28 next birthday, has scored 13 in 38 for Braga, yet won't touch a Fletcher ( Free ) type Murray striker would cost you, not a lot.

Was the difference for me yesterday, and, a Club that plays a very similar system, also thinks so.     

[fulhamben]

Yes sorry about that, too many beers, and sick of our poor form. I'm not even going to try and guess what goes through the stats guys thought process on potential signings. But we now know, it's not financial constraints. Reckon we might have one more forward signing lined up, so maybe, just maybe we will get somone of that ilk

[Wearethewhites]

Firstly, this stuff about not signing players over 28 is currently just unconfirmed press speculation as far as I'm aware.

Secondly, even in the relevant articles it's only been described as a soft target, not a red line, i.e. we will still sign players over 28 if they're cheap proportionate to their ability.

Thirdly, to the extent any such rule does exist, I see no reason to believe it would be driven by "stats team" or Kline. As you say It's a commercial decision based on old players generally having less sell on potential, so what's that got to do with Kline's role?

So if you want to make a case for signing Fletcher then of course you can, he's a good player, but don't present it as a dig at Kline or the some alleged rule about over 28s.

Statto, in all due respect, I admire your input, but, your overall way of delivering things in this forum, is a tad disrespectful, or a bit OTT.

Not having a dig, but this isn't the first time we've rubbed shoulders, and most likely won't be the last.

No one is is having a go at anyone, or accusing anyone, but every single one of your posts/replies, persistently applies so.

This is a footballing forum, a place for open opinions and discussions about football, not a place to point the finger and constantly accuse, or tell people they're wrong. 

By all means, have your say, but maybe not end everything you type in such an aggressive, almighty way.

[Woolly Mammoth]

There's me thinking the idea of bringing experienced players over the grand old age of 28, is to use that experience to help lift us into the Top Two, and yet there are people talking about their diminishing worth in the transfer market.
Well either I have woken up in a lunatic asylum, or I have only got to ask some people where cloud cuckoo land is , cause apparently that's where they live.
All I hear is stats this stats that, well look at our stats yesterday and we still lost at home.
We are being held back by imbaciles who have never kicked a Football in anger, making football decisions based on stats.
Well whilst we are run in the background by these individuals, where football is not in their hearts, this club will never ever reach the Premier League.
All I hear is excuses from the deluded saying give it time, players need time to gel.
That is a load of cobblers.
Don't buy players that need time to settle, their character is floored if they need time. The stats don't tell you that.
We should be signing players that make an impact, from the first whistle, too many milky players wanting a comfort blanket, instead of rolling up their pampered sleeves, no Alice Bands or Gloves should we worn by these pampered over paid pets. 
For a start they should have had their targets lined up in 2016, and once again we have stuttered on the pitch and off it.
Why you may ask, well it's bloody obvious.
The preseason was a damp squib, poor preparation, poor organisation and lack of fitness culminated in our down fall yesterday, why were SW fitter than us etc, why did they win most high balls in the air.
We are easily read now.
What should have been a series of opening games to remember. Have been thwarted by The  stats merchants not moving away from their obsession with figures.
Poor preperation and dragging their feet, that is why we will stutter along, and when we finish in no mans land in May. We will then proceed to lose our prize assets on and off the pitch.
One step forward and two steps back, no vision no foresight, and their being praised for their shortcomings by the merchants of mediocrity, and you wonder why Rome burns.

[YankeeJim]

To the original question:
Berbatov, the Greek, Ross, Martin. Other than some highlight shots, not much going on there. We were better last year when Martin was out of the line up.

Our system depends on all players pulling their load. None of the aforementioned had any clue what tracking back meant.  We simply can't afford a luxury player.
Maybe that is why we haven't added to that list.

[Wearethewhites]

your overall way of delivering things in this forum, is a tad disrespectful

I give my opinion in English and try to avoid insults, foul language etc. Unlike you on the MAF thread the other day. So When you've mastered that then you can lecture me. I see you've already had a go at someone else on the Aluko thread Today

Because you were talking absolute toilet about Mafs finances, and I told you so. To be honest, most of your statistical approaches are. I gave an opinion in the Aluko thread, didn't have a go at any one, so once again, and as per usual, you're going OTT with your assumptions, sorry.

[westcliff white]

Brighton were said to want £10,000,000 + to consider offers for Murray, so that's garden not a lot

[Wearethewhites]

Brighton were said to want £10,000,000 + to consider offers for Murray, so that's garden not a lot

I can't see that. I know there's a 'price' to lock down a player, but Murray is 34 in September, and won't get a sniff in the Brighton side as the season progresses. He'll leave Brighton in January, and not for a lot of money I reckon.

[..FOF..]

As a Data Company, it is in their interest to sign younger players.

After they mined the results, the data is still valuable since the player could still improve.

The data from older player may be stale because the numbers are most likely will be stagnant or on the way down.

As a whole, the data from a batch of younger players may be more accurate too to use it to predict future buys.

They can also sell this data to others because usually the telltale sign of a player who can improve a certain skillset is minute and hidden and only the speed of a computer can predict it with higher accuracy.

Speed in a way of going through thousands of data from previous players and then placing it against our current players to check for accuracy or the need to tune it.

I am taking courses in Machine Learning, Artificial Intelligence and Deep Learning.... not an expert but those are just my views :)

[Andy S]

Usually 28 plus players are looking for their last big pay day where ever it is. Football is a young mans game and players are less likely to be carrying injuries. I think the idea of signing good young players is a good one

[Mince n Tatties]

Usually 28 plus players are looking for their last big pay day where ever it is. Football is a young mans game and players are less likely to be carrying injuries. I think the idea of signing good young players is a good one

So do I,but nothing wrong with a couple of old heads keeping the kiddies in check.

[westcliff white]

Brighton were said to want £10,000,000 + to consider offers for Murray, so that's garden not a lot

I can't see that. I know there's a 'price' to lock down a player, but Murray is 34 in September, and won't get a sniff in the Brighton side as the season progresses. He'll leave Brighton in January, and not for a lot of money I reckon.

thats what I heard, seemed astronoical to me bang average for the prem decent even at his age for the championship

[MJG]

Firstly, this stuff about not signing players over 28 is currently just unconfirmed press speculation as far as I'm aware.

Secondly, even in the relevant articles it's only been described as a soft target, not a red line, i.e. we will still sign players over 28 if they're cheap proportionate to their ability.

Thirdly, to the extent any such rule does exist, I see no reason to believe it would be driven by "stats team" or Kline. As you say It's a commercial decision based on old players generally having less sell on potential, so what's that got to do with Kline's role?

This is exactly how I read it and have been told it.

Lessons have been learnt by the Jol years and also the loss of Dembele and Hyndman especially.

Lets take Parker for example. 32 when he signed on a 3year contract at a conservative estimate of £40K a week. his transfer fee and wages over the 4 years he was actually here cost the club in the region of £11-12M. And he walked away retired and othyers have walked away for free. To be sustainable we cant keep doing that.

Its clear looking at the contracts we are giving to new signings that they are trying make sure when they do leave we get money (too many frees in last 7 years) and also that because of the age range and the way things are accounted for it will help our ongoing finances.

Many talk about no plan(either on and off the pitch) but if you step back and put away your distrust (or worse) against individuals at the club you can see there clearly is one.
Now you might not like it, but I dont believe you can deny there is one.

[masterhaynes]

'As a Data Company, it is in their interest to sign younger players.After they mined the results, the data is still valuable since the player could still improve.The data from older player may be stale because the numbers are most likely will be stagnant or on the way down'.

Spot on FOF, go to top of your class 082.gif

Strategy of all companies selling and mining data is to sell the same data to as many people as possible at highest price by offering early insights using their tools, whether in mining , retail or entertainment sectors. Can you imagine many takers for data on an old oil field past its best , retail sales or audience data from 5 years ago? there will be some but it wouldn't command a high price as the data is well known and readily available from several sources and is already evidence backed.I don't suppose stats man came inti equation for Neymar or any other  big transfers.

In fact mining research and exploration companies increase price of reports after each sale as companies need to purchase the same report and data to keep on a level playing field with their competitors.

[Woolly Mammoth]

Usually 28 plus players are looking for their last big pay day where ever it is. Football is a young mans game and players are less likely to be carrying injuries. I think the idea of signing good young players is a good one

Your absolutely right there mince. A lot of players 28 + are invaluable, and are as fit as a fiddle, cause they have the right attitude, age is just a number, you get fit 30 year olds with the right attitude, and unfit 20 year olds with the wrong attitude.
It's Cobblers to say your past it when you are over 28.
What a load of rot is spoken today.
Fulham will not get promoted relying on 22 year olds and a non footballing stat boy.

So do I,but nothing wrong with a couple of old heads keeping the kiddies in check.

[masterhaynes]

Strategy of all companies selling and mining data is to sell the same data to as many people as possible at highest price by offering early insights using their tools, whether in mining , retail or entertainment sectors. Can you imagine many takers for data on an old oil field past its best , retail sales or audience data from 5 years ago? there will be some but it wouldn't command a high price as the data is well known and readily available from several sources and is already evidence backed.

I should say despite my username  I'm no expert in this area (I don't want wearethewhites calling me "almighty" again) but we're not a "company selling and mining data", are we? Surely we're just a customer in that context. Are we allowed to sell on the data later, under the terms of our contract with Opta or whomever we get it from? Can't see it myself. In any case I also don't see why 5-year old data on a 25-year-old would be any more useful than 5-year-old data on a 35-year-old, when it's just as out of date in both scenarios. So again I really can't see any rule on over 28s having anything to do with stats.

By we I assume you mean Fulham FC but Kline and Khan jnr have their own company which is trying to create and sell a data bank and more importantly for them an Analysis tool that they can sell/Licence using FFC to prototype and use any success as evidence. Statistically speaking it should be in the 60% + area for confirmed success to have any credibility to engage other Football/NFL clubs to licence it and hope the teams follow the Mining/exploration model with everyone buying it as insurance against other teams gaining an upper hand. Good strategy if you can get it to work but managers like Warnock and McCarthy to name a few just keep identifying and buying players cheap using their own knowledge and contacts with regular success which undermines value of statistics as a must have.
As for data you have to have a cut off age somewhere, at 25 a player probably has a couple of contracts left on him and possible a higher resale value so identifying them before anyone else knows about him makes the information valuable.

[..FOF..]

Google bought a London based Artificial Intelligence startup for 400million

http://uk.businessinsider.com/googles-400-million-acquisition-of-deepmind-is-looking-good-2016-7/?IR=T

Data mining is big business.

[bill taylors apprentice]

Firstly, this stuff about not signing players over 28 is currently just unconfirmed press speculation as far as I'm aware.

Secondly, even in the relevant articles it's only been described as a soft target, not a red line, i.e. we will still sign players over 28 if they're cheap proportionate to their ability.

Thirdly, to the extent any such rule does exist, I see no reason to believe it would be driven by "stats team" or Kline. As you say It's a commercial decision based on old players generally having less sell on potential, so what's that got to do with Kline's role?

This is exactly how I read it and have been told it.

Lessons have been learnt by the Jol years and also the loss of Dembele and Hyndman especially.

Lets take Parker for example. 32 when he signed on a 3year contract at a conservative estimate of £40K a week. his transfer fee and wages over the 4 years he was actually here cost the club in the region of £11-12M. And he walked away retired and othyers have walked away for free. To be sustainable we cant keep doing that.

Its clear looking at the contracts we are giving to new signings that they are trying make sure when they do leave we get money (too many frees in last 7 years) and also that because of the age range and the way things are accounted for it will help our ongoing finances.

Many talk about no plan(either on and off the pitch) but if you step back and put away your distrust (or worse) against individuals at the club you can see there clearly is one.
Now you might not like it, but I dont believe you can deny there is one.

IMO these two posts say it all!

[King_Crud]

What the stats don't show is how development was assisted by the older heads around them. Even the Man U "kids" team had some older players to provide experience in the dressing room, you can't put that into numbers

[toshes mate]

As a Data Company, it is in their interest to sign younger players.

Good luck on the courses but don't get too carried away with AI.

I most certainly understand the comments about younger players and accuracy of data, especially if there is concurrency of input which leads to more reliability and accuracy but I would be truly surprised if a computer can spot subtlety in data at all.  Computers can point to a significant but small statistical difference as a potential error or anomaly of note, but subtlety is much, much more than that.  Given that the data input is most likely tick boxed down into manageable chunks and those feeding in the data are humans who don't always get it right then there are certain things that are unreliable as anything other than a crude guide.   You can certainly measure facts  and some trends but computers are notorious at getting output wrong because the input is wrong.   Another human being can see you may be slightly off colour or out of sorts when a computer would standstill completely transfixed by the question asked.   I am all for furthering the uses of machines but if we look, for example, at the data produced to back global warming and climate change we now know that a lot of it is rubbish and the warming trend is so small at the moment that the year on year difference is smaller than the margin of error allowed for in the sophisticated measuring equipment.   But that doesn't stop the computer models from churning out rubbish.   

I think we need to be very careful when trying to understand what computers are really useful for.