A New Look at the Statistics Saga

[Chutney]

At the end of the day we can have an argument about analytics forever, the fact remains they are useful when used correctly.

The fact also remains that the people behind our use of them are the owners son and his mate from uni.

[westcliff white]

I read it that SJ is the one who has final say in that if the manager doesnt want him then he doesnt come, that was the pleasing factor in the story. If I am wrong then fine but thats how I read the article.

I also took it to read that SJ, Stats dept, Scouts etc all recommend but they need to have the approval of analytics and SJ to get signed.

I would hope though that if SJ was adament he wanted a plyer regardless of stats that there would be some cases where he would get his way. I fnot we will have trouble replacing him with any manager / head coach going forward

[MJG]

That's just not how the system works as I have explained elsewhere. Lots of different areas/groups/people put players forward to be assessed. It does not just come from the analytics department.

MJG, question for you since you seem to have a bit of extra contextual info.

To me it's absolutely clear stats must play some part in player selection in this day and age, but equally clear that probably shouldn't be entrusted to the chairman's son's mate, an early 30s law grad with no football experience. Several other posters have echoed that sentiment on this thread.

But just parking those issues for now, my question for you (or anyone else who might know) is, are you aware of any other club giving a stats man a power of veto (ie, not just the ability to advise, but actually to overrule) as we have under the "two ticks" system?

Lets be clear he has a veto in that if he puts an X in the box that's right player does not sign.
Just as scouting reports can put an X in the box to cancel out a tick in the other box and the player would not sign.
And just as explained by Khan, Jokaonvic wont agree to players he doesn't want, so he has that veto as well.

Clubs are very secretive about how all these processes work. Southampton use a similar process but as to two ticks I just do not know.

Having been to an event where these stats and systems were discussed there is no one system out there. Yes they get their match data from the usual suspects (opta etc) along with other information they take from other sources. They then come up with their own ways of interpreting the data.

The real bug that everyone has its its Khan son and his company and while I wish people could step away and look at it coldly, they cant.
IF it was totally independent and run by 'John Smith and Co' then while fans might still not be keen on it, there would possibly be less hatred...and that's what it is...of it. This whole thing is magnified by Khans sons company being involved. And lets be honest...because we are not top of the league or doing well atm.

[Keynsham]

This is so dull.

Surely it's not much different in the way it is set up than with a scout coming to the manager having seen a player and the manager saying yes he wants him, or no he doesn't. If the stats department come up with a player by using numbers, the manager retains the same power of veto.

To run a statistical analysis of the player before the manager proceeds with the approach following a scouting find just adds another check that he is the right type of player.

As long as the manager has the final say, I honestly cannot see why so many have their knickers in a twist about this.  If the statistician were making the signings then there would be cause for huge, huge concern obviously. But I simply don't see that as the case.

[Chutney]

This is so dull.

Surely it's not much different in the way it is set up than a scout coming to the manager having seen a player and the manager saying yes he wants him, or no he doesn't. If the stats department come up with a player by using numbers, the manager retains the power of veto.

To run a statistical analysis of the player before the manager proceeds with the approach just adds another check that he is the right type of player.

As long as the manager has the final say, I honestly cannot see why so many have their knickers in a twist about this.  If the statistician were making the signings then there would be cause for huge, huge concern obviously. But I simply don't see that as the case.

If Jokanovic is to be given the task of getting us promoted, and he says he wants a player, the stats team can veto it. Which is crazy, as it will be jokanovic who gets the blame/sacked if we fail, not the stats team.


If Jokanovic wants a player, that he feels will improve us, regardless of the stats teams input, he should get him (funds allowing).

[Keynsham]

But why?

If that player fails a medical and doesn't sign it's seemingly accepted. Is that the phyiso, or Doctors fault that the player hasn't made the grade?  The manager could potentially be hired or fired based on the results of that too.

This is surely just another method of ensuring that duds aren't signed.

Considering nobody knows anything about how these analytics are interpreted, or applied this whole ongoing drone of misery seems ridiculous.

[Chutney]

But why?

If that player fails a medical and doesn't sign it's seemingly accepted. Is that the phyiso, or Doctors fault that the player hasn't made the grade?  The manager could potentially be hired or fired based on the results of that too.

This is surely just another method of ensuring that duds aren't signed.

Considering nobody knows anything about how these analytics are interpreted, or applied this whole ongoing drone of misery seems ridiculous.

An injury is pretty black and white, either a player is fit or not. Stats are not, there are other variables, quality of league, quality of opponent etc...

All we can do is judge the methods used on the quality of player they bring in, and so far we have signed a load of rubbish window after window.

[Keynsham]

An injured player is obvious, but I'm fairly certain that they don't employ a doctor simply to ascertain that a player has a limp. 

How do we know that the players that have been bought over the past few years haven't been found by the scouting network or the manager and just signed off by the use of the analytics? So yes, collectively all three parties may well have failed in the recent past (although that remains to be seen this season), but that can't be laid 100% at anybody's door, which it seems that a lot of people are desperate to do.

[toshes mate]

There are plenty of in-depth, detailed stats available for football in the UK.  But on the basis of the evidence we don't seem to be using them very intelligently.  Plus, no stats in the world can compensate for selling your two top goalscorers, worth 40 between them, and not spending a dime on buying replacement striker (Martin's is a loan fee). That is either dumb or very misguided cost control by the owner.

There is a mine (or should I write minefield) of information in every bunch of statistics.  For starters the principles of GIGO (garbage in , garbage out) rule the roost.  Then there is the problem of the data entry slaves whose task is to endlessly update information without losing touch with reality.  Then there is the problem of definitions (so clearly and deftly written up by the OP) as in do we define near misses rather than misses when talking about chances and, if so, how finely tuned do we make the concept.  And then there is passing.  Does a scuffed shot which ends up as a through ball to another striker count as an assist?   Now the statisticians will tell you that through the wonders of calculus we have distribution curves that iron out the exceptions, exceptions that we once wisely said 'prove the rule'.  And at the every end of the statistical illusion we have the interpreter who says that because there were more murders per head of population in 'X' than 'Y' then the latter is the safer place to live (hint: there was only ever one person who lived in 'X' and they're dead). 

I've always believed that sport must be pretty darned boring to need to be supported by a plethora of stats to exist in everyday conversation.  I'll not list the culprits here but if your team is consistently in the top ten of whatever league then that is not the definition of competition, and I guess statistics are utilised to make it seem more interesting.  And so for me statistics are a tool but they need much better handling than anything I have seen in my lifetime - trust your senses when watching football and don't allow your emotions to get in the way of what you see.   Fulham have been playing much better this season than last and that is down to good coaching and hard work.  The results will come as statistically speaking they always do.

[Chutney]

An injured player is obvious, but I'm fairly certain that they don't employ a doctor simply to ascertain that a player has a limp. 

How do we know that the players that have been bought over the past few years haven't been found by the scouting network or the manager and just signed off by the use of the analytics? So yes, collectively all three parties may well have failed in the recent past (although that remains to be seen this season), but that can't be laid 100% at anybody's door, which it seems that a lot of people are desperate to do.

I do see where you are coming from, but at the end of the day, with all this involvement in the recruitment from other parties, it is the manager who will be 100% blamed when results don't go right, which we've already seen happening.

He hasn't been allowed to sign players he said he wanted, he made that clear pre-season, but it is him who will be blamed if we perform poorly.

[Nero]

The only problem I have with the stats based side of it is, are we looking at the right stats, Kline and Tony Khan know nothing about football. So are we looking at the right info and sometimes I fell you need to give the manager a wild card or two at the end of the day its his job on the line not the stats geek. If you believe the stats side of it is going to make money go get the chap who set up the Southampton system wages shouldn't be an issue as he should make back what you pay him at least 5 times or give him a percentage of any profits for future sales from players his system brings in

[Keynsham]

An injured player is obvious, but I'm fairly certain that they don't employ a doctor simply to ascertain that a player has a limp. 

How do we know that the players that have been bought over the past few years haven't been found by the scouting network or the manager and just signed off by the use of the analytics? So yes, collectively all three parties may well have failed in the recent past (although that remains to be seen this season), but that can't be laid 100% at anybody's door, which it seems that a lot of people are desperate to do.

I do see where you are coming from, but at the end of the day, with all this involvement in the recruitment from other parties, it is the manager who will be 100% blamed when results don't go right, which we've already seen happening.

He hasn't been allowed to sign players he said he wanted, he made that clear pre-season, but it is him who will be blamed if we perform poorly.

I hear you too, I guess that there has to be some form of happy medium somewhere and it's a case of finding that.

Somehow!

[beijing ben]

Are the players that pass the 'stats test' likely to want to join us? Do the stats then translate to wages offered?

It must be very frustrating for any manager in Slav's position. He basically outright said that there was (at least) one player he wanted but Kline said no. And then when we go through the run we are on at the moment, in Slav's mind I'm sure he thinks we would have done better if he could have had that player (players)...

[H4usuallysitting]

I'm thinking Mr Kline's stats are also based upon player cost ratio.......sell Ross for 12m.....replace with a cheaper option.....in fact don't replace at all, but go for a loan option......I can't get over the fact (not stat) that we didn't replace our 40 goal/season strikers.

I'm sure stats are marvellous, but at the end of the day you need a figurehead to give direction & lead - any/every successful businesses has a head, it is there vision to strive for success.... Committees are I'm afraid a cop out

[nose]

About a year ago I was asked randomly how many corners led to goals. Obviously I didn't know the answer but made a quick stab at arithmetic and decided it was much less than 5%, just using my eyes and knowledge of maths. I also guesed less than a quarter (25%) would result in an attempt). Again just experience.

There is information easily available on line and is as follows:-
It is reckoned, depending on how you measure such things that between 1 and 3% of corners leads to goals
It is further reckoned that less than 20% of corners end with a genuine attempt on goal

Interesting isn't it and not rocket science.

In the 50s the then wolves manager realised that if you belt the ball forward and charged after it you could win games... i think that was push and run (or was that spurs). Percentage football, it does work if you have a commited team.

Wimbledon played 2 4 4 for years and created a genuine brutal long ball game, percentage football, and it worked.

These things are top level stats based things that work and are possible because football is so fluid and dependant on so many uncontrollable factors. To base your transfer policy on it, or if you prefer to allow the analytics the power of veto is self defeating. That is clearly what we have at fulham. if the manager says he was overuled, then I side with the manager, it is his neckl on the line and his experience we are paying for. The rest is interesting but of secondary value.

[nose]

That's just not how the system works as I have explained elsewhere. Lots of different areas/groups/people put players forward to be assessed. It does not just come from the analytics department.

MJG, question for you since you seem to have a bit of extra contextual info.

To me it's absolutely clear stats must play some part in player selection in this day and age, but equally clear that probably shouldn't be entrusted to the chairman's son's mate, an early 30s law grad with no football experience. Several other posters have echoed that sentiment on this thread.

But just parking those issues for now, my question for you (or anyone else who might know) is, are you aware of any other club giving a stats man a power of veto (ie, not just the ability to advise, but actually to overrule) as we have under the "two ticks" system?

Lets be clear he has a veto in that if he puts an X in the box that's right player does not sign.
Just as scouting reports can put an X in the box to cancel out a tick in the other box and the player would not sign.
And just as explained by Khan, Jokaonvic wont agree to players he doesn't want, so he has that veto as well.

Clubs are very secretive about how all these processes work. Southampton use a similar process but as to two ticks I just do not know.

Having been to an event where these stats and systems were discussed there is no one system out there. Yes they get their match data from the usual suspects (opta etc) along with other information they take from other sources. They then come up with their own ways of interpreting the data.

The real bug that everyone has its its Khan son and his company and while I wish people could step away and look at it coldly, they cant.
IF it was totally independent and run by 'John Smith and Co' then while fans might still not be keen on it, there would possibly be less hatred...and that's what it is...of it. This whole thing is magnified by Khans sons company being involved. And lets be honest...because we are not top of the league or doing well atm.

i think if kline was an experienced football statistician, renowned for his work at southampton, leicester etc, and also happened to be connected to the chairman, then people would of course look at it more coldly and ignore that connection

but if kline is the same age as khan's son that puts him in his early 30s. if he went to law school, as the articles say, he won't have finished that until he was at least 24/25. so he's got little or no experience in any field. obviously he's american. and the articles say he had no experience of football (soccer) prior to becoming involved in fulham. so he sounds totally unqualified. so i think people are entitled to ask why on earth he's got the job, and that's when the connection to the chairman's son becomes significant

Statto, how well you have put that! If he had a track record that was proven to assist, that is one thing, but he hasn't.

[MayoDomo]

Quote from Filham:

So, if say seven of our fourteen players signed during the summer turn out to be failures and we find ourselves in the relegation zone at Christmas does Stat Boy get the sack along with the Coach, or does he remain to mislead the next coach.

An excellent post and the exact reason I stopped reading the original post after "The system is 2 equal parties".

The system is blatantly 2 equal parties. Refusing to see this is an incredible example of groupthink.

Mayo:  Stats are fine.  In fact, stats are good.  Our problem is that Fulham has a wealthy owner who places a completely inexperienced, culturally disconnected person on the board of directors (his son) who hires a friend of his from college to run the statistical analysis that decides which players should be hired to play in the team.
In the business world, that might be accepted if the company's results merited the nepotism involved.
Nogood "in our case it stinks, see" Boyo
Nogood "
[/quote]

Trust me, I completely agree with you. But I think a lot of people on this board have a tendency to talk in ultimatums and like creating a scapegoat. I think had we gone back 6 weeks, we'd be saying the system is working. And now that we've had a pretty horrific run, I'm witnessing gross generalizations and wild assumptions about how the club is run. This is me merely playing devil's advocate. By no means do I think Khan has done a good job creating unity in the club, but I think the backlash specifically at statistics is unwarranted.

And to go back to those still refusing to see how Joka and Kline are not equal... I'll lay it out very simply. If they both have the power to veto it ultimately doesn't matter who suggests a player first. If they both have to agree, it still doesn't matter who suggests a player first. Imagine two switches that both need to be turned on to power something. Ultimately no matter which switch you click first, they are equal in function.

As a last point, everyone who has supported Joka needs to also understand he signed off on every single player that has come in during his time in charge. We cannot put blame on Kline without putting blame on Joka.

[Baszab]

Forget the statistical analysis - how about the alphabet analysis -
Marlet
Mitro
Martin

Look at that trend Mr Kline

All absolutely useless

[BestOfBrede]

Who invented the wheel ?

Mr Ug, I think?

[NogoodBoyo]

Who invented the wheel ?

I don't know, but I'll bet he was on the wagon at the time!
Nogood "one good turn deserves another, isit" Boyo