Eyeballs v stats

[Dillwyn the Dog]

The thing about eyeballs is that recollections are infamously inaccurate, people will more consistently remember what annoys them and forget what goes their way. It takes more training than people realise to properly scout and analyse just based off of what you see, almost like watching a highlights reel of a player and using that to form the basis of your scouting report.

Stats likewise can also be infamous, but in this case not about accuracy but about context and the ability to apply them to meet almost any agenda. On their own they are very much a neutral party, but it takes skill to sift through the sea of stats to find the context and the relevance rather than seeing what you want to see to support your own position.

The best results would always come from a combination of the two, no one in their right mind would recruit someone based only on the stats that someone dropped on their desk without doing any scouting. Similarly no one should recruit someone based only on what someone tells them - Alex Ferguson used to go to watch players himself even after getting reports from his scouts.

The main thing about your eyeballs over stats is that they give you valuable context about a player’s effectiveness- Grimes playing the ball back and forth his back 4 did little for us in the context of winning games. His losing of the ball in dangerous situations, his passing to a colleague under pressure are things eyeballs can present to the brain with a sense of reality.

 

[Neath_Jack]

We, or at least I do, go to the football to watch two teams battling it out to score goals. No amount of data can give you that enjoyment. If your first thought after a game is to go and check the stats to confirm what you’ve just watched, you’re doing it wrong.

Football is about emotions, stats are emotionless.

 

[bytholwyn]

We, or at least I do, go to the football to watch two teams battling it out to score goals. No amount of data can give you that enjoyment. If your first thought after a game is to go and check the stats to confirm what you’ve just watched, you’re doing it wrong.

Football is about emotions, stats are emotionless.

My first reaction to a match is always emotional, which I sometimes regret on reflection. But that's the nature of the beast. The analysis generally comes later. If that isn't your cup of tea that's fine, we're all different. I like to have my preconceptions challenged by information, whether that's statistical info or otherwise. In that respect I'm not a typical fan. So be it.

 

[Neath_Jack]

My first reaction to a match is always emotional, which I sometimes regret on reflection. But that's the nature of the beast. The analysis generally comes later. If that isn't your cup of tea that's fine, we're all different. I like to have my preconceptions challenged by information, whether that's statistical info or otherwise. In that respect I'm not a typical fan. So be it.

And you’re welcome to do that my friend. It is completely alien to me and always will be. Going to the football is a release from everyday worries and stresses for at least 90 minutes (most of the time football doesn’t help mind). I have no interest in spreadsheets, percentiles and the like, that’s for the work environment.

 

[bytholwyn]

Eyeballs certainly have their place. Data definitely can't capture some things. Take Eom. My eyeballs tell me he's a class act. Late in the season there were a number of occasions where he left his marker standing with his excellent movement. Having beaten his man the quality of the resulting cross was variable, but it was clear that he has real quality.

He also only scored three goals, but all 3 were excellent. The first, arriving at the back stick for a tap in. Simple goal, but all the instincts of a poacher. The goals against Boro and Oxford were very classy, curling the ball with his instep beautifully.

All of the above make me believe he's going to be a star performer for us next season. He's got it, whatever it is.

Having said all of the above, there is one stat that reinforces the above eyeball impression. His crossing accuracy of 35.2 per cent is 91st percentile. With those sort of figures we can expect more assists down the line.

It's not a binary choice between eyeballs and stats. Both have their place. In fact the distinction between the two is a bit arbitrary. It's just information, and in my book the more information the merrier.

 

[Neath_Jack]

Football creates massive talking points between fans from what they’ve just watched. Sometimes polar opposite views of the same action. It’s what makes football brilliant isn’t it? But if someone of going to roll out a spreadsheet and say in a Mr Bean voice “ah but you’re both wrong because my stats say this and they are facts”. Fuck that boys, don’t kill the game with xG shite, leave it up to the coaches if they are that way inclined.

 

[Andrew - North Hill]

Kai Havertz ‘destroying metrics’ as he nears return from hamstring injury

Mikel Arteta said: ‘There’s been a transformation in his body,’ with the German forward, out since February, and he could feature against Newcastle on Sunday

www.theguardian.com

"Destroying metrics"

Don't read this Wyn, you'll have a stroke....

 

[BanosSwan]

So basically the old qualitative Vs quantitative argument, which most research is based on?

 

[bytholwyn]

Kai Havertz ‘destroying metrics’ as he nears return from hamstring injury

Mikel Arteta said: ‘There’s been a transformation in his body,’ with the German forward, out since February, and he could feature against Newcastle on Sunday

www.theguardian.com

"Destroying metrics"

Don't read this Wyn, you'll have a stroke....

So there all these measures of physical development against which Havertz' rehabilitation have been measured and he has exceeded expectations. And the point is?

Perhaps he should just have been sent to Margate and told to run and down the beach until he got fit. Who needs all this sports science malarkey?