Saving private Ryan

[WindyCOYS]

Well personally from reading Windy's blogs and articles I decided he was fairly intelligent about football matters, I agreed with much of his analysis. That combined with him going to lots of youth games for a long time suggested he had good knowledge about the youth. It has been backed up by some success stories (Kane, Mason). Another thing to remember is that even if Windy does predict a youth player will go on and do well who doesn't- it doesn't necessarily mean Windy has bad knowledge, some players show great promise and have all the tools to succeed at the top level but never do for example there are a few players who have won player of the tournament at international youth cups who then disappeared (Liverpool's Anthony Le Tallec for example).
He doesn't get respect for merely attending youth games, it's the feedback he gives. He also doesn't always praise loan players, he'll say when they have a lame game, don't play or get subbed off etc. If there are on-loan players he praises who fans of club are unhappy with I'm sure there are also fans who are happy with those players, for example read QPR fan statements about Carroll, posts ranged from technically solid classy player to completely shit overrated child. Windy will provide what he believes to be the objective rating. Unless he's on the payroll by Levy or some shit

Thank you, that was really kind.

I'd like to think this is how I'm seen. I'm not a coach, I'm not a tactician, and I don't claim to be. I'm just a fan who watches matches and gives an opinion, like any other fan.

I've been going to youth and reserve matches on and off since my early teens - mostly in the last ten years, though, and I'd say I'm generally a good judge of player (but of course I get some wrong as well, Livermore is a prime example).

I am somewhat baffled by JeremyPaxton saying I always say one of the Academy players has been the best player regardless - especially as I have been so full of praise for Lloris, Eriksen and - recently - Dier this season. I like to think I am not agenda-driven, although clearly I have loved the club using more of our homegrown players - for so many reasons, but partly because I think their connection with the club invokes a feeling of pride from fans as well as giving the player a reason to try harder.

 

[Bardi]

Nice little read. When it comes to windy's information on youth, It's always worth a listen. Fair play to the guy for going and dedicating his time to update us all as what's going on in the academy.
Does that make him more knowledgeable or any better of a fan than any of us? No

I've had a few twitter arguments with him in the past, personally I find myself disagreeing with a lot of what he has to say.
With no disrespect meant, I find not just him but many other modern day fans, " laptop fans "...more interested in running distances, passing stats, etc the usual bollocks. Rather than using your eyes and understanding it from a players point of view. Maybe he has never played the game before?..if he has fair enough. In my opinion he sounds like he hasnt.

But fair play to him, I always enjoy the youth updates.

Windy isn't claiming to be more knowledgeable, but when it comes to youth he does know more. Does this make him always right? No. What it makes him is informed, which means his opinion holds more weight. An opinion however is something personal, whether you agree or disagree it matters little, and neither does your agreeing or disagreeing matter to the opinion. After all it is an opinion not a fact.

As for "laptop fans" "not having played the game." Sherwood, is that you?

Using technology to analyse the game is not a stick to beat someone with. Rather like spending hours watching/scouting it is a tool only.

 

[justin]

Windy isn't claiming to be more knowledgeable, but when it comes to youth he does know more. Does this make
him always right? No. What it makes him is informed, which means his opinion holds more weight. An opinion however is something personal, whether you agree or
disagree it matters little, and neither does your agreeing or disagreeing matter to the opinion. After all it is an opinion not a fact.
As for "laptop fans" "not having played the game." Sherwood, is that you?

Using technology to analyse the game is not a stick to beat someone with. Rather like
spending hours watching/scouting it is a
tool only.

Yeah whatever pal..there is a massive difference between watching/scouting a player than there is of looking at stats on a laptop. These two "tools" arnt even comparable.

 

[Bardi]

Yeah whatever pal..there is a massive difference between watching/scouting a player than there is of looking at stats on a laptop. These two "tools" arnt even comparable.

They are used together.
You watch a game, and then you analyse the stats.

You can see with your own eyes that Mason was all over the pitch but finding out whether he was effective where you wanted him to be relies on some form of technology.

 

[Juicy Sushi]

Yeah whatever pal..there is a massive difference between watching/scouting a player than there is of looking at stats on a laptop. These two "tools" arnt even comparable.

Except at clubs, where they use both to actually evaluate the players.

The "laptop" fans/staff actually watch a hell of a lot of football with their own eyes to verify the data.

 

[justin]

Except at clubs, where they use both to actually evaluate the players.
The "laptop" fans/staff actually watch a hell
of a lot of football with their own eyes to
verify the data.

I'm not saying there isn't a place or any use for them.. But they should also be taken with a bit of an open mind. Yeah they can tell where a certain player likes operating, how many yards they seem to pass it over, how many forwards, backwards etc, but they will never be able to replace the knowledge of someone, and their experience of the game. Or maybe to a lot of you lot they are better. Maybe eventually we won't have scouts or people that have actually played the game before, it will be just one great big game of football manager.
I'm not slating anyone's opinion off, it's just my opinion. Personally I take stats with a pinch of salt. If you have a feeling by watching the game that someone is generally shit, then they are. A laptop stat saying the he covered 5k in the match, isn't gonna change your opinion, but I have a feeling that with some fans nowadays it probably would.

 

[Juicy Sushi]

I'm not saying there isn't a place or any use for them.. But they should also be taken with a bit of an open mind. Yeah they can tell where a certain player likes operating, how many yards they seem to pass it over, how many forwards, backwards etc, but they will never be able to replace the knowledge of someone, and their experience of the game. Or maybe to a lot of you lot they are better. Maybe eventually we won't have scouts or people that have actually played the game before, it will be just one great big game of football manager.
I'm not slating anyone's opinion off, it's just my opinion. Personally I take stats with a pinch of salt. If you have a feeling by watching the game that someone is generally shit, then they are. A laptop stat saying the he covered 5k in the match, isn't gonna change your opinion, but I have a feeling that with some fans nowadays it probably would.

I don't think you really understand what the analytics are getting used for, at clubs, and by some fans though. At clubs using them successfully, the guys doing this are building models of team patterns of behaviour. So, how do teams play? Short passes? Long passes? To which locations/players? In what situations (ie the formation, score, time), how successful are they? When they succeed, what common things occur?

They are also the same people building the video clip packages which the first team are then going over in training to build the plan for future matches.

This is done in conjunction with the scouts going to games. The scouts look for the same things, and look for the stuff which cameras might not pick up, like what's being done off the ball. How well do the players communicate with each other? Are there any particular quirks to exploit?

For recruiting it's the same. You cannot afford a scouting network to watch every match across Europe, let alone the world. But you can use the analytics dept. to go through the Opta/Prozone data and look for players who match profiles the club creates. You can then build a list of potential players who can then be scouted in person. It's a tool for the scouts to use to make their time more efficient.

Take ourselves for example. We've got a few obvious issues right now. Pochettino, Baldini and Mitchell are going to be working together to figure out what new strikers we'll need. They start by looking at Harry Kane, and breaking down his game. What does he do well? What does he do poorly? What do we need the strikers to do within our system? Mitchell can then get the analytics team to build a model looking for players across the database they have, and picking out players who match the profile. You can then bring the list back to the table, and between the three of them they can refine it, and then give that list of players to the scouts so that they can have a close-up look at them. It cuts down on wasted time as you already know what you're looking for, and makes better use of the scouting network, as you're not asking them to just sit in the rain and wait for inspiration.

When the scouts are done having a look you can then compile their reports, the data and video evidence and go to Levy and present the best choices. Then Baldini gets sent to make approaches to those clubs and the bullshit game begins.

This is what the better clubs are doing now, and those who are using the "laptop fans" with the scouts as a cohesive whole are the ones finding better players faster, and finding better tactics sooner, and that adds up to a few million saved here and there, and a few points gained in matches, which can make it easier to make the next step up the table, and find better players again down the road.

This is what Soton have been doing, and it's why they've come so far so fast. They also did it with managerial candidates. That's what led them to Pochettino, and then Koeman. They don't interview guys, they stalk them and only go for people who fit with what they're already doing.

It doesn't replace the old physical methods, it helps them be better directed and more effective.

 

[n17troops]

my dad now lives in yeovil and is a season ticket holder Ryan was always a favorite at Yeovil as was Obika only ever heard good reports ,as Windy will confirm huish park has always been a good grounding,i think part of it,s attraction is keeping young players away from the bright lights.Please accept our thanks Windy ,a part of clubs to easily ignored until we unearth a diamond .Windy knew one of our own was there long before you and i .THANK YOU.

 

[WindyCOYS]

I don't think you really understand what the analytics are getting used for, at clubs, and by some fans though. At clubs using them successfully, the guys doing this are building models of team patterns of behaviour. So, how do teams play? Short passes? Long passes? To which locations/players? In what situations (ie the formation, score, time), how successful are they? When they succeed, what common things occur?

They are also the same people building the video clip packages which the first team are then going over in training to build the plan for future matches.

This is done in conjunction with the scouts going to games. The scouts look for the same things, and look for the stuff which cameras might not pick up, like what's being done off the ball. How well do the players communicate with each other? Are there any particular quirks to exploit?

For recruiting it's the same. You cannot afford a scouting network to watch every match across Europe, let alone the world. But you can use the analytics dept. to go through the Opta/Prozone data and look for players who match profiles the club creates. You can then build a list of potential players who can then be scouted in person. It's a tool for the scouts to use to make their time more efficient.

Take ourselves for example. We've got a few obvious issues right now. Pochettino, Baldini and Mitchell are going to be working together to figure out what new strikers we'll need. They start by looking at Harry Kane, and breaking down his game. What does he do well? What does he do poorly? What do we need the strikers to do within our system? Mitchell can then get the analytics team to build a model looking for players across the database they have, and picking out players who match the profile. You can then bring the list back to the table, and between the three of them they can refine it, and then give that list of players to the scouts so that they can have a close-up look at them. It cuts down on wasted time as you already know what you're looking for, and makes better use of the scouting network, as you're not asking them to just sit in the rain and wait for inspiration.

When the scouts are done having a look you can then compile their reports, the data and video evidence and go to Levy and present the best choices. Then Baldini gets sent to make approaches to those clubs and the bullshit game begins.

This is what the better clubs are doing now, and those who are using the "laptop fans" with the scouts as a cohesive whole are the ones finding better players faster, and finding better tactics sooner, and that adds up to a few million saved here and there, and a few points gained in matches, which can make it easier to make the next step up the table, and find better players again down the road.

This is what Soton have been doing, and it's why they've come so far so fast. They also did it with managerial candidates. That's what led them to Pochettino, and then Koeman. They don't interview guys, they stalk them and only go for people who fit with what they're already doing.

It doesn't replace the old physical methods, it helps them be better directed and more effective.

All well and good but I've got two eyes FFS.

 

[WindyCOYS]

Great post Juicy Sushi . I think there are a lot of 'stat deniers' in the world of football because of a lack of understanding and also lack of confidence in people using stats appropriately.

Some people seem to think stats come in and trump what the average fan can see. Fact is, stats are (or should be) used to supplement what a good analyst has already picked up on.

Any stats can be misused, of course, but used well they can help to create a strong argument which can be used to create a case for or against one element of coaching/management/etc.

 

[Simmo]

Thank you, that was really kind.

I'd like to think this is how I'm seen. I'm not a coach, I'm not a tactician, and I don't claim to be. I'm just a fan who watches matches and gives an opinion, like any other fan.

I've been going to youth and reserve matches on and off since my early teens - mostly in the last ten years, though, and I'd say I'm generally a good judge of player (but of course I get some wrong as well, Livermore is a prime example).

I am somewhat baffled by JeremyPaxton saying I always say one of the Academy players has been the best player regardless - especially as I have been so full of praise for Lloris, Eriksen and - recently - Dier this season. I like to think I am not agenda-driven, although clearly I have loved the club using more of our homegrown players - for so many reasons, but partly because I think their connection with the club invokes a feeling of pride from fans as well as giving the player a reason to try harder.

No need to justify yourself Windy, you're objective about something you have been observing far more than most for years.

 

[Juicy Sushi]

Great post Juicy Sushi . I think there are a lot of 'stat deniers' in the world of football because of a lack of understanding and also lack of confidence in people using stats appropriately.

Some people seem to think stats come in and trump what the average fan can see. Fact is, stats are (or should be) used to supplement what a good analyst has already picked up on.

Any stats can be misused, of course, but used well they can help to create a strong argument which can be used to create a case for or against one element of coaching/management/etc.

Many have math hang-ups from our school days. That creates in-built resistence. Also, the way analytics have been presented by their authors hasn't always helped.

There is a very small % of current football stats writers who are accessible to mainstream fans.

 

[Jayc1]

Many have math hang-ups from our school days.

I disagree, I think people are skeptic over stats because people and businesses often use them in shit ways or think they mean something in and of themselves.

"Eriksen has scored more goals than Gerrard by 23 years old, in 80 fewer games". A useful stat? Not really.
"Townsend has had more shots on goal than anyone else in England, a real dangerous player". True statement? Not really.
"Tottenham had 8 shots on target, they should have won the game". Not if they were weak dribbling shots.

I agree that stats in the right hands are extremely useful, only an idiot would deny that. Virtually every manager gives a team talk next to a laptop these days; inside Man City's dressing room is a computer room, for example. But I can understand that most fans don't get to see stats used in an extremely useful way, they just see pundits and newspapers rattling off bullshit, which makes them doubt.

 

[Juicy Sushi]

I disagree, I think people are skeptic over stats because people and businesses often use them in shit ways or think they mean something in and of themselves.

"Eriksen has scored more goals than Gerrard by 23 years old, in 80 fewer games". A useful stat? Not really.
"Townsend has had more shots on goal than anyone else in England, a real dangerous player". True statement? Not really.
"Tottenham had 8 shots on target, they should have won the game". Not if they were weak dribbling shots.

I agree that stats in the right hands are extremely useful, only an idiot would deny that. Virtually every manager gives a team talk next to a laptop these days; inside Man City's dressing room is a computer room, for example. But I can understand that most fans don't get to see stats used in an extremely useful way, they just see pundits and newspapers rattling off bullshit, which makes them doubt.

Because the pundits use stats, not analytics, and are as clueless as their audience.

Stats are not analytics. Stats are what analytics are built on, but provide no insight on their own.

The mainstream football press do not use analytics, they randomly misquote stats to appear as if they do.

 

[SydneySpur]

No Peedo!

 

[JeremyPaxton]

Thank you, that was really kind.

I'd like to think this is how I'm seen. I'm not a coach, I'm not a tactician, and I don't claim to be. I'm just a fan who watches matches and gives an opinion, like any other fan.

I've been going to youth and reserve matches on and off since my early teens - mostly in the last ten years, though, and I'd say I'm generally a good judge of player (but of course I get some wrong as well, Livermore is a prime example).

I am somewhat baffled by JeremyPaxton saying I always say one of the Academy players has been the best player regardless - especially as I have been so full of praise for Lloris, Eriksen and - recently - Dier this season. I like to think I am not agenda-driven, although clearly I have loved the club using more of our homegrown players - for so many reasons, but partly because I think their connection with the club invokes a feeling of pride from fans as well as giving the player a reason to try harder.

TBH Ive only read about 10 of your tweets. I only have one experience of you saying that Mason was the MOTM when Eriksen clearly was. Ive probably misjudged you, but I still doubt any of the stats you quote. Where are they from?

 

[Aussie Ardiles]

Would love to know of a game that I've seen live and seen stats for later and thought that can't be right. Always leaving the game thinking this side work their socks off and then in the hours that follow that gets backed up, never have I been blown away by how different the stats were to what we just witnessed.

Can they be used solely when determining a player's talent? No of course not. But it's a lot more effective getting every single games data for a player and watching him a couple of times (Poch has done this with Alli at MK Dons & now with his people in Portugal for Salvio). This is how a good football department operates. Signing guys based purely off live opinions is very 1990's and ends up with a squad like QPR's!

 

[JeremyPaxton]

Would love to know of a game that I've seen live and seen stats for later and thought that can't be right. Always leaving the game thinking this side work their socks off and then in the hours that follow that gets backed up, never have I been blown away by how different the stats were to what we just witnessed.

Can they be used solely when determining a player's talent? No of course not. But it's a lot more effective getting every single games data for a player and watching him a couple of times (Poch has done this with Alli at MK Dons & now with his people in Portugal for Salvio). This is how a good football department operates. Signing guys based purely off live opinions is very 1990's and ends up with a squad like QPR's!

Yeah, but there is a difference between stats and just making BS up and claiming that it is stats

 

[Juicy Sushi]

Yeah, but there is a difference between stats and just making BS up and claiming that it is stats

Most places fans cite (whoscored, squawka, etc) all use the same data source: Opta. Prozone and Infostrada are I think alternative data sources, but I know Prozone only work with clubs. Opta has two levels of data. The public stuff, and the private data which teams have to pay a premium to access. I remember someone last year saying Opta's fee for the full data was 5000 euros/league/year. So, if you want data for the top 5 leagues alone, it's 25k. If you want it for most of the major leagues, it'd be a lot more, but for all I know they do package deals.

That level of data though is way beyond what they offer to fans.

 

[JeremyPaxton]

Most places fans cite (whoscored, squawka, etc) all use the same data source: Opta. Prozone and Infostrada are I think alternative data sources, but I know Prozone only work with clubs. Opta has two levels of data. The public stuff, and the private data which teams have to pay a premium to access. I remember someone last year saying Opta's fee for the full data was 5000 euros/league/year. So, if you want data for the top 5 leagues alone, it's 25k. If you want it for most of the major leagues, it'd be a lot more, but for all I know they do package deals.

That level of data though is way beyond what they offer to fans.

Great. Still doesn't answer my question of how Windy gets stats that dispute reality though