Moneyball

If you want an idea on how we are doing well in sourcing good players, watch the movie Moneyball starring Brad Pitt. This is the system that John Fenway brought to Liverpool and Gerrard will also be aware of. Also remember watching a behind the scenes program on Southampton when Ross Wilson was there. They had stats on hundreds of players at other clubs and if for eg they needed a right back, they had all the homework done and the best option always tended to be an unknown name who had the best stats and could be bought very cheaply.Good watch
 
It’s pretty clear at this point that teams that use statistics to assess signings are successful and teams that don’t are not
 
Warburton had success with this system at Brentford, it worked well for him there as he had time to implement it.
 
Bloom (Brighton) and Bentham (Brentford) both have punting firms who use similar systems to it all. Quite a few knocking about. Number of analysts now related to Football stats is staggering really, can’t all be marvellous.
 
The majority of the signings we've made since Gerrard came in have made sense in the risk was always going to outweighed by the reward. The outlier being Grezda, no idea why that was approved.
 
Bloom (Brighton) and Bentham (Brentford) both have punting firms who use similar systems to it all. Quite a few knocking about. Number of analysts now related to Football stats is staggering really, can’t all be marvellous.
Bentham did more than that. He bought FC Midtjylland and used that approach and won the Danish league on a tiny budget via that model. They didn't just use player stats in their analysis, but also tactics and established KPIs from them which they then used to find the right player for them.

He did have a team of 300 people working for him giving the stat analysis mind.
 
The majority of the signings we've made since Gerrard came in have made sense in the risk was always going to outweighed by the reward. The outlier being Grezda, no idea why that was approved.
Grezda and Barisic both performed very well in that Osijek team in all fairness.

Might be an unpopular opinion but we didn't really try too hard to make things work out, we probably should have given him a bit more of a chance to show something.
 
If you want an idea on how we are doing well in sourcing good players, watch the movie Moneyball starring Brad Pitt. This is the system that John Fenway brought to Liverpool and Gerrard will also be aware of. Also remember watching a behind the scenes program on Southampton when Ross Wilson was there. They had stats on hundreds of players at other clubs and if for eg they needed a right back, they had all the homework done and the best option always tended to be an unknown name who had the best stats and could be bought very cheaply.Good watch
Its a good movie mate
 
Grezda and Barisic both performed very well in that Osijek team in all fairness.

Might be an unpopular opinion but we didn't really try too hard to make things work out, we probably should have given him a bit more of a chance to show something.
Get what your saying but seems more likely grezdas attitude was the problem , hence why he didn’t get many chances .
 
Bentham did more than that. He bought FC Midtjylland and used that approach and won the Danish league on a tiny budget via that model. They didn't just use player stats in their analysis, but also tactics and established KPIs from them which they then used to find the right player for them.

He did have a team of 300 people working for him giving the stat analysis mind.

I know all that mate, was just pointing out how many there are - just 10 minutes on LinkedIn and you’ll see stacks.
 
2 questions spring to mind:

1) what is the football equivalent for "getting on base" ?
2) was Craig Brown in fact some sort of football visionary ? I always felt he would come out with some fact-based drivel to shine a positive on a honking Scotland drubbing c. 92-98
 
Grezda and Barisic both performed very well in that Osijek team in all fairness.

Might be an unpopular opinion but we didn't really try too hard to make things work out, we probably should have given him a bit more of a chance to show something.
Dont think Grezda would have taken his chance, borna was pretty poor when he first came as well but he didn't half work at it, we've not made too .any bad signings under the SG regime
 
Grezda and Barisic both performed very well in that Osijek team in all fairness.

Might be an unpopular opinion but we didn't really try too hard to make things work out, we probably should have given him a bit more of a chance to show something.

There is some truth in that. However his attitude was honking. Contrast with Borna and how he got the head down and cemented his place in the team.
 
I watched Moneyball a few years back. Loved the movie, but I was no better at understanding the system than I was before watching. I would assume the approach is only as good as the info you are inputting and the eggheads interpreting that info.
 
I watched Moneyball a few years back. Loved the movie, but I was no better at understanding the system than I was before watching. I would assume the approach is only as good as the info you are inputting and the eggheads interpreting that info.

I think, at a basic level, it's a case of us losing Morelos 20 goals but replacing him with a winger and a striker who will get 21 goals between them.
 
I think, at a basic level, it's a case of us losing Morelos 20 goals but replacing him with a winger and a striker who will get 21 goals between them.
Or just replace Morelos with Lawrence Shankland. Sorted.

I would imagine there are individuals and firms who are very good at this. Probably also attracts a fair share of charlatans and shysters.
 
It was the money ball system that forced Warburton out of Brentford. The owner told him that it was the new approach, and he disagreed and left.
 
Grezda and Barisic both performed very well in that Osijek team in all fairness.

Might be an unpopular opinion but we didn't really try too hard to make things work out, we probably should have given him a bit more of a chance to show something.

More the fact he had been injured for the end of the previous season and was still injured when we bought him. As well as he'd played for Osjek it hadn't been for a full season.
I think it was a punt, based on videos we'd watched of them prior to the Euro game, unfortunately it didn't work out.
 
Warburton had success with this system at Brentford, it worked well for him there as he had time to implement it.
It didn't actually he left because that's what was getting implement and he wouldn't have a say on transfers. Basically they had sussed him and the best in the buissnes in the transfer market. But yeah it has worked well for brentford using that model
 
We have done well on a few low budget buys, but we have also spent money this time on quality no carlos pena
 
You mean couldn’t pay his best mate And daughter agency easy money allegedly.

That was what was said on here anyway.

I didn’t actually put that particular 2 and 2 together.
Interesting point considering how it went at the end with our transfers.
 
Article on it today here:

Just read that it’s good stuff eh .

does sound like numbers and theory are driving that clubs actions , would be interesting to see where we are and our philosophy on these matters
 
John Hendry not John Fenway. Lol.

Also yes it’s good but if everyone does it you don’t get an advantage. Especially when clubs with greater resources do it better.

They key is to do it differently in a way that works for you.
 
2 questions spring to mind:

1) what is the football equivalent for "getting on base" ?

2) was Craig Brown in fact some sort of football visionary ? I always felt he would come out with some fact-based drivel to shine a positive on a honking Scotland drubbing c. 92-98
I've always found the bookmaker odds to score a goal useful for Fantasy Football. If Van Dijk is at home to Fulham, their defence being poorer than say Man City means it is more likely for him to score from a header at a corner and you'll see his any time odds change from 12/1 to 5/1 to reflect that. The poorer the team, the more likely they are to keep a clean sheet as well.
 
Or just replace Morelos with Lawrence Shankland. Sorted.

I would imagine there are individuals and firms who are very good at this. Probably also attracts a fair share of charlatans and shysters.
You cant look at a strikers goals and replace them directly, thats exactly what they tell you not to do in Moneyball. They dont replace a players home runs or runs batted in directly in Moneyball because for a star player its very difficult to do, especially on a budget. You recreate them in the average.

In Moneyball its the on base percentage they use to decide on the players. Not runs scored. Not home runs. Not hits. Just how often the person is on base because that then gives you a chance of scoring a run.
 
John Hendry not John Fenway. Lol.

Also yes it’s good but if everyone does it you don’t get an advantage. Especially when clubs with greater resources do it better.

They key is to do it differently in a way that works for you.
One point of interest for me is the players psychological / personality traits , how they may get metrics about those and determine if they will match there group . After all these are people they haven’t even met for interview in most cases I Would think .
 
I've always found the bookmaker odds to score a goal useful for Fantasy Football. If Van Dijk is at home to Fulham, their defence being poorer than say Man City means it is more likely for him to score from a header at a corner and you'll see his any time odds change from 12/1 to 5/1 to reflect that. The poorer the team, the more likely they are to keep a clean sheet as well.
Thats different to getting on base, that would be projected runs in baseball. Similar in NFL fantasy football with projected points per player, its based on how bad the opposition are at defending against a certain type of position. On base is about being in a position to score so possibly chances created or the positions you take up in the box.

I dont know if there is a direct comparison in football because its such a different dynamic. Baseball is just pitcher v batter to decide whether he gets on base. In football the pieces are constantly moving.
 
Grezda and Barisic both performed very well in that Osijek team in all fairness.

Might be an unpopular opinion but we didn't really try too hard to make things work out, we probably should have given him a bit more of a chance to show something.
I know I'll probably get hammered for this, but the Grezda signing made more sense than the Barker signing IMO.
 
I think Football has too many variables to put a Moneyball type formula. The nature of the game as well as a huge difference on a stop start, essentially static game where only 2-3 individuals are involved in key actions.

In football, things like tactics of the 11 players can have an effect. You can effect the game without the ball.

It is a really interesting concept but I always think back to Liverpool shelling out millions for Andy Carroll (most headers at goal) and Stuart Downing (most crosses in the previous season). Disaster.
 
The majority of the signings we've made since Gerrard came in have made sense in the risk was always going to outweighed by the reward. The outlier being Grezda, no idea why that was approved.

I read about this somewhere, statistically before he came to Rangers his pass completions, dribbles, crosses and goals all checked out.

The one thing the stats did not check out were that the guy was an out and out nutter. Checking stats is great, but only if the background checks are also done.
 
Back
Top