Champions League Game Day 1

[Evilo]

No kidding
I can't say how many times I've said it on this board. No matter the stats, this is what is important.

 

[YNWA14]

Not sure what's more embarrassing; saying expected goals+assists is lame/meaningless or saying per 90 numbers are misleading.

Saying that per 90 statistics can be misleading is embarrassing? Maybe you're still salty because a top 5 team in the world in Dortmund lost to Spurs at Wembley of all places, but that statement is true. Especially for a player that averaged less than 60 minutes per appearance in league and CL last season. For example if he's consistently being used as a sub later in the game against teams with tired legs it's easier to make an impact, if he's only playing as long as he can go 100% that gives him an advantage over players that play the full 90, if he's taken off any time the team is trying to defend a lead (or just not used), if he doesn't play against the top teams, etc. etc.

These things require context and can be very misleading. Use your head; though I know your judgment may be clouded due to recent events so I forgive you.

 

[Incubajerks]

An honest question to try to understand how you value a player: in your opinion is Pulisic a better player than Chiesa for example?

 

[Evilo]

Let him look at Wikipedia.

Here's another : how do you compare him with Stopyra?

 

[Deficient Mode]

Fine, you don't like the Ntep argument, let's use Costa or Kagawa having better advanced stats than Thiago Alcantara.

Those stats are meaningless. Players need to be judged on how they play and also on their end product.
Not on coulda, woulda, shoulda.

It's a measure of how many assists and goals you'd score. Of course it's going to favor Kagawa and Costa over Thiago. They play higher up the pitch and are in better positions to score. That doesn't mean they're better players. It can still be useful to compare attackers to each other.

Those stats do measure how they play. It's not hard to understand.

 

[Evilo]

And it's a wrong way to do it.

 

[Deficient Mode]

And it's a wrong way to do it.

It's wrong to rely completely on either the eye test or the stats.

In some instances, expected goals (and especially expected assists) are more precise than actual goals and assists. They have drawbacks and don't tell you the complete value of the player, but they are definitely useful.

 

[Evilo]

It's hardly wrong to rely only on eye test. It's never wrong to judge a player on what he's doing rather than on what he could do in stat sheets.

Can't believe I have to tell this to anyone.

 

[Deficient Mode]

It's hardly wrong to rely only on eye test. It's never wrong to judge a player on what he's doing rather than on what he could do in stat sheets.

Can't believe I have to tell this to anyone.

If you're talking about attackers, the stats register impartially and exactly their goals, assists, and passes, so you can and should absolutely go back and see if the stats support the eye test. The human eye is far from perfect.

I can't believe I have to tell this to anyone either.

 

[Halladay]

This thread has run its course.