I liked Erik Lamela before it was cool

[ringo]

Signing players
Backing up points of view in arguments
Assessing current players performance
Making money.

100%

 

[billyiddo]

Why do you keep bothering to reply to my point if it tinklees you off that much. Or do only your opinions count on this?

Of course I don't think that, Tbh I'm not sure what I have posted to illicit that question...

I'm just trying to work out who you think is misusing stats on this board as it's something you bring up a lot.

 

[Gazzasrightboot]

100%

5 out of 10 Glory glory users agree.

 

[elltrev]

Of course I don't think that, Tbh I'm not sure what I have posted to illicit that question...

I'm just trying to work out who you think is misusing stats on this board as it's something you bring up a lot.

I think the trouble might be that when someone brings up stats to back up their opinion (which they've likely formed by watching the player or team in question), some people interpret that as having the opinion based solely on those stats.

What a banal argument anyway - surely everyone can agree that using your eyes alone and using stats alone each have respective weaknesses, and that using them together is always better?

 

[Gazzasrightboot]

I think the trouble might be that when someone brings up stats to back up their opinion (which they've likely formed by watching the player or team in question), some people interpret that as having the opinion based solely on those stats.

What a banal argument anyway - surely everyone can agree that using your eyes alone and using stats alone each have respective weaknesses, and that using them together is always better?

 

[Jurgen the German]

You still don't understand. I'll try and put it in as simple language as I can, but I'm really not very good at explaining very basic things so please forgive me if it's still too complicated.

What you have is a single point node of information which tells us that a team made up of many constituent parts - only one of which being the manager, finished two points from the leaders. It says nothing about nearlys maybes ifs whats or whatevers and it says nothing about the ability of the manager. What you have is a large number of what are commonly known as effectors (inside and outside of the team) and you are mistakenly assuming one and only one of them to be the principle one and also that there is some kind of cause and effect between them.

As I've said previously, if you're trying to argue that people who can't understand stats don't understand them or that people who don't know how to apply them shouldn't use them, you won't get any argument from me. But seriously, your use of statistics is a little bit like watching Ali Dia flopping around a football pitch.

You seem to live and die by stats, I was just playing your game and using stats. You don't seem to like when people use them to praise people who you don't rate.

Basically, the stats are only used correctly when it suits your narrative or are trying to prove x player or manager is not all they are cracked up to be.

 

[scaramanga]

You seem to live and die by stats, I was just playing your game and using stats. You don't seem to like when people use them to praise people who you don't rate.

Basically, the stats are only used correctly when it suits your narrative or are trying to prove x player or manager is not all they are cracked up to be.

I'll try one last time.

The stats are only worthwhile when used and collected properly by those who understand them. If you'd like to continue a discussion on the efficacy of stats and how/where/when/why to use them try the following links first and then come back:
http://www.thegreatcourses.co.uk/co...t-are-the-chances-probability-made-clear.html
http://www.thegreatcourses.co.uk/courses/meaning-from-data-statistics-made-clear.html
http://www.thegreatcourses.co.uk/se...-meaning-from-data-statistics-made-clear.html

 

[Jurgen the German]

I'll try one last time.

The stats are only worthwhile when used and collected properly by those who understand them. If you'd like to continue a discussion on the efficacy of stats and how/where/when/why to use them try the following links first and then come back:
http://www.thegreatcourses.co.uk/co...t-are-the-chances-probability-made-clear.html
http://www.thegreatcourses.co.uk/courses/meaning-from-data-statistics-made-clear.html
http://www.thegreatcourses.co.uk/se...-meaning-from-data-statistics-made-clear.html

Thanks for the links but they're really not necessary, I don't need to read an article to make me realise how stats can be twisted and interpreted to present/suit an argument, but ultimately discredited by the likes of yourself if they do not fit in with your narrative.

Stats are of course important, that's initially almost all you have to go on if you haven't seen x player live, but as Parklane says, they almost never tell the full story.

 

[scaramanga]

Thanks for the links but they're really not necessary, I don't need to read an article to make me realise how stats can be twisted and interpreted to present/suit an argument, but ultimately discredited by the likes of yourself if they do not fit in with your narrative.

Stats are of course important, that's initially almost all you have to go on if you haven't seen x player live, but as Parklane says, they almost never tell the full story.

Trust me, at your level of understanding, you need to at least read up (a lot).

I wouldn't challenge Lewis Hamilton to a race, I wouldn't try to tackle Messi, I don't see why you persist with arguing over stats.

 

[Jurgen the German]

Trust me, at your level of understanding, you need to at least read up (a lot).

I wouldn't challenge Lewis Hamilton to a race, I wouldn't try to tackle Messi, I don't see why you persist with arguing over stats.

Ok will do. In the meantime, are there any websites you can point me to so I can learn how to spin every argument like you seem to manage to so that you never admit any other possibility other than you being 100% right whilst being condescending in the process?

 

[Lost Mango]

Ok will do. In the meantime, are there any websites you can point me to so I can learn how to spin every argument like you seem to manage to so that you never admit any other possibility other than you being 100% right whilst being condescending in the process?

Not sure you can find a website for that. Think Scara is just a natural.

 

[scaramanga]

Ok will do. In the meantime, are there any websites you can point me to so I can learn how to spin every argument like you seem to manage to so that you never admit any other possibility other than you being 100% right whilst being condescending in the process?

I genuinely try not to talk down to people. Some just make it so difficult though.

Being right is easy. You just learn a lot about some stuff and then avoid offering an opinion on the rest.

 

[Whiffler]

A new statistic .... 100% of me thinks Lamela needs to go to Hoddle's Spanish academy for the bewildered.

Only a statistic, so may change after another pint.

 

[Gazzasrightboot]

Well that descended quickly!

I have no idea of the history here but I think you're both actually agreeing with each other!

Statistics are facts. The interpretation of them is a skill. Using stats is the right thing to do to a) scope a player, b) sense check the scouting of a player and c) assessing the performance of a player. Statistics are being used more and more in all walks of life and all industries. One statistic will not show the full story. A number of them more than likely will, if the person digesting them knows what they are doing.

I don't understand what is so sensitive about using stats to back up an opinion, or using them to determine if a player is brick or not.

 

[Yoof]

I'd like to know what goal you are referring to when you mention an unintentional cross by the way? Surely you can't mean the Sheffield Utd free kick, which he absolutely meant.

 

[Yoof]

I don't think they are unfair questions. I just doubt your ability to distinguish talent. Eriksen is targeted by opposition teams and closed out of games. With more talented forwards - Son, NJ - to worry teams, I think Eriksen will get more space. He's only 23!! Remember people slating Rose (now 25) wishing him out the team and out of the club?

Thanks.

I've actually watched Eriksen play regularly from the age of 16 and was delighted when we signed him, I've been very happy with his performances overall but that doesn't mean I can't point out faults in his game or his poor form in 2015. I don't know why me questioning Eriksen's suitability to the #10 role is being taken as a personal attack.

 

[parklane1]

I think the trouble might be that when someone brings up stats to back up their opinion (which they've likely formed by watching the player or team in question), some people interpret that as having the opinion based solely on those stats.

What a banal argument anyway - surely everyone can agree that using your eyes alone and using stats alone each have respective weaknesses, and that using them together is always better?

Bingo.

 

[scaramanga]

Bingo.

Yet every time someone argues a point backed up with stats you dismiss them.

 

[scaramanga]

Well that descended quickly!

I have no idea of the history here but I think you're both actually agreeing with each other!

Statistics are facts. The interpretation of them is a skill. Using stats is the right thing to do to a) scope a player, b) sense check the scouting of a player and c) assessing the performance of a player. Statistics are being used more and more in all walks of life and all industries. One statistic will not show the full story. A number of them more than likely will, if the person digesting them knows what they are doing.

I don't understand what is so sensitive about using stats to back up an opinion, or using them to determine if a player is **** or not.

Imagine yourself in a world where the internal combustion engine has just been invented. Then imagine the reaction of those who have spent their lives making horseshoes or shovelling horse brick or whatever else makes a horse go.

That's pretty much the situation with stats here.

 

[parklane1]

Yet every time someone argues a point backed up with stats you dismiss them.

I hate to go down your route of dissing some posters who you disagree with, but maybe you should go back through my posts and read them properly. How many times do I have to say I worked with stats in football for years and they can be very useful.