Ade is a pretty terrible finisher, misses a stack load of easy chances as well but seems to position himself better to get himself more of them.
-
Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara
Roberto Soldado
- Thread starter Boonie
- Start date
Ade is a pretty terrible finisher, misses a stack load of easy chances as well but seems to position himself better to get himself more of them.
NaijaSpurs
Les Ferdinand
Shame he managed to do sweet fcuk all for us last season though, so what happened to his positioning then?
Maltese Falcon
Niko Kranjcar
Can I inquire on what evidence you make that assertion. Definitely not on reliable stats - his shot accuracy is actually twice as good as Soldado's
As with all people who dismiss stats as useless, they're only useless when inconvenient.
Maltese Falcon
Niko Kranjcar
I could never dismiss stats out of turn; I work with stats every day and they bring bread to my table!
Probably because of that I get rubbed the wrong way when people use them nebulously as the whole basis of an argument; that's BS
However in order to give credence or else debunk an already postulated specific hypothesis, stats are invaluable. In this case the hypothesis was that Ade's finishing was inferior to Soldado's - an assertion that lends itself to a stats assessment.
Maltese Falcon
Niko Kranjcar
says he who knows everything...
Not everything. Just most things.
Maltese Falcon
Niko Kranjcar
parklane1
Tony Galvin
Not true in all cases, I have used stats while coaching but they very rarely tell the whole truth. They are a useful tool to use but that are not the holy bible as so many seem to think.
Then you're collecting, using or interpreting them wrong.
Stats are what's left when you strip away all of the subjective crap
Maltese Falcon
Niko Kranjcar
The first thing you are taught in epidemiology is to debunk this exact idea. Stats are a tool and like all tools they can be used properly or wrongly and they can be pretty much subjective depending on the actual parameters you could to study.
Typically stats are extremely useful for a very narrow, specific hypothesis but may be totally misleading for wider ranging postulates, especially when stats are used to actually formulate said postulates - not the other way round.
In this case the reason I used stats was because an assertion was made that Ade was a terrible finisher than Soldado - so a specific stat (shot accuracy) was ideal to verify if this was the case or not.
parklane1
Tony Galvin
Stats in football ( most sport for that matter) are a tool, sorry mate I worked at the FA for years and they are nothing more then that. One of the biggest cons around is the belief that stats are the answer to everything they are not and never will be. Unfortuately they are many who quote them and many fools who believe they are the answer to everything. They are useful and can help but that is all.
Last edited:
That's not what I said at all. I said Ade is a terrible finisher which is true, I've seen him miss stacks of easy chances for us and at previous clubs. Often scuffs it tamely to the goalie etc. Shot accuracy also doesn't tell you much, was he clean through, shooting on his weaker foot, from distance, through a crowd of players, does it include accuracy of headers in that as well etc?
braineclipse
Steve Sedgley
I could never dismiss stats out of turn; I work with stats every day and they bring bread to my table!
Probably because of that I get rubbed the wrong way when people use them nebulously as the whole basis of an argument; that's BS
However in order to give credence or else debunk an already postulated specific hypothesis, stats are invaluable. In this case the hypothesis was that Ade's finishing was inferior to Soldado's - an assertion that lends itself to a stats assessment.
Rubs me the wrong way too...
To operationally defining "shot accuracy" as finishing without any reasoning or comparisons to other players doesn't add up to me. According to the same site both Chamakh and Jonathan Walters are in the top 5 of strikers with 15+ games last season in terms of shot accuracy. Not quite the hallmarks of an invaluable stat I would say.
When do they teach you about sample size then? And the importance of replications? I don think shot accuracy is a particularly good measurement of finishing. Based on a small sample like this I struggle to see how this really supports any side of an argument. The stat presented is far from ideal as far as I can tell.
parklane1
Tony Galvin
That maybe your opinion ( and of course you are entitled to that), however so many fans who quote facts do so to try and prove/justify a point that are trying to prove. That is not what stats are for, as I have said many times they are a tool but they very rarely tell the whole picture.
That's what i see mostly, people using stats along with context as a tool to support their arguments for or against certain subjects - then someone will get bent out of shape because the stats go against their opinion, rather than try and debate the subject further.
Jurgen the German
Erik Thorstvedt
Ade is in a contract year which means he will score 35 goals, so for that reason, if an offer comes in for either player, we may have to listen to offers for Soldado first.
parklane1
Tony Galvin
The problem is that some fans use stats not to support their argument but to try and prove their argument is right, there is nothing wrong in using stats the fault is in thinking that the stats prove they are right. And once again I will say stats do not tell the full story in most instances.
People get " bent out of shape" when those fans who do that think that stats are the full story, they are not.