linekar78 Posted 27 November 2006 Posted 27 November 2006 On the back of another gutting defeat I thought it would be interesting to work out the ratios of games started to results for the squad. It throws up a few interesting comparisons, see Porter / Welsh (we've never won a game Welsh has started!) and Hammond / Fryatt. Also Lows record as a starter is better than people might think. For the sake of keeping it all the same I've counted Aston villa as a draw over 90min. If someone wanted to do one for sub appearances I'm sure that'd be interesting too. Apologies for the wonky lines - tables are tricky in html for idiots like me, if someone can make it look nicer feel free. Goalkeepers Games Started Won Drew Lost Logan 13 38.5 38.5 23.1 Henderson 9 22.2 33.3 44.4 Defenders Maybury 8 25.0 25.0 50.0 Kisnorbo 15 26.7 40.0 33.3 Kenton 14 28.6 35.7 35.7 McCarthy 16 31.3 31.3 37.5 Mcauley 11 36.4 45.5 18.2 Stearman 13 30.8 30.8 38.5 Johansson 19 26.3 42.1 31.6 Midfielders Wesolowski 6 33.3 66.7 0.0 Hughes 15 26.7 40.0 33.3 Tiatto 15 40.0 26.7 33.3 Johnson 13 30.8 30.8 38.5 Low 11 54.5 27.3 18.2 Williams 5 60.0 0.0 40.0 Sylla 4 25.0 50.0 25.0 Porter 7 28.6 42.9 28.6 Welsh 5 0.0 80.0 20.0 Strikers Hume 16 31.3 31.3 37.5 O Grady 6 33.3 50.0 16.7 Fryatt 11 18.2 27.3 54.5 Hammond 10 50.0 40.0 10.0
The People's Hero Posted 27 November 2006 Posted 27 November 2006 Unbeaten with Wesolowski starting. Interesting.
linekar78 Posted 27 November 2006 Author Posted 27 November 2006 Unbeaten with Wesolowski starting. Interesting. Yes, I think it shows how the injuries to him and Williams have hampered us. Even though they've not played many games we seem to do well when they play. Same goes for Porter.
brookfox Posted 27 November 2006 Posted 27 November 2006 The figures sugest Hammond and O'Grady as our front 2. Hmmmm!!
linekar78 Posted 27 November 2006 Author Posted 27 November 2006 The figures sugest Hammond and O'Grady as our front 2. Hmmmm!! haha - obviously we should factor in goals and assists as well to prevent that!
BartonFox Posted 27 November 2006 Posted 27 November 2006 The figures sugest Hammond and O'Grady as our front 2. Hmmmm!! Statistics, dont'ch just love them.
The People's Hero Posted 27 November 2006 Posted 27 November 2006 The figures sugest Hammond and O'Grady as our front 2. Hmmmm!! This is how low we have sunk. This is why the club NEEDS this takeover and shake up. Rotten to the core. TD out. AD out. RK out.
brookfox Posted 27 November 2006 Posted 27 November 2006 Statistics, dont'ch just love them. Well I've got a degree in maths and work as an analyst, so I'm afraid to say yes! Based on points per game we'd play: Logan Stearman McArthy McAuley Kenton Low Williams Weso Tiatto O'Grady Hammond
Thracian Posted 27 November 2006 Posted 27 November 2006 On the back of another gutting defeat I thought it would be interesting to work out the ratios of games started to results for the squad. It throws up a few interesting comparisons, see Porter / Welsh (we've never won a game Welsh has started!) and Hammond / Fryatt. Also Lows record as a starter is better than people might think. For the sake of keeping it all the same I've counted Aston villa as a draw over 90min. If someone wanted to do one for sub appearances I'm sure that'd be interesting too. Apologies for the wonky lines - tables are tricky in html for idiots like me, if someone can make it look nicer feel free. Goalkeepers Games Started Won Drew Lost Logan 13 38.5 38.5 23.1 Henderson 9 22.2 33.3 44.4 Defenders Maybury 8 25.0 25.0 50.0 Kisnorbo 15 26.7 40.0 33.3 Kenton 14 28.6 35.7 35.7 McCarthy 16 31.3 31.3 37.5 Mcauley 11 36.4 45.5 18.2 Stearman 13 30.8 30.8 38.5 Johansson 19 26.3 42.1 31.6 Midfielders Wesolowski 6 33.3 66.7 0.0 Hughes 15 26.7 40.0 33.3 Tiatto 15 40.0 26.7 33.3 Johnson 13 30.8 30.8 38.5 Low 11 54.5 27.3 18.2 Williams 5 60.0 0.0 40.0 Sylla 4 25.0 50.0 25.0 Porter 7 28.6 42.9 28.6 Welsh 5 0.0 80.0 20.0 Strikers Hume 16 31.3 31.3 37.5 O Grady 6 33.3 50.0 16.7 Fryatt 11 18.2 27.3 54.5 Hammond 10 50.0 40.0 10.0 So, just for example, seeing Levi came on at 1-0 down on Saturday, does that go down as a draw next to his name or a defeat?. Same the week before? Cos it doesn't half make a difference to the impression given. By rights, Porter, Hammond and McAuley all came on with the score 1-0 and the part they played in finished 0-0. How can it be fair to associate them with the loss?.
BartonFox Posted 27 November 2006 Posted 27 November 2006 Well I've got a degree in maths and work as an analyst, so I'm afraid to say yes! Based on points per game we'd play: Logan Stearman McArthy McAuley Kenton Low Williams Weso Tiatto O'Grady Hammond McCarthey, McAuley, Low, Tiatto, Hammond and O'Grady are enough to make me want to jack it in.
linekar78 Posted 27 November 2006 Author Posted 27 November 2006 So, just for example, seeing Levi came on at 1-0 down on Saturday, does that go down as a draw next to his name or a defeat?. Same the week before? Cos it doesn't half make a difference to the impression given. By rights, Porter, Hammond and McAuley all came on with the score 1-0 and the part they played in finished 0-0. How can it be fair to associate them with the loss?. Yep agree, thats why these are just for games started and don't include substitute appearances.
Kilworthfox Posted 27 November 2006 Posted 27 November 2006 McCarthey, McAuley, Low, Tiatto, Hammond and O'Grady are enough to make me want to jack it in. McCarthy? are you sure old boy
teblin Posted 27 November 2006 Posted 27 November 2006 Williams Weso is the middle was obvious before the stats though i'd have thought.
Thracian Posted 27 November 2006 Posted 27 November 2006 Yep agree, thats why these are just for games started and don't include substitute appearances. I'm sure that deep down, there may be some relevent and interesting pointers from such figures, further enhanced or otherwise, but statistics can sure open up a can of worms and you have to be very careful to factor in all aspects before being convinced by the conclusions.
linekar78 Posted 27 November 2006 Author Posted 27 November 2006 Williams Weso is the middle was obvious before the stats though i'd have thought. Yes, true. Just goes to show how much we've missed them in the face of our inferior replacements IMO. The main points I was getting at I guess were Porter should start, Low's more use than Welsh and that Hammond does well whenever he starts.
linekar78 Posted 27 November 2006 Author Posted 27 November 2006 I'm sure that deep down, there may be some relevent and interesting pointers from such figures, further enhanced or otherwise, but statistics can sure open up a can of worms and you have to be very careful to factor in all aspects before being convinced by the conclusions. Completely agree - just thought it'd make an interesting post, generate some new discussion and give people some ammo to back up their opinions.
The People's Hero Posted 27 November 2006 Posted 27 November 2006 I can't believe we've only lost once with Hammond starting. That's unbelievable. He's so sh it. Do you think he galvanises the rest of the lads and encourages more effort as they realise we're really up against it with him in the side?
lookwhaticando Posted 27 November 2006 Posted 27 November 2006 Defenders Maybury 8 25.0 25.0 50.0 Kisnorbo 15 26.7 40.0 33.3 Kenton 14 28.6 35.7 35.7 McCarthy 16 31.3 31.3 37.5 McAuley 11 36.4 45.5 18.2 ** Stearman 13 30.8 30.8 38.5 Johansson 19 26.3 42.1 31.6 [...] Strikers Hume 16 31.3 31.3 37.5 O Grady 6 33.3 50.0 16.7 Fryatt 11 18.2 27.3 54.5 Hammond 10 50.0 40.0 10.0 **** ** Not surprised his loss-ratio is lower. Class defender. **** Same for Hammond. One less start than Fryatt, but a much higher win rate.
Kilworthfox Posted 27 November 2006 Posted 27 November 2006 I can't believe we've only lost once with Hammond starting. That's unbelievable. He's so sh it. Do you think he galvanises the rest of the lads and encourages more effort as they realise we're really up against it with him in the side? yes sorry elvis you just aint good enough
The People's Hero Posted 27 November 2006 Posted 27 November 2006 I've decided the explanation is that having Hammond in the side encourages complacency and sloppiness from the opposition.
lookwhaticando Posted 27 November 2006 Posted 27 November 2006 McCarthy? are you sure old boy ** whoops
Thracian Posted 27 November 2006 Posted 27 November 2006 ** whoops I don't think that's a whoops! Barton Fox, as I recall, is not the biggest fan of McCarthy.
TheShrew Posted 27 November 2006 Posted 27 November 2006 On the back of another gutting defeat I thought it would be interesting to work out the ratios of games started to results for the squad. It throws up a few interesting comparisons, see Porter / Welsh (we've never won a game Welsh has started!) and Hammond / Fryatt. Also Lows record as a starter is better than people might think. For the sake of keeping it all the same I've counted Aston villa as a draw over 90min. If someone wanted to do one for sub appearances I'm sure that'd be interesting too. Apologies for the wonky lines - tables are tricky in html for idiots like me, if someone can make it look nicer feel free. Goalkeepers Games Started Won Drew Lost Logan 13 38.5 38.5 23.1 Henderson 9 22.2 33.3 44.4 Defenders Maybury 8 25.0 25.0 50.0 Kisnorbo 15 26.7 40.0 33.3 Kenton 14 28.6 35.7 35.7 McCarthy 16 31.3 31.3 37.5 Mcauley 11 36.4 45.5 18.2 Stearman 13 30.8 30.8 38.5 Johansson 19 26.3 42.1 31.6 Midfielders Wesolowski 6 33.3 66.7 0.0 Hughes 15 26.7 40.0 33.3 Tiatto 15 40.0 26.7 33.3 Johnson 13 30.8 30.8 38.5 Low 11 54.5 27.3 18.2 Williams 5 60.0 0.0 40.0 Sylla 4 25.0 50.0 25.0 Porter 7 28.6 42.9 28.6 Welsh 5 0.0 80.0 20.0 Strikers Hume 16 31.3 31.3 37.5 O Grady 6 33.3 50.0 16.7 Fryatt 11 18.2 27.3 54.5 Hammond 10 50.0 40.0 10.0 Hammond to start against Norwich. Maybury to be re-united with Craig. Tiatto, Weso and Williams as a central 3 (rough, tough yet creative) People to forget the last minute of extra time against villa and stop hounding Low, there are plenty i'd get rid of before him. Useful stats! Help back up my controversial views!
linekar78 Posted 27 November 2006 Author Posted 27 November 2006 Hammond to start against Norwich. Maybury to be re-united with Craig. Tiatto, Weso and Williams as a central 3 (rough, tough yet creative) People to forget the last minute of extra time against villa and stop hounding Low, there are plenty i'd get rid of before him. Useful stats! Help back up my controversial views! Stats can back up almost any view thats the risk, but I think these help show which players get us off to a sound footing in games - and I agree that Hammonds running helps us more than having the 'show pony' with no pace and recently no form whos trying to break the world record for offsides that is Fryatt.
The People's Hero Posted 27 November 2006 Posted 27 November 2006 Stats can back up almost any view thats the risk, but I think these help show which players get us off to a sound footing in games - and I agree that Hammonds running helps us more than having the 'show pony' with no pace and recently no form whos trying to break the world record for offsides that is Fryatt. I'm not defending Fryatt here... but Elvis is hardly the world's greatest exposer/breaker of the offside trap is he?
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.