'Leicester City: A Defence in Numbers'

[SharpeFox]

Hi everyone, just thought I'd post a link to the in-depth article I wrote analysing Leicester's central defensive statistics throughout the league season.

The figures do make rather interesting reading.

To read at your leisure.

http://www.thesharpeend.com/2012/04/leicester-city-defence-in-numbers.html#more

[Jaspa]

Good Work

[Libertine Dream]

I always believed and maintained that Mills and Bamba wqs our best defensive partnership, personally think theyre far better than Morgan or StLedger. I'd always stick by Mills' footballing abilities and he was unfairly criticised because of the pricetag that he couldn't control. However it would appear his poor attitude and discipline will cost the club and himself. But if he is the nob everybody makes him out to be then I'll happily push him out the door, at least Morgan will show effort and desire whilst not having a big ego.

I think sometimes we forget that footballers are only human and Mills was probably as affected by the pricetag as the bank balance. They have all the same emotions but are set apart because of their great ability to play football, so we expect perfection straight away, all the time.

[CountesthorpeFox]

Excellent work.

I like how you try and balance the article. Although I dont fully agree with your conclusions.

[Dan]

Link don't work.

[Swalker]

People should jump off the bamba isn't good enough bandwagon seeing as he is part of our pairings who have conceded the fewest goals sort game

[LCFCCHRIS]

Good article

[Happy Fox]

Very insightful article top work , our defense isn't as bad as it sounds obviously Mills has burnt his bridges for whatever reason that is not known to us, it would also be interesting to see the midfield's contribution to the defense imo a midfield containing Gallagher, Wellens and King would in theory imo concede more goals but obviously I cannot prove that without the aid of stats.

[Raw Dykes]

An enjoyable read. The stats were very interesting. I do think there was a bit too much conjecture, though. Didn't seem very impartial.

[Captain...]

How do you come to the conclusion that Mills and Bamba are the best partnership, from your stats:

Bamba and Morgan have conceded less goals and had less time to form a partnership (as you say centrebacks need time to form a partnership so arguably their stats will improve), you compare their first 5 against Mills and Bamba who conceded 7 goals, surely as a true comaprison you would have to take their first 5 games together, you would also have to take into account that Mills and Bamba had pre-season together, whereas Morgan didn't.

You also don't take into account the disciplinary record, (Mills 2 reds) the rest of the back four in each game and the midfield in front of them (it is a team game) if you are going to put in caveats about opposition then you need to take all factors into account and not just those that prove the point you are trying to make.

I would almost forgive this, but you then decided to turn a balanced look at statistics into an attack on NP first over Mills when you don't know what happened with Mills and why he has been dropped and the reasons behind it. You also harp on about Gradel, not in the team and went out on loan for first team football, there was no falling out with Gradel, but he wanted first team football at a lower level, SSL, wanted first team football, NP couldn't guarantee it, he was placed on the transfer list to give him the opportunity of that should another club be interested, they weren't SSL was always in NP's plans and his chance came, he took it, Beckford and NP did not have a falling out, how you can say that is just nonsense, they may have had an argument but anything more than that was press speculation, if you didn't notice he started the next game. Finally Campbell wasn't performing for us, he was allowed to go on loan, he didn't want to come back, it had very little to do with NP.

You could accuse NP of getting rid of Wayne Brown and we all know why that was, but other managers have obviously deemed it ok, and yes Mills, but even then he was still willing to put him on the bench and keep him as part of the squad until he decided not to turn up to training sessions and reserve matches.

The only person here with a grudge us you, and unfortunately that has turned an analysis of defensive statistics into a pile of tosh.

[Rand94]

pretty good read

[acooling08]

SSL + Mills would be my pairing.

I think the only thing the stats show is that the more games a pairing has, the better the partnership develops.

[Dan]

The link finally worked it was my net pissing around.

I'm pro-Pearson, and anti-Mills, and I've got to admit, that was a huge eye opener.

I think one thing as well this proves is how over-rated St Ledger is. He's not that bad a defender but he always seems to be playing when we let in 3, don't think he's up to a great deal, which is a shame.

However, get one done on the pairing of Hobbs and Brown. They are the partnership Pearson's bought in the past, for a combined fee less than a single one of those players cost (except Bamba). This alone is why I think next year you'll be seeing Morgan partnering one of Pearson's new signings in a solid, more consistent defence that will outdo any of these 6 partnerships.

[Dan]

How do you come to the conclusion that Mills and Bamba are the best partnership, from your stats:

Bamba and Morgan have conceded less goals and had less time to form a partnership (as you say centrebacks need time to form a partnership so arguably their stats will improve), you compare their first 5 against Mills and Bamba who conceded 7 goals, surely as a true comaprison you would have to take their first 5 games together, you would also have to take into account that Mills and Bamba had pre-season together, whereas Morgan didn't.

You also don't take into account the disciplinary record, (Mills 2 reds) the rest of the back four in each game and the midfield in front of them (it is a team game) if you are going to put in caveats about opposition then you need to take all factors into account and not just those that prove the point you are trying to make.

I would almost forgive this, but you then decided to turn a balanced look at statistics into an attack on NP first over Mills when you don't know what happened with Mills and why he has been dropped and the reasons behind it. You also harp on about Gradel, not in the team and went out on loan for first team football, there was no falling out with Gradel, but he wanted first team football at a lower level, SSL, wanted first team football, NP couldn't guarantee it, he was placed on the transfer list to give him the opportunity of that should another club be interested, they weren't SSL was always in NP's plans and his chance came, he took it, Beckford and NP did not have a falling out, how you can say that is just nonsense, they may have had an argument but anything more than that was press speculation, if you didn't notice he started the next game. Finally Campbell wasn't performing for us, he was allowed to go on loan, he didn't want to come back, it had very little to do with NP.

You could accuse NP of getting rid of Wayne Brown and we all know why that was, but other managers have obviously deemed it ok, and yes Mills, but even then he was still willing to put him on the bench and keep him as part of the squad until he decided not to turn up to training sessions and reserve matches.

The only person here with a grudge us you, and unfortunately that has turned an analysis of defensive statistics into a pile of tosh.

Equally good post as the OP.

[ozleicester]

Interesting stats, cheers

[volpeazzurro]

I congratulate you on a really interesting piece of work which is food for thought, it must have taken you quite a while to complete. I too was not too enamoured with Mills but find the stats quite thought provoking. I went to one game (can't remember which one now) and concentrated for a while on everything he did as he seemed little more than a hoofer to me though in fairness, he didn't appear to show a lack of commitment. It wasn't until his 8th touch of the ball that he managed to find another blue shirt. The first two passes that he fizzed up into the air supposedly like a cross field pass went out for throw-ins at around head height. Another pas was seemingly was intended to be down the channels and was heavily over-hit and went out for a goal kick and the rest went straight to the opposition. On none of these occasions was he under pressure and in all except one, he could have made a simpler shorter worthwhile pass to one of his own players.

For me, Mills appeared to want to make the Hollywood pass far too often and that is where perhaps a strong word from NP constructively may have helped i.e. keep things simple. His positional sense also appeared to be a bit lacking on more than one occasion. I like everyone else don't really know what went on in the alleged bust up with NP but there can always only be only one boss for the benefit of the team as a whole and sometimes, even if it appears to be cutting your nose off to spite the face. Fergie for example, because of perceived problems, got rid of McGrath, Ince, Stam and Beckham to name but a few very talented individuals.

I don't profess to know what the answer is for next season but believe that sometimes stability and continuity are the key. I think the right partner for Morgan (i.e. he's very good at what he does imo but is perhaps not the most mobile) could reap benefits. Had it been just a couple or so years back I would have said that Tunchev was that ideal player, i.e. a very good reader of the game and mobile with that touch of class. I have a feeling that at least Mills and St Ledger will be on their way if not even Bamba as well.

Cheers and well done.

[Thracian]

How do you come to the conclusion that Mills and Bamba are the best partnership, from your stats:

How do you come to the conclusion that Mills and Bamba are the best partnership, from your stats:

Bamba and Morgan have conceded less goals and had less time to form a partnership (as you say centrebacks need time to form a partnership so arguably their stats will improve), you compare their first 5 against Mills and Bamba who conceded 7 goals, surely as a true comaprison you would have to take their first 5 games together, you would also have to take into account that Mills and Bamba had pre-season together, whereas Morgan didn't.

You also don't take into account the disciplinary record, (Mills 2 reds) the rest of the back four in each game and the midfield in front of them (it is a team game) if you are going to put in caveats about opposition then you need to take all factors into account and not just those that prove the point you are trying to make.

I would almost forgive this, but you then decided to turn a balanced look at statistics into an attack on NP first over Mills when you don't know what happened with Mills and why he has been dropped and the reasons behind it. You also harp on about Gradel, not in the team and went out on loan for first team football, there was no falling out with Gradel, but he wanted first team football at a lower level, SSL, wanted first team football, NP couldn't guarantee it, he was placed on the transfer list to give him the opportunity of that should another club be interested, they weren't SSL was always in NP's plans and his chance came, he took it, Beckford and NP did not have a falling out, how you can say that is just nonsense, they may have had an argument but anything more than that was press speculation, if you didn't notice he started the next game. Finally Campbell wasn't performing for us, he was allowed to go on loan, he didn't want to come back, it had very little to do with NP.

You could accuse NP of getting rid of Wayne Brown and we all know why that was, but other managers have obviously deemed it ok, and yes Mills, but even then he was still willing to put him on the bench and keep him as part of the squad until he decided not to turn up to training sessions and reserve matches.

The only person here with a grudge us you, and unfortunately that has turned an analysis of defensive statistics into a pile of tosh.

How do you come to the conclusion that Mills and Bamba are the best partnership, from your stats:

Bamba and Morgan have conceded less goals and had less time to form a partnership (as you say centrebacks need time to form a partnership so arguably their stats will improve), you compare their first 5 against Mills and Bamba who conceded 7 goals, surely as a true comaprison you would have to take their first 5 games together, you would also have to take into account that Mills and Bamba had pre-season together, whereas Morgan didn't.

You also don't take into account the disciplinary record, (Mills 2 reds) the rest of the back four in each game and the midfield in front of them (it is a team game) if you are going to put in caveats about opposition then you need to take all factors into account and not just those that prove the point you are trying to make.

I would almost forgive this, but you then decided to turn a balanced look at statistics into an attack on NP first over Mills when you don't know what happened with Mills and why he has been dropped and the reasons behind it. You also harp on about Gradel, not in the team and went out on loan for first team football, there was no falling out with Gradel, but he wanted first team football at a lower level, SSL, wanted first team football, NP couldn't guarantee it, he was placed on the transfer list to give him the opportunity of that should another club be interested, they weren't SSL was always in NP's plans and his chance came, he took it, Beckford and NP did not have a falling out, how you can say that is just nonsense, they may have had an argument but anything more than that was press speculation, if you didn't notice he started the next game. Finally Campbell wasn't performing for us, he was allowed to go on loan, he didn't want to come back, it had very little to do with NP.

You could accuse NP of getting rid of Wayne Brown and we all know why that was, but other managers have obviously deemed it ok, and yes Mills, but even then he was still willing to put him on the bench and keep him as part of the squad until he decided not to turn up to training sessions and reserve matches.

The only person here with a grudge us you, and unfortunately that has turned an analysis of defensive statistics into a pile of tosh.

Bamba and Morgan have conceded less goals and had less time to form a partnership (as you say centrebacks need time to form a partnership so arguably their stats will improve), you compare their first 5 against Mills and Bamba who conceded 7 goals, surely as a true comaprison you would have to take their first 5 games together, you would also have to take into account that Mills and Bamba had pre-season together, whereas Morgan didn't.

You also don't take into account the disciplinary record, (Mills 2 reds) the rest of the back four in each game and the midfield in front of them (it is a team game) if you are going to put in caveats about opposition then you need to take all factors into account and not just those that prove the point you are trying to make.

I would almost forgive this, but you then decided to turn a balanced look at statistics into an attack on NP first over Mills when you don't know what happened with Mills and why he has been dropped and the reasons behind it. You also harp on about Gradel, not in the team and went out on loan for first team football, there was no falling out with Gradel, but he wanted first team football at a lower level, SSL, wanted first team football, NP couldn't guarantee it, he was placed on the transfer list to give him the opportunity of that should another club be interested, they weren't SSL was always in NP's plans and his chance came, he took it, Beckford and NP did not have a falling out, how you can say that is just nonsense, they may have had an argument but anything more than that was press speculation, if you didn't notice he started the next game. Finally Campbell wasn't performing for us, he was allowed to go on loan, he didn't want to come back, it had very little to do with NP.

You could accuse NP of getting rid of Wayne Brown and we all know why that was, but other managers have obviously deemed it ok, and yes Mills, but even then he was still willing to put him on the bench and keep him as part of the squad until he decided not to turn up to training sessions and reserve matches.

The only person here with a grudge us you, and unfortunately that has turned an analysis of defensive statistics into a pile of tosh.

Confirming the eternal problem with statistics, the need to include every known factor.

[Captain...]

Confirming the eternal problem with statistics, the need to include every known factor.

I disagree, the eternal problem with stats is that unless approached with a completely unbiased and agenda free attitude, all you are doing is manipulating numbers to prove the point you want to make in this case, Mills good, NP bad.

Staitstically speaking Morgan and Bamba have a better defensive record than Mills and Bamba, then a bunch of caveats and manipulation were introduced to prove the opposite.

[Guest ttfn]

I disagree, the eternal problem with stats is that unless approached with a completely unbiased and agenda free attitude, all you are doing is manipulating numbers to prove the point you want to make in this case, Mills good, NP bad.

Staitstically speaking Morgan and Bamba have a better defensive record than Mills and Bamba, then a bunch of caveats and manipulation were introduced to prove the opposite.

Well I'd suggest that 5 games does not form a representative sample.

Think it's really well researched but slightly clumsily written - I'm not sure there's a particular agenda there.

[okie fox]

Small differences between different pairings are not significant because of the small sample sizes. The 'StLedger effect' does stand out however.

[Simo86]

From looking at the stats I wouldn't mind seeing how Mills and Morgan would play together.................

[Guest ttfn]

From looking at the stats I wouldn't mind seeing how Mills and Morgan would play together.................

HOOOOOOOF

[Captain...]

Well I'd suggest that 5 games does not form a representative sample.

Think it's really well researched but slightly clumsily written - I'm not sure there's a particular agenda there.

It was fine until this point:

He is the club captain, the record five million pound signing, and the victim of a rather intense vilification from a certain number of supporters and, more importantly, from Nigel Pearson. It has been very well documented that he and Mills had a somewhat grand scale fall out; the rumours of a deliberate clash of heads passed through the grapevine even quicker than it took Pearson to drop him from the squad. But more significant than all of these is that, statistically, he is our best defender – and he hasn’t played since February.

This casts a hugely unflattering light over a vital aspect of Nigel Pearson’s managerial credentials. His complete stubbornness and rigid grudge-holding at the expense of the team is a shocking indictment of the appalling nature of his man-management skills. This is not the first time Pearson has fallen out with and/or pushed out players who have had the audacity to disagree with his methods or question his authority: there was DJ Campbell, who then went to shoot Blackpool into the playoffs; Max Gradel who went to cause havoc on the wing for Leeds before becoming a regular for French side Saint-Étienne in their top division; Jermaine Beckford whose future at the club next season is anything but set in stone and Sean St Ledger who, after being placed on the transfer list following a changing room bust up with Pearson, somehow managed to survive and make his way back into regular contention.

When it just became an attack on Pearson for not playing Mills, which is a shame as it was interesting reading until then, and apart from the majority of that being untrue, it also serves no purpose other than to slag off NP.

I agree 5 games is not a sufficient sample, and as no game is the same it can't be extrapolated out, and it also doesn't take into account the fact that Bamba and Morgan have spent the least amount of time playing together and have not had the chance to form an understanding, there is also the fact that Bamba and Mills were together under Sven when we secured some really dull 0-0 draws towards the start of the season, defensively sound yes, but we didn't take any risks and played awful football.

Even if Mills is statistically the best defender on the pitch, if he gets 2 red cards a season and misses 7 games a season, then he cannot be relied upon, and if he thinks he is bigger than the team, and that he should be immune from being dropped after a couple of awful performances and is not willing to play as part of a squad then he is not worth the statistical advantage he brings. Not to mention his awful distribution.

Finally we win games as a team and we lose them as a team, we can look at the Southampton game, we won that comfortably because of the way we played, not which players we played, and that is the point of a team sport, that is one of the few games I saw this season where we imposed our game on the opposition and we wiped the floor with them, and Mills was a part of that, but so were the 10 other players on the pitch, if we did that all season we would have won, in all honesty we have 4 decent centrebacks at the club, they have their good qualities and their bad, what we haven't done with any of them is form a decent partnership that we can build on for next season that is why we are where we are.

[Les-TA-Jon]

I don't think we can blame Pearson too much for "complete stubbornness and rigid grudge-holding at the expense of the team" regarding the Mills issue.

1- Pearson gets his teams/players doing well by creating a squad ethic and mentality that is shared by everyone, they understand their role in the team and squad, they understand that it is a season of Saturday/Tuesday/Saturday/Tuesday and rotation is inevitable, they work hard and play for each other

2- If Mills did indeed say or do anything that went against this mentality, which we can assume is essentially what he did, then Pearson has every right to drop him and leave him out in the cold.

3- we don't know the details of the "bust-up"

Pearson works more with Mentality than Talent. He has been trying to create this new mentality ever since he came back. Given that he inherited a squad of players that had come here expecting a big pay packet and an easy ride to promotion, it was a big task for Pearson to overcome that and create a massive shift in mentality. His failure to do it quickly/the time it takes to do it effectively is one of the main reasons for our lack of success and consistency this season.

This was a difficult task for Pearson, coupled with great expectation from the fans and owners, now add his Captain openly acting against his work and you can see why Mills was dropped.

You could argue that Pearson could/should have swallowed his pride and just played Mills despite the bust up, for the "good of the team" but in the long run that just dilutes what he is trying to achieve in this 'mentality shift' and also set's a dangerous precedent to the other players:

You can openly contradict me, my methods and where I'm trying to take this football club, we'll have a bust up, you'll be dropped for a few games and then you'll be straight back in the team.

As Sir Alex always says: At a football club, no one can ever be allowed to be more important than the manager.

[RumbleFox]

I like Bamba. His face is friendly. X