PLAYER WATCH v Sheffield United

[tonyoz]

4 hours ago, joey_big_nose said:

I think what you're doing is great! So much more objective than all the opinions that get thrown around.

Do you have average scores so far for the season? Would be interesting to see how Rothwell compares to Travis or Edun compares to Pickering, or Gallagher compares to Dolan.

I haven’t done the averages yet but it’s on my list! I was pondering yesterday …….to avoid any skewing of the average score I need to avoid those short cameo performances. I thought either 30 or 45 minutes as the minimum play time before a performance can be included in the calculation?

I try to be objective but nobody’s perfect. And any 2 fans will often  argue about the controversial incidents; it’s all part of the enjoyment of the game. In fact I often argue with myself…..”That was a +2 for Dolan…..no it wasn’t…..it was +3 if you take the shimmy into account!” But in the end I hope the general picture comes through. 

[tonyoz]

2 hours ago, JacknOry said:

Yep, relly appreciate what you do. I dont always comment or like, but I always read - except I still have not brought myself to check the Fulham game.

Since I mentioned that I don’t get a lot of feedback, I’ve had lots of encouraging comments - it’s been great. To be honest I needed a boost after doing the Fulham game. If the Sheffield game had gone the same way I would likely have given up. (Tyrone and Bigdogg “made” me do the Fulham game….heh heh!)

[broadsword]

14 hours ago, tonyoz said:

I haven’t done the averages yet but it’s on my list! I was pondering yesterday …….to avoid any skewing of the average score I need to avoid those short cameo performances. I thought either 30 or 45 minutes as the minimum play time before a performance can be included in the calculation?

I try to be objective but nobody’s perfect. And any 2 fans will often  argue about the controversial incidents; it’s all part of the enjoyment of the game. In fact I often argue with myself…..”That was a +2 for Dolan…..no it wasn’t…..it was +3 if you take the shimmy into account!” But in the end I hope the general picture comes through. 

Do a weighted average. Multiply each score by how many minutes they were in the game, then divide by the number of minutes they've played this season

[RoverCanada]

17 hours ago, tonyoz said:

I haven’t done the averages yet but it’s on my list! I was pondering yesterday …….to avoid any skewing of the average score I need to avoid those short cameo performances. I thought either 30 or 45 minutes as the minimum play time before a performance can be included in the calculation?

I try to be objective but nobody’s perfect. And any 2 fans will often  argue about the controversial incidents; it’s all part of the enjoyment of the game. In fact I often argue with myself…..”That was a +2 for Dolan…..no it wasn’t…..it was +3 if you take the shimmy into account!” But in the end I hope the general picture comes through. 

Your game summaries are always worth a look! I appreciate them for sure.

Couple suggestions for working out averages:

- Why not just divide all the totals by total minutes played and then conver to a 'points/90' style statistic? Should control for starts/subs. (Next step is controlling for game situation haha...)

- One concern is normalising for position, as players in different positions are bound to have different 'exposure' to risky play, and thus notches on your scorecards. I suspect it'll be more fair to compare within position. Would be interesting to test my suspicion against a distribution of events per position... But I guess we'll see what numbers come up first!

[tonyoz]

7 hours ago, broadsword said:

Do a weighted average. Multiply each score by how many minutes they were in the game, then divide by the number of minutes they've played this season

Yes…I’ve already got my spreadsheet set up!

 

4 hours ago, RoverCanada said:

Your game summaries are always worth a look! I appreciate them for sure.

Couple suggestions for working out averages:

- Why not just divide all the totals by total minutes played and then conver to a 'points/90' style statistic? Should control for starts/subs. (Next step is controlling for game situation haha...)

- One concern is normalising for position, as players in different positions are bound to have different 'exposure' to risky play, and thus notches on your scorecards. I suspect it'll be more fair to compare within position. Would be interesting to test my suspicion against a distribution of events per position... But I guess we'll see what numbers come up first!

Yes I’ve already worked out the averages on this basis….I.e. points/90 style. I discovered that the data becomes severely distorted for some short sub appearances. This is because some short cameo experiences were ‘eye-poppingly’ good (e.g. Khadra v Hull) and would not, realistically,  be sustainable for a full 90 minute shift. So I decided to include only contributions which were at least 45 minutes long. (I’ll review that later). 

The ‘overall contribution’ system is not perfect of course. It’s meant to show how each player contributed positively or negatively to the overall performance and, as you say, players in some positions will have more opportunities to show what they can do than others. Kaminski is the obvious example…..his contribution cannot be compared accurately to the outfield players, nevertheless his score tells me whether he did a good or bad job that particular day.

For outfield players it’s less of a concern. If Lenihan has more opportunities to contribute than say, Travis, and if both do a good job that day……then Lenihan really will have contributed more than Travis to the performance of the team. This will be reflected in his score.

The number of opportunities to score depends too on the nature of the game. If it’s a ‘backs to the wall’ type of game, then defenders will score well if they do their jobs effectively and attackers will probably not do so well. If we are ‘flying’ in a game, then expect the forwards to contribute more. 
 

 

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

55 minutes ago, tonyoz said:

Yes…I’ve already got my spreadsheet set up!

 

Yes I’ve already worked out the averages on this basis….I.e. points/90 style. I discovered that the data becomes severely distorted for some short sub appearances. This is because some short cameo experiences were ‘eye-poppingly’ good (e.g. Khadra v Hull) and would not, realistically,  be sustainable for a full 90 minute shift. So I decided to include only contributions which were at least 45 minutes long. (I’ll review that later). 

The ‘overall contribution’ system is not perfect of course. It’s meant to show how each player contributed positively or negatively to the overall performance and, as you say, players in some positions will have more opportunities to show what they can do than others. Kaminski is the obvious example…..his contribution cannot be compared accurately to the outfield players, nevertheless his score tells me whether he did a good or bad job that particular day.

For outfield players it’s less of a concern. If Lenihan has more opportunities to contribute than say, Travis, and if both do a good job that day……then Lenihan really will have contributed more than Travis to the performance of the team. This will be reflected in his score.

The number of opportunities to score depends too on the nature of the game. If it’s a ‘backs to the wall’ type of game, then defenders will score well if they do their jobs effectively and attackers will probably not do so well. If we are ‘flying’ in a game, then expect the forwards to contribute more. 
 

 

It’s an easy to understand system that pretty accurately reflects who did what in the game.

Edited November 11, 2021 by Tyrone Shoelaces

[tonyoz]

1 hour ago, Tyrone Shoelaces said:

It’s an easy to understand system that pretty accurately reflects who did what in the game.

I wish I’d said that!

[tonyoz]

This is my working model for those who asked about averages. I only included appearances which lasted 45 minutes or longer. Where necessary I scaled the scores to the equivalent of a full game. It took me at least 2 games to get used to the scoring system so the first 2 or 3 columns will be less reliable. Averages are in red. 

 

EDIT: I need to remove the Hull column….I forgot I only marked the second half!

 

 

Edited November 12, 2021 by tonyoz

[joey_big_nose]

On 10/11/2021 at 23:00, tonyoz said:

I haven’t done the averages yet but it’s on my list! I was pondering yesterday …….to avoid any skewing of the average score I need to avoid those short cameo performances. I thought either 30 or 45 minutes as the minimum play time before a performance can be included in the calculation?

I try to be objective but nobody’s perfect. And any 2 fans will often  argue about the controversial incidents; it’s all part of the enjoyment of the game. In fact I often argue with myself…..”That was a +2 for Dolan…..no it wasn’t…..it was +3 if you take the shimmy into account!” But in the end I hope the general picture comes through. 

From a statto perspective I guess the way to manage appearance length is to multiply the score by % where 100% is 93 mins to allow for extra time?

Edited November 12, 2021 by joey_big_nose

[joey_big_nose]

10 hours ago, tonyoz said:

This is my working model for those who asked about averages. I only included appearances which lasted 45 minutes or longer. Where necessary I scaled the scores to the equivalent of a full game. It took me at least 2 games to get used to the scoring system so the first 2 or 3 columns will be less reliable. Averages are in red. 

 

 

Amazing - really shows the impact of players who are underrated like Lenihan and Gallagher. Also maybe that the likes of Dolan and Edun are overrated.

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

17 minutes ago, joey_big_nose said:

Amazing - really shows the impact of players who are underrated like Lenihan and Gallagher. Also maybe that the likes of Dolan and Edun are overrated.

Mm, even Diaz is only on 11. All our defenders have good scores yet we keep very few clean sheets. This isn’t a criticism of Tony’s way of working, I think he’s pretty objective.

Edited November 12, 2021 by Tyrone Shoelaces

[tonyoz]

I think:

• it’s a work in progress. 
• scaling scores for part-game appearances is dodgy. Lenihan’s mighty score v Cardiff is a case in point…..he came off injured on 50 odd minutes. I think the minimum appearance time to be included in the table should be increased.
• Nyambe, Lenihan and Ayala are our experienced and reliable defenders and hence contribute well to most games as shown. Pickering and Edun are average. Other defenders are young and/or haven’t played many games. Van Hecke’s nightmare game doesn’t feature because he was sent off after 30 odd minutes.
• our midfield is a weak area but Buckley is starting to make bigger contributions. Our wingers are young and blow hot and cold. Wonderful one week, woeful the next.
• Diaz scores goals and makes a nuisance of himself but he has some big flaws too. You can see how I allocated his marks on any of the “commentaries.”  Gallagher is a strange one. He can be frustrating to watch but whoscored.com rates him as our best player by quite some margin.
• I’m getting better with practice I think!

[Wood26]

13 hours ago, joey_big_nose said:

Amazing - really shows the impact of players who are underrated like Lenihan and Gallagher. Also maybe that the likes of Dolan and Edun are overrated.

I would never say Gallagher is one of our best players, but when looking at the impact he makes of the whole game then he does very well.

Take away missing easy chances, he’s an outlet for us and his height gives us a different option and makes defenders think. Was it Fulham, when still 1-0, we kept pumping it but had no Gallagher to compete. And defensively when he went off against Derby we looked it so much trouble.

I see him as similar to Armstrong (before the goals came) and he was out on the wing. A lot of fans calling for him not to play, but having him there with his pace made a difference to how the opposition played. (Not saying Gallagher has the pace, but the big man outlet). I think it was Cardiff, we aimed all our long balls out left for Gallagher to try win and if he did Diaz was in behind him.

Dolan gets a lot of love, and I love Dolan, but Gallagher probably offers more if we are honest.

Edited November 13, 2021 by Wood26

[tonyoz]

Updated averages. Players must have been on the pitch for 60 minutes to be included (part-game scores are scaled to 90 minutes.)

[

Partial game Hull removed, QPR added.

 

[Wheelton Blue]

Just a thought @tonyoz ...

Van Hecke hasn't got a score for the Fulham game, probably cos he wan't on the pitch long enough.

Shouldn't the fact that he got an early red - and as a result altering the game for the worse - count against him?

Edited November 13, 2021 by Wheelton Blue

[roversfan99]

12 hours ago, Wood26 said:

I would never say Gallagher is one of our best players, but when looking at the impact he makes of the whole game then he does very well.

Take away missing easy chances, he’s an outlet for us and his height gives us a different option and makes defenders think. Was it Fulham, when still 1-0, we kept pumping it but had no Gallagher to compete. And defensively when he went off against Derby we looked it so much trouble.

I see him as similar to Armstrong (before the goals came) and he was out on the wing. A lot of fans calling for him not to play, but having him there with his pace made a difference to how the opposition played. (Not saying Gallagher has the pace, but the big man outlet). I think it was Cardiff, we aimed all our long balls out left for Gallagher to try win and if he did Diaz was in behind him.

Dolan gets a lot of love, and I love Dolan, but Gallagher probably offers more if we are honest.

I would totaly disagree that Gallagher is a good outlet, in fact I would say he is as poor as I can remember a striker being at that side of the game in a Rovers shirt.

His first touch, hold up play and his ability to back into defenders and bring others into play is so poor it is untrue, and has never shown signs of improving, and that brings further pressure on us. He often over runs the ball or mis controls the ball too which hands possession back to our opponents and can lead to a seige on our penalty box when we are holding onto a lead, and often causes us to throw unnecessary points away.

The 2 perfect examples would be the Luton and Coventry games in which we threw 2 nil leads away in both, not overlooking the fact that he was key in us getting that 2 nil lead in the latter.

I am not saying that he is useless, I think when we are pressing high early in games his physicality and his running power can be very useful, he never will be prolific but he does chip in with a reasonable number of goals and he is useful at the front post from defensive corners but as an outlet, I think that he is piss poor.

[tonyoz]

2 hours ago, Wheelton Blue said:

Just a thought @tonyoz ...

Van Hecke hasn't got a score for the Fulham game, probably cos he wan't on the pitch long enough.

Shouldn't the fact that he got an early red - and as a result altering the game for the worse - count against him?

Exactly so, it’s  an imperfect system, I know, but it’s designed to prevent short cameo performances distorting the overall scores. For instance, if I scale van Hecke’s  Fulham performance to 90 minutes, he would score -9. ………..well deserved obviously. But I would then have to include everyone else’s short cameos to be consistent. For instance, Khadra’s introduction v Hull was about the same length of time (36 min). He had a blinder…..scoring 18. To scale this up to 90 min, he would end up with about 56 points…..far more than anyone has ever scored over 90 minutes. Or, similarly, Carter v Cardiff…..in his 35 minute cameo, he also scored a commendable 18.

No one, over 90 min has ever got close to 40 points…….so I decided on the 60 minute rule, imperfect as it is!
 

Edited November 13, 2021 by tonyoz

[tonyoz]

2 hours ago, roversfan99 said:

I would totaly disagree that Gallagher is a good outlet, in fact I would say he is as poor as I can remember a striker being at that side of the game in a Rovers shirt.

His first touch, hold up play and his ability to back into defenders and bring others into play is so poor it is untrue, and has never shown signs of improving, and that brings further pressure on us. He often over runs the ball or mis controls the ball too which hands possession back to our opponents and can lead to a seige on our penalty box when we are holding onto a lead, and often causes us to throw unnecessary points away.

The 2 perfect examples would be the Luton and Coventry games in which we threw 2 nil leads away in both, not overlooking the fact that he was key in us getting that 2 nil lead in the latter.

I am not saying that he is useless, I think when we are pressing high early in games his physicality and his running power can be very useful, he never will be prolific but he does chip in with a reasonable number of goals and he is useful at the front post from defensive corners but as an outlet, I think that he is piss poor.

You have a similar view to me. Many fans were down on Gallagher early in the season but, credit where it’s due, he’s made an impact in recent games. So much so that many of us were lamenting his absence as a potential disaster before the Sheffield game. I was so down on him last September that I made my first ever Player Watch post……concentrating ONLY on Gallagher’s performance v Luton. it was dire! If you’re interested, you can read it here:

 

[Exiled in Toronto]

11 hours ago, tonyoz said:

Updated averages. Players must have been on the pitch for 60 minutes to be included (part-game scores are scaled to 90 minutes.)

[

Partial game Hull removed, QPR added.

 

Your system is bearing fruit Tony. There’s no doubt in my mind that midfield is our weak point: Johnson past it, Rothwell disappearing for long periods, Travis having too much to do. When the opposition get beyond Buckley’s pressing, there’s not much to stop them running at the defence. Our defenders get good scores because they do a lot of good things but most games they have too much to do IMO. My hope is that Davenport earns a regular spot alongside Travis - no coincidence Sheff Utd had no shots from the D I thought - and I’d start Buckley every game now.

[tonyoz]

2 hours ago, Exiled in Toronto said:

Your system is bearing fruit Tony. There’s no doubt in my mind that midfield is our weak point: Johnson past it, Rothwell disappearing for long periods, Travis having too much to do. When the opposition get beyond Buckley’s pressing, there’s not much to stop them running at the defence. Our defenders get good scores because they do a lot of good things but most games they have too much to do IMO. My hope is that Davenport earns a regular spot alongside Travis - no coincidence Sheff Utd had no shots from the D I thought - and I’d start Buckley every game now.

Yep! I agree completely with all of that. So many teams have waltzed through our midfield with little or no effective response. It’s hard to mark this stuff too…….a bad pass or an ineffective tackle is easy to spot but when players just go missing, it’s much more complex. What I’m trying to say is that the scores are my best estimate, that’s all.

Defence-wise, I think Ayala has been a revelation. He’s made those around him better……including Lenihan.

[Upside Down]

In the case of getting a Red or a Yellow there should be a fixed score for that also. I mean you have -5 for an own goal. So when Vah Hecke got sent off after 20 mins or whatever it was that should receive a fixed score. 

Picking up Yellow cards definitely affects a players performance during a game as they can't commit to tackles etc. And the effect of a Red is pretty obvious.

[Roverinbelfast]

Thanks very much for this tonyoz. I really enjoyed going over it and by and large I think it is a very accurate reflection of our season so far. But (there's always a but lol) I was shocked to see Buckley so low in the scores. I personally think he's been a revelation this season. (when not playing as a false 9)

[Mike E]

22 minutes ago, Upside Down said:

In the case of getting a Red or a Yellow there should be a fixed score for that also. I mean you have -5 for an own goal. So when Vah Hecke got sent off after 20 mins or whatever it was that should receive a fixed score. 

Picking up Yellow cards definitely affects a players performance during a game as they can't commit to tackles etc. And the effect of a Red is pretty obvious.

What about 'taking one for the team' cards? Positives, surely?

[Upside Down]

Maybe. But when it counts towards a one match suspension....

[Wood26]

10 hours ago, roversfan99 said:

I would totaly disagree that Gallagher is a good outlet, in fact I would say he is as poor as I can remember a striker being at that side of the game in a Rovers shirt.

His first touch, hold up play and his ability to back into defenders and bring others into play is so poor it is untrue, and has never shown signs of improving, and that brings further pressure on us. He often over runs the ball or mis controls the ball too which hands possession back to our opponents and can lead to a seige on our penalty box when we are holding onto a lead, and often causes us to throw unnecessary points away.

The 2 perfect examples would be the Luton and Coventry games in which we threw 2 nil leads away in both, not overlooking the fact that he was key in us getting that 2 nil lead in the latter.

I am not saying that he is useless, I think when we are pressing high early in games his physicality and his running power can be very useful, he never will be prolific but he does chip in with a reasonable number of goals and he is useful at the front post from defensive corners but as an outlet, I think that he is piss poor.

I agree with a lot you say there minus the piss poor bit but I appreciate it’s your opinion.

But out of our squad, what we have, I feel we are better of with him in the team. Diaz is a no brainer. I think we our at our best with Diaz Dolan Gallagher. And if I had to make changes to that, it would be Poveda/Khadra into replace Dolan.

For what we have, I think Gallagher starting makes us stronger.