http://www.theguardian.com/football...ute-champions-league-brentford-matthew-benham
They crunch numbers in London to find players.
City transfer thread
- Thread starter originallambrettaman
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
http://www.theguardian.com/football...ute-champions-league-brentford-matthew-benham
They crunch numbers in London to find players.
A quote from Matthew Benham:
"It is a phenomenon I see again and again in football. If I want to know how good a player is I want to speak to a person who has seen that player play one hundred times in all conditions. What tends to happen is so many people in football will see that player for forty minutes and decide they are the oracle.”
SydneyTiger14 - You've got yourself convinced you are right and **** will repeat itself; good for you. I would rather accept that all of these types of players are a calculated gamble and that once signed they deserve our support and enthusiasm. On your reckoning Fergie would have left Ole Gunnar Solskjær in Norway. Maybe Ole was our 'scout' who kept an old mate up to date on a decent prospect? Whichever way, perhaps we should go with your statistics and pessimism!
Where've you got that quote from? That runs pretty directly counter to the impression the Guardian article gives which interviewed Benham.
It's a quote from Benham in the book - The Nowhere Men: The Unknown Story of Football's True Talent Spotters
They use stats to scout potential targets, but to suggest they don't then go and watch them before signing them is ridiculous.
I have got through three chapters of the book, finding it hard work to be honest.
Don't think it's ridiculous. The Moneyball system they base it off at the Oakland A's involved Billy Beane generally refusing to go and watch players he was interested in so as not to ruin his perception of them. The Guardian article misled me on their methodology though, so it's not exactly the same as Moneyball.
I still think there's a lot more room for stats in scouting than are currently used.
Why be cautious, what is the point, he is signed, a done deal, embrace it, be enthusiastic and hope he does the business; it is just as possible that a player like Davis could go backwards, or Aluko could hit a purple-patch - it's a new season, all bets off for at least ten games, preferably 12-15 because of the window - and then we start pulling them apart if they are not performing. It's great, we have an unknown in Dio, another in Snodgrass and a resurgent Diame; I have been a big critic of Hudds, but wouldn't it be great if he found a player in Dio, Maloney or Diame to showboat is control? It will only be a matter of time before Chazz will be asking us all what formation and team we would adopt, or our options, which we have, isn't that bloody great? All of our cups should be half-full as an absolute minimum, as we have massively dodged the bullets that could have been ours.
The point is saving me frustration and anguish for getting my hopes up about a player who may flop. If/when he starts banging them in, I'll be just as enthusiastic and happy as anyone else.
I absolutely agree, and I'm ecstatic that we've held on to Mo, Elmo and Dawson. Much more significant business.
Don't think I'm being negative? Negative would be doing a Roo and classifying him in that ridiculous file of striker-impersonators, going on about him not being able to hit a barn door, etc. etc.
Just being realistic about the nature of a goal scoring record in Norway.
Ah the proven striker like Torres the goal machine at Liverpool who flopped at Chelsea. Liverpool spent most of the Torres money on Andy Carrol another proven striker who flopped at his new club. I bet there were loads of good stats on both of those.
The bottom line is that signing a new player is a gamble, so do you risk a little bit or a lot of money. There is no garantee (sp) that the more you pay the better you get.
The bottom line is that signing a new player is a gamble, so do you risk a little bit or a lot of money. There is no garantee (sp) that the more you pay the better you get.
Yep at the end of the day 1.7m is a good fee - if he does well then it's a bargain, and if not then it's no big issue.
Just spoke to Alan McGregor, asked him about the new signing, "never heard of him" was his response!!
Is there any information on the Internet about Steve Bruce's thoughts on our fantastic new goal machine?
Sorry for being realistic about the quality of our signings, and being much more happy about the players we've held on to.
You've already written off Clucas, so you're one to talk.