Transfer Rumours Transfer Rumours thread

  • 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
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
johnsonsbaby said:
No it doesn't. For a start, the first thing it does is estimate the level of the buying club.
Click to expand...

Which is only one of the five factors they use in the second step to estimate the transfer value.

Overall the approach is quite valid, with correlative significance, albeit not regressive significance. But the inclusion of the book value adds what is essentially a meaningless accounting convention to the valuation of a unique asset. So it skews the data in the case of players with very high or zero book values, like Rudiger and Pickford.
 
johnsonsbaby said:
What you talking about, he played 30 times for city and scored a handful of goals. Sakho got sent home from preseason and didn't play for us again, just as Nolito joined city <doh>
Click to expand...

he hardly played in the 2nd half of the season but i take your point.

Sahko played 8 games last season so he didn't miss a year of football either and was a key player in Palace avoiding the drop
 
Swarbs said:
Which is only one of the five factors they use in the second step to estimate the transfer value.

Overall the approach is quite valid, with correlative significance, albeit not regressive significance. But the inclusion of the book value adds what is essentially a meaningless accounting convention to the valuation of a unique asset. So it skews the data in the case of players with very high or zero book values, like Rudiger and Pickford.
Click to expand...

Rudiger only moved to roma for 9m though. Surely his book value is still pretty low?
 
  • Like
Reactions: johnsonsbaby
Tobes said:
The market dictates the price, it is what it is.

Chamberlain is overpriced at £35m

*shrugs*
Click to expand...

Almost every player was "overpaid" for, which is impossible by definition of market value, although they do admit this a sign of recent price inflation they didn't account for
 
astro said:
Almost every player was "overpaid" for, which is impossible by definition of market value, although they do admit this a sign of recent price inflation they didn't account for
Click to expand...
The Neymar deal set a new bar, and the market prices moved with it.
 
Don't forget when we bought Sakho for £18 million from PSG he'd been benched, stripped of the captaincy and was getting criticism for his fitness and weight

Sounds familiar, right

Making £8 million on him is a result really
 
Tobes said:
The Neymar deal set a new bar, and the market prices moved with it.
Click to expand...

True, it's how commodities work, it doesn't mean that all prices suddenly shoot up into the hundreds of millions but it incrementally raises and inflates the price of every other player beneath that top layer, artificially
 
Swarbs said:
Which is only one of the five factors they use in the second step to estimate the transfer value.

Overall the approach is quite valid, with correlative significance, albeit not regressive significance. But the inclusion of the book value adds what is essentially a meaningless accounting convention to the valuation of a unique asset. So it skews the data in the case of players with very high or zero book values, like Rudiger and Pickford.
Click to expand...
35 factors actually <whistle> which means the book value doesn't have the significance you're assigning it.

Nobody could claim to put an exact valuation on a player but the science these people use has meant they have 81% correct prediction rate which makes it quite valid as you say and fairly interesting to talk about when there's little to no football going on <laugh>

Coincidentally last year they had Wijnaldum value down as £24.8m [£25m] and Mane as £35.5m [£34m] - I'd say that was fairly spot on.
 
Last edited:
johnsonsbaby said:
35 factors actually <whistle> which means the book value doesn't have the significance you're assigning it.

Nobody could claim to put an exact valuation on a player but the science these people use has meant they have 81% correct prediction rate which makes it quite valid as you say and fairly interesting to talk about when there's little to no football going on <laugh>
Click to expand...

do you know how the factors are weighed? are you assuming that book value is of the same import as the others?
 
johnsonsbaby said:
35 factors actually <whistle> which means the book value doesn't have the significance you're assigning it.

Nobody could claim to put an exact valuation on a player but the science these people use has meant they have 81% correct prediction rate which makes it quite valid as you say and fairly interesting to talk about when there's little to no football going on <laugh>
Click to expand...

This is true, however that also means a 19% inaccurate prediction rate. Given that the table posted above shows the biggest discrepancies between their predictions and actual values, it's fair to say these transfers are part of the 19%. Also it's very easy to create a model that has a high prediction rate when you keep adding in more and more variables, particularly ones like book value which will obviously have some colinearity with transfer fees.

The inclusion of book value does actually explain most of their worst predictions as well. Not, imo, a coincidence that the vast majority of the most 'overvalued' players were those with little or no book value, nor that the three 'undervalued' players were the three with their book values still high.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back