Eljero Elia coming back?

[Lighthouse]

Amazing we finished 7th in the PL with so many sh!t or "average at best" players. Think of where we could be with some good ones!!

 

I didn't realise Long and Elia constituted 'so many players'.

 

To answer your question, we could have made the top 4 with just a little more firepower in the second half of the season.

[krissyboy31]

I didn't realise Long and Elia constituted 'so many players'.

 

To answer your question, we could have made the top 4 with just a little more firepower in the second half of the season.

 

Long, Elia, Tadic, Pelle, Mane, Ward-Prowse, Davis, Djuricic (probably missed some) have all bee slaged off on here as not good enough!! I for one, am reasonably pleased with a squad as sh!t as this.

[Crazy Diamond]

Bit weird to be looking up player's wives on Facebook and reporting back if you ask me. Like contacting players that have been linked with us - Alexander Büttner comes to mind.

[Lighthouse]

Long, Elia, Tadic, Pelle, Mane, Ward-Prowse, Davis, Djuricic (probably missed some) have all bee slaged off on here as not good enough!! I for one, am reasonably pleased with a squad as sh!t as this.

 

We were 1 goal away from having the best defence in the League and only finished 7th. I think the criticism of our attacking players was legitimate. If you take out the Villa and Sunderland games our GF tally would have been solidly in the bottom half.

[doddisalegend]

We were 1 goal away from having the best defence in the League and only finished 7th. I think the criticism of our attacking players was legitimate. If you take out the Villa and Sunderland games our GF tally would have been solidly in the bottom half.

 

Why would we want to do that.........

 

If we take out all the games we kept a clean sheet in out defence would have been crap

[Matthew Le God]

We were 1 goal away from having the best defence in the League and only finished 7th. I think the criticism of our attacking players was legitimate.

 

We were the 6th highest scorers in the league. Scored more than Liverpool.

 

If you take out the Villa and Sunderland games our GF tally would have been solidly in the bottom half.

 

What would be the logic behind doing that? Why would you not count those games?

[Aziz Yebda]

I hope he signs, better than JWP and provides skill and pace. Blokes a baller. LAD

[Lighthouse]

What would be the logic behind doing that? Why would you not count those games?

 

You're the boring statistician, surely you've heard of outliers?

 

Apart from those two games we scored 40 goals in 36, barely over a goal a game. Knocking 6 and 8 past a bunch of no-hopers isn't representative our attacking prowess, which is where our problems lay last season.

[shurlock]

We were the 6th highest scorers in the league. Scored more than Liverpool.

 

What would be the logic behind doing that? Why would you not count those games?

 

Because they are outliers. If your argument is robust, removing them shouldnt make a difference. It does. It makes a massive difference - under these circumstances, it's not unknown to exclude the observations from the dataset.

 

More importantly, goals only matter to the extent that they win teams points. But the value of those 14 goals in terms of additional points was negligible.

 

Despite this, you persist. You really aren't the brightest, are you?

Edited 20 July, 2015 by shurlock

[nosaint]

Not matter what you feel about Elia, there's no need for the insults towards Advocaat. He has always seemed a man of honour to me. But then again, that's just typical of this forum, always ready to be nasty, regardless of whether it's justified or not. I just hope he hasn't read this thread.

 

You are completely wrong. I merely wrote the first name of Advocaat which to my surprise changed in to four stars after posting. Try this yourself if you don't believe me. I am a Dutchman and I think it is strange that a common first name is considered inappropriate, altough I am aware that in English his first name has another connotation. Not so in Dutch and D.i.c.k. Advocaat is a household name in Holland. I have followed his career as active player and as coach for over 40 years and I rate him highly as a coach. And also I did not say anything negative about Elia. I hope he will get another chance at Southampton or Sunderland or maybe even Brentford who recently appointed a Dutch coach.

I tried to reply yesterday but got a message that I am only allowed 3 posts in 24 hours and had to wait for a day, unless I pay 5 pounds to become a member. Funny forum this.

[krissyboy31]

You're the boring statistician, surely you've heard of outliers?

 

Apart from those two games we scored 40 goals in 36, barely over a goal a game. Knocking 6 and 8 past a bunch of no-hopers isn't representative our attacking prowess, which is where our problems lay last season.

God it must have been boring watching such an enept attack!

 

Sent from my D5803 using Tapatalk

[shurlock]

You're the boring statistician, surely you've heard of outliers?

 

Apart from those two games we scored 40 goals in 36, barely over a goal a game. Knocking 6 and 8 past a bunch of no-hopers isn't representative our attacking prowess, which is where our problems lay last season.

 

That's an insult to real statisticians. He's basically a pedant with factoids, training for the pub quiz that nobody wants to play. Worse he's not even objective - he's as agenda-driven as the best on here.

Edited 20 July, 2015 by shurlock

[nosaint]

Irony I suppose. If not ****=dîck

 

The latter Sir. Cleaning windows has given you a clearer vision as Herr Ludwig.

[simo]

Hi I'm looking for the Elia thread do you know where it went it seems I've stumbled into the muppet show again !?

[Lighthouse]

God it must have been boring watching such an enept attack!

 

Well it was when we lost to Everton, West Brom, Swansea, Sunderland, Stoke, Leicester, Burnley, Spurs, Liverpool and Sheff Utd. Plus those draws against Villa, West Ham and West Brom.

[stevewanyamasfcs]

I hope he signs, better than JWP and provides skill and pace. Blokes a baller. LAD

 

He's better than all our players bar Wanyama. How Liverpool aren't offering 20 mill is beyond me.

[Latheal]

Because they are outliers. If your argument is robust, removing them shouldnt make a difference. It does. It makes a massive difference - under these circumstances, it's quite common to exclude them from samples.

 

More importantly, goals only matter to the extent that they win teams points. But the value of those 14 goals in terms of additional points was negligible.

 

Despite this, you persist. You really aren't the brightest, are you?

 

To be fair, you could remove a couple of results from Spurs and Liverpool and their Goals For tally would be hampered as well. I take your point though, and no doubt we needed extra firepower during that time. It was plain to see Pelle was knackered and needed a rest. That whole period coincided with Morgan and Toby being out as well, Dusan not being as good as he was earlier on in the season, and the blatant inability of our midfielder's to score. We needed somebody else to step up, Mane did in the end.

 

I would love to see another striker here but can't see it happening. If we really wanted one, we'd go get Austin, surely. Jay Rod can play there, club seems to rate Gallagher highly, Seagar coming through and Long did a job there when asked (Chelsea away).

 

Elia does seem a bit of a weird one, unless somebody else is going out. Guan mentioned a CB and RM for around £20-25mil and that he's happy with the names being touted. I remember he said the same last year after Lallana went and we ended up with Tadic and Pelle, as well as Mane and Toby. That's good enough for me for now.

 

PS, those 14 extra goals were a cushion for a long part of the season. Pity they didn't count in the end.

[derry]

Was it an inept attack or two defensive midfielders with Davis and Ward-Prowse as two of the four attackers without scoring, lacking pace and playing sideways and backwards. Tadic carrying a groin injury made life very difficult for Pelle and whoever was the other attacker.

[Dark Munster]

You are completely wrong. I merely wrote the first name of Advocaat which to my surprise changed in to four stars after posting. Try this yourself if you don't believe me. I am a Dutchman and I think it is strange that a common first name is considered inappropriate, altough I am aware that in English his first name has another connotation. Not so in Dutch and D.i.c.k. Advocaat is a household name in Holland. I have followed his career as active player and as coach for over 40 years and I rate him highly as a coach. And also I did not say anything negative about Elia. I hope he will get another chance at Southampton or Sunderland or maybe even Brentford who recently appointed a Dutch coach.

I tried to reply yesterday but got a message that I am only allowed 3 posts in 24 hours and had to wait for a day, unless I pay 5 pounds to become a member. Funny forum this.

Hi nosaint, I think you'll find Ludwick was just joking. His dry British humour got lost in translation, it appears.

 

You're right though, this is a funny forum.

[nosaint]

Hi nosaint, I think you'll find Ludwick was just joking. His dry British humour got lost in translation, it appears.

 

You're right though, this is a funny forum.

 

OK in that case I misunderstood and I can see Ludwig's comment is quite amusing. No worries.

[Supersubpuckett]

elia is nowhere near good enough - he seems physically weak and mentally very flakey judging by the "i love you man" hug with mad eyes he gave rk when he scored against newcastle

[shurlock]

To be fair, you could remove a couple of results from Spurs and Liverpool and their Goals For tally would be hampered as well. I take your point though, and no doubt we needed extra firepower during that time. It was plain to see Pelle was knackered and needed a rest. That whole period coincided with Morgan and Toby being out as well, Dusan not being as good as he was earlier on in the season, and the blatant inability of our midfielder's to score. We needed somebody else to step up, Mane did in the end.

 

I would love to see another striker here but can't see it happening. If we really wanted one, we'd go get Austin, surely. Jay Rod can play there, club seems to rate Gallagher highly, Seagar coming through and Long did a job there when asked (Chelsea away).

 

Elia does seem a bit of a weird one, unless somebody else is going out. Guan mentioned a CB and RM for around £20-25mil and that he's happy with the names being touted. I remember he said the same last year after Lallana went and we ended up with Tadic and Pelle, as well as Mane and Toby. That's good enough for me for now.

 

PS, those 14 extra goals were a cushion for a long part of the season. Pity they didn't count in the end.

 

True, though it depends how far those results differed or departed from Spurs or Liverpool's other results. Just looking at the Sunderland game: if you take our goal-scoring form from last season and make some standard statistical assumptions about distributions, then we'd score 8 goals roughly once in every 7825 games. If that's not an outlier, then I'm MLG

 

Anyway, on more important matters, I wouldn't mind another striker, someone to take the load of Pelle. There are still question marks whether Jrod can play down the middle, though I thought he led the line pretty well at times in his first season (Wham away). Mane and Long have combined well (e.g. Chelsea away), though it does seem RK likes a target man. Long is surprisingly good in the air but the rest of his hold up play/close control lets him down. I wouldn't say no to Austin, even if I'm not his biggest fan. Remember Austin and Jrod have history together from their Burnley days.

 

I still think we need a genuine playmaker who can pick a pass in and around the box as well as know where the goal is. Mane is probably our most creative player; but if you look at him, Jrod, Juanmi and Long, they all rely on pace to a greater or less extent. That's why Elia is slightly surprising. Yes he's out-and-out-hug-the-touchline winger which the others aren't; but he still relies on pace - never mind, that he's so risk-averse for an attacking player. That only leaves Tadic who struggled when he played behind Pelle. I have high hopes for him -now he's injury-free- though there are no guarantees. The alternative is Ramirez -and, alas, that's not saying much.

Edited 20 July, 2015 by shurlock

[Goatboy]

True, though it depends how far those results differed or departed from Spurs or Liverpool's other results. Just looking at the Sunderland game: if you take our goal-scoring form from last season and make some standard statistical assumptions about distributions, then we'd score 8 goals roughly once in every 7825 games. If that's not an outlier, then I'm MLG

 

Anyway, on more important matters, I wouldn't mind another striker, someone to take the load of Pelle. There are still question marks whether he can play down the middle, though I thought he led the line pretty well at times in his first season (Wham away). Mane and Long have combined well (e.g. Chelsea away), though it does seem RK likes a target man. Long is surprisingly good in the air but the rest of his hold up play/close control lets him down. I wouldn't say no to Austin, even if I'm not his biggest fan. Remember Austin and Jrod have history together from their Burnley days.

 

I still think we need a genuine playmaker who can pick a pass in and around the box as well as know where the goal is. Mane is probably our most creative player; but if you look at him, Jrod, Juanmi and Long, they all rely on pace to a greater or less extent. That's why Elia is slightly surprising. Yes he's out-and-out-hug-the-touchline winger which the others aren't; but he still relies on pace - never mind, that he's so risk-averse for an attacking player. That only leaves Tadic who struggled when he played behind Pelle. I have high hopes for him -now he's injury-free- though there are no guarantees. The alternative is Ramirez -and, alas, that's not saying much.

 

Yep, reading all that we're lucky we weren't relegated.

[Latheal]

True, though it depends how far those results differed or departed from Spurs or Liverpool's other results. Just looking at the Sunderland game: if you take our goal-scoring form from last season and make some standard statistical assumptions about distributions, then we'd score 8 goals roughly once in every 7825 games. If that's not an outlier, then I'm MLG

 

Anyway, on more important matters, I wouldn't mind another striker, someone to take the load of Pelle. There are still question marks whether he can play down the middle, though I thought he led the line pretty well at times in his first season (Wham away). Mane and Long have combined well (e.g. Chelsea away), though it does seem RK likes a target man. Long is surprisingly good in the air but the rest of his hold up play/close control lets him down. I wouldn't say no to Austin, even if I'm not his biggest fan. Remember Austin and Jrod have history together from their Burnley days.

 

I still think we need a genuine playmaker who can pick a pass in and around the box as well as know where the goal is. Mane is probably our most creative player; but if you look at him, Jrod, Juanmi and Long, they all rely on pace to a greater or less extent. That's why Elia is slightly surprising. Yes he's out-and-out-hug-the-touchline winger which the others aren't; but he still relies on pace - never mind, that he's so risk-averse for an attacking player. That only leaves Tadic who struggled when he played behind Pelle. I have high hopes for him -now he's injury-free- though there are no guarantees. The alternative is Ramirez -and, alas, that's not saying much.

 

Yeah, not disagreeing at all. There wasn't that many 1-0s at Home (obviously had a few away). Koeman's way of defending a one goal lead seems to score a second. And no arguments here. Get your point totally, but those 8-0, 6-1, 4-0 wins were important for GD - and confidence. I'd argue that it also made Spurs and Liverpool come out and play against us more openly as they had to win. They were the two game where finishing (and ****e ref decisions) cost us a place or two.

 

The problem with strikers is the cost. Look at last season. Only 5 players hit 15 or more league goals. Three of them (Aguero, Costa, Sanchez) cost more than £30mil. One of them was the find of the season and now has a £40mil price tag (Kane) and the other is available for £15mil (Austin) if reports are to be believed. Of the others that scored more than Pelle, perhaps only Berahino we would stand a chance to sign (even that is debatable). I would love Austin here, but it doesn't look like the club is interested. In fact, it doesn't look like any of the top 10 are which is weird, so maybe something else is at play there (attitude, injury, wages?) as it seems an absolute no brainer. We play with one up most games, so would like pressure on Pelle, but keeping both of them happy would be difficult.

 

Hopefully Tadic can be that creative player. I see Mane and Tadic as total opposites. One is too greedy sometimes, the other not greedy enough. Looking forward to seeing both this year after a season in the prem. I just don't see where Elia fits with what we have coming through. Good point about hugging the touchline, but there are those like Isgrove, McQueen ect that do likewise. Seeing as we rarely play with out and out wingers, it seems a strange one.

 

We seem to always be hoping Ramirez comes good. he's going to struggle to get in the side as it is, let alone know where to play him. He may actually benefit from the number 10 role with Mane and Jay Rod outside him. But Tadic and Juanmi can also play there. On paper, our attacking options are much better than last year. We may well struggle at the back unless we get another CB over the line though - and soonish.

 

Will certainly be another entertaining season down at St Mary's, that's for sure.

[The9]

Anywhere in the attacking midfield line up of three vs anywhere in the attacking midfield line up of three.

 

Yep, I guess you're right.

 

Thanks for your input

 

Except Elia rarely played anywhere other than out wide and almost always on the left, and Ramirez's best position is in the middle and only plays out wide when he's in the process of being dropped for not being good enough to play CAM. They play completely different positions. The only consideration on whether one might affect the other's position in the squad would be wages.

[The9]

I didn't realise Long and Elia constituted 'so many players'.

 

To answer your question, we could have made the top 4 with just a little more firepower in the second half of the season.

 

We would have made the top 4 with 2 more defenders of the ability of Alderweireld and Fonte, and another DM of the ability of Schneiderlin, which would have left us not being in the position of having to put out understrength sides in most of the last 2 months of the season, but we can't afford those kind of quality back ups so it's a moot point really.

[The9]

elia is nowhere near good enough - he seems physically weak and mentally very flakey judging by the "i love you man" hug with mad eyes he gave rk when he scored against newcastle

 

Pretty sure no-one else came to those conclusions. Weak? Not at all, he was holding players off all the time, a lot stronger than Mane for instance. It also takes some weird perspective to see that celebration as a negative thing.

[The9]

Yeah, not disagreeing at all. There wasn't that many 1-0s at Home (obviously had a few away). Koeman's way of defending a one goal lead seems to score a second.

 

Koeman's way of defending a one goal lead last season was usually to continue defending with at least 7 players and not to concede, teams often get out of shape over-committing chasing an equaliser.

[scotty]

You are completely wrong. I merely wrote the first name of Advocaat which to my surprise changed in to four stars after posting. Try this yourself if you don't believe me. I am a Dutchman and I think it is strange that a common first name is considered inappropriate, altough I am aware that in English his first name has another connotation. Not so in Dutch and D.i.c.k. Advocaat is a household name in Holland. I have followed his career as active player and as coach for over 40 years and I rate him highly as a coach. And also I did not say anything negative about Elia. I hope he will get another chance at Southampton or Sunderland or maybe even Brentford who recently appointed a Dutch coach.

I tried to reply yesterday but got a message that I am only allowed 3 posts in 24 hours and had to wait for a day, unless I pay 5 pounds to become a member. Funny forum this.

 

Don't worry about it. I forked out my fiver to steve grants curry and golf fund a week ago, and he still hasn't noticed.

 

Edit.... apparently he has

Edited 20 July, 2015 by scotty

[The9]

Don't worry about it. I forked out my fiver to steve grants curry and golf fund a week ago, and he still hasn't noticed.

 

Golf? Back waxing.

[scotty]

Golf? Back waxing.

 

Euphemism of the day.

[shurlock]

We would have made the top 4 with 2 more defenders of the ability of Alderweireld and Fonte, and another DM of the ability of Schneiderlin, which would have left us not being in the position of having to put out understrength sides in most of the last 2 months of the season, but we can't afford those kind of quality back ups so it's a moot point really.

 

Unlikely; more a case of overkill.

[Lighthouse]

We would have made the top 4 with 2 more defenders of the ability of Alderweireld and Fonte, and another DM of the ability of Schneiderlin, which would have left us not being in the position of having to put out understrength sides in most of the last 2 months of the season, but we can't afford those kind of quality back ups so it's a moot point really.

 

What you're suggesting would probably have cost £40m going by the prices of those three players.

 

Could we not have found someone of similar quality and price to Mane, Pelle or Tadic? £10m in January to push us into the Champions League, I'd have thought that was worth a punt, given a healthy surplus from the summer.

 

We were only 10 points off in the end. 1 goal in any of those games I mentioned could have swung it.

[The9]

Unlikely; more a case of overkill.

 

What's "unlikely"? We failed to finish in the top 4 because we were unable to field key players in most of the matches after the draw at Chelsea and conceded 2 goals in 5 out of our last 6 league matches having only let in 2 or more in 4 of the other 32 matches combined.

 

Stoke saw Wanyama missing and Alderweireld out of the back line to play in midfield. 2 goals conceded.

Spurs was the same, 2 goals conceded again.

Sunderland saw Wanyama back but Schneiderlin missing, Alderweireld again in midfield. 2 goals conceded.

Leicester saw Schneiderlin missing again and Reed start with Wanyama in the middle. 2 goals conceded.

(Schneiderlin was also missing against Villa, but so was Villa's defence, so it didn't matter - and even then we let one in).

Man City saw us concede 2, again with Schneiderlin missing.

 

If we had the kind of backups Chelsea have, we'd have been able to replace those 3 key players without disrupting the entire squad or having to risk Yoshida or Reed to try and get results.

 

Realistically City away was a tough ask even with the first team on the pitch, but clean sheets at Stoke, Sunderland, and even only conceding one against Spurs, would have given us an extra 9 points. A clean sheet at Leicester would have got us 1 more.

 

The point is that we didn't even need to score any more goals in three of those matches, just maintain the level we'd been at all season and we'd have had 9 more points. We finished 10 behind Man U - and I've written off getting points at Leicester and Man City altogether.

 

So we were one point off the top 4 spot without needing to score ANY more goals provided the key defensive players were available.

[The9]

What you're suggesting would probably have cost £40m going by the prices of those three players.

 

Could we not have found someone of similar quality and price to Mane, Pelle or Tadic? £10m in January to push us into the Champions League, I'd have thought that was worth a punt, given a healthy surplus from the summer.

 

We were only 10 points off in the end. 1 goal in any of those games I mentioned could have swung it.

 

What I'm suggesting is unfeasible, just as I confirmed in the original post - it's a hypothesis not based on our real situation - but then so is forking out for a player who needs to score nearly 3 goals per match to get more points per game than cheaper defensive players who guarantee you an average of 2.5 points for any match in which they keep a clean sheet. *It was actually 2.7 for Saints last season, but 2.5 for the Prem over the 10 years prior to us getting back to the division.

 

To bring the discussion back to realistic terms and figures we might have been able to afford, one key DM so we could keep Alderweireld and Fonte together and have someone as good alongside whichever of Wanyama or Schneiderlin would have given us a much better chance of getting those 10 points. We paid £8m for Clasie - could that have been the difference? Selling Cork MIGHT have been the difference too, though it's more difficult to claim he's at that higher level - but clearly nor is Reed, yet, and nor was Alderweireld the DM solution.

 

So £8m for Clasie, and proven defensive statistics showing where and how we were actually getting our points. Does no-one else now realise why we didn't bother buying a Pelle replacement? It's because Long and Mane covered that position if needed, and goals weren't our focus, not conceding was, and those players are also cheaper to buy.

Edited 20 July, 2015 by The9

[The9]

Using data from the last ten seasons of the Premier League, Anderson and Sally compared the value of a goal scored and the value of a goal conceded. They found that scoring a goal, on average, is worth slightly more than one point, whereas not conceding produces, on average, 2.5 points per match. "Goals that don't happen are more valuable than goals that do happen," Anderson says. "It's counterintuitive. The question is: how do we measure something that doesn't happen? The challenge is to see the unseen."

 

Deep, deep into this article, which also has loads about Prozone, Saints, Redknapp and Woodward... http://www.wired.co.uk/magazine/archive/2014/01/features/the-winning-formula

[Lighthouse]

What I'm suggesting is unfeasible, just as I confirmed in the original post - it's a hypothesis not based on our real situation - but then so is forking out for a player who needs to score nearly 3 goals per match to get more points per game than cheaper defensive players who guarantee you an average of 2.5 points for any match in which they keep a clean sheet. *It was actually 2.7 for Saints last season, but 2.5 for the Prem over the 10 years prior to us getting back to the division.

 

To bring the discussion back to realistic terms and figures we might have been able to afford, one key DM so we could keep Alderweireld and Fonte together and have someone as good alongside whichever of Wanyama or Schneiderlin would have given us a much better chance of getting those 10 points. We paid £8m for Clasie - could that have been the difference? Selling Cork MIGHT have been the difference too, though it's more difficult to claim he's at that higher level - but clearly nor is Reed, yet, and nor was Alderweireld the DM solution.

 

So £8m for Clasie, and proven defensive statistics showing where and how we were actually getting our points. Does no-one else now realise why we didn't bother buying a Pelle replacement? It's because Long and Mane covered that position if needed, and goals weren't our focus, not conceding was, and those players are also cheaper to buy.

 

Our problems were never really in our defensive set up. Toby and Wanyama in front of Fonte and Yoshi was never a problem.

 

Someone who could have provided the first goal/assist against Everton, Swansea, West Brom and West Ham for example could have given us another 11 points right there. Finely balanced games in which we just couldn't score.

[nta786]

It all swings and roundabouts.

 

We've had our fair share of luck- the Fonte handball, the Targett foul on Fabregas and amongst others.

The table doesn't lie and we deserved 7th. End of.

[The9]

Our problems were never really in our defensive set up. Toby and Wanyama in front of Fonte and Yoshi was never a problem.

 

Someone who could have provided the first goal/assist against Everton, Swansea, West Brom and West Ham for example could have given us another 11 points right there. Finely balanced games in which we just couldn't score.

 

We conceded 2 goals per match in 5 of those 6 games having managed 18 clean sheets in matches where we hadn't fielded that combination of players in those positions, OF COURSE IT WAS A PROBLEM.

 

I'd also point out that I provided 6 successive matches, whilst you have cherry picked 4 matches from across half a season, and also supported my assertions by underlining that we would also have needed to provide clean sheets for those goals to have more than 1 point in value.

[shurlock]

What's "unlikely"? We failed to finish in the top 4 because we were unable to field key players in most of the matches after the draw at Chelsea and conceded 2 goals in 5 out of our last 6 league matches having only let in 2 or more in 4 of the other 32 matches combined.

 

Stoke saw Wanyama missing and Alderweireld out of the back line to play in midfield. 2 goals conceded.

Spurs was the same, 2 goals conceded again.

Sunderland saw Wanyama back but Schneiderlin missing, Alderweireld again in midfield. 2 goals conceded.

Leicester saw Schneiderlin missing again and Reed start with Wanyama in the middle. 2 goals conceded.

(Schneiderlin was also missing against Villa, but so was Villa's defence, so it didn't matter - and even then we let one in).

Man City saw us concede 2, again with Schneiderlin missing.

 

If we had the kind of backups Chelsea have, we'd have been able to replace those 3 key players without disrupting the entire squad or having to risk Yoshida or Reed to try and get results.

 

Realistically City away was a tough ask even with the first team on the pitch, but clean sheets at Stoke, Sunderland, and even only conceding one against Spurs, would have given us an extra 9 points. A clean sheet at Leicester would have got us 1 more.

 

The point is that we didn't even need to score any more goals in three of those matches, just maintain the level we'd been at all season and we'd have had 9 more points. We finished 10 behind Man U - and I've written off getting points at Leicester and Man City altogether.

 

So we were one point off the top 4 spot without needing to score ANY more goals provided the key defensive players were available.

 

If only, if only. There are no guarantees that we would have kept clean sheets - there's a reason why clean sheets are worth disproportionately, as you point out, its because they are very difficult to achieve and efforts to explain them probably have a large residual which is a fancy way of saying that they are pretty random (by extension, you are likely to be over-interpreting what a clean sheet means).

 

Not sure what maintaining the level we had all season means either - your fanciful scenario is premised on keeping away clean sheets. Never mind that up until the games you mention -by which time the vast majority of the season had passed- we had only managed four away clean sheets (not surprisingly two were against relegated sides and the other against ten men). For all intents and purposes, we would have had to match that record in vastly fewer games. That's not maintaining a level, that's exceeding it. By a long stretch.

 

We actually demonstrated we could be tight without the likes of Alderweireld, though Morgan's absence was a bigger loss. That said, we also missed a decent stand-in for Forster (something you fail to mention). If anything, our defense coped pretty well in those games (Leicester apart); but at key times, we conceded soft goals where either Davis or Gazzanigga should have done more.

 

And finally there are trade-offs: instead of splashing £27m on a Schneiderlin replacement, perhaps that money could have been spent on a more ruthless striker or a quality playmaker (indeed, it would have been the much cheaper option). Over the course of the season, its just as easy, if not easier to tally up games where it would have made the main difference.

Edited 20 July, 2015 by shurlock

[Lighthouse]

We conceded 2 goals per match in 5 of those 6 games having managed 18 clean sheets in matches where we hadn't fielded that combination of players in those positions, OF COURSE IT WAS A PROBLEM.

 

I'd also point out that I provided 6 successive matches, whilst you have cherry picked 4 matches from across half a season, and also supported my assertions by underlining that we would also have needed to provide clean sheets for those goals to have more than 1 point in value.

 

Forster's injury was a much bigger problem defensively. We put in several excellent performances when Toby or Morgan were injured. Anyway, I don't get what your point is. You're saying we would have been better spending £40m on cover for 3 defensive players, whilst acknowledging that it isn't feasible.

 

Bringing in one decent attacking player would have been feasible. I gave those 4 games as examples but in reality it could have been any from Everton, WBA, Liverpool, Swansea, Stoke, Sunderland or West Ham in the second half of the season. You can't just say a goal against Everton for e.g. would have meant a 1-1 draw. If we score first, maybe we then keep a clean sheet, or score again as they chase the game.

[The9]

Forster's injury made a lot less difference than the lack of defending in front of him. I've already posted up a pile of stats showing how he faced the 2nd fewest shots against when we were into November, and a bunch of other stuff that is empirically proven but people still want to argue about.

[shurlock]

Forster's injury made a lot less difference than the lack of defending in front of him. I've already posted up a pile of stats showing how he faced the 2nd fewest shots against when we were into November, and a bunch of other stuff that is empirically proven but people still want to argue about.

 

Sounds like you're running out of steam. Stats from November are irrelevant for this purpose. Specifically, do have you stats of shots faced pre- and post-Forster's injury. Cant find them anywhere; nor do I remember seeing anything on here. A more detailed breakdown would certainly shine light on the question (assuming such stats are actually meaningful to begin with).

[The9]

If only, if only. There are no guarantees that we would have kept clean sheets - there's a reason why clean sheets are worth disproportionately, as you point out, its because they are very difficult to achieve and efforts to explain them probably have a large residual which is a fancy way of saying that they are pretty random (by extension, you are likely to be over-interpreting what a clean sheet means).

 

Not sure what maintaining the level we had all season means either - your fanciful scenario is premised on keeping away clean sheets. Never mind that up until the games you mention -by which time the vast majority of the season had passed- we had only managed four away clean sheets (not surprisingly two were against relegated sides and the other against ten men). For all intents and purposes, we would have had to match that record in vastly fewer games. That's not maintaining a level, that's exceeding it. By a long stretch.

 

We actually demonstrated we could be tight without the likes of Alderweireld, though Morgan's absence was a bigger loss. That said, we also missed a decent stand-in for Forster (something you fail to mention). If anything, our defense coped pretty well in those games (Leicester apart); but at key times, we conceded soft goals where either Davis or Gazzanigga should have done more.

 

And finally there are trade-offs: instead of splashing £27m on a Schneiderlin replacement, perhaps that money could have been spent on a more ruthless striker or a quality playmaker (indeed, it would have been the much cheaper option). Over the course of the season, its just as easy, if not easier to tally up games where it would have made the main difference.

 

No, clean sheets are disproportionately valuable because they guarantee a minimum of a point, whist one goal gets you not that much in comparison. As Saints showed last season, if you keep the back door bolted, you can usually find a way to fabricate a goal to cash in on that.

 

Luck is the primary factor in football, but of the elements we can control, having an organised defence is more effective, and cheaper, than splashing money on creative players. There's nothing fanciful about not conceding against Stoke, Sunderland or at home to Spurs...

 

8 teams managed it against Stoke last season out of the 19 they played.

It happened 14 times for teams against Sunderland (including twice for QPR), and 10 teams did against Spurs. With Saints having one of the best defensive records in the league when we had the first team on the pitch, it wouldn't have been too difficult to recreate those kind of performances against 2 lesser opponents and one rival but at home.

 

I fail to understand how you can continue to write utter nonsense about our defence "coping well" in matches where they conceded twice in 83% of their last 6 matches, compared to the Prem-best defending performances seen with the preferred starting side the rest of the time. Davis/Gazzaniga may have had a lower save percentage than Forster, but firstly the sample size was negligible and no serious comparisons can be made, and secondly (albeit subject to the same sampling problem) they were both facing more shots per match than Forster so more likely to concede to begin with.

 

As for "coping without Alderweireld", we won 4, lost 4 and drew 1 in his January to March absence. Unfortunately his performance stats are skewed by the ineffective midfield performances in those end of season defeats.

 

Also, who said anything about splurging £27m on a Schneiderlin replacement? We've just bought one for £8m, and we could buy 2 good Europa League standard centre backs with that kind of money.

 

I get it, you, like loads of others, think spunking money on strikers scores goals, and goals win games. That's great, because that's precisely the market inefficiency Saints are exploiting, and it means we don't have to spend as much on the defenders and defensive midfielders who are stopping the opposition creating chances in the first place and giving the team the opportunity to make the goals we do score actually worth something.

Edited 21 July, 2015 by The9

[The9]

Sounds like you're running out of steam. Stats from November are irrelevant for this purpose. Specifically, do have you stats of shots faced pre- and post-Forster's injury. Cant find them anywhere; nor do I remember seeing anything on here. A more detailed breakdown would certainly shine light on the question (assuming such stats are actually meaningful to begin with).

 

WhoScored.com has them. I'm certainly bored with proving my point repeatedly and having to deflect irrelevant asides, yes. The stats to November were obviously relevant, as they were part of the reason we were so successful and the basis for many of the clean sheets.

[The9]

It all swings and roundabouts.

 

We've had our fair share of luck- the Fonte handball, the Targett foul on Fabregas and amongst others.

The table doesn't lie and we deserved 7th. End of.

 

Actually the table does lie, luck doesn't even out over a small sample size like 38 matches, and key decisions in key matches (Liverpool at home being the obvious example) can have a huge bearing overall just from the timing of that luck. I doubt Sunderland (Poyet aside) care about the lack of a penalty when Fletcher got poleaxed and we beat them 8-0, but a weaker challenge in the return fixture provided a penalty worth an additional 2 points to them. There's a pile of luck in everything, and it's the main determinant of results, with the skill element less important - and football is also proven to have the widest range of chance of all "major" sports, with favourites winning less often than any other.

 

It may not be purely representative, but that's how we expect it to be, it's accepted as such and it is of course the only representation of the season that matters.

[shurlock]

No, clean sheets are disproportionately valuable because they guarantee a minimum of a point, whist one goal gets you not that much in comparison. As Saints showed last season, if you keep the back door bolted, you can usually find a way to fabricate a goal to cash in on that.

 

Luck is the primary factor in football, but of the elements we can control, having an organised defence is more effective, and cheaper, than splashing money on creative players. There's nothing fanciful about not conceding against Stoke, Sunderland or at home to Spurs...

 

8 teams managed it against Stoke last season out of the 19 they played.

It happened 14 times for teams against Sunderland (including twice for QPR), and 10 teams did against Spurs. With Saints having one of the best defensive records in the league when we had the first team on the pitch, it wouldn't have been too difficult to recreate those kind of performances against 2 lesser opponents and one rival but at home.

 

I fail to understand how you can continue to write utter nonsense about our defence "coping well" in matches where they conceded twice in 83% of their last 6 matches, compared to the Prem-best defending performances seen with the preferred starting side the rest of the time. Davis/Gazzaniga may have had a lower save percentage than Forster, but firstly the sample size was negligible and no serious comparisons can be made, and secondly (albeit subject to the same sampling problem) they were both facing more shots per match than Forster so more likely to concede to begin with.

 

As for "coping without Alderweireld", we won 4, lost 4 and drew 1 in his January to March absence. Unfortunately his performance stats are skewed by the ineffective midfield performances in those end of season defeats.

 

Also, who said anything about splurging £27m on a Schneiderlin replacement? We've just bought one for £8m, and we could buy 2 good Europa League standard centre backs with that kind of money.

 

I get it, you, like loads of others, think spunking money on strikers scores goals, and goals win games. That's great, because that's precisely the market inefficiency Saints are exploiting, and it means we don't have to spend as much on the defenders and defensive midfielders who are stopping the opposition creating chances in the first place and giving the team the opportunity to make the goals we do score actually worth something.

 

 

Nice to see you skirt how we only managed four away clean sheets all season (two against relegated sides and the other against ten men); yetmaintaining that form would have given us three clean sheets in far fewer games. Its only Stoke or Sunderland doesn't cut it, I'm afraid. Having seen the games, we were pretty comfortable against many of these sides (Stoke, Spurs, Everton and Sunderland followed the pattern of so much of the season). You're simply and erroneously reasoning backwards from results. Perhaps performances had less to do with injuries than an end of season lack of intensity. Who knows.

 

As for Alderweireld, he also missed games before January. Indeed, another poster observed that we won more ppg without him than with him, though I accept such comparisons are fraught when it's impossible to control for other sources of variation (Alderweireld playing in midfield is one source). My point regarding Schneiderlin stands. If we're modeling the problem, as you purported in your first post, it involves convenient abstractions and it is fair to assume that a like-for-like replacement necessary to maintain the same level of clean sheets, would cost a similar amount. Otherwise, the exercise is no different from pulling rabbits out of the hat.

 

As a principle, I don't think we should necessarily splurge money on strikers as a principle. Rather its about examining matters on a case-by-case basis and responding accordingly. The fact is that the defense was shooting the lights out (which may or may not have been sustainable); but in the second half of the season, the goals virtually dried up (easily less than a goal a game if you exclude Villa, near the bottom of the table). Only Mane really shone. Pelle was out-of-sorts; Elia and Djuricic lived up to their billing as makeweights; and Tadic was crocked. Its an approach driven by evidence, not some, deductive, grand 'economic' theory to explain everything which in the wrong hands is like a toddler with a machete. How long do you think market inefficiencies would last if they definitively and irrefutably existed?

Edited 21 July, 2015 by shurlock

[hutch]

True, though it depends how far those results differed or departed from Spurs or Liverpool's other results. Just looking at the Sunderland game: if you take our goal-scoring form from last season and make some standard statistical assumptions about distributions, then we'd score 8 goals roughly once in every 7825 games. If that's not an outlier, then I'm MLG

I'm sorry mate, but "roughly" is no bloody good if you wannabe MLG.

Edited 21 July, 2015 by hutch

[Fan The Flames]

No, clean sheets are disproportionately valuable because they guarantee a minimum of a point, whist one goal gets you not that much in comparison. As Saints showed last season, if you keep the back door bolted, you can usually find a way to fabricate a goal to cash in on that.

 

Luck is the primary factor in football, but of the elements we can control, having an organised defence is more effective, and cheaper, than splashing money on creative players. There's nothing fanciful about not conceding against Stoke, Sunderland or at home to Spurs...

 

8 teams managed it against Stoke last season out of the 19 they played.

It happened 14 times for teams against Sunderland (including twice for QPR), and 10 teams did against Spurs. With Saints having one of the best defensive records in the league when we had the first team on the pitch, it wouldn't have been too difficult to recreate those kind of performances against 2 lesser opponents and one rival but at home.

 

I fail to understand how you can continue to write utter nonsense about our defence "coping well" in matches where they conceded twice in 83% of their last 6 matches, compared to the Prem-best defending performances seen with the preferred starting side the rest of the time. Davis/Gazzaniga may have had a lower save percentage than Forster, but firstly the sample size was negligible and no serious comparisons can be made, and secondly (albeit subject to the same sampling problem) they were both facing more shots per match than Forster so more likely to concede to begin with.

 

As for "coping without Alderweireld", we won 4, lost 4 and drew 1 in his January to March absence. Unfortunately his performance stats are skewed by the ineffective midfield performances in those end of season defeats.

 

Also, who said anything about splurging £27m on a Schneiderlin replacement? We've just bought one for £8m, and we could buy 2 good Europa League standard centre backs with that kind of money.

 

I get it, you, like loads of others, think spunking money on strikers scores goals, and goals win games. That's great, because that's precisely the market inefficiency Saints are exploiting, and it means we don't have to spend as much on the defenders and defensive midfielders who are stopping the opposition creating chances in the first place and giving the team the opportunity to make the goals we do score actually worth something.

 

Since you've picked up this nugget of information about clean sheets you have rinsed it for all its worth. I like the way you have used 83% instead of 5 out of 6, because % is proper statistical.

 

I would have thought if one herbert on a forum knows the worth of a clean sheet, then football clubs do as well. We've got a black box ffs.

[angelman]

Are we to presume he is not coming back? His number 22 from last season has been assigned to Stekelenburg