Strategy Trade and List management (Add your rumour to the simmering stew that is the post season. Edition.)

[RedWhite&Blue]

I'd pay $1,000,000 for Bont's nose alone... god that's a great honker!

 

[TiAn_]

I was reading an essay by Aldous Huxley, and I think this quote captures the pros and cons of Champion Data's market monopoly, analytical models and interpretive hypotheses:

"No working hypothesis means no motive for research, no reason for making one experiment rather than another, no way of bringing sense or order into the observed facts.

"Contrariwise, too much working hypothesis means finding only what you already know to be there and ignoring the rest. Dogma turns man into an intellectual Procrustes. He goes about forcing things to become the signs of his word-patterns, when he ought to be adapting his word-patterns to become the signs of things."

Without CD's hypotheses as to what makes a footballer and their team "elite" (to use their term), there would be no reason to test what the wealth of data collected may mean. However, due to their exclusive access to that wealth of data, we may be overly beholden to CD's working hypotheses and thus limited in the conclusions that may be drawn from the data to merely those that support CD's interpretation of "elite".

 

[Fossie 32]

I was reading an essay by Aldous Huxley, and I think this quote captures the pros and cons of Champion Data's market monopoly, analytical models and interpretive hypotheses:

"No working hypothesis means no motive for research, no reason for making one experiment rather than another, no way of bringing sense or order into the observed facts.

"Contrariwise, too much working hypothesis means finding only what you already know to be there and ignoring the rest. Dogma turns man into an intellectual Procrustes. He goes about forcing things to become the signs of his word-patterns, when he ought to be adapting his word-patterns to become the signs of things."

Without CD's hypotheses as to what makes a footballer and their team "elite" (to use their term), there would be no reason to test what the wealth of data collected may mean. However, due to their exclusive access to that wealth of data, we may be overly beholden to CD's working hypotheses and thus limited in the conclusions that may be drawn from the data to merely those that support CD's interpretation of "elite".

Is there a Huxley for Dummies manual?

 

[dogwatch]

Is there a Huxley for Dummies manual?

I thought this was it.

 

[Fossie 32]

I thought this was it.

Really ?
I guess you can't go full dummy though

 

[Cori]

I was reading an essay by Aldous Huxley

Orgy Porgy.

 

[TedDougChris]

Selection of Naughton looks even better after the injury news today...

 

[Norm De Guerre]

I believe it was Professor Alfred E. Neuman who coined the phase. "Lies, Damned lies and Champion Data's statistics are useless unless you are an intellectual giant like David King."

 

[TiAn_]

Orgy Porgy.

 

[Next Waiting]

Without CD's hypotheses as to what makes a footballer and their team "elite" (to use their term), there would be no reason to test what the wealth of data collected may mean. However, due to their exclusive access to that wealth of data, we may be overly beholden to CD's working hypotheses and thus limited in the conclusions that may be drawn from the data to merely those that support CD's interpretation of "elite".

Does anyone here (3NP perhaps) actually know what CD's working hypothesis is? Additionally, does anyone know the full list of CD stats and their definitions accepting that the actual data isn't publicly available. Like others, I find the slim pickings that are made available through match day stats to be borderline useless in terms of assessing the nuances and intricacies of a game or individual player. Some of us enjoy analysis in addition to/conjunction with the eye test.

 

[Dogs Rule]

I believe it was Professor Alfred E. Newman who coined the phase. "Lies, Damned lies and Champion Data's statistics are useless unless you are an intellectual giant like David King."

The Premiership Quadrant.

 

[BRWB]

I was reading an essay by Aldous Huxley, and I think this quote captures the pros and cons of Champion Data's market monopoly, analytical models and interpretive hypotheses:

"No working hypothesis means no motive for research, no reason for making one experiment rather than another, no way of bringing sense or order into the observed facts.

"Contrariwise, too much working hypothesis means finding only what you already know to be there and ignoring the rest. Dogma turns man into an intellectual Procrustes. He goes about forcing things to become the signs of his word-patterns, when he ought to be adapting his word-patterns to become the signs of things."

Without CD's hypotheses as to what makes a footballer and their team "elite" (to use their term), there would be no reason to test what the wealth of data collected may mean. However, due to their exclusive access to that wealth of data, we may be overly beholden to CD's working hypotheses and thus limited in the conclusions that may be drawn from the data to merely those that support CD's interpretation of "elite".

Game styles change so hard to put down a blueprint for success and then weight stats accordingly. And that is just one reason why CD assessments/interpretations are inherently flawed.

By all means collect raw stats but as soon Cd interpret the data with stat weightings and stat parameters, resulting in rankings and elite ratings they are heading into opinion territory (albeit an organised opinion) - just like anyone else.

 

[TiAn_]

Game styles change so hard to put down a blueprint for success and then weight stats accordingly. And that is just one reason why CD assessments/interpretations are inherently flawed.

By all means collect raw stats but as soon Cd interpret the data with stat weightings and stat parameters, resulting in rankings and elite ratings they are heading into opinion territory (albeit an organised opinion) - just like anyone else.

Perhaps, but I still like the idea that someone is at least trying to find objective measures that transcend fads and trends. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and you don’t have to give it any more weight than you choose to.

There wouldn’t be a purpose for analysis if not for opinions to test. Unfortunately, we currently have just a limited group of opinions being tested. Hence why I thought the quote was relevant.

 

[BRWB]

Perhaps, but I still like the idea that someone is at least trying to find objective measures that transcend fads and trends. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and you don’t have to give it any more weight than you choose to.

There wouldn’t be a purpose for analysis if not for opinions to test. Unfortunately, we currently have just a limited group of opinions being tested. Hence why I thought the quote was relevant.

I too like that someone is collecting stats and trying to estsblish a framework.

But lets not pretend its objective.

 

[TiAn_]

I too like that someone is collecting stats and trying to estsblish a framework.

But lets not pretend its objective.

I said the measures are objective. A measure can't be anything but objective.

I suspect you’re talking about the motivation of the persons creating the measures, which is not what I was referring to as objective. Quite the opposite:

due to their exclusive access to that wealth of data, we may be overly beholden to CD's working hypotheses and thus limited in the conclusions that may be drawn from the data to merely those that support CD's interpretation of "elite".

 

[Next Waiting]

In working out what's important and what stats are valuable or indicative of success I look at the ideal. In the ideal winning game from every centre bounce the ruckman taps the ball down the rover's throat who then delivers a pinpoint pass to a forward I50 who takes the mark uncontested and kicks the goal. Only an umpire and 3 players ever touch the ball. This is repeated for 120mins and we win 400 to zip. Everything is derived from that.

 

[BRWB]

I said the measures are objective. A measure can't be anything but objective.

I suspect you’re talking about the motivation of the persons creating the measures, which is not what I was referring to as objective. Quite the opposite:

Im referring to the whole Cd ranking process as being overall highly subiective.

I would suggest that very few measures apart from goals and behinds are objective.

As soon as you establish a measure with criteria it becomes by definition subjective as someone decided on the criteria.

So, many of the CD measures are actually subjective because they've been created by someone.

Then there is another layer of subjectivity when people decide how to weight particular measures in order to rank players.

So when you break it down, CD is riddled with subjectivity....just IMO

 

[TiAn_]

Im referring to the whole Cd ranking process as being overall highly subiective.

I would suggest that very few measures apart from goals and behinds are objective.

As soon as you establish a measure with criteria it becomes by definition subjective as someone decided on the criteria.

So, many of the CD measures are actually subjective because they've been created by someone.

Then there is another layer of subjectivity when people decide how to weight particular measures in order to rank players.

So when you break it down, CD is riddled with subjectivity....just IMO

You're blurring the demarcation between a measure and the purpose for which a person has created it. The former is plainly objective, the latter often is not. A measure is by definition objective. The purpose for which someone creates or applies it is not.

What you're saying is that CD's hypotheses (i.e. their motivations for creating measures, their application of them or the ends they hope to achieve with them) are subjective, which is... the second limb of my point regarding CD.

We're actually in furious agreement, even if you don't realise it yet.

 

[Wocka]

 

[BRWB]

You're blurring the demarcation between a measure and the purpose for which a person has created it. The former is plainly objective, the latter often is not. A measure is by definition objective. The purpose for which someone creates or applies it is not.

What you're saying is that CD's hypotheses (i.e. their motivations for creating measures, their application of them or the ends they hope to achieve with them) are subjective, which is... the second limb of my point regarding CD.

We're actually in furious agreement, even if you don't realise it yet.

Nah i get.it.

You are saying a subjectively created measure is still objective in isolation. True enough.

If I created a measurement for how often a player touches his bum, we could objectively compare that I guess.

Doesnt make such a measure any great shakes at id'ing a good footy player though...I think...

 

[Next Waiting]

Nah i get.it.

You are saying a subjectively created measure is still objective in isolation. True enough.

If I created a measurement for how often a player touches his bum, we could objectively compare that I guess.

Doesnt make such a measure any great shakes at id'ing a good footy player though...I think...

Depends a little on the context of play. We might find elite players only scratch their arses after a goal has been scored, the ball is dead and as they walk back to the centre bounce where play is reset. Lesser players may be prone to scratching their arses whilst the ball is in play and heading towards them, upsetting their balance and making small but significant differences in the time they have available to position their hands to receive the ball. Could be identified as an area to work on....

 

[Yojimbo]

If I created a measurement for how often a player touches his bum, we could objectively compare that I guess.

He could be wiping his hands clean of sweat, which would make
the bum touch incidental, i think we would need several degrees
of the bum touch so the coach could properly address the
players during the breaks in play.

 

[gangsta deluxe]

Depends a little on the context of play. We might find elite players only scratch their arses after a goal has been scored, the ball is dead and as they walk back to the centre bounce where play is reset. Lesser players may be prone to scratching their arses whilst the ball is in play and heading towards them, upsetting their balance and making small but significant differences in the time they have available to position their hands to receive the ball. Could be identified as an area to work on....

The Rafael Nadal effect

 

[Golden_6]

Geez I feel like Jason McCartney has stuffed this one up.

Restricted free agents: Wallis, Roughead
Unrestricted free agents: Libba, Dahl

How are the top 2 in our top 25% of salaries but the bottom 2 are not? I understand the Tom Boyd contract would've shifted others payments around, but this seems like poor management to me.

 

[The Inbetweener]

Geez I feel like Jason McCartney has stuffed this one up.

Restricted free agents: Wallis, Roughead
Unrestricted free agents: Libba, Dahl

How are the top 2 in our top 25% of salaries but the bottom 2 are not? I understand the Tom Boyd contract would've shifted others payments around, but this seems like poor management to me.

Without knowing all the details, I agree completely