Uncle Si
Active member
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2007
- Messages
- 20,596
- Reaction score
- 3
"According to metrics that analyze how a team plays overall (what metrics are those?) the Sounders are predicted to have about 32 points thus far, which would put them in 6th place on the table. So we must ask, why are the Sounders sitting on just 24 points.
The answer is simple. The metrics don't accurately weigh (So they are useless) and account for penalties and errors that lead to goals (there are plenty of metrics that measure this by the way), outside of the normal run of play. (actual important facets of a soccer game)"
So, metrics are good, but also inaccurate? Is that just for the Sounders?
Normal run of play is an ambiguous statement and cannot even be truly defined in a way that can be extrapolated for purposes of hypothesizing a future. (ie, what's normal run of play for Leicester is far different than Bayern, which is much different than Real Madrid). Soccer doesn't work that way.
Metrics used in soccer are going to be a bit more than you're going to pull up from goal.com. We use them constantly to measure player effectiveness, analyze formation and system efficiency to adjust in-game plans and set up future ones. To advance them to a supposed level of points is madness. I'm fairly certain if whatever metric thinks the Sounders should be at 32 points based on "how a team plays overall" was applied to Leicester, even at the end of the season, it would not have them atop the most competitive league in the world.
If you want to do a deep dive on metrics and soccer its important to understand what you're looking for. Barcelona held 69% possession and completed 300 more passes than Liverpool on Saturday. They lost 4-0. Barcelona outshot Liverpool 13-7. All 4 of Liverpool goals took a total of 10 passes (combined). Barcelona's keepers played the ball more than Suarez. Sadio Mane won more tackles on the day than the CM, Emre Can. Poor day by Can? Effective use of the high press by Liverpool? All depends on where the tackles are made. In this game, Mane made two tackles that led directly to goals. There are a number of factors to look into in that, to analyze and forge a move forward. However, none would allow either team to determine in advance the results of the next match (unless it was against each other).
Lucas Leiva (i'm a Liverpool fan) has made the most tackles in the EPL the last 6 years. He's their Oswaldo. He's also a liability of a player on a team that tries to get forward with pace and pin teams back with quick counters. His usefulness, despite his one positive metric, is stymied by his pass completion to attackers over 15 yards (a usable metric). Interestingly, if you're extrapolating this for training purposes, you would also look into his % rates in channels 7, 8 and 9 and determine if there is a side of the field he can't pass to. His opponents would look at this as well and force him there. Danny Drinkwater's success rate in forward passes over 20 yards last year for Leicester was shockingly low (below 25% in some matches). Except his role was to ping long balls to Vardy, who led the league in scoring. His success was basically measured by Leicester in the way the Seahawks measure their punter's success in setting up the Defense, or even more measuring Wilson's success rate in passes that travel over 40 yards in the air. Kante, on the other hand, would move the ball in shorter increments, triggering a team transition. His first pass was to Mahrez or Okazaki. Both critical to Leicester's success. But one player's pass completion rates are far higher despite standing right next to each other on the field. Metrics...
Comparing them to an NFL team is also a misunderstanding of how metrics are used in the sport. Football is played in 3 phases by 3 completely different teams (defense, offense, special teams). Soccer is not. It is a bit more intricate in its ebbs and flows, with players having to perform at multiple jobs to effect a positive day. Ibra had only received the ball in the attacking 3rd 8 times before he nodded home the winner against Leicester. Good game? I've seen that argued on here it would be. But I'm sure Mourinho will be making some adjustments to make sure that number triples by the Bournemouth game.
This could continue but I doubt many are that interested. I will say this in regards to the Sounders:
"Because of Jones weakness defensively, If Seattle moves Brad Evans to LB, and plays him in someways as CB in a 3 man line to limit his weakness going forward in an unnatural position. Seattle's defense at least analytically speaking would be #1 in the league."
A CB's interception per game statistic is a measure of his positioning. It's also a measure of his midfielder's lack of defensive abilities. You cannot know "analytically" that it would be the best in the league unless you are trying to measure it against how the rest of the team is set up. A high interception rate for a CB is an alarm for the midfielders, or potentially a part of the team's system. It's an illustration of a smaller, yet possibly deeper issue. Again, see Leicester. Measure their defensive stability against a team like Arsenal. Whose CBs do the most work? Both gave up exactly the same number of goals. Leicester scored 3 more, yet won the league by an astonishing 10 points. Who had the better D? Who had the better metrics? It really would depend on what the role of the team's D was. Hint, it's not always stopping the other team. Arsenal play possession soccer. They gave up a high number of transition goals last year mostly due to their midfield cover being dispossessed high up the field. Leicester gave up most of their goals in build up (discounting set pieces for this post), which, numerically meant their team was sitting 7-9 players deep, while Arsenal's was 3-4. Yet, same number of goals. Here, the number of goals are reflective of the team's system, not its back 4. Arsenal's CBs were put under far more pressure on a consistent basis. Leicester's CBs had far better cover. Thus, Koscielny's interceptions were far higher, but he was asked to do so much more. However, Leicester won the league and gave up the same number of goals. Metrics... (interestingly, the outside back pairing with the highest number of tackles was Liverpool's. good right? Not so much, they played a high 433 that allowed them to tackle midfielders with their back to goal. that's pretty easy. They pinched players who were waiting for the ball. When the rates are placed into the channels, however, Alberto Moreno was especially awful defending in his defensive 3rd channel, which obviously is an essential place to defend. Noone would place Alberto Moreno at the top of any list of good defenders)
Anyways, that's alot and it was fun to write. Metrics are a relatively new resource in soccer. I can tell you with all certainty it is useful. But it is not as simple as tackle rates, interceptions, goals against, etc.
I'd be interested to see it applied to Seattle. I can show you how it's applied to Sporting KC if you want (you won't) or Liverpool... or Stillwater High School.
The answer is simple. The metrics don't accurately weigh (So they are useless) and account for penalties and errors that lead to goals (there are plenty of metrics that measure this by the way), outside of the normal run of play. (actual important facets of a soccer game)"
So, metrics are good, but also inaccurate? Is that just for the Sounders?
Normal run of play is an ambiguous statement and cannot even be truly defined in a way that can be extrapolated for purposes of hypothesizing a future. (ie, what's normal run of play for Leicester is far different than Bayern, which is much different than Real Madrid). Soccer doesn't work that way.
Metrics used in soccer are going to be a bit more than you're going to pull up from goal.com. We use them constantly to measure player effectiveness, analyze formation and system efficiency to adjust in-game plans and set up future ones. To advance them to a supposed level of points is madness. I'm fairly certain if whatever metric thinks the Sounders should be at 32 points based on "how a team plays overall" was applied to Leicester, even at the end of the season, it would not have them atop the most competitive league in the world.
If you want to do a deep dive on metrics and soccer its important to understand what you're looking for. Barcelona held 69% possession and completed 300 more passes than Liverpool on Saturday. They lost 4-0. Barcelona outshot Liverpool 13-7. All 4 of Liverpool goals took a total of 10 passes (combined). Barcelona's keepers played the ball more than Suarez. Sadio Mane won more tackles on the day than the CM, Emre Can. Poor day by Can? Effective use of the high press by Liverpool? All depends on where the tackles are made. In this game, Mane made two tackles that led directly to goals. There are a number of factors to look into in that, to analyze and forge a move forward. However, none would allow either team to determine in advance the results of the next match (unless it was against each other).
Lucas Leiva (i'm a Liverpool fan) has made the most tackles in the EPL the last 6 years. He's their Oswaldo. He's also a liability of a player on a team that tries to get forward with pace and pin teams back with quick counters. His usefulness, despite his one positive metric, is stymied by his pass completion to attackers over 15 yards (a usable metric). Interestingly, if you're extrapolating this for training purposes, you would also look into his % rates in channels 7, 8 and 9 and determine if there is a side of the field he can't pass to. His opponents would look at this as well and force him there. Danny Drinkwater's success rate in forward passes over 20 yards last year for Leicester was shockingly low (below 25% in some matches). Except his role was to ping long balls to Vardy, who led the league in scoring. His success was basically measured by Leicester in the way the Seahawks measure their punter's success in setting up the Defense, or even more measuring Wilson's success rate in passes that travel over 40 yards in the air. Kante, on the other hand, would move the ball in shorter increments, triggering a team transition. His first pass was to Mahrez or Okazaki. Both critical to Leicester's success. But one player's pass completion rates are far higher despite standing right next to each other on the field. Metrics...
Comparing them to an NFL team is also a misunderstanding of how metrics are used in the sport. Football is played in 3 phases by 3 completely different teams (defense, offense, special teams). Soccer is not. It is a bit more intricate in its ebbs and flows, with players having to perform at multiple jobs to effect a positive day. Ibra had only received the ball in the attacking 3rd 8 times before he nodded home the winner against Leicester. Good game? I've seen that argued on here it would be. But I'm sure Mourinho will be making some adjustments to make sure that number triples by the Bournemouth game.
This could continue but I doubt many are that interested. I will say this in regards to the Sounders:
"Because of Jones weakness defensively, If Seattle moves Brad Evans to LB, and plays him in someways as CB in a 3 man line to limit his weakness going forward in an unnatural position. Seattle's defense at least analytically speaking would be #1 in the league."
A CB's interception per game statistic is a measure of his positioning. It's also a measure of his midfielder's lack of defensive abilities. You cannot know "analytically" that it would be the best in the league unless you are trying to measure it against how the rest of the team is set up. A high interception rate for a CB is an alarm for the midfielders, or potentially a part of the team's system. It's an illustration of a smaller, yet possibly deeper issue. Again, see Leicester. Measure their defensive stability against a team like Arsenal. Whose CBs do the most work? Both gave up exactly the same number of goals. Leicester scored 3 more, yet won the league by an astonishing 10 points. Who had the better D? Who had the better metrics? It really would depend on what the role of the team's D was. Hint, it's not always stopping the other team. Arsenal play possession soccer. They gave up a high number of transition goals last year mostly due to their midfield cover being dispossessed high up the field. Leicester gave up most of their goals in build up (discounting set pieces for this post), which, numerically meant their team was sitting 7-9 players deep, while Arsenal's was 3-4. Yet, same number of goals. Here, the number of goals are reflective of the team's system, not its back 4. Arsenal's CBs were put under far more pressure on a consistent basis. Leicester's CBs had far better cover. Thus, Koscielny's interceptions were far higher, but he was asked to do so much more. However, Leicester won the league and gave up the same number of goals. Metrics... (interestingly, the outside back pairing with the highest number of tackles was Liverpool's. good right? Not so much, they played a high 433 that allowed them to tackle midfielders with their back to goal. that's pretty easy. They pinched players who were waiting for the ball. When the rates are placed into the channels, however, Alberto Moreno was especially awful defending in his defensive 3rd channel, which obviously is an essential place to defend. Noone would place Alberto Moreno at the top of any list of good defenders)
Anyways, that's alot and it was fun to write. Metrics are a relatively new resource in soccer. I can tell you with all certainty it is useful. But it is not as simple as tackle rates, interceptions, goals against, etc.
I'd be interested to see it applied to Seattle. I can show you how it's applied to Sporting KC if you want (you won't) or Liverpool... or Stillwater High School.
