Waltersgotstyle 307 Posted May 8, 2016 Share Posted May 8, 2016 This is massaging stats to fit your argument at its best 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscot 0 Posted May 8, 2016 Author Share Posted May 8, 2016 This is massaging stats to fit your argument at its best Can you explain how they are "massaged"? To fit what argument? I gave multiple stats, each tell a certain story and they are fair and justified. I'm guessing by your tone you have a bit of a problem because they somehow don't agree with your own argument, which would also explain why your accusations are totally without a qualifying rationale. It's amazing how people can get uppity about plainly laid out facts without an opinion attached them. If anyone has a problem with the validity of any of them, I'm happy to discuss and debate their rationale but without the baseless innuendo. It's all about trying to compare like with like and trying to make some kind of sense of it. If you're the kind of person who chooses an opinion and then twists reality to fit then feel free to ignore. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscot 0 Posted May 8, 2016 Author Share Posted May 8, 2016 "Lies, damned lies, and statistics" Yeah, I made it all up... You do know that football leagues are basically statistics, with the most important ones being who scores the most goals in a game and who accumulates the most points in a season? The is a message behind that quote but most people just use it to trash stats they find disagrees with their entrenched way of thinking. Stats are all about the validity of the qualification of their calculations. If you have some doubts about that for any of them I'm happy to explain and debate. As I said I've tried to make them as fair as possible. I don't get the problem a few people have with them and noone has explained what that is. Not even a teeny bit. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearman 9 Posted May 8, 2016 Share Posted May 8, 2016 Calscot...you failed to mention Ally's leadership in 2013/14 where he went unbeaten in the league whilst leading his side to the title... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscot 0 Posted May 9, 2016 Author Share Posted May 9, 2016 Calscot...you failed to mention Ally's leadership in 2013/14 where he went unbeaten in the league whilst leading his side to the title... Granted that did happen, but not so relevant here as I'm trying to show a comparison of results against similar teams and narrowing it down bit by bit to the exact same teams. Not only apples and apples but the exact same same varieties. There is no way of replaying seasons with different managers so these are the only tools we really have to take us out of the subjective. There are obviously qualitative aspects that also need to be taken in to consideration. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,199 Posted May 9, 2016 Share Posted May 9, 2016 Yeah, I made it all up... You do know that football leagues are basically statistics, with the most important ones being who scores the most goals in a game and who accumulates the most points in a season? The is a message behind that quote but most people just use it to trash stats they find disagrees with their entrenched way of thinking. Stats are all about the validity of the qualification of their calculations. If you have some doubts about that for any of them I'm happy to explain and debate. As I said I've tried to make them as fair as possible. I don't get the problem a few people have with them and noone has explained what that is. Not even a teeny bit. So from that I take it given we are promoted, having scored more points than our opponents, whilst also scoring more points than McCoist's team did, that Warburton is clearly a better manager ? Agreed. I'm not one of those people who will hide behind the "yes, but" philosophy. However, lets be real.. McCoist could have stayed at Rangers all season long last year and there is absolutely NO WAY (Sure, go ahead, dispute it) that we would have gotten promoted - that was clear, as clear as day, at the half way point in the season. I find it mildly interesting that Warburton managed to get us promotion with what is considered a squad of "journeymen" whilst McCoist couldn't get us promoted with a squad of internationals. Funnily enough whilst playing teams off the park. Funnily enough whilst having spent on his whole squad the equivalent of what McCoist spent on one player (Templeton). Funnily enough having "run the table" (i.e. from start to finish at the top of the table... Just in case Ally is watching and doesn't know what that means). So whilst I will always, being an accountant, respect the quantitative characteristics of statistics - I will always have a very healthy scepticism of them and also have a healthy respect for the qualitative aspects which tell me that Warburtons team is not only filled with better, hungrier, cheaper footballers - but also one which plays like a team, has a drive and determination to accept nothing less than best. You can throw as many statistics as you like which show Ally in a positive light. But the ONLY statistic that matters is this..... 1. Ally, managed the Club from 4th tier to 2nd tier and failed (yes Cal, he didn't finish the season but that tells its own story....) to get promoted to the top tier (don't even THINK about suggesting that he would have got promoted had he stayed because it was as clear as day he wouldn't). 2. Mark Warburton, never managed in Scotland before (doesn't mean a great deal other than Ally should have known the landscape better than him), got us promoted at the first time of asking, comfortably. He also managed to win the Petrofac Cup in his first attempt (something McCoist had THREE attempts at winning and couldn't achieve), and he also beat Celtic at his first attempt whilst playing them off the park. Whilst you don't finish your stats by attempting to defend McCoist, your previous on this subject would suggest that is exactly what you are doing.... and that being the case it is a very, very sad attempt to do so. In fact, I am pretty sure that Ally himself would be embarrassed to try to defend himself in the same circumstances. It is ridiculous to simply throw statistics out - YES, they are factual, but they don't tell the whole story. And you know it. You are throwing these stats out as a defense of McCoist (seriously, don't even think about denying that because the stats you have used do exactly that). The reality is simple. McCoist, FAILED to get his team promoted from the 2nd tier to the top tier. Worse... he KNEW that he couldn't achieve it so he walked away before the eventuality was known.... Mark Warburton... One season, achieved everything that McCoist couldn't (sorry.... aside from winning the 4th and 3rd tier of Scottish football). Sorry, and I don't mean any disrespect, but this thread proves nothing more than the fact that statistics don't even come close to telling the whole story. In fact, they can clearly (given THESE statistics) defend the indefensible. McCoist failed. Warburton succeeded. Do we really need any more statistics than those ? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,199 Posted May 9, 2016 Share Posted May 9, 2016 Variety of win % stats - hard to decide what is the most like with like (apples with apples) so you decide which is the most valid comparison Overall (includes extra time wins but not penalties wins as is the convention ie wins in open play): AM 72.6% (71.9% without extra time win) MW 71.4% (73.5% with penalties win included) RN 62.2% (not looked for anomalies) Championship season: AM 73.1% (69.2% without extra time win) MW 71.4% (73.5% with penalties win included) RN 75.6% Championship only: AM 62.5% MW 69.4% RN 80.6% Championship only but without Rangers, Hearts and St Mirren (where valid): AM 71.4% MW 68.8% RN 84.4% Championship only but without Hearts, Rangers, St Mirren, Cowdenbeath, Morton (where valid): AM 66.7% MW 67.9% RN 82.1% Championship season against all teams both Rangers managers played at least once (including cups): AM 75% MW 67.6% Any chance you can put together the above stats as soon as promotion was won ? Because, as far as I can see it is convenient to show these stats now that the team haven't won in a few games (conveniently since the league was won and they have had little to play for). McCoist's team ALWAYS had something to play for whereas Warburton's team won promotion with games to spare and, hence, logically, the foot was taken off the gas. Stats will always be factual. What they don't do is tell the full story. YOUR stats, as presented and attempted to be balanced, are used at a point in time where our team have had 4 or 5 games with nothing to play for. So what were the stats at the point in time we gained promotion to the Premier League (a STATISTIC that Ally will never be able to put on his resume...... whilst Mark Warburton can, in his first attempt....) 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,199 Posted May 9, 2016 Share Posted May 9, 2016 (edited) Can you explain how they are "massaged"? To fit what argument? I gave multiple stats, each tell a certain story and they are fair and justified. I'm guessing by your tone you have a bit of a problem because they somehow don't agree with your own argument, which would also explain why your accusations are totally without a qualifying rationale. It's amazing how people can get uppity about plainly laid out facts without an opinion attached them. If anyone has a problem with the validity of any of them, I'm happy to discuss and debate their rationale but without the baseless innuendo. It's all about trying to compare like with like and trying to make some kind of sense of it. If you're the kind of person who chooses an opinion and then twists reality to fit then feel free to ignore. Ally McCoist - his team didn't get promoted to the Premier League Mark Warburton - his team was promoted to the Premier League at the first attempt. Yep, no need to get uppity about statistics that prove the simplest of points..... Edited May 9, 2016 by craig 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearman 9 Posted May 9, 2016 Share Posted May 9, 2016 McCoist's team ALWAYS had something to play for whereas Warburton's team won promotion with games to spare and, hence, logically, the foot was taken off the gas. In that context it doesn't really fit? McCoist's won the league with games to spare then kept on winning (albeit in a lower league) when in 2014. I think all Calscot is doing is placing facts against facts and nothing else...not something to get hot and bothered about really, interesting if nothing else basically. Warburton has been a breath of fresh air no doubt but it's fair to say his team took the foot off the gas where McCoists team in 2014 didn't. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,199 Posted May 9, 2016 Share Posted May 9, 2016 In that context it doesn't really fit? McCoist's won the league with games to spare then kept on winning (albeit in a lower league) when in 2014. I think all Calscot is doing is placing facts against facts and nothing else...not something to get hot and bothered about really, interesting if nothing else basically. Warburton has been a breath of fresh air no doubt but it's fair to say his team took the foot off the gas where McCoists team in 2014 didn't. I'm not hot and bothered - I just get mildly frustrated when someone uses statistics (sure, they are factual - but how you slice them counts too - as I said, what were the %ages on the day we achieved promotion) to make an attempt to prove a point. Cal will more than likely say he isn't trying to prove any pint but simply listing the facts - fair enough - but give me the same statistics at the point we won the league when we didn't have meaningless games left (that, in itself, should tell its own story..... This season we had meaningless games because we had secured promotion well in advance whilst, when Ally was in charge, we were constantly CHASING Hearts in the Championship..... cue the "But nobody had to suffer the off-field issues Ally had".... see, always an excuse when you look for one). As I said, I will leave you with one statistic : Warburton - promoted to the Premier League at the first attempt Ally - FAILED in the same quest - and the likelihood of promotion had he stayed was very, very slim. What other statistics do we need ? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.