cheron85 Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 [url=http://www.derbycountyblog.com/the-actim-index/]http://www.derbycountyblog.com/the-actim-index/ [url=http://actim.pressassociation.com/]http://actim.pressassociation.com/ Up to date as of 12 days ago so taken with a pinch of salt... But interesting that no place for Hughes in the top 100 AND our top player is MY favourite hulking centre-forward... Also interesting that we have the 4th highest number of players in the top 100 but only 1 player in the top 40... Pretty much sums up our side really... great team, no stars? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 I remember someone comparing Sammon to Heskey earlier in the week. Pretty much sums up the situation right now. If Sammon is fed a stream of chances he'd bag a few, but he's not a natural scoring, his game is more to do with unsettling defences. He's a presence, he does a lot of work and he helps bring others into play that way. It's telling how much Ward and Theo's strike rates have increased along side Sammon. Speaking of Heskey, it's odd seeing him in Australia. He's been doing what Heskey does though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
randombc Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 Think this index is a load of ****** to be honest. They put Sharp, Craig Mackail-Smith and Bellamy all behind Sammon when I'd swap any of those 3 for him in a heartbeat. I think Hughes didn't make it in because although he is a neat and tidy player, he's only scored 2 goals and 2 assists this season, which for a midfield player isn't great. I know he's young, and I'm not slagging him off at all, but they won't put players in based on potential, it's pure contribution, and in terms of goals, and changing matches Hughes hasn't much of that...yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheron85 Posted February 28, 2013 Author Share Posted February 28, 2013 I remember someone comparing Sammon to Heskey earlier in the week. Nice to know you remember what I say 'http://www.dcfcfans.co.uk/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':)' /> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheron85 Posted February 28, 2013 Author Share Posted February 28, 2013 Think this index is a load of ****** to be honest. They put Sharp, Craig Mackail-Smith and Bellamy all behind Sammon when I'd swap any of those 3 for him in a heartbeat. I just like that it's an independent, relatively unbiased analysis... And you are more than welcome to your opinions on Sammon... It's just nice that yet again, an unbiased outside source rates Sammon's contribution to the team... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 Think this index is a load of ****** to be honest. They put Sharp, Craig Mackail-Smith and Bellamy all behind Sammon when I'd swap any of those 3 for him in a heartbeat. I think Hughes didn't make it in because although he is a neat and tidy player, he's only scored 2 goals and 2 assists this season, which for a midfield player isn't great. I know he's young, and I'm not slagging him off at all, but they won't put players in based on potential, it's pure contribution, and in terms of goals, and changing matches Hughes hasn't much of that...yet. ??? Craig Mackail-Smith Age: 29 Media value: £3.25 mil Appearances for Brighton: 72 Goals: 20 Assists: 11 Combined: 31 Goals per 90: 0.324 Assists per 90: 0.178 Combined per 90: 0.502 Conor Sammon: Age: 26 Media value: £1.2 mil Appearances for Derby: 33 Goals: 6 Assists: 3 Combined: 9 Goals per 90: 0.202 Assists per 90: 0.101 Combined per 90: 0.303 ...considering how improved the overall attack of the side is as well, is Mackail-Smith's price, age and such justified for his massively increased price? That said, I'm vaguely curious, I may have to look at the methodology of this ranking system. The list on it's own is less than convincing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheron85 Posted February 28, 2013 Author Share Posted February 28, 2013 ot sure how they calculate it but: [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actim_Index]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actim_Index Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 ...hmmm... what a description by wikipedia! Unless I can replicate their methodology, I can't really judge it, but I guess this is sponsored sports journalism, not scientific literature, I can't really expect them to give the full methodology eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stive Pesley Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 I think the point is that, for all people complain about Sammon – there is clearly an awful lot he is doing right in order to be our highest ranking player in the index. If those people think that it's all negated by the fact that he doesn't score enough goals then fair enough, but I think any balanced and rational football fan would at least acknowledge that this offers independent evidence that he's not completely useless Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 I think the point is that, for all people complain about Sammon – there is clearly an awful lot he is doing right in order to be our highest ranking player in the index. If those people think that it's all negated by the fact that he doesn't score enough goals then fair enough, but I think any balanced and rational football fan would at least acknowledge that this offers independent evidence that he's not completely useless Nah mate, I've been watching the Rams since 432 BC, and I can honestly say that Sammon is the worst footballer I've ever seen, whether playing with a modern, leather or enemy skin ball. Not enough goals lolz swag ROFLMAO swag! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
randombc Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 ??? Craig Mackail-Smith Age: 29 Media value: £3.25 mil Appearances for Brighton: 72 Goals: 20 Assists: 11 Combined: 31 Goals per 90: 0.324 Assists per 90: 0.178 Combined per 90: 0.502 Conor Sammon: Age: 26 Media value: £1.2 mil Appearances for Derby: 33 Goals: 6 Assists: 3 Combined: 9 Goals per 90: 0.202 Assists per 90: 0.101 Combined per 90: 0.303 ...considering how improved the overall attack of the side is as well, is Mackail-Smith's price, age and such justified for his massively increased price? That said, I'm vaguely curious, I may have to look at the methodology of this ranking system. The list on it's own is less than convincing. An awful lot of Mackail Smiths appearences has come from the bench, he's only started 1 of the last 4 matches. And although the figures you've quoted do make Sammon's contribution look 'value for money' compared to CMS, what CMS does have that Sammon doesn't is the ability to change a game, and thats what you pay the extra money for. Look back at when Brighton beat us 1-0 at pride park last year, look at all the stats you want, you'll see we had the same pocession, we had more shots, however they had that bit of quality where it really mattered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 An awful lot of Mackail Smiths appearences has come from the bench, he's only started 1 of the last 4 matches. And although the figures you've quoted do make Sammon's contribution look 'value for money' compared to CMS, what CMS does have that Sammon doesn't is the ability to change a game, and thats what you pay the extra money for. Look back at when Brighton beat us 1-0 at pride park last year, look at all the stats you want, you'll see we had the same pocession, we had more shots, however they had that bit of quality where it really mattered. Carefully note the "goals per 90", "assists per 90" and "combined per 90" stats, these take into account the time on the pitch. You can't quantify Sammon's contribution so simply to the team either, they are different players. That's the entire point. Personally, I don't really care what we paid for Sammon, he plays the odd bad game, but the attack as a whole has been better with him in the side. He's an unsettling player to face, and opposition fans have commented on this before. That's what he does best. The fact that he's already hit the total that Murray got last season says it all on the goals front as well. This time next season we could be praising him as our best signing in years or desperately trying to come to a good agreement on compensation, thing change quickly in football. As things stand though, I like him as a footballer, and I'm sick of hearing about how ever man, his dog and his dog's fleas have an option about him based seemingly on goals scored, which is actually pretty damn decent in context. I don't know... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheron85 Posted February 28, 2013 Author Share Posted February 28, 2013 An awful lot of Mackail Smiths appearences has come from the bench, he's only started 1 of the last 4 matches. And although the figures you've quoted do make Sammon's contribution look 'value for money' compared to CMS, what CMS does have that Sammon doesn't is the ability to change a game, and thats what you pay the extra money for. Look back at when Brighton beat us 1-0 at pride park last year, look at all the stats you want, you'll see we had the same pocession, we had more shots, however they had that bit of quality where it really mattered. You just have to look at things like (first example i could think of) the Ward goal against Huddersfield... Great finish by Ward and great cross from Roberts BUT none of it would have been possible without some brilliant link play by Sammon, who showed strength, vision and skill to get the ball to Roberts in a good position to cross... And what statistical credit does Sammon get for that? None... Compare that btw to the second PSG goal against Marseille where every review mentioned that Becks was the one who made the decisive pass to the guy who crossed for the goal... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex W Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 Stats have to be qualified, it's why you can't ever rely on simply stats, unless they're the most detailed available. For example, you can say there that has Sammon has 33 games for Derby, though he has 37 appearances for Derby this season, someone could for example when using Theo or Tyson say "Oh, hes had 15 appearances this season", wheras those appearances might be for only 5 minutes or so a time in a side not all that concerned about going forward during the time the player's on the pitch. If does not qualify either what kind of chances a player has, if a player has a shot on goal, does that count as a 'chance'? What if it's from 40 yards? What if he was hounded by 5 players and had his back to goal and simply shot in frustration? Would that count as a chance wasted in a stat index? The best way to judge a player is to simply watch him and note how he links up when your team is doing the things that he's required for. Sammon could be a good player, however he needs to improve his control, his heading ability (which for someone so big isn't great) and how sharp he is infront of goal. Stats are useful, but unless they're incredibly detailed about every minute topic, then they can be mis-construed. So be wary of simply working on stats alone for such things, or atleast, be wary of doing it with more general stats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bcnram Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 An awful lot of Mackail Smiths appearences has come from the bench, he's only started 1 of the last 4 matches. And although the figures you've quoted do make Sammon's contribution look 'value for money' compared to CMS, what CMS does have that Sammon doesn't is the ability to change a game, and thats what you pay the extra money for. Look back at when Brighton beat us 1-0 at pride park last year, look at all the stats you want, you'll see we had the same pocession, we had more shots, however they had that bit of quality where it really mattered. That is not quite accurate is it? he has started 19 of the last 24 matches. I am sure that the full info is an oversight on your part and you were not trying to slightly skew the figures to match your argument 'http://www.dcfcfans.co.uk/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':)' /> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
randombc Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 That is not quite accurate is it? he has started 19 of the last 24 matches. I am sure that the full info is an oversight on your part and you were not trying to slightly skew the figures to match your argument 'http://www.dcfcfans.co.uk/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':)' /> He's played in 27 of their 33 games, in some way, either on the bench or starting, which is less than Sammon has done (and still scored more goals), but he'll feature in less games between now and the end of the season with the signing of Ulloa. If people are seriously arguing the point that Sammon is better than CMS, than there is something seriously wrong. As Alex W pointed out, if he had better control, better heading ability, and his sharpness, he'd be a good player, but you can't teach a player to have good control, you've either got it or you haven't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheron85 Posted February 28, 2013 Author Share Posted February 28, 2013 Stats have to be qualified, it's why you can't ever rely on simply stats, unless they're the most detailed available. I agree... And looking at the explanation of how they get to these rankings they're pretty detailed calculations... certainly more accurate than the goals per games ratio which people keep mentioning when talking about Theo... The best way to judge a player is to simply watch him and note how he links up when your team is doing the things that he's required for. Sammon could be a good player, however he needs to improve his control, his heading ability (which for someone so big isn't great) and how sharp he is infront of goal. Stats are useful, but unless they're incredibly detailed about every minute topic, then they can be mis-construed. The issue being that your opinion is that Sammon needs to do these things... My opinion is he's actually pretty okay at most of those things... apart from maybe sharpness in front of goal, I'll give you that one... Not in any way claiming that this is absolute solid evidence... Just commenting that it's funny that AGAIN independent outside sources fail to back up any of the Sammon haters... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheron85 Posted February 28, 2013 Author Share Posted February 28, 2013 If people are seriously arguing the point that Sammon is better than CMS, than there is something seriously wrong. I'd have Sammon over CMS any day of the week, weekends, leap-days, bank holidays, mother's day, easter, christmas and whatever other days happen to exist or even not exist... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
randombc Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 Not in any way claiming that this is absolute solid evidence... Just commenting that it's funny that AGAIN independent outside sources fail to back up any of the Sammon haters... So as Hughes didn't make it onto that index, does that same independent source confirm that Hughes isn't one of the best 100 players in the championship? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheron85 Posted February 28, 2013 Author Share Posted February 28, 2013 So as Hughes didn't make it onto that index, does that same independent source confirm that Hughes isn't one of the best 100 players in the championship? In my OPINION Hughes is a very good a very promising player... and outside, un-biased sources seem to agree with me... This is a SINGLE source which doesn't include him... Also in my OPINION Sammon is a good player and deserving of his place in our starting line-up... and it seems outside, un-biased sources also agree with this opinion... I don't see anywhere that I've claimed a single piece of evidence is absolute (like some people on here consider their opinions to be) however I find it interesting that almost every outside source seems to support the idea of Sammon being an asset... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.