vonwright Posted September 5, 2017 Share Posted September 5, 2017 First post here for about a million years, and quite possibly the last for another million. Just read the argument about Russell's stats in another thread and felt an overwhelming urge to comment. You can't measure Russell's goals and assists since 2013/14, and compare them with other Derby players, without taking into account a fairly obvious fact. That is: Russell has been here a lot longer than most other players since then, and played a lot more games. So of course he's going to have more goals and assists. Here's what happens when you rank all Derby players to have played at least 500 minutes since the start of the 2013/14 to date, in terms of minutes-per-assist or goal. I've only included midfield and forward players: Bamford - 115 Nugent - 138 Bent - 138 Martin - 150 Ince - 165 Ibe - 190 Ward - 208 Sammon - 211 Lingard - 219 Bryson - 221 Russell - 222 Vydra - 260 Dawkins - 264 Hendrick - 274 Anya - 357 Blackman - 377 Thorne - 385 Johnson - 426 Hughes - 440 Weimann - 494 Butterfield - 511 Camara - 576 Eustace - 1059 Mascarell - 1647 To me, this gives a fairly reasonable appraisal of Russell over the years. He's not "Camara" bad, but he's not "Ince" good, either. He's sort-of-all-right. (PS A few of our "mainstay" central midfielders over that time - Butterfield, Johnson, Hughes - have never contributed enough in terms of goals and assists.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thierry Ennui Posted September 5, 2017 Share Posted September 5, 2017 The problem with Russell is that he had great stats to begin with but has faded badly, as discussed here: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inglorius Posted September 5, 2017 Share Posted September 5, 2017 You could drive a bus through the attempted logic you've used to derive these figures Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vonwright Posted September 5, 2017 Author Share Posted September 5, 2017 1 minute ago, Inglorius said: You could drive a bus through the attempted logic you've used to derive these figures Go on then. Drive away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inglorius Posted September 5, 2017 Share Posted September 5, 2017 What would you consider to be a fair sampling period to gain these stats Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rynny Posted September 5, 2017 Share Posted September 5, 2017 4 minutes ago, Penelope Pendrex said: The problem with Russell is that he had great stats to begin with but has faded badly, as discussed here: Although his seasons with us doesn't suggest that he started strongly and gradually got worse. 13/14 9 goals 1 assist 14/15 6 goals 8 assists 15/16 10 goals 8 assists 16/17 2 goals 4 assists Basically he has had a horror season last year, similar to most of the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Day Posted September 5, 2017 Share Posted September 5, 2017 Million years is a long time, suddenly I feel very old Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vonwright Posted September 5, 2017 Author Share Posted September 5, 2017 5 minutes ago, Inglorius said: What would you consider to be a fair sampling period to gain these stats Well, I've used the past four complete seasons, plus this season, with a minimum threshold of 500 minutes to be included on the list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deano180 Posted September 5, 2017 Share Posted September 5, 2017 These stats don't measure his inability to understand what's going on around him in a game, his decision making, his positioning, the way he just runs into players, poor standard of passing, his general touch, generally wandering around, these things frustrate me more than the things that are measurable Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inglorius Posted September 5, 2017 Share Posted September 5, 2017 5 minutes ago, vonwright said: Well, I've used the past four complete seasons, plus this season, with a minimum threshold of 500 minutes to be included on the list. Do you think it fair to compare the stats of someone who's played 20 odd games with someone who's played 4 full seasons, am sure Blackmans stats would be world class if you had sampled the part season he had at Reading before he joined us, pretty abject if you then included his time with us as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Comrade 86 Posted September 5, 2017 Share Posted September 5, 2017 How about we focus on his current form for once? Seems to be doing ok, so far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vonwright Posted September 5, 2017 Author Share Posted September 5, 2017 12 minutes ago, Inglorius said: Do you think it fair to compare the stats of someone who's played 20 odd games with someone who's played 4 full seasons, am sure Blackmans stats would be world class if you had sampled the part season he had at Reading before he joined us, pretty abject if you then included his time with us as well. The basic point is that when you are looking back over four seasons - with so many changes of personnel - it's clearly fairer to compare goals and assists per minute than it is to simply look at total numbers of goals and assists. Is it "fair" in the sense you mean? I guess it depends what you think the stats are showing. Are they showing the ultimate worth of a player, in any team in any circumstances? Clearly not. Like you say, Blackman had some decent stats at Reading. If on the other hand you only expect the stats to show you how much players have contributed to Derby's goal scoring over the past few years, I'd say they are indeed fair. For example they fairly reflect that Blackman has been pretty woeful for us. Similarly they fairly reflect that Russell has contributed a decent but not-exactly-staggering amount. Of course you need to be aware of other factors - players who only played when Derby were scoring more freely will tend to have inflated figures. But that doesn't make it pointless, or even "unfair" - it's just something to bear in mind when looking at the list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vonwright Posted September 5, 2017 Author Share Posted September 5, 2017 The "by season" figures are quite interesting, too. MINUTES PER GOAL OR ASSIST, 2013/14 (minimum 500 minutes) Bamford - 115 Bryson - 134 Martin - 135 Sammon - 188 Ward - 212 Russell - 230 MINUTES PER GOAL OR ASSIST, 2014/15 (minimum 500 minutes) Bent - 83 Ince - 134 Martin - 135 Thorne - 162 Russell - 178 MINUTES PER GOAL OR ASSIST, 2015/16 (minimum 500 minutes) Martin - 158 Ince - 168 Bent - 172 Russell - 180 MINUTES PER GOAL OR ASSIST, 2016/17 (minimum 500 minutes) Nugent - 141 Ince - 180 Bent - 200 Vydra - 306 Anya - 352 Russell - 407 (Russell really did have a shocker last year.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angry Ram Posted September 5, 2017 Share Posted September 5, 2017 I'm lost Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gypsy Ram Posted September 5, 2017 Share Posted September 5, 2017 19 minutes ago, Angry Ram said: I'm lost You're not the only one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dethorn Posted September 5, 2017 Share Posted September 5, 2017 The first time I saw Russell I was impressed with his tracking back and helping out his fullback. How do you measure that ? Also statistically it would be good to weight these figures depending on how good a season we had (ie how many assists and goals we had as a team) and also the quality of the opposition when the assist or goal occurred. Another thing which has a major difference is which of the front 5/6 position was each game in - I mean I think I have seen Will hughes play cdm no10 and wide left - surely some positions should be contributing more than others. However you can ignore all this when it helps to proove me right with regard to Jeff Hendrick - I thought he was good !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
May Contain Nuts Posted September 5, 2017 Share Posted September 5, 2017 1 hour ago, vonwright said: The "by season" figures are quite interesting, too. MINUTES PER GOAL OR ASSIST, 2013/14 (minimum 500 minutes) Bamford - 115 Bryson - 134 Martin - 135 Sammon - 188 Ward - 212 Russell - 230 MINUTES PER GOAL OR ASSIST, 2014/15 (minimum 500 minutes) Bent - 83 Ince - 134 Martin - 135 Thorne - 162 Russell - 178 MINUTES PER GOAL OR ASSIST, 2015/16 (minimum 500 minutes) Martin - 158 Ince - 168 Bent - 172 Russell - 180 MINUTES PER GOAL OR ASSIST, 2016/17 (minimum 500 minutes) Nugent - 141 Ince - 180 Bent - 200 Vydra - 306 Anya - 352 Russell - 407 (Russell really did have a shocker last year.) Oh christ, what have I started? From a pedantic exercise in proving a statement to be correct, intentionally taking only one thing into consideration, to full blown analysis! It's one thing being on the pitch, it's another to be actively involved, so you now need to find number of touches and time spent in possession, and a whole host of other variables! You could also do with analysing some trends and considering correlation and causal relation. It's probably not worth the effort though! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nottingram Posted September 5, 2017 Share Posted September 5, 2017 1 hour ago, 86 points said: How about we focus on his current form for once? Seems to be doing ok, so far. You can only use current form as a measurement when he's playing badly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warren Hobhead Posted September 5, 2017 Share Posted September 5, 2017 1 hour ago, vonwright said: The "by season" figures are quite interesting, too. MINUTES PER GOAL OR ASSIST, 2013/14 (minimum 500 minutes) Bamford - 115 Bryson - 134 Martin - 135 Sammon - 188 Ward - 212 Russell - 230 MINUTES PER GOAL OR ASSIST, 2014/15 (minimum 500 minutes) Bent - 83 Ince - 134 Martin - 135 Thorne - 162 Russell - 178 MINUTES PER GOAL OR ASSIST, 2015/16 (minimum 500 minutes) Martin - 158 Ince - 168 Bent - 172 Russell - 180 MINUTES PER GOAL OR ASSIST, 2016/17 (minimum 500 minutes) Nugent - 141 Ince - 180 Bent - 200 Vydra - 306 Anya - 352 Russell - 407 (Russell really did have a shocker last year.) I wouldn't describe anyone last season as having a shocker. We finished 10th and at times had good spells. Didn't we break a winning record or clean sheet record? But beyond Ince, none of the other outfield players impressed me consistently over the season. Russell included. He went from about 10 goals and 10 assists the previous year to very little output last. Butterfield suffered similarly. None of us know the exact reasons they all struggled (including Hughes let us not forget) but it's an educated guess to suggest Pearson, Powell, Mac and Rowett having the same job over 9 months wasn't helpful. This is reason (despite my GR doubts from day one) that I advocate him getting time, years even, in the job. We need stability. The last thing we need is to fire him as soon as we lose a few so that the next manager has a load of Mac, Pearson, Clement and Rowett players to work with. I have said it before many times, but getting rid of Clement was foolish. Everything about him prior and subsequent to that is a great guide. In essence, not a huge GR fan so far, but want to be. And even if we struggle and we moan on here, we'd be daft to get shut. Time to stick to your guns, MM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramit Posted September 5, 2017 Share Posted September 5, 2017 Sammon's stats better than Russell's Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.