play analysis

[sidefootsitter]

http://euro2008.castrolindex.com/stats.aspx?type=9&language=en

People have been looking for a 'system".

This is a system.

Looks good from the casual observation.

[Reccossu]

Are strikers only evaluated for their shooting? I doubt it, but can't really tell from the write-up.

[Jwaksman]

I think it's a very good idea. This reminds me a lot of the defensive rating systems that sabermeticians have come up with for baseball. The fact is that general baseball defensive statistics (put outs, errors, etc) are terrible for judging players, as are soccer statistics (passing %, tackles, assists, etc). So you have to come up with a better way.


The first iteration will always be bad, but it's a process that will improve with time. I look forward to seeing this idea improved upon and used more widely in the future. Baseball's defensive ratings are already excellent - the only thing holding them up are old timers who refuse to admit that Derek Jeter is a terrible fielding shortstop:D

[sidefootsitter]

Are strikers only evaluated for their shooting? I doubt it, but can't really tell from the write-up.
They don't divide the positions but the actions.

So, if a striker completes a forward pass inside the offensive zone, he'll get 2x or 3x the points that the same striker or a midfielder would for completing a Claudio Reyna type of a lateral pass that leads to nothing.

Simultaneously, a striker shot is rewarded differently - a close shot into the middle of the goal gets fewer points than a second zone (long distance) shot into a corner of the net.

However an active striker, who makes tackles, short passes, shoots and holds the ball, etc., will get a cumulative grade for all his actions on the pitch.

I would bet that Freddy Adu would rate pretty highly under these criteria whereas a USMNT Michael Bradley would not.

[IndividualEleven]

The castrol is the shiz. I've postyied articles from the site but I'm not sure if the reading comprehension level of the average BSer is high enough to benefit.

[Nutmeg]

Only thing that concerns me about the CPI is that it appears attackers are deducted more points for losing the ball closer to the opponent's goal. Given that I think a turnover in the final third is among the most critical mistakes that can be made in a game, I would need to be convinced their ratings in this area make sense.

[FnordUnitedFC]

Only thing that concerns me about the CPI is that it appears attackers are deducted more points for losing the ball closer to the opponent's goal. Given that I think a turnover in the final third is among the most critical mistakes that can be made in a game, I would need to be convinced their ratings in this area make sense.

I can see the logic in this. Great buildup through midfield, slicing a team open, all the way, and the final ball goes into row Z cocking up a great scoring opportunity.

Blowing a gilt-edge chance is just as bad as conceding one.

[IndividualEleven]

A pretty high percentage of goals from the run of play are generated from turnovers in the defending third. Worrying so much about losing balls in the attacking third sounds like Bob Bradley ball starring Eddie Johnson and Josh Wolff.

[Nutmeg]

A pretty high percentage of goals from the run of play are generated from turnovers in the defending third.

Uh, my point exactly.

[FnordUnitedFC]

A pretty high percentage of goals from the run of play are generated from turnovers in the defending third. Worrying so much about losing balls in the attacking third sounds like Bob Bradley ball starring Eddie Johnson and Josh Wolff.

And a higher of a percentage of goals NOT scored are because of cockups in the final third.

If you screw up 3 potential goals by errant balls in the final third, and give away 2 potential balls by passes in the defensive third, well, if all 5 chances are converted you are 3-2 up.

[IndividualEleven]

And a higher of a percentage of goals NOT scored are because of cockups in the final third.

If you screw up 3 potential goals by errant balls in the final third, and give away 2 potential balls by passes in the defensive third, well, if all 5 chances are converted you are 3-2 up.

Pretty hard to prove a negative...

[FnordUnitedFC]

Pretty hard to prove a negative...

A negative isn't zero though, so it has value of some sort, and that is reflected in the subtraction of points for screwing up scoring opportunities.

[sidefootsitter]

And a higher of a percentage of goals NOT scored are because of cockups in the final third.

If you screw up 3 potential goals by errant balls in the final third... You must have watched Russia yesterday.

Idiocy - the bane of the Russian soccer (and the society in general).

If those guys had converted 50% of their "odd man breaks" into quality shots on goal, they could have beaten Greece by five.

But their decision making was cretinous.

As to the strikers evaluations by Castrol, I think they value "plays made" more than "plays not made", which would be akin to baseball scoring system never assuming the double play.

Numbers-wise, "made plays" then add up to a higher score.