News: Double the Fun: Fire v. Nashole S_C_ and (Red) Stars v. Seattle 6.14.25 7:30 and 4:00

Probably Cuypers deserves some criticism but he’s not 100% so I can’t really put much blame on him. His position just needed to put away one of the many chances we created.

 

I think the reason I like Barlow so much is I've BEEN that guy on a squad before. Just on the outside looking in and trying to bust my ass to get there, bringing the positive attitude and pushing everyone. That being said I wonder how many pass attempts he had?

 

Why ruin a good thing?

 

Barlow-100% and Gutierrez 61.9%. LOL . Not sure of period of time covered.
The passing percentage is not a good overall measure, but it is relatively easy to compile so it is frequently used. One of the most obvious shortcomings is the degree of difficulty of the pass. Killer passes that lead to a scoring opportunity are often really difficult and the completion rate is lower. But you already knew that!

 

Guti had 7 shot creating actions. The most on the team. He also only had 49 touches which is low for his position. Acosta ended up with 43 (I think) in half the time.

Barlow had three passes.

 

FYP

 

Cuypers and Zinck are often targeted for special attention by opponents, for good reasons. They are experienced pros who know how to react to these efforts and still be effective. Gutierrez is still learning how to do this.

 

Guti quality of play dropped off in the second half...really should have done better getting that service in front of the box...

 

"Goals added (g+) measures a player's total on-ball contribution in attack and defense. It does this by calculating how much each touch changes their team's chances of scoring and conceding across two possessions."

I wonder how that calculation is done.

That's ugly. Only a handful, maybe as few as six, made it inside the final quarter. Most of that passing ends right after midfield where it's not as useful.

 

I don't know if that's very reliable. People really want to moneyball-ize soccer but some of this stuff feels like a stretch.

 

The eye test to me is still the most valuable measurement in soccer. It is not like baseball or football with coordinated start/stop points, it is fluid in a way that’s difficult to measure across 11 players with different responsibilities based on their role and the changing conditions during the game itself. Even hockey, fluid in its own right, is easier to benchmark because of the number of players on the ice and the (slightly) more defined/static roles.

 

I'd argue that if we do want to rely on stats, negative and sideway passes when forward passes/dribbles are available should count against a player. Way too many safe players padding their stats and careers. Some coaches eat the shit up too. Facts are counters score in the MLS. Everyone wants to be Pep. If you have a Mesi or DeBruyne to unlock the sitting defense with 11 behind the ball then fine, but the other 99% of teams can not. Most goals occur off counters and set pieces. Let's find some indiv stats that reflect that and lets punish the ones that get the opportunity and shy away - not just reward the lucky ones in the right place at the right time. Their goals are often off teammates backs that took the real chance.

 

Clearly points is the ultimate measure…

Stats are details that may or may not matter, depending on what you are trying to measure/discuss and how those relate to positions and tactics…

Some folk like to delve into patterns and measures, others don’t.