Some early week analysis since we've got a week until our next game. I was looking at the fact that Preki is doing so well in the league points race. I noticed a couple of things, when I got into Preki's stats over his career. -Preki is now 2 goals away from being the first MLS player in the 70/70 club. He is also the 2 goals and 4 assists away from being the first in the 70/100 club. Just imagine if he were a bit younger when this league started. -Preki only has 20 cards in 194 games played. I'd venture to say that half of those are for disent, 7 are for retaliation, and 3 are for actual tackles. -The one that got me thinking: On a points per game basis, Preki's best years were by '96 and '97 (near 1.5 points/game). His lowest? In 2000 Preki averaged .677 points/game. Does this mean anything? Should we be worried that right now Preki is averaging 1.3 points/game? Just some food for thought.
The guy is a legend, and one of the few recognizable names for the general public around town. If he ever retires, I hope they do something big. I think the local media might actually make a big deal of a tribute match or something.
With all due respect to Cobi Jones, Marco Etcheverrey & Mauricio Cienfuegos.... Preki & Kreis are the greatest players in the history of MLS Honorable mention to Pope, but too many injury problems. (some may not think Jones belongs in this conversation, but do the research, and he has been an impact player since 96) James
Preki was the first in every club 10/10, 20/20, 30/30, etc. Do a stat regression and you will probably find a .4 or so correlation value for Preki's points/game and KC's overall goals given up. A more interesting number might be what percentage of KC's points did KC have and how did that tie in to overall record/points. If my income was dependent on a team's success, I would definitely have this information at my fingertips even if I didn't use it. That said Preki left the NE game up 1-0. Gansler, unlike Andrulis who made a similar error in subbing out Cunningham and having the tying goal scored on his team after the sub and was quoted as saying "my fault", left the blame for the players.
I had a couple of minutes...Mods please cleap up if necessary, thx. Preki *GI % Tm Pts/Gm Team GD 1999 0.545 0.63 -20 1998 0.523 1.00 -5 1997 0.509 1.53 6 1996 0.508 1.28 -2 2002 0.459 1.29 -8 2000 0.383 1.78 18 2001 0.298 2.04 21 (Miami) 2003 0.257 1.43 2 (so far) *Goal Involvement = Add personal G+A and divide by Team goals scored. There will always be a high corellation between Team Pts and Team GD obviously. Still, Preki's numbers bear out that at roughly 35% of GI team success peaks. That almost fits with Ben's offering by establishing a curve instead of a line. You can possibly read into this by extending the thought: If Preki is responsible for more than 35% of the offense required, then his defense duties suffer having an adverse effect on the whole team. OR Preki produces at a level, if the rest of his team fails to produce at a level then that is the cause of the failure driving Preki's percentage up and team results down. Hard to tell which. Overly simplistic bottom line: As GI(Preki) deviates from roughly 35% - team GD and Points break down. Disclaimers: -Numbers are never the whole story (although the Oakland A's would say otherwise) -Team differentials should carry weight -Age is not a factor included in the above -All results should be compared to global results for high scorers on teams in other leagues and ages to establish validity among other things.
I've only got a BS, do I need to go get my PhD in Advanced Mathematics to understand this? Just kidding, I get the point. I think mine was much simpler, with just a quick glance at the numbers. But thanks for crunching the real numbers. I'm not sure Preki's defensive involvement is a factor here though. Preki didn't play any more defense in 2000 than he did in 1996 or he does today.
He sure did in the playoffs, but that's beside the point. I think I misposted when I put his numbers to a factor of his defensive involvement. Regardless of a teams' off/def bent, overall success seems to be directly related to Preki's production level. It would be more accurate to say that when Preki's offensive production deviates (high or low) from 30-35% of the teams', there is a signifigant dropoff of GD. Ahhh. Balance, grosshopper... Enough of that. One thing that is likely to pop up is that of Preki's 3 goals, two have been fairly soft and the other a pk. It's true that Preki has made a nice living exploiting soft spots and errors, but, those gifts will not continue. Hard to fault the assists. In fact, even at KC's MLS high rate of finishing shots, 13.4%, (Avg = 9%), teammates have certainly let him down. Preki should have more assists and maybe even another goal. One more Preki related stat: We've all seen Preki, cutting with high elbows, miss high or wide on a good chance. He usually follows this up with two hands to his face and a classic look of shock. Those watching have seen it more than a few times this year. It's no coincidence that although KC is currently best in MLS at putting balls in the net, KC is also dead last in MLS for actually getting shots on frame. (Both numbers are falling) Only Chicago is even close to KC's poor 37% on frame pct. With all the young quality GKs in MLS it would seem to make sense to get the ball on frame and work for the corner/rebound/mistake. KC is roughly 7% below MLS avg---->that's 1 less ball on frame every 14 shots, which is about what KC generates. Right there is the opportunity for a garbage rebound, Conrad conversion of a corner, etc. At the very least you keep the ball in play which gears the game more towards breaking down of defenses. It's a little thing, but like most llittle things the dividends are enormous.
My god where do you get all of these stats? I would disagree with you on the shots on goal however. I think that GK is the strongest position in the MLS and I don't see that many rebound goals. Also maybe they aren't putting them on goal because they can't. I still remember the time Brown blasted a shot over the crossbar from inside the six.
I would agree with the last statement. The numbers reflect it also as finishing is down 18% from last year's pace. BTW, www.mlsnet.com and some basic math will let you recreate my numbers. I also do similar things for a living. I'm not choosing to look at it that way. Regardless of GK caliber, a great save tipped wide is a corner. a hard shot on frame will sometimes be a corner or a rebound, even if most are snapped up. All a shot wide becomes is a goalkick and the opportunity for a defense to regroup. Bottom line is don't beat yourself, make the other guy do it.
A needed move. We're a better team now because of it. Preki would not have had the same season in KC in 2001 that he had in Miami. I think that both Preki, and now KC, are better for the trade.
Of course shots at the GK have more value than those that go wide of the goal but aiming at the posts gives you more of a chance at scoring than aiming more towards the middle. That being said you may be right. Maybe the Wizards need to put more on net. I'm not so sure the Wizards are better off on the Preki trade even if it was for one year.
I dont see how there was ever any question about whether it matters if shots go on goal or not. It's really quite simple: A shot on goal has a chance to go in, and shot on goal never has a chance to go in. Only shots that go in count. Only shots that go in let you win games and championships. So yes, unless a teams "shots on goal" are all chips from midfield, any reasonable shot on goal is a good thing. Gotta make the keeper earn his paycheck, and anything can happen (see: Preki's two goals vs. DC this season)