USWNT - Individual Statistics

Discussion in 'USA Women: News and Analysis' started by Kevin625, Jan 6, 2016.

  1. Kevin625

    Kevin625 Member

    Jan 4, 2016
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    Is there anywhere I can get the individual statistics for players for the USWNT?

    If not, I'd like to start putting together a database with this kind of information since now's as good of a time as any with the start of a new year.

    I've started to enter the last 2 USWNT games into a spreadsheet and included as much information as possible, but it was a pain to go through and re-watch every minute of the game to capture the individual statistics, particularly Shots and Shots on Goal.

    Here's what I've started recording...

    TEAM STATS/INFO
    • Date
    • Event
    • Opponent
    • Venue (City/Stadium/Playing Surface)
    • Weather
    • Attendance (& capacity/sell-outs)
    • Coach (USA only)
    • Starting Formation
    • Goals (player/time/assisted by)
    • PK's (scored/missed/saved)
    • Shots/SOG/Saves
    • Corner Kicks/Fouls/Offside
    • Misconduct (Yellow/Red)
    • Time (extra time added for end of each half & each OT)
    • Kits (haven't added this one yet, not sure if it's something I'll be able to capture)

    INDIVIDUAL GAME STATS
    • Uniform #
    • Position(s)
    • Minutes (including time on/off)
    • Captain
    • Shots/SOG/Goals
    • Assists/Assist2
    • Substitutions (player replacing/replaced by)
    • +/- (GF/GA while player is on field)
    • PK Conceded (player committing foul)
    • Misconduct (Yellow/Red)
    • Goalkeeping (SOG/Saves/Conceded/Clean Sheet/PK Attempts/PK Goals/PK Saves)
    • Substitutions (Player Replacing/Replaced)
    • Available Substitute (keep track if player was available for the game and didn't play)
    • Injuries (for example: Alex Morgan - Hamstring)
    • Notes (for example: Abby Wambach - Last CAP, Alex Morgan - 100th CAP)

    Most of these stats are relatively easy for me to find or capture. Some are not however... such as an individual player's Shots/SOG. Is there anywhere I can find this information? I really don't want to go back through and watch/pause every game... it took much longer than just watching the game straight through.

    If this is something I can get, I'd like to also include the U17-23 information as well, if possible.

    ALSO... ARE THERE ANY STATISTICS I'VE MISSED THAT WOULD BE WORTH CAPTURING?
     
  2. Smallchief

    Smallchief Member+

    Oct 27, 2012
    Club:
    --other--
    Fouls committed/fouls suffered.

    This will be a great project if you can find the data. Good luck!
     
  3. Kevin625

    Kevin625 Member

    Jan 4, 2016
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    #3 Kevin625, Jan 6, 2016
    Last edited: Jan 6, 2016
    I had Fouls Committed in and took it out, but maybe I'll put it back in with Fouls Suffered. I tried keeping track in the last game and somehow only recorded 3 out of 5 Fouls Committed that USSoccer had recorded in their game stats. I just don't want to bite off more than I can chew, so I took it out.

    Here's the fouls I recorded for the last game played. There's supposed to be 5, but I only had 3...
    1 Heath @ 34:54
    2 Sonnett @ 45:15
    3 McCaffrey @ 94:00

    I recorded Offsides as well. USSoccer only had 5 against the USWNT, but there were definitely at least 7...
    1 Wambach @ 14:50
    2 Lloyd @ 33:54
    3 Wambach @ 52:17
    4 Wambach @ 53:05
    5 Wambach @ 56:52
    6 Dunn @ 82:50
    7 Horan @ 86:38

    I got the USSoccer stats from here...
    http://www.ussoccer.com/stories/201...by-wambach-in-final-game-of-2015-victory-tour

    They definitely got the Offside totals wrong, so I'm wondering what else they recorded wrong.

    I recorded 18 potential shots... but had 4 marked with an asterisk. USSoccer had 14 team shots and 8 SOG. 3 of the shots were either into a wall or immediate deflections and 1 was a 50 mile shank by Abby.

    I'd like the data to be official and accurate and not biased by my opinion. I'm not 100% sure if I'll be able to record the Shots/SOG accurately, which is why I was hoping it was officially recorded elsewhere.

    I've got some experience with HTML, PHP and MySQL. If I can get all the data, I can make a website, although I'm not sure what kind of permissions I'd need to make a fan page.

    All of this is easy for me to do and I've done it before with other data. My only hurdle will be getting accurate statistics.
     
  4. kernel_thai

    kernel_thai Member+

    Oct 24, 2012
    Club:
    Seattle Sounders
    I know this isnt what u had in mind but it sortta fits.



    For all those people on EQ who keep saying HAO has lost a step...suck it.
     
    exref and Kevin625 repped this.
  5. luvdagame

    luvdagame Member+

    Jul 6, 2000
    she has lost a step. winning the beep endurance doesn't prove otherwise.
     
  6. kernel_thai

    kernel_thai Member+

    Oct 24, 2012
    Club:
    Seattle Sounders
    She didnt just win it, she set a new team record. In recent history HAO and KO have dominated the beep tests but it is nice to see Heath sliding in there. Anyway, not sure how u lose a step but do better than u have in past tests.
     
  7. luvdagame

    luvdagame Member+

    Jul 6, 2000
    i know. still doesn't mean she hasn't lost a step.

    "lost a step" means your top speed a bit slower, which it certainly is for her.

    this.

    never thought of tobin as a high beep test performer.

    improve your fitness and endurance.
     
  8. Dundalk24

    Dundalk24 Member

    Jul 20, 2007
    PA/OH
    18 players set new PRs. Even accounting for a few newbies something tells me that venue was quite amenable to high BT scores.
     
    CoachJon repped this.
  9. Kevin625

    Kevin625 Member

    Jan 4, 2016
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    Is there anywhere (website/blog) to follow their camp?
     
  10. lil_one

    lil_one Member+

    Nov 26, 2013
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Some of this information, especially the team information, you'll be able to get from the US Soccer media guide. It has games listed all the way back to 1985 with lineups, subs, attendance (back to c. 1992), goals, assists (totals, not listed by game), caps, etc. It also has some info (not much!) on the youth teams.

    I have a spreadsheet in which I've kept track of that same info that is in the media guide as well as a little extra (some notes: first/last/milemarker caps, 100th goal, etc.). It is nowhere near as detailed as you're wanting though. From keeping that spreadsheet, I can tell you that some of the info is going to be hard to come by, depending upon how far back you want to go. Pre-1995 or so, there's hardly anything out there except for what US Soccer themselves likely have in Chicago (plus what I've been able to find on opponents' website databases, which for some federations are much better databases than what USSF offers online). Prior to the early to mid 2000s, a good number of games were not televised so no way to even go back and watch the game to get individual stats. AFAIK, some of those individual stats (2nd assist, etc.) have not been tracked at all and so if you're not able to find footage of the game, then there's nothing available unless you have friends at US Soccer who can share footage.

    I'm happy to share the spreadsheet I have (pm me an e-mail address), and depending on how far back you're wanting to go, another option might be checking with Dave Brett who has probably the most extensive video collection of USWNT games outside of US Soccer.
     
    holden and Kevin625 repped this.
  11. kernel_thai

    kernel_thai Member+

    Oct 24, 2012
    Club:
    Seattle Sounders
    Well having it indoors always helps if they its a fast surface for obvious reasons. Ud need a historical data sample so u could see if the improvement was more than just a conditions bump.
     
  12. kernel_thai

    kernel_thai Member+

    Oct 24, 2012
    Club:
    Seattle Sounders
    based on observations?
     
  13. taosjohn

    taosjohn Member+

    Dec 23, 2004
    taos,nm
    Also suggests that there may have been substantial improvements in fitness programs, diet, and so forth. There are folks paid to know the best ways to do these things, and they surely deserve at least consideration for some credit. More is not better, less is not better, better is better; and we may be doing things better these days. I would also think that for an endurance test a fast track might be less important to the collective results than temperature, humidity, and pressure?

    I have been assuming myself that HAO has lost a half step, anyway; but without access to the actual data, there remains a real possibility that it is more a matter of the opposition getting faster and/or smarter.

    Again, I would hammer on the notion that the staff gets to hold the stopwatches and see what the monitors say. Most of us watching on tv can see when a player has hit the wall-- if we think to watch for it that is-- but the monitors have changed the game entirely. The staff is going to have a pretty good idea when a player is about to hit the wall; the guesswork is shrinking for them, and not us. We would do well to remember that.

    They aren't necessarily smarter than we are, but they are much more knowledgable-- at least until someone here hacks their database...
     
    Cliveworshipper repped this.
  14. Smallchief

    Smallchief Member+

    Oct 27, 2012
    Club:
    --other--
    One of the things I do in my occasional forays into statistics is to disregard the blowouts -- which I have decided mean matches that the U.S. wins by more than 4 goals.

    I don't think the fat statistics that come from a 12-0 victory over Guatemala or the like should be considered in evaluating players. Thus, if I were doing 2015 stats I would edit out the stats for the four matches the US won by more than 4 goals.

    By tossing out the stats for the blowouts you get a better picture of how a player performs against good or semi-good opponents.
     
  15. Dundalk24

    Dundalk24 Member

    Jul 20, 2007
    PA/OH
    Equally you have to give the other scenario some consideration. I considered both. I just think the venue is the most likely factor. 18 people all setting PBs at once is rather high even if "substantial improvements" in these areas have recently taken place. Those people that are paid to know these things have always been paid. They're not new people as far as I am aware, still Dawn Scott and Co. That doesn't preclude new approaches and advice. But none of these alternative possibilities preclude Occam's razor either.

    But one thing I have not (and probably never will) question is their fitness approach and our players commitment to it. It's been a big advantage for the USWNT for years. If Scott has found a way to make them all even better that's great.

    One thing we do know is that HAO is still beating all of her teammates in the beep test. So there's that. Unfortunately, such endurance comes less into play for players that see minimal minutes in matches.

    Definitely. I think few would disagree. You don't need your hammer on this point.

    Well if I get caught I'll tell them it was your idea.
     
  16. Cliveworshipper

    Cliveworshipper Member+

    Dec 3, 2006

    Well, if you want to set that kind of limit, then you have to add as a criterion how a player does against top competition.

    Using that standard, Press, for example, doesn't do so well. Her first goal against a top 10 team only happened in the last year.
     
  17. taosjohn

    taosjohn Member+

    Dec 23, 2004
    taos,nm
    Actually, I think I sort of do. People post here all the time about how so-and-so who had a great league season is not getting called, and such and such who was in camp didn't get to play and how can Ellis tell if these people can help if she won't give them a "real chance?"

    It is at least possible, is it not, that they just can't play at a fast enough pace, even though they are great at a lesser one?And Ellis would know that and we wouldn't...

    NFL rosters are flush every year with third year players who played well, even very well in college, but have seen very little PT and will be dropped next year when their rookie contracts expire-- without their ever getting a "real chance"-- simply because the guy with the stopwatch, or the guy running the weight room can say pretty authoritatively that a "real chance" won't improve their experience at all. They drafted the guy, believed in him, and worked with him for several years-- but the stopwatch never came into agreement with their belief in him, and so it goes...
     
  18. RAMbunctious

    RAMbunctious Member

    Jul 19, 2011
    HAO problem is not she lost a step, it's the current coach doesn't believe she can play a more possession style. Is that not what they play in KC? She's actually been hurt by the fact that she was told for years to serve in balls to Abby. So that is what she is viewed as.
     
  19. luvdagame

    luvdagame Member+

    Jul 6, 2000
    fyp.
     
  20. Dundalk24

    Dundalk24 Member

    Jul 20, 2007
    PA/OH

    Perhaps by "real chance" they mean actual playing time? Of course, if they haven't been called into camp in the first place then Ellis hasn't been privy to anything that the fans haven't seen. Ultimately, a key part of assessing a player is how they perform in actual matches. I don't believe scrimmages are the best gauge of mental toughness, holding one's nerve, and overall execution. Re: playing at a "lesser" pace...There are plenty of fast players in the NWSL. If there's any hallmark of the broader US Soccer system it is speed. Some players seem to thrive more on the USWNT than they do in the league. Some have excelled more for their club sides. Amy Rodriguez falls into the latter group. But I don't think many would suggest it's because of lack of match pace/fitness on her part.

    As far as fitness/stamina are concerned obviously the USWNT has a fitness regimen under Scott that is excellent. But remember fitness levels are much easier to improve than skill and technique. If they seem to be a bit behind other players in their first call ups it is an area that can be addressed and unless their physical shape looks dire this alone shouldn't put them out of the picture. Moreover, blazing pace hasn't been a mandatory prereq for rosters under Ellis's tenure. She has taken a shine to some players that lack pace but have other valuable skill sets.

    Also, the inference in your suggestion is that there is a large chasm between the league and international play. But even if we presume that to be accurate it would only ring true for the few elite opponents. Kansas City or Seattle may not be France or Japan but they're certainly much better than Trinidad & Tobago, Costa Rica, Ireland, etc. Why the familiar criticisms? I think the most likely explanation is that Ellis just has divergent opinions of players/different playing philosophies than some fans. Fans and coaches will almost always disagree on players and tactics. It's how it is in this sport and many others. It's part of the game and for many part of the enjoyment. Sports forums without second guessing would be a lot more stagnant. Losing will intensify it. But likewise winning never provides the buffer of an exemption aura.


    In the NFL every single regular season match counts. That's not really true for Soccer. NFL teams can't afford to take risks. Those same NFL teams will give all the players a chance to get on the field, even with bloated pre-season rosters, during those summer games that don't count. That includes all the young newly drafted players. The established locked in starters see very little of the field in the preseason. Shouldn't USWNT matches that are not the World Cup, Olympics, or a qualifying tournament be treated much like the NFL treats their pre-season games?
     
  21. taosjohn

    taosjohn Member+

    Dec 23, 2004
    taos,nm
    This, is precisely the point I think I need to hammer-- of course she has. She knows what the stopwatch says about them.

    If they can't get from point a to point b in something very close to the time that, say, Yael Averbuch can, they won't be able to succeed no matter how good the rest of their game is. They will always be behind the play, never in it, except by accident-- you don't need to play them to know that.

    Yael Averbuch is a really skilled and talented player; yet at the national team level was just plain marginal because she isn't/wasn't quite fast enough and quick enough for it. She was just fast enough that she deserved (and got) chances to prove otherwise-- and didn't so prove.

    But what about someone just as skilled and talented who is half a second slower? What would be the point in playing them other than to frustrate and embarrass them? As the speed of play increases, slower player will drop off coaches' radar; that's just how it is.

    A four flat forty could play in the NFL even if he could hardly do anything else. A five second forty can maybe play in the NFL. A six second forty better be amazingly good at everything else, or at least astonishingly good at something else.

    A seven second forty can't play, period.
     
  22. cpthomas

    cpthomas BigSoccer Supporter

    Portland Thorns
    United States
    Jan 10, 2008
    Portland, Oregon
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I actually have been thinking about this, before reading your post. I'm not sure your apparent underlying point is right:

    1. For players who have come up through the Youth National Teams, ODP, and ECNL, Ellis may well have seen the players both in practice and competitions. The competitions theoretically are open to fans, but how many fans have seen very many of them? Part of Ellis' job, on the other hand, is to be part of the search for players, so having time for it is available to her in a way that it isn't for fans.

    2. For the NWSL, Ellis is at some games and has access to video of all of them. Again, having time for viewing the video is part of her job, whereas for fans it's something to be fit in to leisure time.

    3. For college players, there are more and more games available on video, the same applies for these games.

    4. Plus, there is paid USSF staff with access to video on lots of players that can cull through it and help select what she should watch. I don't know of any fans who have that service available to them -- other than other fans' recommendations.
    So although Ellis in theory may not have been privy to a lot that the fans can't see, she's probably seen a lot that the fans haven't seen. Further, generally fans have seen the players who are on the teams they support, and the ones from those teams that they really like are the ones they end up supporting here. This is natural, since they haven't seen a lot of video, taken over a significant span of time, on players from teams they don't support. They think the player they really like on the team they support is great, so obviously she should be in the USWNT mix. But, not having seen as much of top players from other teams, they really don't know how their player compares to the others. That's a situation that Ellis is not in -- she has both the time and the resources to cast a much wider net in terms of what she has seen of players. So, not having called players into camp doesn't mean she hasn't seen them. She hasn't seen how they will perform in camp, but she may well have seen them many times.

     
  23. Dundalk24

    Dundalk24 Member

    Jul 20, 2007
    PA/OH
    Does she have some sort of magic clairvoyant stopwatch? She hasn't had them do timed sprints or beep tests if she has never had those players called up. If she calls them into camp she can observe and use her stopwatch. But if they're not there then they are not there.

    I feel quite comfortable that in most cases, with a reasonable degree of accuracy, fans can compare a player's speed with Yael Averbuch's from watching them play. This is not an observation that requires close personal investigation on a practice field. The finer points of a players fitness and skill level can be assessed more accurately that way. But one doesn't need a microscope to know that Kealia Ohai is quicker than Averbuch. But as you acknowledge, despite her limitations, Averbuch had her shot. Not only was she called into camps. She saw playing time, sometimes even against quality opponents.

    There would not be a point. The coach would probably be right not to play them or even call them up. But you seem to assume this would be something a coach can only discover with close personal scrutiny and data collection. That this knowledge about a player is beyond the observational scope of a fan. If that's the case I would strongly dispute that assertion. If a skilled player doesn't cut the mustard because they haven't got the wheels to keep up with Averbuch then the reasons for their non call up should be obvious to a fan. Stating such as a reason is more effective as a rebuttal than reflexively deferring to the coach, "well she knows stuff that you don't." That sort of retort is basically just a wet blanket that could be thrown over any criticism of a coach's personnel or tactical decisions. That's a bit lazy and sometimes even a cop out.

    Yes, the coach(es) will always know more than we do. That's obvious. It's not that the point doesn't have merit. More leeway to the coach should be given on things like the finer technical skills, chemistry, reading the game, etc. It's undeniable that the coaches are in a much better position to assess which penalty takers to use than the fans (for obvious reasons). But nothing, not even on these things, will shield them from the scrutiny of fans. It's the nature of sport.


    Sure. But do you really believe such a glaring weakness would be known only to those conducting close observation, testing, and data collection? Obvious slow person is obviously slow.
     
  24. Dundalk24

    Dundalk24 Member

    Jul 20, 2007
    PA/OH
    This is true. But we shouldn't automatically assume such. A fan's knowledge isn't necessarily always going to be casual and limited, often for reasons that you allude to below. I would also point out a concept called diminishing returns. You don't need to have an obsessive familiarity with a player or to have observed them closely in 50 odd matches to make valid observations about them. I would certainly value the opinion of someone that has watched a player in 50 matches over someone that has watched them play once or twice. But just watching them play 5-10 times cuts that gap down considerably. In any event, whatever a coach's presumed advantages may be, those advantages... on their own...do not consequently invalidate a fan's conflicting opinion.

    That's a great point. However, I just don't see the use in constantly quashing criticism and differing opinions with the stock response of, "well the coaches know a lot more than we do." Sometimes, believe or not, outside criticism of coaches turns out to have validity even with less intimate knowledge. Strangely enough sometimes looking from the outside-in can provide a perspective that being in the bubble does not. Sure, fans are biased as hell and often spout all sorts of nonsense. And whatever misgivings I have about Ellis I'm much happier that she's the coach than any of us punditheads here on BigSoccer. But there are better ways to counter a divergent opinion than just urging others to yield to the superior knowledge bank of Jill Ellis.
     
    Namdynamo and cpthomas repped this.
  25. taosjohn

    taosjohn Member+

    Dec 23, 2004
    taos,nm
    Are you serious? You think one can only time a player if they are in your camp? I imagine that she or someone on the staff has a whole dossier of timings across several years on every player who is eligible...

    And no, I don't think you can read this stuff adequately from watching games at a lower level. A player who can get by with less than their fastest will, at which point the visual comparison by the random fan becomes inadequate.



    But of course, it isn't really timings alone I am talking about. There are surely dossiers on all sorts of physical limitations of all sorts of players-- and we don't get to see them, but Ellis or someone that works with her does.

    Obviously I think that it is not speed that is keeping Ojai out, and I have reason to think her stamina's pretty good too. But suppose she carries the sickle cell gene, in which case she couldn't play in Denver or Azteca; or can't pass an Olympic gender test. Or god forbid she's HIV positive. The fed presumably knows things that HIPA keeps out of the public discourse... Or simply, her measurables don't add up to a reason to think she can beat out whoever she'd be competing with yet.

    There's any number of things Ellis could know that we would not; this is not to say Ellis must be right and we shouldn't question her judgment; but I do think these endless internet vendettas and denigrations-- "Ellis won't give so and so a chance because she doesn't like her" or "because its a sorority and she isn't the right sort" or whatever-- ought to be somewhat less strident in light of the, um, strong presumption that she has access to data we do not which guides some of these selections.
     
    cpthomas repped this.

Share This Page