The Times Fink Tank Top 20 Players of the season
pbs.twimg.com/media/BKjJw7ECQAEr2gq.jpg:large
pbs.twimg.comPosted May 18, 2013, 2:25 PM UTC
1037
pbs.twimg.comThe Fink Tank system really measures dependency on players for success rather than quality, though the two are correlated. A team having a lot of players on the list indicates that the team doesn't have a great deal of depth, which is a bit counter intuitive.
8
So it's telling us Spurs are less of a one-man-team than Liverpool, Man U, Arsenal and Everton? In your face wankers!
4
I think the opposite. Spurs only have two players on the list, Liverpool have four.
5
What I meant was that the way Bale has won us points is more visible than with most players. Being even or a goal down and then having a player score a wonder goal makes you look like more of a one-man-team than if said player scored at the start. The fact that Bale has scored so many last-minute winners is what makes us look more dependent on him than Liverpool are on Suarez.
1
That is one way of looking at it, and I was surprised that Bale isn't higher given the record with and without.
Another interpretation is that their one-man is better at getting the full 3-points which is something Spurs have at times struggled with. The system also takes into account the statistical qualities of the teams they are up against. So needing Suarez to score against Chelsea is of more value to the system than needing Bale to score against Wigan.
1
I'm sure you're right. I think the main reason Spurs get called a one-man-team and the others don't is the fact that Bale is so dramatic in his ability to turn games around. That he can seemingly find goals out of nowhere at the crucial moment is what does it. Suarez's contribution to Liverpool may be more important for the team, but he's less of a 'clutch player' as the Americans call it.
2
It's also because the rest of Spurs' attacking players went missing in December and Bale was the only one making a real contribution to the scoresheet. Suarez at Liverpool was their only option until January when they brought Sturridge in so his value is inflated over the season due to being the best of a bad bunch. If Spurs make the CL their priority has to be to sign a goal scorer so they can maintain their presence in the competition in the coming years.
1
Begovic, Jaaskelainen and Schwarzer for keepers? Are they having a laugh? Those three have been good but I'd say the likes of De Gea, Lloris, Cech, Guzan and perhaps even Mignolet have played at least as well as they have, if not better. Maybe they're trying to be hipsters.
5
Its a computer based algorithm that measures potency with and without certain players. Begovic is a much bigger loss than for Stoke than any of the players you mention.
9
Oh, sorry. I had no idea what a 'Fink Tank' was. That's a good point, but I'd argue that Guzan should probably be in with a shout in that case.
2
As background it was created by Daniel Finkelstein, Times editor and Chelsea fan as a purely stats based prediction tool. It also interestingly measures manager potency on teams and concluded last season, amongst other things, that in terms of quality of squad Allardyce is the most effective manager in the league and AVB, at Chelsea, was the worst.
7
Then why isn't Benteke in there?
2
Because in terms of points won against top level defenses he wasn't as effective as the strikers on the list. Against top defenses he didn't score that many, which the system takes into account. And the big games where he did score Villa didn't win. Last weekend, partially due to his sending off, being an example.
1
So they write off 19 goals because they weren't against the bigger teams?
Also, he scored twice in a 3-1 win against Liverpool, twice in a draw against Everton, a hat-trick against Sunderland and a goal against Chelsea.
Michu scored less, and scored 3 in results against big teams (Arsenal & Man Utd)
Seems completely illogical.
2
Leon Osman over Bale, Mata and Hazard?
4
I guess 19 goals in your debut season isn't enough anymore.
4
Only 1 Man United player?
3
It is surprising that the champions only have 1 player on the list
1
For those who want to read the article accompanying the picture: http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/sport/football/finktank/article3768283.ece
Daniel Finkelstein mainly writes about politics, but he also writes football columns that are based on a statistical analysis method which he calls the 'Fink Tank'. It's important to remember when reading it that stats only give a reflection of the truth.
There is no Fink Tank column that makes me more nervous than the one announcing our player of the season. But also few that I enjoy more.
When we do ordinary probabilities, I am robustly confident. The same goes for our explosion of footballing myths. This week I told a legend of the game that the worst time to concede a goal was not just before half-time.
And he replied that it was the worst time, because the manager would shout at him in the dressing room.
But from experience I know that measuring performance is hard and that people get very cross about the outcome.
Nevertheless, the work we do with Castrol on player ranking is intriguing because, while I can often (not always) spot the player of the year before looking at the figures, it usually shines a light on players whose contribution I should have appreciated but didn’t.
Dr Henry Stott, Dr Mark Latham and Gabriella Lebrecht have been looking at every move made on the field and relating them to the contribution they make to goals scored and defended.
In Europe, Cristiano Ronaldo, of Real Madrid, has overtaken Lionel Messi, his rival at Barcelona.
The system measures players per minute, showing the contribution made. This demonstrates the ability of Manchester City players, with five (David Silva, Vincent Kompany, Yaya Touré, Carlos Tévez and Pablo Zabaleta) in the top ten. Chelsea have only one player in the top 20, but Demba Ba picked up most of his ranking points while he was at Newcastle United.
Oddly, Juan Mata is only 24th and Eden Hazard, his team-mate at Chelsea, 62nd on this measure.
But for the player of the season we use total contribution rather than per minute, because getting on the pitch is part of it.
This measure shoots Steven Gerrard, the Liverpool and England captain, up to fourth (from twelfth), which is one of his highest positions. Gareth Bale, of Tottenham Hotspur, drops from third per minute to seventh because he has played less than others.
Leon Osman, of Everton, and Leighton Baines, his team-mate, are up there. And it is clear that there hasn’t been enough talk about Santi Cazorla, because he finishes third for his efforts with Arsenal.
The Fink Tank numbers care if you have been sent off because you can’t score goals while not playing. But the numbers don’t make moral judgments.
The runner-up is Robin van Persie, such a hit in his first year with Manchester United, and the Fink Tank Player of the Season 2012-13? Luis Suárez.
3
Wooo 5 Everton players
2
Benteke? What the fuck
1
Bale behind Osman, Baines, Cazorla? Christ. I mean at least you can make a case for RVP and Suarez.
0
The algorithm must factor in the crap that bale is caked in (that rubbed off from his teammates).
-2
What, players like Vertonghen, Dembele, Lloris, Lennon? Yeah they're shite.
0
haha - someone can't see the funny side of being Baled out many times this season...
1
This is a heavily opinionated and skewed ranking. Even as a liverpool fan, I do not see how Johnson made the cut.. Nor do I see how Osman is ranked so highly..
0
Surprised bale and Michu aren't higher up
0
Not a single Chelsea player? Only 1 United player? I'm gonna disregard this.
-1
That's a good thing... this list is players who impacted the teams the most and noninclusion in the team sheet would mean you're team would be fine without you.
Read this as liverpool without luis suarez this year would be in dire straights
3
Ah okay, that makes alot more sense thinking about it that way. Didn't see Tabathock's comment shedding light on the list.
1
Mata, Carrick and Hazard should all definitely be on there.
Mata seems like a huge omission.
It's done with stats so it shows that their figures are not even close to looking in the right places
It just shows that Chelsea and Man Utd were able to adapt when those players were unavailable, hence the lower valuation by the algorithm.