The way we're playing...


Status
Not open for further replies.
😁 ppg for individual players is absolute nonsense, you can't read very much into it all. It is a way of lying with statistics.

George Dobson started 29 league games (and 5 sub apps) for us in 18 months, and he was very poor technically and couldn't run.

Returning to the first point - ppg applied to players. 3 of Dobson's sub appearances for us were 82 minutes + in games we were already winning (1 of them an 89th minute sub app in a 3-1 win). Those add into his PPG ratio, as though he was as response for those results as anyone else who played, and that's just nonsense.

Imagine a scenario where Dobson starts the game, we go 2-0 down to 2 penalties that Dobson conceded, and Dobson goes off at HT. McGeady replaces him, scores a hattrick and we win 3-2. Ppg gives both of those players equal credit for the win. It is non-contextual and doesn't distribute credit at all. You could have a great player in a sh1t side with a poor ppg, and you could have a sh1t player playing the odd game for a good side and statistically he's 'better' with ppg.

Doesn't count unless the player has played more than 70 minutes in the game. Other than that, yea, I liked your hypothetical scenario.
 
Sunderland George Dobson
should not be mentioned in the same sentence
You know people talk about Gareth hall Jeff Whitley and Tommy lynch been bad
well this George Dobson was in that category
 
Last edited:
When we have a little dip in form, let's remember that these players are good enough for this level and have no more kneejerk reactions against certain players and LJ. Gooch was getting hammered every week on here and on social media but has shown that with a bit support he can be a very useful player for example. I know we're used to shit the last few years so it's easy to get down but need to keep the faith more in what we're trying to do. LJ is implementing an ethos and a way of playing which we haven't had for a very long time.
 
Doesn't count unless the player has played more than 70 minutes in the game. Other than that, yea, I liked your hypothetical scenario.
Fair enough, didn't know that. Change Dobson's sub to minute 70, and keep everything else the same and it all still applies though. You can't judge 1 player by the result of the whole team. That player might have only plated in all the harder games, his appearances might coincide with the appearances of another player(s) who have a much bigger impact etc. There are thousands of variables. And the biggest clue is watching Dobson and McGeady play for Sunderland. One of them was sh1t, the other had the most assists in the country.
 
Last edited:
Fair enough, didn't know that. Change Dobson's sub to minute 70, and keep everything else the same and it all still applies though. You can't judge 1 plater by the result of the whole team. That player might have only plated in all the harder games, his appearances might coincide with the appearances of another player(s) who have a much bigger impact etc. There are thousands of variables. And the biggest clue is watching Dobson and McGeady play for Sunderland. One of them was sh1t, the other had the most assists in the country.

I can imagine it but it didn't happen.

There are, like you say, thousands of variables and nuance, but then I have never suggested it's a golden bullet in which to judge players ability, purely a potential indication of either tactical issues or viewer bias.

A really interesting one would have been Juninho of Boro, they were 6th when he joined I think, and he was one of the best players in the world at a time and they went down. That would indicate a tactical issue.

McGeady/Dobson, more so viewer bias, IMO of course.
 
I can imagine it but it didn't happen
It doesn't matter. It's an inherent flaw, and scenarios similar to that happen all of the time. Player plays poorly, gets subbed, sub comes on and wins the game - and you're telling me the sub gets no credit through PPG.

There are millions of lower key, smaller impact examples, but there's a famous one off the top of my head with Romelu Lukaku. It was Fergie's final match at Man Utd, and Utd took a 3-goal lead in the first half. Lukaku came on in the 2nd half for WBA, scored a hattrick, and WBA won the match. On PPG, he gets no credit whatsoever for that result, yet the players who played most of that game - including a disastrous first half, do.

Up and down the country every week, subs change games. Also rubbish players get carried by better ones.

McGeady got more assists than anybody in England last season. When he previously fell out with management, he went on loan to a division above. Dobson meanwhile was shipped out to Wimbledon, who almost got relegated from our league, and now plays for Charlton, who are a million miles behind us.
 
Last edited:
It doesn't matter. It's an inherent flaw, and scenarios similar to that happen all of the time. Player plays poorly, gets subbed, sub comes on and wins the game - and you're telling me the sub gets no credit through PPG.

There are millions of lower key, smaller impact examples, but there's a famous one off the top of my head with Romelu Lukaku. It was Fergie's final match at Man Utd, and Utd took a 3-goal lead in the first half. Lukaku came on in the 2nd half for WBA, scored a hattrick, and WBA won the match. On PPG, he gets no credit whatsoever for that result, yet the players who played most of that game - including a disastrous first half, do.

Up and down the country every week, subs change games. Also rubbish players get carried by better ones.

McGeady got more assists than anybody in England last season. When he previously fell out with management, he went on loan to a division above. Dobson meanwhile was shipped out to Wimbledon, who almost got relegated from our league, and now plays for Charlton, who are a million miles behind us.

Those scenarios do happen yea, it's not faultless nor a golden bullet when assessing a player's overall effect on a game. But... we could discuss both players merits forever and never agree which is fine, however, did we win more points per game when Dobson played as opposed to McGeady, yes, we did, that's not up for debate, you can discredit it using hypotheticals or one-offs from other clubs but that may be due to confirmation bias, I don't know.

Folk like stepovers (or assists, even when the real value is normally in the pass behind the pass IMO), how close they get (or what line) to an opponent when pressing or running the length of the pitch past other teammates to defend a counter seldom provides fanfare.

As for their loan spells, I think McGeady barely played, no? And they got relegated. Whereas Dobson played well and helped his club stay up. You could also say McGeady was free to move for no money (we probably would have subsidised his wage as well) for over a year.
 
, however, did we win more points per game when Dobson played as opposed to McGeady, yes, we did, that's not up for debate
So you say, but I don't care about that because its meaningless garbage - the fact that he happened to be in the team when won some games, doesn't make him a good player, and doesn't mean he was even a positive contributor to it. He only played 70+ minutes for us about 25 times, across 18 months, so it's already a very small pool of data, for a team who are constantly in the top 6. I'd put about as much weight on the usefulness of that stat as a judge of Dobson's time here, as I would put blame on Tom Flanagan for it raining for more than 50% of our away games in Lancashire.

Aiden McGeady got the most assists in England last year, while George Dobson was scratching about at the bottom of League 1, on loan from us, because he wasn't good enough to even make the bench, when we had arguably the sh1ttest collection of central midfielders we've had in our entire club history.

There are good reasons why Dobson's stay here was brief, why he couldn't get in the team, and why he's been shipped off to inferior teams since. To try and argue that Dobson was more effective for us than McGeady based on PPG, is just drivellous nonsense imo.
 
Last edited:
So you say, but I don't care about that because its meaningless garbage - the fact that he happened to be in the team when won some games, doesn't make him a good player, and doesn't mean he was even a positive contributor to it. He only played 70+ minutes for us about 25 times, across 18 months, so it's already a very small pool of data, for a team who are constantly in the top 6. I'd put about as much weight on the usefulness of that stat as a judge of Dobson's time here, as I would put blame on Tom Flanagan for it raining for more than 50% of our away games in Lancashire.

Aiden McGeady got the most assists in England last year, while George Dobson was scratching about at the bottom of League 1, on loan from us, because he wasn't good enough to even make the bench, when we had arguably the sh1ttest collection of central midfielders we've had in our entire club history.

There are good reasons why Dobson's stay here was brief, why he couldn't get in the team, and why he's been shipped off to inferior teams since. To try and argue that Dobson was more effective for us than McGeady based on PPG, is just drivellous nonsense imo.
Logon or register to see this image
 
, however, did we win more points per game when Dobson played as opposed to McGeady, yes, we did, that's not up for debate
what’s that mean
 
Wasn't that long ago we were in a bad run and many wanted LJ sacked. Plenty ups and downs yet. Need to strike while the irons hot and bring a couple in to add to squad.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top