Settled sides (some stats)

[davetherivelinowl]

Was it Napoleon who was asked what he wanted his generals to be like and he said 'lucky'. Those who criticise Carlos (and have wanted him replaced by someone like Jaap Stam or David Wagner) should bear in mind how unlucky we have been this year with injuries - having gone chunks of the season without Forestieri, Hutchinson, Lees and Lee (arguably our 4 most important players), not to mention Hooper, Fletcher, Abdi etc. (and Matias, Buckley...)

The standard counter-argument would be to say that all teams get injuries over a season. So I looked to see if it was true and put together these stats for this season so far.

 

This looks at how many games have been missed by the 11 players in each side who have clocked up the most appearances, in theory those making up their 'starting 11'

Number of games missed by…	Newcastle	Brighton	Huddersfield		Reading	Leeds	Owls
…..Player with most appearances	1	1	0		0	0	2
Player with 2nd most appearances	1	1	1		0	1	2
Player with 3rd most appearances	2	1	1		3	2	4
Player with 4th most appearances	4	3	2		4	4	6
Player with 5th most appearances	6	4	2		5	4	6
Player with 6th most appearances	8	7	3		5	7	9
Player with 7th most appearances	9	9	4		6	10	10
Player with 8th most appearances	9	10	5		9	11	10
Player with 9th most appearances	9	10	8		10	11	12
Player with 10th most appearances	10	11	8		11	11	12
Player with 11th most appearances	13	11	16		11	12	15
Total no of games missed by 'starting 11'	72	68	50		64	73	88

As you can see, our 'starting 11' have missed quite a few more games than those of any other team. And Huddersfield have enjoyed a particularly settled season, with 8 of their players missing no more than 5 games. Reading have been lucky too with 6 players missing 5 or less games. We've only had 2 outfield players (Bannan and Wallace) who have missed less than 5 games. Key players like Kieran Lee and Almen Abdi aren't even in this 'starting 11' because they've missed even more games. No other team has had to cope with so many absentees. If we can still make the top 6 despite all this, I think Carlos will have done well.

 

[Bukta]

16 minutes ago, davetherivelinowl said:

This looks at how many games have been missed by the 11 players in each side who have clocked up the most appearances, in theory those making up their 'starting 11'

 

Surely this eliminates the players who would have been in the first eleven but have been injured long term, hence not clocking up enough appearances to be considered first eleven?

[Mid Wicket]

Interesting stats, as you say not including Lee and Abdi. You. Could also include Matthias in there as he would have played few games as well.

[flo]

Interesting way to look at things. 

[eddyowl123]

Obviously this doesn't take into account any players from other teams who have been injured for large parts of the season but would otherwise have almost certainly played in the 'starting 11'. Players like Lee  for us, and also perhaps Gary Hooper.

 

I'm not as well versed in the so-called 'starting 11' players of those other teams in the top 6 - can anyone think off the top of their heads any who have been out for long periods who would otherwise have been sure-starters?

 

Regardless, I do believe that to have had Lee, Hooper and Mataias injured for long periods, plus Loovens, Lees, FF and Hutch also out for spells through injury, and still be in the top 6 is a good achievement in itself, however if we don't make it over the line then it will mean practically nothing.

[Holmowl]

5 hours ago, davetherivelinowl said:

Was it Napoleon who was asked what he wanted his generals to be like and he said 'lucky'. Those who criticise Carlos (and have wanted him replaced by someone like Jaap Stam or David Wagner) should bear in mind how unlucky we have been this year with injuries - having gone chunks of the season without Forestieri, Hutchinson, Lees and Lee (arguably our 4 most important players), not to mention Hooper, Fletcher, Abdi etc. (and Matias, Buckley...)

The standard counter-argument would be to say that all teams get injuries over a season. So I looked to see if it was true and put together these stats for this season so far.

 

This looks at how many games have been missed by the 11 players in each side who have clocked up the most appearances, in theory those making up their 'starting 11'

Number of games missed by…	Newcastle	Brighton	Huddersfield		Reading	Leeds	Owls
…..Player with most appearances	1	1	0		0	0	2
Player with 2nd most appearances	1	1	1		0	1	2
Player with 3rd most appearances	2	1	1		3	2	4
Player with 4th most appearances	4	3	2		4	4	6
Player with 5th most appearances	6	4	2		5	4	6
Player with 6th most appearances	8	7	3		5	7	9
Player with 7th most appearances	9	9	4		6	10	10
Player with 8th most appearances	9	10	5		9	11	10
Player with 9th most appearances	9	10	8		10	11	12
Player with 10th most appearances	10	11	8		11	11	12
Player with 11th most appearances	13	11	16		11	12	15
Total no of games missed by 'starting 11'	72	68	50		64	73	88

As you can see, our 'starting 11' have missed quite a few more games than those of any other team. And Huddersfield have enjoyed a particularly settled season, with 8 of their players missing no more than 5 games. Reading have been lucky too with 6 players missing 5 or less games. We've only had 2 outfield players (Bannan and Wallace) who have missed less than 5 games. Key players like Kieran Lee and Almen Abdi aren't even in this 'starting 11' because they've missed even more games. No other team has had to cope with so many absentees. If we can still make the top 6 despite all this, I think Carlos will have done well.

 

 

Interesting stuff Dave. Always great when posters go to such trouble.

 

Does it take into account players rested or dropped, rather than injured? Take Palmer or Hunt as examples. Both have missed many matches, but seldom through injury. Pudil likewise.

 

 

[aeroswfc]

Interesting stats.

[davetherivelinowl]

I've said 'starting 11' in inverted commas because it's based purely on the 11 players who have played the most games. I haven't tried to be sophisticated and work out who the starting 11 for each team ought to have been - I'm not even sure what our starting 11 ought to be! It's true that not all the missed games were due to injury or suspension - some, at least, could be just down to rotation as in Hunt(ley) and Palmer. Sometimes Carlos has rotated his team by choice and this will have an impact on these figures. Still, it would have been nice to have had 8 players playing almost every game of the season like Huddersfield have had.

[HirstWhoScoredIt]

14 hours ago, davetherivelinowl said:

Was it Napoleon who was asked what he wanted his generals to be like and he said 'lucky'. Those who criticise Carlos (and have wanted him replaced by someone like Jaap Stam or David Wagner) should bear in mind how unlucky we have been this year with injuries - having gone chunks of the season without Forestieri, Hutchinson, Lees and Lee (arguably our 4 most important players), not to mention Hooper, Fletcher, Abdi etc. (and Matias, Buckley...)

The standard counter-argument would be to say that all teams get injuries over a season. So I looked to see if it was true and put together these stats for this season so far.

 

This looks at how many games have been missed by the 11 players in each side who have clocked up the most appearances, in theory those making up their 'starting 11'

Number of games missed by…	Newcastle	Brighton	Huddersfield		Reading	Leeds	Owls
…..Player with most appearances	1	1	0		0	0	2
Player with 2nd most appearances	1	1	1		0	1	2
Player with 3rd most appearances	2	1	1		3	2	4
Player with 4th most appearances	4	3	2		4	4	6
Player with 5th most appearances	6	4	2		5	4	6
Player with 6th most appearances	8	7	3		5	7	9
Player with 7th most appearances	9	9	4		6	10	10
Player with 8th most appearances	9	10	5		9	11	10
Player with 9th most appearances	9	10	8		10	11	12
Player with 10th most appearances	10	11	8		11	11	12
Player with 11th most appearances	13	11	16		11	12	15
Total no of games missed by 'starting 11'	72	68	50		64	73	88

As you can see, our 'starting 11' have missed quite a few more games than those of any other team. And Huddersfield have enjoyed a particularly settled season, with 8 of their players missing no more than 5 games. Reading have been lucky too with 6 players missing 5 or less games. We've only had 2 outfield players (Bannan and Wallace) who have missed less than 5 games. Key players like Kieran Lee and Almen Abdi aren't even in this 'starting 11' because they've missed even more games. No other team has had to cope with so many absentees. If we can still make the top 6 despite all this, I think Carlos will have done well.

 

I would counter that by saying much of it is due to our squad size and his constant tinkering.

 

For instance, of those 88 missed, how many times were they sat on the bench?

 

Furthermore, bringing in McManaman, Rhodes and Winnall in January will have substantially increased that number. A luxury the other managers would have loved to have.

[AwokenGiant]

59 minutes ago, HirstWhoScoredIt said:

I would counter that by saying much of it is due to our squad size and his constant tinkering.

 

For instance, of those 88 missed, how many times were they sat on the bench?

 

Furthermore, bringing in McManaman, Rhodes and Winnall in January will have substantially increased that number. A luxury the other managers would have loved to have.

 

By the looks of it, stat wise and injury wise, it is a luxury that we have needed and others have not. I've said all along, it'll be interesting over the next five games if any of the play off candidates get injuries to 'key' players. 

Edited April 11, 2017 by AwokenGiant

[HirstWhoScoredIt]

5 minutes ago, AwokenGiant said:

 

By the looks of it, stat wise and injury wise, it is a luxury that we have needed and others have not. I've said all along, it'll be interesting over the next five games if any of the play off candidates get injuries to 'key' players. 

The stats as they are do not show we needed it.

 

Fletcher, Forestieri, Joao and Nuhiu have been fit nearly all season. The very fact we were able to loan Joao out proves we didn't NEED it, it was simply desirable.

 

If we still have the highest number when you discount subs appearances then it is more reflective of injuries instead of rotating.

Edited April 11, 2017 by HirstWhoScoredIt

[Ballmeist]

There's lots of ways that you can use statistics to provoke and support various discussions, however those stats are completely meaningless. 

[eddyowl123]

3 minutes ago, Ballmeist said:

There's lots of ways that you can use statistics to provoke and support various discussions, however those stats are completely meaningless. 

"Thanks for taking a bit of time and effort to research some stats and post them on here, excuse me while I dump all over them."

 

[HirstWhoScoredIt]

9 hours ago, Holmowl said:

 

Interesting stuff Dave. Always great when posters go to such trouble.

 

Does it take into account players rested or dropped, rather than injured? Take Palmer or Hunt as examples. Both have missed many matches, but seldom through injury. Pudil likewise.

 

 

No. 

 

So for instance Wednesday's player with the 10th most appearances is Hunt and 11th is Jones.

 

Between them they have missed 27 matches.  Yet I don't think more than a few of those were through injury.

 

If anything the figures show that Carlos likes to tinker more than the other managers not that we have necessarily had worse injuries.

[HirstWhoScoredIt]

I think the OP has the basis of interesting stat but they don't really show anything as it is.

 

For instance, Charlie Taylor is Leeds' first choice left back and in the Summer was unquestionably their player with the highest market value.

 

However, because he has missed most of the season, his absence isn't even included.

 

Take this as an example:-

 

Club A:- £10m left back misses entire season

 

£500K reserve left back plays every match.

 

In the OP's example this would count as a ZERO.

 

Club B:- £10m left back misses 5 matches through injury

 

£500K reserve left back just plays those 5 matches.

 

In the OP's example this would count as 5.

 

Therefore, the OP's stats would show that club B had the worse injuries when quite clearly it is Club A.

 

The only way to accurately measure this would be for each manager to tell you his strongest XI, then calculate how many times those players were unavailable through injury (and not include rotations and/or suspensions)

 

Youd also have to account for transfers. So for instance, Carlos may say my strongest team had Fletcher in it until I bought Rhodes.

 

So basically, the OP's stats are meaningless as they are and don't show who has had the worst injuries at all.

[flo]

2 minutes ago, HirstWhoScoredIt said:

I think the OP has the basis of interesting stat but they don't really show anything as it is.

 

For instance, Charlie Taylor is Leeds' first choice left back and in the Summer was unquestionably their player with the highest market value.

 

However, because he has missed most of the season, his absence isn't even included.

 

Take this as an example:-

 

Club A:- £10m left back misses entire season

 

£500K reserve left back plays every match.

 

In the OP's example this would count as a ZERO.

 

Club B:- £10m left back misses 5 matches through injury

 

£500K reserve left back just plays those 5 matches.

 

In the OP's example this would count as 5.

 

Therefore, the OP's stats would show that club B had the worse injuries when quite clearly it is Club A.

 

The only way to accurately measure this would be for each manager to tell you his strongest XI, then calculate how many times those players were unavailable through injury (and not include rotations and/or suspensions)

 

Youd also have to account for transfers. So for instance, Carlos may say my strongest team had Fletcher in it until I bought Rhodes.

 

So basically, the OP's stats are meaningless as they are and don't show who has had the worst injuries at all.

Maybe the left back playing now is better than Taylor and thats one reason why they are doing well this year. 

[HirstWhoScoredIt]

Just now, flo said:

Maybe the left back playing now is better than Taylor and thats one reason why they are doing well this year. 

Quite possibly. Although the player that has been playing there is the right back that they decided needed to be replaced by Ayling so it would be surprising.

 

But that isn't at all what I was saying is it?

 

I was using an example to demonstrate that the OP's stats are completely and utterly flawed.

[HirstWhoScoredIt]

To be fair to the OP, it does clearly show that we have had the most unsettled 18.

 

To show the most unsettled team you would need to show only starting appearances rather than total appearances.

 

They certainly do not show who has had the worse injuries.

[davetherivelinowl]

OK, here's some more stats. I looked at how many games were missed by the 'key players' in each team. How did I determine who the 'key players' were? I looked at the performance stats in whoscored.com. They rate each player in each game with a score out of 10 based on tackles made, shots saved, assists, key passes, pass accuracy, headers won etc. I excluded players who had played less than 10 games as their average score was based on a low sample size - this excluded Fox for Wednesday, Maenpaa and Hunemeier for Brighton and Mbemba for Newcastle (almost certainly not 'key players'). Here's how many games were missed by the 'top 6' performers on each side.

Number of games	Newcastle		Brighton		Huddersfield				Reading		Leeds		Owls
missed by…	Clark	9	Knockaert	1	Schindler			1	Kermogant	4	Janssen	11	Forestieri	10
	Hayden	13	Dunk	3	Mooy			1	Moore	6	Bartley	1	Hutchinson	9
	Richie	2	Duffy	10	Palmer			16	McLeary	3	Hernandez	11	Lees	10
	Shelvey	4	Murray	1	Hogg			8	McShane	12	Ayling	4	Pudil	19
	Lascelles	1	Stephens	7	Van la Parra			5	Al Habsi	0	Berardi	19	Reach	6
	Gayle	10	Bong	19	Kachunga			0	Van den Berg	15	Wood	2	Lee	18
Total games missed		39		41				31		40		48		72

 

 

OK, the figures are distorted because Pudil, for instance was available for many of the games 'missed' but I think you can see that Forestieri, Hutchinson and Lee missed a lot more games than Murray, Knockaert, Dunk, Shelvey, Gayle, Mooy, Kermorgant, Wood etc.

Even if you don't think this tells us anything about injury problems you might just like to see who are the top-rated players in each team according to whoscored.com

[HirstWhoScoredIt]

38 minutes ago, davetherivelinowl said:

OK, here's some more stats. I looked at how many games were missed by the 'key players' in each team. How did I determine who the 'key players' were? I looked at the performance stats in whoscored.com. They rate each player in each game with a score out of 10 based on tackles made, shots saved, assists, key passes, pass accuracy, headers won etc. I excluded players who had played less than 10 games as their average score was based on a low sample size - this excluded Fox for Wednesday, Maenpaa and Hunemeier for Brighton and Mbemba for Newcastle (almost certainly not 'key players'). Here's how many games were missed by the 'top 6' performers on each side.

Number of games	Newcastle		Brighton		Huddersfield				Reading		Leeds		Owls
missed by…	Clark	9	Knockaert	1	Schindler			1	Kermogant	4	Janssen	11	Forestieri	10
	Hayden	13	Dunk	3	Mooy			1	Moore	6	Bartley	1	Hutchinson	9
	Richie	2	Duffy	10	Palmer			16	McLeary	3	Hernandez	11	Lees	10
	Shelvey	4	Murray	1	Hogg			8	McShane	12	Ayling	4	Pudil	19
	Lascelles	1	Stephens	7	Van la Parra			5	Al Habsi	0	Berardi	19	Reach	6
	Gayle	10	Bong	19	Kachunga			0	Van den Berg	15	Wood	2	Lee	18
Total games missed		39		41				31		40		48		72

 

 

OK, the figures are distorted because Pudil, for instance was available for many of the games 'missed' but I think you can see that Forestieri, Hutchinson and Lee missed a lot more games than Murray, Knockaert, Dunk, Shelvey, Gayle, Mooy, Kermorgant, Wood etc.

Even if you don't think this tells us anything about injury problems you might just like to see who are the top-rated players in each team according to whoscored.com

That has much more meaning. Thank you for your effort.

 

With regard to Wednesday, Hutch and Forestieri have both missed matches through Suspension and the latter through being rested.

 

additionally, I believe that all or nearly all of the matches missed by Pudil and Reach were through the choice of Carlos. Therefore, I still suspect our figures are inflated more than some.

 

What is clear is that Huddersfield have had a stroke of luck. Their spine is Schindler, Mooy and Kachunga - they've hardly missed a match.

 

Without our squad size and resources I guess they need it.

 

 

Edited April 11, 2017 by HirstWhoScoredIt