Jump to content

Pelupessy


Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, pazowl55 said:

We pick up more points when Pelupessy and Rhodes are in the team. 

A midfielder who knows the midfield role and a striker who knows the striker role. 

Square pegs and all that.

lol

I certainly agree that we can't afford not to play JR!!

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's like being in a time warp reading these threads; go back 10 years and exactly the same debate was had about James O'Connor.  He was derided by most, but the team was more successful when he played than when he didn't.  Makes you think that the team managers might know more about football than the fans.  😆

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Bleeder said:

I don't know SO because there are too many other variables.

 

You above all people on here will understand that (and I'm not being facetious.)

 

His strengths/weaknesses have been done to death but for the most part, imo, he does little but shadow BB, leaving us with what is, in effect, a physically very frail, one man, CM.

 

 

Aye, I completely get what you're getting at, lots of variables to control, too many to control.

 

But that said, we've got about 15 points of data in both the "played" and "not played" condition, which is the only thing we can control for. And with that, we have a huge difference in points won. It's not 0.1 points, or a quarter of a point... twice as many points per game. Over a season it's the difference between getting 32 points and 64 points. Bottom and play-off chasers.

 

I'm not saying he's the only factor, of course not. But when you have an effect that powerful... across a large sample size... it does suggest that quite a lot of that extraneous "noise" can be ignored. 

 

Whether it's because he's the Championship version or Kante, or just so crap that everyone else puts in that extra 20% to compensate and that gets us the win, literally the only conclusion I think you can come to given that facts is that Pelupessy starting games manages to be hugely beneficial to us and gets us more points. It can't be ignored because it isn't even marginal.

 

0.70 points per game without

1.41 points per game with

 

It's nuts, because I don't really rate him either, but I cannot ignore such a bizarre yet powerful statistic. I would play him every game between now and the end of the season.

Edited by StudentOwl
  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, StudentOwl said:

Aye, I completely get what you're getting at, lots of variables to control, too many to control.

 

But that said, we've got about 15 points of data in both the "played" and "not played" condition, which is the only thing we can control for. And with that, we have a huge difference in points won. It's not 0.1 points, or a quarter of a point... twice as many points per game. Over a season it's the difference between getting 32 points and 64 points. Bottom and play-offs.

 

I'm not saying he's the only factor, of course not. But when you have an effect that powerful... across a large sample size... it does suggest that quite a lot of that extraneous "noise" can be ignored. 

 

Whether it's because he's the Championship version or Kante, or just so crap that everyone else puts in that extra 20% to compensate and that gets us the win, literally the only conclusion I think you can come to given that facts is that Pelupessy starting games manages to be hugely beneficial to us and gets us more points. It can't be ignored because it isn't even marginal.

 

0.70 points per game without

1.41 points per game with

 

It's nuts, because I don't really rate him either, but I cannot ignore such a bizarre yet powerful statistic. I would play him every game between now and the end of the season.

Roy Keane ain't he.  Demands that extra 20% from the players. 

 

This or he is as you say the championship Kante.

 

Haters!!!  cast your votes now.

 

lol

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, StudentOwl said:

Aye, I completely get what you're getting at, lots of variables to control, too many to control.

 

But that said, we've got about 15 points of data in both the "played" and "not played" condition, which is the only thing we can control for. And with that, we have a huge difference in points won. It's not 0.1 points, or a quarter of a point... twice as many points per game. Over a season it's the difference between getting 32 points and 64 points. Bottom and play-off chasers.

 

I'm not saying he's the only factor, of course not. But when you have an effect that powerful... across a large sample size... it does suggest that quite a lot of that extraneous "noise" can be ignored. 

 

Whether it's because he's the Championship version or Kante, or just so crap that everyone else puts in that extra 20% to compensate and that gets us the win, literally the only conclusion I think you can come to given that facts is that Pelupessy starting games manages to be hugely beneficial to us and gets us more points. It can't be ignored because it isn't even marginal.

 

0.70 points per game without

1.41 points per game with

 

It's nuts, because I don't really rate him either, but I cannot ignore such a bizarre yet powerful statistic. I would play him every game between now and the end of the season.

I don’t believe in football stats, I think they mislead - I judge on what I believe is a good performance that I’ve witnessed and I believe that I’ve witnessed good performances by Pelupessy. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, StudentOwl said:

Aye, I completely get what you're getting at, lots of variables to control, too many to control.

 

But that said, we've got about 15 points of data in both the "played" and "not played" condition, which is the only thing we can control for. And with that, we have a huge difference in points won. It's not 0.1 points, or a quarter of a point... twice as many points per game. Over a season it's the difference between getting 32 points and 64 points. Bottom and play-off chasers.

 

I'm not saying he's the only factor, of course not. But when you have an effect that powerful... across a large sample size... it does suggest that quite a lot of that extraneous "noise" can be ignored. 

 

Whether it's because he's the Championship version or Kante, or just so crap that everyone else puts in that extra 20% to compensate and that gets us the win, literally the only conclusion I think you can come to given that facts is that Pelupessy starting games manages to be hugely beneficial to us and gets us more points. It can't be ignored because it isn't even marginal.

 

0.70 points per game without

1.41 points per game with

 

It's nuts, because I don't really rate him either, but I cannot ignore such a bizarre yet powerful statistic. I would play him every game between now and the end of the season.

Crikey mate!

 

Who'd a thunk it!!

 

But pragmatically, you know very well that the data proves nothing whatsoever with so many factors to take into consideration.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Barberphobia said:

It's like being in a time warp reading these threads; go back 10 years and exactly the same debate was had about James O'Connor.  He was derided by most, but the team was more successful when he played than when he didn't.  Makes you think that the team managers might know more about football than the fans.  😆

Ey! We've seen enough of 'em given the boot over the last few years to know that some of 'em don't know a reyt lot!!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, StudentOwl said:

This season, we've won twice as many points per game that Pelupessy has started in vs those he hasn't started.

 

Twice as many points.

 

How do we explain that?


He’s an decent player who gels well with Bannan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

as per ....he didnt get forward much  , he created little ,i dont think he had a shot on goal....but  he was head and shoulders the most influential midfield player out there today ....there star man the only time you saw him was from dead balls and when that happens you know your defensive midfielder as had a good un  ....he played well today (as he usually does) 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...