Liverpool have pinpointed the Feyenoord head coach Arne Slot as the man they want to replace Jürgen Klopp.[
@_pauljoyce
]
@_pauljoyce
]
Tea time you mean!!It’s dinner time. I have some homemade chicken soup and the missus’ sourdough.
You’re in Australia who has no actual national dishes.
Fucking hell dreamy. We aren’t eating potatoes and onions. A roast dinner is absolutely phenomenal. There’s no better breakfast than a full English.
What’s wrong with that? This is literally a statistical embodiment of Klopp’s principle “pressing is the best playmaker.” We wanted our data guys to find the closest possible thing to Klopp based on obscure stats such as “shots created from defensive actions” and “points gained from losing positions” and when the data pointed to a baldie from Zwolle everyone suddenly goes: “no, it can’t be him!”
Fair enough. I think the advantage of data-driven approach - when done well - is that it allows you to unearth potential gems before their quality has a chance to translate into obvious success and they become hot property. By the time media and fans catch on, it’s usually too late.I didn't want that.
Not if you put Edwards in charge of recruiting your next wife 🙂You think if your wife died, and you had to get out there again that something about it would be fun, but it wouldn't. It would be this. Ugly young people is about what I think I'd end up with.
All well and good applying that to players. But a whole new ballgame for applying stats based approaches to identifying managers. There are a lot of intangibles associated with being a great manager which stats cannot quantify.Fair enough. I think the advantage of data-driven approach - when done well - is that it allows you to unearth potential gems before their quality has a chance to translate into obvious success and they become hot property. By the time media and fans catch on, it’s usually too late.
It’s a pretty obvious concept with players, but when it comes to evaluating coaches I’m thinking of someone like Brendan Rodgers who went through a couple cycles of being linked with big jobs in seasons when he was doing great at Leicester and the likes of Arsenal wanted him and other periods when he was almost a laughingstock - unlike certain big clubs who still make their hiring decisions mostly based on publicity and other non-football factors, a data-driven approach would probably show a truer picture of Rodgers’ strengths and shortcomings as a manager, correcting for randomness and luck. We all know the story of how Edwards hired Klopp on the back of a disastrous season at Dortmund after concluding based on numbers that it was nothing but random misfortune and didn’t reflect on his quality as a coach.
All of this to say, it’s always easier to swim with the media tide, to chase the next big thing - this season it’s been Alonso and Amorim, next season it will probably be someone completely different. Fans want a name they know and constantly hear in the press, it feels safer, but it’s an illusion. I feel much better about getting someone who satisfies specific underlying statistical parameters that were set before any names were even considered - and I’m sure that’s exactly the process that led our recruitment team to Slot.
I’ll finish where I started - all of this works only if people in charge of the operation really know what they are doing. Stats provide you with a few kernels of useful information buried in an ocean of noise and you can go totally astray if you don’t know what to look for. Fortunately we have a team that have done it successfully before, so I think their chances of getting this appointment spot-on are reasonably high. And as for media narratives or whether fans initially feel “underwhelmed,” I honestly couldn’t give a toss.
Lastly, I thought the whole point of this sort of statistical analysis was that it was agnostic to the idea of a profile. Like, we are clearly going for a certain kind of manager at a certain point in their career. Why?
Maybe so, but you don’t have to rely on stats blindly - it’s just a powerful tool to broaden the pool of candidates, introduce some objective criteria for comparison and, perhaps most importanly, neutralize the bias of meria hype and narratives. In the end, it’s still a human decision - I don’t think Edwards and FSG let AI pick our next manager.All well and good applying that to players. But a whole new ballgame for applying stats based approaches to identifying managers. There are a lot of intangibles associated with being a great manager which stats cannot quantify.
What’s wrong with that? This is literally a statistical embodiment of Klopp’s principle “pressing is the best playmaker.” We wanted our data guys to find the closest possible thing to Klopp based on obscure stats such as “shots created from defensive actions” and “points gained from losing positions” and when the data pointed to a baldie from Zwolle everyone suddenly goes: “no, it can’t be him!”
Maybe so, but you don’t have to rely on stats blindly - it’s just a powerful tool to broaden the pool of candidates, introduce some objective criteria for comparison and, perhaps most importanly, neutralize the bias of meria hype and narratives. In the end, it’s still a human decision - I don’t think Edwards and FSG let AI pick our next manager.
This is harder to quantify, because there are so many different ways to win. If you input the last 10 years of EPL into a computer, the answer will be simple - copy Guardiola as closely as possible and you’ll probably be successful. But in reality of course that’s not possible or maybe even desirable.I didnt want the closest thing to Klopp.
I want to win the PL.
Why would it be agnostic? If we’re replacing Salah on the right wing, we can say we are looking for a profile of a left-footed or two-footed player with above-average speed who is potentially capable of scoring 20+ goals a season (key word is potentially - there is almost no chance we are signing a ready-made player who scores 20+ goals from the wing, so we have to go into deeper underlying metrics such as number of shots per game, chance conversion etc to make this prognosis).
Anyway, it’s a clear profile. Of course if we prioritize a wrong or irrelevant thing (he must be Egyptian like Mo and have curly hair), our data will be garbage. Same goes for managers. We clearly settled on a profile of an up-and-coming manager, hence no Flick or Tuchel, and probably continuity with Klopp’s style of play and suitability to profiles of key players in our current squad was also a factor - perhaps this is why we didn’t go for Amorim with his 3-4-3 and no clear place for Trent.
This is harder to quantify, because there are so many different ways to win. If you input the last 10 years of EPL into a computer, the answer will be simple - copy Guardiola as closely as possible and you’ll probably be successful. But in reality of course that’s not possible or maybe even desirable.
This is where the vision of a DOF and the owners comes in. They know we will always be outspent by at least 3-4 clubs - so you have to prioritize hiring a manager who can compete and win against teams with bigger resources. Alonso, Amorim and Slot all share this trait.
Haha. I don't hate the Dutch, I lived there for a couple of years and they treated me wonderfully well, one couple even let me sleep on their sofa for 3 months ! They are very blunt, very, but friendly. And tall. Bloody hell are they tall.
A cunt then.He’ll be the greatest ever Dutchman if he does.
Maybe on par with Max Verstappen.
Did we?What’s wrong with that? This is literally a statistical embodiment of Klopp’s principle “pressing is the best playmaker.” We wanted our data guys to find the closest possible thing to Klopp based on obscure stats such as “shots created from defensive actions” and “points gained from losing positions” and when the data pointed to a baldie from Zwolle everyone suddenly goes: “no, it can’t be him!”