Liverpool Better team Without Suarez

[6TimesaRed]

According to the stats..

Article by @PaulGorst From the Mirror

[Article=http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/liverpool-really-better-luis-suarez-3588404] We've analysed a number of facts and figures surrounding the Uruguayan striker, and the number-crunching has revealed an interesting outcome

While conventional wisdom suggests Liverpool are better with Luis Suarez in the side - revealing stats say otherwise.

We've done the number-crunching and analysis on crucial facts and figures, and determined that both the Reds are Suarez's former side Ajax are in fact better off without the forward.

Despite plundering 31 goals, winning both the PFA and LMA Player of the Season gongs alongside a double award at Liverpool's own end of campaign ceremony, the stats say the Anfield side are more successful without Suarez.

Liverpool have a win ratio of 64% when he is not in the team compared to 50% when he plays.

Ajax too fared better when he was out of their team, with the Dutch outfit winning 70% of their games compared to the 61% when the Uruguayan was in the side.

However, at international level, Uruguay are more successful when Suarez represents them, if only slightly.

La Celeste have a win ratio of 48% with Suarez up front, compared to 45% when he doesn't play.

However, one area where the 27-year-old truly outlines his importance is the goals per game stats.

All three teams score more when the livewire Suarez plays.

At Ajax, they scored an average of 2.43 goals per game, while Liverpool notch 1.98 to Uruguay's 2.14.

Suarez's 31 goals last term equaled a Premier League record for a 38-game season, alongside Cristiano Ronaldo and Alan Shearer.

The former Nacional youngster also tied Real Madrid star Ronaldo for UEFA's Golden Shoe.

However, Suarez's involvement in the World Cup is in doubt after he underwent surgery on a knee injury on Thursday afternoon.[/Article]

 

[Ryan]

What a wank article.

 

[mark1975]

Ross will like this, no doubt.

Number crunching to come to the conclusion that Suarez isn't all that, or something. Right up his street.

 

[Rosco]

Nah, Its a walk article as Ryan says.

Even if it's right for the wrong.reasons

 

[cloggypop]

@PaulGorst probably nicked his theory off @Rosco

 

[OLD_Lewy]

I haven't read the article, but sometimes when Suarez isn't on form he loses possession a lot, but that's pretty irrelevant when he can come up with the constant magic he shows so often

 

[Halmeister]

That Paul Gorst is a pure cunt.

 

[Halmeister]

In fairness, he's not really saying we're a better team and we should sell him. Just that when he doesn't play, the statistics show we have got better results. That wouldn't translate over the course of the season most likely, for example, if he misses one game and we win it, we win every game he doesn't play in, according to the stats.

It's like that stat when Gerrard doesn't play. We have a better record without him. But nobody would have suggested dropping him. Unless you're one of those twats on RAWK.

 

[Hansern]

Its a wank article that only brainless morons will appriciate.

Comparing the 19 games where he's been out to the 133 games he's played in is just daft.

 

[Comical Aly]

Nah, Its a walk article as Ryan says.

Even if it's right for the wrong.reasons

Err, it doesn't give any reasons

 

[Rosco]

It does. The win percentage thing

 

[Comical Aly]

That's a statistic

 

[Comical Aly]

Ah, I just realised you have divorced being a better team from winning more games. Unorthodox.

 

[Rosco]

You have an appropriate username

 

[Red Mullet]

It does. The win percentage thing

It doesn't show any of the calculations or assumptions to how the win percentage was obtained with a vague 'we analysed a number of facts and figures'. So, immediate questions are which facts and figures, why not all of them?, which years?, which seasons? Until these questions, and many others, are answered it seems a case of fitting the facts around a conclusion rather than looking at the facts to determine a conclusion.

 

[StevieM]

I would have thought that any game deemed suitable for resting Suarez (as opposed to when he's injured) would likely be they sort of game we'd expect to win without him.

 

[RolandG]

Anyone thinking that Liverpool is better without Suarez needs a brain. I don't care what the stats say!

 

[Rosco]

It doesn't show any of the calculations or assumptions to how the win percentage was obtained with a vague 'we analysed a number of facts and figures'. So, immediate questions are which facts and figures, why not all of them?, which years?, which seasons? Until these questions, and many others, are answered it seems a case of fitting the facts around a conclusion rather than looking at the facts to determine a conclusion.

Its a very simple calculation - you can do it yourself very easily. So cut the bullshit.

It's the simplicity of it that is my problem.

And I have to say in response to RolandG - that is the attitude of most Liverpool fans -" I don't care what the evidence says, I know better"

The height of stupidity. Nobody knows anything

 

[RolandG]

Its a very simple calculation - you can do it yourself very easily. So cut the bullshit.

It's the simplicity of it that is my problem.

And I have to say in response to RolandG - that is the attitude of most Liverpool fans -" I don't care what the evidence says, I know better"

The height of stupidity. Nobody knows anything

Stats dont tell the whole story. Any fool knows that.

If that was the case, Suarez would have been easily dispensible.

 

[Spaghetti Legs]

How lazy is that journalism, people on here and other forums could do better than that, hell even school kids could.

The name of the supposed journalist does ring a bell for being a complete wanker and consistantly anti Liverpool.

 

[cloggypop]

The name of the supposed journalist does ring a bell for being a complete wanker and consistantly anti Liverpool.

He is a member on here

 

[Spaghetti Legs]

He is a member on here

Lol, must of rung the wrong bell about the anti Liverpool and being a wanker then.

Stand by the lazy journalism though, its a piss weak article and not even worth wasting any time debating.

 

[Leo]

He didn't score 30 goals last year and we finished 7th or whatever.
That's another stat.
Eat my stats.

 

[Dreambeliever]

Its a very simple calculation - you can do it yourself very easily. So cut the bullshit.

It's the simplicity of it that is my problem.

And I have to say in response to RolandG - that is the attitude of most Liverpool fans -" I don't care what the evidence says, I know better"

The height of stupidity. Nobody knows anything

Why don't you respond to the sas thread so Ross?

 

[Red Mullet]

Its a very simple calculation - you can do it yourself very easily. So cut the bullshit.

It's the simplicity of it that is my problem.

And I have to say in response to RolandG - that is the attitude of most Liverpool fans -" I don't care what the evidence says, I know better"

The height of stupidity. Nobody knows anything

Well, let's pretend it's not a simple calculation and I can't easily do it. So, show me your workings on how you obtained your win percentages and how the team is better without Suarez. Also, list your assumptions and evidence since you want to take the statistical/scientific approach.

Or you can just say it's your gut feeling so no one can dispute you.

Either way, we know who the bullshitter is here.

 

[Halmeister]

I was speaking to Paul Gorst last night and showed him this thread. Basically he agrees, but had to write it. Plus he said you're all cunts for slagging him off.

 

[SummerOnions]

He can write an article about it